Talk:Ryan Wieber

The importance of the article
I just thought I'd mention that Ryan Wieber represents a breakthrough in fan film making, and I think this article is significant enough to stay.

If you don't believe me, go watch a bunch of Star Wars fan films, and then look at Wieber's "RvD" or "Alternate Lightsaber Duel" and you will see that he is truly an elite artist, at least in the field of fan films.

I have removed the "of questionable importance" tag.

--Pmerrill 21:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
This whole article extensively violates NPOV. I've nominated it for a check. Willpower 23:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Extensively? Well...I've removed two or three adjectives (legendary, etc) and I think its neutral now. At any rate, thanks for the heads up. Let me know about any specific complaints you may have about the article. Perhaps you think that the quality of Wieber's special effects could be argued? If this is the case, his special effects can be labeled as professional quality because Wieber was hired by one of the biggest names around for the quality of his amateur film. So it's really not an opinion, it's fact - Wieber's films contain professional quality special effects. --141.157.123.182 00:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not arguing that Wieber's special effects are below par, which they most certainly aren't, but to my knowledge you can't rate the quality of special effects or such on Wikipedia without specifying sources. Like this sentence which still remains:


 * "While lightsaber duels were commonplace on the internet Ryan vs. Dorkman was heralded as one of the most amazing duels ever produced due to the lightsaber effects, which were comparable to the visual effects created by Industrial Light and Magic"


 * which is an good example of a weasel word. If someone can quote an outside article saying this then I'd be fine with it. Willpower 23:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah. I didn't write that part ;-). I'll see what I can find.

Fair use rationale for Image:Rvd.JPG
Image:Rvd.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Professional Career
I saw this guy on the Heroes Season 1 Bonus Features; apparently he also does visual effects for the show. I think that should be added to his professional career, no? --LycanFury09 15:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Microprocessors
"two AMD microprocessors, each of which ran at 1.67 GHz in clock speed."

So forget that there is no source, but why is the clock speed of the AMD microprocessors import? The sentence needs to explain the significance or leave it out. Was this a very slow speed or a fast speed? Did he achieve results despite having low powered equipment or did he do something special to make his equipment faster (i.e. overclocking)?

I'm thinking it isn't relevant at all and should simply be removed from the sentence but maybe someone knows the source of the statement and has some idea about the context and can take a chance and try to fix it. -- 109.76.142.131 (talk) 23:50, 22 May 2016 (UTC)