![]() | 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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Hey, I was wondering, can I create a secondary sandbox, or is one all we get? I wanted to work on assembling the bits of the various Braveheart sections in WP, but a temp page seems a bit over the top. Suggestions? (Alien and Big can pipe in, too - you peeping Toms ;) ) Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I detected a bit of sniveness about it. I think that anyone that fights against the use of non-free images (generally, every image you'll find in a film or television article) kind of takes "better than thou" attitude with anyone that either fights them, or just isn't privy to some new admenments to the guidelines, They generaly never make it public knowledge that they are holding debates about the use of fair-use images, and so it's a wonder when you have tons of reverts from editors that have no idea they've adjusted definitions to be more specific to certain things. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Because they are cracking down on Featured Lists. There were tons of Featured episode lists that had a screenshot next to a quick synopsis. Well, not it's just the synopsis. They've removed all screenshots from FL's on television episodes. It makes me think that they're going to crack down on film plots (if they already haven't...I don't know about you, but I don't watch any film articles that are FA status). Worse comes to worse, we can simply remove them..so I'm not saying leave them out because they may request their removal, just that we should be prepared to defend the rationale of any non-free image we place on that page, in any section. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 15:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
The "cast of around 200" thing was added by User:81.178.255.200. I don't have a cite-able source right now.
I can tell you that 81.178.255.200 is right though. My roommate (a makeup artist) got pulled into helping out at the set yesterday and she is going up there again tomorrow. Short of sending some of her photos to AintItCoolNews and then citing the resulting post, I don't have a source we can use in the article. AlistairMcMillan 16:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar - it's nice to have the work appreciated. I got in over my head with it, spending probably about 70-80 hours in the last week working on this. I'm pretty exhausted. I had not even considered there may have been prior existing image wars...that's great if these ended those so people can move on. Let me know of any in particular that were noteworthy. -- David Shankbone 17:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, please don't make the change until the discussion over the poster image has been concluded. This can be seen as ignoring consensus. I would suggest presenting more information than "I haven't seen it anywhere" because when I did a Google search, multiple websites presenting the image came up. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
To tell you the truth, even though I liked the movie, it seemed that the entire "Spider-Man" story was just tacked on to this character drama between Harry, Peter and MJ. You really don't see that much of Spider-Man or any of the villains in the first act of the film. It seems like they spliced in some quick shots to satisfy people, while spending the rest of the time on just the relationships between the 3 primary characters. Yes, Venom really did seem underused. Topher is awesome as Brock, but (and I already knew how much time "Venom" was going to get on the screen b/c I read it on MSNBC) he still seemed stapled on...and that is most likely because of Avi. Raimi shouldn't have given in. It would have been better to maybe introduce the symbiote at the beginning of a later film, and have an entire film devoted to its story, half on Peter, half on Brock, instead of the way it was used. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I went looking for the entries where CoM came into play. How did you find them? Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, Im sorry about the rating, but after May 4th, I think we could insert the rating of the film in multiple countries into the article. What do you think? ` GTAGeek123 22:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the ratings issue is resolved! :). - GTAGeek123 23:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll erase the credits and provide suggestions instead if I can think of some. My mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gangsta1542 ( talk • contribs) 19:04, May 2, 2007
I'd probably prod is first. That's 3 years away, with no definite. If the third film bombs horribly (not likely, but still possible) then they'd probably scrap. Something to keep on a "Shrek (film series)" page (if one exists). I sincerely hope a "Puss in Boots (2011 film)" film article hasn't already been created. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
That's awesome. You can bet your bottom dollar that it would be frought with plot expansions and useless trivia, or vandalism. I think that plot is probably already too long, but I won't word count it for fear that I'll read it. It was hard enough to add that alert in it, my eyes kept trying to focus and read. Only 25 hours for me. My buddy and I are going to catch the midnight showing at 11:59pm tomorrow. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
So much for the "if we don't have a trivia section it will keep people from adding trivia"..I've removed 4 attempts by 3 different editors to add a trivia section. lol. Oh, I found the other "Snitch" link and removed it. It was on Lucky You (film). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed everything in question. First, we were citing Wikipedia for Wikipedia, and the "list of most expensive films" is not verifed. They are using BOM.com and other similar sites that don't cite their own sources. If Pirates 2 really was 225m then that would make it the second most. It's best to just leave any assumptions to the wind and just state the verifiable information we know. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The one thing I love and hate at the same time, is going to sleep and waking up the next day to do clean up. I love it, because I just like working on the site, but I hate it because it's so tedious to have to deal with people that neglect to read guidelines and think they can do whatever, but choose to do it at the wee hours of the morning when most are asleep. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
That is probably the most hysterical thing I've seen. I thought I saw the main page red earlier today. That's classic. I bet it was someone that got tired of them removing non-free film posters from "featured article of the day". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I honestly don't understand the difference between what I've been posting and what anyone else posts in film and actor articles. I'm a journalist. This is legitimate, high-quality and informative content. I have nothing to advertise. I genuinely just have fascinating information to share with the Wikipedia community. Rather than going back and forth like this and tagging me as someone who I'm not, would you be so kind as to visually illustrate how and where a post for this content would be considered appropriate? Thank you for your time. -- AdamFendelman 00:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
That's the apparent problem. While helpful guidance, people on here keep sending me to scores of massively long articles. I am honestly reading them, attempting again to follow requested guidelines and somehow keep getting it wrong. This is the third time now I'm requesting a specific, visual illustration of how the apparently inappropriate posts I'm doing can be made appropriate. Can you edit a deleted post from me and show me how you'd change it so it's fair game? That would be extraordinarily helpful. Thank you. -- AdamFendelman 00:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
An issue I see is that we have one image for the soundtrack on the film article, and a completely different image on the soundtrack article. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Did you gradumitate, or do you have an internship lined up for the summer?
Btw, did some basic copyediting on the SM3 article.
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
07:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Thought you might enjoy this Spidey-based joke - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
(and franjly, I'm a little insulted that no one laughed at my sandbox joke) Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiProject Films Award | |
I,
Nehrams2020, hereby award
Erik the WikiProject Films Award for his/her valued contibutions to
WikiProject Films. Thank you for your excellent work in improving so many film articles in Wikipedia. Keep up your dedicated efforts in developing articles about upcoming films!
|
Eh. I'd AfD it, but I'm sort of ambivalent. It's probably going to happen, unless 3 tanks. -- Ipstenu ( talk| contribs) 23:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what happened here, but I have no idea how you could consider the first American on top of Everest not notable. There was a good reason the article was orphaned, it was misspelled (it should have two t's). I've created a redirect. - Mgm| (talk) 08:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Then why don't you add some citiation then, instead of just removing it? And have no idea how to add citiation (english is not my mother language, and I'm far from being a computer nerd, so the explanation how to do it is too complicated for me). If you are as interested in The Invasion as you pretend to be, you knwo damn well the added information is taken from the official site. 193.217.193.159 12:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
So, have you started any prep work for the He-Man movie that will potentiall star Brad Pitt (or so says Movies.com)? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Did you see the video and photos for Iron Man? Nothing is said in the video, it's shot from afar. Just thought it was cool to see the suit in live action. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
The proposed recreation of Spider-Man 4, and comment by Spartaz, makes me think we should probably try and make some headway with that future films guideline. What do you think? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I know. I find it interesting that Admins, and some editors, think that if you have that little userbox that says "i'm an admin" that you are god to Wikipedia. It's a popularity vote. Obviously there is some critiquing of the user's ability to do the job well, but in the end, all they are doing is saying "i think I can trust you to not abuse these privileges", and that has nothing to do with an admin's understanding of policy, especially subjective ones at that. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
HOLY CRAP..lol, that was some emotion I think I have rarely seen, if ever, from you.....but I completely concur so it's ok. Like they say..A friend in need....is probably friends with another Admin so they'll get off — well, I don't think they saying goes quite like that, but for some reason that on rings more accurately. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
If you're referring people to Spider-Man film series#Future on the talk page, why don't you want them to be redirected there by the article? Night Gyr ( talk/ Oy) 18:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Seems like it was Mr.Brown (the fine gent that protected Spidey 4) that passed the article into GA status. I'd compare what was passed into GA with how it looks now. Maybe it just got into horrible shap since February when it was passed. If not, then I'd probably ask him about it, and tell him your concerns. I haven't seen the film yet (i've been meaning to buy them all, but summer classes are going to start for me tomorrow..so I'm kinda broke). From what I saw when I glanced at it, it looked choppy. The opening sentence: "written by, directed by, and starring Sylvester Stallone"???? That could easily be written better. It repeats itself in two paragraphs saying "it's the final film in the series". Heck, the entire lead needs work. I see a lot of uncited (probably vandalism in the guise of encyclopedic information) information in the casting, original research in that "references to previous films"....I don't even have to finish going down the page to know this article needs to be delisted and cleaned, thoroughly. 02:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
If you get some free time (free time on Wikipedia..LOL, yeah right) could you take a gander at this FAC. It's my first nomination, and I'd appreciate any input for its improvement. It's on the Aquaman pilot, so it won't be a long article to read. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I know. I posted in WikiFilm here. I will do my best to reach Ed regarding keeping the images in place. What I find infuriating is that admins like FutPerf delete images, then let us know that we can oppose it before deleting the image anyway. there seems to be a glaring lack of oversight on that practice. Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
He was reported here. Can't say we didn't warn him. Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Figured I might as well throw my hat into the ring if I could do so without causing too much trouble. The whole thing is a little ridiculous and it doesn't seem to be getting anywhere. I (like most every other editor here) figured if I stated the points that I thought were valid it might help, but he's using circular logic to defend his point (we give this to you but there's the potential for abuse, so we don't let you actually use it). Hewinsj 02:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that...I don't know what I would have done is someone else would have seen that. I quite possibly would have had to move to another Wikipedia, the stigma would have surrounded me here. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you liked it. I've been catching Spidey 1 and 2 on tv (different channels though) lately, and when FX shows Spidey 2, it's always at the train sequence. I could watch that sequence a million times and it always keeps the tension. It's just so powerful, especially at the end when the passengers catch him and hoist him into the air to bring him into the car. Maybe...just maybe, they will make another one and it won't have so many villains, so that it will be able to focus more on the important things (which, right now I think could only be the marriage of Peter and MJ; they can't leave it at that. But, if they can't get Maguire, Dunst, and Raimi back..then I say "LEAVE IT ALONE!"). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 05:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Great work on Fight Club by the way. I've celaned up Se7en a little ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 12:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Ah, Spider-Man is for kids, so I don't think we could have expected anything less than cringe-worthy comedy, from the guy who made Evil Dead. I think it worked well: dark Spidey murders Sandman, darker Parker is a twit. I personally found Sandman a bit superflous when Venom got involved: you don't think there's any way we can redress the article to focus more on the symbiote? Alientraveller 15:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I think we should supply information rather than interpret it, but it sounds like black-suited Spidey is a chain reaction of wanting to bring in Venom. Still, I guess the article is fine: man, those quote boxes are nifty. Alientraveller 15:32, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Ultimately I'm just happy to supply lots of material for fans to study from and make up their own minds. I found a forum post on Superherohype.com using two citations we've absorbed into the article! Alientraveller 15:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not a big fan of forums: people tossed my opinions around like a beachball. Wikipedia was a Godsend. I do like SHH because of all the fan art. On topic, it was the Sci-Fi Wire Producers beefed up Spider-Man 3 and the EW article. Alientraveller 15:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I thought the image was even more important than the others -it illustrates fight club itself. But if you are not happy with it then remove but if you do so please delete the image too -I'm tired of people removing images from films and not deleting the images too - leaving a string of orphaned images. If it is the case it is a big pity that images are being tightened -but I feel there should be a maximum three per articles ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 15:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep up the good work anyway. Impressive. We are all maggots -all part of the same compost heap!!! Hope you are well ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 15:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Great. I do agree really that images should only be used to illustrate the article - it is finding a kind of balance where everyone is happy. I put the image where it said about Pitt and Norton training and boxing and martial art training -maybe we could have specific section towards exploring the techniques of Fight Club itself - this way the image would have a more clear purpose. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 15:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
All the best then ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 16:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
You are welcome to nominate the new article at AfD if you wish; however, I don't see any violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Uncle G produced sufficient reliable sources to suggest that the film will be made, that substantive information is available regarding it, and that the film is the subject of sufficient media attention such that it is noteworthy. (See exception #1 at WP:CRYSTAL.) Even if the film is aborted for some reason, the existence of sources now suggests that its cancelation would itself be a notable event.
The article is a likely target for unsourced speculation, and may well need protecting in the future. Protection at this time is unwarranted. Best wishes, Xoloz 17:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that was what I didn't like. Being an admin doesn't give him the right to say "this is moot... I like this better so we're doing it this way". That's a clear abuse of power. It's one thing to say "we didn't agree on redirecting, just deleting", but it's another to unprotect a page and move information in there when the consensus was to delete the page. Regardless of whether its redirected or not, the consensus was clear that it should, in the least, stay deleted. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Thoughts on the Shrek 4 article? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Of course it is. I asked Uncle G why he made the last paragraph redundant, citing Maguire as saying that he'd return if the others did, and his response was "see the top of the page". The top of the page basically told me not to discuss articles on his talk page, only on the article page. Then he tried to say that the information wasn't there before. He's using different sources, but the information is basically the same as it was in April. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree. It shouldn't be too bad either since there are only 3 films (thus far), as opposed to Potter's 7 films (in the end). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't care about a color scheme for the cast. I just felt that it might have needed a separation between the films and the first cast member, and I didn't particularly think the black would suit it. Yeah, I'll try and see if I can find an image that links all three films (something official), otherwise I say use the first film poster. As for identifying the films in the plot section...You could just link the titles of the films, or use a semi-colon before each title. Not sure about that.. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah. Something right to the point, something you'd fit in the lead of an article. Peter Parker bitten by genetically altered spider; he takes on the traits of the spider. After losing his uncle, he devotes himself to fighting crime. Norman Osborn, in an effort to save his company, experiments with performance enhancing drugs. As a side-effect, Norman becomes insane and takes on the mantle of the Green Goblin. ... kind of like that, but worded better. I was just listing the key points of the film. Speaking of films, do you remember the animated series that aired in the 90s? I picked up 3 of those DVDs (The Return of the Green Goblin, Spidey vs Dock Ock, and The Venom Saga). I must say, the 5 episodes in "The Venom Saga" were more satisfying than Spider-Man 3. Peter's actions while wearing the black suit, and Eddie tormenting Peter because he knows his secret, that was more tension filled (although not really, because it was a cartoon, but you get the idea) than the film was. Is that bad? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I love how people say "oh, it has 12 references, that means it's well source...we should keep the article". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
How the hell did this become a featured article? Anyone?...Anyone?...Bueller? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 06:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
You got a serious backlog in article focus. Relax man, you probably got years to improve all these articles. Alientraveller 15:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep up the good work. The Untouchables: Capone Rising is ok in my view given the smallness of the project thus far, although the original film is something that needs more work. I should work at The Lovely Bones, and Sweeney Todd too, but even being a big Burton fan, I'm not feeling it. Maybe I'm just not experienced with the tale and find the concept too nasty for him. Oh, and would you drop some citations for The Curse of the Black Pearl on the talk page? I'm looking to improve that given the occasion. Alientraveller 16:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
No, and nor did I find an article for Dead Man's Chest. Part of the problem is that the Pirates series have hilariously rushed productions, so not much time for chit-chat. I didn't find articles for the first two Spideys either. Alientraveller 16:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Ha! That link works! For how long though... Alientraveller 16:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
You know what? I registered on VFXWorld. I mustered up some effort then. Alientraveller 16:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
He's logged it and added it to the page, and removed the nom. Just waiting for the bot, that's all. Alientraveller 18:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I look forward to when you have a little star on your page then. Alientraveller 18:59, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
If Alientraveller is truly such a laudable editor, then he should divulge the nature of his edits to the rest of us, rather than recklessly editing without any explanation for his actions.
Who is watching the watchers?
Osirus 06:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Duly noted. Thank you.
Osirus 06:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
LOL, I'm getting conflicting reports. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to reformat the Smallville season pages. this is what I'm doing and this is the way it is now.
Let me try my hand. But first you got to tell me in one sentence what Fight Club is really about. Alientraveller 20:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I kept looking at the article and basically feel that the themes of the film really rely on its twist, so I'll try two paragraphs, one on plot, characters and a minor mention of themes, and the second on production and reaction. Alientraveller 20:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Have you been following this topic? Near as I can figure it, some folk are arguing that Spoiler tags are unnecessary in film articles, as they are a "blatant" NPOV violation. I suspect more than a few are off their meds... - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Sure, I'll put it on the list. Thanks for the invite. — Viriditas | Talk 04:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Neat. Film series can be addictively hard work: if you want to extend your work to all series like Batman or James Bond, good luck, but don't lose sight of the films you love the most. Alientraveller 16:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Aaaahhh. Yeah, that was in the opening credits. LOL, that's why they are adding him? Yeah, I think we need a better description like you suggested. Something about extended flashbacks. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Nope. I was looking at the diffs, and I guess I didn't hit the "edit page" key the second time to make it go to the current page. Thanks for that. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I saw your work on The Time Traveler's Wife (film). Great stuff, very well sourced! That book was awesome. Smee 07:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC).
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar | |
For your outstanding contribution to Film on the project, all the while maintaining a polite and kind demeanor during discussion. You are appreciated. Thank you. Yours, Smee 07:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC) |
Generally, WP:WPChi puts the {{ ChicagoWikiProject}} tag on movies that were either filmed in part in Chicago or set in Chicago. Do you have a problem with such a tag? TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Well I completed The Curse of the Black Pearl DVD. Any suggestions for what images I should include? Alientraveller 11:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, you replied while I wrote the reply regarding Supes and Bats. Alientraveller 17:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't have anything on Schumacher, I just had the resources what with Burton on Burton on me. I suggest discussion of the 60s Batman as well as the 1940s film serials too, just to be comprehensive. Plus, don't diss the animated movies: Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was released in cinemas, so that needs a mention alongside the Timmverse, as Batman: The Animated Series was inspired by Batman Returns.
You going to mention anything about Pirates whilst we're at it with Supers? Alientraveller 17:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
My two cents on article structure: I love chronology, and we shouldn't be too reliant on what Rotten Tomatoes collects. On the other hand, I included reception to Burton's films, being that's what made Warner Bros do a turn to campiness. Alientraveller 17:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Just be comprehensive: the 40s serials and 60s films show Batman's first attempts at the big screen. I also have advice to not be rash with your hatred of Canceled Superman films, because I'm enjoying reading the external links. Alientraveller 19:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your recent copy-edits on the Jurassic Park article, amongst others, and I was hoping you could help me out on another FAC. GoldenEye is currently a candidate, and one of the problems it faces is the need for copy-editing. While I was looking through a few other FACs I noticed that you had experience with good copy-editing, and I hoped you would help get GoldenEye to FA status. Your skills would be a true asset to this FAC, I hope you can help. Thanks! - • The Giant Puffin • 08:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I know this doesnt have anything to do with the article but could someone tell me the name of the song and who the creater of the song is in this video?[4] I just needed the information and I already said it had nothing to do with the article. I just needed someone to tell me. If you happen to know the information I need could you please tell me? 24.208.55.168 19:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Please read this and stop making pointless reversions here. Why do you think we have a bot which fixes these things automatically? HTH HAND — Phil | Talk 15:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
On your two questions:
1. I'd leave the film as the main entry for now. The important thing is that the entry is started on the graphic novels (to that end I might go for Road to Perdition (comics) as there is a series). The film is higher profile and should makes more sense taking the top slot. Somewhere down the line it might be that everyone agrees there should be a disambiguation page as the top entry but the priority for now is starting the one onthe comics.
2. All those removals look perfectly fine and I'm glad you were bold - ironically I was just about to remove the trivia section from another entry. The trivia, dleeted scenes and differences sections were just trivia traps and have a tendancy to bloat and unbalance the entry. If someone wants that kind of informaiton I'm sure there are sites for it but I suspect if you delved into the film project's pages it would give a big "NO!!!" to all three. Some information may be potentially worked back in so it was good you dropped it on the talk page (always a good move I find) but looking at it I'd not think much needs saving.
So keep up the good work. ( Emperor 02:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC))
Thanks, Erik, for the mini trailer of "The Dark Knight". I'm afraid that the trailer itself is a fake. But I still enjoyed it. I'm hyped up about "The Dark Knight". Thanks again.
Forget about GA; you are very close to FA. Nice work. I left a couple comments on talk, and I will probably leave a few more in the next few days, but aside from adding a url and a few other maintenance edits, I will not be editing the article. Keep at it, I think this will be on the main page very soon. — Viriditas | Talk 11:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I always thought it would have been del Toro, but I was never very sure. I see that I'm wrong; thanks for that. Atropos 14:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I thought you were all set to go with Road to Perdition and Batman film series and then... So what's been up lately? I enjoyed Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End btw, and have been keeping a steady eye on that plot. Alientraveller 10:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
AWE is good fun, it veers a little more into the grotesque humour of DMC and has a killer twist: do stay behind for the credits, that scene is worth far more than either bonus treat of the first two films. It's a long film, my cinema had an intermission, so don't snack on anything beforehand. Alientraveller 10:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and my Asperger's got in the way: I hope you're doing well with your internship! Alientraveller 10:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the head's up, this is my first major attempt at a fictional character, and I'm modelling it on Palpatine. Bit difficult though, given I haven't read that children's book series. Alientraveller 11:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
From the
nomination page:
(self-nomination)This article is simply excellent. Excellent writing, interesting subject matter, improved during its Good Article trial, and eye-witnesses have left notes on the Talk page that talk about the article being so accurate, it's like they were living it all over again. Written in a NPOV and heavily cited with the highest of sources, it includes GFDL media, is wikified to the fullest, a fantastic "See Also" section, and looks at the story from every angle. --
David Shankbone
18:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
That made no sense, but I just felt like breaking "internship" into different words. Anyway, yeah I saw the messages. I hope it's a lot of fun. Is it just "another" internship, or does it have to deal with something you plan to do as a career? My g/f's getting it rough now, she's interning in Virginia (ironically where i'm from), and she doesn't care for it...well she doesn't care for the city life. I hope yours is easier (town wise). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
The May 2007 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 notice by BrownBot 21:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Don't see a need for the expansion tag in the reception section. I'll help expand it, but it's fine without the tag. — Viriditas | Talk 08:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
You should be proud. You got mentioned by name several times on that little rant. Means you are doing a good job. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Nice. I think you explained it rather well. I can't say that everyone will understand, because they see how horrible some articles (to them they don't see the problems, they just see the article) and they think that is how every article is. Because we are an "open" editing website, it brings the problem that people think they can do whatever they want, and they don't realize that there are still rules and guidelines that are supposed to govern our efforts. I think you did a good job explaining that you are simply following the restrictions set forth by Wikipedia, which are completely different than what goes on at BOF and other like websites. I did notice that when someone pointed out the argument you made (here) about not being able to link to a specific release, because it gets archived from the homepage, that Jettman still wrote off Wikipedia. I love the argument "there's tons of BS on that site". Well gee, who would have thought that when you have almost 2 million articles in one language that there could possibly be any BS there. Especially when you allow everyone to edit, without registering. From what I've seen, you are probably not going to get anywhere with this Jettman. You can show him where he's wrong in thinking that we have to use BOF, because of the damn websites own regulations (and not some personal vendetta of yours, mines or anyone elses), and it wouldn't make any difference. From reading through that forum, most (not all) come off as those little children who can't understand why they shouldn't have ice-cream right before dinner. So, instead of obeying they simply whine and threaten to give a tantrum (in this case, a full-on riot of Wikipedia and anything Batman related here). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I've been following. They have the circular logic of "well, we have quotes on the front page that prove it", or the "since we are always right, when Jett says 'this is true', that means we must be recognized". They keep dodging the question. I don't know how to take it. Kryptonsite is one that could be called into question, the only reason I put it above every other Smallville fansite is because no other fansite has ever had their webmaster requested to right official companion guides for the series. Craig Bryne (the webmaster) goes out to the set and interviews everyone, and has written 1 book (due in September) with another due a couple months after that. I think that's a clear case of the studio respecting his fansite enough to say "hey, come write for us". I haven't seen that with BOF (not saying that lack of that means anything), but if they could provide some proof that the studio actually recognizes their efforts and considers them the "TOP", then I think that would help us fight for their existence on the page. As for a "counter", it counts everyone over and over again, so if I visit the site 30 times in one day, it doesn't say I've only been there once, it says I've been there 30 times. Kind of like vote stacking. Where is this counter anyway? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I think the safe bet is to do a proposal. This way people can't say "well you didn't let us know". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I can't see anyting "missing", but I see plenty to clean up. But, you asked for missing, as I'm sure you're more than aware of what needs cleaning. I don't see anything major. I wouldn't say "expand this section" as I'm sure it's already in the back of your mind. I mean, there are plenty of tags on the article for that. Overall, I think it looks decent for just a days worth of work. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I think one skill I have learned to "master" (so to speak), is determing reliable sources. I have a far more critical eye now, than I did before, when I was writing research papers. I try to write them now, and I sit there and go "i would never use this on Wikipedia, why would I use it here". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I am curious - do they also render sound effects (swords clashing, boats creaking) and just how do they caption love scenes? :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Why haven't you linked the production notes? Alientraveller 18:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
You already listed Empire's feature. All good then. I saw a bit of the movie on TV, very beautiful and cool: not cool like slick, but temperature and colour. I hope you get what I mean. Alientraveller 20:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Please write me off-list asap. An opportunity has presented itself for some insider info. Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree that usually images on film pages shouldn't be popping everywhere. What I am describing here is the differences in versions of the released titles. They are very different and visual identification of each title is very useful; hence the images. Also, as I pointed out earlier the images are very small to offer less obtrusiveness. As for calling Alientraveller's edit vandalism and not in good faith; that was the logical conclusion when I asked for him stop the reverts and discuss; which he did not do. Thanks for your time. FrankWilliams 14:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I agree using vandal may have been harsh; but he still should have used the discussion pages. I'll change the wording in the article so it reflects the critical commentary point you're making. I really thing the image are good for the article which is always my interest. FrankWilliams 15:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I do not know how to make citations, but here http://in.rediff.com/movies/2007/mar/15night.htm is the link that confirms that the Indian production company UTV is co-producing with 20th Century Fox to make this film.
Oh I'll agree with you at how macabre it was: the sailor who got extreme frostbite and Sparrow's mum choked me up. I ranked it better as DMC because it did have more a point being the climax, (*cough*no cannibals*cough*) but as much as I love extended universe COTBP tops it for me being just an enjoyable ghost story. Alientraveller 07:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, right now, I think it's easily GA. It's definitely not FA material, but GA's are for well written articles that still need work. I don't think anyone would find fault the quality of the article. As for casting, yeah we should look into that. We could put it with the "Cast and characters" section, this way if it isn't that much information it's still got a home. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 13:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I think for the "Film series" bit we can add some stuff on the production, given that is the ongoings of a film series, rather than a third-perspective reception. On another note, from the Making the Amazing DVD documentary for the second film, Laura Ziskin noted Raimi basically moved onto the second film right after the first was finished. Alientraveller 14:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Shawshank is something I've been meaning for one day. Schedule swamps though: Titanic is ten this year, so that'll be centre of my attention. I'll saw how you do your thang first, and I'll try to expand if necessary once I view the DVD. I certainly think it was subtitled, but don't take my word for it, I only viewed them a few years ago. Alientraveller 15:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Well there's no way it'll reach June 11, but there is Halloween. Anyway, yeah, Tintin's ok, lead takes up too much though. Alientraveller 19:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
There's a lot I did, a few I couldn't do. Alientraveller 19:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. Did you take a degree in English btw? Or am I just Aspergerish with my writing? Alientraveller 19:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I replied on the talk page. Take your pick of either Spielberg or Rambaldi and their creation. Alientraveller 16:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
If you've got some of them, thanks very much. I'll try to find a balance, but like science-fiction films themselves, I try to connect themes and subtleties within the practical problems of creating an alien. I did consider a themes section actually but decided against it due to lack of material. Alientraveller 07:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh right, I see, I just assumed they were avaliable online. Sorry. Alientraveller 10:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you amigo. Alientraveller 13:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
You are very welcome to expand the themes section if you wish. I abide by WP:OWN. Alientraveller 15:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Let's see how you do though, if you have time away from the Road to Perdition. If you want you can bullet point the articles for me. Alientraveller 15:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Would you believe it? Alientraveller 17:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
The problem with Jurassic Park franchise is structuring it. Crichton wrote a script treatment in novel form that got snapped up by Spielberg, who in turn asked him to wrote another novel/treatment for the sequel. After that it was a film series that hit a wall making a fourth film. It can't be as conventional as Spider-Man film series. Alientraveller 19:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Well the article doesn't interest me being that my view is Crichton wrote script treatments, not books, and if it is just the films then count me out. ½ of a trilogy is not something I want to edit on. Alientraveller 20:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Not even a plot summary? LOL. Well I do love to work within guidelines as much as possible, so thank you for that compliment over my structuring. Alientraveller 20:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for coming back to Aquaman, I was thinking everyone forgot about it..lol. Anyway, so I'm finally sitting down and watching (er..listening) the commentary for the Smallville pilot (and the second episode right after that) and I discovered something you'd appreciate. They actually subtitled their commentary, so it's much easier to follow and get things spelled correctly. I just thought that was nice, and that I'd share...you know...in case you suddenly develop a liking of Superman ..lol. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
When do you intend to nominate Fight Club and The Fountain? Alientraveller 14:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
It's already four paragraphs though, how big do you want it to be? Aaron Bowen 00:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I just watched the 30 Days of Night and The Invasion trailers, they both look pretty good. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
You guys haven't seen Downfall? Cracking recreation. Alientraveller 19:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
But the issue here is that the information is relevant. Every bat movie has come out in June except this one. TheManWhoLaughs 19:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've taken out a book, and wrote down page selections to make multiple citing easy, and I'm going to crack out a production section in my sandbox. The book focuses on how, not why Cameron did stuff, so if you do find citations for me, focus it on the writing, structure etc. Thanks. IMDb has a good news archive to flesh out the film's reception, so I may sandbox that too. Alientraveller 20:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Would IMDb be a reliable source for the beginning and end of the shoot? Alientraveller 12:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh ker-rap, any ideas on using italics for both the film and the ship yet disambiguating them? Alientraveller 13:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Erm, thanks, might be more useful for my Spielberg work. Nice touch, how many years does it go up to? Alientraveller 20:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Wonderful. I don't link urls right? Still, *Borat voice* very nice, I like. Alientraveller 20:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Understandable, that's always a problem when you are making a film that has to entertain and enlighten. I recall seeing United 93 and coming out wondering what was the point: I felt like I saw a horror film. World Trade Center has more lasting value. I only have a paragraph on digital effects and editing left for Titanic, and I think I'll sandbox everything from cast, historical accuracy, themes, releases, soundtrack and reception. I already found a review that critcised it as a cash-in, contrary to what Cameron wanted, so that's interesting. Where do you think Historical accuracy can go? Under reception? Alientraveller 14:17, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it seems ok. So far the production section isn't too huge, so I don't think sub-sections are necessary, though it's up to you. Alientraveller 13:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Also, is there real significance to free running? It is a deviation from the book or anything? Alientraveller 13:59, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
OK. Did you see Nightwatch? It was fun. Alientraveller 14:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd appreciate it if you gave your opinion for the deletion of List of deaths in The Sopranos series at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths in The Sopranos series. Thanks. :) The Filmaker 16:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, good so far, I added a bit. The current guidelines are good though, don't forget completely that they're worthwhile. Alientraveller 19:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Topic pulled out of my hat: do you want to see Rise of the Silver Surfer? For me, it's Surfy, Galactus and Doom, so I think I would. Alientraveller 19:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
All that is from Find Articles right? Alientraveller 13:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Should we merge Wolverine? I mean, it hasn't got a director and Magneto is merged. Alientraveller 14:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Cleaned-up and merged. Alientraveller 15:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
LOL, not to my knowledge. If you look at that guys contribs, and follow them to the WikiProject for the EastEnders, he made a comment about "Bloody ridiculous, they are saying it's a copyright violation now". But seriously, go there, and also check out the author of that death/birth/marriage list. It's an administrator. Check out the AfD discussion at that WikiProject and look at what the Admin is saying. His name is like Anemi-something, I can't remember. But yeah, if you find a user box about that let me know. lol. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't see that. But I did explain my reasoning on the discussion page. -- Jimbo Herndan 00:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I can almost imagine Soundwave being one: so he'd realistically have minions. But there is Tidal Wave. But I love Grimlock, Grimlock is something we need: an Autobot who isn't a goody-two-shoes. Man, why do I have to see Transformers on July 27? They're invading our world not Australia, then the USA, New Zealand, Canada and then the UK... When are you seeing it? Alientraveller 16:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I find this archive of message board posts by screenwriter Roberto Orci. Should I incorporate all this or leave it until the DVD to cut down on the references? Alientraveller 13:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
See Consensus - people agreeing are a consensus; not everyone has to bring something new to what it agreed, but everyone participating in the discussion ought to be allowed to have a view, even if it is simply to agree with someone else Stephenb (Talk) 12:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the invite Erik, but I'm going off-line right now. I'll check in later and see what's up. — Viriditas | Talk 14:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Funny, Adewit gave up. Still, his/her E.T. objection will provide practise for Titanic. Alientraveller 16:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I see that you have contributed to this article, do you know where the source for this quote might be found?
Thanks. Atropos 17:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
That would be really great. I'm going to start writing a production section soon, which is the only thing its really missing. Atropos 20:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Um...there doesn't seem to be enough information there to hold a page. There's less there than Spider-Man 4. It seems more like they are all signing contracts but thing has actually been started. Bignole 03:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the assist. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm touched, they care. :) Since you're registered you can pass on the note that their thoughts keep me up at night, I have horrible nightmares over the opinions of BoF members..lol. Anyway, yeah...that user will break the 3RR first...and if he does I won't worry about changing it back. Someone else will. You see he removed the citation, since it didn't agree with what he was putting in? Bignole 01:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey, it looks like you reverted one of my recent edits to the Watchmen(film) page. Now, I'm not trying to argue with what you did, because you're obviously a very experienced contributor to this site, while I'm still relatively new. However, since it looks like your basis for removal were the sources I cited I was just curious what exactly qualifies as a good source for this sort of information in a wiki article? I realize that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and so we shouldn't just toss out every rumor that comes our way, yet on a film such as this, that's still a year or more away from release, pretty much any casting information (other than Gerard Butler since that came straight from the director) is speculation to some extent. Do we have to wait for the actor or director to confirm it themselves or are there any online sources that are considered trustworthy enough to cite on Wikipedia? Also, what in particular did you object to about the comment on Cusack? I wasn't trying to make it sound like he had been offered a part, just that he had expressed his interest in joining the film. The man says this himself in the on the page I linked to. I thought this would be acceptable since no one has removed the item on Cruise, which more or less said that he at one point was interested in being in the film. Also if you are an avid Watchmen fan I expect that you are aware with Jude Law's enthusiasm for the material, and the fact that he even has a tattoo of Rorschach. He has also expressed an interest in portraying Ozymandias, and at this point seems much more likely to than Cruise, considering the CHUD link. Is there any specific reason why, if I could find a credible enough source, the information about Law couldn't be added alongside the Cruise statement? Thanks for the help. I just want to make sure, since I am still relatively new, that I don't make the same sort of mistakes editing pages in the future.
Also is this the best place for me to ask questions like these?
Aurum ore 01:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the response, that pretty much answered everything I needed.
Aurum ore 20:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I thought you might want to know and bring it up with this editor if there are any potential problems: User:Erik the Appreciator. Alientraveller 13:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Eh, just wondering about the handle.
Good luck with G.I. Joe. Mind, a film adaptation with Action Man sounds weird. I mean, why take out the likes of Snake Eyes and Cobra Command and then stuff in another fictional universe for no other reason than economy? Thank Hasbro DeSanto and Murphy were there to keep DiBonaventura in check on Transformers. But I shouldn't really say anything, because I know so little of the Joes: couldn't even get into their crossovers with the Transformers. I'd like an Action Man movie myself, plus Captain Scarlet. Thunderbirds would be cool... oh wait. Alientraveller 13:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I dawdled. Variety is ok for me. Alientraveller 13:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
It's looking pretty good, I'd say you can at least nominate for GA at this point. The Filmaker 03:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Erik. You deleted links to film content pages on our new wiki which emphasizes the Buddhist content in various films. Not sure why. Clearly you consider it some kind of spam. I have read the various requirements for external links and don't see how we have violated them. Our site is not for profit and is a community service for the worldwide Buddhist community. The links in question went to content directly related to the films. You might consider the kind comments from Buddhist practitioners and teachers listed at: DharmaflixWiki:Community_Portal. We are very inspired by the success of Wikipedia and appreciate the fine film reviews that you and others have produced here. However, our interest is to highlight Buddhist themes or Buddhist flavors in film for the purpose of teaching people about Buddhist dharma, that is, Buddhist philosophy and Buddhist states of consciousness. I am not sure what your criteria is for deciding to leave IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes on The Matrix page (when they are sort of boring), and take us off the page, when we had over 100 hits from the Matrix page in 3 days from people who care about how Buddhist philosophy deeply informs The Matrix, for example. I can see that on some films that we believe are flavored with Buddhist content, it may seem too much a stretch to include a link to the page on our site on that film, but Spiritual Films, The Matrix films, Kundun, Crouching Tiger..., and on and on clearly have Buddhist content. Again, our site is purely for educational purposes and I believe you do a very large community of Buddhist practitioners a disservice by indiscriminately removing links. Thanks for your careful consideration of this. Bruce
Thanks for responding to my question about the exclusion of DharmaFlix review links from the film review pages on Wikipedia. First let me say I understand completely that Wikipedia is not a link farm and support you completely in your efforts to make sure the content of the encyclopedia is not diluted. However I would hope for your reconsideration of the exclusion of DharmaFlix for the following reasons.
This has already taken a lot of energy. Perhaps we could reach a compromise and you or your staff could just consider links to our review pages, as users post them, on a case by case basis, instead of making a wholesale judgement that the links represent linkspam. Thanks so much for considering all this. I know it takes a lot of energy on your part as well.
I agree with you that a statement of my rationale should be sufficient, but I've had AFDs that ended no consensus with the closing admin pointing to a single statement from a keeper and saying it wasn't refuted. Kind of a damned if you do, or don't proposition. Say too much and it stalemates. Say too little and it still stalemates. Otto4711 12:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The article's not a bad one by any means, and a majority has to do with adaptations and portrayals in art, film, etc, which is too lengthy to belong in the parent article. It's that bloated "Joan of Arc in popular culture" section, like you said. This is a difficult one, but I do agree with you that with the current backlash against ...in popular culture articles, something needs to be done. It'll just encourage the trivia-lovers. Did you see this comment on the talk page? If an admin believes the article has gotten out of hand, then there's a good reason to be concerned. Perhaps you should contact User:Mangojuice and see if they ever listed it at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates. María ( críticame) 14:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I believe it went alright. I got a 97 on the first one I had to write for this class, so I assume I'll probably (unless I completely screwed it up) get about the same grade on this one. I didn't even start writing the bulk of it till after Mythbusters was over last night. Thankfully, though unfortunate to a point because I liked the class, I had my last class meeting this morning. Now, I just have to take 6 online quizes for the class and I'll be finished. Aren't you just lucky you have nothing to do. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 15:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Midnight Oil? liek, omg, i just luv that group!!!!kkkkkk, they are liek totally teh bommb!
(heh) -
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
15:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The website is verifiable he is in the movie quit changing it. TheManWhoLaughs 17:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The scarecrow one maybe but Jackson is confirmed now. TheManWhoLaughs 17:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
It's not verifiable right now, but I always thought Scarecrow would be a nice beginning to show how Batman's skills have improved to taking done a previous villain in seconds. I don't mind Sam Jackson either as Nick Fury. Alas, the life we chose... Alientraveller 19:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I left him a talk page welcome, asking him to Register, and apologizing for any biteyness. I think both his points were valid for discussion, and we could use a guy like that. ThuranX 23:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Erik. Regarding my troubles with Arcayne, they've been building for a long time. His comments, like that GIPU one, are exactly the sort of problem that i've been seeing in his editing style. He comes in, makes a flip remark, then follows with something like the 5 Pillars link. What he's doing is entering cocky, offering 'The Only Solution', and expecting praise. I spoke to him when he first arrived about his style, and he slowed it for a while, then resumed. The antagonistic aspects of such interactions seems to attract him, as evidenced by his recent interactions with Duhman009. I could go back to the beginning and find more, but ultimately, he's got a poor means of interaction with others. In the same time that I'm making clear my distaste for his poor behavior, I'm also working well with Tenebrae on Captain America, and with other editors elsewhere and regularly. I left a long note for the IP at watchmen, as mentioned above, and so on. I'm not having a general wiki-problem for which a wikibreak would be a remedy, but am just tired of watching him do this thing over and over. ThuranX 03:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
dont my friend who dont? TheManWhoLaughs 20:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your comment on the FAC: what do you think would be better? I mean we got the black Spider-Man in the poster, and we got images for Harry and Eddie, the film's main villains, and a nice Sandman picture to illustrate a discussion of visual effects. Alientraveller 13:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I like the current Sandman picture as it's so bang on. But I suppose when the DVD comes, images will be flying all over the net. When the DVD comes, I can use it to shorten refs and expand context, as pre-release they're trying to be as tight-lipped as possible. Alientraveller 14:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
That book is fantastic from what I've heard, and I have flipped through the previous making-of books in my shop. But knowing my library, it'll be a while. Alientraveller 14:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
We have found some Chicago information for the Batman Begins article. I just posted an edit citing Chicago as the location of the Wayne Corp. building. TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
You probably saw this already, but just in case I figured I'd send it over. Apparently they are banning some filming of Valkyrie. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
What is it is used for? I went to it, but it didn't appear to be much interesting. Is it something someone was adding to a bunch of articles? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you would think so, but it was just that sort of joking that led to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fight Club in popular culture getting the article kept around for an extra five months. Otto4711 22:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I thought it might work, but Olyphants bald head from the trailer just isn't working for me. Of the few instances when I've played Hitman, or watched others, he just isn't getting me to see the spirit of Agent 47 in him. The character is supposed to be older, for starts, but that's easily ignorable if they find someone that fits the part. I don't know if he does. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think I'll be able to execute your Peer Review suggestion for The Power of Nightmares's reaction section due to a lack of "international" commentary outside the United States. All I've been able to find so far are these two pieces, one of which probably isn't even a reliable source anyway. Any suggestions? -- Lenin and McCarthy | ( Complain here) 16:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
The issue was that most of the coverage happens in the film series article and just one para (though pertaining to film 1) is in the film 1 article. Usually when i use further reading, it is to provide in-depth information. Instead, you could have just added a summary sentence in the series article. Also, in the first film, there is no data prior to 1999 where infact you could have added a sentence summarizing the main events that happened earlier.
As it currently stands, it looks that there were x paras of which (x-1) paras were put in the series article and one para in the film 1 article and hence my comment. I hope you understood my comment. -- Kalyan 11:03, 29 June 2007 (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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Hey, I was wondering, can I create a secondary sandbox, or is one all we get? I wanted to work on assembling the bits of the various Braveheart sections in WP, but a temp page seems a bit over the top. Suggestions? (Alien and Big can pipe in, too - you peeping Toms ;) ) Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I detected a bit of sniveness about it. I think that anyone that fights against the use of non-free images (generally, every image you'll find in a film or television article) kind of takes "better than thou" attitude with anyone that either fights them, or just isn't privy to some new admenments to the guidelines, They generaly never make it public knowledge that they are holding debates about the use of fair-use images, and so it's a wonder when you have tons of reverts from editors that have no idea they've adjusted definitions to be more specific to certain things. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Because they are cracking down on Featured Lists. There were tons of Featured episode lists that had a screenshot next to a quick synopsis. Well, not it's just the synopsis. They've removed all screenshots from FL's on television episodes. It makes me think that they're going to crack down on film plots (if they already haven't...I don't know about you, but I don't watch any film articles that are FA status). Worse comes to worse, we can simply remove them..so I'm not saying leave them out because they may request their removal, just that we should be prepared to defend the rationale of any non-free image we place on that page, in any section. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 15:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
The "cast of around 200" thing was added by User:81.178.255.200. I don't have a cite-able source right now.
I can tell you that 81.178.255.200 is right though. My roommate (a makeup artist) got pulled into helping out at the set yesterday and she is going up there again tomorrow. Short of sending some of her photos to AintItCoolNews and then citing the resulting post, I don't have a source we can use in the article. AlistairMcMillan 16:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar - it's nice to have the work appreciated. I got in over my head with it, spending probably about 70-80 hours in the last week working on this. I'm pretty exhausted. I had not even considered there may have been prior existing image wars...that's great if these ended those so people can move on. Let me know of any in particular that were noteworthy. -- David Shankbone 17:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, please don't make the change until the discussion over the poster image has been concluded. This can be seen as ignoring consensus. I would suggest presenting more information than "I haven't seen it anywhere" because when I did a Google search, multiple websites presenting the image came up. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
To tell you the truth, even though I liked the movie, it seemed that the entire "Spider-Man" story was just tacked on to this character drama between Harry, Peter and MJ. You really don't see that much of Spider-Man or any of the villains in the first act of the film. It seems like they spliced in some quick shots to satisfy people, while spending the rest of the time on just the relationships between the 3 primary characters. Yes, Venom really did seem underused. Topher is awesome as Brock, but (and I already knew how much time "Venom" was going to get on the screen b/c I read it on MSNBC) he still seemed stapled on...and that is most likely because of Avi. Raimi shouldn't have given in. It would have been better to maybe introduce the symbiote at the beginning of a later film, and have an entire film devoted to its story, half on Peter, half on Brock, instead of the way it was used. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I went looking for the entries where CoM came into play. How did you find them? Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, Im sorry about the rating, but after May 4th, I think we could insert the rating of the film in multiple countries into the article. What do you think? ` GTAGeek123 22:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the ratings issue is resolved! :). - GTAGeek123 23:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll erase the credits and provide suggestions instead if I can think of some. My mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gangsta1542 ( talk • contribs) 19:04, May 2, 2007
I'd probably prod is first. That's 3 years away, with no definite. If the third film bombs horribly (not likely, but still possible) then they'd probably scrap. Something to keep on a "Shrek (film series)" page (if one exists). I sincerely hope a "Puss in Boots (2011 film)" film article hasn't already been created. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
That's awesome. You can bet your bottom dollar that it would be frought with plot expansions and useless trivia, or vandalism. I think that plot is probably already too long, but I won't word count it for fear that I'll read it. It was hard enough to add that alert in it, my eyes kept trying to focus and read. Only 25 hours for me. My buddy and I are going to catch the midnight showing at 11:59pm tomorrow. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
So much for the "if we don't have a trivia section it will keep people from adding trivia"..I've removed 4 attempts by 3 different editors to add a trivia section. lol. Oh, I found the other "Snitch" link and removed it. It was on Lucky You (film). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed everything in question. First, we were citing Wikipedia for Wikipedia, and the "list of most expensive films" is not verifed. They are using BOM.com and other similar sites that don't cite their own sources. If Pirates 2 really was 225m then that would make it the second most. It's best to just leave any assumptions to the wind and just state the verifiable information we know. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The one thing I love and hate at the same time, is going to sleep and waking up the next day to do clean up. I love it, because I just like working on the site, but I hate it because it's so tedious to have to deal with people that neglect to read guidelines and think they can do whatever, but choose to do it at the wee hours of the morning when most are asleep. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
That is probably the most hysterical thing I've seen. I thought I saw the main page red earlier today. That's classic. I bet it was someone that got tired of them removing non-free film posters from "featured article of the day". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I honestly don't understand the difference between what I've been posting and what anyone else posts in film and actor articles. I'm a journalist. This is legitimate, high-quality and informative content. I have nothing to advertise. I genuinely just have fascinating information to share with the Wikipedia community. Rather than going back and forth like this and tagging me as someone who I'm not, would you be so kind as to visually illustrate how and where a post for this content would be considered appropriate? Thank you for your time. -- AdamFendelman 00:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
That's the apparent problem. While helpful guidance, people on here keep sending me to scores of massively long articles. I am honestly reading them, attempting again to follow requested guidelines and somehow keep getting it wrong. This is the third time now I'm requesting a specific, visual illustration of how the apparently inappropriate posts I'm doing can be made appropriate. Can you edit a deleted post from me and show me how you'd change it so it's fair game? That would be extraordinarily helpful. Thank you. -- AdamFendelman 00:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
An issue I see is that we have one image for the soundtrack on the film article, and a completely different image on the soundtrack article. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Did you gradumitate, or do you have an internship lined up for the summer?
Btw, did some basic copyediting on the SM3 article.
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
07:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Thought you might enjoy this Spidey-based joke - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
(and franjly, I'm a little insulted that no one laughed at my sandbox joke) Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiProject Films Award | |
I,
Nehrams2020, hereby award
Erik the WikiProject Films Award for his/her valued contibutions to
WikiProject Films. Thank you for your excellent work in improving so many film articles in Wikipedia. Keep up your dedicated efforts in developing articles about upcoming films!
|
Eh. I'd AfD it, but I'm sort of ambivalent. It's probably going to happen, unless 3 tanks. -- Ipstenu ( talk| contribs) 23:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what happened here, but I have no idea how you could consider the first American on top of Everest not notable. There was a good reason the article was orphaned, it was misspelled (it should have two t's). I've created a redirect. - Mgm| (talk) 08:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Then why don't you add some citiation then, instead of just removing it? And have no idea how to add citiation (english is not my mother language, and I'm far from being a computer nerd, so the explanation how to do it is too complicated for me). If you are as interested in The Invasion as you pretend to be, you knwo damn well the added information is taken from the official site. 193.217.193.159 12:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
So, have you started any prep work for the He-Man movie that will potentiall star Brad Pitt (or so says Movies.com)? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Did you see the video and photos for Iron Man? Nothing is said in the video, it's shot from afar. Just thought it was cool to see the suit in live action. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
The proposed recreation of Spider-Man 4, and comment by Spartaz, makes me think we should probably try and make some headway with that future films guideline. What do you think? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I know. I find it interesting that Admins, and some editors, think that if you have that little userbox that says "i'm an admin" that you are god to Wikipedia. It's a popularity vote. Obviously there is some critiquing of the user's ability to do the job well, but in the end, all they are doing is saying "i think I can trust you to not abuse these privileges", and that has nothing to do with an admin's understanding of policy, especially subjective ones at that. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
HOLY CRAP..lol, that was some emotion I think I have rarely seen, if ever, from you.....but I completely concur so it's ok. Like they say..A friend in need....is probably friends with another Admin so they'll get off — well, I don't think they saying goes quite like that, but for some reason that on rings more accurately. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
If you're referring people to Spider-Man film series#Future on the talk page, why don't you want them to be redirected there by the article? Night Gyr ( talk/ Oy) 18:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Seems like it was Mr.Brown (the fine gent that protected Spidey 4) that passed the article into GA status. I'd compare what was passed into GA with how it looks now. Maybe it just got into horrible shap since February when it was passed. If not, then I'd probably ask him about it, and tell him your concerns. I haven't seen the film yet (i've been meaning to buy them all, but summer classes are going to start for me tomorrow..so I'm kinda broke). From what I saw when I glanced at it, it looked choppy. The opening sentence: "written by, directed by, and starring Sylvester Stallone"???? That could easily be written better. It repeats itself in two paragraphs saying "it's the final film in the series". Heck, the entire lead needs work. I see a lot of uncited (probably vandalism in the guise of encyclopedic information) information in the casting, original research in that "references to previous films"....I don't even have to finish going down the page to know this article needs to be delisted and cleaned, thoroughly. 02:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
If you get some free time (free time on Wikipedia..LOL, yeah right) could you take a gander at this FAC. It's my first nomination, and I'd appreciate any input for its improvement. It's on the Aquaman pilot, so it won't be a long article to read. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I know. I posted in WikiFilm here. I will do my best to reach Ed regarding keeping the images in place. What I find infuriating is that admins like FutPerf delete images, then let us know that we can oppose it before deleting the image anyway. there seems to be a glaring lack of oversight on that practice. Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
He was reported here. Can't say we didn't warn him. Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Figured I might as well throw my hat into the ring if I could do so without causing too much trouble. The whole thing is a little ridiculous and it doesn't seem to be getting anywhere. I (like most every other editor here) figured if I stated the points that I thought were valid it might help, but he's using circular logic to defend his point (we give this to you but there's the potential for abuse, so we don't let you actually use it). Hewinsj 02:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that...I don't know what I would have done is someone else would have seen that. I quite possibly would have had to move to another Wikipedia, the stigma would have surrounded me here. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you liked it. I've been catching Spidey 1 and 2 on tv (different channels though) lately, and when FX shows Spidey 2, it's always at the train sequence. I could watch that sequence a million times and it always keeps the tension. It's just so powerful, especially at the end when the passengers catch him and hoist him into the air to bring him into the car. Maybe...just maybe, they will make another one and it won't have so many villains, so that it will be able to focus more on the important things (which, right now I think could only be the marriage of Peter and MJ; they can't leave it at that. But, if they can't get Maguire, Dunst, and Raimi back..then I say "LEAVE IT ALONE!"). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 05:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Great work on Fight Club by the way. I've celaned up Se7en a little ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 12:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Ah, Spider-Man is for kids, so I don't think we could have expected anything less than cringe-worthy comedy, from the guy who made Evil Dead. I think it worked well: dark Spidey murders Sandman, darker Parker is a twit. I personally found Sandman a bit superflous when Venom got involved: you don't think there's any way we can redress the article to focus more on the symbiote? Alientraveller 15:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I think we should supply information rather than interpret it, but it sounds like black-suited Spidey is a chain reaction of wanting to bring in Venom. Still, I guess the article is fine: man, those quote boxes are nifty. Alientraveller 15:32, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Ultimately I'm just happy to supply lots of material for fans to study from and make up their own minds. I found a forum post on Superherohype.com using two citations we've absorbed into the article! Alientraveller 15:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not a big fan of forums: people tossed my opinions around like a beachball. Wikipedia was a Godsend. I do like SHH because of all the fan art. On topic, it was the Sci-Fi Wire Producers beefed up Spider-Man 3 and the EW article. Alientraveller 15:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I thought the image was even more important than the others -it illustrates fight club itself. But if you are not happy with it then remove but if you do so please delete the image too -I'm tired of people removing images from films and not deleting the images too - leaving a string of orphaned images. If it is the case it is a big pity that images are being tightened -but I feel there should be a maximum three per articles ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 15:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep up the good work anyway. Impressive. We are all maggots -all part of the same compost heap!!! Hope you are well ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 15:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Great. I do agree really that images should only be used to illustrate the article - it is finding a kind of balance where everyone is happy. I put the image where it said about Pitt and Norton training and boxing and martial art training -maybe we could have specific section towards exploring the techniques of Fight Club itself - this way the image would have a more clear purpose. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 15:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
All the best then ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 16:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
You are welcome to nominate the new article at AfD if you wish; however, I don't see any violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Uncle G produced sufficient reliable sources to suggest that the film will be made, that substantive information is available regarding it, and that the film is the subject of sufficient media attention such that it is noteworthy. (See exception #1 at WP:CRYSTAL.) Even if the film is aborted for some reason, the existence of sources now suggests that its cancelation would itself be a notable event.
The article is a likely target for unsourced speculation, and may well need protecting in the future. Protection at this time is unwarranted. Best wishes, Xoloz 17:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that was what I didn't like. Being an admin doesn't give him the right to say "this is moot... I like this better so we're doing it this way". That's a clear abuse of power. It's one thing to say "we didn't agree on redirecting, just deleting", but it's another to unprotect a page and move information in there when the consensus was to delete the page. Regardless of whether its redirected or not, the consensus was clear that it should, in the least, stay deleted. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Thoughts on the Shrek 4 article? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Of course it is. I asked Uncle G why he made the last paragraph redundant, citing Maguire as saying that he'd return if the others did, and his response was "see the top of the page". The top of the page basically told me not to discuss articles on his talk page, only on the article page. Then he tried to say that the information wasn't there before. He's using different sources, but the information is basically the same as it was in April. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree. It shouldn't be too bad either since there are only 3 films (thus far), as opposed to Potter's 7 films (in the end). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't care about a color scheme for the cast. I just felt that it might have needed a separation between the films and the first cast member, and I didn't particularly think the black would suit it. Yeah, I'll try and see if I can find an image that links all three films (something official), otherwise I say use the first film poster. As for identifying the films in the plot section...You could just link the titles of the films, or use a semi-colon before each title. Not sure about that.. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah. Something right to the point, something you'd fit in the lead of an article. Peter Parker bitten by genetically altered spider; he takes on the traits of the spider. After losing his uncle, he devotes himself to fighting crime. Norman Osborn, in an effort to save his company, experiments with performance enhancing drugs. As a side-effect, Norman becomes insane and takes on the mantle of the Green Goblin. ... kind of like that, but worded better. I was just listing the key points of the film. Speaking of films, do you remember the animated series that aired in the 90s? I picked up 3 of those DVDs (The Return of the Green Goblin, Spidey vs Dock Ock, and The Venom Saga). I must say, the 5 episodes in "The Venom Saga" were more satisfying than Spider-Man 3. Peter's actions while wearing the black suit, and Eddie tormenting Peter because he knows his secret, that was more tension filled (although not really, because it was a cartoon, but you get the idea) than the film was. Is that bad? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I love how people say "oh, it has 12 references, that means it's well source...we should keep the article". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
How the hell did this become a featured article? Anyone?...Anyone?...Bueller? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 06:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
You got a serious backlog in article focus. Relax man, you probably got years to improve all these articles. Alientraveller 15:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep up the good work. The Untouchables: Capone Rising is ok in my view given the smallness of the project thus far, although the original film is something that needs more work. I should work at The Lovely Bones, and Sweeney Todd too, but even being a big Burton fan, I'm not feeling it. Maybe I'm just not experienced with the tale and find the concept too nasty for him. Oh, and would you drop some citations for The Curse of the Black Pearl on the talk page? I'm looking to improve that given the occasion. Alientraveller 16:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
No, and nor did I find an article for Dead Man's Chest. Part of the problem is that the Pirates series have hilariously rushed productions, so not much time for chit-chat. I didn't find articles for the first two Spideys either. Alientraveller 16:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Ha! That link works! For how long though... Alientraveller 16:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
You know what? I registered on VFXWorld. I mustered up some effort then. Alientraveller 16:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
He's logged it and added it to the page, and removed the nom. Just waiting for the bot, that's all. Alientraveller 18:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I look forward to when you have a little star on your page then. Alientraveller 18:59, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
If Alientraveller is truly such a laudable editor, then he should divulge the nature of his edits to the rest of us, rather than recklessly editing without any explanation for his actions.
Who is watching the watchers?
Osirus 06:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Duly noted. Thank you.
Osirus 06:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
LOL, I'm getting conflicting reports. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to reformat the Smallville season pages. this is what I'm doing and this is the way it is now.
Let me try my hand. But first you got to tell me in one sentence what Fight Club is really about. Alientraveller 20:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I kept looking at the article and basically feel that the themes of the film really rely on its twist, so I'll try two paragraphs, one on plot, characters and a minor mention of themes, and the second on production and reaction. Alientraveller 20:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Have you been following this topic? Near as I can figure it, some folk are arguing that Spoiler tags are unnecessary in film articles, as they are a "blatant" NPOV violation. I suspect more than a few are off their meds... - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Sure, I'll put it on the list. Thanks for the invite. — Viriditas | Talk 04:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Neat. Film series can be addictively hard work: if you want to extend your work to all series like Batman or James Bond, good luck, but don't lose sight of the films you love the most. Alientraveller 16:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Aaaahhh. Yeah, that was in the opening credits. LOL, that's why they are adding him? Yeah, I think we need a better description like you suggested. Something about extended flashbacks. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Nope. I was looking at the diffs, and I guess I didn't hit the "edit page" key the second time to make it go to the current page. Thanks for that. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I saw your work on The Time Traveler's Wife (film). Great stuff, very well sourced! That book was awesome. Smee 07:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC).
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar | |
For your outstanding contribution to Film on the project, all the while maintaining a polite and kind demeanor during discussion. You are appreciated. Thank you. Yours, Smee 07:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC) |
Generally, WP:WPChi puts the {{ ChicagoWikiProject}} tag on movies that were either filmed in part in Chicago or set in Chicago. Do you have a problem with such a tag? TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 01:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Well I completed The Curse of the Black Pearl DVD. Any suggestions for what images I should include? Alientraveller 11:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, you replied while I wrote the reply regarding Supes and Bats. Alientraveller 17:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't have anything on Schumacher, I just had the resources what with Burton on Burton on me. I suggest discussion of the 60s Batman as well as the 1940s film serials too, just to be comprehensive. Plus, don't diss the animated movies: Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was released in cinemas, so that needs a mention alongside the Timmverse, as Batman: The Animated Series was inspired by Batman Returns.
You going to mention anything about Pirates whilst we're at it with Supers? Alientraveller 17:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
My two cents on article structure: I love chronology, and we shouldn't be too reliant on what Rotten Tomatoes collects. On the other hand, I included reception to Burton's films, being that's what made Warner Bros do a turn to campiness. Alientraveller 17:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Just be comprehensive: the 40s serials and 60s films show Batman's first attempts at the big screen. I also have advice to not be rash with your hatred of Canceled Superman films, because I'm enjoying reading the external links. Alientraveller 19:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your recent copy-edits on the Jurassic Park article, amongst others, and I was hoping you could help me out on another FAC. GoldenEye is currently a candidate, and one of the problems it faces is the need for copy-editing. While I was looking through a few other FACs I noticed that you had experience with good copy-editing, and I hoped you would help get GoldenEye to FA status. Your skills would be a true asset to this FAC, I hope you can help. Thanks! - • The Giant Puffin • 08:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I know this doesnt have anything to do with the article but could someone tell me the name of the song and who the creater of the song is in this video?[4] I just needed the information and I already said it had nothing to do with the article. I just needed someone to tell me. If you happen to know the information I need could you please tell me? 24.208.55.168 19:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Please read this and stop making pointless reversions here. Why do you think we have a bot which fixes these things automatically? HTH HAND — Phil | Talk 15:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
On your two questions:
1. I'd leave the film as the main entry for now. The important thing is that the entry is started on the graphic novels (to that end I might go for Road to Perdition (comics) as there is a series). The film is higher profile and should makes more sense taking the top slot. Somewhere down the line it might be that everyone agrees there should be a disambiguation page as the top entry but the priority for now is starting the one onthe comics.
2. All those removals look perfectly fine and I'm glad you were bold - ironically I was just about to remove the trivia section from another entry. The trivia, dleeted scenes and differences sections were just trivia traps and have a tendancy to bloat and unbalance the entry. If someone wants that kind of informaiton I'm sure there are sites for it but I suspect if you delved into the film project's pages it would give a big "NO!!!" to all three. Some information may be potentially worked back in so it was good you dropped it on the talk page (always a good move I find) but looking at it I'd not think much needs saving.
So keep up the good work. ( Emperor 02:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC))
Thanks, Erik, for the mini trailer of "The Dark Knight". I'm afraid that the trailer itself is a fake. But I still enjoyed it. I'm hyped up about "The Dark Knight". Thanks again.
Forget about GA; you are very close to FA. Nice work. I left a couple comments on talk, and I will probably leave a few more in the next few days, but aside from adding a url and a few other maintenance edits, I will not be editing the article. Keep at it, I think this will be on the main page very soon. — Viriditas | Talk 11:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I always thought it would have been del Toro, but I was never very sure. I see that I'm wrong; thanks for that. Atropos 14:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I thought you were all set to go with Road to Perdition and Batman film series and then... So what's been up lately? I enjoyed Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End btw, and have been keeping a steady eye on that plot. Alientraveller 10:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
AWE is good fun, it veers a little more into the grotesque humour of DMC and has a killer twist: do stay behind for the credits, that scene is worth far more than either bonus treat of the first two films. It's a long film, my cinema had an intermission, so don't snack on anything beforehand. Alientraveller 10:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and my Asperger's got in the way: I hope you're doing well with your internship! Alientraveller 10:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the head's up, this is my first major attempt at a fictional character, and I'm modelling it on Palpatine. Bit difficult though, given I haven't read that children's book series. Alientraveller 11:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
From the
nomination page:
(self-nomination)This article is simply excellent. Excellent writing, interesting subject matter, improved during its Good Article trial, and eye-witnesses have left notes on the Talk page that talk about the article being so accurate, it's like they were living it all over again. Written in a NPOV and heavily cited with the highest of sources, it includes GFDL media, is wikified to the fullest, a fantastic "See Also" section, and looks at the story from every angle. --
David Shankbone
18:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
That made no sense, but I just felt like breaking "internship" into different words. Anyway, yeah I saw the messages. I hope it's a lot of fun. Is it just "another" internship, or does it have to deal with something you plan to do as a career? My g/f's getting it rough now, she's interning in Virginia (ironically where i'm from), and she doesn't care for it...well she doesn't care for the city life. I hope yours is easier (town wise). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 04:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
The May 2007 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 notice by BrownBot 21:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Don't see a need for the expansion tag in the reception section. I'll help expand it, but it's fine without the tag. — Viriditas | Talk 08:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
You should be proud. You got mentioned by name several times on that little rant. Means you are doing a good job. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Nice. I think you explained it rather well. I can't say that everyone will understand, because they see how horrible some articles (to them they don't see the problems, they just see the article) and they think that is how every article is. Because we are an "open" editing website, it brings the problem that people think they can do whatever they want, and they don't realize that there are still rules and guidelines that are supposed to govern our efforts. I think you did a good job explaining that you are simply following the restrictions set forth by Wikipedia, which are completely different than what goes on at BOF and other like websites. I did notice that when someone pointed out the argument you made (here) about not being able to link to a specific release, because it gets archived from the homepage, that Jettman still wrote off Wikipedia. I love the argument "there's tons of BS on that site". Well gee, who would have thought that when you have almost 2 million articles in one language that there could possibly be any BS there. Especially when you allow everyone to edit, without registering. From what I've seen, you are probably not going to get anywhere with this Jettman. You can show him where he's wrong in thinking that we have to use BOF, because of the damn websites own regulations (and not some personal vendetta of yours, mines or anyone elses), and it wouldn't make any difference. From reading through that forum, most (not all) come off as those little children who can't understand why they shouldn't have ice-cream right before dinner. So, instead of obeying they simply whine and threaten to give a tantrum (in this case, a full-on riot of Wikipedia and anything Batman related here). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I've been following. They have the circular logic of "well, we have quotes on the front page that prove it", or the "since we are always right, when Jett says 'this is true', that means we must be recognized". They keep dodging the question. I don't know how to take it. Kryptonsite is one that could be called into question, the only reason I put it above every other Smallville fansite is because no other fansite has ever had their webmaster requested to right official companion guides for the series. Craig Bryne (the webmaster) goes out to the set and interviews everyone, and has written 1 book (due in September) with another due a couple months after that. I think that's a clear case of the studio respecting his fansite enough to say "hey, come write for us". I haven't seen that with BOF (not saying that lack of that means anything), but if they could provide some proof that the studio actually recognizes their efforts and considers them the "TOP", then I think that would help us fight for their existence on the page. As for a "counter", it counts everyone over and over again, so if I visit the site 30 times in one day, it doesn't say I've only been there once, it says I've been there 30 times. Kind of like vote stacking. Where is this counter anyway? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I think the safe bet is to do a proposal. This way people can't say "well you didn't let us know". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I can't see anyting "missing", but I see plenty to clean up. But, you asked for missing, as I'm sure you're more than aware of what needs cleaning. I don't see anything major. I wouldn't say "expand this section" as I'm sure it's already in the back of your mind. I mean, there are plenty of tags on the article for that. Overall, I think it looks decent for just a days worth of work. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I think one skill I have learned to "master" (so to speak), is determing reliable sources. I have a far more critical eye now, than I did before, when I was writing research papers. I try to write them now, and I sit there and go "i would never use this on Wikipedia, why would I use it here". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I am curious - do they also render sound effects (swords clashing, boats creaking) and just how do they caption love scenes? :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Why haven't you linked the production notes? Alientraveller 18:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
You already listed Empire's feature. All good then. I saw a bit of the movie on TV, very beautiful and cool: not cool like slick, but temperature and colour. I hope you get what I mean. Alientraveller 20:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Please write me off-list asap. An opportunity has presented itself for some insider info. Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree that usually images on film pages shouldn't be popping everywhere. What I am describing here is the differences in versions of the released titles. They are very different and visual identification of each title is very useful; hence the images. Also, as I pointed out earlier the images are very small to offer less obtrusiveness. As for calling Alientraveller's edit vandalism and not in good faith; that was the logical conclusion when I asked for him stop the reverts and discuss; which he did not do. Thanks for your time. FrankWilliams 14:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I agree using vandal may have been harsh; but he still should have used the discussion pages. I'll change the wording in the article so it reflects the critical commentary point you're making. I really thing the image are good for the article which is always my interest. FrankWilliams 15:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I do not know how to make citations, but here http://in.rediff.com/movies/2007/mar/15night.htm is the link that confirms that the Indian production company UTV is co-producing with 20th Century Fox to make this film.
Oh I'll agree with you at how macabre it was: the sailor who got extreme frostbite and Sparrow's mum choked me up. I ranked it better as DMC because it did have more a point being the climax, (*cough*no cannibals*cough*) but as much as I love extended universe COTBP tops it for me being just an enjoyable ghost story. Alientraveller 07:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, right now, I think it's easily GA. It's definitely not FA material, but GA's are for well written articles that still need work. I don't think anyone would find fault the quality of the article. As for casting, yeah we should look into that. We could put it with the "Cast and characters" section, this way if it isn't that much information it's still got a home. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 13:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I think for the "Film series" bit we can add some stuff on the production, given that is the ongoings of a film series, rather than a third-perspective reception. On another note, from the Making the Amazing DVD documentary for the second film, Laura Ziskin noted Raimi basically moved onto the second film right after the first was finished. Alientraveller 14:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Shawshank is something I've been meaning for one day. Schedule swamps though: Titanic is ten this year, so that'll be centre of my attention. I'll saw how you do your thang first, and I'll try to expand if necessary once I view the DVD. I certainly think it was subtitled, but don't take my word for it, I only viewed them a few years ago. Alientraveller 15:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Well there's no way it'll reach June 11, but there is Halloween. Anyway, yeah, Tintin's ok, lead takes up too much though. Alientraveller 19:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
There's a lot I did, a few I couldn't do. Alientraveller 19:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. Did you take a degree in English btw? Or am I just Aspergerish with my writing? Alientraveller 19:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I replied on the talk page. Take your pick of either Spielberg or Rambaldi and their creation. Alientraveller 16:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
If you've got some of them, thanks very much. I'll try to find a balance, but like science-fiction films themselves, I try to connect themes and subtleties within the practical problems of creating an alien. I did consider a themes section actually but decided against it due to lack of material. Alientraveller 07:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh right, I see, I just assumed they were avaliable online. Sorry. Alientraveller 10:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you amigo. Alientraveller 13:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
You are very welcome to expand the themes section if you wish. I abide by WP:OWN. Alientraveller 15:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Let's see how you do though, if you have time away from the Road to Perdition. If you want you can bullet point the articles for me. Alientraveller 15:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Would you believe it? Alientraveller 17:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
The problem with Jurassic Park franchise is structuring it. Crichton wrote a script treatment in novel form that got snapped up by Spielberg, who in turn asked him to wrote another novel/treatment for the sequel. After that it was a film series that hit a wall making a fourth film. It can't be as conventional as Spider-Man film series. Alientraveller 19:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Well the article doesn't interest me being that my view is Crichton wrote script treatments, not books, and if it is just the films then count me out. ½ of a trilogy is not something I want to edit on. Alientraveller 20:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Not even a plot summary? LOL. Well I do love to work within guidelines as much as possible, so thank you for that compliment over my structuring. Alientraveller 20:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for coming back to Aquaman, I was thinking everyone forgot about it..lol. Anyway, so I'm finally sitting down and watching (er..listening) the commentary for the Smallville pilot (and the second episode right after that) and I discovered something you'd appreciate. They actually subtitled their commentary, so it's much easier to follow and get things spelled correctly. I just thought that was nice, and that I'd share...you know...in case you suddenly develop a liking of Superman ..lol. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
When do you intend to nominate Fight Club and The Fountain? Alientraveller 14:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
It's already four paragraphs though, how big do you want it to be? Aaron Bowen 00:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I just watched the 30 Days of Night and The Invasion trailers, they both look pretty good. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
You guys haven't seen Downfall? Cracking recreation. Alientraveller 19:11, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
But the issue here is that the information is relevant. Every bat movie has come out in June except this one. TheManWhoLaughs 19:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've taken out a book, and wrote down page selections to make multiple citing easy, and I'm going to crack out a production section in my sandbox. The book focuses on how, not why Cameron did stuff, so if you do find citations for me, focus it on the writing, structure etc. Thanks. IMDb has a good news archive to flesh out the film's reception, so I may sandbox that too. Alientraveller 20:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Would IMDb be a reliable source for the beginning and end of the shoot? Alientraveller 12:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh ker-rap, any ideas on using italics for both the film and the ship yet disambiguating them? Alientraveller 13:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Erm, thanks, might be more useful for my Spielberg work. Nice touch, how many years does it go up to? Alientraveller 20:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Wonderful. I don't link urls right? Still, *Borat voice* very nice, I like. Alientraveller 20:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Understandable, that's always a problem when you are making a film that has to entertain and enlighten. I recall seeing United 93 and coming out wondering what was the point: I felt like I saw a horror film. World Trade Center has more lasting value. I only have a paragraph on digital effects and editing left for Titanic, and I think I'll sandbox everything from cast, historical accuracy, themes, releases, soundtrack and reception. I already found a review that critcised it as a cash-in, contrary to what Cameron wanted, so that's interesting. Where do you think Historical accuracy can go? Under reception? Alientraveller 14:17, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it seems ok. So far the production section isn't too huge, so I don't think sub-sections are necessary, though it's up to you. Alientraveller 13:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Also, is there real significance to free running? It is a deviation from the book or anything? Alientraveller 13:59, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
OK. Did you see Nightwatch? It was fun. Alientraveller 14:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd appreciate it if you gave your opinion for the deletion of List of deaths in The Sopranos series at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths in The Sopranos series. Thanks. :) The Filmaker 16:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, good so far, I added a bit. The current guidelines are good though, don't forget completely that they're worthwhile. Alientraveller 19:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Topic pulled out of my hat: do you want to see Rise of the Silver Surfer? For me, it's Surfy, Galactus and Doom, so I think I would. Alientraveller 19:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
All that is from Find Articles right? Alientraveller 13:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Should we merge Wolverine? I mean, it hasn't got a director and Magneto is merged. Alientraveller 14:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Cleaned-up and merged. Alientraveller 15:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
LOL, not to my knowledge. If you look at that guys contribs, and follow them to the WikiProject for the EastEnders, he made a comment about "Bloody ridiculous, they are saying it's a copyright violation now". But seriously, go there, and also check out the author of that death/birth/marriage list. It's an administrator. Check out the AfD discussion at that WikiProject and look at what the Admin is saying. His name is like Anemi-something, I can't remember. But yeah, if you find a user box about that let me know. lol. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't see that. But I did explain my reasoning on the discussion page. -- Jimbo Herndan 00:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I can almost imagine Soundwave being one: so he'd realistically have minions. But there is Tidal Wave. But I love Grimlock, Grimlock is something we need: an Autobot who isn't a goody-two-shoes. Man, why do I have to see Transformers on July 27? They're invading our world not Australia, then the USA, New Zealand, Canada and then the UK... When are you seeing it? Alientraveller 16:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I find this archive of message board posts by screenwriter Roberto Orci. Should I incorporate all this or leave it until the DVD to cut down on the references? Alientraveller 13:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
See Consensus - people agreeing are a consensus; not everyone has to bring something new to what it agreed, but everyone participating in the discussion ought to be allowed to have a view, even if it is simply to agree with someone else Stephenb (Talk) 12:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the invite Erik, but I'm going off-line right now. I'll check in later and see what's up. — Viriditas | Talk 14:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Funny, Adewit gave up. Still, his/her E.T. objection will provide practise for Titanic. Alientraveller 16:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I see that you have contributed to this article, do you know where the source for this quote might be found?
Thanks. Atropos 17:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
That would be really great. I'm going to start writing a production section soon, which is the only thing its really missing. Atropos 20:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Um...there doesn't seem to be enough information there to hold a page. There's less there than Spider-Man 4. It seems more like they are all signing contracts but thing has actually been started. Bignole 03:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the assist. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm touched, they care. :) Since you're registered you can pass on the note that their thoughts keep me up at night, I have horrible nightmares over the opinions of BoF members..lol. Anyway, yeah...that user will break the 3RR first...and if he does I won't worry about changing it back. Someone else will. You see he removed the citation, since it didn't agree with what he was putting in? Bignole 01:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey, it looks like you reverted one of my recent edits to the Watchmen(film) page. Now, I'm not trying to argue with what you did, because you're obviously a very experienced contributor to this site, while I'm still relatively new. However, since it looks like your basis for removal were the sources I cited I was just curious what exactly qualifies as a good source for this sort of information in a wiki article? I realize that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and so we shouldn't just toss out every rumor that comes our way, yet on a film such as this, that's still a year or more away from release, pretty much any casting information (other than Gerard Butler since that came straight from the director) is speculation to some extent. Do we have to wait for the actor or director to confirm it themselves or are there any online sources that are considered trustworthy enough to cite on Wikipedia? Also, what in particular did you object to about the comment on Cusack? I wasn't trying to make it sound like he had been offered a part, just that he had expressed his interest in joining the film. The man says this himself in the on the page I linked to. I thought this would be acceptable since no one has removed the item on Cruise, which more or less said that he at one point was interested in being in the film. Also if you are an avid Watchmen fan I expect that you are aware with Jude Law's enthusiasm for the material, and the fact that he even has a tattoo of Rorschach. He has also expressed an interest in portraying Ozymandias, and at this point seems much more likely to than Cruise, considering the CHUD link. Is there any specific reason why, if I could find a credible enough source, the information about Law couldn't be added alongside the Cruise statement? Thanks for the help. I just want to make sure, since I am still relatively new, that I don't make the same sort of mistakes editing pages in the future.
Also is this the best place for me to ask questions like these?
Aurum ore 01:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the response, that pretty much answered everything I needed.
Aurum ore 20:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I thought you might want to know and bring it up with this editor if there are any potential problems: User:Erik the Appreciator. Alientraveller 13:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Eh, just wondering about the handle.
Good luck with G.I. Joe. Mind, a film adaptation with Action Man sounds weird. I mean, why take out the likes of Snake Eyes and Cobra Command and then stuff in another fictional universe for no other reason than economy? Thank Hasbro DeSanto and Murphy were there to keep DiBonaventura in check on Transformers. But I shouldn't really say anything, because I know so little of the Joes: couldn't even get into their crossovers with the Transformers. I'd like an Action Man movie myself, plus Captain Scarlet. Thunderbirds would be cool... oh wait. Alientraveller 13:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I dawdled. Variety is ok for me. Alientraveller 13:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
It's looking pretty good, I'd say you can at least nominate for GA at this point. The Filmaker 03:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Erik. You deleted links to film content pages on our new wiki which emphasizes the Buddhist content in various films. Not sure why. Clearly you consider it some kind of spam. I have read the various requirements for external links and don't see how we have violated them. Our site is not for profit and is a community service for the worldwide Buddhist community. The links in question went to content directly related to the films. You might consider the kind comments from Buddhist practitioners and teachers listed at: DharmaflixWiki:Community_Portal. We are very inspired by the success of Wikipedia and appreciate the fine film reviews that you and others have produced here. However, our interest is to highlight Buddhist themes or Buddhist flavors in film for the purpose of teaching people about Buddhist dharma, that is, Buddhist philosophy and Buddhist states of consciousness. I am not sure what your criteria is for deciding to leave IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes on The Matrix page (when they are sort of boring), and take us off the page, when we had over 100 hits from the Matrix page in 3 days from people who care about how Buddhist philosophy deeply informs The Matrix, for example. I can see that on some films that we believe are flavored with Buddhist content, it may seem too much a stretch to include a link to the page on our site on that film, but Spiritual Films, The Matrix films, Kundun, Crouching Tiger..., and on and on clearly have Buddhist content. Again, our site is purely for educational purposes and I believe you do a very large community of Buddhist practitioners a disservice by indiscriminately removing links. Thanks for your careful consideration of this. Bruce
Thanks for responding to my question about the exclusion of DharmaFlix review links from the film review pages on Wikipedia. First let me say I understand completely that Wikipedia is not a link farm and support you completely in your efforts to make sure the content of the encyclopedia is not diluted. However I would hope for your reconsideration of the exclusion of DharmaFlix for the following reasons.
This has already taken a lot of energy. Perhaps we could reach a compromise and you or your staff could just consider links to our review pages, as users post them, on a case by case basis, instead of making a wholesale judgement that the links represent linkspam. Thanks so much for considering all this. I know it takes a lot of energy on your part as well.
I agree with you that a statement of my rationale should be sufficient, but I've had AFDs that ended no consensus with the closing admin pointing to a single statement from a keeper and saying it wasn't refuted. Kind of a damned if you do, or don't proposition. Say too much and it stalemates. Say too little and it still stalemates. Otto4711 12:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The article's not a bad one by any means, and a majority has to do with adaptations and portrayals in art, film, etc, which is too lengthy to belong in the parent article. It's that bloated "Joan of Arc in popular culture" section, like you said. This is a difficult one, but I do agree with you that with the current backlash against ...in popular culture articles, something needs to be done. It'll just encourage the trivia-lovers. Did you see this comment on the talk page? If an admin believes the article has gotten out of hand, then there's a good reason to be concerned. Perhaps you should contact User:Mangojuice and see if they ever listed it at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates. María ( críticame) 14:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I believe it went alright. I got a 97 on the first one I had to write for this class, so I assume I'll probably (unless I completely screwed it up) get about the same grade on this one. I didn't even start writing the bulk of it till after Mythbusters was over last night. Thankfully, though unfortunate to a point because I liked the class, I had my last class meeting this morning. Now, I just have to take 6 online quizes for the class and I'll be finished. Aren't you just lucky you have nothing to do. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 15:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Midnight Oil? liek, omg, i just luv that group!!!!kkkkkk, they are liek totally teh bommb!
(heh) -
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
15:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The website is verifiable he is in the movie quit changing it. TheManWhoLaughs 17:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
The scarecrow one maybe but Jackson is confirmed now. TheManWhoLaughs 17:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
It's not verifiable right now, but I always thought Scarecrow would be a nice beginning to show how Batman's skills have improved to taking done a previous villain in seconds. I don't mind Sam Jackson either as Nick Fury. Alas, the life we chose... Alientraveller 19:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I left him a talk page welcome, asking him to Register, and apologizing for any biteyness. I think both his points were valid for discussion, and we could use a guy like that. ThuranX 23:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Erik. Regarding my troubles with Arcayne, they've been building for a long time. His comments, like that GIPU one, are exactly the sort of problem that i've been seeing in his editing style. He comes in, makes a flip remark, then follows with something like the 5 Pillars link. What he's doing is entering cocky, offering 'The Only Solution', and expecting praise. I spoke to him when he first arrived about his style, and he slowed it for a while, then resumed. The antagonistic aspects of such interactions seems to attract him, as evidenced by his recent interactions with Duhman009. I could go back to the beginning and find more, but ultimately, he's got a poor means of interaction with others. In the same time that I'm making clear my distaste for his poor behavior, I'm also working well with Tenebrae on Captain America, and with other editors elsewhere and regularly. I left a long note for the IP at watchmen, as mentioned above, and so on. I'm not having a general wiki-problem for which a wikibreak would be a remedy, but am just tired of watching him do this thing over and over. ThuranX 03:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
dont my friend who dont? TheManWhoLaughs 20:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your comment on the FAC: what do you think would be better? I mean we got the black Spider-Man in the poster, and we got images for Harry and Eddie, the film's main villains, and a nice Sandman picture to illustrate a discussion of visual effects. Alientraveller 13:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I like the current Sandman picture as it's so bang on. But I suppose when the DVD comes, images will be flying all over the net. When the DVD comes, I can use it to shorten refs and expand context, as pre-release they're trying to be as tight-lipped as possible. Alientraveller 14:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
That book is fantastic from what I've heard, and I have flipped through the previous making-of books in my shop. But knowing my library, it'll be a while. Alientraveller 14:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
We have found some Chicago information for the Batman Begins article. I just posted an edit citing Chicago as the location of the Wayne Corp. building. TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
You probably saw this already, but just in case I figured I'd send it over. Apparently they are banning some filming of Valkyrie. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
What is it is used for? I went to it, but it didn't appear to be much interesting. Is it something someone was adding to a bunch of articles? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you would think so, but it was just that sort of joking that led to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fight Club in popular culture getting the article kept around for an extra five months. Otto4711 22:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I thought it might work, but Olyphants bald head from the trailer just isn't working for me. Of the few instances when I've played Hitman, or watched others, he just isn't getting me to see the spirit of Agent 47 in him. The character is supposed to be older, for starts, but that's easily ignorable if they find someone that fits the part. I don't know if he does. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think I'll be able to execute your Peer Review suggestion for The Power of Nightmares's reaction section due to a lack of "international" commentary outside the United States. All I've been able to find so far are these two pieces, one of which probably isn't even a reliable source anyway. Any suggestions? -- Lenin and McCarthy | ( Complain here) 16:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
The issue was that most of the coverage happens in the film series article and just one para (though pertaining to film 1) is in the film 1 article. Usually when i use further reading, it is to provide in-depth information. Instead, you could have just added a summary sentence in the series article. Also, in the first film, there is no data prior to 1999 where infact you could have added a sentence summarizing the main events that happened earlier.
As it currently stands, it looks that there were x paras of which (x-1) paras were put in the series article and one para in the film 1 article and hence my comment. I hope you understood my comment. -- Kalyan 11:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)