User talk:Nehrams2020/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Question about IMDB

Hi Nehrams2020, I hope you are doing well. Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Films#IMDB_as_source_for_main-body-text_on_BLPs.3F, and the referenced thread at WP:BLPN. I was previously under the impression that IMDB was okay as a source for tabulated filmography info and other related tables below the biography material on articles, but not okay to be used, or at least not preferable and not the best source possible, for main-body-text-paragraph info, on WP:BLP articles. Perhaps I was mistaken? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 00:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your comment [1], but Jimbo Wales (talk · contribs) apparently does not, and continues to use the source in main-body-text on BLPs, see [2]. Perhaps you would be more fruitful than I, in helping to address this behavior pattern? -- Cirt (talk) 02:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
IMDB is not a reliable source. It is a user generated database. It is fine to refer to it but not to source it. Dr. Blofeld White cat 08:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Nehrams2020, I agree with your comment to me at my talk page, perhaps you could leave a similar one at User talk:Jimbo Wales? (and also re-check WP:BLPN?) Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 15:48, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Updating infobox

Hil. Can you update the infobox with the requested parameters than for costume designers, choreography etc. Even for Argentina, Tita Tamames is credited on many films. Dr. Blofeld White cat 08:48, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes there seems to be no problems with it. But as for a backlask people can choose whether or not to include these paramters or not so it shouldn't be a problem!! Dr. Blofeld White cat 10:31, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010

Miley Cyrus

Original
Edit

Hi Nehrams2020, I hit Miley with an edit, I thought a harsher crop may help given the cutoff head, and tweaked a few other things, see what you think. Cheers, --jjron (talk) 09:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

It's really up to you what you want to do. I think it's probably worth giving a try at FPC. You need to decide which version to nominate. You can do it in different ways. You could put up the original, if people aren't so happy with composition, then offer the edit. You could just offer the edit, and again offer the original if people think it's too tight. Alternatively, you could put up both versions, something like what's done in this nom. If you straight up nominate the edit, make sure you put that version into the article first. If you want some help creating the nom, give me a hoy. --jjron (talk) 09:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010

Re:Image request

I would say two weeks would be better if you want the action plan, but I cannot really promise that it will be on the dot even. I have finished most of the "ground layout" so as to speak; what is left is transforming the whole thing into an isotropic projection and putting in the little touches (which I hope will make this unique from the published forms). Nevertheless, you can still go ahead and nominate the article at FAC, File:Cabanatuan Operations - Actions at the Objectives, January 1945.jpg and its derivatives are verifiable as in the public domain. My product would just be trying to come up with a prettier derivative (heh). Jappalang (talk) 20:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Green removed from Eastwood filmography

Hi. Have you noticed that in your Clint Eastwood filmography the green background of the cell with the word "Yes" in them has been removed? If so, what do you think of it? I think it looked better with the green. — Jimknut (talk) 16:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

year-cells as headers

Hi. I saw you cut the '!' on Clint. I'm looking at this from a semantic perspective, not at the fact that headers get boldface and are centered. Ironically this make the most sense when the year cells use rowspans for a group, which is a poor practice that I am not in favour of (semantics, accessibility, unsortability, impediment to editing). I see the year-cells as headers for the whole row, but I'm not fixed on it. I have an email about this, too, that I've not yet answered; marinating on it. I've been omitting this step today. I cut the explicit centering you'd stuck in there as there's no need for that and the column is pretty much the width of 4 digits, anyway. fyi, the lowercase 'file' habit is per the method browsers use to display a local file:

  • "file:///whatever..."

It just looks normal, to me ;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:41, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I re-centered the years as that was a preference continually mentioned at WP:FLC. I don't see any reason to have the years bolded, it places too much emphasis on them when it is just another column within the table. I may be obsessive-compulsive but I added the capitalization because I'm going off of the title of an image, which starts with "File:", just as we would with "Wikipedia:" or "User:". --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
My intent was not that they be bold, but that the markup indicate that it was a header; i.e all the stuff to the right are films in that year. This is a 'heading' in a horizontal sense. This could also be achieved by:
! style="font-weight: normal;" | 1971...
Not that I'd like that goop, line-after-line. As said, I'm not fixed on this. I've done this in about a dozen places, and will see how that goes over. I may par a few back, especially on ones wo/rowspans on the years. Cheers, Jack Merridew 22:09, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any benefit for doing the years, but I usually don't care for bold face within articles unless necessary (the headings of the table make sense). --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Really, I'll see replies here ;)
Your input is welcome. I'm rethinking all of this. The bolding is not the intent. Cheers, Jack Merridew 23:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Film award

Hi Nehrams. I've awarded another barnstar here. Thanks! Lugnuts (talk) 08:34, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010

Orphaned non-free image File:La Balance film.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:La Balance film.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello (and sorry for putting this on your actual page the first time)

I notice you are the lead coordinator of WikiProject films, I would like to ask you a question. The article for the movie Begotten is one I have been starting to work on, and I was wondering who or where I would ask to find:

  • People who can help add more information to the article.
  • People who can evaluate if it's ready to be start class.

I really enjoy this movie, it's one of my favorites, and I'd love to see it get more attention, so I figured the wikipedia articlte is the place to start.

Thank you. KMFDM FAN (talk!) 03:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010

Orphaned non-free image File:StepbrothersMP08.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:StepbrothersMP08.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Ernest-Borgnine_2004.JPEG, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. I'ḏ♥One 07:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding banned users,

In light of this, could you please remove Sugar Bear from whatever list you're using to send these messages? This user is banned.— Dædαlus Contribs 06:15, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! :D Happy editing as well.— Dædαlus Contribs 06:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Apologies

Action map

Hi Nehrams2020, I have to apologise. I am unable to promptly come up with the 3D representation of the actions at Cabanatuan; certain things did not render as I expected on Inkscape and I am trying to find some manner to implement others. I will keep plodding at it but I am uncertain if can do it (and I would like to put this on a lower priority). I do not wish to hold up your nomination so here is the two dimensional version. Apologies for my ineptitude. Jappalang (talk) 06:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done Jappalang (talk) 05:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

VPC

— raekyT 10:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS newsletter

Hi there! I noticed that you've been delivering the newsletters for WP:FILMS using AWB, and I was wondering if for future newsletters you would be interested in using my bot, MessageDeliveryBot. The way the bot works is that whenever you have a newsletter, or other message, that needs sending, you submit a request here and then, once approved by me, the bot takes care of the rest. Also, if you're submitting requests regularly then I can add you to a list of trusted users, so your requests are automatically approved. - EdoDodo talk 11:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Your request at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Titanic (1997 film)/archive2

Hi Nehrams2020. I did the requests that you wanted on the article. However, can you explain what you meant by "The final sentence in the plot covers possible views on the endings. If there are other sources that touch on this (or that focus on the themes), that would be helpful for starting a new section"? Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 01:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I made the change you wanted. Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 03:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, again. You request to shorten the length is kinda done, as I did shorten down the plot section, but it's still 100 more than the projected 700. I'm afraid I can't remove any more information from the section without damaging the main Synopsis. So will you accept the revision I did? Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 03:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Saw VI peer review

Hi. I had two questions for you at the Saw VI peer review, if you don't mind. Thanks. =) Mike Allen 00:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:03, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

RE:Sherlock Holmes Baffled

Haha, I'd already pre-empted someone might suggest that. I've made a little silent copy, so I can perhaps have a go at converting that to the weird ogv format today. Bob talk 08:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I've added a copy of it to the article. It works fine in Firefox, but seems to have a buffer problem in IE8 (although I've never really got ogv files to work on that browser). I'm not sure if the bitrate might be fairly high (although as a file, it's only 2MB). Bob talk 09:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Road to the Multiverse FAC

Thank you for taking the time to look over Road to the Multiverse. I've attempted to resolve all of your concerns, but I did leave you one question on the page. Thanks. Gage (talk) 19:51, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Satya review

I see that you reviewed Satya (film) back in February and rated it a C. I didn't expect it to qualify for a B based on "grammar and style" (it's pedestrian at best) but I am surprised about it failing the citation/ references criteria. As far as I can say, over 90% of the references are to mainstream publications (or "convenience links"), and where they are not, to blogs of individuals actually involved in the production of the film (writer/ director). There are a couple of dodgy/ broken links which can be fixed.

I would like to have a general idea of what it is that is missing/ not correct. Last Contrarian (talk) 11:16, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Home of the brave.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Home of the brave.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Get Low (film) references addendum

Hi

Your handle says Nehrams 2020 but I am not sure if that is your name. I left this message with Bearcat and Cinemaniac86 but perhaps they are no longer involved in the maintenance of the page on the Get Low film.

I noticed there were only a handful of references/external links about Get Low, the Sony Pictures Classics small budget film currently in release.

There is a video editorial online on Get Low that may interest Wikipedia in referencing the content. It's really well made and if after reviewing it you may think it is worthwhile adding the reference to the list of sources that have produced editorials, essay or content related to the film.

http://midnighttracks.net/2010/getlowvid

Hope this helps in some way and hopefully it is not scorching hot in San Diego this time of year.


CinemaFanCA


76.170.118.23 (talk) 00:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Get Low - A reference worth evaluating

Nehrems 2020,

Thank you for the encouragement but the WP guidelines you mentioned are a little over my head. I just thought the editors that put the Get Low page on wikipedia may find this video editorial interesting and worth referencing in the section on references/external links, that is if some of you would view the video and decide amongst yourselves.

From my experiences with wikipedia simply editing or adding a section for someone who is not a long-time editor is a waste time since someone like me is neither familiar with all the guidelines and any contribution is considered by some editors as vandalism.

The best thing is simply to point out some possibilities to you guys and let you decide on it amongst yourselves. For this reason I left a notice with Bearcat, Cinemaniac86 (?) and another person besides you who all worked on producing the Get Low page.

I'd be curious to see what comes out of this if any.

I believe the video editorial has copyrights from Sony and the editorial producer who put together the storyline for the film/commentary.

Thanks and best,

76.170.118.23 (talk) 10:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Get Low - Reference added

I took a chance and added the reference. You guys will decide if it a worthwhile addition to the references incuded with this film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.118.23 (talk) 20:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

You vandal you!!

Apologies for suspecting you of vandalism on "The Sandlot" with this edit: [3] Somehow you got the name mistaken as "The Right Stuff". I corrected it, then tried to track down the edit, assuming you might be leaving a trail of vandalism that would need to be corrected. If you were doing something automated that explains this error you might want to follow up yourself in the wake of what you were doing at that time. If you were making a systematic error I assume you have corrected it by now. I just thought you might want to know. --68.35.2.8 (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Howard Stern picture

Hi there I saw you were the one that added the main picture to the Howard Stern article. Could you try and find a more recent image of Howard that is free to use? The one currently is from 2000. If not, then not to worry. Thanks. (LowSelfEstidle (talk) 22:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)).

Orphaned non-free image File:Planet51movieposter.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Planet51movieposter.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:48, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Film award

Hi Nehrams - I've awarded Tired time the film award for adding lots of posters to film articles. Lugnuts (talk) 17:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Idea for Films Newsletter

At one point, I read a conversation between a group of editors who noted that they often add films that are coming out soon (as detailed in the newsletter) to their watchlist for a short while to help keep an eye on the inevitable flux non-constructive edits that happen when a film has just been released. Consequently, it recently occurred to me that in addition to the new releases section, a "home media releases" section might not be a bad idea. The same torrent of edits always hits just after a film is released on DVD. It just crossed my mind a couple of weeks ago during a discussion trying to normalize the plot for Inception. I pointed out that we would be going through the whole thing again when the VD release happened, just like we did with Shutter Island. Don't know how useful such a section in the Newsletter would be to anyone else but I thought I'd throw it out there. Cheers. Millahnna (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Film projects

I wrote the spiel on WT:FILM because of discussion with MichaelQSchmidt at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/X-Men: First Class (film project) and on my talk page. I think there are two issues here. First, WP:GNG is being brought up when we have subject-specific guidelines to use and revise based on the reality of the film industry and the nature of the coverage. Secondly, policy is hard to apply here. We can report discussion about future projects, but we cannot make articles out of news reports nor write details indiscriminately. That's how I see it, anyway. I've boldly updated WP:NFF based on this. I'm very wary of the slippery slope to be had here, that news reports could be mashed up into topics of enduring notability. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I reccomend a revertion of his BOLD revision to NFF, as it was done without seeking wider consensus and strikes directly against policy. When the two are in conflict, policy is to take precednt, not guideline. His worry over WP:NOTNEWS is fine, but policy NOTNEWS is already in place to deal with future events docuented only with recent news articles. His change acts as if enduring and persistant coverage of a topic over a many-years period can be ignored, and this acts to contradict policy and existing guideline. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films#Film projects

I propose a perhaps sub-project of WikiProject Film to perhaps be titled "WikiProject Future Films", as we do need to acknowledge policy and guideline in dealing with article topics, no matter what the topic might be. If something has the coverage that merits it being worthy of note, we need find a way to deal with it without project in-fighting. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Yikes, my bad. It exists: Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Future films, but needs a new broom to sweep out the cobwebs. Yargh. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

"Cinema of" templates

Hello! A discussion about the use of {{Cinema of XXXX}} (like {{Cinema of France}}) in individual film articles has opened here. Your input would be greatly appreciated! BOVINEBOY2008 08:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

FLC review request

Hi Nehrams! Looks like you're very busy at the moment, but if you get the chance, can you take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Robert Bathurst filmography/archive1? It really needs more eyes. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Re:OTRS request

Sorry, I didn't see your message. I see someone else has already dealt with that particular image- the publicist is normally going to own the rights to the images, and so if they say that the image is free released, it normally is. It's often useful to get the name of the photographer, if known. J Milburn (talk) 11:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

GA Mentor

Hello Nehrams2020! I have read on the list of GA Mentor that you deal with any question related to GA nominations. I just did a review (here it is) of a song and I was wondering if there's anything else that I might have missed or not addressed. Thanks! Magiciandude (talk) 04:33, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nehrams2020. You have new messages at Talk:CryoSat-2/GA1.
Message added 10:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Award time

Another one. Ta. Lugnuts (talk) 18:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi - for adding lots of posters to film articles. Lugnuts (talk) 13:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Ahhh, he's moved it to another page. Lugnuts (talk) 13:26, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Bathurst

Thanks for your help and support in getting Robert Bathurst filmography to featured list status! Bradley0110 (talk) 06:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Having just seen the news, I wish to extend my best wishes. Not all such results seemed so predestined. WikiProject Films is lucky to have you. Kudos! Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 18:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Getty Images on Flickr question

I am wondering what this means on Flickr under "License". It has "Request to license [name]'s photos via Getty Images". See here. It also has a Creative Commons license. Do I have to go through the steps of Getty Images to get a license for it.. or what? Mike Allen 04:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Film cleanup

Hi Nehrams - I've added a section on the co-ordinators page here. Input welcome. Lugnuts (talk) 08:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The High and the Mighty

FYI: The High and the Mighty (film). Trying to restore some of his contested material. Erik (talk | contribs) 23:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 07:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ILoveYouPhillipMorrisMP.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ILoveYouPhillipMorrisMP.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Overhaul

On WT:FILM, you suggested that the WikiProject's main page could be overhauled. I like the suggestion, and I am wondering what you had in mind. I especially like WP:MILHIST with its framing and its use of tabs. It would be nice to the project pages look more structured. Should we experiment with templates, or did you have someone in mind to help with the revamping? Erik (talk | contribs) 14:39, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, I responded to you at WT:FILM#Project name about finalizing the WikiProject's new name. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Should we broach the topic at WT:FILMC? I think that if we are going to do an aesthetic overhaul, we should see there is any kind of re-structuring to do beforehand. For example, I'd rather put the task forces on the back burner (and maybe have something in the design that's commented out and can later be revealed more fully). I'm also considering what to do about the departments. I think there's a perspective that departments are manned, and as a result, we have so-called "inactive" departments. We should consider a more guideline-based structure. For example, Does WP:FILMCAT really need to be called a department? I think we could re-identify this group of articles as something else, something more reference-based. (By the way, I have a couple of sub-pages going on at User:Erik/Outreach and User:Erik/Categorization. Trying to get results this election term!) Erik (talk | contribs) 14:26, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks like we made the move. The end of an era, huh? Erik (talk | contribs) 03:17, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Let's be sure to mention the "movers" (see WT:FILM) in our next newsletter. :) Erik (talk | contribs) 15:59, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright status of trailers made prior to 1964

Please provide a specific legal basis or other justification (statute and/or applicable case law) for your contention that "trailers before 1964 were not copyrighted", as well as a reliable source and/or citation that supports your claim that the copyright notice that appears as 0:02:39-42 of the trailer for 'The High and the Mighthy" ("COPYRIGHT MCMLIV BY WAYNE-FELLOWS PRODUCTIONS, INC.") refers only to the film but does not protect the trailer that was derived exclusively from the film. Centpacrr (talk) 02:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Have you come up with an answer to my question? Centpacrr (talk) 20:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:33, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dustbin Baby (film)/archive2

Hey, I'm contacting you because you participated in the last FAC. I have renominated Dustbin Baby (film) for featured article status, and I was wondering if you wanted to take another look. Thanks. J Milburn (talk) 10:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Legendofthe7goldenvampiresmp.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Legendofthe7goldenvampiresmp.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Perfect strangermp.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Perfect strangermp.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood

Hello there in Sunny Diego. I'm going to look into this later in the week and add some more Schickel sources and write a bit more about his mayorship and then I think I'll nom it for GA. Been too busy to be focusing on it!! We should be able to get it to GA level anyway.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld

Yeah I remember you were the one who wrote the Nielsen article. I created some short stubs on the remaining Leslie Nielsen films this evening. Can you help fill them out with cast and crew and a source?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Maya stelae GAN

Hi Nehrams2020. Many thanks for the review of Maya stelae. I've responded to each of your points here and would appreciate it if you could drop by and take a look. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 23:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for coming back - I've responded to the remaining queries. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 22:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks for the constructive review! I have been considering reviewing at GA for some time now, but have wanted to clock up enough GAs so I am completely comfortable with the process... Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 08:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood GAN

OK I've added some Schickel sources and filled in some gaps and have now nominated it for a GA. I fyou see articles like Kentucky Railway Museum which are GA this really should have been GA long ago.. If you could help with copyediting/condensing/polishing it in the next week or two this would be much appreciated.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes draw up a to do list and we can remove what we agree on. The 1970s section should be the longest section as that was his prime but it really needs condensing.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:FPCs?

Nice work! I'm a big fan of portrait FPCs, but it can be pretty tough to get them promoted. I don't think File:FredWillardApr08.jpg would do well- I think people would criticise the colours as being a bit off and the crop as tight/uninteresting. File:WendellPierceJan07.jpg is a bit more interesting, but the quality isn't enormous, and, again, the crop isn't great. I think some people may complain about the lighting on File:StephenMerchantNov09.jpg, but it'd certainly get a support from me. However, I do note that the licensing is a bit... Odd. Who's the author? Who sent it to you? Who released it? The licensing has to be watertight for it to pass at FPC. J Milburn (talk) 21:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, note that it was sent to you by Larkin (on behalf of Merchant) and explain who Larkin is. Also note that the copyright belongs to Larkin's company, and it was Larkin who released it. Then note the name of the photographer. That should all be enough to satisfy the FPC crowd :) As for toning the lighting down a bit, you could send it to picture peer review or throw it to the graphic lab- alternatively, if you like it now, you could submit it to FPC, and if others don't like it as it is, it's possible they'll submit an alt. J Milburn (talk) 11:28, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
If you haven't done so already, perhaps get that email available on OTRS as well, just to clear up any potential confusion. J Milburn (talk) 11:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:24, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Charlton Heston image

Yep, that'd be the way to go. J Milburn (talk) 12:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Simon MacCorkindale

As a master of obtaining free-use images, I was wondering if, if you have time, you could send a couple of requests for me for an image of Simon MacCorkindale? This seems to be the only possible image on Flickr (although I'm fairly sure the author wouldn't allow it). This was his agency, so I guess maybe they could supply one? I really don't know. Anyway, thanks for your time. Gran2 01:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Bzuk (talk) 15:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Stephen Merchant
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:StephenMerchantAltNov09.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:42, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

The Deer Hunter: FA candidate?

Dear Nehrams2020,

I'm trying to get The Deer Hunter up to FA-status. Can you take a look at the article and offer any suggestions or comments?

Al Fecund (talk) 16:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Chula Vista

Hello I saw you work alot with San Diego articles and you live there maybe you would be interested in helping me with the Chula Vista, California article so it can get to FA for it's centennial next year. You don't have to help if you don't want too. Spongie555 (talk) 19:41, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy, happy

Happy New Year, and all the best to you and yours!

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Newsletter

Please unsubscribe me. P.S. The notification says to follow the link to do this, but I don't see it in the newsletter. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Charlton Heston
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:CharltonHestonCivilRightsMarch1963Retouched.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\talk 21:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

New article "Wives and Lovers (film)"...

Hi again! and Happy New Year to you too!

I was a little shocked to find "Wives and Lovers" leads to the hit song, not the 1963 movie that preceded and inspired it. I'll start work on an article asap, but would like to ask you to "ride shotgun" for me again: advise, tags, technical trouble-shooting, etc. (especially as I never saw the the movie myself, only remember the stir it made at the time). All the Best, Shir-El too 23:20, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If Nehrams is busy, I can help you with the article. Let me know! Erik (talk | contribs) 00:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't know anything of the film, but I'll be happy to take a look at it when it gets started. Erik, you're definitely more than welcome to step in, as I've been a bit busy lately. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Help

Thank you for your kind welcome. Unfortunately, when I tried to add myself to the Soviet cinema task force, I bungled it all up. Instead of the list of participants, only my name appears. I have no idea how to revert this. Could you help, please? My sincere apologies. Bahavd Gita (talk) 10:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, I managed to fix it. Thanks anyway, sorry for the mess. Bahavd Gita (talk) 12:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy 10th Anniversary of Wikipedia!

File:Verre de whisky.jpg
Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

HeyBzuk (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:User:HJ Mitchell/WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 15:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

SDSU

Does Zuma the new jaguar mascot for SDSU count as a school mascot? I know the Aztec Is still the mascot but should we count Zuma too? Spongie555 (talk) 07:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on January 20, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 20, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch ۩ ۞ 19:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

A Yellow and White Volkswagen T2 campervan.

Little Miss Sunshine is a 2006 American comedy-drama film. The road movie plot follows a family's trip in their Volkswagen T2 Microbus to a children's beauty pageant. Little Miss Sunshine was the directorial film debut of the husband-wife team of Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris. The screenplay was written by first-time writer Michael Arndt. It stars Greg Kinnear, Steve Carell, Toni Collette, Paul Dano, Abigail Breslin, and Alan Arkin, and was produced by Big Beach Films on a budget of US$8 million. Filming began on June 6, 2005 and took place over 30 days in Arizona and Southern California. The film premiered at the Sundance Film Festival on January 20, 2006, and its distribution rights were bought by Fox Searchlight Pictures for one of the biggest deals made in the history of the festival. Little Miss Sunshine received critical acclaim, and had an international box office gross of $100.5 million. The film was nominated for four Academy Awards, including Best Picture, and won two: Best Original Screenplay for Michael Arndt and Best Supporting Actor for Alan Arkin. It also won the Independent Spirit Award for Best Feature, and received multiple other accolades. (more...)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:StepbrothersMP08.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:StepbrothersMP08.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood

Hi. Thanks for that. The thing is though I quite like the current version with detail. Of course it needs cutting down in parts but I think your version is rather extreme in terms of content loss. I agree that not every film needs a review or production details but some of them I think are very relevant...♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll do the cutting tomorrow. It should only require a few hours work. As I'll just be removing the text we'll have to keep tabs on the content which was removed so nothing is lost (ensure it is entered into the sub decade articles as well as the film and other actor articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I've begun the cutting, see my comments at the review. I think we should be aiming for 80kb. List of Chinese inventions, Ming dynasty etc are far longer.. This is Clint Eastwood after all, 60kb or even less would seriously affect the quality and comprehensiveness of the article. Down to 130kb so far. Will work a lot on it tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:12, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I suspect that my splitting of the personal life section will trigger an AFD. Sad really as it could really be developed into a very informative article. I suspect we'll end up losing most of the info in the cutting should a seperate article be deleted. We'll wait and see. Anyway, I've now cut down the article to 86 kb with somehow retaining its comprehensiveness. It still needs some slimming work in parts but the vast majority of remaining material is information which I think is very relevant. Maybe some films don't need earnings/some reviews, but I think I've done a pretty good job of removing the less relevant stuff. I think if you were to remove too much more then it would start to affect it. For instance the personal life section has been filtered down and if you were to remove any info about the children/relationships it would disrupt it I think. I feel that the 2000s needs the most work in terms of quality and the music section needs a major copyedit in particular. Can you add the citations which are needed and the broken refs, non ref filled out citations? The 1970s and 1980s still need a little further cutting but keep in mind the 1970s should quite rightly should be the longest section by far of the article in regards to it being the most productive and prime of his career. You should be able to get it down to around 80kb I think with further editing and making it flow better but I really don't want it to be much shorter than that as I think I've retained some crucial notes on production (like the josey Wales sacking dispute etc) to. Just be careful with what you remove that's all...♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:27, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

As cool as the Dirty Harry lines "Do ya feel lucky punk, Go Ahead Make my Day, A man's got to know his limitations", and the "Dog Shit" squashed quote are, my favourite has to be "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one of them" from Dead Pool. I really wish we could have a bank of GA articles on all the classic/legendary film stars though. We ought to have similarly researched articles on Sean Connery, John Wayne etc but they are just so lacking.. You remember how the Eastwood article once looked?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

One of the poorest developed in terms of comprehensiveness/potential sources available for a top film star has to be John Wayne. We could quite easily have highly developed sub articles too like John Wayne in the 1930s etc which are very important in film history. I think the Eastwood article could reach FA quality in the future but it needs a lot of copediting/polishing. But I think it is exactly how we should be covering film biographies with evidence of wide reading/research from books. I can help you with the Tom Hanks article if you like. But I really must get hold of a decent Wayne biography and begin mass development of it. It would easily end up being at least 200kb before condensing it. It will be very demanding though. Maybe I ought to develop the Sean Connery article first. The Connery article has long been a disappointment. But so many of the names linked in the Eastwood articles are lacking, including many of the directors, screenwriters and co stars frequently mentioned in his biographies..♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:19, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the current length is fine don't you?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

If you could help add the text from the subpages into the film and actor/director articles where appropriate (like Philip Kaufman etc) this would be great. Can you also add the sub articles to your watchlist?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:30, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I've started Irving Leonard (accountant). I wondered if any of your books mention him?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:28, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I've added more reviews and improved the quality of the Eastwood article further. The quotes I added I think are very important to understanding his film techiques and most acclaimed performances. Its currently on 98kb but I'm now much happier than previously as I've improved the 1990s and 2000s sections now which were its weakest part.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually I think there are scores of biographies missing on people like Irving Leonard who are not all that obvious but were probably more notable then many of the low-key contremporary actors we have on wikipedia. The Clint biographies for instance turned up loads of names of film studio executives, talent agencies, film critics etc which could potentially have articles. Same with certain art directors etc. I'm not saying they are all notable but some of them were so important in the film industry behind the scenes...♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

i started Six Bridges to Cross, linked in the Eastwood article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah we definately need more book sources for films and actors on here. Actually a lot could be expanded using sources available in google books even without buying a book.. GA review has begun. I've addressed a lot of things already. Can you address the 70s and 80s comments, they are only minor I think like links etc.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

The review is eh maybe a little excessive for GA but I don't mind as if at some stage it was nominated for FA these things would need to be addressed. Tony wants more about Clint's musical acclaim. Can you look into it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Excellent work, great idea with the discography and the music merger.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I've readded some of the material and tartened it up a bit. I think a lot of it is important and makes the article more comprehensive. Funnily though we are up to 120kb having been as low as 86kb but the length is neccessary to make the best article I think. Some things need addressing. Can you ensure all the references in the politics section are filled out fully and that one of the refs showing an erroris fixed. Also the presidential campaigns of 1968 and 1972 need wikilinking.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Great image of Halle Berry!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Mmm I dunno about that. In my experience the standards expected at FA are often unreasonable. I would say there is an awful lot of work that could be done into analysing his directorial style, common themes in his films, influence in popular culture etc. A featured article on him would have more of a balance I think towards Clint the Director.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Oklahoma City bombing

Hi. I just noticed that you rv my edits to the infobox on the Oklahoma bombing page. Just to explain the reason I put (confirmed) next to 168 (casualties) was based on the following: "The toll eventually reached 168 confirmed dead, not including an unmatched leg that could have belonged to a possible, unidentified 169th victim." I stand by the other edit also (adding "purportedly" to the motive) as I don't believe anything that McVeigh, Nichols, etc. would say. (The motive does not appear in the visible article infobox anyway so it's kind of moot.) Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Newsletter question

I hope you don't mind me asking you but I just noticed that you were placing a lot of talk page messages about the WPFilms newsletter. I am planning on doing a newsletter for WPUS in the next week or so and I was hoping I could ask you a couple questions.

  1. Would you mind if I used your format
  2. Do you know of any others that are doing newsletters I might be able to look at.

Thanks and please let me know if you have any questions. --Kumioko (talk) 03:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks thats a lot of help. --Kumioko (talk) 04:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Greetings!

Hi Nehrams2020,

I just left Erik a message on his talk page saying "I'm confused with the complexity of wikipedia but I really want to help make the existing articles on films much better. Some topics I would like to elaborate on are camera placement and movement, cinematography (depth of field in shots, frame rates and lighting) and editing (time intervals between cuts, transitions between shots (ex. dissolves, wipes)) for films."

I read you graduated from san diego state. I just graduated from UCLA so we're neighbors. I also like mountain dew too haha. Can I email you? I have a lot of questions that I would love to have answered before I start editing articles.

Thanks, Sharrukin Sharrukin josephson (talk) 13:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Dead silence.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dead silence.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 11:31, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive a week away

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 00:08, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Help Needed

Wazzup, since I've seen you on the Wikiproject Film, I want to request your help for check and fix errors on Rachel Weisz's article, currently on review for featured article. Hope to hear from you soon, thanks for your time.--Gduwen (talk) 21:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Lawrence of Arabia

Hi, I'm starting work on Lawrence of Arabia (film) for the film's 50th anniversary in December 2012 and have my sub-pages here. Apparently, the original trailer is in the public domain, so I got a MP4 file of it and have taken some snapshots with VLC VideoLAN player. I want to go ahead with uploading the screenshots, but I wanted to know if there was any way you've learned to check on the public domain aspect. The trailer has no copyright mark; is that all that's necessary to determine, given the time frame? Erik (talk | contribs) 12:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

In addition, I have a nagging suspicion that File:Peter OToole in Lawrence of Arabia.jpg is not in the public domain. That particular shot does not appear to be in the original trailer. I also reviewed a TCM-produced trailer, but the shot is not there either. It's used in a lot of Wikipedias. Is it safe to say it's not in the public domain, at least not in the source claimed by the uploader? (Who appears to have image botspam on his talk page, too.) Erik (talk | contribs) 12:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I never know where you prefer to have the discussion! :) I guess we'll do the split method. Anyway, good point about U.S. trailer vs. U.K. trailer; I did not think about that distinction. I guess the so-called "original trailer" is the UK one? I'll see what the copyright office can tell me.
As for the film, yes, it's a long-term project. I'm hoping I won't give up on it; I need to get some momentum going. I plan to do as much research as I can, but I'll see if you can help me out. I'm using WorldCat.org to find the libraries that have certain resources, and I can put in your library to see if you have anything I may not have. It may be that I would need your help down the road with getting useful information from the DVD commentaries and features; that's one thing I can't do. Anyway, you can see I plan on sub-articles... I think that some recent Featured Articles were pushing it with WP:SIZE, and this film is definitely going to have much more content than these films' articles. I'm hoping to do maybe 4-5 paragraphs per main section; should make the article pretty readable. Erik (talk | contribs) 02:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Earthquake

I finished editing the article NoD'ohnuts (talk) 01:41, 2 March 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts

I was also wondering if it's OK that I don't have an image for my infoboxNoD'ohnuts (talk) 01:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts

GA review

Hello. I noticed you volunteered to assist in mentoring for new GA reviewers. I have just started reviewing good articles, and have not really had any challenging reviews until now. I just started reviewing the article May Revolution. I am wondering if this article matches the criteria for a quick-fail due to the fact that there are no in-line's in the lead at all, and there are several areas that are don't have in-line citations where they should be, far too many to enumerate due the tremendous length of the article. Do you feel that this article is a bit too long (it does seem to get a little too detailed/off-topic at times) to be a GA? Again, this is my first time coming to a review that has challenged me like this so I'm just looking for your opinion. Any help is appreciated. •Felix• T 20:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Tropic Thunder

At Tropic Thunder, I had removed the soundtrack cover images because we had the discussion on WT:FILM some time ago that they were secondary. Do you still think that's the case? InfamousPrince had added them, and when I removed them, the editor created a soundtrack article where the information, the infoboxes, and the two cover images are displayed. Do you particularly care about this arrangement? Just asking since this is a Featured Article you did. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:37, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

That user has created an awful lot of soundtrack articles like that to get around the fact that the album covers shouldn't be used in the film article. I have no massive objection to it, but I suspect the majority of the articles shouldn't exist. J Milburn (talk) 20:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
In addition to that image discussion for the covers, we also had the one on why soundtracks needed to be split off. WP:ALBUM figured that the soundtracks were just like any other musical release and were entitled to an article. However, I have yet to see a soundtrack that would come close to approaching a GA/FA. I don't know when the cover was sneaked in to the article, I must have overlooked it in my watchlist. I'm going to readd the majority of the sourced content, I'm not really that interested in including the tracks. This is the same issue of when an article should have a section split off, such as the awards lists when many of the film articles could easily still contain them. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
There are a few recognised soundtrack articles. I wrote one now featured myself, and this is pretty impressive. I don't offhand know about film soundtracks specifically, though. J Milburn (talk) 23:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Those are definitely notable examples which the soundtrack articles should strive to be, but I don't see how a soundtrack with a dozen songs from multiple artists could ever be expanded to that level (I would love to be proved wrong though). A score may stand a chance, but a compilation album doesn't seem to have much potential for expansion. I figure the soundtracks/scores of film articles should remain within the article until there is actually enough content to warrant a split. Instead, we'll have something like Gone in 60 Seconds (soundtrack) and Deep Blue Sea (soundtrack), which likely won't be improved further than it's current state. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:15, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. They should probably be merged back to the article or redirected/deleted if useful content is already in the article. J Milburn (talk) 11:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Re:Character images

I've done a little research, and I can tell you that it is fine. See the last bullet here, and Mike Godwin's (who, at the time, was legal cousel for the Foundation) opinion on the matter here. This does not apply to toys, statues and so on- just people in costume. Keep up the good work! J Milburn (talk) 20:39, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:Film Newsletter

Hi, I was reviewing some sock puppets of a indef blocked user, User:SCFilm29 and noticed they are still getting your news on the talk page. Not sure if it's a bot that does it or not, but you might want to remove them from the list. Who (talk) 07:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Eastwood

Good job. It now needs something about the themes of his films and characters I think. Funny, its crept up to 130 kb. Just imagine how long it would be if we'd kept it full length!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:04, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nehrams2020/Archive_14&oldid=1143371523"