User talk:YoungForever

Where in the MOS:TVCAST does it say that their last names cannot be mentioned? I read the entire thing and didn't see a reason for my edit's removal. ESPECIALLY, if it's reliably sourced? If it's about the "on-screen credits" of the series, they don't list character names for main cast members or guest stars.... ACase0000 (talk) 04:12, 12 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Per MOS:TVCAST, All names should be referred to as credited, or by common name supported by a reliable source. They are credited with first names only and that is their common names. It is fake wedding invitation created by the characters for the TV series. It is not a press release nor an article written by a staff member. — YoungForever ^(talk) 04:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Again... NO character names are Credited on-screen for main cast and guest stars! The credits don't say "Nicola Cavendish as Connie", they just list the actors name. And as for the article It was written by Netflix staff and they own the rights to the series. Fictional characters cannot write their own wedding invitations, you should know that. Series staff members wrote it. ACase0000 (talk) 19:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Again, Connie is her common name and her surname is not part of her common name. Again, it is a fake wedding invitation by Melinda Monroe and Jack Sheridan as stated on the fake wedding invitation. What part of a fake wedding invitation you do not seem to understand? It is not a press release nor an article written by a staff member, it is just a fake wedding invitation with questions to answer. — YoungForever ^(talk) 19:27, 12 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

What part of Fictional characters cannot write articles in real life do you not understand? Mel and Jack DID NOT write it. Real people like you and I did, how can you not understand that? Real Netflix employees wrote it. –ACase0000 (talk) 11:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Again, it is a fake wedding invitation, not an article nor a press release. You are clearly beating a dead horse. — YoungForever ^(talk) 16:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

So I added the message because season one was missing episode summery's, whys that wrong? I mean maybe the episodes should now be moved to a new page because of that rule you mentioned "an article should not have both an episode table with summaries and a prose plot summary." but the season one episodes should still be written and that's why I put that message. Anthony2106 (talk) 02:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

@Anthony2106: It already have a prose plot summary. Also, it is not enough to split the article FYI. Please see MOS:TVSPLIT and Wikipedia:Article splitting (television), it states an article should be 50kB to 60kB of readable prose or 50 and 60 episodes to warrant a split. — YoungForever ^(talk) 02:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

But I didn't put the message because of it missing a season plot summary. I put it for the missing episode summary's. Are you not meant to use that warring message for episodes like that. Would that mean I taged this wrong? Anthony2106 (talk) 11:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

I don't think you understand what "an article should not have both an episode table with summaries and a prose plot summary" means. — YoungForever ^(talk) 16:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Yes I understand what It means but I just put that there so the season one episodes can be written even though they should probably be moved now, but you said its too small to split them. So what message should I leave instead a "extend this section" message? So is it wrong if someone started writing season one episodes? Is the table meant to be blank? You said you cant split it anyway as it's too small so why can't a message be added to tell people to write the season one episodes? Anthony2106 (talk) 10:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

The template is not necessary because as I said an article should not have both an episode table with summaries and a prose plot summary, per MOS:TVPLOT. What part of that you do not understand? Since you want to go against that and think it is necessary to include both. — YoungForever ^(talk) 16:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Hello, JustinBoy203 has added multiple unconfirmed production codes to future episodes from the list of Bob's Burgers episodes page, many of them not having attributed or credible sources. As I have interacted with JustinBoy203 outside of Wikipedia, I believe he thinks some of these production codes come from WGA or it's from his original research. Since I'm not really an editor on Wikipedia, I don't believe I am legitimate enough to dispute the edits by removing it from the page. However, I saw that you messaged the user about similar edits on one of the Simpsons season pages and thought it would be best to message you about it. Arriabella (talk) 21:40, 8 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

FYI, WGA do not include production codes at all. It is clearly original research if it is yet to air episodes. The production codes are on the end credits of each episode of Bob's Burgers , The Simpsons , and other adult animated TV series on FOX. — YoungForever ^(talk) 21:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I apologize for the late response, but thank you for removing the production codes. I'd like to add that the "Heist Things Are Heist" episode may not be its name. While there have been similar episode titles, like "Lice Things Are Lice" and "Advice Things are Ad-Nice," the source obscures the title on the script cover. It may not be the first episode in the production season either, as Bob's Burgers have had table reads out of order before. "Pig Trouble in Little Tina" had an earlier table read date than "Motor, She Boat" despite being ahead in production order. Arriabella (talk) 22:31, 8 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

You're welcome. And actually, it kinda does look like that FASA01 is called 'Heist Things Are Heist'. Because in the picture, you'll see that the words '...Are Heist' is covered from the number 15. JustinBoy203 (talk) 17:41, 8 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

x.com and Bluesky accounts without verified checkmarks are not reliable sources, FYI. — YoungForever ^(talk) 23:26, 8 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I changed the titles as they were depicted on the episodes (on the screen)

KorrektneSisestus (talk) 07:57, 17 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

@KorrektneSisestus: Those are not the episode titles. The episode titles are listed on Max FYI. — YoungForever ^(talk) 23:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]