User talk:Ged UK/Archives/2008/October

Matthew Mitcham
Thank you for pointing that out.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 20:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Article Sant Tarachand -- Star Monument, Dinod has nothing to do with this article (undo)
Star monument, Dinod is holy Samādhi (mausoleum) of Sant Tarchand.

In other words mausoleum of Sant Tarachand ji Maharaj is given a beautiful shape of Star monument at Dinod.

I have undo the changes.

Raj Kamal Khare (talk) 02:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

ACG Senior College
That's fine on the removal; I can always stand to learn a few more of the thousands of lines of policies. Regarding the "unpatrolled" status, it must have been me who overlooked patrolling it. The system is rather cumbersome, since after you tag you must either go all the way back or come to it from new pages again, and occasionally one slips through the cracks. I'd prefer it if certain tag actions marked it patrolled automatically. Sorry about that!--otherlleft (talk) 10:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

James Cagney, etc.
That IP address is on a crusade of some kind. Funny he just started today and knows right where the archived discussion is. Presumably either a sock or a stealth not wanting people to know who he is. He has updated many articles this way today. I'll be fixing a few, to start with. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, an interesting discussion, and a point worth discussing. But wholesale unilateral changes like that, without consensus, are not good. I reverted a couple of them and posted a challenge on his page. I don't recommend a wholesale re-reversion until we get an answer of some kind. If he gets belligerent, we'll take him to a film project page, or to WP:ANI if necessary. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Common snakeneck turtle
I can't help but be reminded of a Monty Python bit about the value of not being seen. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 10:05, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Or "the ability of an organism to avoid observation", a more syllabic way of saying it. :) Are you acquainted with that particular Python routine? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 10:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * "This turtle has presented us with a poser. We cannot tell which of the three moss-covered rocks is actually the turtle. But we can soon find out." Ka-boom! Ka-boom! Ka-boom (AWK!) ... OK, that was more like a (dead) parrot. I'm not too sure what the dying cry of a turtle would sound like. Ironically, in this example, the turtle got shelled. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 10:24, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

James Cagney
Hi. I fell into the filmbio incidentally, mostly after I realized no one much seems to work on the project. I'll take a look at the article a bit later this evening (we seem to have a time difference) and give you some feedback. I've tried the last couple weeks to work on cleaning up the articles slated for version 0.7 but I can give Jimmy some time. I don't have a lot of resources on him, but I have a couple things that might help. I'll let you know. Wildhartlivie (talk) 18:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually think the article is shaping up quite nicely. I did a bit of copying editing (a very little bit) and reference formatting (using template citation style), which I'd be glad to do as it goes along if that style isn't something you're familiar with doing. I found a specific citation for the Orson Welles video (the actual television episode) and added that. One thing I'm not as comfortable with are the numerous quotes highlighted in the article. There are 14 instances of quotes highlighted - either in a box or a quote template. I'm afraid that is probably too many, at a point when the article would be reviewed for GA or FA status, that would be an issue raised. I'm sure that most could be blended into the article and leave only two or three as standouts. The quotes and miscellaneous facts should probably be incorporated into the article - the last bit, on his grandson working in a video store, is sourced from IMDB. IMDB isn't considered reliable for something like that, and really, what does it matter where his grandson works? Maybe he owns it? In any case, I'll come back tomorrow night and work on the citation templates some more. Let me know if there is something specific you'd like me to do. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to do a bit. I made a note on the article talk page about the Republican category inclusion. The newsmeat ref doesn't support, on its own, saying he was a Republican, only that he made contributions to the party when and after Reagan ran for president. I'm not doubting if he was Republican, just that the source doesn't say that. It won't go away when the time comes that the article supports it, meanwhile, there are some issues with it being there. I see that your goal is a FA, so the use of the more complicated templates - which you have used correctly in the refs section - will help bolster the "FA-ness" of it. And it gives me opportunity to actually read through as I'm inserting them at the inline place. It's shaping up well. There are surely some images somewhere that are fair-use or perhaps even out of copyright? I'll ask another editor if he can find some (Rossrs). He's usually adept at finding good images. Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. I've left a note for Rossrs. Meanwhile, there are two or three images on Wikimedia Commons to start. Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You might want to look at these images that are already in use on WP. If they are too big, they could be cropped and used to illustrate various films in the article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 15:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Image:The Public Enemy 1931 film.jpg
 * Image:Footlight Parade Shanghai Lil.jpg
 * Image:FriscoKid.jpg
 * Image:Yankee Doodle Dandy Cagney.jpg
 * Image:Yankee Doodle Dandy 4 Cohans.jpg
 * Image:Captains of the Clouds- .jpg
 * Image:Captains of the Clouds- next ones.jpg
 * Image:Cagney-TheGallantHours.jpg
 * Image:CagneyImage301.jpg
 * Use whatever works. I'd like to see the Public Enemy image used, the scene is fairly legendary with the grapefruit and all. I've looked a little but haven't found candid shots yet. Hopefully they will show up. Wildhartlivie (talk) 18:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't see the grapefruit image on the page, you're right. Rossrs has uploaded several good screenshots on commons. There are some that would work well in the article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 16:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I've uploaded some images from film trailers onto Commons. They are here.   My two cents,  but the Public Enemy shot is such an important one, I really hope you use it.  It's a clearer image than the one currently in use, and I'd say it's a posed publicity photo rather than a screenshot.   The image on the article page has a blur that is obviously movement.  I think the tag should be changed before the article is taken anywhere such as FAR.  Assuming you use the image, of course.   (Maybe it needs to be made a bit smaller to make the fair use rationale stronger).   A couple of the images I've uploaded are from Yankee Doodle Dandy.  Also I notice that the uploader of the Captains of the Clouds images has put both a copyright tag and a public domain tag on the image page.  This filled me with hope, but alas I can find no evidence that the film is public domain.   Nice work on the article by the way.  It looks very good indeed.  Rossrs (talk) 16:17, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

(outdent)Hi, The grapefruit images - well, the publicity photo is clearer, but on second look it's quite "fake". Mae Clarke looks like she's striking a 'damsel-in-distress' pose. Cagney doesn't really look like he means it either. As for the screenshot - it's very good of Cagney, it shows a lot of meanness and spontaneity, and I think, because it's his article this is more important. Mae Clarke is blurred but it looks more real. It looks like she's being subjected to something unpleasant but in the publicity photo she's registering nothing. I'd go with the screenshot. Also, I think it would be good to discuss this scene in the article. One, because it's such a well known scene and the ad-lib aspect of it is very interesting, and two, because as an unfree image the fair use rationale would be stronger if this scene was discussed. As it stands, it's almost a generic image being used solely to sit alongside discussion of the film. To anyone who doesn't already know, it's importance is not stated. The caption says it's "the most famous scene" but it's only famous to people who've heard of it, if you know what I mean, so I think that should be changed too. "Cagney shoves half a grapefruit into Mae Clarke's face in one of his most notable scenes, from The Public Enemy" (or something)  TheYankee Doodle close-up photo, in my opinion, would work in the infobox. It's a good character image, he's looking to the left, so he'd be looking into the article, plus it's a very notable role. I would suggest giving it a try and see what it looks like. I think it will be OK. Rossrs (talk) 16:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

script
Ah, excellent to have a new user! Have you refreshed the cache? Go to your monobook page and follow the directions at the top for your browser. Let me know if that doesn't help.

I'm now using the bottom two buttons in the toolbox, which delink dates, date fragments and common terms (like UK, Australia and United States). Tony  (talk)  10:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like you're more experienced with scripts than I am. User talk:Lightmouse is the guru. User talk:MatthewEdwards had problems with other functionalities' clashing, but they were resolved. User talk:Gary King may also be able to help. Tony   (talk)  11:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

You can try two things: Regards Lightmouse (talk) 11:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 1. Log in to Wikipedia with another brand of browser. That way you will determine if the problem is with the browser or the script.
 * 2. Check to see if you have WikiEdit. That has caused similar symptoms.


 * I see you are making edits with the script now. Can you confirm everything is fine now? Lightmouse (talk) 14:57, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Time and dates
Hi there, I read your comment on the AIV submission that I declined to block. As a tip, if you don't know, you can activate "A clock in the personal toolbar that shows the current time in UTC and also provides a link to purge the current page" in your preferences => Gadgets which allows you to easily compare the timestamp on warnings with the history of a user. Regards  So Why  08:16, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that tip! Very helpful. I only need to worry about it for another week, and then my local time will go back to GMT/UTC and i needn't worry about it for 6 months! I've taken your advice and turned that clock on, being an hour out is more confusing that being 7 or 8 I think. --Ged UK (talk) 08:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. Have a nice day :-)  So Why  08:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Page patrolling
Frankly, the page patrolling is new to me. I thought a page can only be patrolled by an admin. Thanks for letting me know. I try to learn this feature now. Dekisugi (talk) 09:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandals
I've blocked both those accounts for abusing multiple accounts and for their choice of usernames; let me know if you spot anymore. Regards, BencherliteTalk 10:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I've added the page in question to my watchlist. Is it only that page that the vandal targets?  If so, then further bouts of page-protection is probably the way to go; rangeblocks might hit too many other legitimate users (not that I can judge rangeblock patterns either!). Regards, BencherliteTalk 10:48, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * All added to my watchlist, but poke me if you think action (page protection/user blocking) is needed, and I'll have a look. BencherliteTalk 11:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Those attack accounts
Somehow whoever is creating these accounts is getting around the autoblock--I just requested an IP check to see if the underlying IP can be blocked. Blueboy96 22:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Main Page redesign
The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, P retzels Talk! 10:13, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Stupid Question
Hey I was wondering whether you could help me. How? Does one see who adds or modifies an article. Where do you go to see that? LOL! Sorry. Just thought you'd be willing to tell me. --Klutzulmaniack (talk) 02:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * You can see it by clicking the tab for the article history, at the top of an article. If you add an article to your Watchlist (click the Watch tab at the top of the article, or check the Watch box when you are editing the article) you will also get notifications when people edit.
 * If you're looking for me to ask about my edit to Concerns and controversies over the 2008 Summer Olympics, you may leave me a message at my talk page. &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 02:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Country overlinking
Country overlinking on infoboxes has been suspended indefinitely. Londo 06  11:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No problems. Londo  06  11:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reply for Klutzulmaniack
No problem. I'm sorry you're the one that user ended up yelling at over the plagiarism thing, since I was the one who pointed it out. I am also watching that user's page, and have given him/her a link to the tutorial and offered to help out, so hopefully there won't be any more of those misunderstandings. &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 16:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)