![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
The
February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
18:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
There's some good links here: [1] Alientraveller ( talk) 12:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I fret, but I reckon the costumes look too rubbery (except for Rorshach and Silk Spectre). Still, it's going to be a good film. Alientraveller ( talk) 13:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I hear you. There's nothing that steams my fleckmans more than when someone is asked not to create a mess and they do so anyway. Times like this the site drives me nuts. There's another user who is hell-bent on creating nanostubs relating to a cartoon series. They've all been clobbered but one. His answer to me was to blank my concern from his talk page. Kids nowadays. :) -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 00:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Times like this I wish I were still an admin. Too much insanity, too few keepers. -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 00:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Erik, if you would like to continue our discussion about IPs started on my grand-grand-userpage, I'd suggest you move it here. Your page is easier to remember. -- 87.189.93.245 ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for (sorry, but I have to say: finally) taking a look at what I described the whole time. Seriously, thank you. -- 87.189.93.245 ( talk)
Copied from User talk:87.189.121.82 for context.
[...] If you feel that any editor has been unfavorable in their approach, you can file the relevant report. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 00:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Considering that violating 3RR is disruptive behavior, I don't believe I was inaccurate in describing the meaning of that breach. Like I've said, though, I was mistaken. Regarding IPs, I don't disagree with your perspective. I think that the fact that most disruptive edits come from IPs don't help the mindset, even if it's clearly not true in every case. Maybe it's just me, but having a user account seems appropriately contractual with an intention to edit Wikipedia. Of course, it's not imperative for all contributions to be centralized, but I think that the pros outweigh the cons. However, I'm not sure about the benefit when you reflect that the disdain goes both ways -- lack of respect for IPs, and your opposition to being part of Wikipedia's current editorship. How come this is the case? The situation at The Incredible Hulk is unfortunate, but conflict is inescapable in Wikipedia, even for those who just want to edit out of pure enjoyment of sharing knowledge. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 00:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
End of copy.
Hello Erik. I just wanted to say thanks for your note on the filmproject page. Actually, I have removed external links that don't meet wikipedia's criteria a few times in the past. One of these caused a long and involved situation that was quite a hassle. So now sometimes (though not everytime) I like to get other editors input so that, if the spamming editor gets a little cranky, we can point to a spot where, along with leading them to WP:LINKS, we can show that other editors have agreed on the removal of their links ahead of time. Thanks again for your time and for the idea of keeping the warning templates handy. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 05:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I recently expanded The Secret of Treasure Island from a stub and put it up at T:TDYK, we'll see what happens. I looked through a bunch of different places for sources, but I would really appreciate it if you could find any more? Cirt ( talk) 06:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
Thanks for your note on my talk page. I've updated the section in question with a reference. Please let me know if you have any questions about my citation!
Thanks,
Webbbbbbber ( talk) 19:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
D'oh! Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 21:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I've been improving the article Reservoir Dogs lately and I know that there is still a way to go, but I would like to go to FAC eventually. I didn't get any comments at PR so I was thinking of contacting a user personally. I remembered you from the deletion discussions so I wanted to ask for your help. Can you take a quick look at the article and tell me some other ways in which it can be improved besides the obvious "fact" tags in the DVD and Cast section? I would greatly appreciate your help, thanks! The Dominator ( talk) 04:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you been watching our faithful friend Don Murphy and his glorious comeback to Wikipedia? How about his CIA-like demand that his World of Warcraft minions find dirt on Gb, Steve, and myself? LOL. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Gee, you guys lead much more exciting Wikipedian existences than I!
Jim Dunning |
talk
02:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It is said Steve got upset and left, but I think he's stronger than that. Returning would be a good way to ignore bullies like Murphy. The producer is just bitter Bay revealed he had little involvement in the finished film once Spielberg and di Bonaventura came on board: what does Bay keeping his backfee have to do with the article's discussion of the film cutting costs? And to be honest, I'd be proud to be outed as a Wikipedian. In fact most people I know think it's cool I do well here. But I think the people on his forum no better than to follow him during his childish mood swings. Most of them are only there because Roberto Orci chose to post at his forum instead of the official movie site. Did you ever read Murphy and DeSanto's treatment? It was lame: an origin of the Transformers that ripped off GoBots and Optimus flying in truck mode. Alientraveller ( talk) 10:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I know exactly what you're saying about losing interest in some film articles once they're released, though I stopped with Cloverfield more because I just didn't have the time for checking over the sheer number of edits I'd see for that one when checking my morning watchlist; it tended to overwhelm everything else. Also, hello! I've swallowed my pride, buried my petulance, desysopped my anger. With the help of a friendly admin I've followed your recommendation and excised some of the more revealing edits in my history, and I now feel re-energised and ready to come back. Still slightly embarrassed about my reaction to it all (it was more out of anger than any fear that "ColScott's" ineffectual threats would actually lead anywhere), but the time off has allowed me to refocus my attentions, which had drifted somewhat in the preceding weeks. Expect to see a more committed editor (both in mainspace and beyond) from now on. It's also allowed me time to actually read this site of ours; I've lost count of the number of brilliant, interesting, unique articles I've read these last few days, flitting from article to article unhampered by the need to be fact-checking, grammar-checking and policy-checking as I go. I must have read several months worth of WP:AN and WP:ANI too; the politics of this place are far more complicated than I ever imagined. Anyway, trying not to make a big deal of this (it's not), so I'll shut my hole now and get back to editing. All the best, and thanks. Steve T • C 16:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Holy crap, it's a good job he rejected my offer. I didn't realise what kind of shitstorm the proposal would have generated. I've just read through what must be the whole tortuous history of the Brandt article deletion controversy, and while a complex merge not unlike the one I outlined to ColScott was indeed enacted and subsequently upheld in deletion review and BDJ's abritration, no way would it have been worth it to become involved in something like that. If ColScott had produced all his films under one company's banner, then it might have been easier, but with his output fractured between several... I can't envision any outcome which would be uncontroversial. Steve T • C 22:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
I've been thinking about starting an article on Prehistoric fantasy films (aka Caveman Flicks). It would be interesting to compare costumes, sets, plots, historical inaccuracies, etc... Do you think I would be able to get away with Fair Use of non-free images for the purposes of comparison in such an article? What are your thoughts on this?
Webbbbbbber ( talk) 17:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello Erik, Thanks for your suggestion. I understand your comments and think it is a good one for films that may not happen. I also like the work you have done with many of the film articles. However, regarding this film, "The Informant", production has already started in Decatur, and filming is about to follow. This film is not a "maybe". As I write this, production teams are currently in Decatur, Illinois modifying several filming sites to simulate what they looked like in the early 1990s. News in Central Illinois also verify these facts. They are reporting almost daily on the news about production teams already there modifying those sites. In addition, Decatur newspapers stated that crew members, "especially grips, electricians, sound men, production assistants, etc.," are being sought and listed a fax number for production manager Michael Polaire. In other news related to "The Informant," a classified ad in a recent Decatur Herald & Review requested rental of "1990-1992 vehicles," including "1990-1992 Porsche, Range Rover, BMW, Mercedes, LTD-Crown Vic." The ad also requested "tractor trailers, tankers and a combine," and said the production would be filmed in Decatur next month after the production team has the filming sites ready. Several of these references are listed below:
Decatur Herald & Review March 7, 2008
[2]
Decatur, Illinois WCIA-3 Television News March 7, 2008 [3]
Galesburg, Illinois newspaper March 11, 2008 [4]
Character list [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by ReadQT ( talk • contribs) 16:30, March 12, 2008
Thanks tons sweetie, but I already have it in my collection. User:EraserGirl/Women_Screenwriters Feel free to recommend more! EraserGirl ( talk) 15:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to let you know that I've AfD'd List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck" again, so your arguments are welcome. The Dominator ( talk) 15:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Considering you're a big fan, does anything of the Hulk's animation remind you of Norton (considering he provided the motion capture). Alientraveller ( talk) 16:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I can't help but feel there was another reason you chose that tribal image for Doomsday... Alientraveller ( talk) 22:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey Erik, I stumbled my way into your User Page (not drunkenly I might add) and I couldn't help but notice that you're able to pool resources from University. That then reminded me of all of them sources you found for Batman Begins (yeah, it felt it bit like that cliché 'man realises at the end of the film after all the clues come together and makes him realise the answers were in front of him' scenario) and I was wondering if you could do something like that for me. Well, not for me, but for the Daredevil film's article. I need as much good/useful info as possible for the production of the film, if you'd be able to do so. I have the DVD, and currently I'm sifting through IGN's news database for useful info, but it's limited in various ways. I understand that most people wouldn't go in over a weekend, and also many have their Easter break for at least the next two weeks, but if you were able to find time to do so (even for just a couple of good sources) - that'd be sweet! Appreciate you reading this, bro. -- Harish - 17:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 04:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you seen the abortion themed documentary Lake of Fire which was made by American History X director Tony Kaye? It is the best movie I've seen this year and does not take sides, it only reports. It's a must see. Creamy3 ( talk) 20:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Sounds like a good movie. Thanks for the tip on archiving. -- Creamy3 ( talk) 22:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik
I notice on you Linkspam list is my website. Can you tell me what criteria you use for creating this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.28.178.35 ( talk) 09:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I'd really like an answer to this, I feel that my site is unjustly on a list called Linkspam? Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.171.242 ( talk) 22:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik Thanks for your reply. I actually object to my site being on this list because it is picked up by google search and as you say, "links being indiscriminately solicited by one person" which my site certainly isn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.171.242 ( talk) 10:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, the movie's apparently being shot as we speak, though the producers are also keeping a tight lid on it so I can't find any reliable sources. So for now I should just merge that with the book's article? And thanks for your help! Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 00:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I put something there, like a li'l ol' tombstone. I'd be terribly surprised if, after a diaper change, he wasn't back again at some point. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 04:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, not really, but my wife is brewing coffee in our hotel room and I could sneak away for a few moments. I do enjoy reading and talking about films which stems back from my University days when I was a film reviewer part-time in between cartooning stints. Many wasted hours in darkened theaters led to my involvement in a film group where I ended up doing the usual goofer and best boys boy jobs, predominantly on independent films. That background later came in handy when my first book was turned into a documentary film. Thank you for your note on my "talk page" and I have noticed your many fine contributions not only to discussions but also as an editor. Keep in touch. Bzuk ( talk) 15:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC).
Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~
-- Cinemaniac ( talk • contribs • critique) 02:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, it's me EclipseSSD. Just wanted to tell you that I've managed to create the entire Beverly Hills Cop (film series) article by myself, and also to ask you what you think about it. Took me quite a while to create. I hope it's good, but tell me what you think and I'll try and improve where possible. Thanks -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 19:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
I see you are running for the Wikiproject coordinator position. You certainly have my vote as I was very impressed by your work on the Beowulf (2007 film) article - could you put a brief reminder on my talk page when voting begins? It may slip my mind otherwise. Thanks, - Classicfilms ( talk) 07:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
For what is your reason of redirecting 2012 (film)? I think the article I put together was fairly decent and that it may have some potential for people to build off of. Maybe you and I could collaborate on it. Ok? Please reply back. Thank you. -- Tj999 ( talk) 15:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I am always trying to improve my user page, lol. Reply back, thank you. -- Tj999 ( talk) 04:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal to extend the nomination period and your thoughts on the matter are requested. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 05:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible just to redirect the old one? There aren't that much substantial differences besides a death list, which is usually removed, and Wikipedia usually has the english naming conventions over foreign ones. (Although I admit I wasn't aware of the prior article's existence when I made the new one)-- CyberGhostface ( talk) 00:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
You are certainly very well qualified to work on this project. I support all of the nominees save one. And I meant what I said - Fight Club is an exceptional article!! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 20:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Must have been in the middle of editing when I adjusted the image and to keep his work he just copied and pasted the text he was working on. What's up, haven't talked to you in awhile. How's school life treatin' ya? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I’ve fixed the punctuation for the pieced quotations, removed the IMDb links, and responded to the image concerns (oh, and retitled the Legacy section to ‘Adaptations’.) I believe that deals with all your concerns except the sources; thanks for providing a list, I will see about adding in more of them. (As for an image about the Mummy, I have so far not been able to find a good CGI picture of the character, but I’ll continue looking.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 21:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
(bump) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 23:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
The
March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your great comments on CoM. In another matter, I was wondering if you knew if there was a noticeboard where I can get help and advice about uploading images. I want to upload an image of a very rare plant, but due to its status, most, if not all of these images are copyrighted. There are many sources to choose, from academic, scientific, to general reference books. Any idea where I can go for help? Thanks again. — Viriditas | Talk 05:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I enjoyed reading your (and others') contributions to this article. I do have a fondness for classic films and consider the film a seminal work by Orson Welles. I did notice some variation in the standard format for film articles. I have usually seen the articles in this project group set out in this way:
I have often swapped the Cast and Production notes section but usually I use the same titles and order. Citizen Kane has used "Synopsis" and "Development" and a slightly different approach. The references are also set up with "For further reading" section which is non-standard (but often put in place). I also find that the references as end/footnotes have a number of inconsistencies.
Now, all of this is just rambling, but do you want some help with this article? FWIW Bzuk ( talk) 18:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC).
I thought all this time you were from the United States. How wrong I was... TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 17:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Why do you include such sources as the following link:
http://www.thethunderchild.com/Movies/1954/Them/WhitmoreScenes.html
...and yet remove The Cinemated Man link? Is it conflict of interest, or spam, or links to a personal site, that you are claiming as the reason for deletion?
I'm confused, since you've cited all three reasons on different occassions for the deletions you've made.
Please do not vandalize the external links section of films to only include the ones you like or have connection to. THAT is a conflict of interest. And why not discuss it on the discussion page of each film article rather than just eliminating the links?
Please explain. Humbleradio ( talk) 03:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, someone mentioned your name as someone who might be able to help with a Peer Review? They said you'd done good work on Fight Club. If you have time, I'd appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Peer review/Dirty Dancing, as I'm trying to get the article to FA status. Thanks, El on ka 13:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, and I could be better today, thanks for asking. Um, I wasn't aware about the conssensus to keep the rating out of the article, so in the future I will check for that first. Thanks! RC-0722 247.5/ 1 17:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Erik! Am I wrong in thinking this article is evolving into what reads like a graduate thesis rather than an encyclopedia article? Per the discussion on the talk page, Moni3 admittedly is obsessed with the film, and I think her admiration of and enthusiasm for it is leading her to edit the article with an excessive amount of attention paid to critical analysis of the film by not necessarily worthwhile sources. It's starting to sound like something one might read in a Lynch fanzine. If I'm wrong in thinking the article is veering far off course from the material one is expected to find in a film article, please let me know. As always, I appreciate your input . . . thanks! MovieMadness ( talk) 21:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome. I think you'd be a great coordinator - you're already one of the project "guru"s! Good luck... -- Beloved Freak 10:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Erik. It's me again. Listen, I wanted you to look at the Beverly Hills Cop series article again, and tell me what you think, because I've added the box office performances and critical receptions. I've also revamped the awards section to only include the main nominations. Thanks. PS You have my vote in your quest for project co-ordinator. You've done a great job. Well done, you deserve it. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 12:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Below, in no particular order, are Wikipedia editors with whom I have worked. They have provided me constructive criticism in the past, though outside of our exchanges, I may not always condone their actions elsewhere on Wikipedia. -I don't need this
Why not? TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 22:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Erik, thanks for writing. I did look at the film article and although there are some slight variances in the style guides used (perfectly understandable since a number of editors worked on the article), it appears to be a good attempt at referencing the work. If you would like, I can establish some commonality in the use of the style, mainly in the notation of aspects of the citation such as author name, publisher's location and dates. FWIW Bzuk ( talk) 21:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC).
The format that gradually was adapted in the WP:Aviation Group was the following:
!==References== !===Notes=== !<reflist> !===Bibliography=== !<refbegin> !==External links== !<refend>
The style was adopted for the film articles that I helped develop and appeared as in It's a Wonderful Life.
The reasoning behind the structure of the References section is:
Copyedit from my page:"I guess I was referring more to the section heading layout. Do you think that it would be good to have "Notes" and "Bibliography" subsections at that particular article? Perhaps after the election, as I think that we are both set, we can discuss consistency in terms of referencing. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)"
Thanks for the message - I've indef blocked User:Flakes41 for sockpuppetry. User:Chet lovers lover has already been indef blocked as a vandalism-only account. There may be a couple more out there - if they surface (as I'm not always around) I'd suggest reporting them at WP:AIV with a link to the sockpuppetry case. Thanks. GB T/ C 12:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
From what I could tell, Creamy3 and his friends made up the Creamy Army. Creamy3 was blocked for making a death threat to Chet lover, but I think that it was a joke to a friend who playfully vandalized Creamy3's page. Obviously, the threat was not lightly received by admins, so Creamy3 and a few uncontributive accounts were blocked. In addition, Creamy3 was supported by Cream4 then Flakes41 in the election, so there was probably a little favoritism at play. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 15:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, David! I hope you've been doing well. I was wondering if you were still attending Tribeca Film Festival. The reason I ask is because I recently revised From Within to mention that it will be released at that particular festival. I'm not sure what information you would need (it can be found at the article), but I was wondering if you could have it as one of your tasks to get shots of people involved with From Within at the festvail? Let me know if this is possible or not; I was aware that you messaged WP:FILM inviting any interested editors to be involved. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 20:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the page Animalia (film), which you tagged for speedy deletion on the basis of G4, I wanted you to know that I have removed the speedy deletion tag. This page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because it is only valid with articles which have been deleted as the result of a deletion discussion, such as Articles for Deletion, not articles which have been speedily deleted or PRODed. If you still want the page to be deleted, please re-tag it under a CSD criterion that applies, consider redirecting the article, or use the proposed deletion or the articles for deletion processes. Thanks! Redfarmer ( talk) 16:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Cars 2? I liked the film, but I'd rather see sequels to Monsters, Inc. or The Incredibles. Still, Up and newt sound fun, The Bear and the Bow is using a surprisingly well-known cast, and I was curious Disney didn't mention their John Carter adaptation. Alientraveller ( talk) 19:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
After looking at three articles recently, Mulholland Drive (film), Juno (film) and The Secret of Treasure Island, I am bewildered by the reactions of some of the editors who have become the "gatekeepers" of the articles, bordering into WP:OWN. Do you have time for a discussion? I can take it offline if needed. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 00:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC).
Erik: I'm butting in on your conversation with Bzuk. I'll just give you advance notice that I'm adamantly and resolutely opposed to making the style guidelines more restrictive. In fact, it's my considered opinion that they need to be much less restrictive as regards to specific formating requirements. I think they should be very specific about the intended result and leave to the editors some discretion about how to achieve that.
The attempt to turn the style book into absolute rules rather than guidelines goes against the entire spirit of Wikipedia. After all, if the collective wisdom of past Wikipedia editors had wanted them to be rules, they would have made them rules. The reality is that they didn't and made them guidelines, the collective wisdom of past editors to guide us, not to rule over us. If one takes a "guideline", and use it like a club - "No, you can't do that because the MoS says you can't." - then they are no longer guidelines, they are rules. Best, Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 01:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
For Erik, in gratitude to his invaluable guidance and assistance in 10 frenzied days writing and answering questions for Mulholland Dr. Moni3 ( talk) 17:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC) |
Hi, just to let you know that I've looked at the deletion discussion taking place on this film, and as an alternative, I've also added a merge proposal tag to it, in the event that a merge be possible rather than full-out deletion. I think this is a better alternative, and should be done in the long run. Let me know what you think about it. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 18:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
It's my pleasure to inform you that you have been elected to serve as a Coordinator of WikiProject Films for the next six months. Congratulations!
As you have also received the greatest number of votes, you also may take the role of Lead Coordinator if so inclined. (Please let me know one way or another so that I can update the relevant pages accordingly.)
If you have not already done so, please visit the coordinators' talk page, where you'll be able to find some open tasks as well as reference material and discussions relevant to you. You might also be interested in a bit of advice that has been written about being a coordinator.
Again, congratulations, and good luck! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 08:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Erik, I've encountered a string of stinging accusations of disruption from another editor and I've decided that it isn't worth it to go any further. Even making any conciliatory comments are being misconstrued. Am I right in this observation? See: [7] FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 22:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC).
Heh. The Just Jared copy-paste bandit strikes again. Steve T • C 08:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Copyedit from my talk page:"Argh, you have that problem, huh? The New York Times can be tricky in terms of linking. Sometimes there are ways to bypass this. Try Googling the keywords site:nytimes.com canby catch-22 and see if you can't access a review directly from the search results. If that does not work, you may want to go to BugMeNot.com to get a user/pass (NYT registration is free) and use it to access the website temporarily. Let me know what happens. Do you happen to have access to any databases of newspapers, journals, or magazines online? — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 12:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
1. If I wanted to create or expand articles on films released at Sundance 2008, is it okay to use this site:
http://www.sundance.org/festival/film_events/alphabetical.asp ? There is a lot of juicy info when you click on the film and a little box pops up, but I don't know if those boxes, which you can't give a direct link to, are a proper source. You would have to be linked to the page and find the film on the page and click on it.
2. How do I create restrictions on who edits articles? I want to make it so only people with a user account can edit the pages I created.
If you could answer these for me I would very much appreciate it.
User:Djbj16 (
talk) 01:21, 16 April 2008
Hi, I noticed your other comments on AfD disccusions for film. Would you mind having a look at this one: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraught? Thank you! Dgf32 ( talk) 16:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, sorry, sorry and sorry some more. I got confused because Defiance (film) didn't redirect to Defiance. — 97198 talk 14:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Erik. It's me EclipseSSD. Listen, I would like you to know that I've put in a request for adminship, and if you would like to participate in that discussion, it would be great. Thanks, -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 15:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I noticed Bzuk not only has changed the cast list for Now, Voyager from the usual format to a box, but has designated it a "minor" edit, as well. I'm opposed to presenting cast lists in a box because I think they're unsightly and not very encyclopedic in nature. A bulleted cast list certainly seems to be far more common than boxes. Do you feel this an issue of style that should be discussed before other film articles are changed the same way? As always, thanks for your input. MovieMadness ( talk) 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
One, I don't know his age and if I did it shouldn't be relevant, Wikipedia is not censored. I'm not sure if you understood the purpose of the question, but I think a calm and polite answer to a completely irrelevant, awkward and rude question would be a good indicator of how good an admin this person would become. The Dominator Talk Edits 03:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Just wanted to point out that an RfC has been filed on me, and invite you to participate (one way or the other) if you're interested. Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 19:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Erik, I have a question for your perusal. The use of two or more date conventions for a film article always struck me as being inconsistent. In a friendly discourse, Collectonian indicated that ISO dates are required for citation templates. While I have often adapted the template to read the same dates as the rest of the article's established date format, I was not aware that ISO dates were specified. Can you clear up this point? FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 20:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC).
date=
attribute, I write it like [[2008-04-22]]. My impression has been that based on an editor's preferences, this entry will format itself to your preference. For example, it could appear as April 22, 2008 or as 22 April 2008. Anonymous IPs cannot set preferences, so they only see 2008-04-22. Is this where the dispute lies? I've only used the aforementioned templates in film articles, so I'm afraid I'm not fully understanding the issue. Could you outline the differences side by side? —
Erik (
talk •
contrib) -
21:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)."Sage advice, a kindergarten teacher would probably have said, "say 'sorry,' shake hands, and treat each other with respect." Hope our "children" listen. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 12:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC).
I was doing a rewrite of James Kirk, and it appears that my sectioning of the lead doesn't appear to be showing up after I save my edit. Is there something going on in the article that I am unaware of? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
my bad. should i get rid of the article or just leave it the way it is?
-thanks for the help -- Cman7792 ( talk) 00:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Your thoughts are requested! (Please bookmark the coordinator talk page if you haven't already, so as to save time messaging.) Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 08:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Please don't dump a whole heap of citations on the talk page though: I do check Google News a lot and these articles tend to be written for a general reader who doesn't know basics like when Iron Man was created, the film being Downey's big comeback etc etc. I implemented the production notes a while ago so the article is comprehensive, therefore you should just leave articles with really worthwhile tidbits (no cast backslapping). Thanks. Alientraveller ( talk) 16:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Please read this, and then leave your thoughts here. Thanks! Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 19:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
could you fix my article on curtis kelly of the uconn huskies, who is probably transfering to quinnipiac. i made two short articles in one. -thanks -- Cman7792 ( talk) 22:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Yo Erik, response at my talkpage. Skomorokh 03:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
One one hand I do think the manual of style is worth following on this subject.
But on the other hand I think it's unfortunate that you just remove the text, and the subject you post on your edits is counter-productive. "POV wording" is pretty meaningless, and raises hackles - at least that was my feeling when I saw your editing on three articles that happened to be on my watch list.
Couldn't you please do the necessary editing to move the mention of the award farther down in the article, and as subject specify exactly why you're doing it?
Thanks. -- RenniePet ( talk) 17:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I hope it's not too personal but how old are you? I'm nineteen. Just reply on this page, I'm watching it. TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 18:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, most of film articles mention Academy Awards in first or second paragraphs of the introduction section. It's common for Wikipedia article to start with "A is an Academy Awards-winning YEAR GENRE film by DIRECTOR" or "B is an Grammy Award-winning GENRE singer". This looks like an established practice to me.
If you disagree, you may replace this with "The film won an Academy Award for Best Original Song" in the 1st paragraph. Netrat_msk ( talk) 18:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
So you'll know why I reverted this edit, stating that a film was nominated for an Academy Award is not a violation of neutral point of view. There is no opinion involved. The film did in fact receive the nomination. I am not saying that the statement about the nomination should or should not remain in the article; but an accurate reason needs to be given for deleting it. Perhaps you deleted for another reason, but whether or not a film gets a nomination is not a point of view. It is a fact. If you wish to delete again, consider a more accurate reason to put in the edit summary. Thanks. Ward3001 ( talk) 18:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
You are of course correct about the MoS, it was the wording and the deletion that made me revert. In general though i find (after checking) that about 30-50% of the movies that i spot checked mention academy awards in the first sentence. So POV is a rather strong wording. (and imho also wrong) -- Kim D. Petersen ( talk) 18:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
The
February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
18:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
There's some good links here: [1] Alientraveller ( talk) 12:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I fret, but I reckon the costumes look too rubbery (except for Rorshach and Silk Spectre). Still, it's going to be a good film. Alientraveller ( talk) 13:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I hear you. There's nothing that steams my fleckmans more than when someone is asked not to create a mess and they do so anyway. Times like this the site drives me nuts. There's another user who is hell-bent on creating nanostubs relating to a cartoon series. They've all been clobbered but one. His answer to me was to blank my concern from his talk page. Kids nowadays. :) -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 00:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Times like this I wish I were still an admin. Too much insanity, too few keepers. -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 00:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Erik, if you would like to continue our discussion about IPs started on my grand-grand-userpage, I'd suggest you move it here. Your page is easier to remember. -- 87.189.93.245 ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for (sorry, but I have to say: finally) taking a look at what I described the whole time. Seriously, thank you. -- 87.189.93.245 ( talk)
Copied from User talk:87.189.121.82 for context.
[...] If you feel that any editor has been unfavorable in their approach, you can file the relevant report. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 00:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Considering that violating 3RR is disruptive behavior, I don't believe I was inaccurate in describing the meaning of that breach. Like I've said, though, I was mistaken. Regarding IPs, I don't disagree with your perspective. I think that the fact that most disruptive edits come from IPs don't help the mindset, even if it's clearly not true in every case. Maybe it's just me, but having a user account seems appropriately contractual with an intention to edit Wikipedia. Of course, it's not imperative for all contributions to be centralized, but I think that the pros outweigh the cons. However, I'm not sure about the benefit when you reflect that the disdain goes both ways -- lack of respect for IPs, and your opposition to being part of Wikipedia's current editorship. How come this is the case? The situation at The Incredible Hulk is unfortunate, but conflict is inescapable in Wikipedia, even for those who just want to edit out of pure enjoyment of sharing knowledge. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 00:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
End of copy.
Hello Erik. I just wanted to say thanks for your note on the filmproject page. Actually, I have removed external links that don't meet wikipedia's criteria a few times in the past. One of these caused a long and involved situation that was quite a hassle. So now sometimes (though not everytime) I like to get other editors input so that, if the spamming editor gets a little cranky, we can point to a spot where, along with leading them to WP:LINKS, we can show that other editors have agreed on the removal of their links ahead of time. Thanks again for your time and for the idea of keeping the warning templates handy. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 05:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I recently expanded The Secret of Treasure Island from a stub and put it up at T:TDYK, we'll see what happens. I looked through a bunch of different places for sources, but I would really appreciate it if you could find any more? Cirt ( talk) 06:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
Thanks for your note on my talk page. I've updated the section in question with a reference. Please let me know if you have any questions about my citation!
Thanks,
Webbbbbbber ( talk) 19:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
D'oh! Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 21:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I've been improving the article Reservoir Dogs lately and I know that there is still a way to go, but I would like to go to FAC eventually. I didn't get any comments at PR so I was thinking of contacting a user personally. I remembered you from the deletion discussions so I wanted to ask for your help. Can you take a quick look at the article and tell me some other ways in which it can be improved besides the obvious "fact" tags in the DVD and Cast section? I would greatly appreciate your help, thanks! The Dominator ( talk) 04:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you been watching our faithful friend Don Murphy and his glorious comeback to Wikipedia? How about his CIA-like demand that his World of Warcraft minions find dirt on Gb, Steve, and myself? LOL. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Gee, you guys lead much more exciting Wikipedian existences than I!
Jim Dunning |
talk
02:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It is said Steve got upset and left, but I think he's stronger than that. Returning would be a good way to ignore bullies like Murphy. The producer is just bitter Bay revealed he had little involvement in the finished film once Spielberg and di Bonaventura came on board: what does Bay keeping his backfee have to do with the article's discussion of the film cutting costs? And to be honest, I'd be proud to be outed as a Wikipedian. In fact most people I know think it's cool I do well here. But I think the people on his forum no better than to follow him during his childish mood swings. Most of them are only there because Roberto Orci chose to post at his forum instead of the official movie site. Did you ever read Murphy and DeSanto's treatment? It was lame: an origin of the Transformers that ripped off GoBots and Optimus flying in truck mode. Alientraveller ( talk) 10:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I know exactly what you're saying about losing interest in some film articles once they're released, though I stopped with Cloverfield more because I just didn't have the time for checking over the sheer number of edits I'd see for that one when checking my morning watchlist; it tended to overwhelm everything else. Also, hello! I've swallowed my pride, buried my petulance, desysopped my anger. With the help of a friendly admin I've followed your recommendation and excised some of the more revealing edits in my history, and I now feel re-energised and ready to come back. Still slightly embarrassed about my reaction to it all (it was more out of anger than any fear that "ColScott's" ineffectual threats would actually lead anywhere), but the time off has allowed me to refocus my attentions, which had drifted somewhat in the preceding weeks. Expect to see a more committed editor (both in mainspace and beyond) from now on. It's also allowed me time to actually read this site of ours; I've lost count of the number of brilliant, interesting, unique articles I've read these last few days, flitting from article to article unhampered by the need to be fact-checking, grammar-checking and policy-checking as I go. I must have read several months worth of WP:AN and WP:ANI too; the politics of this place are far more complicated than I ever imagined. Anyway, trying not to make a big deal of this (it's not), so I'll shut my hole now and get back to editing. All the best, and thanks. Steve T • C 16:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Holy crap, it's a good job he rejected my offer. I didn't realise what kind of shitstorm the proposal would have generated. I've just read through what must be the whole tortuous history of the Brandt article deletion controversy, and while a complex merge not unlike the one I outlined to ColScott was indeed enacted and subsequently upheld in deletion review and BDJ's abritration, no way would it have been worth it to become involved in something like that. If ColScott had produced all his films under one company's banner, then it might have been easier, but with his output fractured between several... I can't envision any outcome which would be uncontroversial. Steve T • C 22:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
I've been thinking about starting an article on Prehistoric fantasy films (aka Caveman Flicks). It would be interesting to compare costumes, sets, plots, historical inaccuracies, etc... Do you think I would be able to get away with Fair Use of non-free images for the purposes of comparison in such an article? What are your thoughts on this?
Webbbbbbber ( talk) 17:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello Erik, Thanks for your suggestion. I understand your comments and think it is a good one for films that may not happen. I also like the work you have done with many of the film articles. However, regarding this film, "The Informant", production has already started in Decatur, and filming is about to follow. This film is not a "maybe". As I write this, production teams are currently in Decatur, Illinois modifying several filming sites to simulate what they looked like in the early 1990s. News in Central Illinois also verify these facts. They are reporting almost daily on the news about production teams already there modifying those sites. In addition, Decatur newspapers stated that crew members, "especially grips, electricians, sound men, production assistants, etc.," are being sought and listed a fax number for production manager Michael Polaire. In other news related to "The Informant," a classified ad in a recent Decatur Herald & Review requested rental of "1990-1992 vehicles," including "1990-1992 Porsche, Range Rover, BMW, Mercedes, LTD-Crown Vic." The ad also requested "tractor trailers, tankers and a combine," and said the production would be filmed in Decatur next month after the production team has the filming sites ready. Several of these references are listed below:
Decatur Herald & Review March 7, 2008
[2]
Decatur, Illinois WCIA-3 Television News March 7, 2008 [3]
Galesburg, Illinois newspaper March 11, 2008 [4]
Character list [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by ReadQT ( talk • contribs) 16:30, March 12, 2008
Thanks tons sweetie, but I already have it in my collection. User:EraserGirl/Women_Screenwriters Feel free to recommend more! EraserGirl ( talk) 15:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to let you know that I've AfD'd List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck" again, so your arguments are welcome. The Dominator ( talk) 15:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Considering you're a big fan, does anything of the Hulk's animation remind you of Norton (considering he provided the motion capture). Alientraveller ( talk) 16:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I can't help but feel there was another reason you chose that tribal image for Doomsday... Alientraveller ( talk) 22:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey Erik, I stumbled my way into your User Page (not drunkenly I might add) and I couldn't help but notice that you're able to pool resources from University. That then reminded me of all of them sources you found for Batman Begins (yeah, it felt it bit like that cliché 'man realises at the end of the film after all the clues come together and makes him realise the answers were in front of him' scenario) and I was wondering if you could do something like that for me. Well, not for me, but for the Daredevil film's article. I need as much good/useful info as possible for the production of the film, if you'd be able to do so. I have the DVD, and currently I'm sifting through IGN's news database for useful info, but it's limited in various ways. I understand that most people wouldn't go in over a weekend, and also many have their Easter break for at least the next two weeks, but if you were able to find time to do so (even for just a couple of good sources) - that'd be sweet! Appreciate you reading this, bro. -- Harish - 17:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 04:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you seen the abortion themed documentary Lake of Fire which was made by American History X director Tony Kaye? It is the best movie I've seen this year and does not take sides, it only reports. It's a must see. Creamy3 ( talk) 20:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Sounds like a good movie. Thanks for the tip on archiving. -- Creamy3 ( talk) 22:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik
I notice on you Linkspam list is my website. Can you tell me what criteria you use for creating this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.28.178.35 ( talk) 09:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I'd really like an answer to this, I feel that my site is unjustly on a list called Linkspam? Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.171.242 ( talk) 22:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik Thanks for your reply. I actually object to my site being on this list because it is picked up by google search and as you say, "links being indiscriminately solicited by one person" which my site certainly isn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.171.242 ( talk) 10:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, the movie's apparently being shot as we speak, though the producers are also keeping a tight lid on it so I can't find any reliable sources. So for now I should just merge that with the book's article? And thanks for your help! Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 00:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I put something there, like a li'l ol' tombstone. I'd be terribly surprised if, after a diaper change, he wasn't back again at some point. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 04:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, not really, but my wife is brewing coffee in our hotel room and I could sneak away for a few moments. I do enjoy reading and talking about films which stems back from my University days when I was a film reviewer part-time in between cartooning stints. Many wasted hours in darkened theaters led to my involvement in a film group where I ended up doing the usual goofer and best boys boy jobs, predominantly on independent films. That background later came in handy when my first book was turned into a documentary film. Thank you for your note on my "talk page" and I have noticed your many fine contributions not only to discussions but also as an editor. Keep in touch. Bzuk ( talk) 15:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC).
Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~
-- Cinemaniac ( talk • contribs • critique) 02:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, it's me EclipseSSD. Just wanted to tell you that I've managed to create the entire Beverly Hills Cop (film series) article by myself, and also to ask you what you think about it. Took me quite a while to create. I hope it's good, but tell me what you think and I'll try and improve where possible. Thanks -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 19:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
I see you are running for the Wikiproject coordinator position. You certainly have my vote as I was very impressed by your work on the Beowulf (2007 film) article - could you put a brief reminder on my talk page when voting begins? It may slip my mind otherwise. Thanks, - Classicfilms ( talk) 07:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
For what is your reason of redirecting 2012 (film)? I think the article I put together was fairly decent and that it may have some potential for people to build off of. Maybe you and I could collaborate on it. Ok? Please reply back. Thank you. -- Tj999 ( talk) 15:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I am always trying to improve my user page, lol. Reply back, thank you. -- Tj999 ( talk) 04:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal to extend the nomination period and your thoughts on the matter are requested. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 05:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible just to redirect the old one? There aren't that much substantial differences besides a death list, which is usually removed, and Wikipedia usually has the english naming conventions over foreign ones. (Although I admit I wasn't aware of the prior article's existence when I made the new one)-- CyberGhostface ( talk) 00:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
You are certainly very well qualified to work on this project. I support all of the nominees save one. And I meant what I said - Fight Club is an exceptional article!! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 20:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Must have been in the middle of editing when I adjusted the image and to keep his work he just copied and pasted the text he was working on. What's up, haven't talked to you in awhile. How's school life treatin' ya? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I’ve fixed the punctuation for the pieced quotations, removed the IMDb links, and responded to the image concerns (oh, and retitled the Legacy section to ‘Adaptations’.) I believe that deals with all your concerns except the sources; thanks for providing a list, I will see about adding in more of them. (As for an image about the Mummy, I have so far not been able to find a good CGI picture of the character, but I’ll continue looking.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 21:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
(bump) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 23:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
The
March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your great comments on CoM. In another matter, I was wondering if you knew if there was a noticeboard where I can get help and advice about uploading images. I want to upload an image of a very rare plant, but due to its status, most, if not all of these images are copyrighted. There are many sources to choose, from academic, scientific, to general reference books. Any idea where I can go for help? Thanks again. — Viriditas | Talk 05:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I enjoyed reading your (and others') contributions to this article. I do have a fondness for classic films and consider the film a seminal work by Orson Welles. I did notice some variation in the standard format for film articles. I have usually seen the articles in this project group set out in this way:
I have often swapped the Cast and Production notes section but usually I use the same titles and order. Citizen Kane has used "Synopsis" and "Development" and a slightly different approach. The references are also set up with "For further reading" section which is non-standard (but often put in place). I also find that the references as end/footnotes have a number of inconsistencies.
Now, all of this is just rambling, but do you want some help with this article? FWIW Bzuk ( talk) 18:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC).
I thought all this time you were from the United States. How wrong I was... TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 17:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Why do you include such sources as the following link:
http://www.thethunderchild.com/Movies/1954/Them/WhitmoreScenes.html
...and yet remove The Cinemated Man link? Is it conflict of interest, or spam, or links to a personal site, that you are claiming as the reason for deletion?
I'm confused, since you've cited all three reasons on different occassions for the deletions you've made.
Please do not vandalize the external links section of films to only include the ones you like or have connection to. THAT is a conflict of interest. And why not discuss it on the discussion page of each film article rather than just eliminating the links?
Please explain. Humbleradio ( talk) 03:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, someone mentioned your name as someone who might be able to help with a Peer Review? They said you'd done good work on Fight Club. If you have time, I'd appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Peer review/Dirty Dancing, as I'm trying to get the article to FA status. Thanks, El on ka 13:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, and I could be better today, thanks for asking. Um, I wasn't aware about the conssensus to keep the rating out of the article, so in the future I will check for that first. Thanks! RC-0722 247.5/ 1 17:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Erik! Am I wrong in thinking this article is evolving into what reads like a graduate thesis rather than an encyclopedia article? Per the discussion on the talk page, Moni3 admittedly is obsessed with the film, and I think her admiration of and enthusiasm for it is leading her to edit the article with an excessive amount of attention paid to critical analysis of the film by not necessarily worthwhile sources. It's starting to sound like something one might read in a Lynch fanzine. If I'm wrong in thinking the article is veering far off course from the material one is expected to find in a film article, please let me know. As always, I appreciate your input . . . thanks! MovieMadness ( talk) 21:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome. I think you'd be a great coordinator - you're already one of the project "guru"s! Good luck... -- Beloved Freak 10:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Erik. It's me again. Listen, I wanted you to look at the Beverly Hills Cop series article again, and tell me what you think, because I've added the box office performances and critical receptions. I've also revamped the awards section to only include the main nominations. Thanks. PS You have my vote in your quest for project co-ordinator. You've done a great job. Well done, you deserve it. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 12:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Below, in no particular order, are Wikipedia editors with whom I have worked. They have provided me constructive criticism in the past, though outside of our exchanges, I may not always condone their actions elsewhere on Wikipedia. -I don't need this
Why not? TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 22:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Erik, thanks for writing. I did look at the film article and although there are some slight variances in the style guides used (perfectly understandable since a number of editors worked on the article), it appears to be a good attempt at referencing the work. If you would like, I can establish some commonality in the use of the style, mainly in the notation of aspects of the citation such as author name, publisher's location and dates. FWIW Bzuk ( talk) 21:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC).
The format that gradually was adapted in the WP:Aviation Group was the following:
!==References== !===Notes=== !<reflist> !===Bibliography=== !<refbegin> !==External links== !<refend>
The style was adopted for the film articles that I helped develop and appeared as in It's a Wonderful Life.
The reasoning behind the structure of the References section is:
Copyedit from my page:"I guess I was referring more to the section heading layout. Do you think that it would be good to have "Notes" and "Bibliography" subsections at that particular article? Perhaps after the election, as I think that we are both set, we can discuss consistency in terms of referencing. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)"
Thanks for the message - I've indef blocked User:Flakes41 for sockpuppetry. User:Chet lovers lover has already been indef blocked as a vandalism-only account. There may be a couple more out there - if they surface (as I'm not always around) I'd suggest reporting them at WP:AIV with a link to the sockpuppetry case. Thanks. GB T/ C 12:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
From what I could tell, Creamy3 and his friends made up the Creamy Army. Creamy3 was blocked for making a death threat to Chet lover, but I think that it was a joke to a friend who playfully vandalized Creamy3's page. Obviously, the threat was not lightly received by admins, so Creamy3 and a few uncontributive accounts were blocked. In addition, Creamy3 was supported by Cream4 then Flakes41 in the election, so there was probably a little favoritism at play. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 15:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, David! I hope you've been doing well. I was wondering if you were still attending Tribeca Film Festival. The reason I ask is because I recently revised From Within to mention that it will be released at that particular festival. I'm not sure what information you would need (it can be found at the article), but I was wondering if you could have it as one of your tasks to get shots of people involved with From Within at the festvail? Let me know if this is possible or not; I was aware that you messaged WP:FILM inviting any interested editors to be involved. — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 20:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the page Animalia (film), which you tagged for speedy deletion on the basis of G4, I wanted you to know that I have removed the speedy deletion tag. This page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because it is only valid with articles which have been deleted as the result of a deletion discussion, such as Articles for Deletion, not articles which have been speedily deleted or PRODed. If you still want the page to be deleted, please re-tag it under a CSD criterion that applies, consider redirecting the article, or use the proposed deletion or the articles for deletion processes. Thanks! Redfarmer ( talk) 16:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Cars 2? I liked the film, but I'd rather see sequels to Monsters, Inc. or The Incredibles. Still, Up and newt sound fun, The Bear and the Bow is using a surprisingly well-known cast, and I was curious Disney didn't mention their John Carter adaptation. Alientraveller ( talk) 19:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
After looking at three articles recently, Mulholland Drive (film), Juno (film) and The Secret of Treasure Island, I am bewildered by the reactions of some of the editors who have become the "gatekeepers" of the articles, bordering into WP:OWN. Do you have time for a discussion? I can take it offline if needed. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 00:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC).
Erik: I'm butting in on your conversation with Bzuk. I'll just give you advance notice that I'm adamantly and resolutely opposed to making the style guidelines more restrictive. In fact, it's my considered opinion that they need to be much less restrictive as regards to specific formating requirements. I think they should be very specific about the intended result and leave to the editors some discretion about how to achieve that.
The attempt to turn the style book into absolute rules rather than guidelines goes against the entire spirit of Wikipedia. After all, if the collective wisdom of past Wikipedia editors had wanted them to be rules, they would have made them rules. The reality is that they didn't and made them guidelines, the collective wisdom of past editors to guide us, not to rule over us. If one takes a "guideline", and use it like a club - "No, you can't do that because the MoS says you can't." - then they are no longer guidelines, they are rules. Best, Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 01:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
For Erik, in gratitude to his invaluable guidance and assistance in 10 frenzied days writing and answering questions for Mulholland Dr. Moni3 ( talk) 17:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC) |
Hi, just to let you know that I've looked at the deletion discussion taking place on this film, and as an alternative, I've also added a merge proposal tag to it, in the event that a merge be possible rather than full-out deletion. I think this is a better alternative, and should be done in the long run. Let me know what you think about it. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 18:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
It's my pleasure to inform you that you have been elected to serve as a Coordinator of WikiProject Films for the next six months. Congratulations!
As you have also received the greatest number of votes, you also may take the role of Lead Coordinator if so inclined. (Please let me know one way or another so that I can update the relevant pages accordingly.)
If you have not already done so, please visit the coordinators' talk page, where you'll be able to find some open tasks as well as reference material and discussions relevant to you. You might also be interested in a bit of advice that has been written about being a coordinator.
Again, congratulations, and good luck! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 08:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Erik, I've encountered a string of stinging accusations of disruption from another editor and I've decided that it isn't worth it to go any further. Even making any conciliatory comments are being misconstrued. Am I right in this observation? See: [7] FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 22:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC).
Heh. The Just Jared copy-paste bandit strikes again. Steve T • C 08:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Copyedit from my talk page:"Argh, you have that problem, huh? The New York Times can be tricky in terms of linking. Sometimes there are ways to bypass this. Try Googling the keywords site:nytimes.com canby catch-22 and see if you can't access a review directly from the search results. If that does not work, you may want to go to BugMeNot.com to get a user/pass (NYT registration is free) and use it to access the website temporarily. Let me know what happens. Do you happen to have access to any databases of newspapers, journals, or magazines online? — Erik ( talk • contrib) - 12:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
1. If I wanted to create or expand articles on films released at Sundance 2008, is it okay to use this site:
http://www.sundance.org/festival/film_events/alphabetical.asp ? There is a lot of juicy info when you click on the film and a little box pops up, but I don't know if those boxes, which you can't give a direct link to, are a proper source. You would have to be linked to the page and find the film on the page and click on it.
2. How do I create restrictions on who edits articles? I want to make it so only people with a user account can edit the pages I created.
If you could answer these for me I would very much appreciate it.
User:Djbj16 (
talk) 01:21, 16 April 2008
Hi, I noticed your other comments on AfD disccusions for film. Would you mind having a look at this one: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraught? Thank you! Dgf32 ( talk) 16:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, sorry, sorry and sorry some more. I got confused because Defiance (film) didn't redirect to Defiance. — 97198 talk 14:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Erik. It's me EclipseSSD. Listen, I would like you to know that I've put in a request for adminship, and if you would like to participate in that discussion, it would be great. Thanks, -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 15:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I noticed Bzuk not only has changed the cast list for Now, Voyager from the usual format to a box, but has designated it a "minor" edit, as well. I'm opposed to presenting cast lists in a box because I think they're unsightly and not very encyclopedic in nature. A bulleted cast list certainly seems to be far more common than boxes. Do you feel this an issue of style that should be discussed before other film articles are changed the same way? As always, thanks for your input. MovieMadness ( talk) 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
One, I don't know his age and if I did it shouldn't be relevant, Wikipedia is not censored. I'm not sure if you understood the purpose of the question, but I think a calm and polite answer to a completely irrelevant, awkward and rude question would be a good indicator of how good an admin this person would become. The Dominator Talk Edits 03:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Just wanted to point out that an RfC has been filed on me, and invite you to participate (one way or the other) if you're interested. Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ( talk / cont) 19:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Erik, I have a question for your perusal. The use of two or more date conventions for a film article always struck me as being inconsistent. In a friendly discourse, Collectonian indicated that ISO dates are required for citation templates. While I have often adapted the template to read the same dates as the rest of the article's established date format, I was not aware that ISO dates were specified. Can you clear up this point? FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 20:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC).
date=
attribute, I write it like [[2008-04-22]]. My impression has been that based on an editor's preferences, this entry will format itself to your preference. For example, it could appear as April 22, 2008 or as 22 April 2008. Anonymous IPs cannot set preferences, so they only see 2008-04-22. Is this where the dispute lies? I've only used the aforementioned templates in film articles, so I'm afraid I'm not fully understanding the issue. Could you outline the differences side by side? —
Erik (
talk •
contrib) -
21:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)."Sage advice, a kindergarten teacher would probably have said, "say 'sorry,' shake hands, and treat each other with respect." Hope our "children" listen. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 12:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC).
I was doing a rewrite of James Kirk, and it appears that my sectioning of the lead doesn't appear to be showing up after I save my edit. Is there something going on in the article that I am unaware of? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
my bad. should i get rid of the article or just leave it the way it is?
-thanks for the help -- Cman7792 ( talk) 00:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Your thoughts are requested! (Please bookmark the coordinator talk page if you haven't already, so as to save time messaging.) Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 08:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Please don't dump a whole heap of citations on the talk page though: I do check Google News a lot and these articles tend to be written for a general reader who doesn't know basics like when Iron Man was created, the film being Downey's big comeback etc etc. I implemented the production notes a while ago so the article is comprehensive, therefore you should just leave articles with really worthwhile tidbits (no cast backslapping). Thanks. Alientraveller ( talk) 16:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Please read this, and then leave your thoughts here. Thanks! Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 19:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
could you fix my article on curtis kelly of the uconn huskies, who is probably transfering to quinnipiac. i made two short articles in one. -thanks -- Cman7792 ( talk) 22:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Yo Erik, response at my talkpage. Skomorokh 03:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
One one hand I do think the manual of style is worth following on this subject.
But on the other hand I think it's unfortunate that you just remove the text, and the subject you post on your edits is counter-productive. "POV wording" is pretty meaningless, and raises hackles - at least that was my feeling when I saw your editing on three articles that happened to be on my watch list.
Couldn't you please do the necessary editing to move the mention of the award farther down in the article, and as subject specify exactly why you're doing it?
Thanks. -- RenniePet ( talk) 17:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I hope it's not too personal but how old are you? I'm nineteen. Just reply on this page, I'm watching it. TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 18:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, most of film articles mention Academy Awards in first or second paragraphs of the introduction section. It's common for Wikipedia article to start with "A is an Academy Awards-winning YEAR GENRE film by DIRECTOR" or "B is an Grammy Award-winning GENRE singer". This looks like an established practice to me.
If you disagree, you may replace this with "The film won an Academy Award for Best Original Song" in the 1st paragraph. Netrat_msk ( talk) 18:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
So you'll know why I reverted this edit, stating that a film was nominated for an Academy Award is not a violation of neutral point of view. There is no opinion involved. The film did in fact receive the nomination. I am not saying that the statement about the nomination should or should not remain in the article; but an accurate reason needs to be given for deleting it. Perhaps you deleted for another reason, but whether or not a film gets a nomination is not a point of view. It is a fact. If you wish to delete again, consider a more accurate reason to put in the edit summary. Thanks. Ward3001 ( talk) 18:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
You are of course correct about the MoS, it was the wording and the deletion that made me revert. In general though i find (after checking) that about 30-50% of the movies that i spot checked mention academy awards in the first sentence. So POV is a rather strong wording. (and imho also wrong) -- Kim D. Petersen ( talk) 18:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)