![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
Hi there! I know about the notability guidelines, but figured that since a budget had been set and much work had been done into finding a new director, the article could stay. I actually wasn't the one who created the page. I saw that it was created by another user and that they had blatantly copied the information from the Twilight (2008 film) page, which I found unacceptable, so I began working on the page immediately to improve it. If you feel that merging it into another article is the best course of action, especially if it is to abide by Wikipedia's policies, I wholeheartedly support it. I just hope that all of my hours of work on the article will be saved. ;-) I really appreciate the head's up and thank you for your feedback on this. Let me know what you decide to do either way. And as far as the Twilight (2008 film) article goes, anyone is welcome to edit to it. I actually haven't focused on that article too much as my attention has been on the New Moon article. But feel free to put in some new information if you feel that it will better the article. Again, thank you for your time. – Ms. Sarita Confer 04:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
For taking the time to leave all of those wonderful references and offering to help! – Ms. Sarita Confer 20:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC) |
Very surprised that Fight Club is not an FA. Wow. I wonder what the problem with it is? Hey heres a darker tan version of "the jacket". I used to have a more redder one but it got too small on me, same as this one but I kept this one for vintage timesake!. The Bald One White cat 20:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Incidentally there is an Indian actress called Mala Sinha. Cooincidence? The Bald One White cat 21:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey Erik!
I know you're about as busy on this project as one can be and I know that added tools usually mean added work but I wanted to ask you if you're at all interested in running for adminship. You have most definitely earned the trust of the Film community to put those extra buttons to good use and, the more you are able to do, the more the WikiProject will benefit. What are your thoughts on this?
Peace! SWik78 ( talk • contribs) 15:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I am going to see this movie with my brother in January 2009, do you think it will turn out to be a great one? TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 06:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Interested to know what you thought of both of these if you have the time; I'm considering seeing TDtESS. As for Wanted, the first five minutes promised Fight Club meets The Matrix (which would possibly make it the best film ever made), but for me it swiftly degenerated into a bog-standard (albeit pretty) actioner of very dubious morals and with a thoroughly unlikeable lead character. Steve T • C 08:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Erik, you're very civil so can you explain to an editor using multiple IPs, who falls into WP:UNDUE, why he/she cannot add speculation to Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Will Turner and Elizabeth Swann because they cannot accept the ending of the film? Thank you. Alientraveller ( talk) 12:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for leaving your support. I was wondering if you could answer some of the questions that I asked from the issues you raised. If not, no big deal, I know you're busy. You can always take another look once I take it to FAC. Also, we're planning on starting a tag & assess drive sometime early next year and I've started a basic framework in my sandbox based on the Military History project's prior drives. If there is anything you want to add to it or if you want to modify anything, feel free. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 23:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I was very surprised to see you converted the awards section to a table, since I thought you were one of those who didn't care for boxes in film articles. I think the format you chose makes the list difficult to read, and I believe the situation will get worse if the film continues to receive nominations as the award season progresses, which will make the box overly long and clumsy looking. Formatting awards and nominations never has been addressed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines. Do you think it's time to initiate a discussion about this? Thank you! LiteraryMaven ( talk) 19:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Eric! I didn't mean to suggest prose was a better format. I personally prefer the simple list used in Slumdog Millionaire. It's easy to read and I don't think it provides too much white space. As for Milk, I tried increasing the 2px to 3px but there was no noticeable difference, so I left it as is. I think the problem is the use of the color gray for the dividing lines, since it washes out against the background. As it stands now, it's very difficult to read the list without a distinct break between the different awards. Since you seem to be more proficient than I when it comes to the techical aspects, perhaps you can fix it. Thanks for your response! LiteraryMaven ( talk) 22:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
RE: Valkyrie Critical response
Hello Erik, I very much appreciate your guidance. Can you detail please why you have a problem with adding the Roger Ebert review to the Valkyrie page and what was "messy.?" I very much wish to comply with your guidelines but don't understand at this point. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.146.236 ( talk) 20:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear User:Eric,
I used your advice with success!
Let me know if their is anything else that needs fixing on the film or
series.
Thanx so much for the great advice! I really appreciate it.
ATC
(talk)
21:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
A Nobody
My talk is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-- A Nobody My talk 02:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Certain words are not a good idea in an encyclopedia. Such as "recent".
It very quickly becomes dated.
Better:
or
Tip-O'-the-Day: Write for five years from now...
- 4.240.78.248 ( talk) 06:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
I have the essays since you sent them to me, and will incorporate what I can in the future. Meanwhile, we've redirected the character pages to List of characters in Watchmen. If you can do anything to fill that out (even just copying info from Watchmen; I've been meaning to do that, but I was wondering how to strucure the article), that would be appreciated. Thanks for all your help with the aticle. WesleyDodds ( talk) 05:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello Erik! I just wanted to wish you and your family a merry Christmas! May this Christmas be full of great cheer and holiday spirit. Have a great day and a wonderful New Year, from The Bald One White cat 11:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Merry Christmas, Erik. Hope the day finds you suitably full of food, cheer, and maybe a little illicit alcohol. All the best, Steve T • C 21:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
My christmas was good, and I hope yours was as well. I got a couple of things (special edition DVDs and a book) that should help me on Wikipedia. :D Other than that, it's just been nice to get away from everything. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Why the fuck do you keep on removing the reference to the Australian Synchrotron from the article about Knowing. Just bloody well leave it alone for once. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.110.226 ( talk • contribs) 09:16, December 26, 2008
The page List of Disney feature films represents a films released theatrically (duh) by Disney... but there are some films that Disney released overseas theatrically but only as direct-to-video in the US (if it is released in the US at all). I know that in most cases on film pages, the foreign release dates are not included in the english wikipedia, so could the same philosophy be applied to this page as well, so the page won't reflect foreign-only theatrical releases? Or is that too US-centric? SpikeJones ( talk) 15:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The article
Quantum of Solace you have contributed to has been passed
as a
good article . Well done!
SilkTork *
YES!
12:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
I've just found these two recently created articles:
I know you have an interest in this film, so you may know best how to deal with them. Regards. PC78 ( talk) 23:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Erik, ever so sorry if i have offended but there seems to be a large number of films on wikipedia which provide links to trailers for readers to watch. It seems in line with Wikipedia:External links to provide links to a website which offers:
Sorry this isn't editing related, but it's film related, so oh well. I see that you just watched Planet Terror, and previously, Death Proof. I just wanted to point out that since you have Netflix, you can watch the double feature instantly online (with faux trailers as well). I have Blockbuster online (no double feature for me!), but after visiting family for the Christmas break, I was able to see it with Netflix. Not sure if you saw the full version in theaters or not, but it's much more interesting to see together than separately. I'm still waiting for the release of the full DVD/Blu-ray, hopefully it comes along with the release of Inglorious Bastards. Anyway, just wanted to point it out to you if you weren't aware. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 08:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Rear-window captioning looks interesting and I'm suprised I've never heard about it before. I've been limited with seeing films in theaters in December due to finals but hopefully I can see Benjamin Button sometime this month. I had the opportunity to go and see Slumdog Millionaire for a free screening earlier last month but I had class and was unaware of how good the film was going to be and unfortunately skipped it. For trivia bits and quotes from articles, I'm always surprised to see things that I wrote copied exactly for trivia pages and blogs. It's cool to see information I gathered sourced in newspapers though. I guess the good and the bad offset each other. What I'm surprised with so far is that movie studios haven't considered hiring people or contacting our project with materials to improve articles on their upcoming/released films. I'm sure they're scared of being accused of pushing POV, but I think there are ways they could work with our project to help find better sources, maybe free images, etc. If that ever happens, I think it would benefit the project, but it's likely it won't. There would probably have to be some study that finds a correlation between views to a film article to ticket/DVD sales. You've got to wonder if all of the work you've done for upcoming films has inspired some people to go and see a film based on an interesting production history or a well-developed cast section. Anyway, I'm rambling, so happy new year! -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 13:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi there and Happy New Year! In the last couple of days, PC78 has shown up at my FL review for List of No Country for Old Men awards and nominations and raised a "weak oppose" based on the table style. To me, he's overstating his objections in our WP:FILMS discussion, but maybe I'm wrong. As I've said before, I'm a bit reserved about some members, and I'd appreciate a different set of eyes on the comments. It comes down, in my view, to him saying "I don't like the table, so there". His last comment was "my primary concern here is with regard to the text size." The thing is, I don't find anywhere on WP:FILMS that he mentioned text size. Please take a look when you can and give me your thoughts? Thanks! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 19:32, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
The
December 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)
03:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Just spotted your comment elsewhere about the editor; time permitting, I meant to dig into this more deeply, but it seems to me that the editor is an obvious sock of our old friend User:TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny (aka User:LinkToddMcLovinMontana). Saying that, he has started to use edit summaries on his last few edits, so maybe no action will be needed. As you say, many of the edits are good ones, it's just a hell of a job figuring out which ones sometimes. Steve T • C 23:44, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I began timing every movie that I see in theaters a couple months ago precisely because I've noticed over a long period of time that runtimes listed in reviews are very frequently inaccurate. For instance, the last film I saw, The Wrestler, as you pointed out, is listed by the New York Times as having a 109 minute runtime, but the film in theaters (at least U.S. theaters) is actually closer to 115 minutes, a whole 6 minutes difference. Sometimes the reviews don't even agree with each other; for instance, Fandango lists it as being 105 minutes long. Actually, as I'm checking it now, the NYT's reviews/articles don't even agree with each other: review/ overview. I think the biggest difference in listed runtime I've ever personally observed was My Blueberry Nights, which at the time was stated by many reviews/databases as being 90 minutes long, but in actuality is much closer to two hours (again, at least in U.S. theaters).
I've found that the most accurate secondary source (i.e. not the film itself) for runtimes to be the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), which usually corresponds very closely to the measurements I record. However, for a handful of films, I find there is still a difference (as here with The Wrestler, they also list it as being 109 minutes long). My theory for this is one of two things: (a) they were working with an earlier cut of the film (their page lists it as having been rated back on October 31, shortly after it first screened at Venice), or (b) the film was cut differently for other regions for any number of reasons. (again, all the times I observe are from U.S. theaters, so I guess it is possible there is a different cut in Britain). – Fierce Beaver ( talk) 01:06, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your kind feedback on the article. I do plan to pursue FAC very soon, but I need to get some feedback from a friend who's taken a movie article through first. Incidentally, you might enjoy the flash animation thingy that I did, Writing for the Pictures. I apparently pulled one part out of my ear (I always assumed it was Capital Pictures), but it also has a few worthwhile things that are more on the OR side of things.
Anyway, thanks again and Happy New Year! Scartol • Tok 20:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Dear User:Eric,
I was wondering if you could answer my question I made on the discussion page.
Thanx!
ATC
(talk)
06:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, User:Eric!
I made a reply on the talk page.
Check it out when you get the chance.
ATC
(talk)
23:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok then. (: — Jhn * 16:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I'll probably watchlist it as I have with The Lovely Bones and The Devil Wears Prada, two other film articles that started from books that I had read and developed the articles on extensively. If you've got a Google capture set up, you can add any news items that are relevant ... I'm sure there will be Oscar noms (Kate Winslet will definitely get a nom for this, and (depending on the competition) the statuette itself. She's that good, believe me). When the DVD comes out I'll probably rent it and add things from it as well (that's how DWP got so long, because the commentary and documentary are so informative). Daniel Case ( talk) 19:17, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Ah wow, nice Christmas present, the cinema had a subtitled version up and ready? How was it? Alientraveller ( talk) 10:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Do you think it's worth mentioning Fox News' feud with Cruise over the movie? [1] Alientraveller ( talk) 19:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
I just read an io9 article on the Watchmen ruling. Apparently Fox is Sauron, Palpatine and Lord Voldemort put together, yet I'm going to have to rely on them to continue Narnia now that that mouse jumped the Dawn Treader. Poor Bryan Singer, do you think he'll eventually regret casting Cruise? Alientraveller ( talk) 20:41, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Are you going to write a plot summary? Alientraveller ( talk) 12:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Not that I'm in any way trying to start an edit war here, but... would you, like millions throughout the world, consider William L. Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich a reliable (if not the definitive) account of the Nazi era? If so, then Mertz von Quirnheim is a name used only once in that book - Mertz is the name used most frequently to denote Stauffenberg's confederate. Why is this so hard for you to accept? BassPlyr23 ( talk) 00:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't recall if he was referred to by either name very much in the film. I'd have to check the DVD release, since I'm not planning to see the film again just to settle this discussion. You haven't mentioned whether you consider Shirer a reliable source - why not just leave it for now? BassPlyr23 ( talk) 00:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
MiltonP Ottawa ( talk · contribs) has a funny opinion: interesting information in film articles is trivia. I'm also treating Wikipedia like a fan site and haven't read WP:AVTRIVIA. So I'm basically asking for help because of your " superior intellect" ;) Alientraveller ( talk) 00:20, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I was feeling creative and came up with this:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Future films/Tracking table
If you think it needs anything let me know. I'll figure out somewhere to put it later! :) PC78 ( talk) 19:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I added a new image to Tropic Thunder showing Downey, Jr. and Cruise side-by-side their respective characters. Let me know if you think it is to much (or if I should have only shown Cruise) or if it needs further FUR/cutting down on the caption. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 22:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, if someone can get Apt Pupil and Bryan Singer to GA status then they could be a Good Topic. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I enjoyed reading your comment on Arcayne's talkpage. Very amusing and astonishingly accurate actually. -- Jupiter Optimus Maximus ( talk) 13:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I was reading this article, I noticed you saved it from deletion. Have you thought of taking it to GA? — Realist 2 02:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Erik - I am wondering if you could help me out with this Bollywood film article: Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi. If you check its history, you'll see that this article is a frequent target of vandalism by unregistered or new users. I would like to request semi-protection for the article but am uncertain of who to ask. I thought perhaps you might have some ideas on the topic. Thanks, - Classicfilms ( talk) 12:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
For a while now I've been toying with the idea of taking this template to TfD, and noticed that you yourself intended to do the same about a year or so ago. I saw the deletion argument you have in your sandbox, and was wondering what became of this and what your current thoughts are? PC78 ( talk) 18:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
... is User:PC78/future films any good to you? If not I'll bin it. It's quite a bit out of date by now and largely redundant, and I have no real intention of going through it again myself. PC78 ( talk) 21:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
...check out this bot-created list I've just requested. It lists all articles tagged with {{ Future film}} but without a Future-Class assessment, and vice versa. :) PC78 ( talk) 21:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
As a member of
WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the
project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's
coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing!
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
03:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh Thank You for telling me. Will it be okay for me to creat the page in my sand box then? ChaosMaster16 ( talk) 14:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)ChaosMaster16
Did you edit the page? Tarrant on Wiki ( talk) 11:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't remember seeing your email, but I'm at school so perhaps it's waiting for me at home. I'll check when I can. Cheers! (And thanks for fixing the poster image info.) Scartol • Tok 18:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to show you the new image I was able to get permission for of Cruise. I already added it to the collage on the article ( File:TropicThunderDowneyCruise.png). Flickr really has been helpful these last few weeks. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 22:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Erik, thanks for catching the grade issue on Slumdog Millionaire. I wonder if you could clarify the system for me so that I get it right in the future. I am a bit confused as to how the two banners can have different rankings. Should the other be changed to "Start"? Could you also clarify what needs to happen for the article to reach "B" status? I looked at the guidelines but that didn't help very much. Regards, - Classicfilms ( talk) 16:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
class=B|B-Class-1=yes|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes
in the template. It's a somewhat formal step to show that the article was examined for the criteria. Without the step, it can't be determined if someone really went through the checklist, which was why I reverted the new assessment. Hope that makes sense! Remember that this is per the standards of WikiProject Films, so I don't know if other WikiProjects require such a checklist. —
Erik (
talk •
contrib)
17:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Erik, regarding the curious incident of the coordinator who was stalking, has anyone noticed that extensive googling the two names of the public school system employees fails to place them together at the same school (one doesn't show up any place (no class pages, staff lists), and the principal appears to have retired recently)? Inconclusive, but I'm with the guys waiting until proof more concrete than the unsubstantiated "verbal" accusation of the editor is examined. Hope you've been doing well, by the way.
Jim Dunning |
talk
14:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
You were reverted, in defiance (pardon the expression) of WP:NOR. I was going to trim back the "inaccuracies" section, but there seems to be little point in doing so given the situation in that article. I'm not sure how to proceed as I don't have too much experience dealing with defiance (pardon the expression again) of Wiki rules. Stetsonharry ( talk) 21:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I just discovered that you reverted some vandalism on my userpage a couple weeks ago... thanks! I totally didn't even realize it until just now, so that could have obviously led to a somewhat embarrassing two weeks! In related news, I now have my userpage watchlisted... :) – Fierce Beaver ( talk) 22:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, so you have reverted my changes on the page for The Wrestler claiming that there is no correlation between the death of Paul Fuchs and the movie itself. You wrote, "Revert coverage that is irrelevant to the film; we do not cover such incidents unless there is a connection to the film, like The Dark Knight and Heath Ledger's death."
I fail to see the difference between the two situations.
I must question why this article keeps getting taken down after such mainstream outlets as NY Post and Washington Examiner have picked up on the story. User:Hpchuckyc ( talk) 00:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough. Will do. I thought that I saw a page had been created for him, but was deleted. I will put one up again. I wasn't mad, just confused. Haven't been doing this long. I appreciate your help. User:Hpchuckyc ( talk) 00:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the following post got overlooked in the lengthy discussion re: images in film articles, so I hope you don't mind my directing my question to you on this page.
Re: Tropic Thunder, I agree the images of Downey and Cruise in and out of makeup are appropriate because they show the lengths to which they went to portray their respective characters. I understand why the image of Stiller signing autographs is relevant, because there's an extensive section about promotion and appearances in the article. The image of protesters also seems appropriate because it relates to the section about controversy.
But how does the image of a set constructed for a scene ultimately deleted from the film enhance the article? I could understand if the article included a detailed discussion about why this particular set was built and/or why it was decided not to include the scene in the film, but nothing in the article relates specifically to this image at all. It's my understanding that such images should not be included because they amount to nothing more than window dressing.
I'm trying to understand why some images are considered relevant and therefore acceptable while others are deleted for not meeting Wikipedia requirements, but I keep getting contradictory explanations. Thank you for your input! LiteraryMaven ( talk) 22:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi erik, do you think is is worth the wile to look walle one more time today, because it's rather late by now? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 01:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I going to look for it, before it is too late, im absolutely determined Sha-Sanio ( talk) 01:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
What kind of different way do you mean, I absolutely don't understand what you expect me to do. Sha-Sanio ( talk) 04:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I would like to add some information to the article, that I found on the pixar home page. You can take a look at on my sandbox. Is that what you expect me to do or what else should be done??? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 04:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
No, The Sandbox is called User:Sha-Sanio/Sandbox/Sandbox/Revolutionary Road Sha-Sanio ( talk) 04:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC) Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Is this enough or is there something else that you need to have explained? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have also written about the recent nominations that wall-e received for the BAFTA-Awards. Is there anything else that you want to have in a different way? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well,Erik if you were here you could go watching Revolutionary Road together with me, but as you don't wan't to come, it's up to you. I can't force you, whoever you were. Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have prepared something on the DVD-release of Wall-e and would like to add to the article. If you would like to take a look at it please check my Sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sha-Sanio/Sandbox/Sandbox/Wall-e. If you like you can tell me what you think about it. Sha-Sanio ( talk) 18:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
...does a desire to obtain free images turn into a controversy, ay? *sigh* The ole' "No good deed" Deceased editor User:Jeffpw's mother wrote to me. She doesn't edit Wikipedia at all, but she has taken an interest in following some of its inner politics (she also used to hear about it from her son). This is what she wrote:
I was just reading your user page. Doesn't it become exhausting to get in all these misunderstandings and then have to work so hard to straighten them out? Not just you, but it seems like people are always taking umbrage at something or other and by the time you go round and round and round to straighten it out, does anyone even care any more?
lol. --David Shankbone 14:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for helping me out on the Valkyrie article. I didn't mean to cause trouble with that empty section. The Korean, U.K. and other European releases are about to open, so we'll come back to that when they happen. I hope the premiere protests aren't given too much space in the article, even though they are interesting and quite unusual for movie. I guess it will balance out when the box office results start to flesh out the section. -- 129.241.151.71 ( talk) 16:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, terminology has changed since I was at school. I always grouped Mexico as part of Central America. Do you think it's worth just combining box office and reviews information into American response and German response? Alientraveller ( talk) 19:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm still not entirely sure what you're suggesting. Do you mean a navigational template to be transcluded onto other pages (and if so which pages)? In what way would it be different to either {{ WPFILMS Sidebar}} or {{ WPFILMS Announcements}}? PC78 ( talk) 19:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello mate,
I have it on good authority that it is based on a true story.
Have a great day, CJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.102.4 ( talk) 22:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Erik,
Thank you for letting me know. I've archived Up in the Air (film) on my user space. I probably was premature in creating the article. However, casting for the film are getting a lot of press in the St. Louis, Missouri area.
Since I have the article archived, what action should I take?
On an unrelated matter, I am truly amazed with the amount of great working User:Steve has done on Changeling (film). I already awarded him a barnstar for his efforts on the article. Would it be inappropriate to award Steve a second barnstar?
Sincerely,
Dan Dassow --
Dan Dassow (
talk)
23:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have SO wanted to do this [2]. Good on ya! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 13:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Are you supporting promotion to A-class? I can't proceed unless we have a support margin of three or more. Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 09:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I requested a new future films icon which uses the same film reel image as the project. What do you think? PC78 ( talk) 11:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for adding the information about Ludwig Beck's death to Valkyrie (film). You said in your edit summary that the information came from Reader's Digest. I was wondering if you could be more specific so we can cite the specific issue? It would help to fill out a {{ cite news}} template with the author, the title, the volume, the issue, and the page(s). Please let me know if you can provide this information! — Erik ( talk • contrib) 17:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I am planning to review it, I just tagged it prior to reading so my work wouldn't be in vain. - Mgm| (talk) 23:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I finally got around to posting the info I was gathering on Twilight (1998 film). There are still some tweaks I see where I can improve my edits, but for the most part I've given it a good try. I won't take any suggestions as an insult, I am new to this style of writing, as most of my pre-Wikipedia efforts were more editorial in nature. I know I have a tendency to use flowery words and all, so I have to make a conscious effort to keep things "encyclopedic". You also mentioned that you had references that might help the article, so anything you want to offer would be greatly appreciated.
I'm considering also trying to improve "The Shootist" (John Wayne) when I get time. Hope my efforts have had a positive affect. All my best ... Ched ( talk) 07:18, 23 January 2009 (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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
Hi there! I know about the notability guidelines, but figured that since a budget had been set and much work had been done into finding a new director, the article could stay. I actually wasn't the one who created the page. I saw that it was created by another user and that they had blatantly copied the information from the Twilight (2008 film) page, which I found unacceptable, so I began working on the page immediately to improve it. If you feel that merging it into another article is the best course of action, especially if it is to abide by Wikipedia's policies, I wholeheartedly support it. I just hope that all of my hours of work on the article will be saved. ;-) I really appreciate the head's up and thank you for your feedback on this. Let me know what you decide to do either way. And as far as the Twilight (2008 film) article goes, anyone is welcome to edit to it. I actually haven't focused on that article too much as my attention has been on the New Moon article. But feel free to put in some new information if you feel that it will better the article. Again, thank you for your time. – Ms. Sarita Confer 04:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
For taking the time to leave all of those wonderful references and offering to help! – Ms. Sarita Confer 20:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC) |
Very surprised that Fight Club is not an FA. Wow. I wonder what the problem with it is? Hey heres a darker tan version of "the jacket". I used to have a more redder one but it got too small on me, same as this one but I kept this one for vintage timesake!. The Bald One White cat 20:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Incidentally there is an Indian actress called Mala Sinha. Cooincidence? The Bald One White cat 21:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey Erik!
I know you're about as busy on this project as one can be and I know that added tools usually mean added work but I wanted to ask you if you're at all interested in running for adminship. You have most definitely earned the trust of the Film community to put those extra buttons to good use and, the more you are able to do, the more the WikiProject will benefit. What are your thoughts on this?
Peace! SWik78 ( talk • contribs) 15:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I am going to see this movie with my brother in January 2009, do you think it will turn out to be a great one? TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 06:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Interested to know what you thought of both of these if you have the time; I'm considering seeing TDtESS. As for Wanted, the first five minutes promised Fight Club meets The Matrix (which would possibly make it the best film ever made), but for me it swiftly degenerated into a bog-standard (albeit pretty) actioner of very dubious morals and with a thoroughly unlikeable lead character. Steve T • C 08:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Erik, you're very civil so can you explain to an editor using multiple IPs, who falls into WP:UNDUE, why he/she cannot add speculation to Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Will Turner and Elizabeth Swann because they cannot accept the ending of the film? Thank you. Alientraveller ( talk) 12:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for leaving your support. I was wondering if you could answer some of the questions that I asked from the issues you raised. If not, no big deal, I know you're busy. You can always take another look once I take it to FAC. Also, we're planning on starting a tag & assess drive sometime early next year and I've started a basic framework in my sandbox based on the Military History project's prior drives. If there is anything you want to add to it or if you want to modify anything, feel free. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 23:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I was very surprised to see you converted the awards section to a table, since I thought you were one of those who didn't care for boxes in film articles. I think the format you chose makes the list difficult to read, and I believe the situation will get worse if the film continues to receive nominations as the award season progresses, which will make the box overly long and clumsy looking. Formatting awards and nominations never has been addressed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines. Do you think it's time to initiate a discussion about this? Thank you! LiteraryMaven ( talk) 19:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Eric! I didn't mean to suggest prose was a better format. I personally prefer the simple list used in Slumdog Millionaire. It's easy to read and I don't think it provides too much white space. As for Milk, I tried increasing the 2px to 3px but there was no noticeable difference, so I left it as is. I think the problem is the use of the color gray for the dividing lines, since it washes out against the background. As it stands now, it's very difficult to read the list without a distinct break between the different awards. Since you seem to be more proficient than I when it comes to the techical aspects, perhaps you can fix it. Thanks for your response! LiteraryMaven ( talk) 22:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
RE: Valkyrie Critical response
Hello Erik, I very much appreciate your guidance. Can you detail please why you have a problem with adding the Roger Ebert review to the Valkyrie page and what was "messy.?" I very much wish to comply with your guidelines but don't understand at this point. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.146.236 ( talk) 20:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear User:Eric,
I used your advice with success!
Let me know if their is anything else that needs fixing on the film or
series.
Thanx so much for the great advice! I really appreciate it.
ATC
(talk)
21:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
A Nobody
My talk is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-- A Nobody My talk 02:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Certain words are not a good idea in an encyclopedia. Such as "recent".
It very quickly becomes dated.
Better:
or
Tip-O'-the-Day: Write for five years from now...
- 4.240.78.248 ( talk) 06:40, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
I have the essays since you sent them to me, and will incorporate what I can in the future. Meanwhile, we've redirected the character pages to List of characters in Watchmen. If you can do anything to fill that out (even just copying info from Watchmen; I've been meaning to do that, but I was wondering how to strucure the article), that would be appreciated. Thanks for all your help with the aticle. WesleyDodds ( talk) 05:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello Erik! I just wanted to wish you and your family a merry Christmas! May this Christmas be full of great cheer and holiday spirit. Have a great day and a wonderful New Year, from The Bald One White cat 11:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Merry Christmas, Erik. Hope the day finds you suitably full of food, cheer, and maybe a little illicit alcohol. All the best, Steve T • C 21:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
My christmas was good, and I hope yours was as well. I got a couple of things (special edition DVDs and a book) that should help me on Wikipedia. :D Other than that, it's just been nice to get away from everything. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Why the fuck do you keep on removing the reference to the Australian Synchrotron from the article about Knowing. Just bloody well leave it alone for once. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.110.226 ( talk • contribs) 09:16, December 26, 2008
The page List of Disney feature films represents a films released theatrically (duh) by Disney... but there are some films that Disney released overseas theatrically but only as direct-to-video in the US (if it is released in the US at all). I know that in most cases on film pages, the foreign release dates are not included in the english wikipedia, so could the same philosophy be applied to this page as well, so the page won't reflect foreign-only theatrical releases? Or is that too US-centric? SpikeJones ( talk) 15:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The article
Quantum of Solace you have contributed to has been passed
as a
good article . Well done!
SilkTork *
YES!
12:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
I've just found these two recently created articles:
I know you have an interest in this film, so you may know best how to deal with them. Regards. PC78 ( talk) 23:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Erik, ever so sorry if i have offended but there seems to be a large number of films on wikipedia which provide links to trailers for readers to watch. It seems in line with Wikipedia:External links to provide links to a website which offers:
Sorry this isn't editing related, but it's film related, so oh well. I see that you just watched Planet Terror, and previously, Death Proof. I just wanted to point out that since you have Netflix, you can watch the double feature instantly online (with faux trailers as well). I have Blockbuster online (no double feature for me!), but after visiting family for the Christmas break, I was able to see it with Netflix. Not sure if you saw the full version in theaters or not, but it's much more interesting to see together than separately. I'm still waiting for the release of the full DVD/Blu-ray, hopefully it comes along with the release of Inglorious Bastards. Anyway, just wanted to point it out to you if you weren't aware. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 08:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Rear-window captioning looks interesting and I'm suprised I've never heard about it before. I've been limited with seeing films in theaters in December due to finals but hopefully I can see Benjamin Button sometime this month. I had the opportunity to go and see Slumdog Millionaire for a free screening earlier last month but I had class and was unaware of how good the film was going to be and unfortunately skipped it. For trivia bits and quotes from articles, I'm always surprised to see things that I wrote copied exactly for trivia pages and blogs. It's cool to see information I gathered sourced in newspapers though. I guess the good and the bad offset each other. What I'm surprised with so far is that movie studios haven't considered hiring people or contacting our project with materials to improve articles on their upcoming/released films. I'm sure they're scared of being accused of pushing POV, but I think there are ways they could work with our project to help find better sources, maybe free images, etc. If that ever happens, I think it would benefit the project, but it's likely it won't. There would probably have to be some study that finds a correlation between views to a film article to ticket/DVD sales. You've got to wonder if all of the work you've done for upcoming films has inspired some people to go and see a film based on an interesting production history or a well-developed cast section. Anyway, I'm rambling, so happy new year! -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 13:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi there and Happy New Year! In the last couple of days, PC78 has shown up at my FL review for List of No Country for Old Men awards and nominations and raised a "weak oppose" based on the table style. To me, he's overstating his objections in our WP:FILMS discussion, but maybe I'm wrong. As I've said before, I'm a bit reserved about some members, and I'd appreciate a different set of eyes on the comments. It comes down, in my view, to him saying "I don't like the table, so there". His last comment was "my primary concern here is with regard to the text size." The thing is, I don't find anywhere on WP:FILMS that he mentioned text size. Please take a look when you can and give me your thoughts? Thanks! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 19:32, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
The
December 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)
03:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Just spotted your comment elsewhere about the editor; time permitting, I meant to dig into this more deeply, but it seems to me that the editor is an obvious sock of our old friend User:TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny (aka User:LinkToddMcLovinMontana). Saying that, he has started to use edit summaries on his last few edits, so maybe no action will be needed. As you say, many of the edits are good ones, it's just a hell of a job figuring out which ones sometimes. Steve T • C 23:44, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I began timing every movie that I see in theaters a couple months ago precisely because I've noticed over a long period of time that runtimes listed in reviews are very frequently inaccurate. For instance, the last film I saw, The Wrestler, as you pointed out, is listed by the New York Times as having a 109 minute runtime, but the film in theaters (at least U.S. theaters) is actually closer to 115 minutes, a whole 6 minutes difference. Sometimes the reviews don't even agree with each other; for instance, Fandango lists it as being 105 minutes long. Actually, as I'm checking it now, the NYT's reviews/articles don't even agree with each other: review/ overview. I think the biggest difference in listed runtime I've ever personally observed was My Blueberry Nights, which at the time was stated by many reviews/databases as being 90 minutes long, but in actuality is much closer to two hours (again, at least in U.S. theaters).
I've found that the most accurate secondary source (i.e. not the film itself) for runtimes to be the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), which usually corresponds very closely to the measurements I record. However, for a handful of films, I find there is still a difference (as here with The Wrestler, they also list it as being 109 minutes long). My theory for this is one of two things: (a) they were working with an earlier cut of the film (their page lists it as having been rated back on October 31, shortly after it first screened at Venice), or (b) the film was cut differently for other regions for any number of reasons. (again, all the times I observe are from U.S. theaters, so I guess it is possible there is a different cut in Britain). – Fierce Beaver ( talk) 01:06, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your kind feedback on the article. I do plan to pursue FAC very soon, but I need to get some feedback from a friend who's taken a movie article through first. Incidentally, you might enjoy the flash animation thingy that I did, Writing for the Pictures. I apparently pulled one part out of my ear (I always assumed it was Capital Pictures), but it also has a few worthwhile things that are more on the OR side of things.
Anyway, thanks again and Happy New Year! Scartol • Tok 20:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Dear User:Eric,
I was wondering if you could answer my question I made on the discussion page.
Thanx!
ATC
(talk)
06:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, User:Eric!
I made a reply on the talk page.
Check it out when you get the chance.
ATC
(talk)
23:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok then. (: — Jhn * 16:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I'll probably watchlist it as I have with The Lovely Bones and The Devil Wears Prada, two other film articles that started from books that I had read and developed the articles on extensively. If you've got a Google capture set up, you can add any news items that are relevant ... I'm sure there will be Oscar noms (Kate Winslet will definitely get a nom for this, and (depending on the competition) the statuette itself. She's that good, believe me). When the DVD comes out I'll probably rent it and add things from it as well (that's how DWP got so long, because the commentary and documentary are so informative). Daniel Case ( talk) 19:17, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Ah wow, nice Christmas present, the cinema had a subtitled version up and ready? How was it? Alientraveller ( talk) 10:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Do you think it's worth mentioning Fox News' feud with Cruise over the movie? [1] Alientraveller ( talk) 19:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
I just read an io9 article on the Watchmen ruling. Apparently Fox is Sauron, Palpatine and Lord Voldemort put together, yet I'm going to have to rely on them to continue Narnia now that that mouse jumped the Dawn Treader. Poor Bryan Singer, do you think he'll eventually regret casting Cruise? Alientraveller ( talk) 20:41, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Are you going to write a plot summary? Alientraveller ( talk) 12:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Not that I'm in any way trying to start an edit war here, but... would you, like millions throughout the world, consider William L. Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich a reliable (if not the definitive) account of the Nazi era? If so, then Mertz von Quirnheim is a name used only once in that book - Mertz is the name used most frequently to denote Stauffenberg's confederate. Why is this so hard for you to accept? BassPlyr23 ( talk) 00:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't recall if he was referred to by either name very much in the film. I'd have to check the DVD release, since I'm not planning to see the film again just to settle this discussion. You haven't mentioned whether you consider Shirer a reliable source - why not just leave it for now? BassPlyr23 ( talk) 00:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
MiltonP Ottawa ( talk · contribs) has a funny opinion: interesting information in film articles is trivia. I'm also treating Wikipedia like a fan site and haven't read WP:AVTRIVIA. So I'm basically asking for help because of your " superior intellect" ;) Alientraveller ( talk) 00:20, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I was feeling creative and came up with this:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Future films/Tracking table
If you think it needs anything let me know. I'll figure out somewhere to put it later! :) PC78 ( talk) 19:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I added a new image to Tropic Thunder showing Downey, Jr. and Cruise side-by-side their respective characters. Let me know if you think it is to much (or if I should have only shown Cruise) or if it needs further FUR/cutting down on the caption. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 22:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, if someone can get Apt Pupil and Bryan Singer to GA status then they could be a Good Topic. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I enjoyed reading your comment on Arcayne's talkpage. Very amusing and astonishingly accurate actually. -- Jupiter Optimus Maximus ( talk) 13:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I was reading this article, I noticed you saved it from deletion. Have you thought of taking it to GA? — Realist 2 02:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Erik - I am wondering if you could help me out with this Bollywood film article: Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi. If you check its history, you'll see that this article is a frequent target of vandalism by unregistered or new users. I would like to request semi-protection for the article but am uncertain of who to ask. I thought perhaps you might have some ideas on the topic. Thanks, - Classicfilms ( talk) 12:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
For a while now I've been toying with the idea of taking this template to TfD, and noticed that you yourself intended to do the same about a year or so ago. I saw the deletion argument you have in your sandbox, and was wondering what became of this and what your current thoughts are? PC78 ( talk) 18:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
... is User:PC78/future films any good to you? If not I'll bin it. It's quite a bit out of date by now and largely redundant, and I have no real intention of going through it again myself. PC78 ( talk) 21:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
...check out this bot-created list I've just requested. It lists all articles tagged with {{ Future film}} but without a Future-Class assessment, and vice versa. :) PC78 ( talk) 21:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
As a member of
WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the
project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's
coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing!
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
03:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh Thank You for telling me. Will it be okay for me to creat the page in my sand box then? ChaosMaster16 ( talk) 14:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)ChaosMaster16
Did you edit the page? Tarrant on Wiki ( talk) 11:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't remember seeing your email, but I'm at school so perhaps it's waiting for me at home. I'll check when I can. Cheers! (And thanks for fixing the poster image info.) Scartol • Tok 18:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to show you the new image I was able to get permission for of Cruise. I already added it to the collage on the article ( File:TropicThunderDowneyCruise.png). Flickr really has been helpful these last few weeks. -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 22:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Erik, thanks for catching the grade issue on Slumdog Millionaire. I wonder if you could clarify the system for me so that I get it right in the future. I am a bit confused as to how the two banners can have different rankings. Should the other be changed to "Start"? Could you also clarify what needs to happen for the article to reach "B" status? I looked at the guidelines but that didn't help very much. Regards, - Classicfilms ( talk) 16:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
class=B|B-Class-1=yes|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes
in the template. It's a somewhat formal step to show that the article was examined for the criteria. Without the step, it can't be determined if someone really went through the checklist, which was why I reverted the new assessment. Hope that makes sense! Remember that this is per the standards of WikiProject Films, so I don't know if other WikiProjects require such a checklist. —
Erik (
talk •
contrib)
17:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Erik, regarding the curious incident of the coordinator who was stalking, has anyone noticed that extensive googling the two names of the public school system employees fails to place them together at the same school (one doesn't show up any place (no class pages, staff lists), and the principal appears to have retired recently)? Inconclusive, but I'm with the guys waiting until proof more concrete than the unsubstantiated "verbal" accusation of the editor is examined. Hope you've been doing well, by the way.
Jim Dunning |
talk
14:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
You were reverted, in defiance (pardon the expression) of WP:NOR. I was going to trim back the "inaccuracies" section, but there seems to be little point in doing so given the situation in that article. I'm not sure how to proceed as I don't have too much experience dealing with defiance (pardon the expression again) of Wiki rules. Stetsonharry ( talk) 21:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I just discovered that you reverted some vandalism on my userpage a couple weeks ago... thanks! I totally didn't even realize it until just now, so that could have obviously led to a somewhat embarrassing two weeks! In related news, I now have my userpage watchlisted... :) – Fierce Beaver ( talk) 22:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, so you have reverted my changes on the page for The Wrestler claiming that there is no correlation between the death of Paul Fuchs and the movie itself. You wrote, "Revert coverage that is irrelevant to the film; we do not cover such incidents unless there is a connection to the film, like The Dark Knight and Heath Ledger's death."
I fail to see the difference between the two situations.
I must question why this article keeps getting taken down after such mainstream outlets as NY Post and Washington Examiner have picked up on the story. User:Hpchuckyc ( talk) 00:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough. Will do. I thought that I saw a page had been created for him, but was deleted. I will put one up again. I wasn't mad, just confused. Haven't been doing this long. I appreciate your help. User:Hpchuckyc ( talk) 00:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the following post got overlooked in the lengthy discussion re: images in film articles, so I hope you don't mind my directing my question to you on this page.
Re: Tropic Thunder, I agree the images of Downey and Cruise in and out of makeup are appropriate because they show the lengths to which they went to portray their respective characters. I understand why the image of Stiller signing autographs is relevant, because there's an extensive section about promotion and appearances in the article. The image of protesters also seems appropriate because it relates to the section about controversy.
But how does the image of a set constructed for a scene ultimately deleted from the film enhance the article? I could understand if the article included a detailed discussion about why this particular set was built and/or why it was decided not to include the scene in the film, but nothing in the article relates specifically to this image at all. It's my understanding that such images should not be included because they amount to nothing more than window dressing.
I'm trying to understand why some images are considered relevant and therefore acceptable while others are deleted for not meeting Wikipedia requirements, but I keep getting contradictory explanations. Thank you for your input! LiteraryMaven ( talk) 22:10, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi erik, do you think is is worth the wile to look walle one more time today, because it's rather late by now? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 01:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I going to look for it, before it is too late, im absolutely determined Sha-Sanio ( talk) 01:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
What kind of different way do you mean, I absolutely don't understand what you expect me to do. Sha-Sanio ( talk) 04:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I would like to add some information to the article, that I found on the pixar home page. You can take a look at on my sandbox. Is that what you expect me to do or what else should be done??? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 04:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
No, The Sandbox is called User:Sha-Sanio/Sandbox/Sandbox/Revolutionary Road Sha-Sanio ( talk) 04:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC) Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Is this enough or is there something else that you need to have explained? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have also written about the recent nominations that wall-e received for the BAFTA-Awards. Is there anything else that you want to have in a different way? Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well,Erik if you were here you could go watching Revolutionary Road together with me, but as you don't wan't to come, it's up to you. I can't force you, whoever you were. Sha-Sanio ( talk) 05:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have prepared something on the DVD-release of Wall-e and would like to add to the article. If you would like to take a look at it please check my Sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sha-Sanio/Sandbox/Sandbox/Wall-e. If you like you can tell me what you think about it. Sha-Sanio ( talk) 18:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
...does a desire to obtain free images turn into a controversy, ay? *sigh* The ole' "No good deed" Deceased editor User:Jeffpw's mother wrote to me. She doesn't edit Wikipedia at all, but she has taken an interest in following some of its inner politics (she also used to hear about it from her son). This is what she wrote:
I was just reading your user page. Doesn't it become exhausting to get in all these misunderstandings and then have to work so hard to straighten them out? Not just you, but it seems like people are always taking umbrage at something or other and by the time you go round and round and round to straighten it out, does anyone even care any more?
lol. --David Shankbone 14:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for helping me out on the Valkyrie article. I didn't mean to cause trouble with that empty section. The Korean, U.K. and other European releases are about to open, so we'll come back to that when they happen. I hope the premiere protests aren't given too much space in the article, even though they are interesting and quite unusual for movie. I guess it will balance out when the box office results start to flesh out the section. -- 129.241.151.71 ( talk) 16:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, terminology has changed since I was at school. I always grouped Mexico as part of Central America. Do you think it's worth just combining box office and reviews information into American response and German response? Alientraveller ( talk) 19:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm still not entirely sure what you're suggesting. Do you mean a navigational template to be transcluded onto other pages (and if so which pages)? In what way would it be different to either {{ WPFILMS Sidebar}} or {{ WPFILMS Announcements}}? PC78 ( talk) 19:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello mate,
I have it on good authority that it is based on a true story.
Have a great day, CJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.102.4 ( talk) 22:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Erik,
Thank you for letting me know. I've archived Up in the Air (film) on my user space. I probably was premature in creating the article. However, casting for the film are getting a lot of press in the St. Louis, Missouri area.
Since I have the article archived, what action should I take?
On an unrelated matter, I am truly amazed with the amount of great working User:Steve has done on Changeling (film). I already awarded him a barnstar for his efforts on the article. Would it be inappropriate to award Steve a second barnstar?
Sincerely,
Dan Dassow --
Dan Dassow (
talk)
23:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I have SO wanted to do this [2]. Good on ya! Wildhartlivie ( talk) 13:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Are you supporting promotion to A-class? I can't proceed unless we have a support margin of three or more. Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 09:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I requested a new future films icon which uses the same film reel image as the project. What do you think? PC78 ( talk) 11:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for adding the information about Ludwig Beck's death to Valkyrie (film). You said in your edit summary that the information came from Reader's Digest. I was wondering if you could be more specific so we can cite the specific issue? It would help to fill out a {{ cite news}} template with the author, the title, the volume, the issue, and the page(s). Please let me know if you can provide this information! — Erik ( talk • contrib) 17:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I am planning to review it, I just tagged it prior to reading so my work wouldn't be in vain. - Mgm| (talk) 23:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Erik, I finally got around to posting the info I was gathering on Twilight (1998 film). There are still some tweaks I see where I can improve my edits, but for the most part I've given it a good try. I won't take any suggestions as an insult, I am new to this style of writing, as most of my pre-Wikipedia efforts were more editorial in nature. I know I have a tendency to use flowery words and all, so I have to make a conscious effort to keep things "encyclopedic". You also mentioned that you had references that might help the article, so anything you want to offer would be greatly appreciated.
I'm considering also trying to improve "The Shootist" (John Wayne) when I get time. Hope my efforts have had a positive affect. All my best ... Ched ( talk) 07:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)