User talk:Flax5

Welcome!

Hello, Flax5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Begonia brandbygeana (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

War of the Worlds characters
Following on your proposal for naming consistency, I have proposed a page move at Talk:Tripod_(The_War_of_the_Worlds). ENeville (talk) 01:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Compliment
Nice work on your handling of the Cosmic Cube / Tesseract at The Avengers (2012 film). With so much contentiousness on that site, it's nice to see an editor who takes the time to see the big picture and to find a solution consistent with both policy and similar articles. Bravo! We need more like you. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Flax5 (talk) 19:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Just letting you know I revert one of your good faith additions to The Avengers (2012 film), while I am not saying the info isn't true it just needs better sourcing and it might be better placed in the post-production section. Also please place your citations in the references section. Thank you and keep up the good work.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:57, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, I'll fix it in a moment. Flax5 (talk) 20:59, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

LOTR template
Good call, with the subgroups. Also, I didn't know that there was an original characters list for The Hobbit already. Cliff Smith 18:07, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It's really just a stub right now, but it's likely that we'll also see corresponding articles cropping up for The Hobbit's production design, music, special effects, etc, so I figured it was best to prepare the template accordingly. Thanks for the feedback. —Flax5 18:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Certainly. And I think you're right about future spin-off articles related to The Hobbit; I'm thinking that there will be at least one—about its development. Cliff Smith 18:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

WOTW Template
"Fair enough, but The Next Generation still belongs after the original."
 * Good point, I see what you mean; the entire template appears to be in chronological order. Looks good now. By the way, in the Next Generation article we need some good, referenced information "About the album"; feel free to have a go if you don't mind a bit of research. For example, why did Wayne decide to create this album in the first place, for example. There's something in the original album article but we need referenced work for a change.  —Prhartcom   (talk)  23:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll put some work into the article if I get a chance. —Flax5 21:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

WOTW
Why "collapsed" track listings? —Prhartcom  (talk)  12:35, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Between all the various releases of the album, there are a total of 177 tracks listed. By the default expanded setting, this makes the article much longer than it has to be, so I set the lists to collapsible, which is what the template documentation suggests for "very long lists or pages with several lists". The only reason I didn't convert the 7-disc collector's edition and the iTunes/SACD version to the same format is that I didn't have the time, but I'll get around to it soon enough. —Flax5 12:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Nice job on the plot summary...but can you trim it a bit? In my opinion this good writing is too long. As I said, this is a good positive step for the article, it just needs to be tightened. I would be happy to help as well if you'd like. I'm not sure but I think perhaps the Cast should be above this new section. I wonder if this should be done to the New Generation article? Cheers. —Prhartcom  (talk)  16:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. No major omissions, but I've taken out every redundant or repetitive word or phrase I could find. The summary was 791 words long, and now it's down to 656. Unfortunately Wikipedia's album style guide gives no instructions regarding albums with storylines. For the purpose of comparison, the film style guide says that plot summaries should be placed above the cast and not exceed 700 words, so that's what I defaulted to here. I have no objection if you'd like to place the cast list above the plot – it's not covered by the style guide, so your guess is as good as mine. For the most part, The New Generation is a re-recording of the original album – the reworked music and extended dialogue make no real difference to the underlying story. I'd be inclined to add a link to the plot section of the original album's article and leave it at that. —Flax5 21:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice job; I'll take a closer look at it within the week. —Prhartcom   (talk)  12:52, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Brian Cox
Hello Flax. THANK YOU! I could not for the life of me figure out how to direct readers to the right Brian Cox. LOL Thank you. Mostly thanking you because after reading your revision NOW I KNOW HOW! LOL

Happy Holidays! 50.26.136.217 (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem! For future reference, you may want to read up on the Manual of Style, which contains detailed instructions on how to get Wikipedia to do whatever it is that you need it to do (and much more). —Flax5 20:46, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Neutral notice
A Request for Comment has been called at Talk:Watchmen. As a registered editor who has edited that page over the past year, you may wish to comment. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Fan site is not a reliable source
Dear Flax,

Thank you for joining us on The Matrix article. I'm glad you've fleshed out the thin areas in casting section, and you even provided the reference, but I'm afraid the reference site you provided is not good source materials. Some months ago, I'm the one who cleaned up the entire article and provided references for a lot of things you see here, and during that time, I did some homework on reliable sources.

According to the policy WP:RELY, a fan site is not considered reliable. It falls into a self-published resource, which is considered WP:SPS, meaning that when someone feels like creating a fan site, they can do so, and Matrixfans.net, the reference you provided, falls into this category. The fan who created the site is not an expert in the movie field, unlike, for instance, Roger Ebert. If it's a magazine, or a third party source that is subjected to editorials, then it can be considered reliable, but this is not the case. If I recall correctly, this is why I removed it. My suggestion is that you go back to that site and see where the site got the quote from, then cite that source directly, if it's something official or reliable. Hope this doesn't discourage you and hope you continue to contribute on that article. Thanks. Anthonydraco (talk) 03:41, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * No worries. I've been editing here long enough and I know the drill. Fan sites are often sketchy, but I figured this one might be all right since it was clearly transcribed from an official source. It took me a while, since the original site is long gone, but I've managed to track down an archived version of the Don Davis interview that should serve nicely. —Flax5 23:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Use of derviative works templates
As the creator of The Wolf Man, I thought you might be interested in the discussion about the use of derivative works templates in author bio articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * As the 2nd leading editor in terms of edit count of The War of the Worlds, I am alerting you to the discussion about the use of derivative works templates in author bio articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. We are discussing whether they should be removed from or collapsed or left alone in the author's articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:46, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Your edits to Hannibal (TV series)
I noticed your addition to Hannibal (TV series) was reverted. I'm not the one who reverted, but I think the information itself is fine, but would be more appropriate in a 'development' or 'casting' section of the article. --SubSeven (talk) 23:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Film and TV cast lists often incorporate detailed information on casting, characterisation and influences – it works just fine in Prometheus (film) and Iron Man 3, for example – but I don't have the energy to push for this if people really want it out. In any case, I've added the complete Fuller quote to the Hannibal Lecter character article, which is probably the most appropriate place of all —Flax5 14:08, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Iron Man 3
So, I don't want to start a war over this, but I have a question. Nine times out of ten, when the actors are listed per the poster, they're listed based on who is on the headline. For instance, Inglourious Basterds does what I've described, yet the bottom does contain other actors. Or, in the case of Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Michelle Monaghan and Corbin Bernsen are both listed in that bottom area of the poster, but only Downey and Kilmer are shown in the cast list. I think you are mistaken with what "per poster" means, and that it should be reverted to my edit. Cheers.  Corvoe  (speak to me)  19:32, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The documentation on Template:Infobox film instructs us to "Insert the names of the actors as they are listed in the billing block of the poster for the film's original theatrical release" – meaning we should use the list at the bottom of the poster, not the one on top. I can't deny that the infobox is used inconsistently across Wikipedia, but my edit was definitely in accordance with the present documentation. (If you feel strongly that only the top billed actors should be included, you could always bring it up on the template's talk page. —Flax5 19:55, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I stand corrected. Thank you, I will start editing some of those articles accordingly. I don't care to change the policy, just wanted to be sure that I didn't start a fight where I was wrong. Cheers.  Corvoe  (speak to me)  20:21, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem! —Flax5 20:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Rose Tyler
Your edits of the Rose Tyler page seem unfair, as you remove any criticism of her, claiming the site is obscure. Other such sites have been allowed information on wiki, such as SFX and they have not been removed. Some common criticism of Rose is needed to balance out what there is about her, and the Androzani Team has this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.44.194 (talk) 19:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * By all means, feel free to incorporate criticisms of Rose Tyler – I'm not trying to defend the character. You'll just need to find more reputable sources to do so. For example, SFX is a prominent UK pop culture magazine and website – you need only look at its Wikipedia article to see this. Androzani.com, on the other hand, appears to be a relatively small fan site without any notable writers. —Flax5 19:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Wizard and Glass edit
"It's already in Category:The Dark Tower novels, a subcategory of this." In that case, I guess you will also want to remove that category from every other Dark Tower novel. I added it to Wizard and Glass because the others are listed that way and I figured this one should be too. Crispyinstilly (talk) 20:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)crispyinstilly
 * I hadn't noticed it on the others, but thanks for pointing it out. I'll take care of it. —Flax5 20:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

User:SirPanda7
Hey, I appreciate your reverting almost all of this user's edits, but next time could you please issue warnings for the vandalism on their talk page? I decided to block them indefinitely even without the warnings, but the warnings would have made it cleaner. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for the tip. —Flax5 12:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Please join us in the endless discussion of Larry/Lana identity
Hi, Flax, I know we all old editors are sick of this. There are revisionists who insist on starting a discussion and choose to use the over-sensitive, political, and intentional inaccuracy of naming a director of The Matrix "Lana". It's been done million times, I know, but it seems there's a million and first time. -_-

It started on The Matrix talk page. Join us and help us preserve historical accuracy over touchy political sensitivity here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Describing_transgendered_individuals Anthonydraco (talk) 18:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll pitch in. —Flax5 21:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Official spyro forum
Please do not say that the official forum is a fan website, its been official since 2008, And i have changed the link to SpyroDragon.com because it is no longer SpyroDragon.org.. before you make these childish assumptions, please get your facts straigend out, and please do not remove official links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.97.103 (talk) 23:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Neither http://spyrodragon.org nor http://spyrodragon.com currently exist. The site you linked to was an http://openu2.com free forum, and I doubt very much that it's connected to Activision in any way. —Flax5 12:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The copyrights expire every year, The Copyrights and The domain name were being renewd from activision, so please stop changing things you dont know about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.97.103 (talk) 19:24, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Sauron Tolkien illustration.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Sauron Tolkien illustration.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 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 19:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Neutral notice
This is a neutral notice that there is a discussion at Talk:Prometheus_(2012_film) that may be of interest to you. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:27, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to Comment
Hi Flax5, I've started a discussion at Template talk:Infobox television about the poorly-defined "format" Infobox parameter. I'd like to invite you to comment, as you expressed some confusion about the parameter in an exchange we had in August. My research suggests that genre was created to replace the format field, but that the format field was never removed from service. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Hunger
I had an inquiry for you. I saw your rewrite of Seven Psychopaths's plot section, which I thought was excellent. I was doing some gloss over on Hunger, and I was wondering if you'd 1) seen the film and 2) be willing to do a plot rewrite of it as well. I haven't seen it, despite numerous attempts to, so I was curious if you'd take on this project. Frankly, the plot summary is a total mess and I have absolutely no idea what's going on with it, so any help would be much obliged. Thanks in advance.  Corvoe  (speak to me)  16:26, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I haven't seen the film so I wouldn't be much use in this case. —Flax5 13:51, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Much obliged anyway. Have you seen the Dawn of the Dead remake? That plot is almost 1200 words, and I've only seen it once.  Corvoe  (speak to me)  16:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Afraid not. My interests can be fairly specific, so I'm probably not much good as a "gun for hire" editor in most cases. Thanks for asking though – it's always cool when someone takes notice. —Flax5 22:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your "Undo" on my Father Ted mobile phone edit. I thought I had researched that properly before putting it in, and clearly I didn't. --PoughkeepsieNative (talk) 17:40, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, and thanks for being understanding. —Flax5 17:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Pacific Rim
Shame on me for not looking back in the article's history. :) I hadn't visited the article in a while and I thought it had been like that for some time. Well, I tried to put some of the detail back into the last sequence of the film. You can see it here. Although it's admittedly a couple words longer, the idea was to provide a little bit more clarity into the scene's participants, and the decisions that lead to the outcome. Hope you're OK with that. Thanks for the notice, also. Cheers! --uKER (talk) 20:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries! —Flax5 21:18, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Rayman
Stop deleting the stuff from the Rayman page. It was featured in PowerStation magazine which is now defunct. You are obviously too young to remember it. 86.169.10.137 14:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but it makes very little sense to bluntly state "Rayman is friends with Croc, Crash and Spyro" without any explanation or context. In what sense were they "featured together"? From where I'm standing, it doesn't seem that a magazine article can be considered an encyclopedically notable inter-continuity crossover, and I can't imagine how it contributes to the reader's understanding of the subject matter. But by all means, if this article you read really does constitute some kind of official crossover endorsed by the rights owners, feel free to include a properly formatted reference with additional information and detail.
 * I would recommend against personal attacks on other editors – you're just digging a hole for yourself, and it'll do you no favours. —Flax5 00:10, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Who do you think you are? It's not unencylopedic at all. You're saying your opinion is fact, which it isn't. You're doing yourself no favours by removing the information. A magazine WOULD and DID mention a page about the platforming heroes together. It was from the 90s, which is an era you obviously were not apart of. Keep removing it, and I'll keep undoing your changes. And I never said it was a crossover. It was simply the most famous and most likeable heroes standing shoulder to shoulder representing what they do i.e. fighting evil. It's not infringing on the 'rights of owners' at all. Like I said, keep removing it just because YOU disagree with it, and I'll keep making sure the information stays. And for your information, magazines have a special license for featuring characters and the owners of those characters would naturally allow characters featured in a page because it attracts more customers and fans. Do yourself a favour and learn something about the gaming industry. You clearly know nothing about what is 'informative' - that's not an attack - that's a statement. And how did I attack you by saying you're too young? Also, don't decide whether readers understand something or not - it's an insult, really.
 * Where do I even begin? Your blunt statement that you're going to continually override any decisions you disagree with makes it seem doubtful that you're open to civil discourse, but I'll do what I can.
 * First of all, you claim in your additions that PowerStation showed Rayman to be "friends" with characters from other franchises. Now you seem to be saying that they were simply shown standing next to each other. A photoshopped montage of characters in a magazine does not make a meaningful connection between them. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information – how is the fact that a magazine allegedly once pictured Rayman next to some other characters encyclopedically valuable?
 * I never mentioned the "rights of owners". My point was that Rayman is the property of Ubisoft and the creation of Michel Ancel, meaning that they alone have authorial control. It's not like any old magazine writer can claim nebulously that Rayman is "friends" with other characters and get that recorded in an encyclopedia. If it was an official source like a Ubisoft website that made these comments, perhaps they would be worth including, but as it stands they certainly aren't.
 * Please don't attempt to use other editors' ages as a tool in a dispute – you may well have a hundred editions of PowerStation, all in mint condition, but that doesn't give you any authority to impose your peculiar additions to the Rayman article. (Perhaps, rather than fixating on me alone, you should also add your information to the much more active Crash and Spyro articles and see what the broader community makes of them?) —Flax5 17:51, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

matrix
i know blog posts arent reliable, nor imdb reviews, nor forum posts. but theres nothing else. leonard maltin hasnt reviewed crossworlds (according to my copy of the 2007 leonard maltin movie guide). it was a direct to video movie. no one reviewed it in any paper i'm aware of. it only has 1,920 imdb votes. the only other reliable reviews i can find were made after crossworlds (1996) came out and before the matrix (1999) was made so theres no comparisions of the two films. i'd love some help finding a source, or possibly putting it up unsourced, if thats ok with you? i mean, find the movie and watch it. the matrix stole a lot from crossworlds and its interesting to see this little movie that turned into the matrix. --Compn (talk) 15:41, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

WOTW machines - titles Suggestion
Hello Flax5, I appreciate your comments of support of the proposed article title rename of Tripod (The War of the Worlds) → Fighting machine (The War of the Worlds) and the other two articles, and I hope you are okay now with Wikipedia's WP:LOWERCASE and WP:NCCAPS guidelines we all follow. If you do support these moves, could you please actually state your Support on all three Talk pages? An admin will need to see more than the "Comment" and "Neutral" we keep getting. P.S. This move should make our IP friend happy (you know, the one who keeps trying to improve Template:The War of the Worlds. Thanks and cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 02:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


Prhartcom (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Requested input
Please have a look at this important discussion and share your opinions. Thanks 69.165.246.181 (talk) 21:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

What are your thoughts on this? 69.165.246.181 (talk) 07:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

RfC
This is a neutral request for comment as a participant in a past discussion regarding a similar topic at Talk:The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. Thank you.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:35, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

An RfC that you may be interested in...
As one of the previous contributors to Infobox film or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!
 * This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 18:27, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Penny Dreadful title card.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Penny Dreadful title card.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. Stefan2 (talk) 21:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Spyro Series Revert
Yea you say its for official sites only and you revert www.SpyroDragon.com when majority vote said to keep it, and yet its ok to have Non official sites in external links..Ehmm Do I sense some jealously and hatred ?

Listen (Doctor Who)
Thanks for that. I was looking at this and meant to hit the "restore this version" on the first version, not the revert and restore the content. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 22:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I get it, no worries. —Flax5 23:09, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

A Newcastle for you!

 * You're welcome! Always had a thing for templates. —Flax5 22:50, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

worp worp worp

 * Thank you! —Flax5 13:48, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 8 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:15, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Dermot Morgan page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=670503746 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F670503746%7CDermot Morgan%5D%5D Ask for help])

Disambiguation link notification for July 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Count Dracula, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Forbes-Robertson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

The Duckworth Lewis Method
Hi Flax5. Yes, The Irish Times calls him a "Drimnagh musician/songwriter", presumably meaning he's from there. It even says "Walsh still lives in a flat in Crumlin", but then it goes on ".. Pugwash music resides far outside and beyond its origins." I wonder could the same be said for DLM? I was suggesting that any source actually has to appear, preferably in the DLM article. But does Walsh's nationality (or Hannon's for that matter) determine the band's "nationality"? I wonder where the band does most of its work - writing, recording, etc? It might be London for all I know. Calling it an "Irish band" is fine by me. But I think that would be valid here only if itself supported by a source. Cheers. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:07, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think the place a band does its writing and recording is of any real importance - they just do it wherever is most practical and convenient for them. A band isn't subsumed into a different nationality just by working in a certain country. When someone refers to the Beatles as an "English band", what they mean is that John, Paul, George, and Ringo were born and grew up in England, not that they worked primarily in an English studio.
 * I've never heard The Duckworth-Lewis Method's nationality disputed before, but in any case, their official Google Play page refers to them as "an Irish pop group", so that could be used as a reference in the article if needed.
 * I'm not sure what the policy is for determining the nationality of bands with members of different nationalities. The only example that springs to mind, the Traveling Wilburys, are referred to as "an English-American supergroup". I suppose we could call DLM an "Irish-Northern Irish band", but that seems a little pedantic. —Flax5 19:52, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the Beatles are called an English band (and more often a British band, I think) because they were from Liverpool, i.e. they first came together and played as a band in Liverpool. Even if Ringo was from Dublin, I think they'd still be called British. But then there were four of them. Where are The Duckworth Lewis Method "from"? I really don't know. "Origin" suggests it's something to do with the first place they played. But knowing Hannon's modus operandi, I suspect that could have been anywhere. These days, of course, you can have "virtual bands" whose members never even physically meet. Yes "Irish-Northern Irish band" looks a bit clumsy, doesn't it. But whatever is chosen, I think a source is needed. That one you suggest looks a very reasonable starting point. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:28, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

The Matrix Franchise edit
Hi there, Flax5

I have recently made changes to The Matrix frachise's page, by replacing the creator as Sophia Stewart instead of the Wachowski brothers which has legally been settled in court with the copyrights being returned to Ms. Stewart. I am going to change it back again and I'd appreciate if you'd let the truth be in there, instead of a stolen lie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nvarcy (talk • contribs) 15:50, 16 August 2015 (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) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

rebecca sugar
is rebecca's twitter ok as a reliable source? 66.25.246.226 (talk) 00:26, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, if you cite the tweet as a reference that'll do just fine. —Flax5 10:09, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Songs about the Moon
Can you point me to any of the members of this category that are actually about the moon? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 19:44, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Personally, I would say that any song referring to the moon repeatedly or using the moon as a central image is "about the moon", particularly considering that songwriting is one of the more ambiguous art forms. For instance, I'd consider both The Killing Moon and The Whole of the Moon as being broadly "about the moon", though the moon seems (at least partly) symbolic in both. Are you saying the category should be reduced to focus on songs that are specifically about the moon on a physical, literal level? (Given its countless symbolic/artistic/metaphorical aspects, there are probably only a handful of those, though it's sometimes difficult to draw the line.) —Flax5 20:33, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I started looking at which were "about the moon" and here are my comments for the few I did:-

In other words, these are just song titles that mention the word "moon" and most certainly not about the moon. You have ignored every linquistic device known to man; moon as symbol of love, as apocalypse, etc etc. Comments? Do you want to review your work? --Richhoncho (talk) 21:27, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Fair points, I did essentially count songs that I thought referred to the moon prominently (eg, in the titles or chorus), so I'm sure mistakes crept in. I think we may just have a basic disagreement on what it means for a song to be "about" something – I would say that the writers' decisions to focus on the image/idea of the moon is a defining aspect that ties these songs together, and that (for instance) Waters's choice to use the moon as the song's central metaphor for madness is worthy of inclusion in the category, whereas your interpretation seems more literal (eg, songs about lunar travel). But thanks for the feedback – perhaps culling or even listifying is in order. Are there any Wikipedia guidelines for deciding this sort of thing? —Flax5 21:40, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Just taking the Waters' song. It is NOT about the moon, Waters says so, what else do you need as proof? It's a pun on "lunatic." Then what connects it with any other song that uses the word "moon" other than the word "moon?" --Richhoncho (talk) 22:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I went through my music collection and added a few, probably not all of them directly "about" the moon, more that the moon happens to be mentioned in the title. Several reference moonlight, such as "Moonlight in Vermont" and "Moonlight Swim". Incidentally, "Blue Moon" does mention the moon in its lyrics: "I heard somebody whisper 'please adore me'/And when I looked the moon had turned to gold". "Blue Moon of Kentucky" has the lyrics "Blue Moon of Kentucky keep on shining". Others are probably safer, such as "Walking on the Moon" which is obviously about that topic. This is Paul (talk) 22:18, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Quote from WP:CAT, The central goal of the category system is to provide navigational links to all Wikipedia pages in a hierarchy of categories which readers, knowing essential—defining—characteristics of a topic, can browse and quickly find sets of pages on topics that are defined by those characteristics.2 (my bold). What do Blue Moon of Kentucky and Walking on the Moon have in common save the use of one word? --Richhoncho (talk) 22:27, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ok, there's now a discussion about it here. Feel free to add any thoughts. This is Paul (talk) 22:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Move review for Crossover in fiction
An editor has asked for a Move review of Crossover in fiction. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. --BDD (talk) 13:51, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

July 2016
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Category:Sun in fiction, did not appear constructive and have been undone. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. The reverted edit can be found [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=731609290 here]. —azuki (talk · contribs · email) 12:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I apologize, but I made a mistake in tagging the edit. I hope this did not disrupt your editing, and have a good day.—azuki (talk · contribs · email) 12:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Alien: Covenant edits
Hello. Thank you for cleaning up the plot section of Alien: Covenant. While I did use the creature names based on how they were referred to in the credits, I was initially considering on changing them to general terms to avoid referring to them in an in-universe way. I realized you already did this and I would like to thank you for doing so in a manner that actually clarifies the broad details of the plot. So once again, thank you. Demented-P (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem! —Flax5 18:42, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Kek (mythology)
Thanks for reverting the vandalism here; should really also have templated it with a warning message. I've slapped one on - in effect, he's had one warning for at least 5 vandalistic acts... All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:57, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Twin Peaks
Hello, to answer your question. I rearranged the order of events so as avoid flipping back and forth between locations. This has also been done earlier to the previous episodes. Plot summaries should summarize the plot. They need not follow the sequence of events as shown on TV. Str1977 (talk) 16:58, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of I Killed My Lesbian Wife, Hung Her on a Meat Hook, and Now I Have a Three-Picture Deal at Disney for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I Killed My Lesbian Wife, Hung Her on a Meat Hook, and Now I Have a Three-Picture Deal at Disney is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/I Killed My Lesbian Wife, Hung Her on a Meat Hook, and Now I Have a Three-Picture Deal at Disney until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:04, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Star Trek Continues
Flax5, on the Star Trek Continues page you made a substantial edit with the explanation "there's no need for large tables and charts when the same information can be conveyed more effectively and concisely with simple lists." Yet in the process of this edit, you deleted significant information (i.e. characters' ranks) with no explanation. Can you shed light on why you did this -- or please re-instate the info you (perhaps accidentally) deleted. Thank you. Smegsmegsmeg (talk) 08:25, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't realise the ranks themselves were that important, so I just kept it down to the characters' roles ("Communications Officer" seems more informative and specific than "Lieutenant", etc). No big deal though, I'll put them back in. —Flax5 17:44, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who like Black Mirror
Hey! I saw that you edited the article Black Mirror and thought maybe you would be interested in this new user category I created?- 🐦Do☭torWho42 ( ⭐ ) 01:21, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:30, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 31
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Malcolm Tucker, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin O'Neill ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Malcolm_Tucker check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Malcolm_Tucker?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Works of H. P. Lovecraft
Template:Works of H. P. Lovecraft has been nominated for merging with Template:H. P. Lovecraft. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- wooden superman  15:11, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Bernice Summerfield audios
Template:Bernice Summerfield audios has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Zack mann  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:20, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

File:Chris cwej seventh doctor and roz.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:04, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Father Trendy portrait.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Father Trendy portrait.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) 02:40, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Category:Metafictional characters has been nominated for renaming
Category:Metafictional characters has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 16:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You have the only comment on the cat's talk page, so manually tagging you. - RevelationDirect (talk) 16:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Media based on H. P. Lovecraft works
Template:Media based on H. P. Lovecraft works has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:23, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Grandfather Paradox (Doctor Who)& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Pokelego999 (talk) 15:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of The Other (Doctor Who) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Other (Doctor Who), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/The Other (Doctor Who) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Grandfather paradox dwm.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Grandfather paradox dwm.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) 17:15, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chris cwej seventh doctor and roz.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Chris cwej seventh doctor and roz.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) 02:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The other - doctor who.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:The other - doctor who.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) 02:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Monk stories
Template:Monk stories has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Pokelego999 (talk) 14:57, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Category:Lists of unrealized projects by artist has been nominated for renaming
Category:Lists of unrealized projects by artist has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

CfD nomination at
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at  on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 06:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Interquel video games has been nominated for renaming
Category:Interquel video games has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ― Blaze WolfTalkblaze&#95;&#95;wolf 17:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Doña Lupe


The article Doña Lupe has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Fails WP:NFILM"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donald D23  talk to me  13:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)