User talk:EddyGA

License tagging for File:National-treasure-31.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:National-treasure-31.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:HP7part12poster.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:HP7part12poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM May 2011 Newsletter
The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM June 2011 Newsletter
The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. We are also seeking new members to assist in writing the newsletter, if interested please leave a note on the Outreach department's talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Deathly-hallows-p2-1.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Deathly-hallows-p2-1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Harry Potter 7 Box Office
Sorry, I was (and I am) actually on vacation. As soon as I can, I will expand this box office section. However, this will probably be possible after August 13.--Spinc5 (talk) 13:50, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM July 2011 Newsletter
The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. We are also seeking new members to assist in writing the newsletter, if interested please leave a note on the Outreach department's talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:42, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Box office
"Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readability and neatness of our articles." Of course the box office isn't restricted to North America and major markets such as the UK and Australia; but let's say, the current "panorama of international box office pointing out highlights" delivers the info faster and easier than "detailed pointing out of where/how it broke a record" (it's a mere 4 paragraphs against 28 kb of text, for Chrissake!). It's comprehensive, but unwildely (not to mention that, as pointed somewhere, just linking to the 2011 openings to convey the records is kind of original research), and as I pointed out to Spinc5, sometimes not much necessary (the top two highest-grossing films of all time spend more space on "Commercial analysis" - why it made so much money - than dumping financial data). I must admit on not having any objections on separate articles for box office records/runs if necessary - after all, several films had their Awards section made into separate articles which even became Featured lists (and articles such as List of box-office records of Toy Story 3 and Theatrical run of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 have such potential). But sometimes, less is more - after all, there are guidelines asking for concise plot summaries and averting lists of crufty data. igordebraga ≠ 23:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

igordebraga, I didn't understand -after reading your answer at EddyGA's talk- if you consider all this box-office data as cruft or if you support the idea of a sub-article. Because if you do consider it as cruft, and if is this what Wikipedia considers them, then I don't see any reason for keeping the box-office articles for Toy Story 3 and HP7 either. They were created based on the same concept that you obviously disagree with. However, I do feel there should be more people saying their opinion. Anyway, what is left is to either delete the two sub-articles or continue expanding more articles. Thank you.--Spinc5 (talk) 21:17, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

You will be need more help...
wrote previously...

Wikipedia List of superpowers article, need more superpowers
I have a real article that i work any moment and everyday with any pals... you have rights for use it for your convenence (except erase it or modify it) to show how many super powers exist in your article. Super Power List behind Wikipedia from Spanish Leanguage to english leanguage I work so much, and any pals too, dont destroy own article but almost try to add more super powers to your super power list. If my wikipedia in Spanish article is not without faults of orthography, you could read it without so much problems, Greetings. (This for your List of Superpowers. --Georgy (talk) 18:43, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you very much for that Barnstar. I am honored and profoundly grateful. Spinc5 (talk) 11:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM September 2011 Newsletter
The September 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 16:39, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

2011 WikiProject Film coordinator election
Voting for WikiProject Film's October 2011 project coordinator election has started. We are aiming to select five coordinators to serve for the next year; please take a moment from editing to vote here by October 29! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 11:58, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM October 2011 Newsletter
The October 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Film November 2011 Newsletter
The  2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Peppage (talk &#124; contribs) 22:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Dark knight rises poster2.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:The Dark knight rises poster2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 04:33, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Box office
Thanks for initiating discussion. I'm sure we, based on consensus discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film and elsewhere, can reach a middle ground.

First things first: The term "all-time" isn't a matter of my or anyone's individual preference. Syntactically speaking, it simply doesn't have any meaning &mdash; because a record, by definition, is always "all-time" unless qualified as, for example, "the 2011 record," "that country's record", "the record box office for a sports movie", etc. "All-time" is a filler word, and a meaningless peacock term. It's bad writing; it's got nothing to do with WP:FILM itself per se.

Wikipedia, by the guideline WP:INDISCRIMINATE, doesn't list context-less tables of box-office data. Manual of Style/Film says we may include some box-office information about countries that are not that of the film's production, but we need to "Determine a consensus from objective (retrospective if possible) sources about how a film performed and why." And, of course, notability guideline are in play: We don't list box-office statistics for every single country. So if we're going to include one country's box-office performance, we have to say why the performance in that particular country is notable. The United Arab Emirates line in Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol is a perfect example, since it set a record for that country.

Within Wikipedia and WP:FILM guidelines, you can include any information you want. You don't need anyone's permission. If other editors feel something's a guideline violation, it gets removed and discussed, just like we're doing now ... and some of my most fruitful collaborations and Wiki-friendships with other editors have begun with exactly the kind of discussion we're having. So what information do you think needs to go in that I or anyone else has remove? (For simplicity's sake, I'll watchlist this page and we can keep the discussion here in one place.) --Tenebrae (talk) 22:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The information which I think is germane to the box office section is the following (taken verbatim from article), "t opened to $6.04 million in Russia, which is over twice as much as Mission: Impossible III." and "it launched to an enormous $4 million in India, which is more than four times the opening of Mission: Impossible III." I hope you may find it acceptable and worth-noting. The areas in bold are as such since I wanted to highlight the sections which I think make the information worth noting.--EddyGA (talk) 22:32, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * OK. Good start. So we're saying that what's notable is that it made more on its opening weekend in these two countries than the previous film did. Are these the only two countries where that happened? If it happened in other countries, we need to make clear why we're singling out these two. (My guess is the doubling and quadrupling, of course, but did that occur elsewhere as well?) The simplest and best way to take care of this would be if a quote from Variety, The Hollywood Reporter or some English-language Indian or Russian magazine / website / newspaper would give us a contextual quote saying something to the effect of "This is significant because...." --Tenebrae (talk) 23:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, I see you've got a Barnstar from my good colleague User:TriiipleThreat. He's an excellent editor, so I'm impressed you impressed him!--Tenebrae (talk) 23:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * If you take a look at the article I am using it may clarify what I am trying to tell you (http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3328&p=.htm.) The reason behind picking these two countries is clearly stated above; they were locations were the film was shot and where the film took place in. So for that reason UAE ( which was discussed), Russia, and India were given the spotlight. It is also worth-noting that the other countries also had a "significant improvement" from M:I 3. But as you said you don't want to list, so maybe adding Russia and India isn't a far fetched idea. Thanks for your recognition of the award. I must agree with you User:TriiipleThreat is a great editor, though I was baffled at the news that you knew him. I guess Wikipedia is a small world after all. Merry Christmas btw. Have Fun. I won't be able to look frequently at our discussion but I will be glad to finish it up after Christmas Day( a lot of work to do) --EddyGA (talk) 10:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Eddy. Yes, as a matter of fact, we got to know each other in a very similar same way &mdash; discussing on a talk page whether or not something was a reliable source. He has become one of the most thoughtful, exacting, and encyclopedia-minded editors I know; there are a handful I'm proud with which to have collaborated over the years, including J Greb, Doczilla, Nightscream, Hiding and others.


 * I'm working today, unfortunately, and just stopped by to check messages and a couple of pending things after a couple of days off. I'll stop in probably tomorrow and look at the invaluable Box Office Mojo. You make another good point, that the movie was shot partially in those countries (I wasn't aware Russia was a real, what they call "practical", location.) So I beginning to see how the wording of this might go in order to give context. Thanks for the fruitful talk, and I'll see you probably tomorrow. With regards, Tenebrae (talk) 22:19, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Eddy. So what proposed, contextual wording can we come up with to get this information into the box office section. I think, as you note, we should include a phrase to the effect of "In countries in which the movie was filmed, its box office performance increased by multiples over the previous installment: In Russia ... In India..." With the mojo cite. What do you think? --Tenebrae (talk) 15:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Just the way I foresaw it; it's perfect. EddyGA (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah, you're too kind! That's what I love about give-and-take discussions: It forces both parties to focus like lasers!


 * You want to go ahead and add it, and I can copy-edit/proofread? --Tenebrae (talk) 15:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

After referring to the article again, I realized that it was the opening weekend that increased by multiples. So, I think that "box office performance" should be changed to "opening weekend performance"; "opening weekend gross"; or "debut".

After thinking about all my previous discussions with other wikipedians; this one is above all the best one. EddyGA (talk) 16:06, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I added two possible ways of doing it: In countries in which the movie was filmed, its opening weekend gross increased by multiples over the previous installment: In Russia, for example, it grossed $6.04 million which is over twice as much as M.I:3’s debut. In India, however, it opened to $4.0 million which is over four times more than its predecessor opening weekend gross.

Or

In countries in which the movie was filmed, its opening weekend gross increased by multiples over the previous installment: In Russia and India, for example, it grossed $6.04 million and $4.0 million respectively on it opening weekend. EddyGA (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Maybe combine those two? "In countries outside the US in which filming took place, its opening weekend gross increased by multiples over the previous installment: In Russia, more than doubling to $6.04 million, and in India, quadrupling to $4.0 million.[cite]" (Do we have anything for other countries in which it was filmed? If not, we probably should say, "In two countries outside the US in which...."--Tenebrae (talk) 16:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * These are the two only countries that we have info on, so I guess that's it. Plus we don't need to cite it again since the same reference was used for the previous sentence. I added it to the sectionEddyGA (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Cool. I look forward to see more of your work!--Tenebrae (talk) 17:37, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Film December 2011 Newsletter
The December 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Peppage (talk &#124; contribs) 22:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Film's January–February Newsletter
The January 2012 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the distribution list. GRAPPLE  X  00:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
Hi! I don't know if we should discuss this in the article's talk page, but as with Pirates 4, Toy Story 3, Ice Age 3, etc, I think we should limit HP7-Part 2's box office article only to data that are well referenced, because many of them are original research (most of them are a product of my work, but after many discussions with other editors about box office sections in articles, I think that any non-verifiable non-referenced data should be removed, otherwise the article may be subject to criticism and many data may be removed anyway). We could find more articles in other secondary sources of box-office analysis, so as to add references for non-referenced data. However, especially for foreign records in specific countries, it will be difficult to fing sources (like Slovenia, Hungary or other smaller countries). What do you think? Since you were the one who asked me to expand the article, I thought of contacting you first. Thank you in advance. Spinc5 (talk) 08:49, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Its quite a long time that we haven't talked. Anyhow, thanks for contacting me. And yes, it's fine by me.--EddyGA (talk) 14:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

The Amazing Spider-Man
Thank you for all of your copyediting on this article. By all means keep on doing it if you want. :) Jhenderson  7 7 7  21:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

It needed some work so I helped. Yeah, I usually edit when I'm free.--EddyGA (talk) 20:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a quick read of that section and work on it tomorrow...Yea it need some serious trimming!--EddyGA (talk) 20:53, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey thanks. I will see what I can do with that. On another note I am just curious on what the limit is on adding countries outside of North America's gross? Can you add second or third highest opening and what if that turns out outdated. The box office magazine quoted a lot of countries in Asia that were in the top ten but I did not know if they were allowed to be included. I am a little new on taking care of the box office sections and when it's all over I want a just as detailed box office section as The Avengers (2012 film). Even though I know it probably won't make as much. Maybe that's something you can take the responsibility on? Jhenderson  7 7 7  14:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah sure...I purposefully left it short as some editors find an excessively detailed box office section beyond the requirements of Wikipedia. I will contact a friend and we can both work on it. By the way, I tried my best to reduce the Viral Campaign Section--removed 500 words to be exact. Although I still think it needs another 150-200 word reduction, I just can't remove that much information as the whole section would lose continuity. Some parts even refer to other sections of the article notably the web-shotter design pic--I liked that connection from one section to another; it indicates continuity and logical thought.

I'm actually going off to watch it today...I hope its not a replay of the old one (I didn't watch the previous film not to ruin this one). I'm sure you watched it; what is ur take on the film?--EddyGA (talk) 14:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually I haven't...but I am still going to watch that video. I always figured out the post-credit scenes of Marvel movies before I have seen it so it's no big deal to me. I would say that it's probably got a better Peter Parker but I am not sure on the movie being better. I would say it's got enough difference on the movie to be entertaining. All the same old is Parker gets bullied by Flash (even though the bully seems more fleshed out), Peter gets bitten and Uncle Ben dies. That had to be in there anyways. If so it would have been unfaithful to the comic's origin. Jhenderson  7 7 7  15:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Cool, but technically you read the plot, I thought you watched it because you are clearly a Spider-Man fan. We do usually add second or third in major markets like Japan, China, Russia. When they become outdated we don't remove them but say "at the time of release"....and then we add that it was surpassed by a specific movie.
 * If the movie was unfaithful to the comic books then the film may actually do worse at the box office, so I think they did there best by changing the suit, tone, and villain to kind of renew the reboot.

--EddyGA (talk) 15:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah I am a fan of Spider-Man and superheroes in general. I had a glance of some of the plots while adding some. But I ain't letting the plot stick into my mind. Question:Are you the one that added the budget on the infobox? Jhenderson  7 7 7  15:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Nope...may I ask why?--EddyGA (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Its not wrong, but the citation is, I have seen many sources state that the budget of the film is $220M--EddyGA (talk) 15:54, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Well I do remember you removing what was on the filming section about what a particular guy saying what the budget is. Tenebrae put that there because it's not reliable enough for the infobox but needed to be put somewhere. Personally it might could be put as a note just like the notes you would see in the Avengers article. Even still it's in the infobox but there was other sources (like the Hollywood Reporter) that had different estimates on the budget making it not the right place to be. I think we need to note the source's estimates. See the talk page of the article for that discussion. Jhenderson 7 7 7  15:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I just thought I might show this. I am not in a being online mood as much as yesterday. Hope you liked the movie. Jhenderson  7 7 7  15:47, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Also this. They might be saying the same thing. Jhenderson  7 7 7  17:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The Box office hasn't seemed to be updated for a while and I am wondering if it's because if it's because you are back to being busy. If so should I take over? Jhenderson  7 7 7  23:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Well I was just figuring that Ice Age 4 being ahead in this weekend estimate making the film in second place would be worthy to add. But other than that I would probably agree with you. Jhenderson  7 7 7  12:39, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Plot word-count
Hi, Eddy, and may I second JH's compliments at the start of the previous section about your very good and often incisive edits. WP:FILMPLOT doesn't specify that cast members should be part of the plot &mdash; that would be redundant, given the Cast section that immediately follows &mdash; and it doesn't mention cast members among the limited exceptions to the 400-700 word-count: "The summary should not exceed the range unless the film's structure is unconventional, such as Pulp Fiction's non-linear storyline, or unless the plot is too complicated to summarize in this range. (Discuss with other editors to determine if a summary cannot be contained within the proper range.)"

Given those two factors &mdash; the separate Cast section and the lack of mention in the passage about exceptions &mdash; having cast-members' names included in the plot but not included in the plot's word-count doesn't appear to be what the guideline intends. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Really, really nice of you to say. Editing Wikipedia can be a trial sometimes, with many, many contentious personalities. A kind word really brightens a guy's day! Thank you so much! --Tenebrae (talk) 21:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

both
Sorry I didn't notice the other "both". You can word it in you're own words too. I just tried to avoid the apostrophe's. I think they were on that section too much. Jhenderson 7 7 7  18:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Fast Five
This is neutral notice of a discussion concering the box-office section of Fast Five. Spinc5 (talk) 14:43, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Skyfall BO
This is a neutral notice of a discussion concerning this film's box office section.Spinc5 (talk) 03:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Guardians of the Galaxy - Box office
This is a neutral notice of a discussion about the box office section of the film.Spinc5 (talk) 16:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

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. Kailash29792 (talk)  04:05, 19 November 2018 (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

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

Welcome to 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

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