User:Dr. Blofeld/February 2016

Free images
Hi, I created one bio for Women in Red's Black Women's History Month editathon, and am busy working on another. I wonder if you could find a free image for Gloria Tanner and for Reynelda Muse (television news anchor). You could post the Muse image on Commons and I'll pull it from there after I post the article. Thanks for any help you can provide. Yoninah (talk) 14:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately nope, no fair use images on either I could find.♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:17, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks for looking! Yoninah (talk) 12:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Translation project
You left a message on my talk page. Thank you.

I drafted a reply, but never pasted/posted it because (1) it was much too long and (2) I was concerned not to hurt your feelings.

In summary, I speculated on why the number of participants has apparently declined to two and I hoped that those who have drifted off have drifted off only from that sub-project and not from the wiki world more generally (tho' I guess we shouldn't be surprised if people occasionally get day jobs or, alas, get sick...)

On the transwiki page itself, I'm more than happy to archive each month's res gestae myself if you don't have time to (or simply don't get round to it), but I think it would become unneccessarily demotivating if we simply let stuff accumulate quarter by quarter. Most of us are used to thinking in months rather than in quarters, and some of us (well, it's me, really...) have to blink at least twice before remembering which quarter to use for July or September/October. Maybe we can blame the emperor? Or the other emperor?

Either way, would you be unnecesssarily distressed if I archived January and set up a new batch or two for February?

Regards Charles01 (talk) 16:13, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for being honest, always appreciated! Archiving January and starting one for February is fine. I did it because the rounds had been reduced to just a couple and to save time having to archive each month. I thought it would make it easier for you too (rather than demotivate you). If you could take care of that it would be great. I'm currently experimenting with a Wales contest which will be run in March WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon. If you're interested sign up. For March then we could list some of the needed articles on the Intertranswiki page for starting. Wouldn't have to be translations from Welsh wikipedia, but things like missing listed buildings or whatever. You're also welcome to help build the WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon/Missing article hotlist. A productive way we can get you involved in this. Yes, it is disheartening to see that Intertranswiki doesn't have the number of editors consistently working on missing article drives as we had in the first few months. It's not just that project though, I've personally drastically reduced my own output on the site of late. Long term I hope there's a way we can keep it going.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * On the Hurrah for Wales project I'm all in favour of Wales, though I know embarrassingly little about it.  And I'm certainly not going to volunteer for translating from the language which I find beautiful but incomprehensible (and partially unpronouncable).   However, you might consider working through some of the ODNB/DNB outstanding lists for some historical-biographical candidates from Wales, thus combining support for two wiki-projects simultaneously.   There must have been lots of nineteenth century rich industrialist/mercantile movers and shakers round Swansea, and no doubt there were eloquent churchmen, politicians and poets, in towns and valleys alike, and all across the principality.  Success Charles01 (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, I nor most of the contributors are going to be translating from Welsh wikipedia. And since when do any of us know lots about every new article we create? That's part of the fun isn't it? Learning through research.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You're absolutely right about learning through research (as in I agree with that), but I do find that it's more interesting and more fun where I already know something of the context.  Also, some understanding of the context means one makes fewer elementary mistakes because one is better able to evaluate the plausibility (aka quality) of available sources.   Best wishes Charles01 (talk) 07:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Dr.B, and thanks for your message. On the subject of Wales, I'm sure there are plenty of interesting and important churches not included on WP, but since CADW changed its website to be even more completely hopeless it is now impossible to link to the listing details for Welsh buildings, and you can only find them by going through a map view - you can't search for "Cardiff Castle" or even "Cardiff", you have to find Cardiff on a map and zoom in. Utterly useless. I have abandoned my Anglesey churches project and have no energy or enthusiasm for finding other Welsh churches to write about. Good luck, though. BencherliteTalk 17:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Harkenbäk


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Harkenbäk requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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. Schuddeboomw (talk) 18:10, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Rod Steiger
Hello Dr B. Long time no see. Just wanted to know that I have put Rod Steiger on screen and stage list for FLC here as you are a major contributor to its parent article. --  Frankie talk 08:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

A pity User:FrB.TG that you didn't consult me before actually nomming it!♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:57, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah I thought so that's why I thought of informing you now. --  Frankie talk 14:02, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, but you've nommed it already though!♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:04, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * TBH I was in a bit of hurry to submit it for FL as I was pretty much free when I got back on it after abandoning it for months. --  Frankie talk 14:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, it's good that you want to promote a filmography on somebody like Steiger and it will compliment the main FA article on the side. The lede needs a fair bit of work though I think, I will edit it this evening if I can or tomorrow at latest.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I did want to ask your help but I hesitated from doing so after you declined some of my requests 'cause of your busy schedule. --  Frankie talk 15:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Smalls Paradise, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jimmy Smith (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) 10:24, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Awaken the Dragon
Hi Dr. Blofeld,

Your FAs, GAs, Awards etc are unbelievable. How can one person create so much?

"We could really do with somebody of your experience and ability"...flattery will get you nowhere, okay it will :-) but it depends on how much time I have. Best of luck!  Seth Whales   talk    13:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I've been pretty idle of late though ;-) Well, I did mention you recently as being the guy who created a lot of quality articles for Wales. You and Fruitmonkey and precious few others have come up with the goods on the Cardiff area in particular I think. We need people like you for each locality of Wales and elsewhere! Well, after ten years at the project I think I have a pretty good idea on how to develop the site but I think we need to invest something back into the site and really get us the content we badly need. most of the core articles are really lacking and that's after fifteen years. I think we need to find a sort of "mechanism" which gets us quality articles on core topics and to reward the people who work so hard on here at the same time.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Sterndale Bennett
Mon cher docteur - in case you are interested in this curious fellow... Immer dein,--Smerus (talk) 18:21, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Looks excellent on the surface, will try to read it tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:18, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Katherine Orrison
Hi! I am desperately trying to contact Ms. Orrison concerning a family member in Birmingham Alabama. Do you possibly have contact with her or have the ability to get a message to her? It is extremely urgent.

Thank you.

Suzanne Henderson jsh6925@gmail.com Jsh6365 (talk) 18:40, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Don't know her sorry, I only added a category to her article!♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Meaza Ashenafi
Meaza Ashenafi may interest you. I'm too tired to do anything more with this one tonight. Who knows... she might become President of Ethiopia one day. :) --Rosiestep (talk) 05:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

LOL!!.♦ Dr. Blofeld  08:53, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I've added a fair bit, I will return to it later/tomorrow. As usual there's some shady areas in research, not clear if the Ethiopian Women Lawyers Association (EWLA) is the same as the Fighting For Women's Rights In Ethiopia group (which had 45 lawyers in 2002), and some sources give 1965 as her birth year. BTW I don't know if you want to get this for the Women in Red group, looks a terrific book which somebody at the project would find very useful. It had information on her which few others sources seem to have. 1000 women's rights activists might really benefit the project!♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:16, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for working on Meaza. Looks like a really cool book. Wish some university could motivate their students to write articles on every woman with an entry in the book who doesn't have a bio already. I found their names (the 1,000 women nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2015) here. So much work to do. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:59, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Frightening isn't it how much is missing? Wikipedia such an important part in making the work of these women known too.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:31, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Walter Skinner.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Walter Skinner.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Walter Skinner, LOL ;-). "Mulder, I think it's bile!"♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:42, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Polonia-Ekspreß


The article Polonia-Ekspreß has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No sources, no demonstration of notability and not really any information either.

While all constructive 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 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 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.  —♦♦ AMBER  (ЯʘCK)  19:33, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

That a film was made in East Germany in 1957 is notable in itself!!♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:42, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Ich bin ein Lugnuters!  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 14:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Julio Iglesias Por una mujer.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Julio Iglesias Por una mujer.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of 1622 Slovenia earthquake for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1622 Slovenia earthquake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/1622 Slovenia earthquake until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Eleassar my talk 16:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Prioridad nacional for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prioridad nacional is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Prioridad nacional until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Schuddeboomw (talk) 22:24, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Malouma
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 7 February 2016 (UTC) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I suppose my criticism and copyediting helped improve it! It certainly does show what combined teamwork can achieve though!♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Parti des déshérités de Madagascar/GA1
Dr. Blofeld, you opened this review back on January 4, but haven't returned to do the actual review as yet. Are you planning to review it soon? I do hope so. If, however, you won't be doing the review, please tag the page with a user-requested speedy delete, and I'll take care of the rest of the clean-up once the page is deleted, so the nomination is put back in the reviewing pool without a loss of seniority. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot about that one for some reason!! If you ever see we evade a reserved review for longer than a week again ping me earlier! I'll review it asap.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:41, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Good to know that for future reference. I hadn't really noticed this one until today. Thanks for starting it! BlueMoonset (talk) 22:41, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I noticed that there hadn't been any response to your review in a week, and then I took a look and found that the nominator, Lemurbaby, hasn't edited since last August. I'm sorry I didn't notice that before I pinged you! At this point, with no edits in over five months and some clear issues to fix, it probably makes sense to close the review. If you want, you could formally put it on hold for a final week; it's up to you. Thanks again, and my apologies. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I think we've hit the point, at 17 days after your review and now six months after Lemurbaby's most recent edit, where it makes sense to close the review as unsuccessful. Should Lemurbaby return someday, he can fix up the article per your review and renominate it. This is now the oldest nomination and the third-oldest review; I think it's time to end it gracefully. Thanks again for the review. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:46, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps, or  could try to address what they can. It's certainly GA quality.♦ Dr. Blofeld  22:37, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't know if you have any more points on this but I've tried to take care with those you raised.--Ipigott (talk) 08:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Very cool that Ian came to your assistance. Les and I had a great time playing on his birthday. Thank you for sending him wishes. SusunW (talk) 14:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Norma Cox Astwood
I have no earthly idea how to properly put this woman's name. All of her notability was under Norma Cox or Norma Astwood. Then she married a lord and is now Lady Blackman. Is she Lady Norma Blackman? How does one style a redirect? Thanks! SusunW (talk) 00:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Tricky. What has the most hits? I'd probably go with that. Normal Cox Astwood seems reasonable, but in brackets I would put something like (also known as Norma Cox, Norma Atwood or Lady Blackman) and redirect all the alternative names.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was sure about Norma Cox Astwood. That's the most hits, I was not sure about the redirect, but you answered me. She loses her name and is just Lady Blackman. SusunW (talk) 16:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

In the news
For info. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 19:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Cheers, much appreciated.♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:53, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Amelia Bence has died :-(. Always difficult when you've worked on an article and they die! I must admit I did think for a while that the death date was missing as it seemed unusual that she was still around!! Very good actress, I must see more of her films sometime.♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for telling me Dr. B. Definitely an icon has passed. SusunW (talk) 21:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, a definite Latina icon, RIP Amelia.♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * She's lived a very long and happy life! JAG  UAR   21:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Zoumboulaki Gallery for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zoumboulaki Gallery is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Zoumboulaki Gallery until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 10:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 9
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.


 * Smalls Paradise (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to 7th Avenue


 * The Genius of Art Tatum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Louise

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Recommendations
I'm sorry Dr. Blofeld, i couldn't reply to you soon. I've listed the films that you recommended me at the Great films talk page here, and i shall begin watching these soon. I aim to complete at least 70% of these and shall let you know what my viewing experience was. And, i also hope that you can complete watching anyone film out of those i recommended (not at all compulsory). Happy editing! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:27, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, yeah those are the really moving/sentimental/poetic ones I recommend, too. You said you liked films like that so that's why I recommended them in particular. Most of them are among the best films I've seen. At some points I'll cite a few by genre which are among the best I've seen so depending on anybody's mood they can find ones from a particular genre I recommend. I'll try to watch more Indian ones, I'm currently watching one Krimuk recommended to me though, an Indian one incidentally.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:31, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Doctor. I enjoy all the genres of films, but i restrict myself to this in particular. For me, the problem with the action and horror films is that, i find them soulless. I want to understand the psyche and heart of the protagonist, but i end up watching plain action—guns, chases, cars, bombs, and plenty of VFX. By the end of the screening, i feel that i've watched a tale of CGI and stunts, rather than that of a human like us. But i may be proved wrong anytime. Heart-touching, for me, includes all comedy, romance, sentiment and anything that lets me see myself through those characters' hearts. Recommend some good ones later, i shall watch them. As Ssven2 says, you pick good eggs very well! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I like a wide range of films, my favourite genre is definitely the psychological thriller/film noir with a twist, particularly late 40s to early 70s period, but it depends on the film. Some of the greatest horror films are actually psychological thrillers, ones like Peeping Tom, Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby, 10 Rillington Place etc, ones which have far more impact on you than a film intentionally trying to scare you. I appreciate poetic elements, use of nature to influence emotions and realism in drama films, which is why I tend to favour some of the Japanese/Russian/French/Italian masterpieces alongside a lot of the Hollywood classics. I suppose I'm least favourable overall to the franchise type films which rely on CGI primarily and a pretty face, just there to make money and largely devoid of any art whatsoever, and those low budget slasher movies.All depends on the film though.♦  Dr. Blofeld  16:53, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If you ever say "I really feel like watching a romantic comedy now, or a western or something from any genre I'll help you out!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:56, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Doc! Just like you, I am a huge fan (don't know if you're a huge one) of the psychological thriller genre. Since you are great at films, could you (or Pavan) recommend some great psychological thrillers of any era (mostly of the 21st century)? --  Frankie talk 22:27, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The best psychological thrillers were made in the classic era. When you're young I know the tendency is to only want to watch recent films in colour as black and white can seem boring though! Sunset Boulevard (film) (1950), The Night of the Hunter (1955), Vertigo (film) (1958), Psycho (1960 film) , Peeping Tom (film) (1960), Whatever Happened to Baby Jane (1962) , Cape Fear (1962), Repulsion (1965), Wait Until Dark (film) (1967), Rosemary's Baby (film) (1968), Straw Dogs (1971 film), Don't Look Now (1973). Those are among the best, watch those! Every one of those is really an essential for that genre. The only great ones of the 21st century which springs to mind right now are Mullholland Drive (film) (2001), Mystic River (film) (2003), Shame (2011 film) (2011), Drive (2011 film) and The Babadook (2014), but you have no place watching those unless you've seen the real classics first ;-).♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I too enjoy psychological thrillers (like Vertigo) and gritty, dark films (like The Godfather series). It is only that i hate the films where the importance is on only CGI and stunts rather than storytelling. One reason why i hate Mission Impossible series is because of this. Coming to horror films, i just don't find them appealing when they try to horrify me. Say, films like The Omen, Oculus, etc. So, to be precise, i find these too appealing only when the due importance is given to storytelling over the cheap gimmicks by computers and trust me, they have become rare these days., Even the James Bond series is slowly turning another Mission Impossible, esp. the last release Spectre. And, I haven't watched many psychological thrillers in the recent past, and Dr. Blofeld may help you out. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 03:54, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not that I find films in the era boring, in fact I am obsessed with the Norman Bates character. It's just that I am not very used to watching the oldies though I agree with you on how modern films suck. Anyway, thank you Doc for the suggestions and I have struck the ones I have watched. --  Frankie talk 14:48, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Glad that you liked Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu. Ssven2 and Jaguar loved that film, and the former imitates the elder one's shirt pulling act in real life even now. And yes, the shirts were really good and half of my wardrobe consists of similar ones. I personally loved the visuals, and the performances, esp. at the railway station and the climax i.e. from the conversation between the father and the brothers till the very end. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, the strength was the sentimentality at the end in particular, "India is one big family" etc. Late Spring ends a bit like that too. Rarely wear shirts nowadays, I dress like Roger Waters haha, like a session musician, black/grey t shirt, faded jeans, denim shirt or cardigan if it gets cold! I'm not cleancut enough to pull off that formal shirt look!♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha! I too amen't a greek god to carry such shirts with elan. I find them a bit cheaper and durable compared to the tees i purchase, so they occupy half of my wardrobe. Moreover, i prefer formals in college as i find them classy and balanced compared to the loud tees the men of my age find these days. But yes, the film did inspire me to kick a flower pot, and my sister slapped me instead of making a phone call emotionally. :p Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The last two Mission Impossible films are quite good really and are less dependent on VFX.   —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me 14:58, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Good to know that, . I shall watch them later. And, do try to watch few of the films i recommended to you. And Dr. Blofeld, i began watching Late Spring now. Setsuko Hara is serene and very beautiful. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If you wanna watch a light-hearted film, catch up with one of Cary Grant's or Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau's ones. —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me 15:12, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, if my people give me some time to do so. Dr. Blofeld has given a list and i've begun watching them. After that, i shall get back to you both and you may suggest some good ones. I watch the gritty ones too, but now i am comfortable with rom-coms and dramas. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:16, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Setsuko is really one of the most underrated actresses of all time, the rare ability to make you feel happy with her smile.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You are right, Dr. Blofeld. It is not that easy to be extremely natural when you smile at a camera. The film's visuals, fine performances by Chishu Ryu and Hara were the film's highlights. The climax scene at the bar was a shock, though! I thoroughly enjoyed it. And i'm glad that you liked Eega too. I personally love the birth of the fly and the intermission sequences. Yours? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:25, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The setting the mattress alight with the cigarette, the pin in the toe, and the way the fly boasted about it with pumping his fist I liked. The fly initially I found irritating but it grows on you as the film progresses.♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:21, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed, when he returns again in the end, as a fly. Now that Late Spring and A Dog's Love are done, my next shall be Ugetsu in YouTube with subs. What is the next for you? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think I'm done with Indian films for the week, next week perhaps! I have to be in the mood to watch Indian films as they're really unlike any others! The important thing with those Japanese films is that they're not made to entertain. You really have to appreciate the sentimental value, the poetic elements and the subtleties. The films are not everybody's cup of tea, but as you did say you appreciate the sentimental ones those are definitely ones to watch which you might appreciate. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course. The visuals were surely poetic and the emotions were handled in a mature way. Late Spring had a lot of scenes just focusing on plants, flowers, hills, rooftops and of course, Hara's smile. What i liked is the way these were appropriately used to enhance the mood correctly because their improper use would let boredom creep in. Once Ugetsu is done, i shall watch Grave of the fireflies and Ikiru. Then i too should take a break, mostly for a five or six days before resuming watching them. If you too like to watch something intense from that list, try Vedam. Though the screenplay resembles Crash (2004), it is more realistic and painful. The very last scene where a kid calculates interest payable before a money lender is something that may stay with you for long. :) Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I was looking at Vedam yesterday actually, 2010 right?♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:00, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was a 2010 release. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Watching Vedam on Valentines day. Not so cool idea. How was the experience, Doctor? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:26, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Not bad, but I didn't enjoy it as much as the previous ones.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Not always i can let you smile. I said it would be artistic and "painful". But if you want to enjoy this Valentines day, watch Oohalu Gusagusalade in that list. Its tongue-in-cheek humour and breezy visuals may make you feel happy. It is 130 minutes long, including the credits. And, that can help you well. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Frank Sinatra Day page views
Hi, I'm a little confused here. stats.grok.se said that Frank Sinatra got 72,593 page views on December 12. But a different tool, ErrantX, is indicating 233,977 views on December 12. Which is correct? Yoninah (talk) 18:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Page stalker here, the Errant tool says "This tool will report higher numbers than stats.grok.se because it also includes mobile views" So, my guess is they both are accurate, just depends what you are counting. SusunW (talk) 19:15, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * And is stats.grok.se not recording hits since January 21? Anyone else getting that?  Montanabw (talk)  08:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, got that, but we have the other now which has even higher numbers, 238.952 (and another spike a few days later), almost as good as Beethoven 488.836, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, this is going to revolutionize DYK stats. All those 5,000-view hooks are probably 100,000-view hooks! Should I go ahead and change the Frank Sinatra Day listing and knock their eyes out? Yoninah (talk) 10:31, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's great! Yes, please update the DYK stats!!♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Does anyone see the irony that untechnical me found this tool? I am so laughing. :) SusunW (talk) 15:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * LOL!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:23, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

The PR of Stepney...
Hi Doc, I've been working on the Siege of Sidney Street recently, and I've just taken it to PR. If you have time, and if the topic is of interest, would you be able to take a look? Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 23:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Looks great Schro, will try to read this later on.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks ! and myself and others think the same about your efforts on it and others! Glad you like the photo, I was a bit worried initially that you might not favour it as the other was a closer image! I think the red dress and smile helps, it makes her look more the icon that she was, just about perfect for the article. Would love to see Elizabeth Taylor at FAC at some point, How are things progressing on that? I began on Cary Grant weeks back but need to resume soon!♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:00, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I think it's definitely an improvement – it makes sense to use an image which shows her famous figure rather than one that just focuses on her face. Unfortunately I don't have the time to focus on another project at this time, although I agree that it would be great to take ET to FAC. I'm tempted to merge the section about her marriages with the career section though, but I don't have the patience right now to fight with a certain individual. I've added Grant to my watchlist, eagerly waiting to see your improvements! Good luck! :) TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 19:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3
 * Oh yeah, I said I'd read through Liz Taylor and haven't yet, sorrrrry...It will happen, promise (some time). Oh and the new Monroe image is great but what happened to her right boob?! lol -- Loeba (talk) 11:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries! :) What would you think about merging marriages with career? Hahah, didn't notice the boob until now! I think it may just be an optical illusion due to the folds in the fabric... it still looks weird though! Actually I think even the left boob looks weird, kind of flattened (and I doubt she was wearing a sports bra...). Maybe they tried to 'photoshop' them but failed miserably. TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 12:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3
 * I think somebody like Taylor definitely needs a separate personal life section. It's not impossible of course to marge into career, but I think a lot of people will approach the article with the intention to read about her personal life.♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:37, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah I think we are talking about the same boob (this is a ridiculous conversation!) - on the picture it's left, but her right. They look so uneven. ANYWAY, yes I agree with Blofeld that it's best to keep Liz's personal life separate. I know she worked with Burton a lot but it should be possible not to have too much overlap; I had a similar thing with Hepburn and Tracy. -- Loeba (talk) 12:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it was one of those sleazy film executives that ruled Hollywood in those days having a grope before the photo was taken which accounts for the flatness? You never know. ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:59, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Looking at her profile pic, I'm feeling like this guy here. It's great, sexy, classy and "I'm lookin' and I'm a likin". Great job, Doc.  —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me 12:40, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

ParlungZangbo
You have created and later moved the page years ago without changing its content. Which name is correct? Xx236 (talk) 09:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi No idea, that name clearly doesn't look right though.♦  Dr. Blofeld  12:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Villamagna for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Villamagna is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Villamagna until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Daniel kenneth (talk) 14:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Visaranai
Doc, just came back from watching it at the The Forum Vijaya. Do watch it when you get the opportunity to do so. A really great and grim egg! — Ssven2  Speak 2 me 16:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Cheers. I doubt it'll be out in cinemas over here so might have to wait a while though!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's so far the best film of 2016 IMHO. It's so grim, (comes close to Grave in a way, but that's my opinion again). It's screened with English subtitles in theatres so that everyone would see it. To think that such a thing really happened..... Tsk, tsk, tsk.  —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me 16:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you
I don't want to keep posting irrelevant stuff on your talk page. Just want to thank ya for the suggestions of the classic films after I requested. I am glad I asked you. --  Frankie talk 15:04, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

LOL, unlike certain people here, you can talk to me about practically anything, even milking cows or monkey go-carting, and I won't batter an eyelid! I like the film discussions, when things go "off track" that's a good thing, makes the site less boring. Why have you sene any of the recommended films yet? Sunset Boulevard in particular is mind blowing, Ssven2 and Krimuk both have it as near the greatest film ever too I think. In fact if there was one classic Hollywood film I could get up to FA status it would probably be that.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Mine's the second greatest film behind the LOTR trilogy.  —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me 15:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * When you think "great Golden Hollywood classic/masterpiece", I always think of that, Citizen Kane and Gone with the Wind first. I did actually request a book for Sunset during the Kubrick stuff a year or two back but it turned out to be a bleeding screenplay dialogue and contained nothing actually about the film production! Getting a film like Sunset or Citizen Kane to FA status would sort of be like the holy grail of Golden Hollywood IMO.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "No one ever leaves a star. That's what makes one star." I loved it and yes I watched the suggested films. Haven't watched all of 'em yet but the watched ones are classics in true sense. --  Frankie talk 16:11, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Which ones have you seen to date? Perhaps move the list to your sandbox like Pav did and cross off when seen?♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * User:FrB.TG/Films to watch. In the meantime, may I suggest you to watch Moneyball (film) (I didn't find it in your list), a 2011 sports biopic with Brad Pitt in it. It is a pretty good film. You won't regret watching it. --  Frankie talk 16:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've seen Moneyball. I've seen virtually every film with P.S. Hoffman in it! Not that great really if you're not American but good enough to be included as good film. I excluded it originally as it was only originally reserved for great films. I remember watching it and thinking it was a very American film and wondering why I cared about what happened to the team! There was a certian amount of intelligence in the office discussions though to make it qualify as a good film though, I agree.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

You seen Taxi Driver? I guess that qualifies as a psychological thriller, though a vigilante film really. That definitely belongs in the essential category, it's quite an extraordinary film often included in director's top 10 best film lists.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "You talking to me?" I love Scorsese and De Niro's collaborations. --  Frankie talk 17:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thought you might have seen it. The Tenant (another Polanski masterpiece) and Barton Fink are the only other essentials I can think of right now, but Barton isn't a strict psychological thriller, it's more a comic film noir. Last half hour is definitely psycho trhiller material though. That's in the my top 50 and an essential to see though. Won't suggest any more now, but those definitely belong in the to see list. I have The Tin Drum and Marriage of Maria Braun to watch soon, I know you've seen those. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha that's okay. You don't have to keep thinking. They (the ones in my list) are too many to watch so I guess that's enough for now. :-) --  Frankie talk 17:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah it's not good to recommend too many. I would put watching The Tenant or Barton Fink more a priority than the post 2000 ones (with the exception of Mulholland) though.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have put The Tenant too in my list. Speaking of The Tin Drum and The Marriage of Maria Braun, yes I have watched them. I listed them among the few German films I wanted you to watch a few months ago. --  Frankie talk 18:01, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Pictures for actress Audrey Hepburn
Hi there, I was wondering that maybe if you can find and add some pictures for actress, Audrey Hepburn. That would be nice. :) User:LoveFromBJM (talk) 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Poon, how are you? I had intended working on Audrey sometime but am pretty busy with some hotel uploads at the moment. I'm sure there's more images which could be found though.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm fine. Happy to hear that from you, just take your time. ;) Anyway, where are you from? I'm from Malaysia. User:LoveFromBJM (talk) 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm British. I thought you might have been South Korean origin.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not replying in such a long time T.T, I'm Malaysian Chinese. Poon (潘) is my family name. Are you Welsh? (Just asking) User:LoveFromBJM (talk) 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:38, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Municipal Art Gallery of Ioannina for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Municipal Art Gallery of Ioannina is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Municipal Art Gallery of Ioannina until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 09:38, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Discouraging
I'm feeling discouraged so much right now that It cant be expressed in words. Look at what Krimuk has to say about me. You were the one who came up with the discussion and his reaction is so discouraging to me. I mean I was only discussing with you, but his sharp words have done their work this time to me. Was it my fault that I chose a more peaceful way to resolve a conflict? Did I abuse him? Misbehaved? Seeing this attitude of his makes me upset. Should I leave wikipedia to make him happy? Krish |  Talk  09:42, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, Krimuk called himself a "fucking retard who doesn't understand what a virginal beauty the almighty Priyanka Chopra is". The place where it began was because of edit warring, wasn't it? I said to you both to focus on very under developed articles instead of fighting and bring them to GA/FA (if possible) status "multiple times". None heeds. At least now, try to work on something unrelated. Bollywood has so many classic films' articles which are in a very poor state. But you and Krimuk fight over Chopra, and it bothers none, including Chopra herself. If editing Wiki is a way of solace to you, let the same remain to us. Stop fighting and start building something completely unrelated. For example, any film starring Amitabh Bachchan? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Please correct yourself. I didnt say a word and it was a discussion started by Blofeld. Where did you see the fight? It was he, who reacted badly on a calm discussion. Krish |  Talk  13:22, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Pavanjandhyala sums it up well. Just move on and do something constructive, there's far too many inadequate articles on here which badly need developing. If this continues though I think it's time you and Krimuk had an interaction ban if you can't settle disputes in discussion.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Not sure why, but Krimuk90 abused me first, made a few vandalism edits, self reported himself at ANI and cited these as the reasons behind the necessity to block him indefinitely. He infuriated the admins and got blocked indefinitely. He was one of the great Wikipedians i met and worked with, and perhaps his retirement in July 2015 was far better than this self-attained indefinite block which marks a disgusting end to his career. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 03:00, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I guess the edit wars with Prashant made Krimuk suffer a nervous breakdown, even though I specifically told him not to edit war with that user. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:51, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Prashant/Krish!, I saw your comment to Kailash, and you blaming me for it "everything was going smooth until his outburst to what he thought was right" is absolutely ridiculous. Read my comment at Talk:Shahid Kapoor "Generally I'm all for mentioning relationships, but they do have to be notable ones and not rumoured flings. If Kapoor and Chopra had a very well publicized long term relationship it would be fine to mention, but if she denied it that makes it difficult. Perhaps in the article body just state there was press speculation about them being romantically linked, which she denied. I'm saying all this of course but Krimuk might offer a different perspective which also needs to be respected.♦" How on God's green earth does than even remotedly resemble an outburst? I stated this after Krimuk and Prashant edit warred and were facing being blocked. If you or Krimuk can't see that it was an intelligent and fair attempt to sort out the issue and you haven't the maturity to see that then I'd really rather that you didn't comment here again. Grow up people.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Whatever it may be, considering how adamant Krimuk is, he will apparently never return back, even as a sock. Now, i hope that all the aggrieved parties may resume their works just like before. I'm going for Ugetsu soon, i made a commitment and couldn't watch it due to loss of internet for 48 hours. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:24, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * And Dr. Blofeld, are you sure the comment was made to Vensatry? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:56, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

My bad Kailash, I thought the comment seemed too childish for you, this, it was Krish/Prashant's comment not yours so apologies for that. When I logged in this morning I saw that message and Kailash lit up so I read it as from Kailash. Prashant comes out of this looking even more ridiculous, and justifies what I said to him the other day. Krimuk has still overreacted to this though and refuses to respond by mail which is disappointing. I thought I told Krish to never post here again anyway?♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:20, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The admin who blocked Krimuk left a message saying that he can leave a message or just ping him if he wishes to return, again. While it is not so possible that Krimuk would return anytime soon, i still ask them to focus on something else. Yet, Krimuk was hellbent on vandalising his contributions like a madman, and Krish continued to work on Chopra's article. I don't prohibit them to stop working on their favourite actors/actresses. But, they should have left it for the time being, say until they bring another unrelated article to GA/FA (too much, i think). If not, at least any Chopra's film-related article. I don't think that Krish would listen to me, at least now. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't say your outburst Dr. Blofeld. I meant to say Krimuk's outburst. Why I would say your outburst? You were the one who started the discussion and we presented our thoughts and there was no bad faith. So why I would say your outburst. I think my text was confusing that you thought I was blaming you. But I was say that Krimuk's outburst on the discussion was irrelevant, since I provided my thoughts and you replied. I hope it's clear now. Krish |  Talk  15:08, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You said "The discussion on Shahid Kapoor was started by and everything was going smooth until his outburst to what he thought was right." Clearly you're referring to me as Krimuk didn't give an outburst on what he thought was right, he just edit warred and then called himself a retard.♦  Dr. Blofeld  15:04, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * What I meant to say to Kailash (he was calling me a lunatic, Vensatry warned him not to) that whatever Krimuk dis was not my fault but Krimuk's own fault. Dr. Blofeld started the discussion and everything was going smooth (me and you had discussed the need of that claim in two separate relies), until his outburts (Krimuk's): "I'm not interested in editing this article anymore. I'm sure Mr. Krish can do a much better job at this than a fucking retard like me! Good luck.". I never meant for you. Why I would in first place because you and I had a smooth discussion. I think my text was confusing so you thought I was referring to you. Krish |  Talk  15:20, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Quoting you, Krimuks outbursts were "I'm not interested in editing this article anymore. I'm sure Mr. Krish can do a much better job at this than a fucking retard like me! Good luck.". you stated "until his outburst to what he thought was right." Obviously you're referring to me as Krimuk didn't give an outburst on what he thought was right, I was the only one who offered an opinion on what I thought was right and the best thing to do.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:27, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Anyway, none of this matters. You continue to demonstrate that you can't interact well with others here. And no matter how many years pass you never change or grow out of it.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:29, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "outburst on what he thought was right" means that Kimuk's thought on what is right. It means krimuk was not ready to discuss, posting a harsh message, which showed that what he thinks is only right and the discussion didnt matter to him. How can you even feel i would say that, because you and i were discussing nicely. Pleasethink again, i didnt say that for you and didnt say bad to anyone. Krish |  Talk  15:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Ontario Highway 58/GA1
Hi! Could you please take a look at this review that you did? Thanks. --Rschen7754 16:40, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Michael Hordern FAC
...has been started here. Thanks once again for all you help.  Cassianto Talk   17:14, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

A romantic film for Valentines Day
If anybody watching my page wants a nice romantic film to watch today I highly recommend this if you've not seen it. Indiscreet (1958 film) with Cary Grant and Ingrid Bergman, one of my favourites.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This is what I watched for Valentine's Day.  Ya  sh  !   15:47, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh dear!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:23, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Since you've mentioned Donen, my pick would be Charade. Not really a romantic comedy, more of a Hitchcockian thriller, but the wit and chemistry between Grant and Audrey Hepburn certainly makes it a delightful film for Valentine's, haha. Cheers,  κ  ατάστασ   η  16:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * True, great chemistry but that's too much of a crime thriller, the Grant and Bergman really is more a romantic classic, which also has similar chemistry and wit. Brief Encounter, Before Sunrise, and Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans also great. I know has mentioned In the Mood for Love being a masterpiece.♦  Dr. Blofeld  16:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * God, I wish I read it earlier. Wasted my time watching some ridiculous films. --  Frankie talk 18:41, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Such as?♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Step Brothers, and What Happens in Vegas. It was a God awful experience. --  Frankie talk 19:13, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Not seen either. I generally like Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly, especially Reilly, and I tend to like Vegas based films so I might feel differently! I'll take your word with it anyway!♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:17, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Me too (that's for those two). Anyway, I am terrible in judging a film so if you decide to watch any of it don't think of my opinion. BTW when/if you watch those two German films, please tell how you feel about them. --  Frankie talk 19:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * For Vegas-based film, I have one in mind -- Bugsy (1991), which I couldn't find in your list (like Moneyball you might have seen it). --  Frankie talk 19:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it's one of those I've seen on TV a long time ago. I used to sometimes watch late night films on TV and not really take notice of the titles years ago before I got seriously interested in film. Not sure, I'll have to see it again sometime. Leaving Las Vegas is probably the best Vegas film I can think of. Of course though if you want classic Vegas Ocean's 11 is the one to see.♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:03, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Along Came Polly. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yup, I enjoyed it too, it's one of those the critics love to hate for some reason!!♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:18, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

1511 Idrija earthquake
Got a start on the article today. Thanks for your work on creating many of our older earthquake articles. Dawnseeker2000 23:54, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Yes I think we ought to often identify a few missing ones by decade and start them, the further you go back the poorer the coverage.♦ Dr. Blofeld  07:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon list
Hi Dr. Blofeld, could you please temporarily stop adding new articles to the list at WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon? I meant to write you an email this morning but now I'm out of time as I was catching up with translating all the additions you made yesterday for the Welsh Wikipedia! Cheers, Ham II (talk) 09:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Not at all, I understand confrontations with Prashant can be exasperating. It's a relief that you're back as I thought you'd be gone as long as last time. It takes guts to apologise and try to patch things up so kudos for that! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions
--Ipigott (talk) 14:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Fatima Massaquoi
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Rod Steiger on screen and stage
I have withdrawn the list's nom at the FLC from my part. My writing's sometimes a complete mess but would you like to continue your work on the list, helping Ssven2 and MarnettD to transform it to a featured list? --  Frankie talk 23:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

When I'm feeling a bit more energetic maybe. Cary Grant though I really need to crack on with. How is the film watching going, seen any more on the list?♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Was trying to take a break from the psychological thrillers but I did watch a rom com. Going to see more of them. --  Frankie talk 14:44, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

You seen Indiscreet, That Touch of Mink, Pillow Talk or Adam's Rib? Those are highly recommended ones.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Have seen the first one with Cary Grant and Ingrid but not the rest. --  Frankie talk 19:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Kate n Sidney
Hi Many thanks for your recent comments at the Siege of Sidney Street PR. I've now moved this on to FAC, should you have the time and inclination. Many thanks once again. – SchroCat (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Want to peek at a FAC?
Featured article candidates/Thunder (mascot)/archive1 Should be fun. American football and an Arabian horse (or, actually, three of them). The pigskin pony, the equine of the elements (it's cold in Denver) the Superbowl stallion (well one was a stallion, the other two are geldings) -- oh heck, sportswriter hyperbole aside, I need some FAC reviewers. Have fun! Montanabw (talk) 08:29, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Mortara case
Hi there Doc, hope you're well. I wonder if I might be able to interest you in the Mortara case, which is up at FAC here—any thoughts you might have would be gratefully received. Cheers and all the best, —  Cliftonian   (talk)  16:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, the article looks in terrific shape at first glance! It might be a few days, as I also have The Oceanides and Montanabw's to look at, but definitely by the end of the weekend. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:55, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks Doc, I appreciate it. Cheers, —  Cliftonian   (talk)  16:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

GBS
You've saved me a job. I have been taking the begging bowl round for PR contributions, but I see you're ahead of me. I may now be able to devote a little time to the Welsh National Opera article, as I promised to do if poss, but we shall see. As to Shaw, the I-B was there when we started our overhaul and I didn't see any prospect of a consensus to remove it, nor did I have the energy, after the stupendous amount of work GBS took, to go into battle on the subject. I've pruned it a bit, but I don't proposed to go any further. You'll have other comments on the article in general in due course, I hope?  Tim riley  talk    17:47, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

The article looks amazing at first glance, despite the infobox ;-) Yes, I know what you mean, an exhausting effort (like Sinatra was) and infobox squabbles are the last thing you really want. I had to put up with it during the expansion though which as you can imagine is probably worse! I haven't been that well in the last week but my energy is returning. I'll try to look at this this evening as the others I need to look at are already at FAC. The contest has been approved now and has been announced on Twitter. It is running in April now, but non contets participants can submit content between now and end of April so if you do have time to work on the opera between now and April 30 this would be great!♦  Dr. Blofeld  17:49, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for comments so far. More would be greatly appreciated if you have time and inclination. I know you sometimes chafe when I disagree with your views, but they are important and helpful in getting the finished article in focus. But no obligation, natch! Best, as always,  Tim riley  talk    21:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Nope, not all, but I have three FA reviews to do, so I thought it might be more constructive for me to move on with those. If you really want me to give the lower sections a grilling I'll do it later, but a quick scan of it really does look in excellent shape (as expected). The only thing I would dispute is that you mentioned rules for a maximum length. If you've had to cut some genuinely useful/encyclopedic reviews for the sake of length I disagree with that. The article should be however long it takes to give it an effective treatment. Given his status, the massive coverage and size of his career, I would certainly expect it to be markedly longer than normal. There's quite a few FAs on some of the really big fishes which are much longer. It is important to be concise, but if it has to be cut to the point we're losing some valuable quotes I think it's time we lightened up on the length for certain articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Bless you, Doc! That's most encouraging, and I'm most grateful.  Tim riley  talk    21:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Let me get another of the FA reviews done first and I'll look at it again tomorrow. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:45, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Carrie Harper, Welsh politician up for AfD
Hi, Dr. Blofeld! I'm trying to source Carrie Harper, to see if she's notable. I'm not familiar with Welsh politics, but I thought this would be of interest to you to take a look at. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with it either haha! The question is whether she has adequate sourcing in reliable publications? I'm not buying the "failed candidate" reason for deletion, are you? ?♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Harper does have a lot of news hits. She seems important in her party. I also have another AfD of a Welsh person, Liza Gordon-Saker who is a circuit judge. I'm happy to add sources, but I'm having trouble parsing the politics of both. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

An award for you!
Cheers, that's an excellent achievement! Probably not best to Grave of the Fireflies to celebrate that haha!. Try Take the Money and Run, too, it's a hoot isn't it ?♦  Dr. Blofeld  11:00, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep, Doc. It's the best film of 1969 IMO.  —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me 11:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Almost, my favourite of that year is The Secret of Santa Vittoria but Take the Money comes close! Take the Money is definitely up there in the top league of comedy films.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:07, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Have any of you seen The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!? Always forget that one for some reason but I think it might just have more laughs a minute than any other film. The parodies in it are genius. Watch that one asap!♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:22, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad you enjoyed Repulsion, that's the one I recommended to Krimuk next.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:39, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I planned to watch Ikiru with my friend in his house, but things didn't work as planned. Take the Money and Run up next! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:40, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Take the money is the sort of film to watch with an amigo, Ikiru is really best enjoyed alone I think!♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Began watching the film. Allen is superb and the voice over is fantastic, i mean, it is unintentionally funny! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well watch the whole thing and then give your verdict! The narration is intended to be funny because it's so serious! It's an essential ingredient of the "mockumentary"♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it's the second funniest Allen film I've seen, the clear winner for me is Love and Death, which is also a must see one.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:06, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Done with Take the Money and Run, my second Allen film after Annie Hall. I liked the film mainly for the voice-over, Allen's work as the director and actor also. The best of the film, however, is the scenes related to guns made of soap and the ones at the chain gang. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The funniest moment I think was the horse joke when he was reeling off lists of serious crimes the offenders had committed. I laughed aloud for about five minutes after that!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:03, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Lady Armstrong's crime: Marrying a horse. Really a hilarious one. Also, Allen's call to choose between those two gangs in the bank was a good one. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The scene with the guns was copied by Ritesh Deshmukh in Dhamaal. The bank scene was my favourite ("I'm pointing a grub at you" LOL.), that was copied by Vadivelu in Eli Here's the gun scene copy and here's the bank scene copy.  —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me 16:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Love and Death is even funnier, Allen and Keaton are at the peak of their powers, even more so than Annie Hall IMO. What's Up, Tiger Lily? is a laugh too, because it's simply a redub of a different film!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The best "adaptation" of that soap gun scene was made by Brahmanandam here. I consider it much better than that of Deshmukh's. I would surely watch Love and Death soon, though i can't guarantee a timeline. Dr. Blofeld, i intend to watch the Japanese ones later, with a fresh mind after recuperating and i hope you too would like to watch a couple of choices from the ones i have recommended. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well the idea is that you enjoy watching them and watch them when you want to watch it, not to see it as a chore or order!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course i enjoy viewing them. But as you said before, these films were poetic and very well-written. To enjoy the experience completely, i wanted to have a break as i am recuperating from an illness currently. I've completed more than half of Grave of the fireflies and should complete it soon. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:52, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Carrie A. Tuggle
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Ecological stations in Brazil
You created a series of substubs in 2008, would you please develop them?Xx236 (talk) 08:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

No. I don't speak Portuguese. Ask somebody at WP:Brazil or a fluent Portuguese speaker as most sources will be in Portuguese. I would question the notability of a lot of them and probably favour deleting a lot of them.♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Kanche
Would you like to review this article for GA status? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:39, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I usually prefer reviewing the older ones but OK. On condition that you watch Rosemary's Baby first haha!♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * My family members are not so happy, and i guess i have to postpone it haha. I've added it to the recommendations list as a bold one, and when i get really free time, i will watch this at the earliest after completing Grave of the fireflies. The storyline of Rosemary's Baby is interesting, though it remotely resembles The Omen in its treatment (Satan, Anti-christ, demonic baby etc.) Still, i like it and i hope to watch it soon. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you really not watch Grave in one go?? That kind of takes the impact out of it I think. You need to be emotionally involved and in that world for the duration of the film without break for full effect I think. The Omen wishes it was as half as good as Rosemary's Baby and came later!! The only flaw in RB is the ending, the last five to ten minutes.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:32, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I really tried to complete Grave of the fireflies at one go, but am lying down with some spinal issues. The Omen is an excuse of a horror film IMHO. Whenever the writer wanted a thrill or a conflict, he inserts an accident. I too felt that Rosemary's Baby could've ended better when i read the summary, but i must watch it to judge it well. Let me know when you want to commence the GA review. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've reserved it. I'll review it a bit later.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:40, 26 February 2016 (UTC)