Hi, I already tried to clean up Zwarte Piet. Please don't engage in arguments with the other user on my wall (for the same reasons I've told him not to on Shane's wall, a year ago). If you want to debate it between each other, e-mail is best. I understand where you're coming from, but otherwise we admins have to keep policing both of you. Thanks!
Hi, just a minor grammar note. There are common rules about the usage of "on" versus "in" regarding projects, which is what we use on Muppet Wiki. Just as the common phrasing is "in a movie" but "on TV," when referring to a single specific project, "in" is used (Ingrid Bergman was in Casblanca) or referring to film series (i.e., in the Muppet movies). When referring to ongoing broadcast works on radio or TV (and now podcasting, streaming etc), it's generally on (William Shatner played Captain Kirk on Star Trek). When narrowed specifically to an episode or segment, it's in (William Schallert guest starred *on* Star Trek but he appeared in "The Trouble with Tribbles.") That's also the phrasing we use when writing about Muppet/Sesame relevant people (Jerry Nelson was a regular puppeteer on Sesame Street, but made an on-camera cameo *in* Episode Suchandsuch.)
The main difference is if the word franchise is involved rather than referring to a specific series (in which case "in" would be used, like in the Star Trek *franchise* rather than on a specific series; I don't know why that's the rule, but it is).
So generally, while there are some uncaught incorrect usages for either (a few stem from non-native speakers, since outside of English, many languages use the same word for on *and* in, avoiding the whole issue), if you see "on" used referring to a TV series, you don't need to change it to "in." Thanks!
Hi, just a note. We had a community discussion years ago and agreed on using apostrophe's inside Wiki brackets (as looking neater rather than breaking the blue for the possessive); now that the old talk and community pages are archived, I can't find it. The consensus was also not to make it mandatory (so users could also put it outside if they liked), which is why you've seen both.
You can do whichever you personally prefer when writing, but you really don't need to undo every instance you come across in an article (in a few cases, like Abigail it was just awkward since it was the show that was possessing and needed to be in italics, so that made less sense anyway; I tweaked the change to put the apostrophe after the italics and it works). Thanks!
P.S. Is there a name we can call you by? You've been editing awhile now and beyond a username, we don't know how to address you. If you're concerned about privacy or search engines, it can be a nickname or pseudonym. Just so we can actually address you beyond leaving a blank.
Thanks, but that's not a source for your addition which states that a character was planned (past tense) and has been replaced. Bobbi Baba is missing from the new image, but any statements beyond that are speculation. I'll revert the changes accordingly, thanks.
Hi! Thanks for helping us clean up some dead links. There's actually a neat feature at archive.org that lets you look at cached versions of websites that are no longer up and running. So, what we usually do is replace the dead link with one of those links found at https://archive.org/web/