User talk:J.D./Archives

Of note

 * A contest has begun in order to improve our Wikipedia 0.7 Release Version articles prior to their publication in December. Many awards are available, including several prestigous competitive ones. However, the vast majority are participation-based and proportional, meaning that more improvements equals more awards. With over 200 articles to choose from, we anticipate that active editors can easily obtain considerable "lucre" well before the December 1st deadline, and look forward to seeing you all there.

Ghostbusters
Hi, I don't know if you're still planning on doing some work on the Ghostbusters article, but I made some comments at its peer review. -- Beloved Freak  19:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Awesome! Thanks for the comments. I will definitely incorporate them into the article. --J.D. 20:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2007 Newsletter
The September 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Please note that special delivery options have been reset and ignored for this issue due to the revamp of the membership list (outlined in further detail in the newsletter). If you would like to change your delivery settings for future issues, please follow the above link. I apologize for the inconvenience. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 23:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Escape from New York
Hi, I've left some comments at the peer review for Escape from New York. Hope they help. -- Beloved Freak  20:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow! Thanks for all the comments! This is great. I will implement them soon. Thank you for taking the time. --J.D. 00:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

JFK
I have some more suggestions, particularly on the overall structuring of the reception section. Alientraveller 19:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! These are fantastic. --J.D. 20:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Getting warmer. I added a few citation needed tags. Alientraveller 09:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I took care of those tags. --J.D. 14:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Your welcome, I passed the article. Hopefully FA is not a far-off sight for you. Alientraveller 11:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Many thanks! --J.D. 14:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Darkman01.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Darkman01.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Austin Stories
Oh man, I'm sorry. I accidentally clicked the Rollback Vandal link while trying to undo the change from stub to start. :( I rated that article as a stub as it has no major sections and only some half hearted info (and all of the sources are questionable...they say they are from one place, but link off to the same Geocities site). Collectonian 16:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No sweat. No harm, no foul. --J.D. 18:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Unfaithful
I've uncovered some potentially useful articles. You can find them under the sections at User:Erik/Unfaithful -- they're commented out to limit their exposure. Hope you can make good use of them! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You are awesome! Thanks so much. This is a big, BIG help. --J.D. (talk) 19:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Homages to Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow
This article doesn't make much sense. For example, who is Conran, the Sky Captain and what is the World of Tomorrow? When you talk about the Wizard of Oz, for example, you must be talking about a different 1939 version than the one I saw because nothing you say about it makes sense to me. Can you clean it up a bit so it makes some sense to those who are at least a bit unfamilar with what you are talking about? 172.153.123.99 16:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I clarified this entry a bit better and put it in some context. --J.D. 18:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! Postcard Cathy 19:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The Mummy
I've left some suggestions to your peer review request for The Mummy (1999 film). --Lenin and McCarthy |  (Complain here) 03:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I read them and they are very helpful! I will start implementing them soon. --J.D. 20:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

It is sourced...
You removed "unsourced" material from They Live. The material appears in the movie, which means it is sourced by the movie, which is what the article is about. I do not understand the logic for your edit. Maury 18:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I gotcha. My bad. Thanks for pointing that out. D'oh... --J.D. 20:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I re-worded it anyway, it reads better now I think. Maury 20:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

What articles?
Just wanted to know what articles you wrote for the sources you listed. You can email me privately. Tommyt 18:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry. Refresh my memory... which article is this for? J.D. 18:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Hcl.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hcl.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Updated rationale for this image. --J.D. 12:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call
Hey fellow Wikipedian! Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name to the Active Members list. You may also wish to add   to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. We also have several task forces that you may be interested in joining as well. Also, elections for Project Coordinators are currently in sign-up phase. If you would be interested in running, or would like to ask questions of the candidates, please take a look. You can see more information on the positions at WikiProject Films/Coordinators. Thanks and happy editing! An automatic notification by BrownBot 23:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Trlstillphoto.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Trlstillphoto.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Trlstillphoto.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Trlstillphoto.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Walker (film)
Hi. I was wondering why you replaced my poster image here? No harm done and maybe 'your' version is better than mine. I only noticed because it caused me to receive a message from the dreaded Betacommandbot. Best wishes, --John (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, yeah, I just replaced your copy with one that had better resolution. That's all. Cheers. --J.D. (talk) 15:15, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Trlstillphoto.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Trlstillphoto.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of National Lampoon's Animal House
The article National Lampoon's Animal House you nominated as a good article has failed, see Talk:National Lampoon's Animal House for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Cheers, CP 23:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Usual Suspects
Hey, would like to ask why the edit to The Usual Suspects had be undone, it's a nice little fact and captivating sentence for the readers. Cheers.
 * Sorry 'bout that. I read the previous user's comments and thought that it applied. My mistake! --J.D. (talk) 15:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh alright, good to know.

Hi, don't know how to create a new topic on here

In regards to my contribution on the usual suspects page, the bit about Al Pacino is mentioned by Bryan Singer on the "Pursuing the Usual Suspects" documentary. The bit about Walken and De Niro turning down the role is from IMDB trivia section, but I can't find a more concrete source for that.

I thought the bit about Pacino especially was worth appearing on the page, so could you maybe put it back up in a place you feel is appropriate, as I don't know how to properly cite stuff —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rossi 1983 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I gotcha. I think I know how to cite it. Let me take a crack at it. --J.D. (talk) 16:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Wild at Heart
Hi J.D., I've done a peer review for Wild at Heart. Hope it is of some use. -- Beloved Freak  19:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * This is great! Thanks so much for all of the comments. --J.D. (talk) 19:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on Zodiac
Seen that it has been promoted, and just wanted to give you a thumbs up. Thanks for your hard work. 76.10.142.168 (talk) 01:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, man. Much appreciated! It certainly was a labor of love. I'm a big fan of the film.--J.D. (talk) 03:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Future films
Hi, I noticed you created Public Enemies (2009 film). I wanted to let you know that the notability guidelines for future films says that articles on films should be created when shooting begins. This is due to various factors, including budgeting issues, scripting issues, and casting issues. Some films like Justice League of America (film) have faltered due to the strike, while others like State of Play (film) barely make it to production. Any chance you could follow the process? Userfying it may be the best approach -- see my User:Erik/Nottingham (film) due to its delay caused by the writers' strike. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Done. Now how do I go about deleting that Public Enemies article? --J.D. (talk) 19:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You can do a prod of it or even a db-author since you're the only one who's edited it so far. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Magnolia (film)
May I ask why you created a duplicate of the film template at the top of the page? Ward3001 (talk) 19:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry 'bout that. I was just trying to create a Peer Review request.--J.D. (talk) 19:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * That's why we have a "Show preview" button. Just a thought. Ward3001 (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Use of References and citations
The Notes are a part of the references section and when you use other sources, they are part of a Bibliography and not a Further reading section which implies that these are ancillary sources. This style guide is employed in WP:Aviation and a format, see the use of Aviation:Films and the multiple uses within this category.

The use of this convention has been very carefully screened since a Swedish editor implemented it last year. It follows and fits MoS guides and has not been reverted even once (well, once- in the case of this article). Admins and other experienced editors use this format throughout the Aviation group. The reason for its implementation was the nonstandard use of references as a "catch-all section" when in fact they incorporated an endnotes or footnotes section and a bibliographical record. The Further reading section is just what it says, further to the article's research sources. My background is as a reference librarian and presently, author/editor for a number of publishing houses. See: 49th Parallel, A Wonderful Life, The Right Stuff and countless other film articles for examples of this use of referencing.

As to the reasoning behind the use of bibliographic protocols, Wikipedia is mainly created by the efforts of countless editors worldwide. One of the first concerns was that in order to maintain professional standards in writing and research, assistance had to be provided to editors who did not have a background in academic or research writing. The "templates" were offered as a means of helping non-professionals in complex tasks. Citations in bibliographic format are difficult to cite for most editors in Wikipedia and the templates offer a solution. They are guides not policy and are useful up to a point but even now, there are many errors in their format and the use of templates brings in a question as to which style guide is being followed. As an author and a 30-year+ librarian, I have been exposed to many differing styles and formats. Most publishing style guides utilize the MLA (The Modern Language Association) Style for identifying research sources. The very simple form of this style is the tried and true: "Author. 'Title.' Place of publication: Publisher, Date. ISBN: (optional)." The academic or scientific citation style that you have adopted is not generally used in school, public and other libraries. See the following website (one of countless digital aids available) for a primer on this bibliographic standard:  Many of the Wiki templates are written in a APA (American Psychological Association) style guide which is a simplified format that often is used in university and scholarly works although it is not as widely accepted as the MLA guide.

This is the reference guide you may wish to use: "Formatting of a Wikipedia article reference list is a secondary detail, and there is currently no consensus on a precise prescribed citation format in Wikipedia." MLA style is the most widely accepted style in the world and certainly is accepted in Wikipedia. Since I do Wikipedia editing as a diversion from my other work, I tend to spend little time and give articles only a cursory examination. If there is a very minor error such as a misplaced comma, I "tweak" the article and I don't usually elaborate on the change since it will show up in the history note on the article. As for citations, I rely on the MLA (Modern Language Association) style which is the world's most common bibliographic style and one that is accepted by Wikipedia. I have been utilizing this citation style in my own writing and in the cataloging that I carried out in my other life as a librarian. I know that the standard today for library cataloging is to simply download an entire MARC (MAchine Readable Cataloging) record from an established library but I continued to be a curmudgeon and relied on "scratch" editing which I still apply to Wikipedia work today. Basically it follows the old format of: Author. Title. Place of Publication: Publisher, Date of publication (with variations to satisfy ordering and researching stipulations, usually ended by including an ISBN (international standard book number) and at times, page references). There are some subtle variations of the MLA style to facilitate multiple authors, articles, multimedia and other questions. Sorry for being verbose but I will make a point of stopping to clarify some of my edits but when it's merely a spelling, sentence or grammatical error, I will still give it a "tweak."

Let me further explain my use of references. I am a former librarian with 33 years experience in cataloguing and I tend to revert to "scratch" cataloging whenever I am working in Wikipedia. The format chosen for the majority of templates for citations and bibliographies is the American Psychiatric Association (APA) style guide which is one of the most used formats for research works. The most commonly used style guide is the Modern Language Association (MLA) which is the style guide I tend to use. Templates are not mandated in Wikipedia and many editors use full edit cataloging or scratch cataloging since it does away with the variances in some of the templates extant. As a matter of form, a number of articles have also utilized the Harvard Citation style guide as a link to the bibliographical reference. The actual format that I have used is to provide full cataloging in MLA style for a citation if it only appears once in the text as a quote or note and if more than one instance, then Harvard Citation is placed inline and a full bibliographical MLA record is provided in "References." The references area is kind of a catch-all in that it can often incorporate endnotes and footnotes if there are only a few citations. Many editors prefer to provide a "Notes" and "References" section. It is presumed that if entries are made in the references list that the reference source is used for corroboration in writing the article. In some instances wherein an editor identifies a useful source of information that was not part of the research than a "Further Reading" section can be established. In the The Rocketeer (film) article, any instances of two citations were placed in Harvard Citation style while all others were set forth in MLA style in the references section. There is no need to re-do an MLA entry into a APA style, in fact, it is most often preferable not to mix formats or style guides for consistency and readability.

I know that your eyes have probably glazed over long ago, but that is the rationale behind my editing the "The Rocketeer (film)" citation/reference notes. The "true style" is primarily use one consistent style guide (I choose the MLA as it is the standard worldwide for research articles) and adapt it when needed. If so desired, that is the actual correctly attributed source wherein all the "tracings" are provided and placed in the correct order. A suggestion made by Jeff Finlayson, one of the prolific editors in the Aviation Project Group on Wikipedia (which both of us are also members) was to "shortcut" the electronic citation partly due to reasons of need for brevity but also because many of the sources are not as well defined as our example. The final form that he proposed is one that maintains the core element of the source and provides a "hot link" to the URL where it is found on the Internet.

As to the website citations, the simplest system is all that is required as per Jeff's suggestion You will have to read this note in the edit mode in order to see what I have done to the citations. IMHO, it works for me and I don't need to go into the full bibliographic record especially for a Wikipedia article. The simpler form should predominate, not to say, that if someone insists on a full bibliographical accounting that another format might be used, but generally speaking, go with the simple system.

Excuse the pedantic ranting, but I can follow up with more information on referencing on this talk page if your wish. FWIW, it can be a Referencing 101 primer for you. Bzuk (talk) 15:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC).


 * Fair enough. Works for me.--J.D. (talk) 15:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Further
Here's an example of how complex cataloguing and referencing can be (note that both ISBN:10 and ISBN:13 formats are being employed):

The original edit:
 * The Big Lebowski, by Ethan Coen and Joel Coen ;(May 1998, Faber and Faber Ltd.), ISBN 0-571-19335-8.
 * I'm a Lebowski, You're a Lebowski: Life, The Big Lebowski, and What Have You, by Bill Green, Ben Peskoe, Scott Shuffitt, Will Russell ;(Bloomsbury USA - August 21, 2007), ISBN 978-1596912465

The MLA style guide edit:
 * Coen, Ethan and Coen, Joel. The Big Lebowski. New York: Faber & Faber Ltd., 1998. ISBN 0-571-19335-8.
 * Green, Bill; Peskoe, Ben; Shuffitt, Scott and Russell, Will. I'm a Lebowski, You're a Lebowski: Life, The Big Lebowski, and What Have You. New York: Bloomsbury USA, 2007. ISBN 978-1596912465.

FWIW, that's why there are reference librarians lurking about the WikiWacky world in which we both inhabit. Bzuk (talk) 15:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC).

My peripheral interest in films
Oops, forgot to mention that I am also an editor (by trade) and author as well as a filmmaker, directed two documentary films, screenwriter on two others, worked variously as an extra, gofer, grip, gaffer, consultant and on-screen actor on 10 films.

It was a brief fling at directing in 2003 when as the screenwriter on a series of television documentaries, I was enlisted to take over two films when the original director was called away to Chile on another project. Being a screenwriter on a documentary is a thankless task anyway and since I knew the context and focus of the documentary projects, I fell into directing. The first film, Bearing his Soul was the life of Gerry "The Big Bear" Barrett, an aboriginal comic starting out as a stand-up comedian that appears on local channels and an Aboriginal network at times. The second film, Zero Over the Prairies was a Canadian-American co-production with PBS. That one also still pops up on television and documents the recovery, construction and flight of a Mitsubishi Zero fighter aircraft. My first book was also made into a film and that one is everywhere, Avrocar: Canada's Flying Saucer (2004) was purchased by Discovery Channel, History Channel, Space Channel, ad infinitum... I know now, I should have taken "points" instead of a commission/salary, that "flick" is shown all over the world... FWIW, that's why I also casually look at film articles in Wikipedia based on films that I have loved in the past, and "tweak" them a bit, sorta stems from my first career as a writer of movie reviews at the local university newspaper. Bzuk (talk) 16:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC).

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Latakedown.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Latakedown.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Ed Wood (film)
Are you going to be nominating the article for GA status any time soon. It's pretty impressive, and it's only missing a plot section and minor work on Cast. I can help out. Oh yeah, if you have the time, (since your are a decent film editor), would like to review two articles I have for nomination? They are American Graffiti and Batman: Mask of the Phantasm. Thanks. Wildroot (Talk) 15:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'm going to tweak the Ed Wood article a little more. I can work on the plot section but whatever you would like to do to make it better, that would be great! I will take a look at your articles and see what I can do.--J.D. (talk) 19:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Citizen Kane
Hi, I'm working on User:Erik/Citizen Kane 'cause I've had similar thoughts like what you expressed on the film article's talk page last January. I'm still in the midst of Fight Club (film) (to add "Critical analysis"), but I'd like to make Citizen Kane the next project, considering the scale of the film. I have a few links there, and have written out the ISBNs for some books so far. Any interest in joining forces? It only seems proper that Citizen Kane should be a flagship article for WikiProject Films. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree. When I first started looking at the Kane article, it was a mess. Very few citations, load of info but very unorganized. I've tried to make some sense of it but there is still a lot of work. I've checked out Kane rough notes page and it looks fantastic! Load of sources. I've been a Orson Welles fan for years and, in particular, Kane, so I have a few resources. I think the best books to get the bulk of the info for the article are:



These are the books I keep coming back to - Carringer's book especially is invaluable, giving you a blow-by-blow account of every aspect of the film. I've been meaning to start work going through it and making notes but I would definitely be into teaming up on this article.--J.D. (talk) 13:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Awesome. I was thinking that if you have access to books, you will probably have a better opportunity to develop the production details of the film.  Nearly all the critical analyses I found, I've saved.  I think it would be a milestone for film articles since I don't think we've ever really explored the field of critical analysis.  I want to develop critical analysis for Fight Club first, as to master the learning curve for Citizen Kane. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 22:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a plan. I already started last night going through my Welles/Kane books and started making notes so I should have a bunch of stuff for Monday. Now, how do you want to work it? Do you want me to start posting stuff on your User:Erik/Citizen Kane page and then once we have it worked out and looking good we'll post it onto the actual article? I'm thinking that might be a good idea and that way we can decide what to keep, etc. as there is so much detail one could put into a Kane article that I'm trying to just keep the most important stuff.


 * As for critical analysis, that could be interesting. I know, with my books, I can probably dig up what critics thought of Kane when it first came out and then we could juxtapose it with what critics think of it since which it sounds like you've got covered.--J.D. (talk) 14:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, my subpage is a little bit full with the listed resources and the popular culture detail that I retrieved from an AFD. (Hoping to see if I could salvage something that won't be trivial.)  You mentioned that the article was very unorganized, so I think we should use a sandbox in the meantime.  We could start on the typical sections like Production section in the sandbox for our content and copy some uncited items from the film article itself into a bullet list under a Miscellaneous section.  When the information is in the Miscellaneous section, we can do two things: 1) Work from scratch (using the resources we have combined) to put together a "new" article, and 2) Seek out citations for the uncited items and integrate them when we can.  To be honest, I'm not sure what to expect from the critical analyses as I've only given them a brief look, though they won't be typical "critical reactions".  For Fight Club, it's been topics like Deleuzian philosophy, spatio-temporality, and downplaying of homoeroticism using the DVD.  I'm sure Citizen Kane will be nothing like these. :-P  I'll print out a few Kane studies and see how digestible they are.  In the meantime, User:Erik/Citizen Kane/Draft. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 15:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this new link. I will use that to hammer out a better Production section and integrate some of the details from the existing article (as you mentioned). Yeah, you certainly have your work cut for you re: Fight Club. A lot has been written about that film. It's funny, before you did all that work on it, I was thinking of giving it a much needed makeover but you did a great job! It's weird, because I've been working away on another Fincher film article as well with Zodiac. Anywhooo...--J.D. (talk) 16:11, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Zodiac was very enjoyable. I was familiar with what reviewers said of the film, so I knew to enjoy the path of the film and not expect a true conclusion. There were some elements that I initially thought unrealistic like the detective knowing all the details about the case so long afterward, but the article showed that was really how he was. Any interest in Fincher's next project, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? I'm really interested in seeing the backward aging, which is definitely going to make the film trippy. (Makes me think of Merlin from The Once and Future King, who ages backward, too.) Fincher, as I recall, is attached to at least three projects -- Torso, The Killer, and Black Hole. Kind of annoys me when a director has so much on his slate. Guillermo del Toro is the worst -- he's attached to Tarzan, Deadman, 3993, At the Mountains of Madness, Runoff (rumor), The Hobbit and its sequel, and I think he's interesting in rounding out Hellboy as a trilogy. The man is busy! :-P — Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, Benjamin Button looks interesting. And, Fincher is teaming up with Brad Pitt again - they always seem to work well together. I really hope Fincher decides to pick Black Hole next. It's a great graphic novel and I think he could really tap into Charles Burns' sensibilities. I really dig Del Toro too. I am really looking forward to Hellboy 2 and I sure hope he does Mountains of Madness as I know that has been a pet project of his for some time. The only problem is that's going to be expensive to make and not very commercial so we'll see. The Coen brothers have a lot of on their plate as well.--J.D. (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The content you just added looks great! I had a question, though -- is there any chance you could cite page numbers from the books? I've noticed in Featured Articles that there's usually a "Bibliography" section and a "References" section that has something like "Carringer, pp. 13-15." It's more of a breakdown, but I think it's more realistic because it would make the information more immediately verifiable with the page numbers available. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for bringing up the page numbers thing. I just added some more content, but let me go back through my notes and cite page numbers.--J.D. (talk) 20:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I took a lot of notes from Barry Norman's Anatomy of a Classic. Erik suggested I add it to the subpage and hopefully we can merge it together. Alientraveller (talk) 12:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I took a look at your additions and they look great! Let me take a crack at merging 'em into what I have done some time today.--J.D. (talk) 13:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Just remember to cite pages for Simon Callow's book. Alientraveller (talk) 10:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to say that both of you have done terrific work with the draft so far! I feel bad that I haven't pitched in yet, but it's not for lack of wanting to. I've been bogged down with academics lately, but I should be able to contribute something after this week. Keep up the excellent work, both of you! :) — Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Hey, not a problem...whenever you can add something, that's cool. I'm taking a little breather myself. I think we're in good shape though. I wanted to make sure that I created the foundation for the Development and Reception sections and then go through some of my other Welles books to see if there are any little details that can be added to what I've already put in there.--J.D. (talk) 13:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kowalskisingle.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Kowalskisingle.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 00:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections
The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Answer
To answer this question Tony Dushane has been using various IPs (see here and here for example) to promote himself. That's why I removed the links. IrishGuy talk 19:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ahh, I gotcha. Understood. Thanks for letting me know.--J.D. (talk) 20:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. If you really like the link, it's no problem at all for you to add it back in. :) IrishGuy talk 20:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you...
...for your kind support of me as a coordinator! But really, I haven't done too much (yet) with Citizen Kane -- you and Alientraveller have gotten the draft off to a great start. I really do hope I can find some downtime to just add something to the draft, lest I feel like a freeloader! :) — Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, no sweat. Kane is just one of the many things you do/have done and I was more than happy to lend my support to your bid for coordinator. I've been slack with working on the Kane draft as well. "Real life" intruding and whatnot but I haven't forgotten it.--J.D. (talk) 12:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:BluevelvetCD.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:BluevelvetCD.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --20:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

the big jackass
why are you repetadly deleting my trivia sections? Luke12345abcd (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia discourages Trivia sections and secondly all of your points need citations. They are unsourced and should really be located in other sections, not trivia. See this.--J.D. (talk) 19:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all. hmmm i see and where does it say that trivia is discoureged,and if it is THEN WHY ARE THERE TRIVIA SECTIONS ON ALMOST EVERY FILM IN HERE!!! Luke12345abcd (talk) 01:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, there shouldn't be and I know when I start giving a film article a major overhaul, one of the first things I do is remove the Trivia section. Usually, I just take the text and cut and paste it to the Discussion page so that it still exists somewhere and maybe can be sourced and integrated back into the article. I mean, most Trivia sections are lifted DIRECTLY from the IMDB which is just lazy.--J.D. (talk) 13:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC
 * so the reson your deleting it issss....? Luke12345abcd (talk) 00:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * For the reasons stated in the link above. But mostly 'cos it wasn't sourced at all and since I've gotten the article promoted to GA status and hope to get it up to FA status, I want to make sure everything is cited properly and where it belongs. If a Trivia section exists, there is no way it will get promoted to FA status.--J.D. (talk) 13:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * it was cited and i know it was abit messy which is why im redoing it now Luke12345abcd (talk) 18:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The Usual Suspects
I think I'll take a pass at summarizing the plot. Cliff smith (talk) 02:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for an explanation from you on the talk page for this edit which is separate from and distinct from this. The name of the column in Spy magazine is a reference to the film Casablanca; it's where the term comes from. Viriditas (talk) 02:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry 'bout that. I just checked the Discussion page and saw all of the sources you cited for the Casablanca reference. My mistake. That certainly supports your assertion that the title came from both the film AND Spy magazine. My bad.--J.D. (talk) 13:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

JFK GA review
Article could lose its GA status. How about just dropping the whole "inaccuracies" section and just find mention of Stone intending this film as his "counter-myth"? Alientraveller (talk) 11:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. I have an article where Stone mentions how the film is meant to be a countermyth to the Warren Commission Report. Let me look for it this week and I'll remove the "inaccuracies" section when I do.--J.D. (talk) 22:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:CHICAGO
According to my records, you have nominated at least one article (When Harry Met Sally...) that includes a category at WP:CHIBOTCATS and that has been promoted to WP:FA, WP:FL or WP:GA. You are not signed up as an active member of WP:CHICAGO. If you consider yourself either an active or semi-active member of the project please sign up as such at WikiProject Chicago/members. Also, if you are a member, be aware of Meetup/Chicago 3 and be advised that the project is now trying to keep all the project's WP:PR, WP:FAC, WP:FAR, WP:GAR, WP:GAC WP:FLC, WP:FLRC, WP:FTC, WP:FPOC, WP:FPC, and WP:AFD discussion pages in one location at the new WikiProject Chicago/Review page. Please help add any discussion you are aware of at this location.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The Usual Suspects
I am reviewing your article The Usual Suspects for GA and posting comments on the talk page review. I am impressed with the article. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 18:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Thanks for the heads up.--J.D. (talk) 19:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections
Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections - voting now open!
Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:01, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

National Lampoon's Animal House on hold
Hi J.D., just letting you know that I've left some suggestions on the nomination review page and the article is now on hold. Having never watched the film it's been an interesting read. Someoneanother 14:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'll check it out.--J.D. (talk) 14:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

JFK FA
Keep going... you're doing a good job! The JPS talk to me  22:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the encouragement. I feel like I'm almost there!--J.D. (talk) 23:29, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello, are you able to find any of these resources through any library you may have? I have saved the resources that are listed at the FAC page. Do you have a preference for utilizing the resources? I can try to look through all of these and add what I can, or I can share a few items via Google Documents, Google Groups, or plain throwaway emails. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I do have the Cineaste articles and that's about it so anything you can throw my way would be greatly appreciated. As far as preference, whatever is easiest for you.--J.D. (talk) 14:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you have a throwaway Gmail you could use? I can set up Google Groups or Google Documents.  My Gmail is upcomingfilms at gmail dot com (I use it to gather Google Alerts of films' headlines). — Erik  (talk • contrib) 21:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. You indicated on the FAC page that you'd be interested in incorporating some of Erik's sources into the article. I'm not entirely sure that's something that could be done within the timescale of the FAC, so it may be a good idea to withdraw the nomination for now so any additions can be worked on at your leisure. If this is the way you want to go, let me know and I'll see it gets done. But it's entirely up to you. I know it seems like we keep adding a bunch of new hoops for you to jump through, but that isn't the intention. The article really is in good shape, it's just not quite there yet. All the best, Steve  T • C 14:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, maybe I will withdraw the nomination after all. I've got a bunch of other things on the go and just don't have the time to pursue it as I would have liked. Thanks for all your help and suggestions - they really have helped the article tremendously.--J.D. (talk) 14:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, and thanks. If you have no objections in the meantime, I'll archive the nomination later on. All the best, Steve  T • C 15:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Done, and good luck with it the next time. Let me know when you put it up and I'll be happy to look over it. Steve  T • C 21:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I sure will and thanks again for all your help and guidance.--J.D. (talk) 02:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, I just noticed you were responsible for getting Zodiac (film) to FA. I just wanted to tell you I read that immediately after seeing the film earlier this year, and I thought at the time it was an excellent article, well worthy of the brilliant film. Cheers, Steve  T • C 14:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words. I love that film -- I think it may be my fave David Fincher film now and I tracked it as it was being made and when it was released. I'm trying to do the same thing with Steven Soderbergh's film about Che Guevara but there is a bitter editing war going on in the various articles about it so I'm just waiting for the dust to settle. Yikes.--J.D. (talk) 14:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Goodfellas1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Goodfellas1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Che
Do you know what happened to the information I added from Del Toro's interview with Empire I added? I can't find it in any of the three articles on the biopic. Alientraveller (talk) 22:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That IS weird. I checked the history of the Che article, for example, didn't find your name. When did you post that addition?--J.D. (talk) 03:32, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Found it! Now you decide which of the three to paste it in: Del Toro confessed he only thought of Guevara as a "bad guy" since he was a child. For the film he researched into the differing opinions on Guevara and travelled to Cuba where he met "tons of people that loved this man". He met Fidel Castro "for five minutes" and was told by him that he was happy for the research being undertaken. Del Toro, who speaks Puerto Rican Spanish, tried to speak the best Spanish he could without sounding "stiff". Regarding the brisk shoot, he noted his "fingernails [had] a little bit of dirt" a year after its wrap. Alientraveller (talk) 11:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks. I used all of 'em except for the last one.--J.D. (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Che film
Thanks for reformatting the references that I include. I believe we have a fruitful collaboration going on, and quite a good article. Your efforts are appreciated. Of note as well, be on the lookout to assist with the "incorrigible" Damiens, who at anytime could decide to burst/troll in. Red thoreau (talk) RT 16:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the kind words. I certainly appreciate your contributions as well. Between the two of us, we have been keeping the articles on Soderbergh's film up-to-date with the most current info. They are shaping up quite nicely. Thanks for the heads up about Damiens. I'll keep my eyes open for him and other trolls.--J.D. (talk) 16:33, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Quick ? Do you not think that Soderbergh's statement on being "loyal to the facts" and "sourced" etc is relevant to the NYC section? Also the way it reads at present, might give the impression that the audience was more contentious than the reality of one heckler who was shouted down. As an aside, I think the article looks really great and thanks to our cobined imput/effort is coming along very nicely.  Red thoreau  (talk) RT 16:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You make a good point. I was just worried that we were dwelling too long on one screening but let me reinstate that quote.--J.D. (talk) 16:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Questionnaire
As a member of WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Merging ?
I am curious about your opinion on merging The Argentine & Guerrilla (film) with Che (film) (which is a much better article anyway thanks in part to your help) as they seem not only redundant, but could confuse readers. Moreover, now the official titles are Che Part 1 & Che Part 2. What is your view on this matter? Thanks. Red thoreau (talk)RT 04:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Benicio Del Toro quote
Hey, J.D., you removed a quote I added about the reaction the Che movies had in Miami, which he made in Mayagüez, Puerto Rico -my hometown, as well as quite a few of Benicio's relatives'. I quoted Benicio as saying: "Difficult as it was, we did face the crowd there. No question about it". Yes, it is unsourced... for the time being. However, I was in the room when he said it last Saturday. You may claim then I'm guilty of original research, but chances are that I'll get a printed reference of that visit later in the week and source it (a fellow journalist prints it in the local newspaper). Would you accept it once we do have it in print? ;-) Demf (talk) 21:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. Thanks for the heads up on this.--J.D. (talk) 14:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Traffic (2000 film) GAN review
Hey, I'm Hunter. I've conducted a GAN review of Traffic (2000 film). Nice job with this article! Please take a look at my review and my suggestions. Thanks! --Hunter Kahn (talk) 02:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice work! --Hunter Kahn (talk) 05:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! And also, thanks for all of your hard work and suggestions. Much appreciated!--J.D. (talk) 15:33, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.
You've done some really great edits here and I'm am interested in that book you're writing, I love the film business and myself am involved in it.

Proud to have you helping here. Thank you. Obi-WanKenobi-2005 (talk) 03:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, man! As you can tell, I'm a rabid film buff and it's nice to know that my contributions are appreciated. Working on Wikipedia articles is quite addictive and I plan to be in it for the long haul.--J.D. (talk) 13:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on losing a lot of collected data.
Apparently, you were the user who removed any and all quotes regarding Ray Hudson to Wikiquote. Some other idiot removed the entire Wikiquote entry on Ray Hudson calling everything there "unsourced." All of those entertaining soccer quotes are now GONE. Thank you VERY MUCH. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veritas88 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You are misinformed. I moved the extensive list of quotes from Ray Hudson's Wikipedia entry to its own Wikiquote entry because quote lists do not belong on Wikipedia. That's why Wikiquote exists. Because someone then deleted them from Wikiquote is not my problem. AND, if you knew anything about Wikipedia you would know that you can retrieve lost data by checking out the history of an article. Case in point. So, before you start giving me attitude, do a little of your legwork.--J.D. (talk) 20:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:49, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Alternative text for images in film articles
Hello, since the guidelines to add alternative text for images are being proliferated, I would like to ensure that the Good and Featured Articles under WikiProject Films have such text. Since you are a primary contributor to the articles listed below, I ask you to review the guidelines to add text to images in the body. For the image in the infobox, please add  above   and include alternative text in this field. For an example, see the text for Fight Club (film): alt. Here are your articles and a tool assessing them for alternative text: If you have any questions or would like a hand collaborating on alternative text, please let me know! — Erik (talk • contrib) 18:29, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Zodiac (film) alt
 * Sweet Smell of Success alt
 * Che (film) alt
 * The Rocketeer (film) alt
 * Traffic (2000 film) alt
 * Ed Wood (film) alt
 * National Lampoon's Animal House alt
 * The Usual Suspects alt
 * The Big Lebowski alt
 * Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow alt
 * When Harry Met Sally... alt
 * The Thin Red Line (1998 film) alt
 * JFK (film) alt

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 10:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar for Big Trouble in Little China
Thanks! This means a lot. Always nice to meet another fan of this wonderful film.--J.D. (talk) 19:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. :) And remember, it's all in the reflexes. Otumba (talk) 04:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Strange Days Recation section
Thank you very much for starting a Reaction section on the movie Strange Days. For lack of a better way to express my appreciation I'm forced to leave you with this cheesy wikiCookie. Padillah (talk) 18:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)



Padillah has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!


 * Thanks so much! I love Strange Days and it was high time that it was upgraded. I hope to create a Production section too.--J.D. (talk) 18:55, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting
The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Terry Gilliam
I see you have made recent edits on the Terry Gilliam entry. The following is a new interview with Mr. Gilliam and I thought it might be relevant to the entry either as a new source for added information or worthy of an external link. Thanks for all your work on film-related entries!

http://www.viceland.com/int/v16n9/htdocs/terry-gilliam-139.php CorridorX (talk) 23:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Good call! I had actually seen that one but forgot to add it but, you're right, there's a lot of good info there.--J.D. (talk) 13:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Glad you enjoyed it. The same issue, A Film Issue, has many more interviews with wonderful filmmakers, notably David Lynch, Lars von Trier, Werner Herzog, Dario Argento, and Spike Jonze.  All of the articles and interviews can be found here: http://www.viceland.com/int/v16n9/htdocs/  Happy reading!  CorridorX (talk) 19:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Awesome. I will have to check it out. Lynch is one of my fave filmmakers.--J.D. (talk) 19:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)