User talk:Joeyconnick

Talk order

I noticed you changed the positioning of the Talk Can Eng template on a few pages where I had added it. It's not a big deal but I want to bring WP:TALKORDER to your attention. The language template goes above the banner shell, not under it. Thanks! Masterhatch (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh sorry... wasn't aware. Seems weird to me but I'll keep that in mind going forward. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:31, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

I agree it does seem weird. I used to put it below the banner shell too until I ran across that page. Masterhatch (talk) 03:13, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate you letting me know in a non-judgmental way! I will try to emulate that next time I point out guidelines to someone. —Joeyconnick (talk) 04:21, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Trout

 Self-trout My bad; I wasn't thinking. ToThAc (talk) 17:41, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

No worries... I double- and tripled-checked before I re-reverted just to be sure the pages were showing up in the expected places. With some of the district articles going by "Regional District of X" rather than "X Regional District", it makes sense it can get confusing. —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:11, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Scream 5 Infobox

Ahhh, I see. I had to find a clearer full size resolution on eBay. That's so annoying that on one entry, they only list half of the cast, while they list practically the entire cast on the sequel lol. But it makes sense I guess; Gallner was a cameo, Brown was unknown, but Minnette was well-known though so that was strange. Madison was pre-Anora, so who knew the psycho chick on fire would win the Oscar?! Love it.

Ulrich was a shock omission, but they probably wanted his appearance to be a secret/surprise until you saw the movie. Alas, they're in the cast section, so that's all that matters. So cast section = credits order, while infobox = stick to either billed above title or just billed on the poster period, correct? --Cinemaniac86^Talk_Stalk 14:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Yeah it's a bit loosey-goosey... I think on some articles, they use the full end credits in the infobox but most I've seen follow the poster billing block and its order. And yeah it is annoying to track down a full-res version of the poster given how IMDb makes it so you have to inspect source, essentially, to see the posters at full resolution.

For the article cast section order vs. the infobox cast order: I myself usually steer clear of getting involved in article cast order battles for films because, unlike with TV shows (MOS:TVCAST), there are no clear rules. I've seen some follow the infobox (i.e. nearly always billing block) order and then add in the rest (probably in full credits order), which makes sense to me because then the two lists are consistent to a point and then the article list just has more entries.

Apparently one or more of the X-Men films have different cast orders in the start credits vs. the end credits, and so some people swear the end credits are definitive, but honestly sometimes there are two sets of end credits: the flashy decorative ones and then the more text-based ones that are usually more complete, and at that point, people are usually just arguing on an "I like it more" basis. I think there it was someone who insisted on putting Hugh Jackman quite high up because of his status in the industry now, conveniently neglecting the fact that for the first film, and arguably the second, he had a much lower profile than Stewart or McKellen. That was the fight that made me decide film cast order battles weren't worth it. 😂 —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:58, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Requesting input on possible page move

Hello, Joeyconnick! I'm reaching out by recommendation of Johnny Au. You are a much more senior Wikipedian than I, so I thought you may be able to point me in the right direction.

The BLAST network is a previous iteration of a rapid transit plan in Hamilton. The project has since evolved to include greater scope, and now carries the name (Re)envision the HSR. However, I have to assume this is the working project name and not the final name of the network. Because of this odd limbo state, I am hesitant to put the page move template on the page, and I have never proposed a page move before.

If you have some time, could you take a look at the page for me and let me know your opinion on its destiny? We could:

• Keep the article as-is, including both the original plans as well as future plans, with potential for a second article once the new system is more concrete
• Keep the article as-is and move it to a new name once announced
• Begin the process to move the page to the new name now

If this is outside of your wheelhouse and you know of someone who might know better, that would also be helpful! Hamilton's transit articles have been collecting dust for a while, so this is my attempt at drawing some attention to it outside of the talk page. Thanks in advance for your help! JaredTamana (talk) 00:41, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi JaredTamana... appreciate you seeking out other folks' advice—few of us at Wikipedia engaged with that much humility early on, me included.

(Or maybe I shouldn't speak for anyone but myself: I definitely didn't!)

I'm for sure not the be-all and end-all of how this should be handled and until you brought it up, I'd never heard of the article, but based on what you've said and the details in the page itself, mainly:

In 2019, the City of Hamilton launched a project entitled (Re)envision the HSR, which was an evolution on the BLAST network. The new plan includes an additional E-Line. As a result, the BLAST network branding is no longer used.

I would go with your first option... keep the page where it is, maybe set up a redirect of the new name (which is, uhm, ugh... but ours is not to reason why, I guess?) to the existing page.

I would probably restructure the existing BLAST page a bit to have a section actually called "(Re)envision the HSR" (is HSR here high-speed rail? because it REALLY shouldn't have a "the" in front of it, then) with all the 2019 onwards stuff in it, then the redirect could target that until there were enough details to flesh out a full article on the new project.

I think the key here is I would have a new article for the new plan and keep BLAST as historical. Much like Relief Line (Toronto) is separate from the successor project, Ontario Line. Once RHSR (or whatever they call it) has enough details to warrant its own article, then most of its content from BLAST can be moved over with a summary left on the BLAST page.

Hmmn... okay, thinking about it more, this article doesn't have the kind of long detailed historical info that Relief Line (Toronto) does. And I see you've anticipated that perhaps the current RHSR may not (hopefully won't!) stick.

Okay... I think probably keep it where it is for now (since RHSR does not seem to be a WP:COMMONNAME), put the redirect in place, restructure the article to include a section on the 1981 plan to use SkyTrain tech, a section on BLAST, and a 2019 onwards section on RHSR. Then if RHSR catches on/becomes the main brand, move it there, otherwise move it to the future name.

Like I said, that's just me. I think the main factors are:

• the existing article isn't super-detailed
• the "new" RHSR moniker does not really seem to have caught on (or at least we aren't citing sources that seem to be using it)

So there doesn't seem to be enough material to support both a separate BLAST article and a new article on RHSR, but BLAST is clearly the better-known concept, so (again, to me) moving it seems premature. A redirect and a bit of restructuring of the article to highlight the 3 main phases/eras (1980s, BLAST, RHSR) seem like a good way forward.

Sorry... this is me working it through in basically real time LOL

Hope my somewhat stream of consciousness remarks help! —Joeyconnick (talk) 07:11, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the prompt reply! Of course I won't take your opinion as gospel (that's what the move consultation is for anyways, right?) but your take is highly appreciated.

HSR in this case is the Hamilton Street Railway. The name is a holdover from its legacy of streetcars. Naturally many in Hamilton are excited to see rails going back in the road, even if this has been well over a decade in planning already.

The redirect is a good idea, I didn't think of that, and an article restructuring makes sense to me. This at least gives a little more clarity for the next few years while we wait for the City and Metrolinx to figure out the specifics.

Hope to see you around! JaredTamana (talk) 19:36, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Prompt: well honestly I was tickled to be asked (and to be recommended by Johnny Au) 😀 so I figured the least I could do was provide my take in a timely manner

HSR: ah I see... that makes more sense!

Figure out the specifics: ah transit in Ontario! Fingers crossed they get some clarity and shovels in the ground soon. 🤞

See you around, I'm sure! —Joeyconnick (talk) 20:18, 13 April 2025 (UTC)