I don't know what happened with this edit and why you reverted the article to an old version without all the segments listed, but from your edit summary, I'm assuming you were looking to remove the unsourced birthdate. I reverted your edit and just took out the date. We don't need to speculate on his birthdate without a source.
I don't know what happened there. I was looking at old edits to determine when the birthdate was added, I guess I ended up clicking the edit button in the old revision?
As for the circa birthdate, Aleal had first put that in in 2006. Aleal's source would likely have been the various interviews with him (like this one from 1998 ) where he says that he was two at the time of filming. It stayed in the article for 12 years, until IAmMaxB made the unconfirmed leap in judgement.
Hi! I fixed the link of the Daily Press mention, the revision you're pointing to. I presume, though, that you're referring more to the no autograph policy?
Since 2012, two different companies have held the Canadian live appearance license for Elmo, Cookie, and Abby. Under both companies, I've been the default performer for Cookie Monster. Sesame Workshop's document outlining dos and don'ts included autographs in the latter category.
I've reworded it to clarify that they do sign autographs at Sesame Place.
Nick, you're still creating messes. I moved that press release paste (with no clear source) to Sandbox, although in this case it should really be in your namespace since it seems to be mainly for your future use/reference. You started a thread explaining and actually sourcing it, but only after you started the page. You're starting pages that just repeat the same info (see the policy on notability). Image files should be renamed to reflect the suspect, as otherwise they're confusing and often look like spam (this is usually a message we leave for new users).
You didn't respond to Scott's last warnings and can't seem to abide by our editing guidelines, not to put incomplete or info dump pages as actual articles (really, it's better if you just start pasting screengrabs of the articles or pages to the forums if you want them to be available to others, or wait until you can make a proper page if you're going to do so yourself).
So at this point, taking a break seems wisest. You're receiving a one month block. After the holidays, please show you can follow the corrections and policies we've left for you about proper editing and sourcing and what makes a real page, or ask for help if you're not sure what you're doing.
Just a reminder, as the text above every page in the Sandbox page points out, they're not actual articles yet so they're categorized later. Putting sandbox pages in actual categories makes the rough notes appear to more casual readers and editors before they're ready. So just put it on when you're actually ready to move the page.
I'd also suggest not trying to duplicate the Sesame templates as closely as you have, especially in copying "Episode ****" as actual redlinks in navigation, and the street scenes filter doesn't really apply to international shows (and especially those where it's mostly notes and no images for any localized scenes, which might not actually be "street" but repeated inserts anyway). I'm trying to clean it up but it's taking awhile so please keep all this in mind for the future. Thanks!
I moved all of these to your username space. You can find them in your subpages linked on your user page.
These pages are a mess, Nick. What are you using for sources? Why are you copying over templates that have no functionality here? What is with the redlinks for titles we'd never have pages for (like Andrew's aforementioned star episodes)?
As someone who's been editing with us for 14 years and has a Wikipedia history, I continue to be astonished by the info dumps you leave behind. It's really annoying for us to clean-up, as well intentioned as I know your edits are. But please, PLEASE — and I've asked you this before — please put some more thought into your additions on this wiki. We all have other things to do and cleaning up your half-assed edits is not something we want to do when we have wiki time. We're happy to work with you, but you have to work with us, too. If you're unsure about something, ask a seasoned editor, or start a discussion in Special:Forum.
Please let me know what your thoughts and intentions with these Sesame Park pages are. I did see Thread:242987, but to be perfectly frank, I can't make heads or tails of it.
Sorry to be a dick about this; I hope you understand where we're coming from.
Hey Nick, thanks for the addition to Superman. Please don't just drop a url in a reference tag though. Links go dead all the time and it's best that we cite the publication, article title, author, and date. Just like we've been doing for 14 years. Here's my update so you can see what that looks like. Thanks!
I think the important thing to remember is that we're not Wikipedia. Instead of millions of editors a day, we have a handful of regular contributors who are trying to maintain 36,000 pages. So, while a drive-by dump on Wikipedia might work in that there are plenty of people to help flesh it out, the same kind of dump here just creates more work for people. So it's important to curate our new articles and additions with some care. If something's "not ready for prime time", we should really be using the Category:Sandbox space.
Hey Nick. This wasn't on my radar then, but do you remember what source(s) you used to compile the Thomas Sanford page; in particular the specifics like performing Sam the Eagle and Beth Bear in the finale?
Hi Nick. Just a quick question, where does this image come from? I only ask because I haven't seen a lot of Muppet related images of the show on Google, so I wasn't sure if it was official or someone online made it. Thanks!
Hi Nick, I've had to clean up your recent contributions to puppets included in the Canadian museum exhibit. Please review the wiki's policy on the FAQ about adhering to NPOV and citing sources over speculation and guesswork. Thanks!
Hi, I've been told in separate emails from Ingenium and the CBC executive quoted in the article below that the props, costumes, and puppets in their holdings are not going to Ingenium. The article below only goes as far to say that Ottawa I'd getting "many" of the items.
If we have a source that comes from email communication, please cite it as "email communication between [cited party] and User:Zanimum" and the date. But please avoid phrases like, "the current whereabouts of [or future plans for] said item is currently unknown." It reaches into the speculation area. Just go with what we know, so in this case, "the puppet was on display until 2017" or whatever. Thanks!