User talk:Adamstom.97/Archive 10

Congrats on Rings of Power!
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is well-written and extremely pleasant to read. Given how well-referenced it is, it would also likely pass GA review. Whether or not you have the time to go through the nomination process, I just wanted to thank you for your contributions to that article. Best, DFlhb (talk) 00:27, 15 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. I haven't been as involved in the article since the show finished airing because the online discussions about the show (including at the talk page) were quite full-on and starting to have an impact on me mentally. As that dies down I may be tempted to get back involved considering how much time and effort I put in originally, and it would be great to get the article to GA. I appreciate the message :) adamstom97 (talk) 07:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Three different Udûns
Hi, on your move of Udûn to Udûn, Mordor, and the taking of the primary topic for the name of a single episode of a streaming series: this was not discussed, nor posted at WP:WikiProject Middle-earth (nor anywhere else, it seems). It is far from self-evident that this was a good idea, or that a disambiguation page might not be better.

There's actually another Udûn = Utumno, the hellish stronghold of Morgoth before the First Age in the time of the Two Lamps, in the extreme north of Middle-earth underneath the Iron Mountains. This is the Udûn alluded to in "flame of Udûn", i.e. your link to Mordor is in fact wrong, and we should link to the other one (if anything). You also haven't provided a hatnote anywhere.

In short, this is not exactly the ideal way to go about things. I see you are "semi-retired"; if you are going to come back from retirement for brief visits, you're welcome, but a measure of care and "before"-style research is needed before drastic changes like page moves are made. I'll have a go at sorting things out now. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I didn't realise there was a third use, "flame of Udûn" was already linked to Mordor I just updated the link to match where it previously pointed. I was going to start a discussion but felt it wasn't necessary since the original "Udûn" was only used by one article and was getting basically no views compared to the TV article. If you feel it was incorrect then I don't mind changing it back or having a discussion somewhere. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Cite: Film and TV episode
Hey, hope you're enjoying your time away from here. I finally have free time again so I'm back to working on the Thanos article to try again at an eventual GAN.

From the Peter Parker GAN, you mentioned using cite film and cite episode for the character biography. I realized I never used those for citations before so I was wondering what the most important parameters to use were.

For films:

For TV episodes:

Edit: Would it be as simple as ?

Maybe include the Disney Plus URL when possible?

and

Is first and last for writers? Or directors?

-- Zoo (talk) 00:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I think you have the main fields you need, always good to look at other examples as well (we use the episode one in a lot of articles these days). First and last is generally used for writers. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * If we're adding refs for films/episodes, do we still need the "further information" at the beginning of each section? It mostly lists the same films/episodes as the refs. -- Zoo (talk) 18:43, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There is probably a good argument to remove those, it would clear up some clutter for the characters who make multiple appearances. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * So because Thanos has a whole section dedicated to only IW, would it be best to just leave further information for that section or use the IW ref somewhere? That's the only biography section I'm not sure where to put a ref since it's just covering one movie and it's stated at the beginning of the section. -- Zoo (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better to have an actual ref with all the credit details over a simple further information link. The IW article should already be linked elsewhere in the article anyway, from a real-world perspective. If there are multiple paragraphs of plot summary from one project then just put the ref at the end of each one. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:03, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll do that. I just wasn't sure if that was overdoing it with the ref. Thanks for your help on this. -- Zoo (talk) 19:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * One last thing for now. Do I include the Disney Plus links for the movies like the episodes or do I not since they weren't originally released on Disney Plus? -- Zoo (talk) 19:20, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure on that one, it's probably not necessary but it can be nice to have a link for readers to follow. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:30, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * When it comes to movies like the Spider-Man trilogy, would I cite them the same way as the other movies, just without the Disney Plus link? -- Zoo (talk) 19:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:07, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

I've been working on the MCU Avengers article off and on and they use efn a lot to say "As depicted in [movie/series]". Should I keep those or replace them with the Cite AV media refs since most, if not all of the movies/series will have the refs cited already from the biography section? -- Zoo (talk) 19:38, 5 February 2023 (UTC)


 * You should avoid overusing efn, that is handy in a plot summary if understanding the film/episode requires prior knowledge of another film/episode but in the case of non-film/TV articles you should just be including the relevant elements of each plot summary with a citation to support each. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Meaning of "IP"
Hi Adam, do you know the meaning of "IP" in the context used here? It appears to be film/TV industry jargon, but none of the definitions at IP fit the sentence. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * stands for intellectual property. —El Millo (talk) 17:54, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. BilCat (talk) 18:13, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Merchandise images
Since I know you've done plenty of GA reviews, I was wondering what the rules were in regards to using images of merchandise posters in a merchandise section for a character. Specifically something like this. I know I overdid the merchandise section for Thanos (I'll let the eventual GA reviewer say something about it), but I also thought a recent (kinda) offically licensed Infinity Saga Avengers poster set would be one of the better things to represent the section. Or maybe I'm just not supposed to use those kinds of images and should just forget about it. -- Zoo (talk) 06:21, 15 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Posters are not covered by free use, we need to be able to justify including them. I have used posters outside of the infobox before when the content of the poster helped depict things that are being discussed in the article, but I'm not sure you could argue the same thing with that one. Better to stick with images that can definitely be explained or find free alternatives on Wikimedia Commons. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:44, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright, in that case I think the current images are probably good. Not sure if anything else needs covered unless I need to add something else to the biography section. -- Zoo (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

DC Universe
Hey, pinging you since you both have taken notice of my sandbox work. I am basically done with the work and was wondering if either of you have any questions/comments/concerns about what I have in there at the moment? And do you think I should take my changes to the DCU talk page or just boldly make the change in mainspace? Thanks, adamstom97 (talk) 05:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I think everything you've done for it has been very well done, and I want to thank you for the dedicated work. I agree that we don't have enough information to include projects for Affleck and Lobo just yet, and whatever connections it has with the DCEU (through Peacemaker/TSS content, The Flash multiverse shenanigans, etc.) can be detailed on a case-by-case basis, especially when we don't really know how that will all play out just yet. I love all the background and development work you have done. I'm only slightly iffy on the Elseworlds section, though that's because it's still early on with knowing how they'll be handling those, and I don't think a table would fit quite well for it, so what is there works. Of course the categories will be included, as should the DC TV template. Other than that, I think what you've got is a great version of it and I believe you can be bold and make the change, given there is not much (if anything) that would warrant pushback. Good job with this and thank you, again. Trailblazer101 (talk) 06:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm okay with you just implementing. Do you have the "Connections to the DC Extended Universe" section text somewhere in your draft? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It's integrated into the development section, and then the third paragraph of each film/TV section has specific DCEU connections in addition to DCU connections (so confirming when an actor returns from the DCEU and also having the usual shared universe stuff). - adamstom97 (talk) 19:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Cool, then all good with me for you to implement. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks both for your input. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You are very welcome. Cheers! Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Logan GA
Hey mate, I want to get Logan (film) to GA and saw that you had wanted to work on it couple years back. Did you get round to it? What would you suggest needs improving on it. Thanks Lankyant (talk) 16:09, 28 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hey, I did a bit of work on this in my sandbox a few years ago, I was just working my way through the article and expanding / cleaning up as I went along. This is where I got to. You can see the blank spaces that I didn't get around to working on yet. Feel free to take what I have done there and carry on with it, or integrate missing info from the live page into this version. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Discovery revert
Are you American? Do not revert my edit for Star Trek Discovery. The correct geographical nomenclature is "Toronto, Ontario, Canada", not "Toronto, Canada". The same as if the show was shot in "Detroit, Michigan, USA". It would not be written "Detroit, USA". I live in Toronto. As well, I worked on all five seasons of the show. It's correctly written "Toronto, Ontario, Canada". Don't tell me what is or isn't "necessary" based on American ignorance of proper geographical nomenclature. I'm returning it to the way it was, as it is 100% correct and proper. Do not revert it again. Kubrickrules (talk) 02:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC)


 * @Kubrickrules Do you have any guidelines or policies that support your position that it must be formatted this way? (Also, if you bothered to look at Adam's userpage, you'd realize you're talking nonsense by calling him American.)
 * Also, if you worked on the show, you're admitting to WP:COI. -- Alex_ 21 TALK 21:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The better question is why can it NOT be formatted in this way, when Canadian geographical formats and nomenclature are identical to American ones. If one writes "Chicago, Illinois" or "Chicago, IL", or "Chicago, Illinois, USA" then "Toronto" must be written "Toronto, Ontario", or "Toronto, ON", or "Toronto, Ontario, Canada", not "Toronto, Canada." This is fact, not opinion. No one from outside Canada can tell people they have to write "Chicago, Illinois, USA" for an American locale, but cannot write "Toronto, Ontario, Canada" for a Canadian locale. Also, there is zero conflict of interest, as my edit only involves correcting incorrect geographical nomenclature, not adding or subtracting information about the show itself. I'm putting the edit back as it is factually correct, and follows the correct geographical format. Please do not revert it again. "Toronto, Ontario" or "Toronto, Ontario, Canada" is correct. "Toronto, Canada" is not correct. It would be like saying "Los Angeles, USA", which no one ever does. If you take the name of the province out because you deem it "unnecessary", then by that exact logic, you'll need to remove the name of every state listed in every Wikipedia article that names American locales by city and state, because the name of the state is "unnecessary". Kubrickrules (talk) 21:40, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * You should try assuming good faith and being more civil, assuming someone made an edit because of will often be wrong, as in this case Adamstom is from New Zealand, and jumping straight to assuming the other is ignorant instead of thinking they may have a valid reasong is assuming bad faith. You should also include an edit summaries in your edits, especially if it's a reversion, which you did not do for this revert. —El Millo (talk) 22:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The editor has started a discussion at the article's talk page, I'm sure the content discussion can continue there.
 * A discussion on their conduct, however, it still very relevant. -- Alex_ 21 TALK 23:23, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Witch wording in A: CoC
Hey Adam, I noticed that you manually reverted my edit where I removed the word "witch" in the music section. Can you explain? The sentence will mean that the actors portraying the witches are witches actually, but that is not true. Perhaps, "alongside actors who portrays witches"?

Have a nice day, bro. Haere Raa! (Goodbye in Maori) JEDIMASTER2008 (talk) 06:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC)


 * You changed "witches" to "actors" since they are not actually witches, and then I changed it to "witch actors" to specify that it was only the actors who portray witches. I don't feel anyone is going to read that sentence and assume that there are actual witches acting in the show, but if you disagree then you can clarify further with your wording. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Production of Infinity War and Endgame
Hey, if you ever find the chance to work on the article again, let me know and I'll try to help if you want to speed up the process. I just know that you seem to have made good progress in your sandbox at one point.

I mostly bring this up because I'm in the long process of getting Avengers (Marvel Cinematic Universe) to a Good Topic. Which means I assume that the production article, the soundtracks, and the accolades will all be required with the films. I'm not sure about the box office records. The main editor doesn't plan on nominating them for Featured Lists because things didn't go well when they nominated the Force Awakens list a few years ago. It sounds like those types of articles are sort of frowned upon and it's preferred that info be covered in the main articles.

Anyways, I hope your semi-retirement is treating you well! --  Zoo Blazer talk 05:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Hey, just like all of the MCU articles I do plan to get back to it at some point! In my attempt at semi-retirement it is really dependent how much free time I have and what I feel like working on. I will let you know if I do turn back to it at some point. I also heard the box office record articles weren't going well for FL, I expect they would just have to be excluded from any good topic. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If the box office lists weren't required, that would make things nicer for sure.
 * I think what's left are the four soundtracks, the production article, the IW accolades, and the main article which is now nominated for GA though. I feel like looking at the other MCU accolades, IW is ready to go for the most part, but no one said anything a few months ago on its talk page, so I could be wrong. And I've never worked on soundtrack articles before, so I'm not sure what additional info is needed there. Maybe reception? --  Zoo Blazer talk 05:47, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Most of the MCU soundtrack articles could do with some general clean-up and expanding, I while ago I restructured the MCU Music article to be more of a summary of each soundtrack article but I didn't go through and move all the details from that article to the soundtrack articles yet. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:21, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Something like What If... the World Lost Its Mightiest Heroes? wouldn't be needed just because the main story is about the Avengers, right? --  Zoo Blazer talk 07:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think it would need to be a list of everything Avengers-related, just the main articles. One thing I would note is if the Avengers films are included in the topic, there may be some concerns raised about the fact that the Kang Dynasty and Secret Wars articles are not ready and won't be GA for years. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * True, but wouldn't it just come down to them needing to be GA nominated within 6 months of their releases? Although, at the pace I'm going, we might be on Avengers 7 and 8 before the Good Topic is ready. --  Zoo Blazer talk 07:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the within 6 months thing was specially determined for the previous MCU good topic so it may not be assumed by all involved, that's why I thought I would mention it. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:35, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah. Not sure if movies differ from video games, but for those it's only 3 months to get them nominated/promoted to GA. 3 months would be rough for a movie though. If I get to the point of the GT nomination, I'll probably just being up the 6 month thing and see where things go during the review. --  Zoo Blazer talk 21:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The 6 month's post release was the rule for FT overseer's for all film articles I believe. It was co-opted into the MCU one when we were more regularly doing them. I think on some of the talk or nom pages for that old FT, should have the confirmation of that, or on the FT/GT guidelines pages. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Star Trek: The Animated Celebration
Hey Adam. Concerning Star Trek, what's your thoughts on Talk:List of Star Trek television series? Similar to Short Treks? -- Alex_ 21 TALK 10:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Black Widow (2021 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Black Widow (2021 film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ayakanaa -- Ayakanaa (talk) 00:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Black Widow (2021 film)
The article Black Widow (2021 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Black Widow (2021 film) for comments about the article, and Talk:Black Widow (2021 film)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ayakanaa -- Ayakanaa (talk) 03:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Star Trek: Lower Decks (season 1)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Star Trek: Lower Decks (season 1) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of OlifanofmrTennant -- OlifanofmrTennant (talk) 01:42, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in the August 2023 GAN backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Black Widow (2021 film)
theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 12:03, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vortex3427 -- Vortex3427 (talk) 05:42, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Black Cat (upcoming film)
Hello, Adamstom.97. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Black Cat (upcoming film), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Silver Sable (film)
Hello, Adamstom.97. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Silver Sable (film), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Silk (upcoming film)
Hello, Adamstom.97. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Silk (upcoming film), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Star Trek: Lower Decks (season 1)
The article Star Trek: Lower Decks (season 1) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Star Trek: Lower Decks (season 1) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of OlifanofmrTennant -- OlifanofmrTennant (talk) 20:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Ouroboros (Loki)
Hi, You don't put a standalone section with reviews. Wikipedia is not a newspaper or theatre review sheet. Reviews are generally embeded in the text, if they are needed. Not a standalone section. It is not done. You don't an external section like that. Its just badly written.  scope_creep Talk  20:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Literally every film and television article on Wikipedia have a section on critic reviews, do you also plan to go delete all of those? I have added a section to the article's talk page, please respond there. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Hatnote
Hey, can you show me the discussion where that consensous was established please? I might have missed it. Gonnym (talk) 09:03, 27 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The original discussion is at Talk:WandaVision/Archive 2, we may have talked about it again at one of the other TV articles but that might have also just been an edit summary. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * As I see, thanks. I think I'll ask in MOS:TV/MOS:HATNOTE about this usage. If its something valid that the project wants then it should probably be mentioned in the MOS:TV as there isn't anything special about Marvel's ~10 TV shows that other shows don't have. Gonnym (talk) 07:04, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Neighbours 30th Anniversary
Neighbours 30th Anniversary has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 23:21, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!


—El Millo (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message. —El Millo (talk) 20:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy Holidays
Apologies for just being able to share now. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:25, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Doctor Who (2008–2010 specials)
Doctor Who (2008–2010 specials) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Adamstom.97!


Happy New Year! Adamstom.97, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Abishe (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.