User talk:CzechOut/Archive 1

Welcome
Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Ardenn 02:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Dead Ringers/Doctor Who
Hey, CzechOut. I was going to make some niggling fixes to the Dead Ringers section of Doctor Who spoofs, but I see you've got the "inuse" sign up. I just wanted to mention (in case I forgot later) that the other driving force behind the Doctor Who mentions on Dead Ringers is writer Nev Fountain, who's written a couple of Big Finishes (as well as being the script editor for Death Comes to Time!). He's probably a bigger fan even than Culshaw.

Also, we should probably mention that in the radio show, it wasn't just Culshaw-as-the-Fourth-Doctor calling Doctor Who celebrities; he also made everyday-type calls (booking a taxi or a hotel room, or calling a DIY shop to warn them that they had all the makings of a Dalek in the shop).

Finally, don't forget to use UK spellings for "programme" and "humour", since it's a UK subject! :) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Not a problem! I think that Khaosworks and I were drawn to the article because you were editing it, and we didn't realise that you weren't finished until you put the "inusefor" tag up.  Hope you don't feel we were jumping on you! :) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


 * No special understanding required. As for spelling, I added the UK spellings to my spellchecker years back, so it doesn't trip me up.  On the other hand, sometimes I have to check the dictionary (online or dead-tree) to remind myself which way a certain word is spelled on whatever side of the Atlantic I'm writing about! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:27, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Lady Serena
I do apologise if my actions seem high handed - I admit I'm not as diplomatic or as easy to get along with as people like Josiah. I assure you that I'm not trying to put you down, personally, but am simply trying to improve the edits and/or placing them where they should be. If it helps at all, if you want to revert my changes to the article until more people weigh in, I won't object. As I said, it's all in the history, and can all be changed back. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 23:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. It's all good, as they say. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 02:21, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Háček
I thought it might interest you that User:Ackoz has initiated another caron > háček move request here. +Hexagon1 (t) |*̥̲̅ ̲̅†̲̅| |>̲̅-̲̅| 09:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Háček 2
There's yet another vote at talk:caron. +Hexagon1 (t) 04:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Great Going!
Hey CzechOut, I must say, great going on the Strange World (TV series) article.. I think the programme does sound interesting, and I'll help you edit the article as well, if that's okay :) .. Have a nice day/night! :P Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 04:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, do you know if this programme's on DVD? I could not find it... Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 04:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was just wiki-ing around a few days ago and found it.. Grr, I wish it was on DVD.. And, yes, I do know you did not create the page, I was just remarking on the great work you've done with that page :) .. However, at least, the programme's producers decided to quickly film a finale before it was cancelled :) .. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 03:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 19:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Policemen and flowers.jpg
Hello CzechOut, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Policemen and flowers.jpg) was found at the following location: User:CzechOut. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Not really your fault. There was a non-free image on the userbox Template:User Czech History which I removed. Since you have that userbox on your userpage, you got the Bot's warning. Garion96 (talk) 00:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually meant to post this on the bot's talk. Oh welll. :) Garion96 (talk) 00:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 02:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 00:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 00:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 18:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Bbcp-55.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bbcp-55.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 07:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:30, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Whoniverse
Hi there, can you find some references for the edits you made to Whoniverse? It'll just improve the quality of the article tremendously, thanks.~ZytheTalk to me! 14:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Phew, I was worried you'd be mad...~ZytheTalk to me! 23:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, to me, it just seems a tiny bit... in-universe? Subsections devoted to things that only matter from the perspective of a fictional character in the show itself... Hmmm. It's also really long.~ZytheTalk to me! 13:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Like the work you did on the inclusion section Biscit 14:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 03:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Century Falls.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Century Falls.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. The Islander 21:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

The Alaskans
I like your username, CzechOut, by the way; I've spent some time in Prague and love that city. Regarding The Alaskans, you did a sensational job with the infobox and improving my links (I frankly didn't know how to make links with that much specificity). One thing I did go back and adjust, though: crazily enough, "Maverick" didn't merely contribute ideas but whole shooting scripts that were reshot scene for scene and close to word for word, a typical Warner Bros. practice at the time with its TV shows, although almost impossible for anyone to believe today. I remember being amazed as a child that my father would frequently know precisely what was going to happen next during many TV shows we were watching, never realizing that he'd seen half a dozen episodes of entirely different series using precisely the same script and could almost prompt the actors with their lines.

As I noted in my comments on the Discussion page, I simply cannot find any more information about the show at all....anywhere. It wasn't well thought of, I know that much, but finding out much detail is tough, even in biographies of Moore, which give that show extremely short shrift. I think Moore was perfect for "Maverick," though, and since he'd actually reshot Garner's scripts and repeated Garner's dialogue, it was no stretch for Jack Warner to visualize him as Maverick. "Maverick" was a show with two leads, though, Bret Maverick (Garner) and his brother Bart Maverick (Jack Kelly), and when Garner left, Kelly moved up to top billing with Moore coming aboard with second billing. Most of Moore's "Maverick" episodes are available for free viewing online but, sadly, this is anything but the case with "The Alaskans." I wish I could expand the article about that show more than I have but I can't seem to find out another thing. I'm going to keep my eye out for DVDs of episodes in the bargain bins, though; I think I actually saw one somewhere recently but I might be imagining that. Skymasterson 15:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

More on "The Alaskans"
Thanks, CzechOut; I'm enjoying corresponding with you about this. I've read the story of "Maverick" scripts being used on "The Alaskans" repeatedly, but it never happened the other way around ("The Alaskans" was apparently sort of a quickie bastard stepchild by comparison in terms of quality). Both books on the Maverick series cited in my Maverick (TV series) Wikipedia article mention it if I'm not mistaken (I have both books but they're very inconveniently packed away) and I believe Roy Huggins mentions it directly and James Garner speaks broadly of Warner Bros' propensity for recycling scripts through different shows in both their videotaped reminiscences for the awkwardly named Archive of American Television. (Both Huggins and Garner were disgusted with Warner Bros' outrageous behavior in general.) Both of them talk about the way the recycled scripts were usually credited as being written by "W. Hermanos" (Spanish for "W. Brothers") and that the studio was shooting entirely with recycled scripts during the writers' strike, the same strike which provided Garner's own ticket to freedom from his WB contract when he contested the studio putting him on hold without pay during the strike. Garner has laughed about "Hermanos" being one prolific writer in a variety of interviews over the years, including a televised one with Tom Snyder in the 90s. Roger Moore was absolutely right about his Maverick scripts being "tired" since he came in at the tail end of the show, long after Roy Huggins had departed (Moore's scripts were mostly junk compared to Garner's in the series' first two years), but he did get a couple of good episodes, including one written and directed by Robert Altman that's available for free viewing online (I recommend it: it's superb). I've read about scripts being recycled through 77 Sunset Strip, Bourbon Street Beat, Hawaiian Eye, and Surfside Six (I've read about the script-recycling many times in an extremely wide variety of different places and heard about it in a number of television interviews), since the same script routinely made its way through practically every one of their detective shows and many of their westerns (Bronco, Cheyenne, Sugarfoot, Lawman, Colt .45, etc.), usually (but not always) credited to "W. Hermanos" after the first use. The Internet Movie Database has a listing for "W. Hermanos" explaining the writer's strike story and listing a dozen scripts but I believe there were many more than that; I just found one myself called "Ferry to Algiers" for Bourbon Street Beat in about 30 seconds of looking, in fact. I'm going to put out a call to Art Lortie, one of the internet's resident experts on 1950s WB television series, if I can track him down, and see what he has to say about it as well. Skymasterson 02:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Latest "The Alaskans" Changes
CzechOut, I like your changes very much, I think you did a superb job with the article. I remember seeing Moore in a television interview complaining that he'd be playing a recycled Maverick script on The Alaskans and have to change "...as my pappy used to say..." to something like, "...as my maternal grandfather used to say..." while leaving the rest of the dialogue the same. I know that Maverick never recycled the same script within the Maverick series but its scripts apparently made the rounds of other shows. I especially like that you got Moore's dislike of The Alaskans into the article. The business about Moore's marital discord during the shooting and his affair with Dorothy Provine came as a diverting surprise to me and I'd never thought about what it must have been like to wear those winter clothes in that sweltering heat: oh god, how he must've hated working on that show. Bravo, CzechOut, you greatly improved that article across the board, with the infobox, the improved links, and now this latest contribution; I couldn't be more delighted with the improvements, and you did something that I simply couldn't, which is find out more information about the series. Skymasterson 02:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Additional "The Alaskans" Musings
I think directionally, the scripts went from Maverick to The Alaskans instead of ever going the other way around: at least that's the way I've always heard it, and I know one (or two) source(s) are the book(s) I mentioned about the Maverick series. Maverick was Warner Bros' flagship show, by far the most popular in its heyday, while The Alaskans was unfortunately produced as sort of a bottom of the barrel quickie by all accounts (the few I've ever found). As far as I know, Garner never complained about the scripts for Maverick lacking originality, especially since the scripts he got in the first couple of seasons were so stunningly good. Moore observed that if his scripts had been as good as Garner's early ones, he would've definitely stayed with the show. By the time Moore reached Maverick in the 4th season, the script quality had declined precipitously, although Garner's reason for wanting to leave was the fact that he was so popular after Maverick that he knew that he should be doing movies instead, plus he'd been severely underpaid for years (Maverick was a national sensation during the first two seasons and Garner was paid $500/episode bumped up to $650/episode along about the second season) and Garner was pissed off about it. The studio and Kaiser Aluminum offered him the moon to stay, including partial ownership in the show (Garner talks about this at length in the Archive of American Television interview) but Garner had his eye on a movie career. Moore didn't want to step into Garner's shoes (or literally put on his clothes, which he did to play the part: you can see that they wore the some of the same outfits and Moore talked about seeing "Garner" written inside the jackets and pants) and, according to Garner, Moore struck a deal with the studio that if he did the series for a year, they'd let him out if his contract, although I'm not sure that story is true since I've never heard it anywhere else and Garner's memory can be faulty. As for the absolute and total lack of content about the show itself in our article, that's always bothered me, too, but so far there hasn't been anything I could do about it. The premise is extremely intriguing and the names of some of the lead characters are wonderful. I wish I'd picked up that $2 DVD of an episode of the series that I think I saw in a bargain bin somewhere recently, though, assuming I didn't just dream that or something. Skymasterson 03:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Please use "minor edit" tag selectively
You seem to be using the "minor edit" tag for most of your article edits. As a favor to other editors, please try to use that tag more selectively; more information on the Wikipedia convention can be viewed at Help:Minor edit. Thanks! Engineer Bob 22:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Additional "The Alaskans"
My wireless connection went down last night right in the middle of our correspondence. The paragraph about Garner you found in on the Television Heaven site is exactly right, I think it's pristinely correct to a surprising degree. The story can be found in detail in a number of different places, including the two Maverick books from 1994, Garner's Archive of American Television online videotaped remembrances, and a number of interviews I've seen over the years with both Garner and Kelly telling the same story. The real reason Garner left, though, was that he was extremely angry about being underpaid for so long, which he goes into in some detail in the Archive of American Television interview, and the writer's strike suspension was the last straw on the camel's back, plus it provided a legal gambit for him to escape the contract: Garner was immensely popular and knew that he'd have a huge movie career as soon as he was free (although Jack Warner pulled out the stops to block him for a while after he left until Wyler hired him for The Children's Hour, which broke the brief blacklist). Kelly, on the other hand, understood that he wasn't remotely in the same position and broke their two-Maverick strike to return to work on the series. Kelly's career didn't last too much longer after the series was canceled and he eventually became a City Councilman for Huntington Beach, California. Most of the careers of the Warner TV cowboys ended within a few years; I remember reading about Will Hutchins (Sugarfoot) driving a forklift in a warehouse decades later, or maybe it was Ty Hardin (Bronco).

And Garner had sensational scripts during the show's first couple of years that hold up electrifyingly well today, with only a very gradual decline in quality afterward, while most of Roger Moore's scripts aren't in the same class (except for a few exceptions, like Altman's "Bolt from the Blue").

Everything I've read and heard concerning "The Alaskans" indicates that it was more or less entirely built with recycled scripts from other shows and I've heard Moore speak in at least one televised interview about playing the Garner role in hand-me-down Maverick scripts on The Alaskans. I'd be stupefied to learn that anything ever originated with The Alaskans and went from there to Maverick instead of strictly the other way around, but of course we are talking about a series for which we can't find any direct information about the episodes themselves for a Wikipedia article, so how knowledgeable can I actually be? Skymasterson 04:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The Lawman
You don't need to speedy request redundant articles, it's best to replace all their contents with a redirect. Deleting them just allows for someone else to repeat the error. Thanks, Carlossuarez46 21:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The Dakotas
Damn, CzechOut, I just saw that story about The Dakotas being suddenly canceled because of that scene in the church (when you read the allusion to it in the first paragraph, you keep reading). I never knew that, or evidently had long since forgotten it. Fascinating. I dimly remember The Dakotas as a very good show and the first time I recall being aware of Jack Elam, which is the main thing that sticks in my mind. Skymasterson 01:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Another Axed Show
Yes, one example of a show killed by public reaction and many local stations refusing to run it again as a result was a sort of half-hour copy of "Laugh-In" by the same producers called "Turn-On!" I remember seeing its one broadcast episode at the time and I suppose the most "objectionable" thing was extreme close-ups of host Tim Conway's face making lewd expressions as he looked at a woman in a bikini; today it would be so tame nobody would even notice. I think both instances, though, say more about the networks' crazed fear of any controversy than anything else (in that superb George Clooney movie about Ed Murrow, you can see how Bill Paley destroyed Murrow's career because Paley was terrified of controversy). I don't think the public killed "The Dakotas" as much as the network's pathetic over-reaction to a little letter-writing and phone-calling by zealots.

By the way, speaking of Bill Orr, he wasn't well thought of by his peers. Have you checked out Roy Huggins' and James Garner's interviews at the Archive of American Television? Their derision of Orr is absolute and in accord with what I read everywhere else, with Garner offering an incendiary Orr anecdote in (I believe) the last section of his interview. Skymasterson 04:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Bill Orr
I did already note that the Archive of American Television interviews exist in the Orr article but I'll have to go back and fill in some detail when I get a chance. Huggins and Garner both viewed Orr as never making any contributions to the studio's shows whatsoever, being completely detached creatively and merely functioning as a credit-grabbing figurehead as a result of being Warner's son-in-law. Far more interesting than Orr, actually, is Huggins himself, who was the main creative engine of the Warner Bros. TV series until he fell physically ill and subsequently moved over to their movie department for a while. Huggins also had a major television career afterward, creating The Fugitive, Baretta, The Rockford Files (Maverick updated to become a private eye), and quite a few more. Skymasterson 04:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

More Orr
(I couldn't resist that title...)

I'd have to cogitate about the two questions you asked. For the answer to the first one, or at least the glimmerings of an answer, run Huggins' and Garner's free online Archive of American Television interviews. (And I think, although I'm not positive, that Huggins was running all those shows, which was why he fell ill.) As for Orr's retirement, I'm betting that had something to do with his relationship with Jack Warner but I don't know offhand without looking it up and piecing it together.

You also mentioned something else I'm curious about as well: those 77 Sunset Strip episodes after Jack Webb dumped the whole cast except for Zimbalist (playing the character from the early Huggins novels) and turning him into a globe-trotter of some sort. Those shows sound intriguing as hell to me (I never thought the rest of the cast amounted to much anyway and I'd've probably jettisoned them myself); I wonder if any of those episodes exist at the Museum of Television & Radio (recently rechristened the "Paley Center for Media," much to my chagrin). I'll have to look them up and see next time I'm there; I'll go armed with a list of them. Of course, not much television overseen by Webb was ever worth watching except for some of the earlier episodes of Dragnet (especially one with Lee Marvin as a murderer eagerly confessing to his crimes). But I'm more or less enthralled by what little I've read about Webb's 77 Sunset Strip season. (Now if he'd gotten rid of everybody but Kookie, that would've really been crazy but might've been a perverse hit in the ratings.) Skymasterson 05:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Still More Orr
When Orr divorced Warner's stepdaughter (or vice versa) that was it for him and the studio: she was by all accounts the reason he was there to begin with and that's always the downside of marrying into a top position---when the marriage ends, so does the top position, ninety-nine times out of a hundred. Huggins wore himself out and fell seriously ill with pneumonia, I think it was. He then went into supervising movies for the studio but they stuck him with TV actors instead of real movie stars and threw him into projects he didn't want to do so, amazingly, he quit and went back to school for a while! (Why school, I don't know.) I'm familiar with Garner's interview on Costas' show (I miss Costas, he was that extreme rarity for television: a good interviewer, and I discovered his show shortly before he left, which was very annoying.  On network TV, there have only been Paar, Cavett, and arguably Charlie Rose that I can think of offhand as regular hosts that can interview worth a damn.  Carson and the others are absolute abominations at interviewing). Garner also did an interesting installment with Tom Snyder (a so-so interviewer often with spectacularly great guests). The picture you get of Orr from interviews with various ex-Warner employees was of a sort of Ted Baxter/Ted Knight type character from the old Mary Tyler Moore Show; pompous, empty-headed, ridiculous in his treatment of staff, of no worth whatsoever regarding the shows themselves, and eager to grab public credit and Emmys---in other words, the perfect cliche of the boss's son-in-law. If there's another side to that story, I haven't heard it, Ron Simon notwithstanding (and I don't know how much time you've spent at Museum of Television & Radio seminars, but I wouldn't put but so much stock in that, especially if that line was part of some sort of introduction or something). Of course, Orr might somehow be getting a bad rap, and it wouldn't be the first time that happened.

I never really watched Emergency! at all but I am glad EMTs and those guys are there when we need them. Unlike Maverick, 77 Sunset Strip doesn't strike me as holding up but so well today, although it's probably ideal fodder for a new movie, especially with that goddammed catchy theme song (wonder why that hasn't happened). As soon as I saw Zimbalist throw that obligatory punch at somebody in the pilot TV-movie Girl on the Run (every American television episode and movie has to include at least one punch for some reason), I snapped the screen off at the Museum of Television & Radio. I'd already seen enough by then. By the way, Huggins tells in interesting story in his Archive of American Television interview about Warner showing the TV-movie for an afternoon on an offshore island so he wouldn't have to subsequently pay Huggins the creator fee for the series every week. Skymasterson 16:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Still More Bill Orr
That was a good job with Girl on the Run today; I had a feeling you might work on that a little and I was happy to be right. The film was certainly the first made-for-TV movie except for Warner slipping it into that offshore theatre for one afternoon, technically disqualifying it and I suppose arguably restoring that title to Fame Is the Name of the Game, which NBC (I think it was) flogged into monstrous ratings with the most intense ad campaign in the history of the medium (later exceeded by the first telecast of "Bridge Over the River Kwai"). CzechOut, you had to see that campaign for the first "World Premiere" to believe it. They turned it into a series, The Name of the Game, the following year, with the most lavish rotating cast of TV actors in television history by the end of its run (Peter Falk, Tony Franciosa, Gene Barry, Robert Culp, Robert Stack, Robert Wagner, and Darren McGavin all played leads at different times) and an intriguing science fiction episode written by Philip Wylie and directed by Steven Spielberg (L.A. 2017) that featured a fascist state run by psychiatrists! Skymasterson 03:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Huggins, Garner, and Orr
If you looked at the Archive of American Television tapes for Huggins and Garner (all of them, since they both skip around a bit---Garner's most trenchant observations about Orr are in the very last section of his interview, where you find the Orr anecdote about Orr's staff), then I think one source for the picture of Orr that I carry of his having nothing whatever creatively to do with any of the shows he "produced" is at least one of the two 1994 books on the Maverick television series cited in Maverick article under "Sources," probably dealing with Garner and Huggins interviews. I've been learning about Warner Bros. television series literally ever since I learned to read, though, in countless magazine articles, biographies, and radio and television interviews and so forth and it's usually impossible to cite exactly how I happen to know something, so go ahead and pull those lines, or tone them down however you like. Aside from those two 1994 Maverick books, if there's nothing in the Archive of American Television interviews beyond Garner's evident withering contempt for Orr evinced toward the very end of his interview, I can't back them up off the top of my head.

You're certainly right about Garner's memory being abominable, by the way; he claimed to not realize that Huggins left Maverick after the second season, although I'm not sure I believe that. What you have to understand when you listen to Garner discuss Huggins and vice versa, though, is that Garner fell out with Huggins for some reason early in the run of The Rockford Files, which is why Huggins left that series when he did and why Garner gives almost complete credit for the show to Stephen J. Cannell (which is something Cannell himself would never dream of doing). Garner bad-mouthed Huggins viciously and relentlessly for a while, and Huggins would tell interviewers that he and Garner had a "love-hate relationship: I love Garner and he hates me." The "punchline" for this, as Huggins later put it, came afterward during the single-season run of Garner's 1981 "sequel series" Bret Maverick when Garner put out the word that he wanted Huggins to come produce that show; Huggins refused, explaining that when they decided to have Maverick settle down in one place they'd changed the formula too much since Maverick was by definition a drifter (Garner's writers responded by changing this concept for the following season, writing scripts with Bret's brother Bart returning to run the saloon while Bret resumed traveling, with the first several episodes of the second season divided between them, but NBC unexpectedly canceled the series, shocking everybody). I recall that one good source among many for most of what I'm talking about at the moment is Garner's 60 Minutes television interview back in the 80s or 90s, which I believe is available for viewing at the Museum of Television & Radio. That museum, by the way, held a seminar celebrating Huggins' career with both Huggins and Garner in attendance, and that's also in the Museum's library (it's worth taking a look at if you live in New York or L.A.).

And lastly, you're certainly right about Walt Disney being the subject of criticism. There was even a recent write-up on Mark Evanier's blog, www.newsfromme.com, about Disney stealing the credit or rights to a character from an artist, and Evanier literally worships Disney; Evanier routinely refers to Disney as "Mr. Disney" and the execrable Tonight Show-host Johnny Carson as "Mr. Carson," the only two people I know of that he does that with. If you're not familiar with Evanier's blog, by the way, or his other website www.povonline.com, I can't recommend them highly enough. Check out his profiles on povonline.com of Redd Foxx and Red Skelton if you're up for a little amazement. Skymasterson 20:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Orr, Encyclopedias, and Temple Houston
I didn't realize Orr left Warner's prior to his divorce from Warner's daughter. That puts what I said into a somewhat different light, of course, to say the least. Garner's remarks about Orr's childishness were pretty funny, though. I don't know, the picture I've always gotten from everywhere is that Orr left the creative end up to everyone else until it came to silliness like collecting those stupid Emmy Awards. You've doubtless heard the story of Huggins being told to be as brief as possible when he picked up his Emmy for Maverick, only saying "Thank you," then Garner being pissed off for years about it. And you're certainly right about factual evidence being required for evaluating something like creative contributions, of course.

I do think Wikipedia sometimes has an institutionalized fundamental misunderstanding of what an encyclopedia should be, though; we see a lot of meaningless factoids simply because they're irrefutable "facts," like who won what silly awards or whether or not somebody has one of those preposterous "stars" on the "Hollywood Walk of Fame" (which, by the way, the recipients or someone in their organization has to pay for themselves) and not enough actual information. I used to own an original set of the 1910 Encyclopepia Brittanica, which is routinely cited as the best year for any encyclopedia ever, and it was full of opinionated essays by various people that went shockingly far afield from the Jack Webb autistic tone and approach being so zealously guarded in certain quarters for Wikipedia (and again, let me stress that what I'm musing about at the moment has nothing whatsoever to do with Orr or our correspondence about him, I'm talking about something quite different).

Mentioning Jack Webb deftly segues us into Temple Houston. I do remember the show to a slight extent; it echoes or presages other series of the period---the original Star Trek captain played Houston while the best sidekick of the era, Jack Elam (Sugarfoot, The Dakotas, etc.) was also much in evidence, so to speak. I don't recall the show making much of a ripple, probably because of that initial (and idiotic) Jack Webb seriousness in tone cited in the excellent Wikipedia article about the show (somebody seems to have done a fine job). I have no idea whether any copies exist at the Museum of Television & Radio here in New York but I almost tend to doubt it. I never quite knew what to make of Jeffrey Hunter as an actor, by the way. I think The Searchers would've been even better had John Ford been able to cast his first choice, Fess Parker, in Hunter's role opposite John Wayne (Wayne's brilliant acting is woefully underrated today), but Walt Disney, who held a personal(!) contract with Parker, wouldn't allow it. And that may have been the single worst thing Disney ever did creatively to American culture. But I will tell you one thing: Hunter was Olivier and Cagney rolled into one compared to his replacement on Star Trek. DeForest Kelly, a superb performer, saw his busy career as a character actor suddenly ended by being typecast while the execrable Shatner enjoys a literally endless flourishing career based on making fun of the fact that, aside from Arnold Schwarzenegger, he is absolutely the worst actor ever to appear on any screen anywhere, ever. (And just to show you how everything's the opposite of what it appears to be in this world, something that you will notice more and more as time goes on, Schwarzenegger in Batman and Robin was the highest-paid movie actor in history up to that time for the single worst performance ever captured on film, his turn as "Mr. Freeze.") Skymasterson 19:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

One More Thing About Temple Houston
I just realized something else about Temple Houston (you did a bang-up job on that article, by the way): the only other western series about a frontier lawyer I can think of, Sugarfoot, also featured Jack Elam as the sidekick. Skymasterson 20:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Wendy and Me
Have a look at my addition to the Wendy and Me article. You'll probably have to take my word for it if you haven't seen the show but I swear it's true. Skymasterson 20:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The Voyeur Landlord
What happened with Wendy and Me, I think, was that Gracie retired, possibly due to poor health, and perpetual workhorse Burns (who lived to be a hundred) started this new series with Connie Stevens after the George Burns and Gracie Allen Show became the George Burns Show immediately after Gracie's retirement and flopped. (Burns was terrified that he'd have no career without Gracie but of course he turned out to be quite wrong about that: the more surreally simian he looked with shockingly advanced age, the better his career somehow went). By the way, the most interesting Burns and Allen stuff I've seen were the shorts they did together in the very early '30s, two decades before their TV show: Burns is dashingly handsome and Gracie is so sensationally ravishing you wonder why the celluloid isn't melting. By the TV era, Gracie was okay but rather matronly, not the bombshell she'd been a couple of decades earlier (although she didn't change as much during the same span as Pert Kelton, who played the first Alice Kramden on Jackie Gleason's The Honeymooners before being blacklisted: Kelton went from absolute goddess in movies like Bed of Roses (1933) to battleaxe in the very dark and incredibly entertaining early version of The Honeymooners). Burns had already been shooting Wendy and Me when Gracie died. What's funny, though, is that in that comparatively innocent time, it apparently didn't occur to many people (or perhaps anybody) to think it rather oddly voyeuristic to have middle-aged landlord Burns intently watching his gorgeous young tenant on his television set via what appeared to be hidden cameras. Nowadays the show would probably either be ridden off the air on a rail or perceived as the darkest comedy to come along in decades.

I do detest the "original research" stricture, especially when it applies to actual experience with the topic of the article. To take it to a cartoonish extreme, I watched Wendy and Me, for example, but in order to write about it on Wikipedia, I need someone else who watched it to have already written about it somewhere else so that I can paraphrase what he said. My closest friend used to be Enrico Banducci, the guy who ran the hungry i San Francisco nightclub for decades and launched Barbra Streisand, Lenny Bruce, Mort Sahl, Bill Cosby, and countless others: don't get me started on all the original research I can't write about where that's concerned.

You're right that there are all sorts of reasons to view Temple Houston as important, right down to the Jesus connection (maybe Willem Dafoe or Jim Caviezel should do an HBO TV-movie version of Temple Houston). Hey, I wish someone had cast Jack Elam as Christ! On second thought, maybe that's not all that far afield from using thuggish Dafoe; I never could understand why Scorcese cast him unless he was just transported into some other realm by Dafoe's death scene in Platoon and had to make the crucifixion even more literal than it already was.

I find your consideration of the effect of various executives on the entertainment industry to be unique and rather refreshing when applied to '50s and '60s television, especially when it comes to somebody like Jack Webb. Stephen J. Cannell started out working for Webb before moving up to Huggins and describes it as a perfect way to break in, which it doubtless was. Skymasterson 05:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Girl on the Run
Hey, CzechOut, I'm continuing to enjoy our correspondence about the Stone Age of Warner Bros. Television (which, ironically produced some of their very best stuff). I took another look at the Girl on the Run article and found a couple of things you mentioned that I'd like to run past you, since it seems to indicate some sort of fundamental misunderstanding of what actually happened somehow (I sometimes almost begin to think you're a lawyer or work for Warner Bros. or both). First, your excisement of the word "technical", with the note, "It wasn't technical, it wasn't a TV movie" definitely misses the point of the whole thing. What we have here is a film that was made strictly for television but was dropped into an offshore theatre for one afternoon in a shoddy legal gambit to cheat Huggins out of any subsequent residual creation fees. Warner had a standing policy, which everyone in the company knew about, to cheat any writer under contract out of any creation residuals by hook or by crook, and one of Bill Orr's jobs was to make sure that no nickel of Warner's money ever went into any Warner writer's pocket as a creation residual on his watch, as Huggins ruefully but (decades after the fact) jovially observed in his Archive of American Television interview (I think he mentions that Orr would've been fired had it occurred). The Girl on the Run article in its previous incarnation would infer that Warner ran the film in a "brief theatrical release" in the Caribbean as some sort of test, perhaps, conducted offshore so as not to spoil the fun for TV viewers who didn't happen to be vacationing there at the time, when it was actually projected onto a movie screen there for one day (according to Huggins) in order to technically disqualify Huggins from being able to collect any residuals, also technically disqualifying it from the term "first made-for-TV movie," although no one was likely to be thinking about that at the time.

I took out another line, "Since he had been writing under an episodic television contract, Hargrove had no rights to the series whatsoever" since it's inaccurate as far as I can tell; Huggins was under a similar contract when he created Maverick, but Warner had to switch the order of the first two Maverick episodes so that an episode based on a Warner property would be telecast first, thereby cheating Huggins out of creator residuals, which was business as usual at Warner Bros., unfortunately for the writers (this penny-wise pound-foolish approach hurt the company more than anyone can even speculate in the long run, of course, as writers like Huggins gradually wound up swearing to never create anything for Warner again). This injustice was finally acknowledged decades later when Huggins was given creator credit in the Mel Gibson movie version of Maverick (probably at Gibson's insistence, now that I think about it) but by then, of course, it was far too late for Huggins to claim any monies from creating the series.

This all puts me in mind of the story of the real Paladin, whose cheating at the hands of a studio over Have Gun - Will Travel was even slimier than this, but that's too long a story to go into right now. Skymasterson 16:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

More Girl on the Run
I agree with you about a movie-length episode of a TV show and a made-for-TV movie being two different things (I read your earlier comments in the TV-movie article that you linked to) and it does put the question of whether Girl on the Run is merely the pilot of a series or the first made-for-TV movie (as has been routinely assumed by a lot of people for decades) into an interesting light. I think you're right about the extra half-hour being stuck in in order to release it as a movie for legal purposes because I do think, now that you've reminded me, that Huggins did say that, which really puts the whole issue into a spin. I had completely forgotten all about that. It's been a while since I've looked at Huggins' online videotaped interview but I also thought he said it was shown offshore for only a single afternoon, although I could certainly be wrong about that, too. You're right, we're not looking at the first made-for-TV movie here, it's a pilot that got stretched specifically so it could be exhibited once as a "movie" to circumvent paying Huggins his creator residuals. I think it's only a movie in the technical (or "legal") sense since it never got a release beyond a single theater nor was it ever intended to. It's not really a movie (except "legally") nor is it a made-for-TV movie: I finally agree fully with your complete removal of that phrase once you reminded me that the extra half hour was tacked on strictly as part of Warner's scam to begin with, otherwise it would've been the standard hour in length. It's a pilot that got stretched during a tug-of-war over the creator residuals between Warner and Huggins. (Fame Is the Name of the Game's status as the first made-for-TV movie is momentarily more or less secure.) Now one of us should insert a paragraph into the article to explain all this clearly and put an end to the idea that Girl on the Run is the first made-for-TV movie (preferably under a heading like "Made-for-TV Movie Controversy"), otherwise people who haven't hashed it out at the length we have won't see it and the article will inevitably undergo periodic amendments by people who assume that the earlier contributors didn't realize the historically significant fact that Girl on the Run was the first made-for-TV movie, when it was actually just the first series pilot stretched into movie length for a legal loophole. Skymasterson 23:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

TV-Movie or Not TV-Movie
Couldn't resist the bad pun tonight in this case, although I normally eschew puns. Here's the thing: Girl on the Run had been referred to in conversation as the first made-for-TV movie for decades before Wikipedia or even the internet even existed. The controversy about whether it's Fame Is the Name of the Game or Girl on the Run or maybe even something else has raged for a long time and will probably continue to (christ only knows what the zeitgeist will eventually settle on to accord the dubious "honor," if anything; probably some obscure primordial telecast from Philo Farnsworth's lab that nobody's even thought of yet). More recently, and just as a minor example, I've spent a lot of time at the Museum of Television & Radio and if you ask anybody who works there (who is marginally knowledgeable, and not all of them are) what the first made-for-TV movie was, they'll usually respond with Girl on the Run, often with an allusion to Fame Is the Name of the Game as the runner-up. This is a long-standing issue that literally predates Wikipedia by a very wide margin, believe me. It's not an important issue, granted, but it has had a long healthy life completely apart from Wikipedia.

Then the whole question of what constitutes a made-for-TV movie in the first place is something I'd rather not even think about at the moment: what was Frankenheimer's 1957 live telecast The Comedian if not the greatest made-for-TV movie ever, except of course that it was initially presented live and filmed only during the broadcast performance as a kinescope (but it was filmed...). Tomorrow night I think I'll try to forget all this by watching some Claude Chabrol TV-movies projected onto a movie screen at the Museum of Modern Art. Skymasterson 23:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

More TV-Movie Nonsense
There well may not be anything in print whatsoever about that one way or the other, in fact it wouldn't surprise me if there isn't. This is the kind of thing you find yourself talking about once in a while over the years but never read about in print (until the dawn of Wikipedia) because it isn't the kind of question anyone would have the context for bringing up in print if you think about it: it's too picayune a point for the formal realm of published writing. Like so many mildly diverting (for two seconds) conversational points, it probably never came up in print and never would have done so had technology not changed recently (and that's only if you call Wikipedia "print"): it's too ridiculous a topic. The only way I could imagine it ever surfacing in print would be if someone wrote in to one of those question columns like in "Parade Magazine" asking about it, then what editor would ever select a question like that for a response? I guarantee someone will bring it back up in the Girl on the Run article by mentioning it probably sooner rather than later, though: I'm positive that will happen again and again over time. I have no "source" offhand for that except the infinitesimal but deadly accurate source of a lifetime of occasionally hearing about it (truly "anecdotal evidence"). Over time, you'll see that I'm right, I think (on the other hand, who knows...or cares).

By the way, I noticed your self-deleted notation about Temple Houston being an actual practicing lawyer instead of a student like chronic cowboy/lawyer sidekick Jack Elam's other partner Sugarfoot. You are a lawyer, aren't you? And while I'm being so eerily prescient in grasping the obvious, do you work for Warner Bros.?

An interesting thing about the flamboyant real-life Temple Houston, of course, is that he was Sam Houston's son. The title of that PDF reference, by the way, was exactly right: while I remembered the TV series "Temple Houston" the moment you brought it up, I had entirely forgotten it prior to that and it hadn't crossed my mind in decades, despite having just seen Jeffrey Hunter in The Searchers at the Museum of Modern Art a couple of months ago during the John Wayne retrospective. Skymasterson 02:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Lorne Greene
Couple of odd things about Lorne Greene (whom you are right about). You probably already know this, but he's Canadian and used to announce the soldiers' deaths over the radio for the government during WW2 and was consequently nicknamed "The Voice of Doom" up there. Imagine how "Bonanza" must've resonated in subsequent years with the parents and widows of some of the people whose names he'd read on the radio earlier. The other oddity is something that I alone seem to have ever noticed and whenever I mention it to anyone I get a blank look (like staring into the face of a fish): Lorne Greene looked exactly like the Ayatollah Khomeini back in the 80s only without the beard. And I mean exactly. And apparently I'm the only person on earth who can see it, I don't know why.

Some of the early "Bonanza" scripts were unspeakably awful, with the grown sons practically having to ask "Pa" for permission to urinate (not just when but where and how much). No wonder Pernell Roberts left the show, although he stayed an extra season to derail Guy Williams, who was going to replace him by playing a Cartwright cousin.

While I'm pointing out strange things only I can notice, have you caught the fact that almost every leading lady's character in practically every movie produced in the past 25 years or more has a man's first name? She'll be Steve or Frank or Jack or Butch or Sam or any other boy's name you can think of; when she's Mary or Alice (instead of Al), it comes as a mild shock. I mention this to people all the time but no one else is aware of it or seems to be capable of noticing it. I once even started poring over the Internet Movie Database looking for "sources" but imdb.com is kind of formal and will write a female character named Steve's name as "Stephanie," so that didn't work.

I'm ambivalent about Disney; I have various problems with the way his empire has been run but that's all kind of after the fact of his death, which probably shouldn't count. I really loved his Davy Crockett series as a child, though, that's for sure, even more than I detested Fess Parker's subsequent Daniel Boone TV series (you'd think they'd've been similar but they felt entirely different, the complete opposite of each other). You know, Buddy Ebsen had the Crockett part then Disney saw Fess Parker in something and Ebsen was instantly demoted to sidekick George Russell (a character who didn't actually exist in life). First he loses the role of Tin Woodsman in The Wizard of Oz because of an allergy to the make-up, then he has an even bigger show business phenomenon jerked away from him after being assured it was his. He deserved the frenzy The Beverly Hillbillies created in '64: he was finally at the center of a bona fide cultural firestorm after all (and you simply would not believe how the whole country was utterly fixated on Jed Clampett and his brood at the time: outside of 9/11, I've never seen anything like it since). Speaking of Daniel Boone, did you know that both Pat Boone and Richard Boone are (were) supposedly related to Daniel Boone and to each other? There's some sort of profound metaphorical truth or something in there somewhere but I'm too tired at the moment to see it.

If you want to see something really remarkable, click on this (or paste it into your browser if it doesn't work) and watch Part 3 of a stunningly great several-minute recent Harlan Ellison interview on youtube. It builds to a crescendo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI2XuMoQOCU&NR=1

Skymasterson 04:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Temple Houston
You have really improved the article on the Temple Houston TV series. Kudos! — Walloon 08:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Lorne Greene, Women's Names in Film, Weasel Words--and Still More Bill Orr
Well, Ben Cartwright's ranch was in Nevada in a time when there wasn't much between there and Canada but wilderness (hell, there still isn't). I was reading something in a collection of Robert Altman interviews a week or two back about how the western accents we know today had to evolve over time and didn't exist back in what we now think of as the Wild West. Statistically, the place was populated with a lot of immigrants with a broad range of accents, and any accent we think of today like the regional "Texas" accent is wrong while practically any European accent could be said to be right. As for Lorne Greene's character, he was about as cultured as anyone could possibly be (as cultured as Orson Welles and sounding like Orson Welles), having been almost everywhere and done practically everything before settling down on his ranch, so his accent made perfect sense for the character, counterintuitive as that might initially seem to a viewer. The fact that his kids didn't appear to replicate it would've been due to the environment. Unlike some things (like William Shatner's jarringly awful acting in Star Trek), Greene's Voice of Doom voice never spoiled the series for me but some of the early scripts were horrible: compare the first season to the Maverick episodes then in production (Maverick came first by a couple of years) and it's almost hard to believe.

Fess Parker has a long interview with the Archive detailing how disgusted he was with his missed opportunities, especially The Searchers and, to a lesser degree, the famous Bus Stop fiasco with Marilyn Monroe (lunatic Disney wouldn't let his property perform in such an adult piece, much to Parker's frustration). Everybody knows about Bus Stop, which is in every article about Parker, but I'd never heard the story about The Searchers, which Parker quite properly ranks as his worst career reversal (he would've been magic in that part, which was obviously in one of the greatest movies ever made). I would surmise that Parker must've enjoyed acting in the early stage of his career: it's hard to imagine him doing what he did with Davy Crockett without enjoying it (his Crockett puts even John Wayne's and Billy Bob Thornton's in the shade largely because of its reined-in exuberance).

As for women's names, no, I'm not deluded about the prevalence of women's names usually being male in movies. You cited a few exceptions (I never said all women's names) but I'd say that the percentage of leading lady's characters in modern-set films having male names easily tops 90% if not higher. You're right about it no longer being as divergent from reality as it used to be since girls using guy's names is more and more common, but I think that's a case of life imitating art since everybody's growing up watching a continuous stream of movies featuring leading ladies with male nicknames, which is bound to have its subliminal effects. And the trend of male names for women in films has absolutely nothing to do with surprise gender revelations (it's presented as the most normal thing in the world), it has to do with something else, but I can only speculate as to what that something else might be, which is something I've spent a lot of time doing. The remarkable thing, which is the reason I brought it up, is that I'm the only one who notices it or seems able to recognize it. I was anything but surprised by your response.

Speaking of gender-blurring, why has "actress" fallen into disuse in the past fifteen or so years? How long will it be before they change the Academy Award designation for women from "Best Actess" to "Best Female Actor"?

You mentioned the notion of Girl on the Run as the first TV-movie being strictly a Wikipedia phenomenon. That's anything but the case, but you also touched on a real Wikipedia excretion that I find abhorrent, the concept of "weasel words," a term that simply didn't exist before Wikipedia, and that seems to have come from the same kind of mindset that recently labeled the French "weasels" for not backing our war against Iran (because, of course, of a business conflict and their oil contracts with Saddam). From what I can tell (without ever having looked at the Wikipedia information on the topic, of course, which is something I will never waste a moment to do) a "weasel word" is any word that actually says anything and lifts an article from an imdb-style compilation of lists including idiotic minutia like "stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame" to the level of a coherent narrative that says anything. I wish those people could see that 1910 encyclopedia set I mentioned earlier (which was actually reprinted a few years ago). That would be a real paradigm shift. Skymasterson 04:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Another thing I forgot to mention. I dropped by the Paley Center for Media yesterday (formerly the Museum of Television and Radio) and looked at the first part of the Roy Huggins seminar panel again. In addition to Huggins himself, the panelists included James Garner, Stephen J. Cannell, Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., and about ten others, including....Bill Orr!! One of the panelists, who I believe was Huggins' son-in-law who became a producer (maybe it was Jo Swerling, I'm not sure) mentioned that Huggins was a great editor and that Huggins once told him that he was taught how to edit by Orr! Garner was sitting beside him in a two-shot at the moment he said that and sort of made a face, I think, but maybe that was my imagination. Anyway, I unfortunately only reserved the first part (I've seen it countless times but usually just fast-forward to the Maverick and Rockford Files parts) but I'll watch the rest again the next time I'm there and let you know how Orr's appearance shook out. It is one hell of a seminar, that's for sure. Cannell said that he owes Huggins everything and Garner noted that his whole acting persona was concocted during the first three episodes of Maverick and that he owed that to Huggins. Everybody on the panel that didn't go back quite far enough to have worked on Maverick themselves mentioned that it's the gold standard for television during its Huggins era, and they're right. I think "According to Hoyle," "Shady Deal at Sunny Acres," and "The Saga of Waco Williams" remain the three best episodes of any television series I've ever seen, with "Stampede" and "Duel at Sundown" not terribly far behind. I was fascinated again by hearing of the care Huggins took in post-production, polishing everything like a jewel; a couple of the panelists mentioned that his shows cost one-third more in post-production than any others, which the studio hated. Skymasterson 04:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Weasel words
Actually, Theodore Roosevelt wrote some of the articles in that prized 1910 Britannica, now that you mention it. To judge from his citing of Wilson's "universal voluntary," I think he was zeroing in on the Orwellian everything's-the-opposite-of-what-it-says trend so popular with our current government, which is a very different thing from a word like "technically," which is loaded with meaning that's actually changed when "legally" is substituted. I think Roosevelt used "technically" often in his writing. My point here is that good, clear writing is being sacrificed as Wikipedia inches more into the realm of legalese, to use a different form of the same word, and it's not necessarily good from the standpoint of clarity, that's for sure. And I don't know what words have been selected by the "staff" at Wikipedia as "weasel words" because I don't care to know. That way my blood pressure will remain at its normal level.

It's funny you should mention the evil twin article. I was just corresponding with someone about that two or three days ago, at exactly the same time that I was writing back and forth with you, the only time I've done that with anyone besides yourself in probably a year or two. That article seems to be a real lightning rod for those who can't stand bulleted lists (and there are people out there who delete them on sight, weirdly enough; I can't think why). I think the point of the article would be reinforced, though, if there could be a list of a hundred or even a thousand examples: it's the only way a novice to the concept could understand how irresistably pervasive it is. Almost every single narrative television series of any description features an evil twin sooner or later, if not actually more than one. Oddly, I had a close friend years ago who actually had an evil twin. An identical twin who liked to beat up women, brawl in bars, and so forth. The poor guy never knew when he was going to be suddenly assaulted by someone mistaking him for his twin brother.

Getting back to Star Trek, how did you like that youtube clip of Star Trek writer Harlan Ellison? Skymasterson 17:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 01:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:WonderWoman175.jpg
CzechOut, would you mind beefing up the rationale for the above image, as it currently doesn't address a lot of required elements. See WP:FURG for the guideline/templates. Videmus Omnia Talk  15:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The image has been substituted with one that is in the .png format, cropped to just the salient point of the article, and given an expanded fair use rationale. Please check to see whether it's satisfactory, or whether I need to try agan.  Also, the original .jpg version should probably now be deleted.  Czech Out   ☎ |  ✍  16:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:WonderWoman175.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading Image:WonderWoman175.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. fuzzy510 19:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Swlogo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Swlogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sierra logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Sierra logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rigormortis.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Rigormortis.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Evil Twin Suggestion
I suggested the Evil Twin page not be merged with the doppelganger page, but have a link to the other on both sides. Do you think that's a good idea? PRhyu 11:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Andypandy.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Andypandy.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:LizzieDrippingBTS.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:LizzieDrippingBTS.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MoondialTV.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MoondialTV.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I got this one, the Andy Pandy one and the Lizzie Dripping one. I assumed for the fair use rationale, that you made an original screen captures of the title screens.Number36 22:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 08:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Conflict, Maverick, and 77 Sunset Strip
Wonder what SuggestBot would suggest for me. I'm glad you wrote the Conflict article; it's about time somebody did (I'd often looked for it but didn't know enough about the show to write it myself: my knowledge of The Alaskans was encyclopedic by comparison) and your discussion of the wheel formats is fascinating and concise. I'm intrigued by the notion that the pilots for Maverick and 77 Sunset Strip were on that show: I don't believe I've ever heard that. I do think Huggins mentions seeing Garner on Conflict in a sci-fi episode called "The Man From 1992" or something (god, I'd love to see it!) and realizing Garner was perfect casting for his new Maverick idea; at least ten different people all talk about independently realizing that Garner should play Maverick and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if most of them aren't right since he was a contract player on the lot at the perfect point in his career to do a series, shooting "Sayonara" with Brando at the time. But aside from that, I don't think there was a Maverick pilot on Conflict. Was Girl on the Run part of Conflict? Sounds like that would be much too early but I'm not really 100% sure offhand. Interestingly, though, the Samantha Crawford character turns up in an episode of Cheyenne before she makes her several memorable appearances on Maverick. She was named after Huggins' mother's maiden name.

Oh, I also finished watching the Huggins seminar with Bill Orr; he shows up again at the last five minutes and talks about teaching Huggins about dubbing dialogue, if I'm not mistaken. It was very interesting. Skymasterson (talk) 04:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Images
I've come to the realization that all images in every Wikipedia article will be deleted and replaced at some point. It's kind of eerie.

And what did you think of that Harlan Ellison youtube talk? It's still up if you haven't seen it yet. Skymasterson (talk) 04:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Doctor Who World Game.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Doctor Who World Game.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC) '''Sorry, we weren't able to suggest any articles for you. Something is probably wrong on our end.'''

Lesley Scott article
Given your comments on the talk page of the Lesley Scott article, I thought you might want to be made aware of my sourced revisions to it. If not, my apologies for wasting your time. Ted Watson (talk) 21:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Wendy and Me
Burns watched Wendy on a television screen in his apartment as she went about her business upstairs. If that doesn't appear to be a secret closed-circuit telecast, what does it appear to be?Wastetimer (talk) 02:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Wastetimer (talk) 15:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Czech Republic
Hi, welcome to the project CzechOut and I hope you enjoy your participation. I czeched out you're work at President of the Czech Republic and it's excellent, the prose article is much better than the list. I wish I had some fancy welcome template with flags and banners and everything, but oh well, welcome anyway. The Dominator (talk) 04:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)




 * Welcome to WikiProject Czech Republic!




 * Hi, and welcome to the Czech Republic WikiProject!


 * We are the project collecting, improving and maintaining articles related to the Czech Republic, Czechoslovakia, medieval Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia and Samo's Empire
 * Please feel free to add the membership userbox to your userpage  
 * If you spot an article within the scope of our project please add our tag   to its talk page
 * In case you have any questions use our project's talk page
 * We wish you happy editing !
 *  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 15:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Czech law
Hello. Thank you very much for your recent new articles about Czech constitution and related issues. They were much needed. By the way do you plan to create article about Czech Statistical Office? It is still missing and creation would be much appreciated. :) - Darwinek (talk) 13:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It looks nice. :) -- Darwinek (talk) 17:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

2006 merger discussion at Talk:History of Czechoslovakia (1918–1938)
heheh.. i had just finished reading your comments when you wrote on my talk page. =) - TheMightyQuill (talk) 00:57, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

CS template
I've started a discussion with a few proposals here, and as one of the tireless editors on that template I'd appreciate it if you gave your thoughts and opinions. +Hexagon1 (t) 02:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Editor Assistance/Requests
From WP:EAR

I puzzled over this one when you first raised the issue. If it was a town, we would have no problem. But a mountain split between two nations? The only other example I can think of is %C5%BDumberak/Gorjanci on the Croatia/Slovenia border. On the first move option it was raised that you could meet half way and call it by its German name Schneekoppe and that was immediately shot to pieces.

I can't see you reaching a consensus easily please read Polls Are Evil ;-). You need to put forward every option possible and explain that its not a vote. Its the most level headed arguments that generally form (or split) consensus. Personally, put a note on all the regular editors talk pages inviting them to submit their proposals for the options you are going to use if and/or when you pagemove. Just as importantly move discussions on this to a sub-discussion page so that everything is clear.  Have a definite timespan say 28days (the interest you are going to generate is going to be quite exclusive (as you found with the Czech and Polish wikiprojects) and not everybody contributes every week to Wikipedia. Make a ground rule that there won't be a WP:SNOW and that you'll invite an Administrator to close the discussions. Any other ideas? -- Bp E ps - t @ lk 06:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:CzechStatOffice.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CzechStatOffice.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 13:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Women in Czech politics
Hi CzechOut, since you contributed on Politics of the Czech Republic, would you be able to help with the Czech section of List of the first female holders of political offices --Rye1967 (talk) 12:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

ITC project
Hello CzechOut! I noticed that you'd signed up to the WikiProject ITC Productions a while ago, but the project has been a little dormant recently as I've been busy "in real life" as they say. I'd really appreciate your continuing contributions to the project - it needs a bit of a boost, to say the least! See you, Howie &#9742;  00:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Arrested Development Taskforce Invite
Hey there. I couldn't help noticing that you appear to be interested in Arrested Development. I am interested in setting up a Arrested Development Taskforce to improve articles related to Arrested Development. At the moment I am just looking for people who are interested in joining. If you are interested in joining, please add your name here or contact me on my talk page. Thankyou, Joelster (talk) 23:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject British Empire
If you've no idea who I am, you are receiving this message because of your British Empire UBX! If you are a regular editor to articles related to the British Empire please sign up (no pesky newsletters!) to the project and help better organise and improve articles within our scope! Thanks --Cameron (T|C) 21:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

WP AH
Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your comment on my talk page about Yes Minister. I took a WikiBreak over the last few months because of the lack of respect of my time/work (if I put a lot of time in t something than I'd expect someone to dot the i's and cross the t's rather than the entire article invalidated). So, your barnstar is really appreciated. Cheers. The JPS talk to me  12:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes Minister for TFA?
Hey, I'm one of the losers who hangs out over at TFA/R, where requests are made for Today's Featured Article. I notice that the anniversary of the first episode of Yes Minister comes up in late February, and I'd be happy to guide you through the process of requesting that it be on the main page, because I know the process is hard if you haven't done it before. Let me know, here is fine, I've watchlisted.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

List of Maverick episodes
Looked at your trims for the List of Maverick episodes from December a few moments ago and decided to restore the cast information at the top of the article since, without it, the reader hasn't a clue what actor plays any of the recurring characters cited in the boxes (Dandy Jim Buckley, Gentleman Jack Darby, Samantha Crawford, Big Mike McComb, etc.). I'm the "single editor" who wrote most of this one and created it under an earlier guise for which I've long since lost the password, and it's designed to have a cast key at the beginning so readers will know who's playing what among the recurring characters, otherwise the article doesn't quite make sense functionally. Storyliner (talk) 07:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Witch Hunters (Doctor Who)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Witch Hunters (Doctor Who), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A search for references has failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources in order to comply with notability requirements. This has included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:

The Witch Hunters (Doctor Who) – news, books, scholar Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Rogerb67 (talk) 01:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)