User talk:Lugnuts/Archive 5

Smashing Orange
I've removed your speedy deletion tag from this article. It needed cleaning up (and still does until I get round to it), but there is clear assertion of notability. Could you please be more careful in your use of speedy deletion, and only use it when there is no assertion of notability in an article, and when deletion would clearly not be controversial. You might want to take a look at WP:MUSIC for details of what is considered to constitute notability for musicians. An article that asserts that the subject released multiple albums on significant labels (e.g. MCA) should not be speedied (and if verified would almost certainly be kept at AFD). Thanks.--Michig (talk) 10:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip re. Categories in preview mode. Native Records are/were a noteworthy label, despite not (yet) having an article here. I know the band toured the USA and the UK, if not the rest of Europe, and I have a few decent sources to cite, so the article should be good enough when I've finished with it. --Michig (talk) 11:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Flags
Hi, I saw you created a lot of film and actor stubs. Regarding the actor articles, could you create them without the flag icons in the infobox? See Manual of Style (flags). The also counts (although I don't care that much) for the film stubs. Per WikiProject Films/Style guidelines flag icons should also be avoided from film articles. Garion96 (talk) 20:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't forget to change your film template also. Out o' Luck was created with the flag on it. Garion96 (talk) 23:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Can I just say that I don't think the flag in film articles is any problem at all ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      Talk? 17:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films December 2007 Newsletter
The December 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Monarchs of England
Lugnuts, I see you've added the Monarchs of England template to the kings of Wessex. Can I suggest you remove these, at a minimum for everyone before Alfred? None of the kings of Wessex were monarchs of England in any sense; only Egbert has such a claim made for him, and that only lasted a year and is not really a claim of kingship. Alfred also was never king of all England, though he was king of all the English who were not ruled by a foreign invader. Various later kings are sometimes claimed as the first king of the English, but I don't know enough to suggest who it should be.

Let me know what you think. Mike Christie (talk) 21:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Good point. I've commented at the template, which is probably what I should have done to start with.  Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 13:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi -- just to let you know I've removed the inappropriate kings from that template, and will be reverting the kings articles. I will use revert, since it's faster; I know people think revert can be rude so I wanted to drop you a note to say it's just for speed reasons.  Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 15:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Our Gang
Yes, I realized after I made the page that there one an existing one out there. I had searched for a while to make sure I was not duplicating efforts, but did not find the duplicate until afterwards. I merged the two pages together, and redirected one to go to the other. Thanx! Oanabay04 (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Removing cast sections from films
Hi, Please do not remove cast sections from films, as per your edits on Baby Brother and Seeing the World. The infobox should contain a handful of starring names and the info can be duplicated across the infobox and the main body of the article. I've reverted the edits you've made. Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 08:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey there - I removed cast sections from the articles because I felt they were duplicative. Also, Baby Brother and Thundering Fleas were listed as Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy films, which they are not. Those were part of the Our Gang series with brief appearances by said actors. Thanx, though. Point well taken. Oanabay04 (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The Rising of the Moon (film)
John Ford 1957. Could you start it? Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      Talk? 17:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It still amazes me the films that are missing even by director's as big as John Ford ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      Talk? 12:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thats a terrible idea. These lists are supposed to serve a purpose which categories can never do. Given time they could even each be written into articles with text summarising the years in American film and then the detailed tabled lists underneath. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦     Talk? 13:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Glad you saw that one. I usually stay well away from film discussions because it is always about something controversial and people often get the wrong impresison of me when it is about something I feel strongly about and get peed off with the deletionists. The way some editors think destructively on here really concerns me ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦      Talk? 20:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion
Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here. Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia. --User: (talk) 02:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Ballbearing Pinatas
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Ballbearing Pinatas, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Ballbearing Pinatas is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Ballbearing Pinatas, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 10:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

John Wayne filmography
I just wanted to tell you that this is a work of art. It appears you were involved in developing it (or maybe did it all yourself) and I just wanted to congratulate you for the work involved. Rossrs and I are working on filmographies and wondered if we could use this as a model for some other articles that will have extensive filmographies? Thanks! Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * me too! For the record, I think it's great.  Rossrs (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello
Hey, it was really nice, the Practical Joke. At first I was a bit puzzled! LOL. At the end of a tiring day (both at university and at wikipedia) it gives a nice feeling. I am gonna add it at my page as well :-). Cheers. -- Niaz (Talk •  Contribs)  19:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2008 Newsletter
The January 2008 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. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

SkidVid
It's fairly notable surely? Loads of videos on YouTube have it at the start, suggesting that it's in fairly widespread use or at least used to generate lots of videos there. Can't find much info about it on t'internet is all. Charlie (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

and -templates?
Hi!

I see you're adding alot of to various film actors. Apart from the WP:FLAG-issue that's been mentioned above, could you also consider using the and -templates as per this edit? Thanks in advance! &mdash;Gabbe (talk) 00:16, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Gramophone Records (label)
My Dear Lugnuts, I see you have created many entires, soundly researched I'm sure, although some of the labels to which you refer certainly seem less notable than our own! However I agree that our writing style could be a lot less 'advertorial' with more relevent information regarding the notability of the players on the label. This can, and will be addressed. I can assure you our credentials are good, and that this is always going to be work in progress, and I agree with an earlier comment on this page that you are maybe too quick to delete a sincere, embryonic label.

By the way, for someone who makes many contributions, your grasp of punctuation is very poor: there is no apostrophe in the possessive "ITS".
 * If you're pulling me up on grammar (ha!), then "independent" doesn't have an a in it. Lugnuts (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Quite right, "independent" does not have an "a" in it - your point being?


 * Haha, failure. Lugnuts (talk) 08:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Now You' Have New Messages
LOL - I couldn't resist. The message on your userpage confused me for about 10 seconds. Cute *wink* • <font color="#1100ff">Supā <font color="#ff0011">saru 15:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a Cinch
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article It's a Cinch, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of It's a Cinch. Million_Moments (talk) 20:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Anne Brodie
An editor has nominated Anne Brodie, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

helen gibson metadata
Can you explain what use the metadata section is? I have read the page regarding it but i don't get what it is good for. can you direct me to an example? EraserGirl (talk) 03:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Re Silent films and Buster Keaton template
Hi: I see you edit quite a bit of silents. I've been working on Harry Langdon's films and may do quite a few more. I think he was a very important silent film actor (well at least for time he was). I was also thinking of working on some of Buster Keaton's films, but then I saw that incredible large template he has on his films. Is there a reason the Keaton template cannot be collapsed? What are your thoughts? I know that templates can be controversial, and my buddy Blofeld has run into some antagonism in the past with them. I love templates, but if they are large, I think they should be as hidden as possible. Besides the article will look better and the information is still on the page. So please share what information I'm lacking. I see, also, that you've done an excellent job with silent film actors. Well, that's it. I hope you can help. Best, -- ♦ Luigibob ♦  "Talk to Luigi!" 17:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Fantastic!!!! It may seem petty to you but now I'm willing to do some work on some of his films. Here's my logic: The way I work is that when I work on a film article, I try to take the article to a START PLUS, and if the info is readily available to a B MINUS class.  So, I'm thinking: why should I work on an article if I think the article looks terrible after my work is done?  I know I'm way too anal retentive!  Well, hopefully I can help you build some good silent film articles.  Silents are super and I want to take a break from the film noir articles I've been editing.  I'll probably start catching some silent films on Turner Movie Classics on Sunday nights.  Thanks again -- Luigibob (talk) 19:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Great on the Chaplin template, I own a few of his films as well. I started updating Keaton's films and have updated two of his films.  So Lugnuts who's is your favorite silent film era comedian?  Mine is Keaton.  Although, during my youth, back in early 1960's in Guayaquil, Ecuador, my favorite aunt would take me to Chaplin films on Saturay afternoons.  I remember soiling my pants with laughter!


 * Finally, I was happy that I worked on two classic silents recently: Foolish Wives and The Wind. Again, super job on the templates. Best-- Luigibob (talk) 11:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: John Ford template
Hey, thanks. Director templates are basically all I do at Wikipedia nowdays, since they're simple and don't require my undivided attention. A lot of major ones have already done, but I was shocked to find nothing for John Ford! It might be a bit incomplete though, as I was working from IMDb and didn't include his short films or short documentaries. .... 22:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Hatnotes
I'd just like to point out that adding hatnotes, as in Wee Willie Winkie (film), is discouraged by WP:NAMB. (Repent! Repent! Lest you fry in WikiHell, where everything you do is vandalized immediately.) Clarityfiend (talk) 16:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2008 Newsletter
The February 2008 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. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Calderdale College
A tag has been placed on Calderdale College, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

The college is already mentioned in the Halifax, West Yorkshire article and insufficently notable for its own article

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please note other colleges and schools that are simple one liner stubs are being marked for mergers with articles in a similar manner. A simple one line stub page with a website link is nothing more than a form of providing an advert link. Richard Harvey (talk) 16:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

P.g 108
No I haven't seen it. What is it a page on Blofeld? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦      $1,000,000? 19:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool! Blofeld the Bald of Bruges!!! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦      $1,000,000? 21:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Your comment on Articles for deletion/2007 in Costa Rica
Hi Lugnuts,

With regard to your comment on this deletion discussion, I have to say I'm a little bit hurt. Accusing someone of a bad faith nomination is a rather serious accusation, and I'm surprised you were willing to level it so lightly. Please keep in mind that deletion discussions are just that--discussions--and that just because someone disagrees with you is no reason to stop assuming good faith. -- jonny - m t  08:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

New message
Please remove your practical joke thing. This isn't a thread or a serious notification or anything, just a friendly heads-up. I had one too, but overall it is more disruptive than fun (seeing as you never actually find out if anyone fell for it) and imagine the poor dial-up users (whose ranks I am to join for the next four days as I exceed my 30gig limit once more...) So, just a friendly message before a nasty admin comes and removes it themselves. +Hexagon1 (t) 21:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You took it exactly in the way I didn't mean it. It was just friendly advice. But if you wish keep it there, feel free. Though again, many nav-boxes have been VfD'ed simply because they have had a few extra kb in flags for countries. How do you think a whole article full of images will impact on someone on dial-up or close to their limit? I was trying to be helpful, shame you misunderstood me. +Hexagon1 (t) 10:39, 15 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) 04:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Film(s) directed by Herbert Brenon
I believe the preferred name for the new Brenon category would be "Films directed by Herbert Brenon". - JasonAQuest (talk) 13:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Pearl Jam 2008 U.S. Tour
You're welcome. I'll try to contrbute more as more information about the tour comes up.-5- (talk) 14:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

He my fellow Wikipedian
I realize that you are working on many cats...and how you place them is mechanical on your part...that is, you always place them last. Now, I realize that there is no set policy about placing cats in alpha order, but I'm following after you as you place the cats in the films I work on. I guess that is the best way to do it...I guess it's no big deal...right? So I'll follow up, after you place a new cat, and ALPHA SORT.... my best -- Luigibob (talk) 04:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No reason. Again, I realize there is no policy.  I just think it looks better, it makes sense, and they are easier to read....it's my way of being bold, one can say...again, if I see cats that are not in alpha order in any of the films on my watch list, or that I work on, I place them in ALPHA order...have a good day...I'll have to work on another silent film....cheers -- Luigibob (talk) 18:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Funny Games
Hi. I think instead of having a disamb page it would be better if Funny Games redirects to the original film and there is a link to the remake. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC) Ok, no problem. I would put it in the talk pages. I just contacted you at first because I thought to put it in the talk page of the article but I don't think many people would participate in the conversation. I am searching for examples of other films with remakes. I think there is not a "common practice". Check for example The Curse. This is a case I would put a disambiguation page! On the other hand Psycho (film) is a redirect! -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

KAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A tag has been placed on KAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Vivio Testa rossa  Talk Who 06:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

KAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A tag has been placed on KAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Vivio Testa rossa  Talk Who 06:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)