Talk:Wild 'n Out

message: Can someone please add a cast list to this article, since Nick doesn't do it alone? -- Jalabi99 13:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast list 

message: Requesting semi protection. I don't know how to do it, so if someone could do it for me and tell me how to do it? ThanksQuatreryukami 16:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  semi pro 

message: :Image:Wild n out.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Wild n out.jpg

message: :Image:Wild n out.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Wild n out.jpg

message: what's the source for the list of season 5 team captains?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.62.150 (talk) 02:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Season 5 team captains

message: Greetings all. I come from the Family Force 5 article. XD
Anyway, quick question. I remember an episode in which Taran Killam and MIkey Day were both on the black team (if I remember correctly), and it was during the opera-version of R&Beef (can't remember the name and can't find it -- it can be seen in the fourth season episode with Paula DeAnda, I remember that much)...or maybe it was Jokin' Word? I FORGET.
But anyway, Taran and Mikey just totally burst out going "WHITE BOY ROBOT".
I absolutely love that bit, but I can't find it anywhere on YouTube. Any help, or can you atleast tell me what episode it is? Thanks! (P.S.: Regarding the fake thing, I think it's for real -- atleast with Biz Markie and Mikey. Biz because he's a DJ/freestyler/whatever, and Mikey since he's a professional comedian) SuperDMChan (talk) 18:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: White Boy Robot?

message: i think he was very creative with making this show. i wonder how he came up with it. but other than that is was good. better than yo momma. now that show was stupid  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.64.82 (talk) 22:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  my thought 

message: In the episode with Ms.Rowland visiting...One of the girls from the black team accidentily mooned the audience  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.147.40.66 (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  There's a funny part that was not intended 

message: Please do not add trivia lacking support from reliable secondary sources. See WP:TRIVIA and WP:NOT. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want the trivia section to exist because it is not encyclopedic. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:47, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: It doesn't have to be encyclopedic. It's all facts. The King Gemini (talk) 07:36, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it does have to be encyclopedic if it's posted here, as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. If you want to write about facts that aren't encyclopedic and don't meet Wikipedia's requirements, I suggest you try an alternative venue. In any event, please do not continue to repost material in this article that does not meet Wikipedia's policies and standards. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Gemini, simply continuing to revert without edit-summary or talk page engagement is edit-warring and is not an appropriate response. I've explained that the material you're adding is unsourced and unencyclopedic. If you disagree with that assessment, you're welcome to provide secondary sources, to seek a third opinion, or to explain why you believe policy supports inclusion of this material. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: And how is it not encyclopedic? The King Gemini (talk) 20:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:NOTEVERYTHING: we don't include every possible fact about a subject, but rather summarize what reliable secondary sources have said. This section is an indiscriminate and unsourced collection of trivia, and some of it is original research. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:26, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Thank you, RM. Gemini, did you have a response? As I noted above, it's not appropriate for you to simply continue to revert without engaging on the talk page. If you have no policy-based rationale for including the material, it would appear that consensus is against you. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for self-reverting here, Gemini. As a reminder, edits like this are also not an appropriate response. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever. I still don't like you. The King Gemini (talk) 01:58, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You can dislike me all you want, Gemini, you just can't violate policy. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't violating policy. The King Gemini (talk) 18:31, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: First, stating that you dislike a respected and experienced editor, even if you have reasons to dislike her, isn't productive or collaborative. It doesn't, as such, violate the rule against personal attacks, but it is unnecessarily personal, and it doesn't, as such, violate the civility policy, but it appears to be rude, and isn't helpful. Second, edit-warring with yourself is almost as problematic as edit-warring with other editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:49, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It does, however, violate the userpage policy, as I've mentioned to Gemini before. But if he's prepared to stop edit-warring over this content we can hopefully move forward. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Gemini, above both Robert and I have explained why this section is inappropriate. You've now got both of us on your personal dislike list and have resumed edit-warring over inclusion of this section. If you feel consensus for its inclusion has changed you can start a new discussion, but as above do not simply re-add the content without proper sourcing and without engaging here. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:58, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: User:King Gemini - If you want to hold long grudges against other editors for something that happened one-and-one-half years ago, that is your privilege. Edit-warring is not your privilege. If you really want the trivia section, please use a Request for Comments. And someone is likely to tell you not to keep an enemies list in plain view on your user page, especially when the reason is so old. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

text: Please start a new discussion and gain consensus for your proposed addition before re-adding it, rather than edit-warring. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

text: I'm not edit edit-warring because I'm waiting over 24 hours before I edit. The King Gemini (talk) 22:19, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be thinking of the three-revert rule, but that's not an entitlement, and it's quite possible to edit-war without ever approaching that. Again, if you want to restore the content, the appropriate action is not to just keep adding it, but rather to start a new discussion to get consensus for it. Above Robert suggested starting an RfC - that's an option for you. But right now you don't have consensus on your side. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:46, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Slow-motion edit-warring can result in a slow-motion block. I don't think that you, User:King Gemini, want to find out what that is. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:42, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You threatening me, Robert? Cause let me you tell right now, I don't take too kindly to threats. The King Gemini (talk) 04:25, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: User:King Gemini - I am not an administrator, and was not threatening you. If I tell you that driving at 130 kph on a US Interstate highway may result in a reckless driving citation, I am not threatening you, because I am not a trooper. However, what threat are you making in response to my alleged threats?  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:15, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not making any threats. I'm simply telling you that I don't take too kindly to them. I don't like people that threaten me because I feel like that's a coward move. Threatening someone behind a screen. And the way that you have been talking to me and taking up for Nikkimaria make it seem like that you are an administrator. The King Gemini (talk) 04:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you have a right to be an unpleasant editor, as long as you don't engage in personal attacks, since the civility policy is ineffectively enforced. However, I am not making threats, and you are being pointlessly hostile, and it isn't useful. Pause and reconsider. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:54, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not being pointlessly hostile. What I am being is an unpleasant editor, because I feel like that when I put the Trivia section on this article which are actual facts that happened on the show, you and Nikkimaria got some kind of problem with it because the Trivia section is "completely unsourced and it's too long for the article". Well I'm here to tell you that it's not. And you telling me that slow-motion edit-warring can result in a slow-motion block, and that I don't want to find out what that is, I felt like you were threatening me when you told me that. The King Gemini (talk) 05:34, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: A third opinion was requested.  In my opinion, the trivia section, which is completely unsourced, is too long for the article.  Either delete it, or reduce its length and add sources.  I agree with the criticism of the section.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:44, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, RM. Gemini, did you have a response? As I noted above, it's not appropriate for you to simply continue to revert without engaging on the talk page. If you have no policy-based rationale for including the material, it would appear that consensus is against you. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for self-reverting here, Gemini. As a reminder, edits like this are also not an appropriate response. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever. I still don't like you. The King Gemini (talk) 01:58, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You can dislike me all you want, Gemini, you just can't violate policy. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't violating policy. The King Gemini (talk) 18:31, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: First, stating that you dislike a respected and experienced editor, even if you have reasons to dislike her, isn't productive or collaborative. It doesn't, as such, violate the rule against personal attacks, but it is unnecessarily personal, and it doesn't, as such, violate the civility policy, but it appears to be rude, and isn't helpful. Second, edit-warring with yourself is almost as problematic as edit-warring with other editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:49, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It does, however, violate the userpage policy, as I've mentioned to Gemini before. But if he's prepared to stop edit-warring over this content we can hopefully move forward. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Gemini, above both Robert and I have explained why this section is inappropriate. You've now got both of us on your personal dislike list and have resumed edit-warring over inclusion of this section. If you feel consensus for its inclusion has changed you can start a new discussion, but as above do not simply re-add the content without proper sourcing and without engaging here. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:58, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: User:King Gemini - If you want to hold long grudges against other editors for something that happened one-and-one-half years ago, that is your privilege. Edit-warring is not your privilege. If you really want the trivia section, please use a Request for Comments. And someone is likely to tell you not to keep an enemies list in plain view on your user page, especially when the reason is so old. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

text: Please start a new discussion and gain consensus for your proposed addition before re-adding it, rather than edit-warring. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

text: I'm not edit edit-warring because I'm waiting over 24 hours before I edit. The King Gemini (talk) 22:19, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be thinking of the three-revert rule, but that's not an entitlement, and it's quite possible to edit-war without ever approaching that. Again, if you want to restore the content, the appropriate action is not to just keep adding it, but rather to start a new discussion to get consensus for it. Above Robert suggested starting an RfC - that's an option for you. But right now you don't have consensus on your side. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:46, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Slow-motion edit-warring can result in a slow-motion block. I don't think that you, User:King Gemini, want to find out what that is. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:42, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You threatening me, Robert? Cause let me you tell right now, I don't take too kindly to threats. The King Gemini (talk) 04:25, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: User:King Gemini - I am not an administrator, and was not threatening you. If I tell you that driving at 130 kph on a US Interstate highway may result in a reckless driving citation, I am not threatening you, because I am not a trooper. However, what threat are you making in response to my alleged threats?  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:15, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not making any threats. I'm simply telling you that I don't take too kindly to them. I don't like people that threaten me because I feel like that's a coward move. Threatening someone behind a screen. And the way that you have been talking to me and taking up for Nikkimaria make it seem like that you are an administrator. The King Gemini (talk) 04:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you have a right to be an unpleasant editor, as long as you don't engage in personal attacks, since the civility policy is ineffectively enforced. However, I am not making threats, and you are being pointlessly hostile, and it isn't useful. Pause and reconsider. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:54, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not being pointlessly hostile. What I am being is an unpleasant editor, because I feel like that when I put the Trivia section on this article which are actual facts that happened on the show, you and Nikkimaria got some kind of problem with it because the Trivia section is "completely unsourced and it's too long for the article". Well I'm here to tell you that it's not. And you telling me that slow-motion edit-warring can result in a slow-motion block, and that I don't want to find out what that is, I felt like you were threatening me when you told me that. The King Gemini (talk) 05:34, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Third Opinion

message: I could find nothing in any reliable source that mentioned a season 8. Some stuff on Wikia but that is just a bunch of anonymous people putting in the same unreferenced stuff that I removed from this article. I did make a good faith attempt to find support for a season 8 and found nothing. Any editor restoring the info has the WP:BURDEN to include supporting references. Please note that Wikia is not a reliable source as it is edited by anonymous people and has no reputation for fact checking.  Most the content I removed was directly copied from a corresponding article on Wikia and updates here followed updates on Wikia. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 8 

message: Is there a way to make it show the gap?  -KaJunl (talk) 10:43, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better way of listing original run dates in infobox? 

message: DC Young Fly needs a Wikipedia page. MhcL947 (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  DC Young Fly