This user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Deoliveirafan ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))

206.188.55.235 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Jack Pater". The reason given for Jack Pater's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts".

• Blocking administrator: Courcelles ( talk • blocks)

---

Accept reason: IP is a public IP, user got caught in the autoblock by mistake. Alexandria (chew out) 16:16, 18 November 2011 (UTC) reply

The article The Hunt (1963 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable film. No reliable sources can be found, let alone independent sources sufficient to demonstrate notability. The director is notable, but the film itself isn't sufficient to require its own article as all relevant information is covered in the main article on the director.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mrmatiko ( talk) 18:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited Charles Prince (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Île-de-France ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:19, 21 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited Love Letters (1999 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Steven Weber ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:34, 29 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited Jafar Panahi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page World Cup ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:49, 28 June 2012 (UTC) reply

I reverted your edit because it doesn't make sense, and I cannot see what you meant to say clearly enough to rewrite it, in particular this part: "Stanley Kaufman Ozu's direction, stating that ..." If you want to put it back it would be OK, but please proofread that statement since it doesn't make sense as it stands. JoshuSasori ( talk) 00:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Adieu au Language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3D ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:58, 10 December 2012 (UTC) reply

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for your contributions in helping Greed (film) to become a Good Article. I notice you still have a redlinked user page. Maybe this will give you a proper start to filling it in! Khazar2 ( talk) 02:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC) reply

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film#Cast in foreign films. I'm puzzled. How is "the peddler" more of a proper name than "le camelot"? Clarityfiend ( talk) 00:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:FrancisBacon-StudyforPortraitofIsabelRawsthorne.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:33, 25 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:FrancisBacon-PortraitofIsabelRawsthorne.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot ( talk) 04:33, 25 December 2012 (UTC) reply

To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 15:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your note: Nearly all bibliographic and citation style guides employed in creating citations use a standard format in their "tracings" or line entries. In general, the abbreviations that are used include: p. or pp. which stand for "page" and "pages, multiple pages or range of pages", respectively. Note: pg. is the abbreviation for "paragraph" and pp without the period is used by editors for revisions or correcting text and stands for "use the standard verb form". If you cite sources in APA, Chicago, Harvard or MLA format, the specific requirements are to write "pp." for "pages". If you would like to learn more about their formats just search on google.com for APA format or MLA format, the two most common style guides in "the outside world".

As to the reasoning behind the use of bibliographic protocols, Wikipedia is mainly created by the efforts of countless editors worldwide. One of the first concerns was that in order to maintain professional standards in writing and research, assistance had to be provided to editors who did not have a background in academic or research writing. The "templates" were offered as a means of helping non-professionals in complex tasks. Citations in bibliographic format are difficult to cite for most editors in Wikipedia and the templates offer a solution. They are guides not policy and are useful up to a point but even now, there are many errors in their format and the use of templates brings in a question as to which style guide is being followed. As an author and a 30-year+ librarian, I have been exposed to many differing styles and formats. Most publishing style guides utilize the MLA (The Modern Language Association) Style for identifying research sources. The very simple form of this style is the tried and true: "Author. 'Title.' Place of publication: Publisher, Date. ISBN: (optional)." The academic or scientific citation style that you have adopted is not generally used in school, public and other libraries. See the following website (one of countless digital aids available) for a primer on this bibliographic standard: <style guides> Many of the Wiki templates are written in a APA (American Psychological Association) style guide which is a simplified format that often is used in university and scholarly works although it is not as widely accepted as the MLA guide.

This is the reference guide you may wish to use: "Formatting of a Wikipedia article reference list is a secondary detail, and there is currently no consensus on a precise prescribed citation format in Wikipedia." MLA style is the most widely accepted style in the world and certainly is accepted in Wikipedia. Since I do Wikipedia editing as a diversion from my other work, I tend to spend little time and give articles only a cursory examination. If there is a very minor error such as a misplaced comma, I "tweak" the article and I don't usually elaborate on the change since it will show up in the history note on the article. As for citations, I rely on the MLA (Modern Language Association) style which is the world's most common bibliographic style and one that is accepted by Wikipedia. I have been utilizing this citation style in my own writing and in the cataloging that I carried out in my other life as a librarian. I know that the standard today for library cataloging is to simply download an entire MARC (MAchine Readable Cataloging) record from an established library but I continued to be a curmudgeon and relied on "scratch" editing which I still apply to Wikipedia work today. Basically it follows the old format of: Author. Title. Place of Publication: Publisher, Date of publication (with variations to satisfy ordering and researching stipulations, usually ended by including an ISBN (international standard book number) and at times, page references). There are some subtle variations of the MLA style to facilitate multiple authors, articles, multimedia and other questions. Sorry for being verbose but I will make a point of stopping to clarify some of my edits but when it's merely a spelling, sentence or grammatical error, I will still give it a "tweak."

Let me further explain my use of references. I am a former librarian with 33 years experience in cataloguing reference materials, and I tend to revert to use "scratch" cataloging whenever I am working in Wikipedia. The format chosen for the majority of templates for citations and bibliographies is the American Psychiatric Association (APA) style guide which is one of the most used formats for research works. The most commonly used style guide in editing, however, is the Modern Language Association (MLA) which is the style guide I tend to use.

Templates are not mandated in Wikipedia and many editors use full edit cataloging or scratch cataloging since it does away with the variances in some of the templates extant. As a matter of form, a number of articles have also utilized the Harvard Citation style guide as a link to the bibliographical reference. The actual format that I have used is to provide full cataloging in MLA style for a citation if it only appears once in the text as a quote or note and if more than one instance, then Harvard Citation is placed inline and a full bibliographical MLA record is provided in "References." The references area is kind of a catch-all in that it can often incorporate endnotes and footnotes if there are only a few citations. Many editors prefer to provide a "Notes" and "References" section. It is presumed that if entries are made in the references list that the reference source is used for corroboration in writing the article. In some instances wherein an editor identifies a useful source of information that was not part of the research, then a "Further Reading" section can be established. In most Wiki articles I edit, any instances of two different citation styles were reconciled by the use of Harvard Citation style while all other sources were set forth in MLA style in the references section. There is no need to re-do an MLA entry into a APA style, in fact, it is most often preferable not to mix formats or style guides for consistency and readability.

I know that your eyes have probably glazed over long ago, but that is the rationale behind my editing. The "true style" is actually to use one consistent style guide (I choose the MLA as it is the standard worldwide for research articles) and adapt it when needed. As to the exact citation in question, it should have been written in the traditional "Author. "Title". Place of publication: Publisher, year." convention but being adapted to an electronic/digital source of information. The following entries are written in both full-text and citation templates in MLA format:

• Cook, David A. The History of Narrative Film. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Third Edition, 1996. ISBN  978-0-39395-553-8.
• Wakeman, John. World Film Directors, Volume 1, 1890–1945. New York: The H. W. Wilson Company, 1987. ISBN  978-0-82420-757-1.

(Note the placement of author, title, publication information and the juxtaposition of the date in order to site date of publication with the publisher.) The same enties written in APA format:

• Cook, David A. (1996). The History of Narrative Film Third Edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. ISBN  978-0-39395-553-8.
• Wakeman, John (1987). World Film Directors, Volume 1, 1890–1945. New York: The H. W. Wilson Company. ISBN  978-0-82420-757-1.

(Note the placement of author, title, publication information and the juxtaposition of the date in order to site date of publication with the author. This is one of the failings of the citation templates as they do not allow proper output of second and other authors, cannot accommodate multiple years of publication or allow any incidental notes such as separate section authors as in anthologies.) FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 15:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC) reply

After taking a cursory look at Greed (film), you might want to ask some more questions on other aspects of bibliographic notations, as there are some standard rules that are found in all style guides, that you may not be familiar with (sorry for the tortured syntax). FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 17:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello Deoliveirafan, i have had another look at the article. Some additional points and suggestions to consider:

• The plot description seems too detailed, both in the lead and the main article body. For the lead aim for a very broad, general summary - just 1-2 sentences to describe the movie's topic and main plot should suffice. Try to trim the main plot section a little bit more. Especially check every detail and side-event of the story - does the reader need this detail to understand the overall plot? If not, that detail should probably be trimmed or even removed, if it adds nothing essential.
• Avoid too emotional terms like "holy grail" and "hate", replace them with more encyclopedic, neutral terms.
• "bête humaine" - could this term be explained, maybe in parentheses, for the ignorant reader (like me)?
• Quotes and possibly contentious statements need immediate citation, even in the lead., for example:
  • "Greed is unique due to its original, unreleased version being as famous (if not more so) than the existing released version." - strong, somewhat subjective statement could use a citation. Who makes this judgement?
  • "Von Stroheim called Greed his most fully realized work and was hurt both professionally and personally by the film's re-editing." needs citation (especially the "personal" part).
• "Thalberg and von Stroheim had fought over the production of Merry-Go-Round a few years earlier at Universal Pictures, which had resulted in the unprecedented decision of Thalberg to fire von Stroheim—asserting the authority of the producer over the director for the first time in Hollywood culture." is far too detailed and slightly out of focus for the lead. Briefly mention, that the two had some "history" in the past, but leave the details to the main article body.
• In section "Editing" the detailed "reel" explanation as separate box is distracting (and not really part of the main text). Suggestion: use the template:efn to create an explanatory footnote (which are usually placed before the list of citations).

I am not really that knowledgable about cinematic history, but hopefully those points will be helpful. You might want to contact WP:WikiProject Film and start a peer review. There is already a lot of great content in the article and you had some very helpful suggestions on talk, but i think the article could use even more input from other subject experts to progress before FA. Nice work so far, i enjoyed reading the article. GermanJoe ( talk) 15:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC) reply

I've submitted Ugetsu for peer review in hopes of improving the article. Hope to see you there. JoshuSasori ( talk) 04:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC) reply

• I rented the Criterion DVD last week (before I even noticed all the recent edits) and have been planning on adding content from it soon. Its a tough one though and the one biography of Mizoguchi that I had at my disposal was scarce on info about the actual production.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 17:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited César Award, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amour ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:38, 27 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your note. Please list the article on the assessment request page of the Wikiproject Biography. I'm sure it will be reassessed in time. Best regards Hekerui ( talk) 22:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC) reply

I've begun the review for Stanley Donen; it looks quite strong overall, but I listed a few concerns at the review page. Thanks for your work on this, and I'll look forward to your thoughts. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 15:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC) reply

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your hard work to bring Stanley Donen to Good Article status. Thanks for all that you do! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 20:34, 7 March 2013 (UTC) reply

I wonder why the FAC is not generating response (of any kind)! The article is quite interesting. Did you notify the film wikiproject?-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 16:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC) reply

I hadn't and now its archived. I'm not sure what that means.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 02:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply

That probably means it is archived with no results due to lack of reviewers. I think you can probably renominate very soon in such cases. You can ask the fac delegate.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 03:55, 15 March 2013 (UTC) reply

again I think you should notify on the talk page of wikiproject film.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 05:02, 3 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Bringing Up Baby at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Mini apolis 23:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Deoliveirafan, I'm beginning the copy-edit of the above article you requested at the GOCE Requests page. Please feel free to contact me, or to correct or revert my edits if necessary. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 22:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC) reply

• Great, thank you. I'm not sure how much farther it can go until Simon Callow releases his final biographical volume in 2015, but I thought it would be nice to make sure it was in great shape in the meantime.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 04:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC) reply

No worries. I'm not sure the material in the section "Welles and Falstaff" is appropriate for the article, but it's possible that some of the material could form part of a Characters section. Don't forget that this article is about the film, rather than Welles' biography. You might like to read WP:COATRACK—which has advice on keeping the article on topic, and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film— which has guidelines about film articles. I hope you find them useful. That said, the copy-edit is done—feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit, and good luck with your planned FA nomination (though I'd recommend seeking a WP:Peer review before nominating). Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 00:25, 25 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Great job. Thank you very much. I'm just going to fix those two "By whom?" tags then I think I'm done with this article for a while. Also, you may have a point about the Welles and Falstaff section, but in my opinion its the most interesting aspect of the film. The entire 30-year project was very personal to Welles and although the film can stand alone without the connections to Welles' personal life, I think its much more interesting with that information in mind.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 00:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC) reply

No worries; I'm not a reviewer so I won't argue with you about that section. if the info is relevant that's fine.:-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 01:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Did you submit Bringing Up Baby to the Guild of Copy Editors' Requests page, from an IP address? If so, please see the note I placed there in response. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 04:24, 20 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi, this has long been on my list to promote to GA. Thanks for the work you put into it, made it much easier for myself to prepare. I see you've opened a peer review. I've given it an edit and trimmed the lead and was about to nominate it was GA before I saw your peer review. I think it's fine for GA now, GA doesn't need masses of critical commentary. OK by you if I nom? I have somebody in mind to review it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, sure go ahead. I was just trying to get it yo B standards at the moment but if you think its up to GA all the better. I'd love to see it promoted as well. -- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 00:34, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply

It should pass GA as it is. Themes and new content from your books would take it towards FA quality. BTW Greed (film) is a great article which offhand looks like we could get it to FA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Great. Good luck.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 01:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Do you have access to "According to Robert Chapman's Dictionary of American Slang, the adjective "gay" was used by homosexuals among themselves since at least 1920." I've added the book but can't access the page number.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Greed (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Variety ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 3 April 2014 (UTC) reply

...I would be interested, yes. I'd like to add some more things, though, if that's all right with you; just a few more pictures (one of Gibson Gowland from Blind Husbands, and one of Frank Norris himself), and... well, let me have another look at the article. :-) Stolengood ( talk) 02:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for L'Atalante at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! cyberdog958 Talk 07:57, 20 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Rules of the Game, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Claude Dauphin ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Rules of the Game, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Naturalism and The Night of the Hunter ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:49, 27 May 2014 (UTC) reply

	The Special Barnstar
	For getting, finally, Greed to featured status. Dwaipayan ( talk) 17:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I was going to leave you my customary {{ FA congrats}}, but I see you've added Greed to the pending list already. Good work x 2! Bencherlite ^Talk 22:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

L'Avventura ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to New Republic

The Green Room (film) ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Time Out

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:52, 11 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Featured Article Greed To Deoliveirafan Congratulations on gaining FA status for Greed A great job!!♦ ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Instead of dragging out at ANI, I will just explain here. I already have explained it, but perhaps not well enough. You might not like it, but all I know to do is be honest. When you went to ANI, you didn't provide diffs and you made some pretty strong claims. You also started talking about all the other times Ken was at ANI. Then you said that were weren't going to provide diffs. You might mean well, but that is considered very unacceptable. Anywhere on Wikipedia, if you make a claim that someone's behavior is problematic enough for sanctions, it is expected you will provide diffs to back your claim. It is considered uncivil and even a personal attack if you don't.

Next, dragging up the past is considered poisoning the well. Not a blockable offense all by itself, but it is bad form and looked down upon unless you are providing diffs and showing how it is a pattern. The same with even talking about dragging up all the people that were in his prior ANI cases. WP:CANVAS covers this, although it isn't something we often block for. Typically we just dismiss the whole thing.

Then saying you weren't going to provide diffs, that is kind of giving the community the finger, as the community norms (and policy) demands that anyone do so. Taking someone to ANI is akin to asking the community to block them or sanction them in some way. You just don't do that without providing evidence. And you never backed away from the claims. All this together was problematic, and if you continued to make the claims without evidence, someone was going to come by and block you. It isn't about right or wrong, it is about behavior, and what is and isn't acceptable here.

Ken is a smart guy, has lots of skill, and can piss people off sometimes. The same can be said of most of the really good editors here, to one degree or another, myself included. Your one edit summary "Please stop attempting to own this page and let the Copy Editor finish their requested job" would probably have made me say something to you as well, although not as blunt as Ken's choice of words. You were angry when you wrote it, it came across. As an admin, these are exactly the kinds of comments I ignore, just like Ken's reply, because I know that people bump heads sometimes and they don't need an admin micromanaging them. Big stuff, yes, we will get involved, but not small comments.

This is no different than the real world, you have to overlook small things or you go mad. Sometimes, you just have to accept that you bump heads with people you work with, yet you work through it. The one thing that I am completely convinced of is that both of you want to improve the article, and both of you have some good ideas. You just managed to piss each other off. It doesn't matter who started it first, I'm not the school marm, nor a judge to dispense justice. All that matters is the article. If you dwell on these little things, you will be miserable at Wikipedia, because we aren't going to block over such small things. It is better to just walk away for a minute, cool down and focus on the content. So yes, you both made some blunt comments, but it doesn't matter. Move on, use each other's ideas and skills to make the article better. THAT matters. Dennis Brown |  2¢ |  WER 22:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC) reply

You did not actually answer any of my questions, which I'm going to interpret as intentional. Please remember that there are more of us than you, so if you do intend to continue allowing disruptive editors to upset more and more people we'll all just see where that leads.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 22:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for The Rules of the Game at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 03:03, 19 July 2014 (UTC) reply

This is to inform you that Greed (film), which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 4 December 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:28, 25 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Speaking of which, I've got a question about that blurb. I don't have the source that uses the term "holy grail"; was the lost footage the holy grail in the sense that archivists wake up in the morning thinking "I must find that footage!", or in the sense that many false claims have been made? I'm thinking the term may be ambiguous in this context. - Dank ( push to talk) 19:56, 25 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Nice work on the article. On that one item, it took me twice looking at it, and the article, before I realized it was correct. The fact sort of backed into it. Happy editing! Onel5969 ( talk) 03:46, 27 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Passion of Joan of Arc, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Mann. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:00, 28 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Citizen Kane may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• R. McCormick]], another member of Chicago's powerful McCormick family, as Walska's husband.}}<ref name="Welles TIOW"/{{Rp|49|date=November 2014}} McCormick divorced [[Edith Rockefeller
• a treasured bicycle, stolen while he visited the public library and, in punishment, never replaced.{{efn|"The prototype of Charles Foster Kane's sled was this bicycle, which became a symbol of Herman'

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 03:16, 29 November 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Citizen Kane may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 01:50, 30 November 2014 (UTC) reply

silent film
Thank you, user with a silent user page, for quality articles on films such as Greed and Closed Curtain, for requesting peers to review, for improving in collaboration, such as Citizen Kane and The Rules of the Game, for being content with adding content, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC) reply

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1051 of Precious, a prize of QAI! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:08, 4 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Just noticed this Gerda Arendt, thank you and happy holidays.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 18:29, 26 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Two years ago, you were recipient no. 1051 ... -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:22, 4 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Three years now! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:09, 4 December 2017 (UTC) reply

You continue t be very kind Gerda Arendt, thank you.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 05:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC) reply

I try - four years ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:45, 4 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Thank you once again. I changed my password and then forgot it, arrgg, but this is me. Phibesfan ( talk) 06:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC) reply

... thank yor letting me know - five years now! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:56, 4 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Citizen Kane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Good Samaritan Hospital. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 5 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Citizen Kane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Yorker. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:05, 12 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Citizen Kane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spoof. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:41, 7 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Goodbye to Language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint-Just. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Goodbye to Language

added a link pointing to Vanity Fair

Jean-Luc Godard

added a link pointing to In Praise of Love

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Correct — that would be a bad idea. Links should be to the original source wherever possible, i.e. in French, in this case.

Incidentally, while I think the article is generally excellent, it could probably benefit from a bit more citation of French critics. Here, here, here, here and here would be good places to continue with that. - Biruitorul ^Talk 20:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for that, I've had some trouble with google searches for French articles. Also do you think This is usable or just a blog? I'm not sure.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 20:46, 2 February 2015 (UTC) reply

I'd call it borderline. On the one hand, the site appears to be written by an erudite group of people centered around the figure of Philippe Sollers, and it doesn't look as though just anyone can contribute at will. On the other hand, there isn't a clear indication of some kind of editorial policy, from what I can tell. So: it's probably quotable, but not definitely so. - Biruitorul ^Talk 21:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Deoliveirafan, don't know if you have heard about this, but McFarland & Company are giving out free e-books to Wikipedia editors. They have a pretty interesting collection of film studies titles. The catalogue is linked at WP:McFarland - put in a request if you see anything there you want. The Interior (Talk) 20:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Wow, thank you for the tip. I'll check it out.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 20:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC) reply

On 17 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Goodbye to Language, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Fabrice Aragno's cinematography in Jean-Luc Godard's 3D film Goodbye to Language introduced a new kind of camera shot? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Goodbye to Language. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 —  Crisco 1492 ( talk) 12:02, 17 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Time to Live and the Time to Die, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Time Out. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirifan - I just saw that your photo of Jacques Rivette was not promoted. I read all the exchanges and realized that, since it was your first FP nomination, you might be quite disappointed in the lack of response. I just wanted to tell you that I had not even seen the photo before today. There are so many nominations, I can't always keep up with them and I didn't get to this one. I thought the photo of Rivette was quite nice. Perhaps you can nominate it again, with or without the suggested modifications. I just don't want you to get totally discouraged by this once experience with FP. Keep looking for other images to nominate, and vote, too! - CorinneSD ( talk) 20:53, 27 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Any opinion on this before I start updating the core list? Fortdj33 ( talk) 19:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Goodbye to Language you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JohnGormleyJG -- JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 12:21, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The article Goodbye to Language you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Goodbye to Language for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JohnGormleyJG -- JohnGormleyJG ( talk) 16:01, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply

There are some films waiting for assessment in Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Assessment. Please consider. -- 106.66.180.39 ( talk) 13:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your message. I like your contribution to the article. Generally, I don't think that the article is far off GA quality, so perhaps we should put it forward next year. -- Thoughtfortheday ( talk) 23:27, 26 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Jacques Rivette at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Happy New Year and all the best, Mini apolis 22:29, 31 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mike Nichols: American Masters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Susan Lacy. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:25, 3 February 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello! Your submission of Lenny Schultz at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 21:06, 4 April 2016 (UTC) reply

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. I provided a link to Lenny Schultz on Google newspapers which might yield more information. Best, Yoninah ( talk) 11:04, 6 April 2016 (UTC) reply

On 8 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lenny Schultz, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lenny Schultz kept his day job as a high school gym teacher while gaining popularity on late-night talk shows and in comedy clubs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lenny Schultz. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 01:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC) reply

Doc's just started up this contest about topics and articles covering Classical Hollywood cinema. Do express if you are interested or not by signing up under the "Editors Interested" section. Thanks.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Rules of the Game you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS ( talk) 20:20, 1 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Sherlock Jr.

added a link pointing to New Republic

The Navigator (1924 film)

added a link pointing to Catalina Island

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:03, 13 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Shouldn't it be Category:Stripping in film ? Strippers infers actors not films. Mlpearc Phone ( open channel) 19:30, 15 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Sure, change it if you want.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 19:53, 15 October 2016 (UTC) reply

 Done Thanx, Mlpearc Phone ( open channel) 20:01, 15 October 2016 (UTC) reply

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Dear Deoliveirafan, thank you for your contributions on Wikipedia, especially your recent creation of Themes and style in the works of Jacques Rivette . Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, Anupam Talk 23:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Requesting your input here. Regards.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:13, 8 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply

I see the article's still up for reviewing. If its alright, I would very much like to review it. Thank you.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Fantastic. I think it's in good shape but would be happy to work on it with you.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 15:16, 27 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Thank you. I have just begun reviewing it. My 25th review too! A silver jubilee.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:54, 28 November 2016 (UTC) reply

The article The Rules of the Game you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Rules of the Game for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 ( talk) 16:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Please refrain from adding material to the lead of Last Tango in Paris without having consensus for it. Your edit warring is detrimental to this encyclopedia. Please obtain consensus first and edit later. Debresser ( talk) 00:23, 5 December 2016 (UTC) reply

		Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar
		Thanks for your contribution, particularly on the talk page for Last Tango In Paris. You hit the nail on the head, this movie and dead actors are being exploited for a juicy article. Group29 ( talk) 14:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks Group29, that's nice of you. Yea, I am dreading and expecting future headlines to read "Scorsese admits to planning Reagan assassination", or "Kubrick knowingly drove Shelly Duvall insane" or even "Breaking news: Silent Comedian Fatty Arbuckle was a rapist".-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 04:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Tentative de bleu requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Oluwa2Chainz »» ( talk to me) 21:03, 11 December 2016 (UTC) reply

	We wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2017!
	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas, and a Happy, Glorious, Prosperous New Year! God bless!  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 11:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks, you too.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 17:11, 25 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deolivierafan, and Happy New Year to you. I plan to take this to FA. Do let me know if you wish to leave comments at the PR page by pinging me. Thanks.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 07:39, 5 January 2017 (UTC) reply

	We wish you a prosperous New Year 2017!
	Wishing you and yours a Happy, Glorious, Prosperous New Year! God bless!  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 08:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi, Deoliveirafan. I'm just posting to let you know that Jacques Rivette filmography – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for January 29. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 ( Talk) 02:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. How are things going with your good self? I see the article's up for reviewing. If its alright, I would very much like to review it. Thank you.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 09:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi, sounds great, thank you, I appreciate that. Themes and style in the works of Jacques Rivette is still on my to do list for articles to expand, but I'll get to it.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 22:54, 24 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jacques Rivette you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 ( talk) 07:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC) reply

De Oliveira fan ( a worthy fandom), The Revenger's Tragedy, written during the Jacobean period is now acknowledged to be by Middleton, not Tourneur. Old English was not spoken then, nor was it in the 15th century, when Middle English was current. Old English is Anglo-Saxon, a very different idiom. Fabricedeldongo ( talk) 15:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi Fabricedeldongo. Yea I know in the past editors have revised that part, on at least two occasions I think. Basically I just added the info that was in the source. I don't know much about the subjects of old English or Middle English, but if there is a more accurate way to write this article I'm happy for any contributions.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 18:02, 5 February 2018 (UTC)HI Deoliveirafan. Basically, Jacobean era is Shakespeare, Middle English Chaucer, Old English Beowulf. reply

The article Jacques Rivette you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Jacques Rivette for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 ( talk) 09:01, 1 February 2018 (UTC) reply

The article passed. Ignore the bot.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 14:34, 1 February 2018 (UTC) reply

On 11 February 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jill Messick, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Step hen 21:56, 11 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Keep getting notices that there have been multiple failed attempts to log onto my account. Flattered as I am that someone wants to get inside me that badly, I just wanted to say upfront to everyone on Wikipedia that yes I do think you are all a bunch of poohpooh heads and that you all smell like instant ramen and yes I do think that adding "Seymour Butts" to George Washington's list of nicknames is a constructive, bold edit. Nevertheless I'm happy to keep all of this to myself so don't blame me if I get hacked. Also my email address is NOT attached to my profile here, nor is any personal info. I don't choose to do things like that.-- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 21:21, 7 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, Deoliveirafan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

The file File:The Rules of the Game.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-free screenshot being used in a decorative manner in The Rules of the Game#Filming. A non-free screenshot could possibly be used if wa for showing a particular filming technique, etc. as explained in WP:FILMNFI or the screenshot itself was the subject of sourced critical commentary about it included in the relevant section of the article; however, simply wanting to show three cast members in certain seen to indicate their relationships with each seems to broad of a context to meet WP:NFCC#8 as explained in WP:NFC#CS an unlikely something that the reader's understanding of the section which would be significantly improved by seeing this screenshot or harmed by not seeing this screenshot.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 06:15, 3 October 2019 (UTC) reply

Category:Stripping in film has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DonIago ( talk) 19:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC) reply

The article Christopher Columbus – The Enigma has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Film appears to fail WP:NFILM

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 22:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Where Is the Friends Home.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:46, 28 March 2022 (UTC) reply