User talk:Grapple X/Archive 1

Hey Grapple, you dick

 * This too, for Twin Peaks.
 * Lovecraft
 * Valentich
 * This is just, like, his opinions, man
 * Giallo films
 * Stone's War/Back from the World


 * If you need them really badly, there's WP:RX... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Might give that a look; but I can access things like JSTOR at university, so I dump links here as a reminder. GRAPPLE   X  15:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, although in my experience the RX board has it up within an hour. Since I barely use Jstor, I haven't even bothered signing for a free account. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Twin Peaks Ratings
I wasn't exactly sure which ones you needed, so I did Episodes 13–15. I found them, including viewer, rating, share, and rank:

Episode 13 Viewers = 11.3 million Rating = 7.6 Share = 14 Seventy-First most-watched show

Episode 14 Viewers = 17.2 million Rating = 10.4 Share = 20 Fifty-first most-watched show

Episode 15 Viewers = 13.3 million Rating = 8.2 Share = 16 Seventieth most-watched show

Hope that helps! If you need any more, just ask; I should be able to get quite a few more!--Gen. Quon (Talk)   22:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks man, I really appreciate that. I should be able to stick those all in the article. They match the original numbers, which makes Chicago Sun-Times wrong, but I'm starting to think they're running on a faulty premise (I think they're basing numbers on ratings and not shares, maybe. I dunno). Anyway, thanks! I'm just about to pop the features disc for TXF season 5 in to see if it has anything on "Mind's Eye" for you. GRAPPLE   X  11:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem! If you need any more, just ask.--Gen. Quon (Talk)   15:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I might; I'll be starting the first season soon as I rebought the DVDs I lost. Thanks again. GRAPPLE   X  15:05, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

X-Files Season Seven Abandoned Mythology
I was doing a little digging and I ran into some really sad information regarding season seven and a whole trove of abandoned mythology episodes. Apparently, at the beginning of the season, Carter and Co. were preparing to end the series by revisiting the warring alien factions and the destruction of the Syndicate, but it never came to pass. Do you know anything about this? Seems really too bad that the show didn't go out with a bang instead of the wimper it did.--Gen. Quon (Talk)   05:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Wow, first I'm hearing about that. I always got the feeling that the whole super soldier thing came about the same way MM season 3 did, they had prepared for cancellation too well and needed to think of somewhere to go fast. That might have been an interesting direction but it seems a bit too grand. GRAPPLE   X  05:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Good point. Would've been cool to see, though. Also, I guess Krycek and Covarrubias were supposed to take over the Syndicate and side with the rebels, but this too was scrapped. That would have been pretty sweet. Oh well, I guess I have to be contented with season 8 and 9.--Gen. Quon (Talk)   06:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I certainly wouldn't argue with more Covarrubias. I guess "One Son" was them shooting themselves in the foot, especially considering they were under no pressure to kill off the syndicate by that stage. GRAPPLE   X  09:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The more and more I dig into this, the more and more I wish it had ended in s7 with Mulder, or even s8, since Duchovny was still sorta on board. I wish they had touched upon the alien rebels before the show exploded. I guess if a final movie gets made, they could always retcon the series and say that the alien rebels beat the colonists, and thus the colonization never happened. That would be a seriously lame ending, though.--Gen. Quon (Talk)   17:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I think a film (or even a comic series, something that's relatively unencumbered by cost) could deal with the actual 2012 invasion being enacted in the face of rebel resistance, maybe a bit like V. GRAPPLE   X  19:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Sigh - I loved all the alien warring-factions story arc and much preferred them to the standalone episodes.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * For me it was all about the sneaking around, the earlier alien-oriented episodes where you just get the slightest peek behind the curtain without knowing the full ins and outs of it all. GRAPPLE   X  19:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you could tell that after season 5, they didn't know where to go and the mytharc got ridiculous fast. I was cool with most of it, until the whole alien-baby-Jesus thing at the end of season 8 and all of season 9. I wish they made a comic book, honestly. A movie would be sweet, but a comic would still be canon, wouldn't require the actors and actresses, and could be produced cheap enough.--<font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   20:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I think the crossover with 30 Days of Night was pretty successful, too, so it would make financial sense. GRAPPLE   X  20:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Crossover with 30 Days of Night?! wow....link? Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Here you go. GRAPPLE   X  21:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool....Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh man, I love that crossover, although I still don't know what the timeline is supposed to be.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   02:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Haven't a scooby, to be honest with you. All I know is that Resist or Serve is meant to take place during the seventh season. GRAPPLE   X  02:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Should that be considered canon? I read that awhile ago and wondered that. I emailed the person who runs EatTheCorn and asked about any info regarding abandoned season seven episodes, and they sent me back an email with some links. Apparently, they were going to make a "Musing of a Cigarette Smoking Man"-type episode that would have explained his motives. In addition, the original series finale would have revolved around Strughold, the Syndicate, the alien invasion, and Samantha. Since they explained Samantha's disappearance, I think they just kind of ran out of steam. Poo.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   02:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe so, it's an official release. They wouldn't have assigned it a season (and production codes!) if it wasn't meant to be canon. Also more Strughold would have been good. He was surprisingly effective for a one-shot character. Him and Martin Landau were great. GRAPPLE   X  02:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I always kind of wondered what happened to him. He just disappeared. As for the game, what was the plot? I've never played it, so I don't know really that much about it. Pretty cool that it was placed in season 7, though.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   06:25, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, good news; I found viewer info for the first two seasons! Woo!! They're kind of lumped together, since the info is from newspaper scans from USA Today that I found in a TV blog's archive.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   07:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The plot was some awful nonsense about the black oil suddenly turning a whole town into zombies. Then Mulder starts getting weird hallucinations, they visit the gulag from "Tunguska"/"Terma", track down a UFO landing site and shoot a bunch of dogs and old men. GRAPPLE   X  16:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well that's kind of stupid. At least it touched on the black oil mythos. I really despise how they just abandoned that storyarc after the movie.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   17:55, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I think they figured since the movie showed there was a vaccine that they could write it off. But I'd have liked to have seen more episodes along the vein of "Zero Sum" showing a sort of biochemical arms race. GRAPPLE   X  22:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That would have been sweet. I miss the bees. Unrelated, would you want to help Bruce Campbell and I work on the main article sometime? I feel that it is just sitting there.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   23:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's a scary one. Want to draw up a plan for a heading each or something? GRAPPLE   X  23:33, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I've been messing with the Ratings section, but I'd be fine doing whatever. I think if we all chip in, it will be pretty good. The refs will be scary to have to comb through, though.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   23:35, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess we'd have to decide on a format before launching in (I tend to use MM DD, YY) and then individually check them all afterwards to be sure. GRAPPLE   X  23:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That sounds good to me. I generally use DD MM YYYY just because the template is generated that way. I don't really care that much.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   00:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm easy. Could just stick with what's already present I guess. GRAPPLE   X  00:12, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * I remember how much effort you put into that. Wow, CNN took the "new" out of "news". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:59, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I was wondering where all the traffic was coming from, the page views went up by something like 1000%. Guess CNN's journalism isn't a patch on The Guardian then, who had this covered years ago. :P GRAPPLE   X  16:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Erm... Geez, even my TFAs don't get that much traffic. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:33, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's scary. Worst thing is none of the new crop of sources say anything new... :( GRAPPLE   X  22:40, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * LOL. Probably sourcing to your article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:51, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Really wouldn't surprise me. Think I might take it to PR some day and see what can be done. GRAPPLE   X  22:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Good luck with that. Although you've had trouble so far. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I might need to just start from the ground up again. Still, I don't like seeing "former featured article candidate". It just reads as "Grapple. Must do better." GRAPPLE   X  23:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I doubt you'll need to go from the ground up, but there may be some heavy lifting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * When it comes to overhauling I find it a lot easier to start fresh. I might go section at a time soon and see what I can do, but I want to get "Ice" and an ill-advised foray into theatre out of the way first. GRAPPLE   X  23:15, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW, you've got a "not in citation given" tag on the article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:15, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I became aware when Project A119 also got an extended mention on the Colbert Report. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:11, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * At first I thought this would be an easy segment to look for, but 1100 episodes? Holy gooches. GRAPPLE   X  23:15, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

A-Class Stuff
I see that you're busy on your Moon Bombing article (congrats on that!) and "Ice", but if you have time, would you mind voting/commenting on the X-Files A-Class nominations. I think that'll be the last few I nominate for the time being. I need to get them all peer-reviewed/copy-edited before I even approach FAR again.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   22:44, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'll see if I can round out any of the half-done ones. I think the trouble is just knowing who has a good eye for FA-quality prose; if editors whose prose is their weak point are the ones reviewing at GA/ACR then grab a copy-edit before going to FAC, but if someone whose prose is impeccable has reviewed it already then you should be okay. GRAPPLE   X  23:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool. I think I'm going to focus on "Deadalive" next. I'll just get a few people to really copyedit it nice and good.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   23:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, I've started work on the main page. Do you want to take "Production"? I've been working on "Broadcast and release". I don't really care who has what.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   01:32, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Support - I just expanded BWV 36 enough for DYK, it was tough, - consider now to nominate it for GA on the Sunday ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Nominated, on the Sunday it was written for and first performed, title translates to "Soar joyfully aloft" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:30, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Main Page
Tah-dah! What do you think? I think I'll put it up for a copyedit before GA, just to work some of the prose kinks out first.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   21:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Looking good! Sorry I haven't been much help with it; between post-cup burnout and NaNoWriMo I'm kinda running on fumes. :P GRAPPLE   X  22:29, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries, I've been using the article to procrastinate on my school work. Just thought I'd get a few bits of advice. I hope your novel turns out well!--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   22:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad to see I'm not the only one who turns to Wikipedia to procrastinate (like right now!) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Ruby2010
Thanks for commenting! Between you and Cassianto, I didn't even need to really leave the IP a message :)  Ruby  2010/  2013  21:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. Feeling a bit burnt out myself lately so I didn't want to see someone being accosted unnecessarily on top of that. GRAPPLE   X  00:22, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments at Talk:2012 in film
Hi Grapple X,

I'm getting the impression that for whatever reason, you just have a preconcieved notion that my ideas are bad, and aren't even considering them. It seemed like in your reply about the wide/limited/rereleases, you didn't even bother to check what was actually in the sources and just wanted to post something disagreeing with me as quickly as you could. Also, I certainly didn't appreciate your comment that you were "tired of repeating yourself" when I was making a new proposal to try to address the concerns that had previously been stated (i.e. to list individual countries but to choose them in a non-biased way). Some of your replies, such as the one that started "The bias isn't in the assumption . . .", seemed to state points that I was in agreement on as if I had disagreed on them, making me think you didn't read to the end of my original comment. I'm basically feeling a lot of passive-aggressiveness in your replies that I think is unintentional, but is still very off-putting to me. I want to assure you that I'm trying to help make the article better, and that we are in agreement that it has problems with bias, and in agreement that the article needs work to make it be focused on the world as a whole rather than select Anglosphere nations. We may be in disagreement on how exactly to fix the article, but I ask that you please actually consider my suggestions, or at least try not to reply to them in a way that misstates facts or makes it seem like we disagree on points where we actually agree. Calathan (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I didn't realise that the refs given for the films' release would cover the notion of wide/limited release, I suppose I expected that field to be cited in itself rather than realising the whole row used one ref; that was a mistake on my behalf. I'll clarify that on the talk page for other readers when I'm done here (though for what it's worth, the actual meaning of wide/limited releases is still of narrow scope—including the fact that we don't even state where the release is considered wide or not—and should be defined on the page if it's being used). I certainly don't mind the "R" for re-releases as that's not a question of bias, either a film was released before or it wasn't; a film released in one region can't be un-released, after all. As for being tired of repeating myself, I've several times on that page, in edit summaries when fixing problems, or at WT:FILM or related talk pages had to repeat points when editors (and I don't mean to imply you when I say that) have overlooked or missed explanations being given (several knee-jerk reverts, for example, followed any changes which had been already hashed out on the talk page, including things as simple as listing Yash Chopra's death, which is exactly the kind of thing I was/am tired of re-doing). As for the passage you cited ("The bias isn't in the assumption . . ."), I still feel your point was that it was of interest to readers to see the regional grosses which were given, while I was stating that the simple giving regional grosses are what is problematic, but the assumption that we should stick to the ones that had already been there—I did see that you suggested changing the fields to something less arbitrary but it also seemed that you were defending the initial ones as well (essentially I took your response as "I see no problem with what we have, but if there is a problem here is a Plan B", and as I had no issue with Plan B, simply refuted the part I did disagree with). In terms of feeling that I'm being brusque or passive-aggressive, I point you to the talk header up there—I am a bastard, but I don't mean to aim it at anyone in particular, so I'm sorry if that's the impression you've been left with. GRAPPLE   X  00:26, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I just want to thank you for replying. It actually made me feel a lot better about interacting with you here.  Anyway, about the numbers in the table of highest grossing films, I understand that numbers from specific countries aren't necessary for the article, and I'm taking the lack of other replies to suggest that most people disagree with me about having them.  I'm fine with leaving those off if no one else speaks up in favor of them (though I still personally think having some numbers for specific countries would make the article better). Calathan (talk) 02:33, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I think the numbers like that would probably be best suited to those articles listed at Lists of number one box-office films; tables like the one at 2012 in film could easily be geared towards each individual territory there, and given much more depth than it would have enjoyed in the broader article. There is definitely room for the material, it's always just a matter of where is right to put it, and how is best to present it. GRAPPLE   X  02:36, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

End of Year wrap up
Happy holidays Grapple. If its at all not an inconvenience, can you close some of the nominations? I think it would be great to get most of the noms taken care of before the end of the year. GamerPro64 03:29, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Bollocks! Was about to promote the Capcom topic—wanted to wait until you'd finished the Pacific command one so it didn't confuse the article counts. Let me know when you're done for the day and I'll pick one up then. GRAPPLE   X  20:07, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Terribly sorry Grapple. I didn't get an answer so I assumed you were busy. But yeah I'm done for right now. GamerPro64  20:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I should have said something. Well if you're done I'll have a look at what's next in the queue then. Thanks for working so quickly through those, too. GRAPPLE   X  20:33, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Though I find that me getting through them so quickly to be ironic as I had internet problems earlier. GamerPro64  20:36, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Batman: Arkham City
Hey Grapple, hoping to catch you before the holiday period in case you won't be around. I want to nominate this article for FA, now IMO it's comprehensive of all available info, but I noted during GA you said there was a substantial gap in coverage that would need to be filled before it can go to FA. Can you give me some idea what needs doing? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:44, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * What I meant at that time was that the Wii U version hadn't been released—and therefore documented—yet; I imagine that's all been handled by now though so the scope should be fine. GRAPPLE   X  20:29, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thought that might be it but wanted to make sure, thanks GX, I will submit it for FA then. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:31, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Good luck! GRAPPLE   X  20:35, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Done! Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:52, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Grapple, sorry to bother you but I'm being told that I need a co-nominator for the Batman FAC as you're only allowed to have one FAC active at a time. SandyGeorgia says that its so you can be around to make edits and what not but I don't think you should have to depending on how long input takes and if and when I hear back about a job so i'd just need the nom from you if you are willing. If not let me go and I will try someone else. Thanks for reading. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:16, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I had assumed one of the nominations was already co-nominated. I don't mind helping out but I'd feel dishonest taking credit for the article as I'm mostly patrolling it for vandalism or discussion. I'd say you'd probably be better asking one of the film editors to co-nominate with Prometheus; IllaZilla seems very active there. If you're really stuck I'll definitely put my name down to help you out though. GRAPPLE   X  20:21, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think it means you're taking credit for it, just agreeing that it should be considered for FA. I can ask Illazilla, but won't it be weird for him to nominate it 5 days after discussion began? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:09, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It's your call, really; though a third nominator was added to the FAC for "Episode 14" (Twin Peaks) after a fair bit so it's not unheard of. If you'd rather have Batman be the co-nominated one then stick me down, I can vouch for the article's scope, stability and neutrality (FA criteria 2–4). GRAPPLE   X  21:12, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

WP:RSN
FYI: In order to get some clarification on the tagging of self-published sources, I brought up my tag and your revert in List of The X-Files episodes in Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Cheers! Location (talk) 17:26, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Have responded there, thanks for the ping. GRAPPLE   X  17:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

 * Hey man, thanks for the cheer. Have a good one yourself! Haven't been doing much as November was taken up with off-wiki writing and retail workers aren't allowed to have December to themselves ever, but I should be making some fresh inroads in January. Hope your holidays are grand. GRAPPLE   X  17:54, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Holiday Cheer

 * Thanks! Have a great one yourself, and don't forget it's difficult being an airport at Christmas. GRAPPLE   X  17:56, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

An award

 * Thanks very much! I have #100 cooking in a sandbox, haven't had the energy to go finish it off what with the holiday rush at work but if you're an Al Pacino fan, look out for it. Hope the holiday's a good one for you. GRAPPLE   X  00:04, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

 * Thanks very much; have a great one yourself. I'll go easy on the brownies, or else I'll be baked enough to eat the whole turkey. GRAPPLE   X  00:46, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * :O Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know if it's by design or coincidence but outside of stoner culture brownies are rare as hen's teeth here; they haven't really crossed the pond in their family-friendly form (not that a serious hot box isn't a damn good family activity or anything). GRAPPLE   X  00:56, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Why, where are you locateD? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:10, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ireland. GRAPPLE   X  00:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah ok, i'm in the UK, was gonna say, we have brownies. Lol,though they're not associated with that culture as far as I am aware over here either. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:25, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

That problem with the rollback button
Don't worry, I've done the same thing loads of times. Glimmer721 <sup style="color:blue;">talk  00:50, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

nobody answer me in the consensus
nobody answer me in the consensus to change the nationality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prometheus_ (film) # Nationality I would like to further discuss the issue why you do not participate more? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MervinVillarreal (talk • contribs) 01:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Because I've said all I have to say; your own unwillingness to collaborate rather than demand is what reduces others' willingness to continue debating. I've already left a comment yesterday (possibly the day before) expressing a preference for not using a nationality at all as classifying dual-nationality films only foster edit wars while offering no useful information; I see you've made no reply to that. Why do you not collaborate more? GRAPPLE   X  01:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

the problem is this, all companies that produce the movie are American, all have their headquarters there, and the film is also distributed by an American company, why the movie can not be "American"? to my knowledge, there is no a UK production that makes the movie is British film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MervinVillarreal (talk • contribs) 01:13, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * But this is clearly false, as the production is heavily English, involving Scott Free Productions, Ridley Scott and the Pinewood/Shepperton studio work. If you're going to keep ignoring that then it should be clear why others ignore you. GRAPPLE   X  01:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Scott Free Productions is based in California, USA.

Ridley Scott has no bearing on the origin of the film, then, titanic is a Canadian-American film for James.

what is your source of Pinewood / Shepperton studio produced the movie?MervinVillarreal (talk) 01:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * It's cited twice in the actual article, which I expressly fucking told you the last time you asked the exact same thing. Try reading for a change. GRAPPLE   X  01:23, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * As for Scott Free, here's their website. Let me quote: "Scott Free has offices in London and Los Angeles".
 * "Scott Free has offices in London"
 * "in London"
 * "London".
 * GRAPPLE  X  01:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

do not insult me, lucer I have a picture.. MervinVillarreal (talk) 01:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Indignation is the last resort of the outmanoeuvred; if you've nothing useful to add then I'd ask you to quit bothering me and find another outlet for your jingoistic revisionism. I suggest Risk. GRAPPLE   X  01:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

no worries, thanks for the help - A nation that tries to imitate to the original ends up as ash in the air. - Venezuelan writer. Have a great new year MervinVillarreal (talk) 01:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Copy-editing help
Do you know of anyone who'd be willing to copy edit "The Sixth Extinction II" page... again. I'm running into some very frustrating comments at the FAC...--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   18:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Short of the GOCE, all I would know are Crisco, who's swamped IRL, and Mark Arsten, who to be honest I don't know what he's up to at the minute. I guess you could ask either but I wouldn't hold out hope for anything immediate, sorry. GRAPPLE   X  03:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tips. I'll try Mark Arsten, but I have a feeling the FAC will just die on the table. I'll work on it this winter and see about next year.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   22:32, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, this... I ended up copy-editing it a little. Shame about the FAC — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Request
Hey Grapple, long time no see. I've managed to find time to write a fairly nice article and was wondering if you could give it a once-over. It's a little nasty, though... Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, man. Reading over it now. I'm immediately struck by how the title has a slash while the poster doesn't; is there a poster available which does include this slash? GRAPPLE   X  13:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "General Suharto destroys the coup and urges the Indonesian populace to commemorate those killed fight against all forms of communism." -> If this is intended as I believe it is (fight communism to commemorate the dead), try "General Suharto destroys the coup and urges the Indonesian populace to commemorate those killed by resisting all forms of communism".
 * Done — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "The Army" shouldn't be capitalised, it's a generic term rather than the official "Indonesian Army" name (cf "Taoiseach Enda Kenny" versus "Enda Kenny, the taoiseach")
 * The Indonesian Army --> Army. A lot of the milhist FAs have Air Force (for US Air Force) and Army (for US Army). Abbreviated proper noun, I guess you could say — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "living care free" -> I'm not 100% sure, but I think this is either hyphenated or one word.
 * Reworded to avoid the question. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "The bodies and prisoners are taken to the G30S/PKI camp in Lubang Buaya, where they are tortured, and killed" -> "The bodies and prisoners are taken to the G30S/PKI camp in Lubang Buaya, where the survivors are tortured and killed"
 * "plotting "every move the last detail"" -> missing a word here
 * Dur. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "The film was in 1984, the first commercially-released domestic feature film to deal with the events of 1965." -> same again, should probably be "was released in 1984"
 * Other than that I think it seems grand. Didn't give it too stern a combing in case you want me to review it fully in the future. GRAPPLE   X  16:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. Don't know why the VCD case doesn't have the slash. All the sources use a slash (which means, per WP:COMMONNAME, we use a slash too. Other comments above. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I knew you wouldn't use one without good reason, it just looks a bit strange at first blush. GRAPPLE   X  21:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll say. I LOVE how Indonesian names can have a hundred and one spellings. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I hear you on that one. GRAPPLE   X  00:02, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Its own section? Geez... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 starting soon
Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:11, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup!
Hello Grapple X, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: *The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking. *If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens. *Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked. Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 18:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup
Hello, Grapple X, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
 * The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
 * Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
 * If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
 * Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
 * Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:55, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject: Good Articles Newsletter (January 2013)
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year and Comment
Hey there Grapple. Happy 2013. Though it may be a more interesting year due to all the civil controversy. And it seems Wizardman has retired because of it. While I have seen him to this once or twice before, this time may be permanent so you and I will have to up our A-game at FTC. GamerPro64 23:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Agus bhlian nua shona duit. I noticed Wizardman's retirement but his wording seemed to imply he'd still be around, just not doing much outside of content creation. As for FTC, I'm happy enough to promote the earliest hurricane topic tonight if you're in agreement with that; other than that it's a little slow for the time being and might be another week before the other noms are due to be processed. I believe I've one due to nominate myself soon (one more GA to bother myself to write and it's ready) so if Wizardman's out I'll be relying on you or another volunteer to process that; I don't mind doing the legwork if you've anything coming down the pipe too. GRAPPLE   X  23:33, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Yeah it may be too early to think he's done all together. But if I'm wrong he can change the edit I made to the header. But yeah you can promote the hurricane topic when you get around to it. GamerPro64  23:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

A conversation that may be of interest to you:
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive_jingoistic_behaviour_by_User:MervinVillarreal

Thought you might be interested in this discussion currently taking place. MisterShiney <font color="Red"> ✉    18:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I saw it, but it was resolved with a block before I even got home. Seems dealt with, but thanks for the heads up. GRAPPLE   X  19:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

May I have your opinion?
User VasOling on The Dark Knight Rises article insists on saying it received "a warm critical response" in the lede. And that it received positive reviews from "most" critics. I believe this is against practice on most film articles, as "most" is arguably incorrect. I've started a discussion on The Dark Knight Rises talk page and stated my reasons there and informed him of the discussion, but he has a history of edit warring, so I'm not sure if he's going to listen. Now he said "The Dark Knight Rises received praises from most critics," and I know for a fact that he knows about the discussion, but it doesn't seem like he has no intention to participate.

I've reverted him once already. May I have your opinion on the article's talk page? Anthonydraco (talk) 11:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/National Film Award for Best Actress/archive1
Hi, any chance by which you could review this list? &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  18:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Les Misérables
Hello and Happy New Year! :) I made a suggestion that was quoted at Talk:Les Misérables (2012 film) and subsequently added some detail in a follow-up comment. Trappist the monk thinks you would disagree with the suggested approach. I'm curious to know what you think. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 16:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Have made a brief comment. Thanks for the ping, I'd dropped the page from my watchlist. GRAPPLE   X  19:45, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

GA
Just a heads up: Talk:Laborintus II/GA1 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Working on it now in two open tabs. Thanks for getting it so quickly! If you've anything you need reviewed just pester me about it when I get this finished. GRAPPLE   X  23:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * FL is always backlogged... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * More or less done the review. Hate to bring this up at the bottom of the ninth, but it appears your sources support adding a section about the album's sound. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Way to go, looks like a pretty solid article. If you make an article about the original work, you can move this one to Laborintus II (album). I'm planning on doing the same with Mereka Bilang, Saya Monyet! when I finally get around to reading and writing about the short story collection — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * As for the extra work... it paid off, I hope? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Certainly looks that way. I might stick it up for PR soon enough; really didn't expect it to get as in-depth as it turned out (guess I'm getting lazy in my old age). GRAPPLE   X  16:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps I'm getting anal retentive from hanging around FAC too much . — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * "Feel"? :P Thanks for the star, though. Not sure I really did that much though, but still. GRAPPLE   X  17:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I did wonder how I got that tennis ball shape lump on my heard.... MisterShiney  <font color="Red"> ✉    17:10, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Collaboration?
So, what do you think about Asian films? Want to join in, assuming the Cup lets you collaborate? This can definitely get to GA, maybe even FA once the d*mn DVD comes out. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * BTW, I dumped about 20 English-language sources there if you're interested in helping. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well I've never seen one that wasn't Chinese or Japanese (though I did try watching Oldboy once but the disc was too scratched to play); I'll certainly comb through some of the English sources for you today. GRAPPLE   X  16:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Kewlz, so that could be another... 15 + 30, I think, assuming we get a fairly quick GA review. Not sure when the darned DVD will come out; I haven't seen it in stores yet. Sang Penari too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Couldn't find anything for the film using any of the English-language sites I'd usually go to; Empire and Total Film gave no useful hits, The A.V. Club was the same. Couldn't track it down in the BFI's website and AllRovi lists it but has no actual content on it. If there's no DVD release over in your neck of the woods I guess that's not surprising though. GRAPPLE   X  00:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I piled a list of English reviews at the bottom (those hyperlinks to The Jakarta Post, The Jakarta Globe, and a couple others). I got caught up in doing Darah dan Doa after Dr. B. stubbed it, so I haven't gotten back to this yet. Hopefully tonight or tomorrow — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, assumed with those titles they'd be Greek to me. :( GRAPPLE   X  16:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hehe. Nah, those sources are surprisingly all in English (and some of them are film festivals). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I've managed to (essentially) double the length. I'll go to a DVD shop later and try and find the film, otherwise we can get a basic plot outline from the reviews. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Putting a plot together without the film isn't so hard, it's how I put most of my gialli articles together before I tracked them down. I'll see what I can do from what you've posted then, and if you can find a copy of it then it can be perfected. GRAPPLE   X  16:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree, that's how most of my film articles are written (except those that have gotten to FA). Get Married, for example, was written based on reviews and then expanded once I saw the film. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Have you had a look at what I could muster? I tried all the Jakarta Post sources and one or two of the others; it's good as a premise but doesn't go beyond setting the scene. GRAPPLE   X  22:31, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep. Haven't found the DVD, the lady said it hadn't been released yet. Ended up five new films... including one which is about a step below porn, according to what I've read. Curiosity, ya see. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Now that sounds like my kind of movie. Just finished watching Mangiati vivi, might end up making that my next project. Who knows. But that threw porn out the window. GRAPPLE   X  22:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * "cannibal-rape film"... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Christmas present from my brother, along with Ultimo mondo cannibale. Last year he got me Cannibal Holocaust. Good lad, that boy. GRAPPLE   X  22:49, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

ITNC
Just a heads up that ive now changd the blurb. Feel free to reword it further.Lihaas (talk) 22:25, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've responded; I still think the item is not worth the nomination as we'd essentially be reporting on month-and-a-half old news. GRAPPLE   X  22:26, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ive updated he latest, more injuries and violence. Better late than never?
 * Also isnt this good to generate more discussion on the move?Lihaas (talk) 23:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Isn't there something better suited to move requests? What you added was a merge proposal, which is designed to take content from two article to create one article (like turning several TV episode articles into just an article for one season, or merging Myra Hindley and Ian Brady into Moors murders). There are a few better templates Template messages/Moving here that could be used instead. GRAPPLE   X  23:35, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Party!
I *just* realized... after "Unrequited" is GA-reviewed, all of The X-Files' episodes will be GAs. Is that a first for a TV project?--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   02:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You know, I'm pretty sure it is. Only The Simpsons probably has more GAs than us and they're only halfway through. By the way, did you catch that The A.V. Club now use our articles when they're writing reviews? The shoe's on the other foot now. GRAPPLE   X  02:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact, I did. When they mentioned the "real-life" thing, I checked the article, but couldn't find it. Then I saw your commented and had to chuckle. I guess it's some sort of symbiosis. Although it is cool that The AV Club, which I regard as a pretty legit review site, uses our work. Neat stuff.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   03:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Uncle David peer review
Hey Grapple; just want to say thanks so much for reviewing the article; I didn't think anyone was gonna touch it! Much appreciated Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Not a bother at all. You've given me a few PRs in the past so I knew I owed you one. GRAPPLE   X  14:47, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mit Gas
The article Mit Gas you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Mit Gas for things which need to be addressed.  Puffin  Let's talk! 16:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thanks very much! GRAPPLE   X  17:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Anonymous (Tomahawk album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Stanier


 * Mit Gas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to John Stanier

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Film lists for Indonesia
So, what do you think I should do for a proper list of Indonesian films? Should I go by year (i.e. 1950 in Indonesian cinema, 1951 in Indonesian cinema, etc.), by five years (i.e. List of Indonesian films (1950–1954), List of Indonesian films (1955–1959), or by decade (i.e. List of Indonesian films (1950–1959), List of Indonesian films (1960–1969)). As you can see from the graph, if I want the most detail (like at List of films of the Dutch East Indies) I should go by the year, but that'll leave me with some really short freaking lists around 1998 through 2001. If I go by half decade it might be more manageable, but that's a weird way to divide it up. If I go by decade, the 1970s will be huge (614 films total). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * By decade would average about 400 entries — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:10, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd say it wouldn't be too hard to have uneven divisions; I think you should try dividing it by article size rather than by equal spans—pre-70s can be lumped together, 70s can be split as 70–74 and 75–79, and the rest divided maybe by decade or the like. I think between 150 and 250 films would be an ideal average but in sticking to that don't use odd ranges just to keep it exact (if 70–74 is going to give 400, say, then just go with that instead of going 70–73). Though to be honest, someone like The Rambling Man or Giants would know about ideal scope better than me. GRAPPLE   X  16:25, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Pinging TRM. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Just a case of being sensible and being able to defend the position. Instead of splitting evenly, if that's lop-sided, split it another way. I'd avoid going beyond a hundred or so per list, what would that result in? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * By year, give or take. They average about 60 to 70 annually, although 1973 saw some 130 productions. Alright, how's this...
 * 1950 through 1954 - Yearly
 * 1955 through 1969 - Per five years
 * 1970 through 1994 - Yearly
 * 1995 through 2005 - Per five years
 * 2006 + - Yearly
 * That gives an average of about 100 films per article, although some (like 1970) will end up short and some (like 1955 to 1959) will be quite a bit longer — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I think anything that gives a decent and even split and can be defended, as you've done here very well, will be fine. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:39, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Dream
Episode 2's dream was listed as the fourth best sci-fi dream sequence by SFX recently. Thought you might like that. By the way, I finished Episode 12 Friday. Glimmer721 <sup style="color:blue;">talk  02:41, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Fourth? Ooh, you're closing in on the big reveal. I can't remember if you said you knew or not who it was. GRAPPLE   X  02:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was kind of expecting #1, but close enough. And all I know is BOB. Glimmer721  <sup style="color:blue;">talk  00:43, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

You have some nerve.
This is how you operate in a nut-shell - enter an edit war with someone already struggling to fend off another revert spammer, refuse to justify your edits until pushed, then have the audacity to threaten said user with a ban for trying to prevent the other reverter from removing useful, well-recognised information. And then you put that laughably pathetic 'warning' banner at the top of the new section page, as if that's supposed to make a difference. Typical tactics from someone who has no way of working this out in a mature way - just throw mud at people then ban them when they refuse to bow down, regardless of how much substance and credibility there is to their point.


 * Go fuck yourself. You're the one who ignored both common consensus and the three-revert rule while operating in the belief that your own personal opinion matters, when it doesn't. Take your unwarranted high horse and shove it up your ass. GRAPPLE   X  20:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "American Psycho (film)". {| style="border: 0; width: 100%;"
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:


 * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:


 * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
 * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
 * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
 * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:


 * Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors.   Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
 * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
 * Sign and date your posts with four tildes " ".
 * If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 21:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: WP:NCF
Hey, with regard to our recent interaction on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film: I would be very interested in seeing a change to the NCF on the matter of official titles vs. the titles home video distributors come up with. One of the problem articles I was talking about, Taboo (1999 film) is apparently actually better-known by its Japanese title Gohatto, but because of one disruptive editor I am at the moment unable to even add the fact that it has been released in several English-speaking countries under this title, much less request a move. I don't know how many articles like this there are, but I found another one not long ago. It would be so much easier than Googling all variant titles under a whole bunch of different variables, if we could actually call all the films by their official titles. Are you by any chance still interested in such a proposal? I will be there with bells on! (^_^)/ (I don't actually feel comfortable proposing such a change myself, as I am not a member of WikiProject Film and don't intend to become one, although the disruptive editor mentioned above is a member of Film and not of Japan and made such a suggestion on WikiProject Japan...) elvenscout742 (talk) 02:20, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I've certainly been meaning to bring it up, especially as in some cases there's been articles passing GA and FA reviews with their real titles instead of translations, which points to a changing view on the matter. I'll see if I can come up with a good proposal some time tomorrow afternoon GMT, possibly this evening if the coffee holds out. My film work frequently focusses on gialli from Italy, which as you can see often have multiple translated titles, which has been a point of contention in the past. I'll see what I can come up with soon then. GRAPPLE   X  02:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll be there with bells on!
 * (What follows is just a rambling story about my experiences on this topic. If you're interested and you enjoy a good rant, read on.) Most Japanese films have one main English title, although sometimes the UK (and Ireland etc.) prefer a romanized Japanese title. This is problematic in that some Wikipedians consider it redundant to give the native title twice (once as the native title, and once as the UK English variant). However, this only really applies to modern films that have been released globally by a variety of DVD/Blu-Ray distributors, and I just discovered that someone has been going around creating articles on obscure pre-War films (i.e., films that were never released outside Japan and the then-part-of-Japan Korean Peninsula and Taiwan, and possibly Manchukuo) under titles that only exist in filmography lists in books about the directors, or on IMDb! This is getting out of hand.
 * elvenscout742 (talk) 04:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I work extensively with Indonesian films, ranging from the first one in 1926 to modern films (like this, this, and this). I generally work under the belief that it's better to have the original title, especially when there is no official title (like, say, Sam Pek Eng Tay). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:33, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * NCF already says that we should use the original title if there is no official title. Other translations that are given by scholars don't even belong in the opening, unless they are being given as a gloss because the article uses the original title. elvenscout742 (talk) 04:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Essentially my view, although I still tend to disagree with using an international name as an article title (especially if the film has had several titles) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh I agree entirely! I was just quoting the guideline as it stands now, but it is my view as well that it should be changed. I agree with what Grapple X said to me on the above mention project page that the "official English title" is usually a marketing decision made by a company that actually has nothing to do with the film itself. elvenscout742 (talk) 04:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds about right. Compare Darah dan Doa (literally "blood and prayers") with The Long March. Although generally Indonesian films seem to have stuck with literal translations (c.f. Ruma Maida, Mereka Bilang, Saya Monyet!, Sang Penari etc.) Do you generally work with Japanese films? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:02, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I generally worked with Japanese literature until about a month ago when I decided to branch out. I edited Wikipedia articles on numerous topics, including Japanese cinema, from 2005 to 2008, before taking a long break until summer 2012. When I came back to Japanese films last month, I found that one particularly stubborn and not very polite user had basically seized control of all of the articles, and any edit he didn't like (in addition to all edits from me, whether he liked them or not) tend to get reverted. (I'm still working on this.) elvenscout742 (talk) 05:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, that. Saw that thread. Pity...
 * (luckily?) I'm essentially alone in Indonesian lit, film, and music articles. Don't think I've ever gotten past 2RR on those articles. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:20, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Anonymous (Tomahawk album)
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Signpost question
Hi Grapple X, would you and GamerPro64 be willing to give a short (100-150 words each) commentary on featured topics promoted this year that you consider especially well prepared, interesting, or representative of what Wikipedians do well? It should end up looking like this. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 100–500 each or altogether? If the latter, here you (if the former, poke again til I give it):
 * "Although 2012 regrettably saw several periods with little progress, with welcome the return of GamerPro64 we have seen several interesting topics promoted—in addition to the usual Wikipedia strong points of numismatics, military history and meteorology, the year has also been a strong one for music with topics promoted featuring a mezzo-soprano wunderkind and an Indonesian legend. Sport saw a strong showing, too, with both baseball and motorcycle racing seeing hugely comprehensive topics put through, which reflect the ability of FT to showcase vast spans of knowledge in surprisingly deep chunks. My personal favourite of our 2012 topics was also the year's least—a topic on the Armero tragedy reminded me that there's still room to encapsulate subjects that are entirely new to the process, and to use the idea of a topic to explore an event rather than something that obviously lends itself to the process like a series of lists or a serried history."
 * If you'd like anything on GT I could manage that, too. GRAPPLE   X  02:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's good, I think. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

The Mirror Never Lies
Okay, I finished it and nominated it (with you as co-nom). Question though: I found a list of nominations which checks out with the number of nominations in another source. Issue is, no supersources have the list of nominations. KapanLagi is an entertainment website, but it's reliability at the FAC level will be doubtful. It's better than other places that reproduced this list, including blogs. So, question: should we use this, or let just the wins be in the (now growing) table? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmm. That's pretty hard to say; I'd like to say go with the bigger list but I don't know if it'd hold up to scrutiny. Then again I'm no expert in the field. Maybe WP:RSN would be of use? Betty Logan is also quite good at making these kind of judgement calls, especially with film articles. GRAPPLE   X  19:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll try RSN. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:56, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

RE: Newsted's Metal
Hi, I own a digital copy of the album. The digital booklet only contains handwritten lyrics, there are no song writing credits listed in it. I would assume Jason wrote the songs though; this Blabbermouth article states that the lyrics in the digital booklet were handwritten by Jason. The1337gamer (talk) 21:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair do. I guess I can just credit it all to the band as a whole, covers any necessary bases. Thanks anyway! GRAPPLE   X  21:23, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Mirror Never Lies
KTC (talk) 08:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Mit Gas
KTC (talk) 16:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Discussion on the AFT5 Request for Comment
Hey - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Notifying you that Batman Arkham City is up for FAC
I've nominated this article again, it failed last time not through opposition but lack of interest. It's a quality article encompassing all the available information in a neat, presentable and interesting way, so I hope you can lend your voice to the discussion if you have the time. Thanks for reading. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Reviews
Greetings. I was wondering if you could review Tenhemad for me? Anything you want reviewed?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  13:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure. Might be busy for the next two or three days but I'll get looking at it. GRAPPLE   X  14:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you reserve the review then?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  16:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter
Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:
 * was also the first to score for an article, with the good article Hurricane Gordon (2000). Again, this is a repeat of last year!
 * was the first to score for a did you know, with Marquis Flowers.
 * was the first to score for an in the news, with 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede.
 * was the first to score for a featured list, with list of Billboard Social 50 number-one artists.
 * was the first to score for a featured picture, with File:Thure de Thulstrup - L. Prang and Co. - Battle of Gettysburg - Restoration by Adam Cuerden.jpg.

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:


 * was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
 * has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
 * claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of, who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Anonymous (Tomahawk album)/GA1
Hi, I've placed this GAN on hold for a week, with issues noted on the page. I'll be checking in at least once a day to see how progress is going. Good luck! WesleyDodds (talk) 11:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

The Mirror Never Lies again
Think we could go to GAC with such a short plot summary? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, definitely. Think of it this way, the problem is usually that plots are too long, so you've avoided that one right out of the gates. :P GRAPPLE   X  08:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * LOL. Sure, I'll nominate. I think my longest plot summary is still at Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI (I really should hit the archives for reviews of that) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:18, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Attack page
Someone created an attack page against you here. I thought you should know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.118.187.9 (talk) 01:28, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. I needed a good laugh. GRAPPLE   X  01:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * And it's deleted. Bleh. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:37, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Aww... GRAPPLE   X  01:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

There is another attack page here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.118.187.9 (talk) 01:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Somebody's having too much fun... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:01, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * LOL, of all the editors on this site, I think Grapple X is the last one I've seen "attack" someone for no reason causing, with a history of "long-term abuse".--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   05:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Definitely. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Pointing fingers
I'm going to blame this on your album articles. As a side note, somehow his articles are all a mess. Case in point. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm an awful person. Though yeah, some of those are surprisingly stubby. Just for You looks good, though. GRAPPLE   X  17:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Guess he doesn't have as much of a following now as MJ did. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think post-"Dancing on the Ceiling" things tapered off a bit. GRAPPLE   X  23:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Except both Dancing on the Ceiling and Can't Slow Down are very DYK-able. Geeze, I know where I'll be tonight. Really? DotC is not even 500 characters! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:12, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I meant in terms of support, but yeah, those could make for pretty solid DYKs. I'm sorry for what I done... :P GRAPPLE   X  00:18, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Reword: What support could he have had until 2013 when his biggest hits are... well, lacking in article size. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)


 * So, yeah... but... really now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

FTC
Could you close some of the nominations? Seem to not having a chance to close them myself. GamerPro64 16:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

HUGE CONGRATS!!
"Unrequited" just passed GA, so that means that ALL of The X-Files episodes have been promoted to GA. I think this might be a first on Wikipedia, or at least a first for a long-running television series. Now if the season four page can get promoted, we'll have all the seasons DONE. That's really cool.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   21:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Now you've only got a few characters, actors and other production staff, and FA endeavors ;) Glimmer721  <sup style="color:blue;">talk  21:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think we can do it! I'll try to keep chipping away, if I don't get distracted.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   23:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Happy days! I'm pretty sure that's a first for the site. We've still some fiddly things to get seen to, but I think we might be able to work through some of the crew for the likes of DYK quite easily now—I was pleasantly surprised to see Cliff Bole at DYK due to Star Trek fans working on the article, and as we know, Howard Gordon, Alex Gansa and Vince Gilligan are all doing fantastic now with new shows. GRAPPLE   X  23:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The synergy between a lot of franchises is interesting. Now we just need to finish that Scully article that's been on the back burner forever. :P--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   05:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Well done to all of you! This just has to be an achievement -- definitely something for all other series to emulate (especially Fringe!). Perfect example of editors collaborating and focusing on good content, rather than getting bogged down in administrative details (something that seems to be becoming increasingly rarer at this site). Keep up the good work!  Ruby  2010/  2013  06:03, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This is definitely a first, but Fringe will probably be the second! Glimmer721  <sup style="color:blue;">talk  01:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

A pie for you!

 * Oh, thanks. I'm just after dinner so that'll hit the spot nicely. I hope it's cherry. GRAPPLE   X  21:17, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there any other kind? ;) On that note I have now closed the conversation. Hopefully the guy will get the idea and move on. If not, he was been warned sufficiently for the matter to be taken further (again). MisterShiney  <font color="Red"> ✉    22:46, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well it depends. There's the good kind and the awful kind. And don't hold out too much hope, even if this particular article has seen the end of it, he'll just find something else equally as baselessly jingoistic to do. He did last time. Ah well. GRAPPLE   X  22:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Thought you ought to know
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MisterShiney <font color="Red"> ✉    23:58, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * On my way, thanks. GRAPPLE   X  00:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Apologies for putting your talk page on Blake's. Major Malfunction on my part. MisterShiney  <font color="Red"> ✉    00:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It's probably the most outlandish mistake I've seen in a while, definitely raised a chuckle. :P GRAPPLE   X  00:23, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Notification of discussion
A few months ago, you participated in a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Did you know about Gibraltar-related DYKs on the Main Page. I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on such DYKs, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman (talk) 21:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sweet holy prepuce, has that still not been lifted yet? GRAPPLE   X  22:02, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * I'll drink to that! GRAPPLE   X  00:08, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That doesn't look like a drinking man's beer, but I'll have a round too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If the doctor's buying I'm not going to be picky. :P GRAPPLE   X  00:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree, agree. I said the same thing when J. V. d. B. offered me a beer in Jakarta. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The Dawson? GRAPPLE   X  00:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Reference.
 * Head.
 * ? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * JVdB = JVDB = Dawson? GRAPPLE   X  00:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I never got into that. No, this one. I've known him and his wife for several years now (and did work for Mrs. Vandenberg of Wikimedia Indonesia before they were married). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:38, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Hey now...
This edit summary is probably a bit over the line. Calling someone a douche based on their first edit is not a very friendly way to greet a new editor. Take some care when you're making jokes. -- Jayron  32  06:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Because I check the edit history of every spammer. :/ GRAPPLE   X  06:24, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Regardless, you still shouldn't call people "douche". It reflects badly on you, and generates a generally unfriendly environment (even to non-douches) to work in.  -- Jayron  32  06:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep. Cleaning up unconstructive bullshit is best done with a smile and a held hand. Gotcha. GRAPPLE   X  06:31, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * :) -- Jayron  32  06:33, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Money No Enough WP:GAR
I have requested a GAR for Money No Enough, which I feel does not meet our GA criteria. ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 07:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

X-Files ratings
I found this site: http://www.tvtango.com/series/x_files/episodes?filters%5Bday%5D=&filters%5Bseason%5D=8&filters%5Bbroadcast%5D=No&filters%5Bmedia%5D=&commit.x=25&commit.y=12

Do you think it is reliable for Nielsen ratings? It is under the command of Maj Canton, who apparently "started her career in documentary and reality programming" and "served as Executive Director of Development at the Larry Thompson Organization and then as a consultant to NBC Entertainment." A google search of the name turns up quite a few hits for books that she's written.

I'm leaning towards yes, but I thought I should check.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   01:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * She certainly seems to fall under the "expert SPS" category but I'd maybe run it by WP:RS for a second opinion on that. GRAPPLE   X  17:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

GAN review
Hi! You were recommended by Gerda as a good GA reviewer, and the GAN American Saddlebred/GA1 has been languishing a bit. Dana boomer and I worked on it, Dana is in the wikicup, and I was hoping we could get someone to trot over (pun intended) and start the review. Dana has one or two other articles in the queue, and we are starting on another soon. If you haven't the time, perhaps give one of your friends a ping? Thanks! Montanabw (talk) 23:25, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter
Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:
 * , primarily for an array of warship GAs.
 * , primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
 * , due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with, this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:
 * , whose Portal:Massachusetts is the first featured portal this year. The featured portal process is one of the less well-known featured processes, and featured portals have traditionally had little impact on WikiCup scores.
 * , whose Mycena aurantiomarginata was the first featured article this year.
 * and, who both claimed points for articles in the Major League Baseball tie-breakers topic, the first topic points in the competition.
 * , who claimed for the first full good topic with the Casting Crowns studio albums topic.

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by : did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for List of songs recorded by Jason Newsted
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey Grapple X; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Second Opinion
I am not entirely sure wither or not to close this FTRC yet. While the majority are voting for delist, two articles that need to be part of the topic are currently at GAN. What do you think? GamerPro64 00:19, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd say delist, Halo 4 isn't at GAN yet and even at that the queues can run for weeks. There's no fallow period after a delisting so even if everything passes GAN the second it's delisted it then it can be renominated at leisure. Also sorry for the delay, I've kind of been surgically attached to the xbox this past while. GRAPPLE   X  22:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Laborintus II
Any word yet when you'll be taking this to FAC? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Not sure to be honest, man. I think it's in good nick but I might try shopping it around a little more first, either a second PR or just a general talk message at one of the music projects to have a once-over at it. I managed to have the GOCE copy-edit "Ice" (another X-File) so it might be nominated in the interim. Sorry it took so long to get back to. Blame effete ninjas. GRAPPLE   X  22:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh my, ninjas? And here I thought Ireland was all about the rain and beer. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The rain and the beer are why the ninjas seem so appealing. GRAPPLE   X  23:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just wait until the earthquakes come... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Anonymous GA review
Hey Grapple X - I did a GA review of Anonymous (Tomahawk album), and then noticed that you haven't edited for a while. I'm not sure if your break is planned or unexpected, but if you do return in the next few days, you can read and respond to my comments here. Take care, Moswento talky 10:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay, man. Really appreciate the review; will be on it like Max Clifford on a has-been in about 20 minutes. GRAPPLE   X  22:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, whenever you have the time in the next few days. Moswento talky 21:54, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

"Deadalive" Concerns
The FAN for "Deadline" has been inactive for quite awhile. However, a reviewer went through and argued that, because a majority of the references are from Fox products (DVDs, commentaries, websites), that "very little of [the article's sourcing] represents independent sourcing". I'm failing miserably at trying to get words out. Is there anyway you could drop by the page and see if I've adequately responded/maybe add a few points yourself? I really don't see anything wrong with the article's source, and honestly, I feel that the concerns are kind of super-nitpicky. But maybe I'm just grumpy at this point.--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   05:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll have a check now, but the rule of thumb I'd go by is that controversial or likely-to-be-questioned facts should be third-party, but the motives, methods and opinions of a creator are perfectly sourceable to their own work like a commentary. GRAPPLE   X  19:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I see the objection was withdrawn but I'll see if I can add a review for you within the next few days. GRAPPLE   X  19:54, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool. I'd appreciate that. This article has been stalling for awhile now!--<font face="Arial Black"><font color="#B22222">Gen. Quon <font color="#708090">(Talk)   05:27, 16 March 2013 (UTC)