User talk:J Greb/Archive Sep 2010

Consensus discussion on photo
Hi. I've started a consensus discussion here, and would appreciate your input. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 03:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Batman villains.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:The Batman villains.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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Spider-Man 3 article help
I know you occasionally monitor the Spider-Man 3 article. Currently, I'm engaged in an unfortunate edit war with a user who wants to add a section about Spider-Man 4 and the Spider-Man reboot. Besides being an unreferenced and awkwardly written section, I argue that Spider-Man 3 has nothing to do with the reboot and shouldn't have it mentioned in the article. And it doesn't have anything to do with it since its reception (box office or critical) did not lead to the reboot. Also, Spider-Man 4 is well-covered in the Spider-Man (film series) article. I was wondering if you could weigh in?-5- (talk) 17:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. I apologize for totally mishandling the situation.-5- (talk) 19:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that the user went ahead and reverted my edit again without discussion.-5- (talk) 22:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I know, I just couldn't control myself. This person is angering me and I'm frustrated that I'm the only person who has had to deal with it basically. My mistake was not getting assistance sooner.-5- (talk) 22:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You're angering me, removing useful information without logical means. I'm not the one who began the edit war. I know there's an article on the film series page, but if there was a proposed sequel in place, there should be info on the previous films article.Rio de Janiero God (talk) 10:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Why is this still being discussed in a user page. If you have strong feelings over something being done in a article. The logical place to discuss it is the talk page of the article and to stay cool when doing it. Jhenderson  7 7 7  14:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I noticed you finally did so. Jhenderson  7 7 7  14:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Druu
Hi, I tryed to improving the description of File:Druu.JPG. Please, tell me if this change is enoght, if not, please help me telling me what more I need.

Thanks Arussom (talk) 03:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The biggest concern was which issue it was from. The original information you had didn't match up well since the image wasn't from the cover. That makes it hard to assume that the image was from that issue.

The clarification you provided is fine though. The only remaining question is if you actually scanned the image or found it else where.

- J Greb (talk) 03:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi again, I scanned it... How can I clarify this? Thanks you very much Arussom (talk) 05:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * By removing "Apparent" from the line source line as you have already done. - J Greb (talk) 05:33, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks you! Arussom (talk) 11:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Current Events
I noticed you put an edit freeze on updating a TV results show because it was not done airing in a different time zone. It is my understanding that this is inconsistent with Wikipedia policy on spoilers []. --MatthewM (talk) 01:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * In a way, but it is consistant with not substituting for watching the chow as it is aired. As pointed out in the article's talk page: We are not a news site and we do not work to a deadline. While the information can be added when the show's initial boroadcast ends it shouldn't be rushed in. And in this case, the "initial boroadcast" is the first compleate airing within it s country of origin. - J Greb (talk) 01:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

America's Got Talent (season 5)
Why fully protect this until so many hours after it airs on both the west and east coasts? I'd understand fully protecting until the episode airs (anywhere in the world, meaning it ends on 10 pm EST in this case), so that edits are made only after all the information is available, but that's about it. This is rarely done, though, even on more popular shows. Gary King ( talk  ·  scripts )  02:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. This is inconsistent with Wikipedia's policy on spoiler alerts. If the show has already aired on one time zone, it has finalized. Please lift your editing freeze. Gamer9832 (talk) 02:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * And if it were air live on both coasts of the US I'd agree. But the home country's broadcaster tape delays the west coast presentation by 3 hours. Posting the results can be seen as undermining their comiercial rights in that regard.
 * And as pointed out above, this isn't a news site. Having the information up immediatly is not a requirement. A 3 hour delay isn't going to kill anyone at this point, and it plays fair with the regard to adding the non-free content. - J Greb (talk) 02:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * This is the first time I've heard of this. Could you please point me to somewhere where I can read more about this? I am genuinely interested. Does it also affect shows like Lost, the Oscars/Emmys, the Olympics, etc.? I think the second of those are not delayed, but the first and third do have some delays for most of their content. Gary King  ( talk  ·  scripts )  02:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Two of those it would come close to affecting: the Olympics, like any sporting event, is once the competition is closed, and the delays are more along the lines of "When are we showing what? It doesn't have to track with the other events."; and the Oscars, an awards event which is generally after the harsware is handed out.
 * As for Lost and other television shows - last I checked most of them do wait for the show to end its initial airing boefore the updates to characters plots and episode articles happen.
 * - J Greb (talk) 02:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that other editors, as well as myself, would like for you to cite policy for this protection. Is there one, other than your own personal view?--Jojhutton (talk) 02:26, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Greb, you better check any other popular television episode article again, then. Lost and Heroes are good examples. Their articles have constant edits while they are being aired. They are often semi-protected due to vandalism, but that's about it. They are never fully protected. And those shows have massive, massive spoilers. Gary King  ( talk  ·  scripts )  02:28, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It appears that your Oscars reference seems to contradict your actions regarding this show. If the Oscars page is updated after the hardware is given out, I would think that announcing a person is through a round is comparable to being handed an award. Zehnra (talk) 02:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Indeed. In any case, the Oscars articles are updated while the show is still airing (particularly since it's a long show and the article gets a lot of visits precisely because people want to know the results). Gary King  ( talk  ·  scripts )  02:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * At the base of it? WP:NFCC. Posting the content of the show prior to its full airing at home is undermining the broadcaster's commercial opportunities.
 * So, since we aren't on a deadline here, what is the need to disrespect the broadcaster's commercial opportunities?
 * - J Greb (talk) 02:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * WRT copyright concerns, can we at least reduce it to semi? There's no evidence that autoconfirmed editors are causing trouble. I have to agree with the above. There doesn't seem to be any basis for this action, policy or otherwise, and contravenes our philosophy of openness to all editors. Please unprotect the article. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * WRT copyright concerns, can we at least reduce it to semi? There's no evidence that autoconfirmed editors are causing trouble. I have to agree with the above. There doesn't seem to be any basis for this action, policy or otherwise, and contravenes our philosophy of openness to all editors. Please unprotect the article. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Please see Talk:America's Got Talent (season 5).
 * Again, my appologies.
 * - J Greb (talk) 02:46, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Nav templates and WP:ACCESS
I seem to remember that discussion too.

At this point, I don't mind going through our list of nav templates and checking for colours.

But we should probably find some way to reduce incidences of this apparently common adjustment (apparently due to enthusiasm for "coolness" or at least aesthetics).

Any ideas? - jc37 22:24, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's been brought up over and over for, I think, 2 years now. Mainly when an IP or OTT fan decides the washed out colors or the default isn't "good" enough. And it really doesn't help that you can go look at collage or sports team boxes and see patently inaccessible combinations.
 * It also doesn't help that every time the navboxes are brought up on the Project talk as needing some level of addressing in the project level guides it's ignored.
 * While I can see the appeal of what's on Hulk or Spider-Man, I'm not that far from calling it "decoration only" and flipping them to match or reflect the infobox colors. At least that way there is a consistency across the Comics templates. It may need to go into a section at WikiProject Comics/Templates or the MoS though. Something along the lines of:


 * We could also add sections at that point as to what the project finds appropriate to include in the links, and how the "scope" of a topic is defined.
 * - J Greb (talk) 23:45, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, go for it. This should be non-controversial since we're following policy. - jc37 00:43, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And it's in place now... so the fun should beging. - J Greb (talk) 04:51, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If not before, now it should : ) - jc37 05:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Spider-Man (film series) help
Okay, I'm having another altercation with User:Rio de Janiero God and I'm not making the same mistake this time. The user wants to add something that is not backed up by the source he or she is providing. I've reverted his edits twice already (an unregistered user also added it and I reverted that edit). Can I get some help here?-5- (talk) 23:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This has been resolved, for now.-5- (talk) 00:02, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not quite... though the troubling item is getting a user talk page note. - J Greb (talk) 00:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Due to this and this you might want to watch him. Looks like he's getting personal with User:-5- Jhenderson  7 7 7  19:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's part of the reason I pointed them to the Wikihounding section. Hopefully they realize what they are starting to do leads to a bad place.
 * It's also interesting to see the shotgun editing pattern - mostly film but the odd comics, director, TV show and hockey player.
 * - J Greb (talk) 20:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Chances are, I have a few of those kind of articles on my watchlists. Such as film and comics. But I am not always prone to join in edit wars. Also an IP editor reverting your edit on X-Men: First Class (film) a while back. I am just saying because that might be him outside his account. Jhenderson  7 7 7  20:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * He's doing the same thing on X-Men: First Class and having edit conflict with another user on The Avengers film project. Jhenderson  7 7 7  18:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Charliechanfeb0539.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Charliechanfeb0539.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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Mr. America image
Hello, I noticed you took away the image I added on the Mr. America page. Why did it need to be removed and replaced with the old one? User:Mfowler11 (talk) 12:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The edit summary is pretty self explanitory. The Comics Project has set up a guideline for character images for the infobox - see WP:CMOS. The "old" image, while contorted, fits the guidlines better that the "new" one, which is a more contorted pose and focuses more on the whip than the character design.
 * And if you want to get to the nitty-gritty... Why did the "old" image need to be replaced in the first place?
 * - J Greb (talk) 04:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for explaining to me. I apologize, I wanted to replace the "old" one because I thought that the newer picture was a better pose and capture of the character and looked more accurate for the page. Looks like I was wrong. User:Mfowler11 (talk) 8:30, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

The A-Team (comics)
Hoping you could be a 3rd set of eyes on the A-Team. I feel pretty confident their are some fair-use problems with the page, and some additional insight would be appreciated. -Sharp962 (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC).
 * Thanks for the follow-up. -Sharp962 (talk) 13:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC).

heads up
I just thought I would let you know. The user you blocked, User:Rio de Janiero God is asking for a second chance on his talk page constantly. − Jhenderson  7 7 7  17:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see "retribution" but a whole lot of whining for reinstatement. - J Greb (talk) 18:15, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't listen to me! Wrong definition. :} − Jhenderson  7 7 7  18:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I just figured he might need some some kind of response. Positive or negative. − Jhenderson  7 7 7  18:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

As seen in
Since when is "As seen in" improper for a cite? There are no rules for this. In fact it was added to assist those unfamiliar with comics. --Xero (talk) 02:09, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * A citation is where the information is found. Period.
 * "As seen in..." is editorializing. Redundant editorializing at that when citing a primary source. It is about as appropriate as "As described in..." for a cite of a prose story or "As depicted in..." for a cite of a film.
 * If you honestly feel the phrase is needed - show that there is a consensus for using it in addition to the standard citing of a comic. Either on the talk page or through the Comics project. The latter would be preferable because if there is a consensus to add it, it would affect all comics articles articles.
 * - J Greb (talk) 02:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I would have fought for it, but your prose and film examples are damning. I initially started doing it because of a confuses reader, but I can see now it would be simpler to just explain on a case by case basis. --Xero (talk) 10:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Avs38.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Avs38.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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bat518.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Bat518.png. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Catwoman16.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Catwoman16.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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bat386.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Bat386.png. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)