User talk:72.197.249.141: Difference between revisions

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, 72.197.233.244. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind providing me with the link to the website(s) in which you got your information? I just can't locate your source of information. If you do, that would be really helpful to me. Thank you!

They are all at the bottom of the article, and are also on my userpage. - The JMA is the main one.Jason Rees (talk) 17:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if Post-Tropical Cyclones are actually extratropical, then why does the NHC state that they have a chance to redevelop? (For instance: Hurricane Eugene (2011), and Tropical Storm Emily (2011).)

To be honest I don't know the reasoning behind it, but I do know that Gert is still considered to be a Post-Tropical Cyclone by the OPC, and not extratropical.Jason Rees (talk) 01:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I see you edit Wikipedia a lot. Have you thought about creating a user name? It helps people know who you are, instead of the random digits of numbers that you are currently seen as. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)--♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I certaintly have thought about that. It does sound really nice. You know, I might create a user name sometime, once I get the time to. Well, I will definitely look forward to that.

Just as a fyi for this edit - users are allowed to remove warnings from their talk page par WP:R Van, section 5. Any editor may remove warnings from their talk page (This does not go for block templates), though clearing the warnings is just taken as an indication that the user read and accepted them. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:14, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I guess I didn't know that. Well, another user kept attacking me (about 5 months ago; he kept reverting my good faith edits, and made excuses by calling me a vandalist), and naturally I assumed that you couldn't remove warnings (since he always readded the warnings, and told me that I could not remove them). Well, thanks for the heads-up, I certainly appreciate it. Thanks!!! 72.197.253.243 (talk) 22:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, have you ever considered registering a username for yourself? Might be something you want to think about, it does have its perks. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have, and it does sound really nice. Who knows, maybe I might create a username for myself, someday soon. 72.197.253.243 (talk) 23:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, come on...You can do it in a minute or less by going here :-) TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah we use UTC but the systems advisories were initiated @ Dec 5 00UTC hence its the 5.Jason Rees (talk) 03:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I didn't know that. 72.197.253.243 (talk) 03:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My information comes directly from the RSMCs - the instance that the final advisory on a storm does not automatically mean that it has dissipated.Jason Rees (talk) 01:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The last TWO said that it was dissipating as we speak but that was 12 hrs ago.Jason Rees (talk) 01:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Storm has dissipated on December 16. Thanks for the update! 72.197.253.243 (talk) 19:49, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you did not know, the National Hurricane Center releases Tropical Cyclone Reports on each individual storm that formed at the end of each hurricane season. In this case, they upped Bret's maximum sustained winds from 55 knots (65 mph) to 60 knots (70 mph). You can find all of the Tropical Cyclone Reports they have releases here. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 01:41, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I got that. But just where do they release the TCRs? 72.197.253.243 (talk) 01:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not shout at other people in edit summaries. Just stay calm. ––Bruvtakesover (talk!) 21:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I guess I kind of lost it there, for that second. 72.197.253.243 (talk) 22:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stop using disruptive edit summaries. ––Bruvtakesover (talk!) 17:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stop it, or you will be reported. —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 00:15, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stop what??? (Seriously, I don't know what did wrong this time, so could you please show me?) 72.197.253.243 (talk) 00:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use capitals in edit summaries. 1, 2, 3... and more —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 00:20, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 00:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please tell me why doing that is wrong? Besides, the Cap letters weren't for yelling this time, it was to mark certain words that I wanted the reader to emphasize on. (Oh, and I have seen more than a few users use cap letters, repeatedly.) 72.197.253.243 (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop plonking in crap about when a storm has dissipated, when it is clear it hasn't dissipated. The dates in the season info-boxes generally only include dates when RSMCs are actually warning on systems and they are either tropical or subtropical. For the record Fina hasnt dissipated yet and will not dissipate for at least another week - it has only weakened into a tropical low (depression) and will probably become extratropical soon which is when we would normally shut the infobox off. However the infobox has been shut off early and will be updated till one of Brisbane Nadi or Wellingotn say its become extratropical. In summuary do not add in when a storm dissipates by the JTWC, since they are usually wrong or when we shut of the infobox.Jason Rees (talk) 03:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And btw, Fina is unofficially subtropical. —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 12:49, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please give me a link to your source? I would very much appreciate a new source of tracking data (which I may be able to use as well). 72.197.253.243 (talk) 19:03, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check the New Caledonia marine bulletins. —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 19:08, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the website? 72.197.253.243 (talk) 19:09, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is what it states:

GENERAL SITUATION: THE FORMER TROPICAL DEPRESSION NOW FINA

Subtropical depression was centered at 12 UTC on 23/12 BY 22.6OS

157E D: THEREFORE: WINDS ASSOCIATED REACH 35 TO 40

KNOTS

—Bruvtakesover (talk!) 19:14, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! (Please update me, upon Fina's dissipation.) 72.197.253.243 (talk) 19:15, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And the bulletin is located here. —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 19:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However, it is likely that Fina will enter the SPAC basin. —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 19:18, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The New Zealand bulletin mentioned that the system was frontal. 1 —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 20:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have created File:JMA TD39 2011 track.png but you will have to sort out with Jason Rees whether this short lived system gets to be mentioned in the article. Regards--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 22:04, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have created File:JMA TD40 2011 track.png. As regards Grant I thought I was up-to-date, as regards the NRL trackfile which we use for storms where one is available. What data are you comparing?--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 17:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, seeing as you have updated the summary track (the edit with the statement about Grant's final update) later than Grant's own track, I assumed (I may be wrong) that you may not have given Grant's track "the final update." If I am wrong, please tell me. Thanks! 72.197.253.243 (talk) 05:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Sorry, never mind! I overlooked something. You did give Grant the final update. Sorry about that. 72.197.253.243 (talk) 06:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, Grant is not gone. No, 02F is not gone. What is your source? None of the bulletins state those systems are gone. —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 20:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guess I misread something. 72.197.253.243 (talk) 20:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RSMC Nadi - "TROPICAL DISTURBANCE TD02F [1002HPA] ANALYSED NEAR 20.0S 163.5W AT 291800UTC AND SLOW MOVING. POSITION POOR." - and BoM only state that it is a tropical low. —Bruvtakesover (talk!) 20:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The New Zealand bulletins are not in French... so instead of asking both of us, be bold. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 02:34, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. (P.S, why does the Google Toolbar state that the page is in French?) 72.197.253.243 (talk) 05:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Report it to Google. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 06:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe that they would make such a big mistake. 72.197.253.243 (talk) 06:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is just their stupid servers. Computers are not always correct. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 06:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What google toolbar?.Jason Rees (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the Google Translation Toolbar. 72.197.253.243 (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

South Pacific Bulletin: 1 Added by: 72.197.253.243 (talk) 00:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TCWC Darwin Bulletin: 2

1: Mediterranean Tropical Cyclones

2: South Atlantic

3: Great Lakes

4: California

Posted by: 174.65.96.212 (talk) 06:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making useless edits such as removing lines between clears and a block writing or adding in useless tags. Thanks.Jason Rees (talk) 00:41, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was just trying to make everything "neat and organized." (P.S, why do most other pages have the same format, as the one that I have tried to change 03F's to?) 72.197.253.243 (talk) 00:43, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're just cluttering the article up by adding those useless tags. And most other pages do not have the same format as the one that you tried to change 03Fs to, most have a space in between the clear and last paragraph, to keep it looking neat in the edit window. Jason Rees (talk) 00:45, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I didn't know. (Cause no one actually cared enough to explain that to me.) 72.197.253.243 (talk) 00:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The track for Heidi cannot be updated since the final warning for Heidi was just off the coast of WA. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 00:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure there are no more track info? (Because Google Earth has data that Heidi made it deep inland, before dissipating.) 72.197.233.244 (talk) 00:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it did make it inland to Mucalana Creek. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 00:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But isn't there any more track data to provide the additional update? 72.197.233.244 (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 00:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait there is additonal track data. Keith Edkins managed to locate additional advisories on Heidi. 72.197.233.244 (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So Keith can get some piece and quiet from you, I have installed the track software... so why don't you come and bother me now. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 02:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The track in the Coral Sea was included in error. It related to a disturbance known to NRL as 97P.INVEST (see comments at Talk:2011–12 Australian region cyclone season#Remnants). I copied it into my datafile thinking it might be the remnants of Grant, but on reflection it seems it wasn't - it existed at the same time as Grant but 400 miles further east. It doesn't seem to have been noticed by the BoM so I removed it. I don't have any plottable data on the remnants of Grant beyond the Cape York peninsula at 29 Dec 0000z.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 14:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks for your works! 72.197.233.244 (talk) 00:28, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And you can also find the track you requested here. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 01:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now remember, it is an unofficial track. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 01:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot add it to the page since it is unofficial data. Unless you get something from the NRL, NHC or CHC, then it would be official. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 01:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just asking if there was any more tracks you wanted me to do since I am going away to sleep? Bruvtakesover (T|C) 02:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If possible, then can you please locate some track data, and create a track for the 1996 Lake Huron cyclone? If you can't, then please let me know. Thanks! (Oh, and you don't have to do it right now. You can do it tomorrow.) 72.197.249.141 (talk) 06:55, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you seriously think I'll be able to get track data for that system? Bruvtakesover (T|C) 22:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know. I located a webpage or 2 with tracks, but as for the coordinates, I haven't been able to locate any yet. If you search on Google for long enough, you might be able to find it. Otherwise, the meteorological website I've been to may be the only site with the track. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found a track here. If you are unable to use this PDF, then I guess that we will have to look harder. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 00:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If possible, please try to determine the coordinates of the track points, in the file I linked to above. The track is on page 12 of the document, and the real points are marked by small grey squares. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 00:59, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well it doesn't have any coordinates on it so that doesn't help. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 09:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well. Until we can find a useable set of track coordinates (if that is even possible), I guess that we will have to drop this project. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 20:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave the damage and deaths columns blank if the TC affected an area rather than putting unknown or None since otherwise its OR.Jason Rees (talk) 01:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. But why blank them? 174.65.96.212 (talk) 01:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because we need to back ourselves up with sources about deaths and damages and if a TC affected an area id rather leave it blank than commit ORn and say that there was an unknown or no damages or deaths. This applies to all basins. Jason Rees (talk) 02:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I get it now. 174.65.96.212 (talk) 04:19, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The RSMC Nadi has issued their final advisory on this system because it has moved south of 25S. Check here for the latest advisory from RSMC Wellington. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 23:35, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide me a link to Wellington's bulletins, because I can't seem to find them. Thanks! 174.65.96.212 (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now next time, look harder. . Bruvtakesover (T|C) 00:00, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! 174.65.96.212 (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please create an account since your IP is changing every few days and it gets harder to track your edits. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 01:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. It's just that I am currently experiencing some Internet connection problems. However, my IP Address usually does not change this often, and seeing as that I have been assigned a completely new IP previously (174.65.96.212), I believe that the IP changing issue is directly connected to this problem. However, I am sure that this problem will be fixed soon. But until then, you can always leave a message on my previous talk page, if you are unable to find me, as I will read those messages. Thanks for the notice. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you are going to add verbage about the different tropical systems - ALSO add the proper reference. You continue to inappropriately use existing references which are not at all associated with the additions that you provide. Otherwise, it will be removed even more so since you do your edits via this IP address. Brudder Andrusha (talk) 10:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to webcite pages, which is why you are unable to find the material that used to be there. I'm sorry, but citing the webpages as they are is the best that I can do, on my own. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So you're saying you don't know how to add in a web link and your email? Bruvtakesover (T|C) 20:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

.....Probably not. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 20:33, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lemme guess.. you don't have an email? Bruvtakesover (T|C) 20:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How did you know??? Wait, ... I guess that's probably all too obvious. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 20:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop warning this IP. We know that it is a sockpuppet of Typhoonwikihelper.

And will you stop replying to this person and start reverting them? Bruvtakesover (T|C) 07:50, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will try, if you will help me. This is just too much for me to handle alone. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He's threatening to change IPs each time he is blocked? What am I supposed to do now? Report him to WP:ANI? I don't even know if I can successfully do that. I seriously need help from the Admin. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 22:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. ANI will do nothing. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 22:33, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then where am I supposed to report him? And if I can't report him, then what am I supposed to do? 72.197.249.141 (talk) 22:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"You will have all your available IPs blocked off" - None of the admins will do that since they are dynamic IPs Bruvtakesover (T|C) 08:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a figure of speech. Plus, if he does keep vandalizing, all of his IPs will get blocked off, one by one. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IP Range of User:Typhoonwikihelper Added by: 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:33, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you gave me the wrong line - http://www.webcitation.org/65lHRQWxN points to a modern Tropical Weather Outlook.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 13:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely think you have given me the wrong link and it is producing different results for you than it does for me. This is what I get (sometimes - other times I get nothing): no mention of Alenga at all. This is probably the last thing **I** archived - you may be seeing the last thing **YOU** archived (perhaps it's cached by each of our browsers). Can you copy what you see onto my talk page?:

Original source: http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDW10800.shtml, recovered at: 2012-02-27 0615Z
IDW10800
Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology
Western Australia
Tropical Cyclone three-day outlook for the Western Region
Issued at 2:00pm WST on Monday the 27th of February 2012
Valid until midnight WST Thursday  
Existing Cyclones in the Western region:
Nil.
Potential Cyclones: 
A weak low pressure system lies near 18S091E, and is forecast to move southwest
on Tuesday and out of the region. The system will not develop into a tropical
cyclone, however gales are possible to the south of the low for a period due to
the pressure gradient between the low and a high pressure system to the south.
Refer to Ocean Wind Warning 1 [IDW21100] for details.
There are no other significant lows in the region and none are expected to
develop over the next three days.      
Likelihood of a tropical cyclone being in the Western Region:
Tuesday     :Very Low
Wednesday   :Very Low
Thursday    :Very Low
NOTES: Development Potential is an estimate of the chance of each system being a
tropical cyclone in the Region for each day. 
Very Low:  less than 5%      Low:    5% - 20%, 
Moderate:  20% - 50%         High:   Over 50%
The Western Region refers to the Indian Ocean between Longitudes 90-125E and
south of 10S.
Further information on Tropical Cyclones is available at: 
www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/
This weather bulletin was retrieved without alteration from the Commonwealth of Australia Bureau of Meteorology web site for purposes of study and research.
Consult BoM Copyright Notice for restrictions on reproduction. Bureau of Meteorology Home page

Track updated.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 08:37, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! (P.S, I have left new messages for you on your talk page.) 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With all of the new refs that have been added to User:Atomic7732/Mediterranean tropical cyclone, can we restore this article, and with its contents? 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, can I take that as a yes? 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to, but IMO that version isn't written very well (no offense). I have a sandbox for the article in my userspace, but I don't feel like working on it at the moment. HF25 00:17, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop making up absolute crap about tropical cyclones in the Mediterranean. The cyclones you added were extratropical cyclones.

• February 28, 2012 surface analysis
• March 8, 2012 surface analysis

Todays surface analysis shows that there is a non-frontal system west of Tunisia, however, this cyclone is a cold-core low. See satellite image. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 09:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What about the one on March 9? That looked about 95% tropical. (The storm existed at 0000 UTC on March 9, and was located just off the eastern coast of Southern Italy, in the Adriatic Sea.) 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And seriously, the one on February 23, off the coast of Tunisia, was tropical. If I am wrong, please convince me otherwise. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:56, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And seriously, the ones you have just said are extratropical. It may look tropical, but you have to look at surface maps before you can make a decision. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 12:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but the storms I mentioned later are not in your maps. You mind providing some? (The dates and locations are provided.) 72.197.249.141 (talk) 00:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You mind linking me to the maps/satellite images? I would really appreciate a new source to draw from. Thanks! 72.197.249.141 (talk) 00:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just because a storm doesn't have any fronts doesn't mean it is tropical. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 08:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Enough of the crap from both of you please. You can not use any images to prove a disturbance existed or that it was possibly tropical. We have to reliable sources that say if a system was possibly tropical and can not go around looking at images or surface maps and making calls ourselves.Jason Rees (talk) 14:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected Koji-Joni (had forgotten about the problems of filing storms which cross basin boundaries). I shall have to to try to get the TD12 points off Bruvtakesover - it's not clear to me where he got them from and they make a very erratic track.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 18:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts! (P.S, come to think of it, the last part of the track does look erratic.) 72.197.249.141 (talk) 05:43, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The seasonal effects infobox will have to keep the blanks until we can prove one way or another that there was impact or deaths. This is per the rules on Original Research.Jason Rees (talk) 00:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say that Lua didn't kill anybody. I just want to know if Lua killed anybody. And if it did, how many? 72.197.249.141 (talk) 00:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You also asked about the blanks on my talkpage as for Lua - i dont know, i didnt follow it.Jason Rees (talk)

Hi, I'm sorry but I don't know what you mean by "color order".

All I did was remove the bold-faced font styling from the episode titles. This brings the template inline with Template:Episode list, which also did this recently. You're right that it's the English language Wikipedia, but why choose episode titles to emphasise over everything else? Look through any list at Wikipedia:Featured lists (or indeed any other non-featured list that isn't television episode-related), you shouldn't find any table data that is bold-face.

• Take List of London Marathon winners, for example. The winners are the runners. Without the runners, there would be no nationality, no winning time, and no notes/comments. But we wouldn't expect their names to be boldface just to emphasise the fact that they won.
• In List of tallest buildings in Las Vegas the primary data is the building. Without the building there would be no rank, no height, no floor #, no coordinates, and no year of completion, but the name of the building is not in boldface for emphasis.
• At List of Scripps National Spelling Bee champions, the primary data is the person who won, but they're not in boldface. The newspaper titles are in italics, per WP:ITALIC, which says periodicals should be in italic type.
• Another lists that heavily include episode titles is List of awards and nominations received by The Simpsons. Here the awards are the primary information, but where the episode itself was nominated or won, it still isn't boldface.

The only other type of list that did use boldface on a regular basis were musicians and recording artists' discographies. But since the Discography WikiProject decided to follow the MOS and WP:DTT, the formatting there has successfully changed to produce articles like Kelly Rowland discography and Jennifer Lopez discography (compare with the older Kaiser Chiefs discography).

There is no reason that episode lists should go against the grain and violate a number of Manual of Styles for the sake of making the title stand out. First of all, WP:MOS says that italics, not boldface, should be used for emphasis, as does WP:MOSTEXT. However, they also explicitly state that TV series should be italicised, not episode titles, which should be placed within quotemarks. They also state that boldface may only be used in certain cases, and in tables, only the table headers may be in boldface (ie the very first row that carries the words "title" "airdate" "production code" "written by", etc), and not the actual data elements.

As for why the Japanese titles are still in boldface when it was removed from the English titles -- I didn't notice. Best, Matthewedwards (talk · contribs) 01:40, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

Dear 72.197.249.141, you have been editing Wikipedia for a few months now, and i noticed that in your contributions, you often revert vandalism, surprisingly without a wiki account! You deserve the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar, for all you effort. But i noticed that you often attack users who Vandalism. Please warn them only when they did more than one Vandalism, and be Be polite, and welcoming to the new users. Thank You. I award you this Barnstar, so that you can be a better Wikipedian! Keep up the good work! Earth100 (talk) 12:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And don't worry, I'm improving. I'll soon have a new username up and running. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 19:23, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]