User talk:Big Bird/January 2010 - December 2010

WikiProject Films December 2009 Newsletter
The December 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Big Bird! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is an  Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current  article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 16:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Amir Mann -

Note
I have responded toward your input at Talk:King_Cobra_(film) and ask that you look in.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 18:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Better late than never
No problem. We all say and do little things here and there that later make us cringe. Thanks for the note. All the best! Doczilla STOMP! 18:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Please help us translate Persepolis to Bosnian.Shahin (talk) 11:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Role of the media
Thanks Big Bird, i really didn't see that. I am typing some text here, so it was little mistake! Thanks you very much! :) -Tadija (talk) 14:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2010 Newsletter
The January 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Bosniak discussion
Thanks for telling me, I appreciate it. Opbeith (talk) 13:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Since you offered
A recent edit on the Uninvited 2009 film page may have been vandalism but no matter how many times I read the wiki article on what to do, I can't seem to wrap my brain around it today. I was wondering if you could give me a hand or if I should even worry about it. I blame the pain meds (bad back). Millahnna (mouse) talk  04:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Help me figure out the edit in question. Is it this one? Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's the one. You'll find references to both names on other sites but it is actually Ivers.  Since the official credits don't list the last names – including for other characters than just in that edit – I removed them entirely where appropriate instead of reverting .  Interestingly, you can actually find more references to Rydell in a google search than Ivers.  So it could have just been an honest mistake.  With the IP history I figured a warning wouldn't hurt.  Millahnna (mouse)  talk  13:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The official site, IMDb, and Allmovie list no last names for the charcters. I think you made the right decision removing the last names altogether; this is the best solution to minimize edit warring in the long run unless we can find a reliable source (eg, The New York Times) that specifies the correct last name. As far as the IP editor is concerned, I believe they probably acted in good faith, correcting the information as they saw fit based on reading it somewhere-or-other online (the user written plot summary on the IMDb page shows the last name as Rydell so that's where the IP might have obtained their info but this is not a reliable source for us). I added a welcome template to the IP's page for now since I don't think a warning is necessary. If they continue reverting, we can ask them to join the discussion so that we can come to a long term solution. What do you think? Big Bird (talk • contribs) 14:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. And for the record I dropped an edit note to IMDB too (anal or thorough, you be the judge).  The only thing that gave me pause with the IP User was the Bangors and Mash edits in their contribs.  But shared IPs and all so I wasn't really sure.  All the big media outlets (Times, Ebert, SF Chron, etc.) list no names for the characters who info I deleted and that's how it shows in the credit scroll and on the official site.  So I went with that.  I truly think there is actually mixed official info out there; I found interviews with cast members where the author of the article referenced one name (unreliable sites with plagiarized material), but I can confirm from recent viewing the other is spoken in the film.  Thoroughly bizarre. Thanks for checking it out for me.  I got to WHOIS and went stupid; sadly I used to work tech support.   Millahnna (mouse)  talk  14:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I saw the Bangers and Mash edits but that was two years ago and we may not even be dealing with the same subscriber editing from that IP anymore.
 * Back to the issue of names, though. If you wanted to, you could maybe create a sandbox on your user page and, as you find them one by one, copy and paste the sources (interviews and such) that claim different last name for the characters. If we end up finding enough reliable sources that contradict each other in this respect, it may give us enough material to create a brief section in the article where we give the reader an explanation of the last name dispute. That way we also explain the situation to both sets of editors &mdash; the "Ivers" and "Rydell" camps &mdash; and resolve the issue once and for all. That's only if enough good sources exist. If not, no biggie; we'll just leave the names out and explain that to people who revert. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 15:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh you are good. I think I found my next mission after I'm done butchering the Sherlock Holmes summary.  Is it possible to cite the movie itself as a source (if I note the time elapsed or something)?  I know I've seen that around but it always looks weird to me; maybe it just wasn't formatted right.   Millahnna (mouse)  talk  23:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There was a lengthy discussion here (n.b., I'm not joking when I say "lenghty", please be careful if attempting to read it all) where some editors involved agreed that citing the film as a primary source is acceptable and others did not. There is a template (Template:Cite video) that can be used to cite a video available though a URL but, obviously, you'd have to be sure that the URL steers clear of Copyright violations. Personally, I would suggest not to use the film as a source for this sort of thing because secondary sources are always better, if available. Also, you want to avoid violating WP:SYNTH which is done when you present a conclusion that you reached yourself by citing a primary source. But, if you do decide to cite the film as a source, you can use reference #68 from this version of Children of Men as a guide of how to format a citation to the actual film. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 15:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Plumber
Hi BB! I'm surprised you reverted my notes about Scott Hicks. Clearly 2nd assistant director doesn't warrant a place in the infobox, but he's now a very big name in Australian cinema and both he and Peter Weir are notable graduates of the Flinders University film school. I'll see if I can find a reference that gives a truer summary of the last scene. --Doug butler (talk) 22:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, Doug!
 * Information about the second assistant director's alma mater is not directly related to the subject of the article. The Plumber is an article about a film and tangential information about people involved with the film does not provide added benefit to the reader. It would certainly be helpful to include additional material about the cast and crew if that material is directly related and helps provide a better understanding of the subject &mdash; such as awards won, film industry firsts, etc. That some scenes of the film were shot in the same place where the second assistant director attended school does nothing to provide a better understanding about the film The Plumber unless that fact plays a significant part in the plot or is somehow notable in the film's production. It really is trivia that's hard to fit in an encyclopedia. Maybe in the Scott Hicks article (although, even then it should be inserted in proper context) but definitely not in a film article. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Additionally, don't worry about finding a reference for the final scene. The film itself is considered a primary source and the plot does not normally need to be referenced. I only removed your added sentence of "Jill finally turns the tables on Max in a fine plot twist" because WP:PLOT and WP:PSTS state to "not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about information found in a primary source". A "fine plot twist" fails that guideline, that's all. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks BB for spending so much time on your explanation. I really don't know anything about Wikipedia movie summaries; it just pained me that the author of the page missed the point of the final scene of a good little movie, plus "rock and roll outlaw" is a poor description of a creep who was getting some kind of enjoyment by getting under her skin, exacerbated by the husband's failure to empathize. There, I've got it off my chest! --Doug butler (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem at all! One of the main things to remember about film summaries is to only describe what is presented on screen. By all means, feel free to further describe the final scene but just try to avoid editorializing and presenting commentary of any kind (such as "amazing twist" or "hillarious consequences", etc). Big Bird (talk • contribs) 18:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2010 Newsletter
The February 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood
Hi, can you fix the references, I messed them up whilst condensing the article... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 21:55, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I will most certainly help you but I can't anymore tonight. It's a few minutes before 5PM where I am and I'm just about done work and logged off of my computer and I don't edit from home. First thing tomorrow, I promise :) Big Bird (talk • contribs) 21:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The bot fixed it! Now why can't we use bots to generate content in the same way... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 13:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It would be fun if they did! If for no other reason, I would love to see one bot tell another bot "F.U. for reverting me again, you SOB. I'm reporting you to WP:ANI." Big Bird (talk • contribs) 14:00, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Haaha LOL. That would be funny. Bots that rant and cause wiki drama like certain beloved colleagues on wikipedia... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 15:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Big Bird. Can you help copy the text from the Clint Eastwood articles (sub articles) into his film articles. They contains a lot of valuable missing production info. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 10:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry for taking this long to respond. Let me take a look at it and see what I can do to help. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Random Question
The collapsible boxes on your user page are primarily html tables, yes? I was looking at the code trying to figure them out and some of it I know, some I don't; I couldn't decide how much was wiki markup and how much was html. I don't suppose you know where I could find a blank version of the same basic thing? That's my primary method for reverse engineering code I don't know much about (and the source of many hours of me killing time tweaking my blogger template). I'm gonna redo my user page here soon and I want to go with something along similar lines. I watch your page so you can answer me here. Millahnna (mouse) talk  08:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Just about anything you want to know about tables is available at Help:Table. The section on callapsible tables is here and, to save you an extra click, here's the sample code:




 * which gives you this:


 * Also, feel free to cut and paste any code from my user page and just substitute your own content. Did that help? Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * You're a peach, thanks. I was trying to look at it to copy but I kind of lost my mind staring at it.  Help page is helpful.  =)   Millahnna (mouse)  talk  23:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Anytime. Have fun with it! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

AFD
There's been enough !votes already that I would favor separate AFDs. I think the Phineas and Ferb one deserves one for an additional reason: as an animated extension of an existing franchise, I'm not certain the normal criteria of WP:NFF fit all that well.&mdash;Kww(talk) 22:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Point taken. Den Brother is already at AfD, I will go ahead and nominate P&F. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Brexx
On another topic, I'm squinting pretty hard at. What do you think?&mdash;Kww(talk) 22:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks like a pretty good candidate to me. Maybe wait till the current SPI case is closed and file this one. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

MS
Jolly good - no offence was intended, and none has been taken! Cheers 4u1e (talk) 19:52, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you read this Big bird?
If you can, can you send me a message as quick as possible? Im the guy who said that nudity in films rock! I also had a serious question but i guess you reverted it again. Nudity is NOT filthy! Why do Americans think its filthy? Are you an American? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.19.130 (talk) 15:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

How do i talk to you in private Big Bird?
Yeah i received your message so at least that works and ive got something to add! How do i talk to you in private with no onlookers? 91.150.19.130 (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Liberal European wrote this.
 * What's the reason that you want to speak in private? If you'd like to discuss how to improve the article it's better done in full view of others who might have something else to add. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 18:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * And how on earth do i speak to you in public when you delete everything i say?? Im trying to improve the article here you know and the main question is still: Why do Americans consider nudity as filthy?? Whats so "filthy" about it? Can i get a reply to that question i would be somewhat happy. Real communist Soviet Union way of thinking you know! And it wouldnt hurt if you looked up what the word discussion means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.19.130 (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * When you get a minute, please briefly read WP:NOT for a description of things that Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is not a place for discussion of real-world issues and personal opinions unless they directly influence article improvement. Your questions and assertions are not intended to improve any article as much as they are meant to engage in a general discussion of personal preferences and opinions. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 19:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Election
Thanks for reminding me. Usually some other coordinator has started the election preparation, but as lead, I dropped the ball. I started a discussion on the coordinator talk page to see how the other coordinators want to go about starting the election half-way through the month, so please comment there. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Nudity in film
You said: Per your statement here, if you are serious about wanting to improve the article (not just wanting to see "great tits and ass" as you said earlier), there is lots of very useful information contained at Wikipedia:Images that will tell you all about what images are/aren't acceptable and how to upload them. Big Bird"

1. Wiki is NOT censored! (Which completely contradicts this so called "acceptable" clause. So what is is it really? (Per your definition) 2. Its a topic about NUDITY in film! (I have very great artistic nudity photos to show) 3. Is it my fault if some sick American with an extreme aversion of Nudity in film starts to mouth off?? Nudity rocks and thats a fact! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.19.130 (talk) 17:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not censored, you are correct. I provided you with some reading material that explains how to upload images if that's what you'd like to do. There are plenty of explicit images on Wikipedia that have not been censored and they are acceptable as long as they are properly or freely licenced and as long as they serve some purpose rather than being posted because someone thinks they are neat.
 * But, please, stop this "sick American" BS. Plenty, probably the majority, of Wikipedia images containing nudity were shot in the United States and uploaded by American editors so your argument holds no water. We're a collaborative project and you'd be better advised to be more polite and less confrontational in the future. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 18:24, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The "Sick American aversion sex syndrome" is unfortunately not a myth. Some examples: "This film has not been rated" by Kirby Dick where it is explained that violence is OK in films but sex is not according to MPAA, Titanic (James Cameron version) on CNN with Larry King some insane priest said it had been censored in Utah because of nudity! (And those shots were very artistic) European directors talking/complaining about the issue and how hard it is to show nudity in American films. You must understand that USA has been hijacked by a pack of religious Christian and other evil sects as well as the bible belt. Entire Southern States of USA is not much better. If i give some straight to the source links will you trust me? Nudity in films rock and thats a fact, no crazy American priest or evil sects are gonna tell me otherwise. 91.150.19.130 (talk) 16:09, 27 March 2010 (UTC) Liberal European


 * And while we are at it: Health care in USA! Only 100 years behind Europe! (Im watching CNN right now) Senators threatened by psychopaths, violence because they approved Obamas health care plan. I bet Americans think we Europeans like to pay taxes because of the hell of it, huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.19.130 (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


 * What you're doing now is called soapboxing and Wikipedia does not exist for the purpose of people having a venue to vent their frustrations and promote their opinions; these venues exist elsewhere, Google them. I have tried to give you a few pointers on improving the article in question but you don't seem to have done anything with that information; all you've done is to keep trying to engage me in a general real-world debate about nudity and your perception of the American people. If you have any further questions from me, I will gladly help you if you ask them with the intent to improve the encyclopedia. Any other kind of communication from you I will ignore but rest assured that, should you cause any further disruption to articles or talk pages, I will report you and ask that you be blocked longer than you were last time. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:49, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Meet the Parents (1992 film)
Moved hook to April_Fool's_Main_Page/Did_You_Know.--293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 13:46, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've referenced the hook statement about the budget. Thanks for the great idea, it just never occured to me that we could have some fun with it. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 14:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Gee, I dunno, no activity on the page. I did explain the joke, but no bites. Best case scenario, it does get shoved in this year; worst case scenario, they shelve it for next year/gets shunted back to DYK normal. Maybe you gotta go in and at least ask why the inactivity. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 05:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * By the time we moved the article to that page there was tons of material already for today so I'm not all that surprised that they weren't able to fit this one in. I've moved it back to regular DYK, I'm sure it will get approved and promoted there. Thanks for the good idea again! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2010 Newsletter
The March 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Kevin Heffernan cute little penis
Big Bird, aren't you a woman too? have you seen Super Troopers and that part where Kevin Heffernan is naked and isn't his little penis so cute? It's like my toddlers only Heffernan is circumcised. (talk) 15:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, Jill (I'm presuming that's your name per your partial signature)!
 * No, I'm not a woman but that's besides the point. When it comes to describing plot summaries in films, WP:FILMPLOT advises "only to make descriptive claims" and to "not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims." Your edit made an evaluative claim which is not suitable for an encyclopedia just as it's not suitable for us to state that "Lamborghini Murciélago is a cool car" and "Pizza is delicious", both of those being subjective claims that can vary from one person to the next.
 * I hope that explains things a bit. Feel free to let me know if you have any further questions.
 * Peace! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Meet the Parents
Hey, I've finished my review and left you a few things to work on at the review page. There's nothing major, so I'll be happy to pass it once they're fixed. Best, HJ Mitchell  |  Penny for your thoughts?   15:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. I'll get on that immediately. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 15:32, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Travismullins1996
Please look over and see if I'm being too trusting. I don't think this is Brexx, but I've been fooled before (Anywhere But Home comes to mind).&mdash;Kww(talk) 21:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Alejandro Robaina
-- Cirt (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Pacino RfC
Except you don't realize that Chowbok wikistalks me, posts negative and personally attacking posts to the talk pages of other editors with whom I have a dispute and I will be taking him through the dispute process before long. With the other one, it's basically the same, and his rationale was based on POV. Also, the RfC already has responses. Wildhartlivie (talk) 15:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikistalking and personal attacks are serious and should definitely be dealt with. I don't see that an RfC on an article will help that, though. Plus, it looks as though User:Cnota, not User:Chowbok, created the new article and removed the filmography section so I'm not sure how the two issues are connected. I do see that Chowbok has replied to your RfC request but I still think it's better that the issue is discussed among the involved parties first before outside opinion is requested. And I do think that a more neutral statement is required on any RfC. Otherwise it just looks as though you're looking for support of your point of view. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 15:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Trading Places
I thought the final scene explanation was worth having (properly spelled and outlined, as I attempted to do). But if you're going to be all WikiAvenger (tm), re-reverting within seconds, forget it. RMc (talk) 18:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note!
 * There are several things about the inclusion of that "explanation" that make it inappropriate for the article. First and foremost, while it may be correct, it is a blatant violation of the original research policy. It is also not sourced at all which is to be naturally expected from original research anyways.
 * But, ultimately, even if sourced and not in violation of WP:OR, it provides very little benefit to the average reader. It is quite a long passage explaining one scene. What makes that scene deserving of such a long explanation? Why not a full section explaining why the gun didn't fire when Winthorpe pulled the trigger but did when he tossed it on the ground? Why not explain how a gorilla might come to like a human in a gorilla costume? These explanations are basically trivia that are important only to those people who saw the film and liked a particular scene. They're not encyclopedic and it's difficult, if not impossible, for a reader to verify externally that this information is correct. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 18:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

 * Thank you for that. I realized that I was going to be a little obsessive in completing some of the ranges, so to hopefully not scare potential participants off, I wanted to definitely take myself out of the running. Although I hoped we would get more participants over the length of the drive, I'm still satisfied that we finished all of the Start/Unassessed ranges. Again, thanks for your hard work, although it may be enjoyable at the beginning, I know the allure wears off from assessing so many articles (especially when you see the poor shape many of them are in). --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS April Newsletter
The April 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Opium War
Thanks for your contributions to Opium War —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josefacarson (talk • contribs) 07:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:31, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Optimists (2006 film)
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Request of your review
Hello Big Bird, we had the occasion to discuss on 2008 about an article and you provided me a lot of suggestions. May I kindly ask you to review now the article EICASLAB and tell me if in this version the advertising tone has been reduced? Thank you very much for your help, Best regards Gabriella Caporaletti (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Gabriella!
 * I had a look over the article and it's looking much better to me. In all honesty, though, I'm not well versed in these types of topics so I left a note here for the members of WikiProject Computing who would likely be better able to help you with the development of your article. I hope that helps! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks again for your help and for the note to the members of WikiProject Computing! Best regards. Gabriella Caporaletti (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC).

Discussion Move - Thanks!
Thanks for copying the plotsum template discussion over to the template talk page! Doniago (talk) 19:35, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! We may get better input that way. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 19:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Because I don't have the foggiest idea how to go about it (and if you guys think the conversation may be relevant), there was some discussion on this on my talk page as well from when Doniago first offered it up to a handful of people for feedback. I just don't know how to set it up in one of those collapsible box thingies.  But feel free to grab it if it is relevant.   Millahnna (mouse)  talk  03:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up about that! I've copied it over. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI
Redirects_for_discussion. Pcap ping  02:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Notification to a contribitor of Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy
There is a current request for comments HERE that is discussing whether the article Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy should be merged and redirected to the Elm Street franchise article at A Nightmare on Elm Street (franchise), or whether it has met, or has the ability to meet notability inclusion criteria in order to remain an independent independent article and be allowed to grow through regular editing. Findsources:, All viewpoints are welcome.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:01, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS May 2010 Newsletter
The May 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Image cleanup listing
I hope you are doing well. I'm asking all of the coordinators who haven't already taken a look at the spotlight image cleanup listing to consider leaving comments on the images. I'd like to get the ball rolling on either keeping or removing the images from the articles, but we need more than one or two comments to ensure there is consensus. I'm sure we all the know the importance of our project's spotlight articles, and if we don't have proper examples, new editors may make MOS mistakes (say that five times fast!) if they're referring to what should be our project's best articles (which may actually conflict with MOSFILM). I plan on asking the uploaders of the images and the main article contributors to join in as well later this week. If you have any questions at all, please let me know. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS June 2010 Newsletter
The June 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:29, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Trading Places
Hi, just started a discussion about the section in dispute on the Trading Places article; would appreciate your input! Thanks! DP 76764 (Talk) 18:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS July 2010 Newsletter
The July 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:59, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

We Care
Hi there! Seek admin guidance on the issue of the miscellany in this article. It's a 2-page article in an RS specifically about the braces - it's notable. Could maybe go on Cia Berg's page? --78.101.141.187 (talk) 12:43, 19 August 2010 (UTC)--78.101.141.187 (talk) 12:43, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it can't go on the Cia Berg page because it's contentious material about a living person and, as such, is in violation of WP:BLP. The bottom line with the braces issue is that it's something that only seems to be important to a handful of people who seem to remember the video for some sort of a sexual connotation with the braces; the web is full of blogs discussing this sort of thing. At the end of the day, it's just not something one reads in an encyclopedia—such as Brittanica or Wikipedia—because it in no way whatsoever provides a further benefit to the reader in understanding the subject of the article. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS August 2010 Newsletter
The August 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator election
I started a discussion about this month's election that I'd like to get started in the next few days. Please comment there so the nomination period can be initiated quickly. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:15, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Nomination Period Open
The September 2010 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting five coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next year; members are invited to nominate themselves if interested. Please do not vote yet, voting will begin on September 15. This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:42, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

"Cinema of" templates
Hello! A discussion about the use of {{Cinema of XXXX}} (like Cinema of France) in individual film articles has opened here. Your input would be greatly appreciated! BOVINEBOY 2008 18:57, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Conflict Resolution: "The Seventh Seal"
Hello BB - As I glanced through your article contributions, I noted that you have an interest in international cinema as well as that of the U.S. - so I figured it couldn't hurt to ask for help here or a push in the right direction.

Another editor has posted some material about a Cinema Insomnia supposed parody of Bergman's The Seventh Seal that I have reverted as irrelevant insofar as the description of the show by that editor DixieDellamorto involved only what seemed to me to be trivia. This editor has objected, which is understandable, but his/her responses on the Talk page have become querulous and borderline uncivil. I responded that if someone from WP:Film thought the material relevant then I would not object to its inclusion. I wonder if you might take a look at the edit here [] or suggest to me someone who could or would be interested. Our little discussion is going on under the "Parody Again" section here. Thanks -  Sensei48 (talk) 21:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Why are you linking years and months?
Hi, I noticed one instance of this]; are you aware that such items should not be linked unless there is a particular reason to do so?

Please ask me if you need more information. Tony  (talk)  09:51, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm well aware they shouldn't be linked. was found to be a sockpuppet of a banned user and this was me reverting his edits on that article. Unfortunately, while I reverted incorrect information that he added, I failed to notice that I inadvertently re-linked the dates at the same time. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 12:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS September 2010 Newsletter
The September 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:19, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM October 2010 Newsletter
The Octoberr 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:39, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Time Travellers
It was a compromise idea so that those who want the time travelling mentioned still have it. It also woulds make it easier for anyone looking for that to find were to go.Slatersteven (talk) 13:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand the point of the link to List of Internet phenomena but I was unsure what "Time traveler at premier" meant. In this version of the article, the way it was piped onto the article/list link, it did not link to anything within the list itself. I see that you added a link to the "Films" section and that's fine. I was debating linking to the "Films" section myself but decided against it; either way is fine by me. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * i think it should be piped because (if the statements made on the talk page is correct) people are coming to the page because of the time traveller story and as such will want to read about it. The problem is it’s not about the film, but its premier. So it seemed the best was to appease those who do not think it should be in the article (its only a link) and those who think that without it people might not be able to find the story (its piped).Slatersteven (talk) 14:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:EASTEREGG suggests to "keep piped links as intuitive as possible." An average reader clicking a link for "Time traveler at premier" might not expect to be taken to a List of Internet phenomena that contains, among others, internet memes in such categories as music, books etc. I know that I didn't expect to be taken there when I clicked it. I had to read the discussion on the talk page before I found out why the link was there and what it meant to explain to the reader. It was only on my second visit to the list that I found the information that I was intended to find. I'm familiar with the way this encyclopedia works, others might have a harder time finding the intended information. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 14:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Eastereggs
You missed the one on the Planet of the Apes that had been there for some time, and was the basis for adding the It Happened One Night and luggage combination references. I don't think that linking those things (or Alien or Planet of the Apes for that matter) is a violation of guidelines. I also don't understand why you think the article is more navigable with just one column of characters...there's just so much white space to right doing it that way.  Pur ple  back pack 89    18:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)


 * An average reader that sees a blue link stating "leaves without accepting payment" will not expect to be taken to It Happened One Night if they click that link. A reader should not have to follow a link before they realize what's going on; links should be intuitive, plain and simple. Further, WP:FILMCAST advises against using table formats in the cast section, an instruction that also encompasses usage of columns in that section. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 18:28, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Havana Heat (film)
While understanding some of what you wrote at the AFD, I was a bit confused when you began by granting the film was in pre-production and then calling it a hoax anyway, even though what errors were in the article were addressable. I have given the article some attention per film MOS and added sources. Might you agree to a possible incubation of the now-sourced article until filming begins?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:14, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That the film in question may exist or be in pre-production does not mean that the article about the film cannot be a hoax, per WP:HOAX and the DHMO/water example. My delete rationale was based on NFF, anyways, and my personal opinion is that the argument still applies. I !voted delete in this debate that failed NFF but I further qualified my !vote as "purely procedural" and suggested to the nominator that it never should have been nominated for deletion in the first place because the principal photography was scheduled to begin in September of 2009 and it was early September when the article was nominated. That project seems to be in development hell, where it's been for about 10 years now. Since then, I've seen a number of examples where a film is announced by a studio to begin production "any day now" only to end up in development hell again. That has made me more aware of just how important the commencement of principal photography really is in determining the project's ultimate fate - first as a film and then as an article on Wikipedia. Unless strong strong evidence exists that the film is more than just scheduled to begin its principal photography "in the near future", I would point to NFF and state that we have no guarantees that this project will ever be filmed (thereby actually becoming a film) and no amount of incubation will change that. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 21:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILM November 2010 Newsletter
The November 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:51, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  06:08, 6 December 2010 (UTC)