W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: Overandoutnerd

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{Archives}}

Violating the 3RR



You have now made 4 reverts in under 24 hours at the Eleven (Stranger Things) ↗ page. Please stop as more than 3 usually comes with a block.Gooperman (talk) 20:04, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
:Gooperman - That is not correct. Overandoutnerd has made ''two'' reverts that restored the article to their intended revision (here ↗ and here ↗). You, on the other hand, have made ''three'' (1 ↗, 2 ↗, 3 ↗). I see that you started an ANI discussion about this, but I think the dispute at-hand will likely see a resolution by responding to the discussion that this user started on the article's talk page ↗ and following Wikipedia's dispute resolution protocol ↗. ;-) <b><span style="color:#C00000">~Oshwah~</span></b><sup><small><b><span style="color:blue">(talk)</span> ↗ <span style="color:green">(contribs)</span> ↗</b></small></sup> 20:57, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

You are invited to WikiProject AI Tools ↗!



<div style="background: linear-gradient(145deg, #00d9ff 0%, rgba(138, 43, 226) 66%, #bd7bae 100%); width: 80%; margin: 10px auto; border-radius: 3.1px; padding: 3.1px 0;">
<div style="background-color: white; width: 100%">
<div style="text-align: center; background-color: white; margin: auto; padding: 10px;">Hi! I've seen you working on {{#if:User:Overandoutnerd/Scripts/articleSummary|User:Overandoutnerd/Scripts/articleSummary|an AI tool}}. Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject AI Tools ↗, a WikiProject which aims to create and improve AI-using tools for Wikipedia? Please feel free to join us ↗. <span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span> (talk · contribs ↗) 20:26, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
</div>
</div>
</div>

Harry Potter season article



Hello, given the limited information you have primarily published, you shouldn't have simply published the draft in first place, much less without submitting the draft as is usually done. Also, what I've done with the article is an usual process for series when there are already season articles in the main section. Normally, the first season article is a copy of the main article's content, and the main article is simplified to contain only general information about the series, with the remaining information going to the respective season articles. A thing I'm doing right now. Also, the table colors should match the poster color, or in this case, the title card color, not whatever color you want, like the green you've used. And finally, you need to use the correct punctuation marks, like the ', which on Wikipedia should be straight, not crooked. And as I said, this is quite common and you can check it in many articles from the first season of other television series. Marco camino 10 (talk) 16:13, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

:Thanks for your message.

:I believe there may be some misunderstanding regarding how season articles are structured on Wikipedia. Per MOS:TVPRODUCTION ↗, WP:SUMMARYSTYLE ↗ and WP:CONTENTFORK ↗, season articles are intended to expand on season-specific details, not duplicate large portions of the main series article.

:The current version introduces significant duplication of production and casting content that is already covered in the main Harry Potter series article, which goes against standard content splitting practices.

:I agree that the season article can be expanded, particularly with sections like episodes and more season-focused production details, and I’m open to improving it in that direction. However, copying most of the main article content into the season page is not consistent with Wikipedia guidelines. Overandoutnerd (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::I've already shortened the main article's production section, which is the part in which pos information is only about the first season. The thing is to shortener the main article and transfer the information regarding the first season from the main article to the season's article, as it's high quality. As you can see, I've reduced the filming and casting sections, but the development section can't be reduced because it's general to the series. You can verify that this is not something I made up, but that normally when the article of the first season is published, what I have done is done, otherwise I would not have done it. Marco camino 10 (talk) 17:09, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the clarification.

:::I think the key issue here is distinguishing between series-level information and season-specific information.

:::The development material you’ve added largely covers events that took place before the series was produced and applies to the show as a whole (e.g., early discussions, planning, and overall development). Because of that, it belongs in the main Harry Potter television series article.

:::A season article, on the other hand, is intended to cover content specific to that season—such as filming for that season, episode details, and any production elements directly tied to it.

:::Moving general development history into the season 1 article doesn’t just duplicate content, it also places it in the wrong scope, since that information is not exclusive to season 1.

:::I think the best approach would be to keep general development in the main article, and keep this page focused only on material specific to the first season. Overandoutnerd (talk) 17:14, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Given what you say, expanding the section with little extra information makes no sense, because the essential and necessary information would already be in the main article, and the seasonal one would contain irrelevant information. Marco camino 10 (talk) 17:16, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::I don’t think it’s a case of either duplicating the main article or having an empty season page.
:::::Season articles serve a different purpose: they focus on details specific to that season, not the overall history of the series. For example, this page can include episode information, season-specific filming details, casting relevant to this season, and later reception.
:::::The development material you’re referring to is still about the series as a whole (especially pre-announcement discussions), so keeping it in the main article doesn’t make the season page irrelevant. it just keeps each page within its proper scope.
:::::The goal isn’t to move all “important” information here, but to organize it so that general information stays in the main article and season-specific content is expanded here. Overandoutnerd (talk) 17:20, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::And with all due respect, what's usually done is what I'm doing; I'd never seen yours before. Clearly, with this information transferred to the season article, it can, over time, be expanded with new information exclusively about the second season. As I said, the main article, when season articles exist, is meant to contain essential and necessary information about the series in general, and information that is exclusively about a season goes into the season articles, oAnd with all due respect, what's usually done is what I'm doing; I'd never seen yours before. Clearly, with this information transferred to the season article, it can, over time, be expanded with new information exclusively about the second season. As I said, the main article, when season articles exist, is meant to contain essential and necessary information about the series in general, and information that is exclusively about the seasons goes into the season articles. Information about the casting process that was in the main article is only relevant for the first season, while what's relevant for the main article is who plays whom, since that information isn't relevant for future seasons. For example, the filming section of the main article had a lot of extra information that's no longer necessary for a season-specific article.
::::::Basically, it would be wise to create a draft for the second season soon to add expanded information about what comes out (writing, casting, filming, development, and more) and only put the general information in the main article, just as I just did with the first season article and the main one Marco camino 10 (talk) 17:22, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Thanks for the explanation. I think we may be approaching this from different interpretations of scope.

:::::::I agree that season articles should contain information specific to that season, and that the main article should remain a summary of the series overall. However, not all information that happens before or during the first season is automatically “season-specific.”

:::::::For example, material such as early development, initial planning, and franchise-level decisions (including discussions before the series was officially announced) relates to the series as a whole, not uniquely to season 1. That kind of content remains relevant beyond a single season and is therefore better suited to the main article.

:::::::By contrast, content like casting, filming for the first season, episode details, and production activities tied directly to that season clearly belong here and can be expanded over time.

:::::::The concern is that moving broader development and casting process information into this page does not just expand it, but shifts general series content into a single season article, which creates overlap and makes the structure less clear. Overandoutnerd (talk) 17:30, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::But the casting process, a lot of information was part of the process and saying the actors that are going to be main characters is the general information, the information about actors being scouted and so on is specific to the season, at most I'd say the controversy surrounding Paapa Essiedu ↗'s Severus Snape ↗ could be re-added. The same goes for the filming; there's a lot of detailed information that, with a season article, can be simplified to the essentials and a few anecdotes like the royal visit. And then there was the cast; it was an enormous section with all the names, and since there's an article where you can include the entire cast of a season, in the main article you only have include the main characters, and it's not only a good option, but something that's always done when there are season articles. In the "Cast and Characters" section, when season articles already exist, only the main characters are included in the main article, and the recurring and guest characters are each included in their respective season articles. That's why, at the beginning of the Production section, I added the "See also" link which leads to the production of the first season, so that you can see detailed information about the casting, filming, and cast of the first season. Marco camino 10 (talk) 17:42, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::I think part of the issue here is that we’re focusing mainly on casting and filming, while overlooking other parts of the production section.

:::::::::A significant portion of the material—particularly early development and discussions before the series was officially announced, clearly relates to the series as a whole, not to season 1 specifically. That content isn’t tied to the production of a single season and remains relevant beyond it.

:::::::::Because of that, moving it into the season article doesn’t just expand this page, it shifts general series information into a single-season scope.

:::::::::I agree that some elements, such as detailed filming and season-specific production activities, belong here and can be expanded. But broader development and pre-announcement material should remain summarized in the main article.

:::::::::I think it would help to separate these more clearly, rather than treating all production information as season-specific. Overandoutnerd (talk) 17:52, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::The thing is, a lot of the information, for example, about casting, is about the process used for the casting of actors in the first season that for future seasons it won't be necessary because the same actors will be there, except for the new additions. Therefore, if we keep the information and also add information from future seasons, we'll have a very long article, and one of the purposes of writing season articles is to lighten the main article, leaving the essential information there and moving the less necessary details to their respective seasons. To add new main actors of future seasons on the main article, we can include text such as "returning actors from the previous season are... and new additions are..." or simply "the returning actors from the previous season are joined by..." and casting information and other details for future seasons are added to the season articles.

::::::::::That's why in the main article I've simply left it with the main actors and their roles, and, as with the "Cast and Characters" section, the recurring and guest actors have been moved to the first season article along with the rest of the information. For example, I haven't touched the Background and Development sections because those are more general and cover the entire series, but the information that was in Casting, Filming, and Cast and Character is what I've kept in the main article, and what isn't as necessary for the main article and is about the first season, I've moved to the first season article. Then, as we do in the other cases I've mentioned, we'll keep updating the page with the information that comes out about the first season. Marco camino 10 (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::::I think we may be talking past each other slightly.
:::::::::::My main concern hasn’t been addressed yet: a portion of the material (particularly early development and pre-announcement discussions) is about the series as a whole and predates season 1 entirely.
:::::::::::That content isn’t just “detailed” or “less necessary”—it is general series-level information, and moving it into the season article places it outside its proper scope.
:::::::::::I agree that detailed casting lists and expanded production coverage can be placed in the season article, but broader development and series-wide context should remain summarized in the main article.
:::::::::::I think clarifying this distinction is important before deciding what should be moved or retained. Overandoutnerd (talk) 18:09, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::::But what is your concern of the information and style that is already on the main article? So we can have a better idea for each other ideas and have a decision. Because what I've done is something I saw a various times now and, if we have the informations on a season article and can be viewed. I don't se the problem. Let me explain myself better: the purpose of creating season articles is to alleviate the information load of the main article. The main article should contain the most basic and necessary information that regards the ENTIRE SERIES, while the season articles should provide details about the season's production and other aspects. The filming and casting information I've removed is primarily from the first season. For example, it wouldn't be necessary to add that information to future season articles, making it information primarily from the first season, and therefore better left there.

::::::::::::See this draft, Draft:Wonder Man season 1 ↗, in which the information is copied almost entirely, and in the draft that exists for the second season, it is expanded with information from the second season so that, when the season articles are published, the article can be simplified, as the user Favre1fan93 here ↗ correctly states, in which when the drafts are published, the information will be separated and the main article simplified like in this case. Marco camino 10 (talk) 18:17, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Production information predating series announcement doesn't belongs in season 1 article. That information is about the entire series, not season 1 specifically. Overandoutnerd (talk) 18:31, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::::::With all due of respect, Favre1fan93 has agreed with me on this whole matter here ↗. As I've already told you, the process is to transfer the information from the main article to the season articles and simplify the main article with universal information. Because the goal of creating season articles is to lighten the information load of the main article, leaving only the essential information that affects the ENTIRE SERIES, and the rest of the extra or exclusive information that only applies to one season is moved to the corresponding season article. Marco camino 10 (talk) 18:36, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Harry Potter main article



Hi, I've created this sandbox, User:Marco camino 10/sandbox, showing what the main article would look like after the drafts for the first and second seasons are published. Let me know what you think could be added and I'll see how it could be done, but this is roughly how a main article should look after the information is transferred to the season articles and only the universal and most important infromation thas affcts ALL THE SERIES remain on the article. Marco camino 10 (talk) 20:16, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

:Besides Favre1fan93, user Trailblazer101 also says here that the way I do it is correct Marco camino 10 (talk) 22:54, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation ↗: Android 17 (operating system) ↗ (March 31)


<div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: var(--background-color-warning-subtle, #fdf2d5); color: inherit; padding: 0.5em 1em; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;">'''Draft declined'''{{pb}}50px|left ↗Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation ↗ has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.{{pb}}
<nowiki> </nowiki>'''Feedback'''{{pb}}The reviewer, Wisenerd, left the following feedback:
{{divbox|gray|3=This draft is not suitable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general publishing platform. We do not accept:

Read What Wikipedia is not ↗ to understand what content is excluded.|}}<!--
--
-->{{divbox|blue|3=WP:TOOSOON ↗ and WP:CRYSTALBALL ↗}}

'''Next steps'''

'''Need help?'''

'''Scam warning'''
Wisenerd (talk) 00:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)</div><!--Template:AfC decline-->

{| style="margin: 0.4em 2em;"
|- style="vertical-align: top;"
| alt=Teahouse logo ↗
| <div style="background-color:#e1e6db; color: #393D38; padding: 1em; font-size: 1.1em; border-radius:10px;box-shadow:-2px -2px 1px #8e8a78;">Hello, '''Overandoutnerd'''!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the '''Articles for creation help desk ↗'''. If you have any ''other'' questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the '''Teahouse ↗''', a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Wisenerd (talk) 00:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)</div>
|}<!-- Wikipedia:Teahouse/AfC Invitation -->
Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC ↗

Your submission at Articles for creation ↗: Harry Potter season 1 ↗ (March 31)


<div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: var(--background-color-warning-subtle, #fdf2d5); color: inherit; padding: 0.5em 1em; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;">'''Draft declined'''{{pb}}50px|left ↗Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation ↗ has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.{{pb}}
<nowiki> </nowiki>'''Feedback'''{{pb}}The reviewer, YoungForever, left the following feedback:
{{divbox|gray|3=Fails MOS:TVSPLIT ↗. In addition, it also should not be copied and pasted from the main TV series article.|}}<!--
--
-->

'''Next steps'''

'''Need help?'''

'''Scam warning'''
— <span style="color: #E63E62;font-family:Georgia;">'''Young'''</span><span style="color: #414A4C;font-family:Georgia;">'''Forever'''</span><sup style="color: #2D68C4F">(talk)</sup> 16:59, 31 March 2026 (UTC)</div><!--Template:AfC decline-->

Harry Potter season 1 draft



You have various things to change in order to comply with Wikipedia's style guide Marco camino 10 (talk) 22:56, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

April 2026



25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hi, and thank you for your contributions ↗ to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to change the title of :Draft:Android 17 ↗ by cutting its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move ↗", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history ↗, which is legally required for attribution ↗. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be ''moved'' to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits ↗, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab ↗ at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu ↗ for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect ↗ from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves ↗ to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge ↗. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-c&pmove --> <span style="font-family:times new roman"><span style="background-color:purple; color: #7FFFD4">~ŤheŴubṂachine</span>-<span style="color:#339966">840</span><span style="color:red">≈</span></span> 21:19, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

":Draft:Harry Potter (tv series) ↗" listed at Redirects for discussion ↗


30px ↗
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Harry_Potter_(tv_series)&redirect=no Draft:Harry Potter (tv series)]</span> has been listed at redirects for discussion ↗ to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines ↗. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 18#Draft:Harry Potter (tv series)}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> Umais Bin Sajjad (talk) 08:09, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Upcoming expiry of your ipblock-exempt right



Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot ↗ to let you know that your WP:IPBE ↗ right which gave you the ability to bypass IP address blocks will expire on 17:34, 2 May 2026 (UTC). If your IP is still blocked, please submit a new request by following the instructions at the IPBE page; otherwise, you do not need to do anything. <small>{{grey|To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion ↗.}}</small> Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 25 April 2026 (UTC)