Hey I just wanted to inform you that there is a credit mistake on the Season 6 page of Arrow. Marc Guggenheim is credited for Teleplay and Ubah Mohamed & Tyron B. Carter are credited for the story but it is the other way around. It is the episode "Docket No. 11-19-41-73".
Oh and I found another one on Arrow Season 1. Marc Guggenheim and Greg Berlanti are credited for the story of the episode "Lone Gunmen" but it actually are Greg Berlanti and Andrew Kreisberg. Guggenheim did just the Teleplay
Just so you are aware, this is the final attempt I'm making to discuss the issue with you before I report you for administrator corruption. This has gone on for way too long, and it's obvious that you are stalling to keep the page on your preferred version for as long as possible.
"Finished over a year ago"? The article is still protected and there has been a talk page discussion open for well over a year now. Two people support reverting the article back to the verified version and the only user openly opposing it is... just you and you claim to be doing it on behalf of users you don't remember from a discussion you can't prove exists.
You have said that other unidentified users also opposed it in a private discussion that you can't link to, which isn't a community consensus and isn't something that can be linked to. The people supporting the change back to the verified version (and the community at large) was also never notified about this, so whatever you vaguely remember happening there is void anyway.
It honestly looks like you're just making stuff up to keep the page on the inaccurate version it's already on.
Also keep in mind that, if anyone actually does oppose this, they have already been given multiple opportunities to respond to Talk:Royal Flush Gang in the 10 months the discussion has been open. Unless you would like to discuss it yourself, there is zero grounds to keep it on the revision it's currently on.
Well, multiple messages have been posted to Talk:Royal Flush Gang and none of the users you said supposedly opposed the sourced changes ever came forward. One user did, however, support the article being reverted back to the verified version.
I think it's time the page to be unprotected. If these people who supposedly opposed the changes exist, they obviously don't feel strongly enough about it to respond. There was never a community consensus or discussion against it anyway. Private chats aren't how Wikis are handled.
Sara has powers and knew she'd get them before the season of Legends began and in the episode "Ship Broken" Sara gained the powers of Foresight. It was also explained by Charlie that it was because her body was "Radiated By Godly Light" affecting her human philology so does this technically make her a Meta-Human??Because we have a category for Metas who get their powers through other means such as Livewire getting her powers the energy of a Kryptonian mixed with the radiation of Lightning.
In my opinion, I wouldn't say that she is a meta-human based on the current definition of meta-humans in-universe. However, she could be. Honestly, we should wait until we get some sort of information from the show before we classify her as anything. For all we know, this could be temporary.
That is true. I was asking because in this universe Metas are created through so many different ways on The Flash, Supergirl, Black Lightning and even Legends considering how Nate got his powers. Waiting for more context seems fair.
Since they were mentioned to be cybernetic drones, should we put them as robots instead of meta-humans? I forgot about that when I removed them from the clones page, but I don't think we should say they are clones, since clones are genetic copies of people and are not cybernetic.
It's not an assumption, well the SIGINT and the acronym weren't mentioned, but in the last episode of Batwoman it's made clear that the NSA controlled and processed information, they have cryptographic experts among their agents for said purpose, and while speaking about the agency they said that it decipher and developed code as part of their intelligence duties. I'm not assuming it, it was said by the character what they did and it isn't the acronym enough to link the real life agency in the Behind the scene section? It's a real question I'm not being sarcastic
The real life agency, sure. But the name itself and the logo has not been stated. For example, even if someone mentions "Kanye", we as viewers know they are meaning "Kanye West", but we as documenters of the in-universe material only know them to be "Kanye". We have to be careful about what assumptions we make in-universe based on our real world universe.
Ok, so can I place the "Behind the scenes" section with the real life agency and the information that in the episode were given such as the fact that they work with intelligence processing and controlling informations? That was cleary said
For example: in Kanye (Earth-38) page, there is a "Behind the scenes" section with a wikipedia link to Kanye West page, even if the last name wasn't given. Isn't the same for the real life agencies?
Yes, it certainly does. I will add it to our TUD list and make the page later today (unless someone else gets to it first).
Also, I appreciate the spoiler warning! :) Most people just ask the question and I usually can't watch the episode until the day after airing. I have learned to not respond/even read until after I have watched everything.
The wanted pages list is almost completely alternate versions of characters/locations/etc that are only there because something in the doppelganger/doppelplace/etc templates link to them in a hidden way. I don't know how to change this because the code involved with the templates is beyond what I can do but I think it is something that should be fixed because it makes it much harder to locate real "wanted pages" (red links) which would be more useful to know about.