User talk:Alex 21

TPS: 149

Home Talk Userboxes Scripts Sandbox 1 | 2 | 3 | DW | Module: / Sandbox TV Shows Notes Contributions Subpages Uploads

Archives

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, linking to your username, so that you will be notified.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

User:Alex 21/script-imageres

You script seems to be broken thanks to the endless incredible work by Wikimedia Foundation. I suppose there’s no way to fix it, is there? Yacàwotçã (talk) 02:54, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, when I try to get the resized version of this file, I receive the following message: "Use thumbnail sizes listed on https://w.wiki/GHai". Yacàwotçã (talk) 02:56, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Yacàwotçã Wow, that sucks. The script used to work solely based on replacing the size in the URL (e.g. /media/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/12/Some_Time_in_New_York_City.png/250px-Some_Time_in_New_York_City.png → /media/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/12/Some_Time_in_New_York_City.png/600px-Some_Time_in_New_York_City.png used to work). I'll have to rework it to instead choose the next "allowable" size. Thank you for alerting me to this! I'll post an update once I've got some time to focus on it. -- Alex_talk 04:04, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Yacàwotçã Issue fixed.

The script now pulls from the largest available thumbnail size that is under the 0.1MP requirement. -- Alex_talk 23:17, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Invincible season 3 draft

Hi Alex 21, I just wanted to check if Draft:Invincible season 3 is ready for publication. Most of the sections are filled apart from the user viewership data. The review section could also be expanded. Let me know what you think? Andykatib (talk) 06:14, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Afrowriter for their thoughts; they were the main creator behind the S2 and S4 articles. -- Alex_talk 21:25, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Alex 21 and @Andykatib I'm going to take a final look at the article, cross-check the references, and share my feedback afterward. Afro 📢Talk! 21:37, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much @Afrowriter:. Hope the article gets published. Andykatib (talk) 22:23, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Production codes

New editor that is prone to emotional accusations.

I have been informed that, per this diff on Not Suitable for Work, neither WP:TV nor MOS:TV say that it is frown upon to add production codes if episodes air in the same order they were produced in. You also needed consensus to make such edits, something you definitely did not have. As such, the production codes you removed from Love Story have been restored. If you wish to remove the parameter from the episodes, please use the series' talk page and reach consensus. Skeetacus25 (talk) 19:44, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Skeetacus25 That's a lot of putting the blame on me for your own edits. Just because something flies in one article, doesn't mean it does on another. Kindly take some accountability; you've based your edits on a sole one of mine. This is definitely a retaliatory "I can't have my way so you can't have yours"; I'll be watching you for similar edits. -- Alex_talk 21:21, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do take accountability; I went back to the articles I remembered I removed prodcodes from and added them back, if they weren't already added back. Why aren't you taking accountability for misrepresenting your opinion as a fact? You originally removed them without so much a second thought, and did again when I added them back. Where was the consensus for removing them? If adding prodcodes even when episodes air in the same order they were produced is not frowned upon, your removal of them (without consensus!) on Love Story is most definitely your opinion, and your opinions do not matter when it comes to editing, nor do you get to force them onto other editors. If it's not frowned upon by neither WP:TV nor MOS:TV, then it's allowed despite the fact that you simply don't like it. Reach consesnsus next time. Watch all you want, buddy. Skeetacus25 (talk) 21:50, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It remains a standard practice, that's my accountability. It has been actively discussed in the past If you are unfamiliar with either WikiProject due to your inexperience, then I can educate you as best as possible, but you do not base your edits solely off another user, and hand off accountability to them. You have no basis not position here.

You are not welcome to post here further per WP:TPO. -- Alex_talk 23:11, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Skeetacus25 Furthermore, in these edits, you are adding a column to a table that already has all widths adding to a total of 100%, without fixing any of the preceeding values. Can you please explain why you are deliberately causing accessability issues on Wikipedia by creating tables forced to 100% with widths that add to over 100%? -- Alex_talk 21:28, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's very simple actually; I didn't know. It looked just fine to me. Skeetacus25 (talk) 22:04, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Skeetacus25 "Looking fine" is unacceptable. If you are not aware of the template documentation, please read up on it. Unfortunately, ignorance being bliss is not an acceptable reason to introduce accessibility issues. -- Alex_talk 23:07, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]