![]() | 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 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 |
The box office mojo link does not work so does not support the statement. Feel free to find an alternative. Personally I think it's better to omit it, but I'd be equally happy to include along with the competing judgment that it's propaganda. Guy ( help!) 16:53, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed this has been moved again by the same protagonist. Has there been some change that justifies it, or are they gaming the system given the repeated RMs have not gone their way? Number 5 7 21:35, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
As an editor who commented at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film between Jan. 1, 2019, and today, you may wish to join a discussion at that page, here.-- Tenebrae ( talk) 23:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Rather than giving anyone time to cite the longstanding (but suspect) first meaning of whitewashing, you have simply removed it. This does not strike me as the best way to make such a big change to this article. For example, many of the examples listed later on are only of this suspect meaning. tahc chat 19:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Erik. You recently made this edit at The Terminator, with the edit summary, "Undid revision 935547154 by Freeknowledgecreator (talk) revert per WP:OWN policy, specifically WP:OWNBEHAVIOR where Freeknowledgecreator called the changes in details "unnecessary"; editor is known for always reverting any change to plot summary." Do not make personal comments about, or unfounded accusations against, me in edit summaries. It is a form of personal abuse and aggression that I refuse to accept. If you continue I will make an issue of it and respond as needed. Freeknowledgecreator ( talk) 01:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I cannot believe that you just deleted everything I spent days adding. I will find sources and re-add all of them. I hope you have a horrible year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyruslcohen556 ( talk • contribs) 01:54, February 6, 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith#Plot summary.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
08:17, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your draft article on the character Wendy Torrance! I had seen it at the beginning of last month for the Women in Horror event but forgot about it by the end. I saw the Italian version and used that as a basis for the article. I'll try to review the merge and other refs to see if more can be added. StrayBolt ( talk) 16:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Dear Erik! I am new to Wikipedia and only yesterday finished writing my first English-language article about a Russian-Spanish documentary My Pilot, Whale(before that, I published a similar article in my language section of Wikipedia). Wikipedia informed me that it will take up to 4 months for my article to be checked... I'm sorry, I don't know if this is accepted in the community, but I found a link to your profile in the Documentary films task force community and I want to ask you to check my article — I'm sure you know how much you want to see your first Wikipedia article : ) Once again, I'm sorry to bother you, and if this is not the way to do it in the community, please let me know so that I don't disturb anyone in the future. Regards, Ioanradostniy ( talk) 15:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
If that's how you feel my rendering of references is, it's because I click the "normalize" feature of ProveIt which then renders refs in a particular manner. If you believe that's not the right way to render refs, please comment here. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 06:10, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
On 27 March 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on cinema, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that due to its similarity to the coronavirus pandemic, Warner Bros.' second most successful film of 2020 so far is 2011's Contagion? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on cinema), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
--valereee ( talk) 00:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Untitled A Quiet Place sequel. Since you had some involvement with the Untitled A Quiet Place sequel redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC 678 18:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Since you care SO MUCH about having red links until a page is created, why don't YOU edit the pages, because you want these people to have pages. Never ask people to make pages for you again. Draft:Polly Morgan (cinematographer), Draft:Michael P. Shawver. Iamnoahflores ( talk) 14:30, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
To conclude this, I created Polly Morgan (cinematographer). Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
I also created Michael P. Shawver. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 14:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
I strongly urge reverting to WP:STATUSQUO ASAP. -- 109.77.197.77 ( talk) 16:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello, what are you talking about? First of all, I just fixed typo in the page, because the info panel and even the filmography is not on point. Check any actor's pages, for example Norman Reedus. Does the filmography looks butchered to you? You are not improving it, you are doing quite the opposite.-- Tobi999tomas ( talk) 14:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:A Bug's Life#Plot summary issue.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
08:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey, so I saw your edit on the Wikiproject Film page here https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film&diff=959251366&oldid=959210327 and I just had a quick question for you. I'm no expert on this so how would you use templates to 'close out' the section since a consensus has been reached on the page? Davefelmer ( talk) 19:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
From what I can see on the talk page you previously reverted edits that are quite similar to what has recently been readded to the article. [1] I would appreciate if you could check and see if this is substantially the same or if this latest attempt is actually appropriate. -- 109.76.212.43 ( talk) 18:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Do you happen to recall a discussion where the use of Review score tables were deprecated in film articles? It is not stated in the MOS, and I am having a hard time finding it in the talk archives. BOVINEBOY 2008 16:20, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Done. Let me know when it becomes ineffective and semi-protect or pending changes need to be put back in. OhanaUnited Talk page 19:37, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
Whether big or small, Lauren, the deaf actress, was part of the film “Sign Gene: The First Deaf Superheroes”. It has encyclopedic content.
Deleting this film on list is like sweeping this under the carpet maliciously...it may sound like "systematic discrimination" even if you didn't mean it.
The deaf actress didn’t have a big role at Wonderstruck nor did have any “signed” dialogue (dialogue in sign language) like she had for Sign Gene.
It may not be significant to you but it may be very significant to me and to to those who want to understand her historical background career related. Movies whom she initially took part definitely helped her boost her career.
I strongly believe that you should bring back the info you deleted. Thank you.
-- Wowspucks ( talk) 13:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
I spent lot of time translating the German article (Verkannte Menschen) into English along with adding and verifying the sources. Why did you revert the article to the skeletal version that is very lacking in information and material?
Don't you ever revert the article to older one! You are doing a great disservice for the deaf community! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverTwist78 ( talk • contribs) 13:36, July 18, 2020 (UTC)
Hi, regarding this edit. I realise that ordinarily there are many 'directed by', 'written by' etc, categories, in addition to 'genre' categories - but in this instance "Films directed by Dinesh D'Souza" is actually a sub-category of "American propaganda films", ie it has effectively been decided that everything directed by D'Souza is inherently propaganda! Thus they duplicate in both parent and child cats - it is also an unusual judgement to make in advance about a filmmaker, possibly the 'directed by' category should be moved out of "American propaganda films" - meaning that these films are BOTH directed by D'Souza and American propaganda. Hope this makes sense, I don't dispute that these films are generally seen as propaganda, I was merely trying to tidy pointless duplication of categories. Pincrete ( talk) 15:41, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
You deleted my edits on the Cuties film, your reason being "Removed POV addition not covered in source." This is not a "point of view" addition in any way, actually, and if you read the multiple sources everything stated is 100% contained with the cited sources indeed. So please undo your removal. DivineReality ( talk) 23:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
I could use some c/es on this if necessary. Also how ready do you think it is? Jhenderson 777 02:22, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Erik
I appreciate your counsel pointing out the long term view. It is the way of Wiki.
I do see change happening, usually a word or phrase at a time. This evolution process is bearable. What annoyed me was that Bink, who edits movie plots without having seen the movies (he actually makes this claim proudly), is a compulsive editor (he made over 200 edits that day), dropped in, mucked up what was a clear plot (though I agree somewhat too much for the 700 word limit--700 word limit, that sounds like the requirement for a high school book report, HAHA) and produced a hack job. Since he had not seen the movie, had no first-hand knowledge of the story, he had no idea what nonsense he created with his edits to remove "bloat".
It was Bink's arrogance in what he did that annoyed me. He sloppily performed just one of very numerous edits (apparently he has a compulsion) and just moved on. When apprehended by my complaint, he just shrugged it off, with what he thought was a Jedi Mind Trick (. . .theses are not the droids you are looking for. . .move on. . .). And that annoyed again. He wasn't interested in working to compromise, he did not care. In his most recent reply to my complaint, he did acknowledge that I was angry; I did appreciate that slight nod.
This was another Wiki learning experience for me. There is so much Wikipedia documentation, rules and such that are just hidden. The Manual of Style (which is admirable) is a document that is hard to get a comprehensive understanding of (short of reading and reading and reading). 700 word limits, only 4 paragraphs in the led, on and on, stuff I stumble on often.
So in penance for my sins, I have rewritten the plot into a tight terse narrative of 665 words. It tells the film's story accurately enough so that a reader will see the story sort of (adequate for Wikipedian purposes). I left out anything that could be left out (it was a lot) although sorely tempted to include some explanatory detail.
So now others will edit. I wonder what enhancements or detractions it will bring.
Wikipedia editing, a blessing and a curse. Oh well, may we live in interesting times.
Thank you.
Stay Safe.
PS I will send you 35 cents for the psychiatric counseling (it used to 25 cents in the Peanuts cartoon, but with inflation and such, the session fee has increased)
Osomite hablemos 23:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please take a look here, and see if there is a way to promote this movie draft? Thanks. Draft talk:Jarhead: Law of Return. -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:7901:7BC:9665:2F53 ( talk) 00:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Do not WP:WIKISTALK me. Thanks. 2A02:C7F:6E64:1C00:C59C:A410:479F:B9DD ( talk) 21:55, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I added my film "GODDESS" to the Afrofuturism film page and would like to know why it was deleted? There is adequate sources available to verify that my film is indeed part of this list and the Afrofuturism community. 2601:C0:C97F:82C0:9533:369A:AF23:BABC ( talk) 21:14, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
I know you've probably got plenty of stuff on your plate, but the FAC could use some additional input and you're my go-to film guy. If you have a chance I'd love your input. Happy holidays, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 05:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey Erik, hope you are doing well. Thought I'd solicit an opinion from you about the audience scores listed at Star Wars: The Last Jedi#Audience reception. I noticed these are being updated regularly, but I could have sworn there was a discussion at some point that determined they should remain static, to reflect what the sources were writing about at the time. What the sources were saying back in late 2017/early 2018 became the focus of an RfC that allowed the audience section in. Doesn't seem like something we should be updating, and instead should reflect that moment in time.
I searched SWLJ's talk archives and couldn't find anything. Either I'm having a memory lapse, or that discussion happened somewhere else. What are your thoughts? Do you think the numbers should be regularly updated? It would have created a contradiction if the user rating ever creeped up above 60% (though it wasn't likely to happen). -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 10:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Wonder Woman 1984 § Rotten Tomatoes.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
06:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
12 Years a Slave (film) (redirect). The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 26#12 Years a Slave (film) (redirect) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠)
07:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there! I've seen some of your reviews on FAC, and since much of your work on WP is related to film, I thought I'd ask you if you have time or interest to review an article on a film actress. Shahid • Talk2me 23:35, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, Erik! This is just a reminder in case you still intend to take a look at the above article and offer a review. It has attracted little notice. If you are busy and have no time (or energy or interest), please ignore this message. Best wishes,
Shahid •
Talk2me
22:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi - I don't disagree that we should organize things with readers in mind, but isn't chronological order (and not reverse chronological) the standard for disambig pages? I don't think I've seen them sorted by any other way, eg. Dracula (disambiguation), Mummy (disambiguation), and Ben-Hur. -- Iiii I I I ( talk) 19:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Rio 2 § Big Boss's fate.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
20:42, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you.
2605:8D80:521:8BB6:346E:2E7F:AA0C:CAB1 (
talk)
02:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Permanent link: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 167#Wikispecialist. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Hey - I'm wondering if you might be able to discuss through the language issue over on Music (2021 film) a little further? Given I'm an IP editor with not as much history on wikipedia (+ I probably let myself get dragged a little into the heat wrongly with a couple of prev. edits) it seems that they really just don't want to engage in discussion with them. I'm wondering if you might be able to get them to bring up an explanation or further the issue, otherwise it's just a brick wall of either leaving the issue unresolved, or getting it into an edit war where the rapidly revert it without elaborating, and I'm not really sure where that leaves me with it then. 188.220.86.46 ( talk) 23:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Editor making mass changes without consensus to do so. Thank you.
Sdrqaz (
talk)
01:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Permanent link: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1058#Editor making mass changes without consensus to do so. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 13:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
There is a request for protection for the Music (2021 film). Since you have been editing it I thought I would let you know. Afootpluto ( talk) 15:46, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " Music (2021 film)".The discussion is about the topic Music (film 2021).
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
188.220.86.46 ( talk) 13:56, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Permanent link here. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 14:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on Talk:Eagle Eye. I was almost ready to take it to WP:3RD so thanks for saving me from that extra hassle. -- 109.76.192.5 ( talk) 15:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for those links. Seeing the film and then reading the credits makes it look like Antwerp, as they speak French there as well. That was certainly never clear to me. Based on those refs we should certainly say Paris then. I think we should include a ref in the synopsis as well as I can't have been the only one who was confused by that. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy ( talk) 22:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Please see the discussion thread at Talk:Sound of Metal#Opening sentence. ParetoOptimusPrime ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) — Preceding undated comment added 01:13, April 17, 2021
Hey! Do recall back when there was a review summary table template for films that was eventually deleted? I am having a discussion with someone who is basically recreating such a table manually but I can't recall what the template was called, or where the AfD is located. BOVINEBOY 2008 01:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Erik,
If you tag a page for speedy deletion because it was deleted through an AFD discussion, could you link to that discussion so an admin reviewing the tagged article doesn't have to search for it? If you use Twinkle to tag pages for deletion, it asks for the AFD link and also posts a notice on the talk page of the page creator which is an important step in the deletion process which makes things easy. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:18, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fictional counties, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional counties (4th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
![]()
| |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. ( t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC) |
I got your message. Why are only positive reviews by COMPENSATED critics being mentioned? Why should not IMDB (Which is considered far more accurate) being posted. This film has overwhelmingly received very poor reviews, and the page does not reflect that truthfully. TheOminousDarkness ( talk) 13:02, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
This citation https://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/woman-king/ that you provide for The Woman King page feels very inadequate. What gives this page credibility? There aren't any sources for any of the claims made throughout this article. I think we should take it and any claims it makes out of the page because they may be misleading. Blackboardd ( talk) 22:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Next time, see if the user you're pinging has any previous relevance or knowledge of the topic in question. Otherwise, you are wasting both parties' time. The "debatably entertaining turn" doesn't go against the negative reviews, it actually says that what viewers will watch on screen won't be boring and therefore will be "debatably entertaining". So it CAN be entertaining to watch a "bad" performance. ภץאคгöร 18:01, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Grave of the Fireflies § Plot summary format.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
20:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Normally I'd be annoyed by an article being locked because of one editor but in this case I'd be totally fine with it if you want to go there. (I'm half surprised admins haven't jumped in already.) -- 109.79.75.129 ( talk) 01:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Erik. Just another registered user here, that is, not an IP. My best advice to you is to start those Enola Holmes talk sections yourself, when engaging IP editors that may not know better. That is, my advice to you is not to wait until IP editors follow the rules - instead lead by example and show how the BRD policy is meant to be used yourself. After all, in a room full of IP editors, you're the "grown up" = registered editor.
Another benefit of starting talk sections is that it becomes apparent which other editors are only there to be disruptive - if they persist in edit warring and using edit commentary as their sole means of communication, they can simply be blocked. If there is a talk section, they need to engage there. This greatly lowers the risk to yourself as well - I have come close to violating the 3RR rule when engaging in edit summary discussions, and once there is a talk discussion, things usually calm down. Like, a lot!
You'll find you will stand on higher ground once you realize the initial bother of having to start a discussion pays off. Anyway, read or ignore this as you will - this is meant as nothing more than friendly advice. Cheers CapnZapp ( talk) 07:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I think you were overcomplicating things with this edit.
[2] To say Addressed apples-vs-oranges comparison; putting production budget versus box office is disingenuous in all cases
is a big overstatement (emphasis added). Never say never. In the case of films that earn considerably less than their budget it is not disingenuous, it is merely a simplistic way to show that the film was not a success. Also presenting the numbers seemed a far gentler more
neutral way of pointing out the underperformance than using the colorful metaphor of "box office bomb". Less seemed like more.
The details may be more complicated, but the overview is simple, anyone can see that a film that does not even gross as much as the budget is not a success. That simplification is not misleading at all. There is no need to character that as admits that it is not appropriate to compare directly
I am merely pointing out that the minimum explanation can be quite simple, while acknowledging that sometimes more complicated explanations might be necessary.
Sometimes more is obviously more (other times it's just overcomplicated). Since you were willing to rewrite the intro extensively and provide a more informative maximal explanation [3], that ultimately makes for a better encyclopedia article, I can certainly get behind that. The gross versus budget comparison might be simple and certainly isn't as good as what you added later, but Wikipedia has long been about "good enough" until someone else is willing to rewrite it better. -- 109.76.131.219 ( talk) 17:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
What is the antagonist looking for at just the "cast" section? 105.112.59.253 ( talk) 22:36, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Erik,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
05:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 05:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Could you restore your rewrite of the lead section again please? There are some editors who don't get it. -- 109.79.162.163 ( talk) 00:44, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The article Alex Tse (judge) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Delete per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margaret J. Schneider/ WP:USCJN
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Snickers2686 (
talk)
04:12, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Erik. Just so you know, there's a discussion regarding the review summaries in the lead section of Fantastic Four (2015 film). It can be found at Talk:Fantastic Four (2015 film)#Summary of reviews in the lead. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 08:33, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey Erick. Good to bump into you. I've re-phrased the supernatural horror bit in that book. I feel a bit weird about citing a book that's not about the subject at hand to fill in the blanks on a subject (especially when some of the sourced material was not what was written in the book), so i've taken a quick crack and re-editing it and discussed it on the talk page. Just don't want to edit war over it is all. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 13:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Back as Barney Crumble Rusted AutoParts 05:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024! |
Hello Erik, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
InfiniteNexus ( talk) 07:08, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Erik. I'd hate to ask, but would you be able to provide an opinion on Talk:Horror film? Some more voices here would be really helpful. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 13:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
In the Themes section you kept paragraph one and dropped paragraph two. It might be worth keeping a shortened version of the original version of paragraph 2 because it gives insight into comparing the themes as written in Frank Herbert's book in comparison to how Villeveuve represented these themes in his own film version. The reference to Frank Herbert's knowledge of the Algerian war seemed to be useful to readers since Wikipedia even has a linked article for it. Could you consider doing a shorter version of the second paragraph that might preserve some of this discussion? HenryRoan ( talk) 14:28, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Tarzan (1999 film) § Plot rewrite.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
05:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Also, there's a discussion at Talk:The Lion King II: Simba's Pride#Changes to the plot and lead if you are interested. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 01:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
I know it's rude to use the C word, but there is no better way to describe it, I was a cunt back in 2007 on Wikipedia and want to do my best to add something of value to this site. Do you have any advice? As of this year I started reading books because I know books have far more valuable information than random pages on the Internet that could be misinformation. And unlike the Internet what's in books can't be taken away by a proxy provider. Blaze The Movie Fan ( talk) 00:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
If just ONE more corrupt admin threatens me I am leaving for good. I'm beyond fed up with power hungry admins ruining this website. Blaze The Movie Fan ( talk) 05:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
The redirect
List of film accents considered the worst has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 12 § List of film accents considered the worst until a consensus is reached. —
a smart kitten[
meow
18:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:A Christmas Carol (2009 film) § Plot summary.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
22:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
There's also an ongoing discussion over at Talk:Toy Story 3#Plot discussion as well. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 08:32, 14 May 2024 (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 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 |
The box office mojo link does not work so does not support the statement. Feel free to find an alternative. Personally I think it's better to omit it, but I'd be equally happy to include along with the competing judgment that it's propaganda. Guy ( help!) 16:53, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed this has been moved again by the same protagonist. Has there been some change that justifies it, or are they gaming the system given the repeated RMs have not gone their way? Number 5 7 21:35, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
As an editor who commented at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film between Jan. 1, 2019, and today, you may wish to join a discussion at that page, here.-- Tenebrae ( talk) 23:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Rather than giving anyone time to cite the longstanding (but suspect) first meaning of whitewashing, you have simply removed it. This does not strike me as the best way to make such a big change to this article. For example, many of the examples listed later on are only of this suspect meaning. tahc chat 19:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Erik. You recently made this edit at The Terminator, with the edit summary, "Undid revision 935547154 by Freeknowledgecreator (talk) revert per WP:OWN policy, specifically WP:OWNBEHAVIOR where Freeknowledgecreator called the changes in details "unnecessary"; editor is known for always reverting any change to plot summary." Do not make personal comments about, or unfounded accusations against, me in edit summaries. It is a form of personal abuse and aggression that I refuse to accept. If you continue I will make an issue of it and respond as needed. Freeknowledgecreator ( talk) 01:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I cannot believe that you just deleted everything I spent days adding. I will find sources and re-add all of them. I hope you have a horrible year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyruslcohen556 ( talk • contribs) 01:54, February 6, 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith#Plot summary.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
08:17, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your draft article on the character Wendy Torrance! I had seen it at the beginning of last month for the Women in Horror event but forgot about it by the end. I saw the Italian version and used that as a basis for the article. I'll try to review the merge and other refs to see if more can be added. StrayBolt ( talk) 16:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Dear Erik! I am new to Wikipedia and only yesterday finished writing my first English-language article about a Russian-Spanish documentary My Pilot, Whale(before that, I published a similar article in my language section of Wikipedia). Wikipedia informed me that it will take up to 4 months for my article to be checked... I'm sorry, I don't know if this is accepted in the community, but I found a link to your profile in the Documentary films task force community and I want to ask you to check my article — I'm sure you know how much you want to see your first Wikipedia article : ) Once again, I'm sorry to bother you, and if this is not the way to do it in the community, please let me know so that I don't disturb anyone in the future. Regards, Ioanradostniy ( talk) 15:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
If that's how you feel my rendering of references is, it's because I click the "normalize" feature of ProveIt which then renders refs in a particular manner. If you believe that's not the right way to render refs, please comment here. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 06:10, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
On 27 March 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on cinema, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that due to its similarity to the coronavirus pandemic, Warner Bros.' second most successful film of 2020 so far is 2011's Contagion? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on cinema), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
--valereee ( talk) 00:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Untitled A Quiet Place sequel. Since you had some involvement with the Untitled A Quiet Place sequel redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC 678 18:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Since you care SO MUCH about having red links until a page is created, why don't YOU edit the pages, because you want these people to have pages. Never ask people to make pages for you again. Draft:Polly Morgan (cinematographer), Draft:Michael P. Shawver. Iamnoahflores ( talk) 14:30, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
To conclude this, I created Polly Morgan (cinematographer). Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
I also created Michael P. Shawver. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 14:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
I strongly urge reverting to WP:STATUSQUO ASAP. -- 109.77.197.77 ( talk) 16:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello, what are you talking about? First of all, I just fixed typo in the page, because the info panel and even the filmography is not on point. Check any actor's pages, for example Norman Reedus. Does the filmography looks butchered to you? You are not improving it, you are doing quite the opposite.-- Tobi999tomas ( talk) 14:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:A Bug's Life#Plot summary issue.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
08:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey, so I saw your edit on the Wikiproject Film page here https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film&diff=959251366&oldid=959210327 and I just had a quick question for you. I'm no expert on this so how would you use templates to 'close out' the section since a consensus has been reached on the page? Davefelmer ( talk) 19:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
From what I can see on the talk page you previously reverted edits that are quite similar to what has recently been readded to the article. [1] I would appreciate if you could check and see if this is substantially the same or if this latest attempt is actually appropriate. -- 109.76.212.43 ( talk) 18:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Do you happen to recall a discussion where the use of Review score tables were deprecated in film articles? It is not stated in the MOS, and I am having a hard time finding it in the talk archives. BOVINEBOY 2008 16:20, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Done. Let me know when it becomes ineffective and semi-protect or pending changes need to be put back in. OhanaUnited Talk page 19:37, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
Whether big or small, Lauren, the deaf actress, was part of the film “Sign Gene: The First Deaf Superheroes”. It has encyclopedic content.
Deleting this film on list is like sweeping this under the carpet maliciously...it may sound like "systematic discrimination" even if you didn't mean it.
The deaf actress didn’t have a big role at Wonderstruck nor did have any “signed” dialogue (dialogue in sign language) like she had for Sign Gene.
It may not be significant to you but it may be very significant to me and to to those who want to understand her historical background career related. Movies whom she initially took part definitely helped her boost her career.
I strongly believe that you should bring back the info you deleted. Thank you.
-- Wowspucks ( talk) 13:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
I spent lot of time translating the German article (Verkannte Menschen) into English along with adding and verifying the sources. Why did you revert the article to the skeletal version that is very lacking in information and material?
Don't you ever revert the article to older one! You are doing a great disservice for the deaf community! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverTwist78 ( talk • contribs) 13:36, July 18, 2020 (UTC)
Hi, regarding this edit. I realise that ordinarily there are many 'directed by', 'written by' etc, categories, in addition to 'genre' categories - but in this instance "Films directed by Dinesh D'Souza" is actually a sub-category of "American propaganda films", ie it has effectively been decided that everything directed by D'Souza is inherently propaganda! Thus they duplicate in both parent and child cats - it is also an unusual judgement to make in advance about a filmmaker, possibly the 'directed by' category should be moved out of "American propaganda films" - meaning that these films are BOTH directed by D'Souza and American propaganda. Hope this makes sense, I don't dispute that these films are generally seen as propaganda, I was merely trying to tidy pointless duplication of categories. Pincrete ( talk) 15:41, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Erik,
You deleted my edits on the Cuties film, your reason being "Removed POV addition not covered in source." This is not a "point of view" addition in any way, actually, and if you read the multiple sources everything stated is 100% contained with the cited sources indeed. So please undo your removal. DivineReality ( talk) 23:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
I could use some c/es on this if necessary. Also how ready do you think it is? Jhenderson 777 02:22, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Erik
I appreciate your counsel pointing out the long term view. It is the way of Wiki.
I do see change happening, usually a word or phrase at a time. This evolution process is bearable. What annoyed me was that Bink, who edits movie plots without having seen the movies (he actually makes this claim proudly), is a compulsive editor (he made over 200 edits that day), dropped in, mucked up what was a clear plot (though I agree somewhat too much for the 700 word limit--700 word limit, that sounds like the requirement for a high school book report, HAHA) and produced a hack job. Since he had not seen the movie, had no first-hand knowledge of the story, he had no idea what nonsense he created with his edits to remove "bloat".
It was Bink's arrogance in what he did that annoyed me. He sloppily performed just one of very numerous edits (apparently he has a compulsion) and just moved on. When apprehended by my complaint, he just shrugged it off, with what he thought was a Jedi Mind Trick (. . .theses are not the droids you are looking for. . .move on. . .). And that annoyed again. He wasn't interested in working to compromise, he did not care. In his most recent reply to my complaint, he did acknowledge that I was angry; I did appreciate that slight nod.
This was another Wiki learning experience for me. There is so much Wikipedia documentation, rules and such that are just hidden. The Manual of Style (which is admirable) is a document that is hard to get a comprehensive understanding of (short of reading and reading and reading). 700 word limits, only 4 paragraphs in the led, on and on, stuff I stumble on often.
So in penance for my sins, I have rewritten the plot into a tight terse narrative of 665 words. It tells the film's story accurately enough so that a reader will see the story sort of (adequate for Wikipedian purposes). I left out anything that could be left out (it was a lot) although sorely tempted to include some explanatory detail.
So now others will edit. I wonder what enhancements or detractions it will bring.
Wikipedia editing, a blessing and a curse. Oh well, may we live in interesting times.
Thank you.
Stay Safe.
PS I will send you 35 cents for the psychiatric counseling (it used to 25 cents in the Peanuts cartoon, but with inflation and such, the session fee has increased)
Osomite hablemos 23:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please take a look here, and see if there is a way to promote this movie draft? Thanks. Draft talk:Jarhead: Law of Return. -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:7901:7BC:9665:2F53 ( talk) 00:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Do not WP:WIKISTALK me. Thanks. 2A02:C7F:6E64:1C00:C59C:A410:479F:B9DD ( talk) 21:55, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I added my film "GODDESS" to the Afrofuturism film page and would like to know why it was deleted? There is adequate sources available to verify that my film is indeed part of this list and the Afrofuturism community. 2601:C0:C97F:82C0:9533:369A:AF23:BABC ( talk) 21:14, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
I know you've probably got plenty of stuff on your plate, but the FAC could use some additional input and you're my go-to film guy. If you have a chance I'd love your input. Happy holidays, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 05:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey Erik, hope you are doing well. Thought I'd solicit an opinion from you about the audience scores listed at Star Wars: The Last Jedi#Audience reception. I noticed these are being updated regularly, but I could have sworn there was a discussion at some point that determined they should remain static, to reflect what the sources were writing about at the time. What the sources were saying back in late 2017/early 2018 became the focus of an RfC that allowed the audience section in. Doesn't seem like something we should be updating, and instead should reflect that moment in time.
I searched SWLJ's talk archives and couldn't find anything. Either I'm having a memory lapse, or that discussion happened somewhere else. What are your thoughts? Do you think the numbers should be regularly updated? It would have created a contradiction if the user rating ever creeped up above 60% (though it wasn't likely to happen). -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 10:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Wonder Woman 1984 § Rotten Tomatoes.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
06:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
12 Years a Slave (film) (redirect). The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 26#12 Years a Slave (film) (redirect) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠)
07:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there! I've seen some of your reviews on FAC, and since much of your work on WP is related to film, I thought I'd ask you if you have time or interest to review an article on a film actress. Shahid • Talk2me 23:35, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, Erik! This is just a reminder in case you still intend to take a look at the above article and offer a review. It has attracted little notice. If you are busy and have no time (or energy or interest), please ignore this message. Best wishes,
Shahid •
Talk2me
22:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi - I don't disagree that we should organize things with readers in mind, but isn't chronological order (and not reverse chronological) the standard for disambig pages? I don't think I've seen them sorted by any other way, eg. Dracula (disambiguation), Mummy (disambiguation), and Ben-Hur. -- Iiii I I I ( talk) 19:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Rio 2 § Big Boss's fate.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
20:42, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you.
2605:8D80:521:8BB6:346E:2E7F:AA0C:CAB1 (
talk)
02:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Permanent link: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 167#Wikispecialist. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Hey - I'm wondering if you might be able to discuss through the language issue over on Music (2021 film) a little further? Given I'm an IP editor with not as much history on wikipedia (+ I probably let myself get dragged a little into the heat wrongly with a couple of prev. edits) it seems that they really just don't want to engage in discussion with them. I'm wondering if you might be able to get them to bring up an explanation or further the issue, otherwise it's just a brick wall of either leaving the issue unresolved, or getting it into an edit war where the rapidly revert it without elaborating, and I'm not really sure where that leaves me with it then. 188.220.86.46 ( talk) 23:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Editor making mass changes without consensus to do so. Thank you.
Sdrqaz (
talk)
01:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Permanent link: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1058#Editor making mass changes without consensus to do so. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 13:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
There is a request for protection for the Music (2021 film). Since you have been editing it I thought I would let you know. Afootpluto ( talk) 15:46, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is " Music (2021 film)".The discussion is about the topic Music (film 2021).
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
188.220.86.46 ( talk) 13:56, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Permanent link here. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 14:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on Talk:Eagle Eye. I was almost ready to take it to WP:3RD so thanks for saving me from that extra hassle. -- 109.76.192.5 ( talk) 15:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for those links. Seeing the film and then reading the credits makes it look like Antwerp, as they speak French there as well. That was certainly never clear to me. Based on those refs we should certainly say Paris then. I think we should include a ref in the synopsis as well as I can't have been the only one who was confused by that. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy ( talk) 22:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Please see the discussion thread at Talk:Sound of Metal#Opening sentence. ParetoOptimusPrime ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) — Preceding undated comment added 01:13, April 17, 2021
Hey! Do recall back when there was a review summary table template for films that was eventually deleted? I am having a discussion with someone who is basically recreating such a table manually but I can't recall what the template was called, or where the AfD is located. BOVINEBOY 2008 01:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Erik,
If you tag a page for speedy deletion because it was deleted through an AFD discussion, could you link to that discussion so an admin reviewing the tagged article doesn't have to search for it? If you use Twinkle to tag pages for deletion, it asks for the AFD link and also posts a notice on the talk page of the page creator which is an important step in the deletion process which makes things easy. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:18, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fictional counties, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional counties (4th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
![]()
| |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. ( t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC) |
I got your message. Why are only positive reviews by COMPENSATED critics being mentioned? Why should not IMDB (Which is considered far more accurate) being posted. This film has overwhelmingly received very poor reviews, and the page does not reflect that truthfully. TheOminousDarkness ( talk) 13:02, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
This citation https://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/woman-king/ that you provide for The Woman King page feels very inadequate. What gives this page credibility? There aren't any sources for any of the claims made throughout this article. I think we should take it and any claims it makes out of the page because they may be misleading. Blackboardd ( talk) 22:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Next time, see if the user you're pinging has any previous relevance or knowledge of the topic in question. Otherwise, you are wasting both parties' time. The "debatably entertaining turn" doesn't go against the negative reviews, it actually says that what viewers will watch on screen won't be boring and therefore will be "debatably entertaining". So it CAN be entertaining to watch a "bad" performance. ภץאคгöร 18:01, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Grave of the Fireflies § Plot summary format.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
20:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Normally I'd be annoyed by an article being locked because of one editor but in this case I'd be totally fine with it if you want to go there. (I'm half surprised admins haven't jumped in already.) -- 109.79.75.129 ( talk) 01:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Erik. Just another registered user here, that is, not an IP. My best advice to you is to start those Enola Holmes talk sections yourself, when engaging IP editors that may not know better. That is, my advice to you is not to wait until IP editors follow the rules - instead lead by example and show how the BRD policy is meant to be used yourself. After all, in a room full of IP editors, you're the "grown up" = registered editor.
Another benefit of starting talk sections is that it becomes apparent which other editors are only there to be disruptive - if they persist in edit warring and using edit commentary as their sole means of communication, they can simply be blocked. If there is a talk section, they need to engage there. This greatly lowers the risk to yourself as well - I have come close to violating the 3RR rule when engaging in edit summary discussions, and once there is a talk discussion, things usually calm down. Like, a lot!
You'll find you will stand on higher ground once you realize the initial bother of having to start a discussion pays off. Anyway, read or ignore this as you will - this is meant as nothing more than friendly advice. Cheers CapnZapp ( talk) 07:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I think you were overcomplicating things with this edit.
[2] To say Addressed apples-vs-oranges comparison; putting production budget versus box office is disingenuous in all cases
is a big overstatement (emphasis added). Never say never. In the case of films that earn considerably less than their budget it is not disingenuous, it is merely a simplistic way to show that the film was not a success. Also presenting the numbers seemed a far gentler more
neutral way of pointing out the underperformance than using the colorful metaphor of "box office bomb". Less seemed like more.
The details may be more complicated, but the overview is simple, anyone can see that a film that does not even gross as much as the budget is not a success. That simplification is not misleading at all. There is no need to character that as admits that it is not appropriate to compare directly
I am merely pointing out that the minimum explanation can be quite simple, while acknowledging that sometimes more complicated explanations might be necessary.
Sometimes more is obviously more (other times it's just overcomplicated). Since you were willing to rewrite the intro extensively and provide a more informative maximal explanation [3], that ultimately makes for a better encyclopedia article, I can certainly get behind that. The gross versus budget comparison might be simple and certainly isn't as good as what you added later, but Wikipedia has long been about "good enough" until someone else is willing to rewrite it better. -- 109.76.131.219 ( talk) 17:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
What is the antagonist looking for at just the "cast" section? 105.112.59.253 ( talk) 22:36, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Erik,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
05:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 05:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Could you restore your rewrite of the lead section again please? There are some editors who don't get it. -- 109.79.162.163 ( talk) 00:44, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
The article Alex Tse (judge) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Delete per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margaret J. Schneider/ WP:USCJN
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Snickers2686 (
talk)
04:12, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Erik. Just so you know, there's a discussion regarding the review summaries in the lead section of Fantastic Four (2015 film). It can be found at Talk:Fantastic Four (2015 film)#Summary of reviews in the lead. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 08:33, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey Erick. Good to bump into you. I've re-phrased the supernatural horror bit in that book. I feel a bit weird about citing a book that's not about the subject at hand to fill in the blanks on a subject (especially when some of the sourced material was not what was written in the book), so i've taken a quick crack and re-editing it and discussed it on the talk page. Just don't want to edit war over it is all. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 13:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Back as Barney Crumble Rusted AutoParts 05:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024! |
Hello Erik, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
InfiniteNexus ( talk) 07:08, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Erik. I'd hate to ask, but would you be able to provide an opinion on Talk:Horror film? Some more voices here would be really helpful. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 13:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
In the Themes section you kept paragraph one and dropped paragraph two. It might be worth keeping a shortened version of the original version of paragraph 2 because it gives insight into comparing the themes as written in Frank Herbert's book in comparison to how Villeveuve represented these themes in his own film version. The reference to Frank Herbert's knowledge of the Algerian war seemed to be useful to readers since Wikipedia even has a linked article for it. Could you consider doing a shorter version of the second paragraph that might preserve some of this discussion? HenryRoan ( talk) 14:28, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Tarzan (1999 film) § Plot rewrite.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
05:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Also, there's a discussion at Talk:The Lion King II: Simba's Pride#Changes to the plot and lead if you are interested. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 01:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
I know it's rude to use the C word, but there is no better way to describe it, I was a cunt back in 2007 on Wikipedia and want to do my best to add something of value to this site. Do you have any advice? As of this year I started reading books because I know books have far more valuable information than random pages on the Internet that could be misinformation. And unlike the Internet what's in books can't be taken away by a proxy provider. Blaze The Movie Fan ( talk) 00:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
If just ONE more corrupt admin threatens me I am leaving for good. I'm beyond fed up with power hungry admins ruining this website. Blaze The Movie Fan ( talk) 05:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
The redirect
List of film accents considered the worst has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 12 § List of film accents considered the worst until a consensus is reached. —
a smart kitten[
meow
18:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:A Christmas Carol (2009 film) § Plot summary.
Lord Sjones23 (
talk -
contributions)
22:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
There's also an ongoing discussion over at Talk:Toy Story 3#Plot discussion as well. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 08:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)