User talk:Jimknut/Archive 2

Jo Stafford
That's fantastic. Thanks for uploading them. Paul MacDermott (talk) 11:51, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sadly I've had to temporarily remove them because of copyright problems, but if you can fix them they can be readded. Take a look at the discussion for further details. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Kellie Loder
Hi Jim,

I was wondering if you would consider reviewing my current FAC for the Kellie Loder article. I noticed that you reviewed the Ringo Starr FAC and thought you might be interested in this FAC as well. Any constructive comments you would be willing to provide at the corresponding discussion would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 21:12, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Jim,


 * I really appreciate you reviewing this article. I believe I have addressed your concerns. Please let me know if I have not or if you have any further ones.


 * Neelix (talk) 22:07, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Laurel and Hardy filmography PR
I will make some comments on the peer review for Laurel and Hardy filmography Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 13:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Just checking for additional comments
Per the suggestion from Aureez at FLC Audie Murphy honors and awards, just checking with all previous reviewers to see if there are any other comments. Thank you for what you have already input there. — Maile (talk) 12:31, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Neil Diamond
Hey Jim, thanks for all the time you've put into concerning Neil Diamond and his music, and great job, too! Best, --Discographer (talk) 19:16, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Peer review
Thanks for your support, regardless of the other comments (now it's attracting some attention!) By the way, I left more comments for TR at Peer review. Good luck. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't jump on TR earlier because I thought it should have gone through GAN first. I'll have another look. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:47, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Briarcliff Manor
Hi Jim,

I left more comments at Featured list candidates/Timeline of Briarcliff Manor/archive1. Let me know what you think.

Thanks.-- ɱ    (talk)  16:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Jim, I can see that you've edited recently, do you not always see these talk page comments, or are you busy at the moment that you don't want to address this yet?-- ɱ    (talk)  17:19, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I was away from home over the past few days. I have resolved all comments. BTW, I have a FAC in the works on an article I wrote for an American television sitcom called Temperatures Rising.  Care to take a look? Jimknut (talk) 19:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'm also nominating an article for FA, might ask you to take a look at it afterwards too.-- ɱ    (talk)  19:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I submitted the article Briarcliff Manor, New York to FA a while ago; the first run-around received too few comments, so I'm trying again. I'd like this one not to fail for the same reason, so please do contribute. Here's the link: /archive2. Thanks again.-- ɱ    (talk)  03:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Temperature Rising FAC
I'll be happy to review Temperature Rising for FAC. It may be a few days of checking, but I think so far it looks well done. Should be done before Monday.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 06:42, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

RE:User talk:ATC

 * I replied to your comment on my talk page. ATC . Talk 00:39, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Having reviewed the article, while the writing and sources are quite good, I came across an issue that will not be approved for featured article status which is structure. It is missing a "Production" section (which should include development/concept; filming; the showrunner, writer/producers, and other crew; music) and should be listed first in the body. Also "First season" and "Second season" should not have its own sections; rather, they should be discussed under a "Synopses" section. A list of characters should not be in the synopses. They should be in a "Casting" section right below "Production". And "Ratings", "Reviews", and "Further reviews and sinking ratings" should be consolidated into one category, "Reception", being listed at the end of the article (and should discuss the ratings of ALL the seasons). And "Summer replacement", which should be listed after the synopses section, should be retitled to "Series renewal" as the proper heading. And finally, remove the "Episodes" section, and instead, list the "Further information: List of Temperatures Rising episodes", right below the "Synopses" section header (before the first paragraph).
 * Also, while this is a minor issue, this should also be addressed. While the developer and creator share similar roles, there are differences. Did William Asher create or develop the show? If he developed it, make sure to change "created by" (in the infobox) to "developed by" and list the creator and the book, film, or TV series the show is based on. If he did create the show, change "originally developed, produced, and occasionally directed by" to "created, produced, and occasionally directed by".
 * Make sure to make these tweaks (I mentioned above) and I'll address if there is any more issues. I'd like to see it when you reconstruct the article. Good luck! ATC . Talk 01:29, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice for the article. Unfortunately, your statement that it needs a section on the series' production throws a major and insurmountable roadblock in my way. Temperatures Rising is not currently playing in syndication nor is it commercially available on DVD or blu-ray. Hence there are no audio commentaries or behind-the-scenes documentaries discussing the making of the show. Likewise, there are also no websites, books, or magazine articles devoted to it. Thus I simply do not have any information about the series' writers, photographers, directors (other than Asher) and other crew members. The only thing available is one TV fan site with an episode list but the information it has is sparce and I'm fairly sure that it would be dismissed as being unreliable.

Is the article structure you suggested an absolute? Is there any talk page regarding this? I separated the show's seasons and reviews into different sections because it seems a logical way to discuss the series when considering how it was changed around so radically. In fact, one reviewer suggested the two seasons be given separate articles. I vetoed this idea as did several other reviewers. My decision then is to keep the article's structure the way it is.

As for the bit about Asher, I did change the infobox to say he was the developer rather than the creator of the series. Also, a friend of mine who has published several articles on film history gave me a few suggestions on improving the grammar of the article. I have implemented them into the text.

So, at present time, I'm keeping the article as it currently stands. Where do we go from here? Jimknut (talk) 17:19, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I see what you are saying about the article's structure. I'd take it up with the FAC staff, explain to them the reasons for the formatting structure. Also, I understand you can't find info on the TV series' production and crew because it is an old show, and yes, you are correct that you cannot use any unreliable sources. I just don't know whether or not they'll accept it without that info (of course, with reliable sources only).
 * I don't know how I could be of any more assistance other than to wish you luck on the FAC status (It looks like it is written quite well). I made some minor edits by adding a couple of commas and apostrophes (where needed). BTW, what did you mean by I "shot you down"? Just trying to provide you with my advise from what I know on FAC criteria for TV shows. At this point, you may need to ask someone else for further assistance (for this article) because I have no more advise to give and FAC is not my area of expertise (I've only had successes with promoting articles to WP:GAN. Maybe try nominating it for a GAN article first? I think you may have better success). Take care, and again good luck! ATC . Talk 02:23, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Barrymore
Many thanks once again for your thoughts on the John Barrymore article. Could I ask you to make one further visit to comment on the question of the inclusion of a family tree. Many thanks - SchroCat (talk) 10:13, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Temperatures Rising
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Temperatures Rising you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jimknut -- Jimknut (talk) 21:01, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

LO at PR
Following a recent overhaul by Tim riley and me, we now have Laurence Olivier up for comments and suggestions at PR. Any thoughts you have would be greatly appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 20:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Peer review/Enthiran/archive1
I have opened the peer review for the film. Please do suggest any changes that I should make before I go for FAC. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me '' 06:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Temperatures Rising
The article Temperatures Rising 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Temperatures Rising for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Squeamish Ossifrage -- Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Temperatures Rising
The article Temperatures Rising you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Temperatures Rising for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Squeamish Ossifrage -- Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Peer review/Enthiran/archive2
I have opened the 2nd PR as the article's first FAC was withdrawn recently due to prose issues. Feel free to leave comments. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me '' 13:54, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Favorites in Hi-Fi.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Favorites in Hi-Fi.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Amy Adams filmography/archive1
Hi. Hope you're well. I've fixed your comment on the above FLC. Would it possible for you to return? Cowlibob (talk) 15:41, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Julianne Moore filmography/archive1
Hi. Hope you're well. I've sorted your points on your review. Gentle nudge to return to the nom if you think I've sorted them + any other comments. Cowlibob (talk) 18:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/78th Academy Awards/archive1
Is it possible if you could proofread 78th Academy Awards for featured list consideration? I would appreciate the feedback.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 04:20, 19 August 2015 (UTC)\

RE:78th Academy Awards FLC
Hi there,

I addressed your comment regarding Featured list candidates/78th Academy Awards/archive1. Thank you.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 18:33, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

2015 Oscars
Hi there,

Could you please kindly review 87th Academy Awards regarding featured list promotion when you have the time? I would appreciate the feedback. You can also feel free to make minor corrections if you see something.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 06:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

The Artist accolades FLC
Hi there,

I understand your busy schedule, but Would you kindly please proofread List of accolades received by The Artist (film) for featured list conisderation. Frankie and I would appreciate the feedback.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 08:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

1993 Oscars
Hi there,

Could you please kindly review 65th Academy Awards regarding featured list promotion when you have the time? I would appreciate the feedback. You can also feel free to make minor corrections if you see something.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 07:11, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Accolades list
Hello there! Can you review one of my FLCs - Lady Gaga accolades or Silver Linings Playbook accolades?

Temperatures Rising
Hello: The copy edit you requested by the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Temperatures Rising has been completed. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Twofingered Typist (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Temperatures Rising and 1988 Oscars
Hi there,

I left a small comment for Temperatures Rising regarding its promotion to FA. Sorry about the long delay. Was busy with midterms at school.

By the way, could you proofread 60th Academy Awards for FL promotion, please? I would appreciate the help.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 06:59, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

80th Oscars
Hi there,

Could you proofread 80th Academy Awards for featured list promotion? I know you are busy, but I would appreciate the help.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 21:16, 22 December 2015 (UTC)