User talk:Darkwarriorblake/Archive 14

Invitation
You are invited to WP:FILM about the issue of formats that started on 2019 in film. BattleshipMan (talk) 01:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays
Thanks again for all of your help this year. It was very much appreciated. Wishing you and all your loved ones a happy and healthy holiday season. And remember to take the time to do what you want to do in 2020. Over the course of human history, only a relatively minuscule amount of people will ever be able to say they lived through the year, so make it a good one! ;) Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 21:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
Have a great rest of your holiday season! If you do not, then you should know that I have acquired a very particular set of skills on my time on Wikipedia. Skills that make me a nightmare for people who do not enjoy themselves. If you do not have a great time this year, I will find you... And I will block you.

But seriously, happy holidays.  Dark Knight  2149  22:02, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

FA process
I've tried to nominate an article for a FA once, and never again. The amount of excessive nitpicking by some editors went beyond poor taste, and thus they can literally invent flaws in each sentence of an article. I think you should be content with a GA status, the reviews are much more constructive and reasonable.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 12:42, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * They were literally questioning the use of Expedia to source locations. They were derailing it for the sake of their FA Coordinators brethren. That article was a slam dunk FA. Absolute jokers. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

The Empire Strikes Back
If you ever want to collaborate on rewriting The Empire Strikes Back, let me know! JOE BRO  64  22:12, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe. I need to finish Ghostbusters 1 and 2 first. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm going to rewrite Sonic the Hedgehog before I start, so when you're done with those let me know if you're interested (good luck btw, I'll comment on the FACs if you want me to). JOE BRO  64  20:02, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm going to tidy them up but I'm not going through the FA process any time soon. The coordinators have derailed the FA noms for Ghostbusters and Ghostbusters II, the latter was done deliberately by who feels that the travel website Expedia is not qualified to source locations or that a 52-year-old globally available magazine is not sufficient to review the film. I wanted to get them both to FA status before the third film comes out but that isn't going to happen now.


 * I will add some finishing touches to them and I need to tidy up The Shawshank Redemption too, but that won't be a long process, maybe a week or two. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 11:50, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Just saw that you did some work on it, which is awesome. I'm not ready to start working on it just yet (I want to finish the Sonic article so I can put it up at GAN and eventually FAC) but I have a Time special edition all about Star Wars, which I recall including some information regarding the production of the film and Time original review from 1980. I'll have to dig it up but if you want to see it I'll send it to you. I should be completely ready to work on it by next Saturday (not this coming) as I'm going to be tied up a bit IRL. Also I agree that you were treated unfairly at the Ghostbusters reviews; you might not find this useful but I've personally found it helpful in the past to try and not seem agitated when they oppose so I can sort out the issue easier. JOE BRO  64  23:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Also I've got access to EBSCOHost through my school so I can try to pull up some scholarly analysis of the film if there's not enough online. JOE BRO  64  23:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That'd be great, those sources will be useful! Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Also just ordered The Making of the Empire Strikes Back on Amazon, should be here in a few days JOE BRO  64  01:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The book just showed up. It's a big book, but I will try to read it quickly and take a ton of notes so we can integrate them into the article. JOE BRO  64  01:29, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I've started expanding the article, just an FYI. It'll probably take a while, as I've added so much from only 10 pages... JOE BRO  64  02:41, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Neutral notice
As an editor who commented at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film between Jan. 1, 2019, and today, you may wish to join a discussion at that page, here.--Tenebrae (talk) 00:07, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Your edit warring complaint
Hello Darkwarriorblake. You filed at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. I added a note to the report about the reasons for disagreement. How would you feel about opening a discussion on the article talk page and try to settle the difference between 9 months and one year? If you are willing to do this, it might allow the edit warring report to be closed without further action. I notice you have done FA work regarding Batman, so most likely you are quite familiar with the sources. If you are willing to discuss but the other party won't cooperate, other steps are possible. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think he comes across as the discussing type. I have tried explaining it in the edit summary, and his talk page is a history of non-cooperation and questionable comments. They can close the case if it isn't something they deal with. Unless the user provides a source that disputes the existing one, it's pretty cut and dry for me. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 18:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey mate I’ll discuss it no problem but 9 months I’ve got pretty conclusive evidence that it’s 9 months from my playtime of the game and the fact that the actual Wikipedia page for the Arkham series says 9 months RossButsy (talk) 19:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You weren't discussing it though. Literally anyone can edit the Batman Arkham page right this second to make the game set 26 months after the last game. It's Wikipedia, anyone can edit it. It is not sourced in the Batman Arkham article and it is in this one. It's not even debatable when you've not provided any evidence beyond a Wikipedia page with no sourcing on it. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:46, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

No hard feelings mate yeah RossButsy (talk) 19:08, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Well the main editor for the Batman Arkham page out that in there so take it up with him it’s 9 months and it’s always been 9 months. RossButsy (talk) 19:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Put* instead of out RossButsy (talk) 19:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Really? Because this edit right here is you putting nine months on the 12th of January. Don't think people are idiots, there's a whole edit summary of who did what. With that, I consider this discussion over, it's one year and it will be one year until you provide a source that counteracts the existing one. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 19:20, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

You’re the one who was being petty and reporting me and you got nothing 😂 you should be blocked mate disgrace to the platform and your family name. Good day sir! RossButsy (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Is it correct to say there is no source either for the 9 months or the 12 months? I searched gameinformer.com and came up with this link: "this chapter (i.e. Arkham Knight) picks up nine months after the events of Arkham City,". Is there any reason why Game Informer wouldn't be considered a reliable source for this information? EdJohnston (talk) 20:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * GameInformer is a great source ed, that's why it is the source in the Arkham Knight article saying one year here. So yes there was a source and Ross edit warred without having an alternative. He also said "Yeah game informer just isn’t a source ".Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:45, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Seems you’re right Ed. Nine months it is RossButsy (talk) 20:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * So we have two different links to Game Informer, one (Andrew Reiner, Jun 19, 2015) saying 9 months and the other saying 'one year later' (Jeff Cork, March 2014). Should we put this down to a difference of opinion between Andrew Reiner and Jeff Cork? Or blur over the difference by using a vaguer term in the article? It is probably not a super-important issue. Anyone who believes this is a life-or-death issue might open an WP:RFC on the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 22:02, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't readers best be served by "either 9 months[ref] or a year{ref]" so they'd see that it isn't definitive and also where the contradictory claims come from? Schazjmd   (talk)  22:10, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Or just write "approximately 1 year after" Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:23, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

But it isn’t “approximately” one year after though. Play Arkham city and you’ll see the date referenced as late January and Arkham knight takes place in Halloween the same year. nine months nine nine niney niney nineyroo RossButsy (talk) 23:45, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Unless you start evidencing anything you claim I don't see why you continue to involve yourself. Where is it mentioned in Arkham City that it takes place in January? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 00:18, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Alright lad. Was just replaying Arkham knight today and jim Gordon (A character in the game if you didn’t know) said something about nine months. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq8uV66rkds&app=desktop Skip to 1:25 in that video and we’ll officially draw a close to this. RossButsy (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fantastic, next time provide the evidence first, act like a dick second. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 23:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Spider-Man PS4 wiki page
Could you stop reverting the good edits. I made this account to talk to you (I'm the anonymous guy) like seriously they are good edits and only one was a shit post. The original drafts had information that was incorrect. It's really fucking annoying that I have to keep going back and editing long stuff because you keep reverting shit. Please stop Rollingdowntown (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * They're unsourced, poorly written, factually incorrect edits in a Featured Article. You can't just make "shitposts" and random additions to a Featured Article. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:52, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Okay only ONE edit was a shit post, and the source its the GAME, am I supposed to add a source for the game everytime I make a sentance? And some of the stuff that I edit is actually incorrect Spider-Man wasnt searching for li when he was breaking into Norman's office Rollingdowntown (talk) 22:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

(Also wtf do you mean they are "random editions"?) Why do we call all the other members by their supervillain names but we still call Mister Negative by his normal name? Fisk wasn't captured he was arrested. Spiderman got his powers at 15 in both the comics and this game. Saying "gains" and not "gained" implies he recently got the powers. Saying "a button for web attacks" in gameplay is incorrect when the only thing web themed attack is the web strike and even then it's not multiple attacks Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Yknow what? As a source I'll just use a YouTube video that is just all the games cutscenes Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:07, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I sourced Peter being 15. And multiple boss fights. Happy? Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:45, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

There, I sourced all the shit. Dont remove it. Rollingdowntown (talk) 04:08, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

http://imgur.com/gallery/2zZ8fm3


 * So the exact same thing as written without mentioning Spider-Sense? It's not a fan wikia, there's a word limit on plots. There is nothing lost between saying that he sees Li turning into Negative, and his spider-sense alerts him to Li turning into Negative. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:56, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Peter witnessed the bombing with his Spider-Sense Rollingdowntown (talk) 22:40, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

But there is actually no such thing as "precise dodge" it's "perfect dodge" So can I edit that without having it being reverted? Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not calling it a "precise dodge", it is saying that a precise dodge allows a retaliatory strike. Calling it a "perfect dodge just before the enemy strikes" leaves the reader asking what a perfect dodge is. Whatever, I've changed it for you. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!

I'm a fucking idiot Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:10, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about everything Rollingdowntown (talk) 23:28, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Spider-Man (2018 video game) scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that Spider-Man (2018 video game) has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 16 February 2020. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/February 16, 2020. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:55, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I’ve also read some of your other talk pages and edits, and people are saying you are being a bit of a dick. I repeat, Wikipedia doesn’t belong to you. Heroe Of Time (talk) 08:03, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Interesting positioning ;) - Thank you today for Spider-Man (2018 video game), about the "superhero action adventure video game Spider-Man. Critically praised, it has been called the definitive take on the superhero in the medium akin to the Arkham games for Batman"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:26, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Congrats on TFA! The article really does make you feel like Spider-Man. JOE BRO  64  19:58, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Batman: Arkham Asylum
Thanks for your contributions to Batman: Arkham Asylum. I know it is a featured article, but I’ve played the game for 2 years straight, and though my contribs were unsourced, all that information is similarly found in DC webs and YouTube. MoonytheDwarf reverted your deletion, with a fair point of view, but I also understand. I just want to say that even though the article is of a featured status, it can be improved, and does not belong to you. I do admire the rest of your work though. Heroe Of Time (talk) 07:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

The Shawshank Redemption
Stop the personal attacks, comment on content not (new) editors. You should know this. - FlightTime Phone  ( open channel ) 17:56, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * When they're repeatedly, deliberately ignorant, I point it out. You should know this. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:44, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Your signature
When reviewing requests at WP:RFPP, I noted your custom signature line. Most custom signature lines don't cause me any concern, but the link to your talk page {"SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!") made me wonder what I'd find if I followed the hyperlink. Frankly, it gave me the impression I'd be taken to the kind of page that I usually avoid, and it's disconcerting. I know you've been using this signature line for years, but perhaps you might want to consider something a little less, umm...evocative?  Risker (talk) 06:04, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Ghostbusters II
Congratulations for eventually promoting it to the Featured Article status, despite numerous back-and-forths for nearly half a year. I never imagined you could pull it off.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 10:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, yeah that first review was pretty depressing. Now I just need to get re-excited about the first film so I can add the finishing touches and re-list that too. I get interested in things for a while but get bored after a while, which makes the FA process pretty difficult. I'm going to focus on Groundhog Day now. I'm not just doing Bill Murray articles btw, I just happen to like films that happen to involve Ramis/Murray and/or Aykroyd. I watched Doctor Detroit for Aykroyd. Never again. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

File:EddieBrock-Bonding-and-First-Appearance.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:EddieBrock-Bonding-and-First-Appearance.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Scream
Allmovie is very clear that it considers the top-level genres for Scream to be Horror and Comedy. You're welcome to change that if you can provide an alternate source, but please don't change the genres without providing a source to back up the genres you provide. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 13:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , you're normally a sensible editor. Regardless of what AllMovie thinks, is there a reliable source that would describe scream as a Horror comedy? Especially since you've left it as Slasher, a subset of Horror, not Horror itself, because it is always described as a Slasher. It is clearly not a comedy. By that metric half the Nightmare on Elm Street film's are Comedy. You have to understand that to be the case? IMDB says Horror/Mystery. I'd rather not have to go through a whole discussion at WikiProject Film about this, and you revert on the basis of common sense. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 14:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * In a discussion of reliable sources for determining a film's genre, Allmovie was one of the sources that came up, and it explicitly does call Scream a horror comedy...did you read the cited source before you deleted it?. I don't really trust IMDb as a source for much of anything non-trivial these days. Allmovie very obviously doesn't call Elm Street a comedy, so I wouldn't support that. I haven't seen Scream myself, but I don't think it's beyond the pale that a slasher film could also be a comedy...but it doesn't matter what I think, it matters what the sources say. Perhaps you can use AFI or another reliable source to provide a genre classification that you consider more accurate? DonIago (talk) 14:12, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I just don't get why it's even an issue. Maybe you need to watch it. It's a film where people die very horrible deaths and a young girl is tormented over her murdered and raped mother. It satirizes tropes of the genre, it's in no way a comedy, AllMovie is completely wrong. It's not even questionable. They maybe mixed it up with Scary Movie, which is a parody OF Scream, but AllMovie is wrong, it's one of the most famous slasher movies ever. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 15:34, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2016/12/22/scream-20-wes-craven-kevin-williamson-tore-slasher-filmapart/
 * https://www.amazon.co.uk/Scream-David-Arquette/dp/B00FYNIYZ6
 * https://www.altpress.com/features/20_reasons_why_scream_is_the_movie_horror_desperately_needed/
 * https://www.outofourelement.co.uk/single-post/2019/10/16/Scream-The-Rebirth-of-the-Slasher-Genre
 * https://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/34098/1/how-scream-reinvented-the-slasher-movie
 * https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1074316_scream
 * https://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2019/12/how-scream-holds-up-in-2019/
 * https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/jul/10/scream-is-back-but-does-the-horror-genre-need-ghostface-any-more
 * I appreciate your concerns, but when I Googled "scream 1996 comedy" I got 3.9M results back, and I immediately saw several that linked the film to both horror and comedy. You just called it satire yourself, and satire is a form of comedy. As I said, if you feel the classification is inappropriate, your best option is probably to pull genres from AFI or BFI or another site considered reliable for film genre classifications. Failing that, maybe we do need to raise the question at the article's Talk page. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 15:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Lost Cues: The Thing
Hi – as you keep an eye on The Thing article and I'm wary of messing with an FA, I wanted to let you know that I think the above article should be merged into the music section of The Thing. I mean, it's just a four-track EP, all mentions of it in reliable sources were simply of its forthcoming release, and it was accompanied by a reissue of Ennio Morricone's score... I can't see that it's worthy of a separate article, and would be better incorporated into the main article, to keep all information about the film's music together. What do you think? Richard3120 (talk) 21:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I will take a look. Never heard of the article tbh. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It only came out last month, as a low-key release, and isn't available from anywhere except the record company's website and Bandcamp, as far as I can see... you'll understand why I think it's not notable by itself. Richard3120 (talk) 22:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes I agree, it's basically a sentence worth of content. It's late here now but I will start a Merge discussion tomorrow. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have started a discussion at Talk:Lost Cues: The Thing. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 09:06, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Quarter Million Award for Ghostbusters II

 * Thank you :) Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:38, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Copy edit of Groundhog Day
While copy editing Groundhog Day (film), one of the first things I noticed is that the prose is about 10% longer than the recommendations of WP:LENGTH and WP:SPLITSIZE. I tried to work a bit on cohesion, bringing together material that had been presented in different places. Otherwise, I think you might want to look at cutting some of the less encyclopedically notable factoids (I understand that it's general practice to go as broad as possible when writing an article, including everything that you can cite, then to condense the material afterwards). A few notes: Cohesion: Some factoids to consider trimming: I hope this is of help. Please ping me and let me know if you have any questions. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:14, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * For the picture caption The "Cherry Street Inn" where Phil wakes every February 2nd. The property was a private home at the time of filming. although it is in the Plot section, maybe this could be given more of an out-of-universe description leading with what the picture actually depicts: A private home used for exteriors of the Cherry Street Inn, the fictional location in which Phil awakens every morning in the film.
 * It was considered the most successful comedy release of the autumn. MOS:SEASONS recommends against using seasons which don't apply globally.  Consider changing to: of the fourth quarter, since this is in an economic context.
 * I moved the bits about the studio's demands for an explanation of the time loop into one paragraph.
 * I moved the recreation of Gobbler's Knob into one paragraph in preproduction.
 * Should the 'abuses' visited upon Murray have their own paragraph in Filming, moving the bit about the groundhog bites up with the pothole step, slap, and snowball hits? I think this might also work if moving the weather conditions for the pothole step and the car stunt into the same paragraph as other weather concerns. – I attempted this in a separate edit so it's easier to undo if you don't like it.
 * I moved the 25th anniversary re-releases (theatres and home video) into one section.
 * There were two places talking about Ramis taking up Buddhism from his wife; put these together.
 * and akin to Siberian weather This description comes from Tobolowsky, whose family were Russian and Polish, so I guess that gives it some credence. However, I'm not sure it's quite necessary.
 * One of the shopfronts in this scene, Woodstock Jewellers, betrays the actual filming location.
 * During filming, the crew took part in a benefit softball game against local players. Murray also rented out the Woodstock Theater (used for the exterior of the Punxsutawney theater) for the cast and crew, only to show them a bad French film as a practical joke. Residents recounted a story of he and MacDowell having a snowball fight at 3 a.m. during a break in filming.
 * The first two paragraphs of Release, while informative, provide more context than is strictly necessary. I don't want to delete it, but maybe some of it could be moved to 1993 in film?  In particular, I feel that all those examples of films from that year distract from the subject.
 * In a less prescient review that same year, Desson Thomson said "Groundhog will never be designated a national film treasure by the Library of Congress." I feel that this detracts a bit in the first paragraph of Cultural impact.  Thomson's review is already cited twice in Reception.
 * Fair points, I will take a look when I finish work. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:29, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Groundhog Day (film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Groundhog Day (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3E1I5S8B9RF7 -- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 18:40, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

PR
Hey DWB! I don't want to distract you from any of your current projects, but if you've got time, would you mind commenting at my peer review for Sonic the Hedgehog? I'm trying to get it to FA status to run it on the main page on June 23, 2021 (the 30th anniversary) and want some outside eyes before I nominate it. JOE BRO  64  00:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Groundhog Day (film)
The article Groundhog Day (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Groundhog Day (film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3E1I5S8B9RF7 -- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Die Hard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lawrence Gordon ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Die_Hard check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Die_Hard?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:43, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Trading Places
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Trading Places you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3E1I5S8B9RF7 -- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 15:00, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Trading Places
The article Trading Places you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Trading Places for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3E1I5S8B9RF7 -- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 19:21, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Die Hard
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Die Hard you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rusted AutoParts -- Rusted AutoParts (talk) 00:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Die Hard
The article Die Hard you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Die Hard for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rusted AutoParts -- Rusted AutoParts (talk) 15:21, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Die Hard
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Die Hard has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

The only "significant" change I made is changing the heading "Lasting Reception" to "Contemporary Reception", which I think better describes the section's content.

Best of luck with the FA nomination.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, another article long overdue for promotion! Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 12:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Trading Places
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Trading Places has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Batman: Three Jokers
Hi. In light of the revision of some information I added to Joker that involves the Batman: Three Jokers miniseries, there is a link for it which was created as a redirect by another user that redirects to DC Black Label. I just wanted to let you know that. At least the first issue revealed that the three Jokers are classified by as the Criminal, the Comedian, and the Clown. --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:35, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Have you considered starting the article? I would but I have a lot of projects I am working on . Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I was able to find a draft for the page and was able to add to it. --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:23, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Groundhog Day FAC
Just saw this was closed as successful. Congrats on taking the page to FA! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks !Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * My pleasure :) SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 20:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

A pie for you!

 * Thanks, just another 20 odd articles to go to complete my project. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

1980s and 1990s movies
Congratulations for the successful Groundhog Day FA outcome. Parallelly, another Bill Murray movie, Lost in Translation, was also promoted to FA status, in a seperate review process I was unaware of. You really did some great stuff here, and it seems we have similar tastes when it comes to movies in the 80s and 90s. If you are in doubt about your project for a great film for each year, for the year 1987, if you allow a suggestion - choose RoboCop. I think it would be the best among the candidates.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 12:16, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks 3E1I5S8B9RF7, I think it's easy for tastes to overlap from those decades especially because that's just when the best films were made. I am leaning and have been leaning towards Robocop for a while, but it feels a shame to waste Predator for so long to. I might try to promote someone else taking over Predator at least. The goal at the minute is to finish Back to the Future, get Ghostbusters promoted to FA before the new film comes out, and then try and get Raiders done before it's 40th anniversary. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 16:16, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Joker WhatCulture
Hello. A few weeks ago, there was a discussion over WhatCulture, if it's a reliable source for opinion and fact. The answer was not. The website itself presents as "You do not need to have any relevant experience or hold any particular qualifications". So, the source is written by people with not knownledge (no weight for opinion) and no record of fact checking. The archive as several discussions about WC being not-reliable   Sorry if I distubed you. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:36, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, but at the same time you straight-up removed content entirely. Unless I go through and check what is missing, I would never know in all that text. If you are going to remove a source you need to be leaving th information intact and adding one of the tags like Citation Needed so people know to replace it. Especially when you're removing one source that is among 1 or 2 others, as we won't know what source is sourcing which bit of the text without checking them all. If the source is a book that is significantly harder to do. Most of the content you removed could have easily been sourced elsewhere if notification was given. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 12:45, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Raiders of the Lost Ark
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Raiders of the lost Ark has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

This sentence appears in the Filming section: "Alfred Molina's Satipo would have held half of Jones' map, but it was seen as achieving the same outcome in a long way." I masked it because it makes no sense to me. Perhaps you know what is trying to be conveyed here.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

October 2020
Your recent editing history at Dishonored shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.''I'm not taking sides in the issue this is just a warning as you are approaching the 3 revert rule by reverting another user twice and using edit summaries as a place for discussion. Please start a discussion on the article talk page and ping the other editor involved to resolve issue. Thank You.''   Alucard 16  ❯❯❯ chat?    23:28, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
 * In the interest of fairness I've placed the same notice on both parties talk pages.   Alucard 16  ❯❯❯ chat?    23:30, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Back to the Future, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Corey Hart and All American.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

FA review?
Hey. I see that Trading Places and my own nomination were both placed on the "urgent" list. I was wondering if you'd be interested in the two of us reviewing each other's nomination? I'd understand if you don't have the time/willingness to do so. Just thought it'd be a good idea to ask. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 00:42, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah sure, I'll take a look at yours today. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 08:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Saw 3D
Given the radical alterations to Saw 3D since you originally reviewed it in 2011, do you believe that it still meets the standards of a GA article? I was thinking about doing a selective revert to an earlier version.  Dark knight  2149  18:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Honestly it looks pretty much the same? Short of reading the whole thing I can't tell much of a difference. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 18:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Back to the Future
Hello:

I've had a final look at Back to the Future and finished your GOCE request.

Thanks so much for the Barnstar - much appreciated.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks buddy. I'm learning a lot as I keep pumping these FACs through so I will go back and touch up The Thing eventually. Just too many projects at once. Wish we could get paid to do this! Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aliens (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jaws.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!
 D ÅRTH B ØTTØ ( T • C ) 21:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jonathan Schwartz (producer)


A tag has been placed on Jonathan Schwartz (producer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.hamroprajashakti.com/site/jonathan-schwartz-actor-8db9d8. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Amkgp 💬  04:19, 29 November 2020 (UTC)