User talk:Matthew R Dunn/Archive 3

Occupation (Battlestar Galactica) GAN
Just a friendly reminder that I am reviewing one of your articles. You can find it at Talk:Occupation (Battlestar Galactica)/GA1. Thanks,  R uby2010   comment!  17:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reminding me. I'll get on with it. -- Matthew RD 18:32, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Precipice (Battlestar Galactica)/GA1
I have just reviewed Precipice (Battlestar Galactica). Have a look. Queenieacoustic (talk) 15:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The episode passed! Congratulations! :) Queenieacoustic (talk) 14:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The Curse of the Black Spot GAN
I have added my review. You can find it at Talk:The Curse of the Black Spot/GA1. Thanks,  R uby2010   comment!  21:09, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a reminder that I have reviewed The Impossible Astronaut. Thanks,  R uby2010   comment!  20:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Spooks.
Yes, it doesn't hint that. The interview was done before he'd filmed the final scene and he said he didn't know how it would turn out, and might not know until after it was edited. He was also aware that saying "my character dies" or "my character lives" in an interview published before the final episode goes out is poor form. So, it does not say the ending is ambiguous, but rather he does not know before it is filmed. 203.35.82.133 (talk) 09:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Also why did you return the ref to a Primary Source? 203.35.82.133 (talk) 09:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It is my understanding that the episodes in question are perfectly valid sources. In the Lucas article it states that he disappears from the roof. That is a very reasonable statement (because of the fact that he did disappear from the roof. -- Matthew RD 14:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * "An exception to this rule may be shows containing plot details that are unclear or open to interpretation, in which case the different interpretations should be sourced to reliable sources." 203.35.135.133 (talk) 06:14, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Call fo consensus: Dead/Alive/Unknown
On Spooks. 203.35.135.133 (talk) 09:26, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Series 5
Hello, and congrats to passing The Impossible Astronaut and The Curse of the Black Spot to GA! Having just joined the project, I've been browsing and noticed that the articles for Series 5 are quite mediocre. I'm not quite sure where would be the best place to start, though I was thinking "The Time of Angels" and "Flesh and Stone". What would you suggest? Thanks, Glimmer721  talk  17:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I was planning to do the same for the other five episodes for series 6.0, and then the second half when it comes out, but I'll get there eventually. In answer to your question, I would suggest you go for the first part first. One reason; the DVD/Blu-ray includes an audio commentary (well, in-vision commentary), whilst the second part doesn't for some reason. -- Matthew RD 17:44, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * That would be "The Eleventh Hour", "The Beast Below", and "Victory of the Daleks", right? I don't really have access to commentary; my local library has the complete S5 DVDs which I rented once but there's no chance now--they're all out and on hold (seems to be a lot of Who fans in America trying to catch up). But I can watch Confidential on the BBC America website. It's probably easiest to find references for "The Eleventh Hour", but the article can use some major cleanup. I've been dropping in on series 6, too. Glimmer721  talk  01:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Sanctuary (season 1)
Hello there Matthew, I noticed that you've offered up Sanctuary (season 1) for Good article review. These sort of articles generally count as lists, should it not be put over at Featured List candidates rather than GA?  That Ole Cheesy Dude  ( Talk to the hand! ) 15:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see Smallville (season 1), Supernatural (season 1), Supernatural (season 2), Parks and Recreation (season 1), Parks and Recreation (season 2), Parks and Recreation (season 3), Spooks (series 7), South Park (season 13). None of those examples are featured lists, but featured/good articles. Also, only the episodes section counts as a list, there is a lot more prose in there. -- Matthew RD 19:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've made a note on the Featured List talk page, voting that those articles be moved to Featured List instead, since they are technically List-class articles.  That Ole Cheesy Dude  ( Talk to the hand! ) 19:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * But a lot of them aren't lists, the only part of the articles that is "listed" is the episodes, while the rest is prose. How do you propose we "list" the production and reception sections? Also, please note that there is no voting in Wiki discussions, rather than establish consensus. -- Matthew RD 19:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're twisting my words, by voting, I mean proposing, suggesting. Some list articles have prose in them, in fact a lot of them do. If you take a look at Featured lists, there is an entire section dedicated solely to season lists.  That Ole Cheesy Dude  ( Talk to the hand! ) 19:22, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I'll wade in on the discussion, most likely to reiterate my view on this talk page. -- Matthew RD 19:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That's fine, and I am looking for opinions, rather than just to get my way, just to see if I am right in this or not. If I'm not right then I'll only have wasted a few hours, if I am then I'll have helped sort out a lot of articles on the 'pedia. By the way, you've written some great articles. [[Image:Face-grin.svg|20px]]  That Ole Cheesy Dude  ( Talk to the hand! ) 19:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * How dare you edit my user page! :) Joking aside I have put in my post for the discussion. If you want more output may I suggest leaving a message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television? Unless you already did it. -- Matthew RD 20:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Over There FAC
The agoniz...er....fun process begins again. Over There (Fringe) is once again back at FAC with some more improvements. When you have a chance, would you mind stopping by and leaving a comment/support like you did the first time? The last FAC ended with no opposes but was still not promoted, so I'm hoping this one will go more smoothly. You can find it here: Featured article candidates/Over There (Fringe)/archive2. Much thanks!  R uby2010  comment!  20:46, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll take a look, but since I support it the first time, I doublt my verdict will change much. -- Matthew RD 20:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Scott & Bailey GA
Thank you for reviewing the article (very quickly, I wasn't expecting it to be reviewed for at least a month judging by my past nominations). I've ammended all the points except one which I hope you can help clarify for me. I've written the problem on the review page. -- Patyo1994 (talk) 21:29, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

 * Thank you. I do whatever I can do to help out. -- Matthew RD 03:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Nikita
I'm curious, are you stopping at characters? Or will you eventually move onto season pages and the main page itself? Jayy008 (talk) 16:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * To be honest I haven't though about Nikita articles much (I just worked on the character as a spur of the moment thing). I did at one point plan an extention of the main article itself after somebody did the same with Hellcats, but now I'm not so sure. Anyway, thanks for the barnstar! -- Matthew RD 18:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the slow reply. Is there enough info for Nikita then? If there is, I may do some overhauling. Jayy008 (talk) 21:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Anything's possible. I was at one point focused on possibly expanding the reception section by adding reviews from here. -- Matthew RD 21:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Fancy a glance over Goldfinger?
Hi Matthew, Thanks again for all your attention when you reviewed Dr. No for GA Status. A few of us have been working on Goldfinger recently and got it into what we think is pretty good shape. We now have it listed as a good article nominee, so if you feel like stepping in to review it we'd be extremely grateful! (I know this is a bit cheeky, but I hope it's not against any WikiRules to ask!) Cheers - SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 19:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'd be happy to help. I'll get on it (and no, I don't know any WikiRules that prevents me from reviewing on request). -- Matthew RD 19:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's very good of you - and thank you so much! If there's anything that needs updating or fixing then the three of us who worked on Dr. No are also working on this, so we can get it sorted fairly quickly.  Thanks again -  SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 23:00, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your very quick response on Goldfinger. It's all been updated (I hope!), but if I've missed anything - particularly in relation to the "" / “” issue, please let me know.  Thanks again -  SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 11:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
undefined — Bill william compton Talk   16:50, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Another rather cheeky request...?
Hi Matthew, I saw you're trying to get Helen Magnus up to GA - just below you on the nomination list is On Her Majesty's Secret Service (film), which the same group as before have been working on. I don't suppose we could persuade you to undertake the review for us again could you? No problem if you're busy on other things - entirely understandable, but if you have the time we'd all be very grateful! Cheers - SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 22:30, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * * Sighs* Okay... :P. In all seriousness though, yes, I'll take a look. Just give me a couple of days. Thanks. -- Matthew RD 02:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * :) You're a star! Thanks so much (yet again) for doing this! -  SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 07:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review Matthew - I've gone back over and sorted out the issues you raised, so please feel free to let me know if there is anything else at all that you think may be an issue. Thanks again -  SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 18:51, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks again Matthew - very good of you to do it all so quickly. We're working hard on The Man with the Golden Gun at the moment, so we'll probably come knocking again in a week or two! ;)  Cheers -  SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 21:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK nom for Helen Magnus
Hi Matthew, I have reviewed your DYK nomination for Helen Magnus at Template talk:Did you know/Helen Magnus, and I have a small request before I approve it. Could you see my comments at the nominations page and reply there? Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Helen Magnus
The article Helen Magnus you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Helen Magnus for things which need to be addressed. GRAPPLE  X  15:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Helen Magnus
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Will Zimmerman
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Golden Gun
Hi, if you claim a GA review can you not leave it for an entire week? A couple of days is fine but a week is pushing it. .. Somebody else could have reviewed it in the meantime.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:36, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As the nominator of TMWTGG, I don't have a problem with the delay - there are a lot more nominations that have been waiting a lot longer! Besides, there's no rush: we're onto working on For Your Eyes Only in the meantime and will all come back to this one when needed. - SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 15:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for the delay. I intend to review it today, but the Internet at home went kaputt until just now. -- Matthew RD 19:41, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Matthew - all edits now done: I think it should be okay, but if you need anything else, please let me know. Cheers once again!  SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 07:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Matthew, obviously you couldn't post that there was a delay then!♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK notice
Your nomination of Template:Did you know nominations/Strike Back: Project Dawn was placed under the wrong date (it should have been under August 24, not August 29). In the future, please make sure to nominate articles under the correct date, as explained in the instructions at T:TDYK. Thank you, r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 21:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nom for Strike Back: Project Dawn
Hi Matthew, I have reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Strike Back: Project Dawn and I have a quick question before I approve. Could you see my comment at the nomination page and reply there? Thank you. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Dr. No
Hi Matthew, I’ve recently nominated Dr. No for FA Status. Please feel free to have a look over the article and nomination with a completely fresh pair of eyes under new constraints – and please feel free to support the nomination going forward, if you feel you’re able to! Thanks again for all your recent help with the GA processes. - SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 13:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Strike Back: Project Dawn
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Nikita (Nikita character)/GA1
Hey there, I have reviewed Nikita (Nikita character) and left a few comments. You can find the review here. Regards,  R uby   comment!  16:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Prison Break
I am just curious why a personal eyewitness account of facts can't be used for a source at Wiki.

I tried several times to edit an article that has incorrect information, which is supported by other sources posting the same incorrect information...but my edits keep getting replaced by the original misinformation.

I personally saw John Wayne Gacy enter and exit Joliet Correctional Center on the same day...and it is a verifiable fact that there was no "death row" at Joliet when Gacy was incarcerated...even the Wiki article about Gacy says he was in Menard.

If you could please give me an explanation why an unverifiable statement, which is not supported by any records kept by the Illinois Department of Corrections, can be allowed to stand as truth, when I know myself from being there from December 1979 to September 1980 that it is untrue.

Thank you. Myklj999 (talk) 18:26, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I don't exactly believe you. The thing about the internet is that because of its anonymity, people can come in and say anything. Wikipedia needs sources on the information you have tried to add on. If you know of a source that backs it up other than yourself, then by all means add it. Though I'd keep it brief; a three-lined paragraph would tend to go off topic from the article itself, which is a TV show, not a real prisoner. If you want you can take this up further to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. -- Matthew RD 18:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

All I can say is I was in cell 721 of the west building there...whether you choose to believe that or not is entirely up to you. My inmate number was A-98336. The sources that are quoted saying it was Gacy's cell are not anything other than what others heard second hand...but thanks for listening. Myklj999 (talk) 19:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Fringe
Hey, I was wondering why you reverted my edits on Fringe (season 3). I haven't edited TV show lists before, so I'd like to know if there's any stuff I should be aware of if I'm going to try revamping the article. Thanks. --RAN1 (talk) 01:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said in the edit summary, the synopses you edit, particularly the third episode, was much too long. Per WP:TVPLOT episode list articles should have plot summaries of up to 200 words (350 if the plots are complicated). If you want to expand on them, that's fine, but the summary for "The Plateau" you added was 438 words. -- Matthew RD 02:42, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Cast ordering discussion
As a regular television editor, please voice your opinion here. Thank you in advance. Jayy008 (talk) 19:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry
I was gonna get my reason on the Tempus, but my computer forced me to close out all the programs cause it's not responding very well due to a slow connection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.108.115 (talk) 21:38, 16 October 2011 (UTC) That is not a problem. -- Matthew RD 00:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Nikita
I never said that. I just think it belongs in the article with a source. Putting it in the infobox and the beginning of he lead give undue attention to something that's been mentioned once, and gives the impression that she goes by her full name. Thoughts? Jayy008 (talk) 20:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Also, I'm sorry, I only just saw your message above. I'm for adding all the reviews. Jayy008 (talk) 20:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * From what I heard, it was revealed in a second season episode (though I haven't seen any of the episode as they haven't been shown in the UK yet, though I did see a season one episode where Nikita and Alex were standing over Nikita's grave, and though her last name was blocked, I did see what looked like an M or N as the first letter). Also I agree, a source would be useful, I recall doing the same for the Adam Carter article, where a BBC source provided his middle name as Henry, despite that fact that it was barely (if at all) mentioned in any Spooks episode. Secondly, yes, reviews would be helpful for main articles. I have the first season on DVD recently and, although I haven't seen all the special features, does provide useful information about the development of the series, as well as actors' insight into their characters and their journey through the season. -- Matthew RD 03:30, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * So would you object if I removed it from infobox and judge the wording to "Nikita Mears, simply known as Nikita"—obviously I'm willing to hear various wording on that. I have also got the first season recently, so when I get time I'll review the special features. It says there's some exclusive content on the blu-ray too, so maybe I can add some of that. Jayy008 (talk) 18:02, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object to that. -- Matthew RD 18:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll play about with it a little. Jayy008 (talk) 18:14, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Will Zimmerman
The article Will Zimmerman you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Will Zimmerman for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Spy ratings
Do you have a source for the Spy (2011 TV series) viewer numbers? The only source I can find says that it had "Just under half a million viewers", notably less than the 889,000 you added. Also, an IP user claims the second episode pulled the same number of viewers. DarkProdigy (talk) 01:17, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Might be hard to notice, but there is a cite right after "UK viewers (millions)". -- Matthew RD 01:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, my bad, must be blind today. The second episode's number isn't the same either. >.< DarkProdigy (talk) 01:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

sanctuary season 4 finale part 2 problem
i tried to get the second part of the finale while gathering the december episodes of the show but part 2 was unavailable when i clicked on the 30th. 96.254.108.115 (talk) 07:15, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Sanctuary (season 2)
I have put the review on hold while the issues are addressed. Cheers! Glimmer721 talk  19:36, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Lost
As you're a Lost fan and has done GA reviews for articles of the show before, can you take a look at The Constant, which I've put on the FAC? Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 12:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

There's also a peer review, but I don't know if you have any interest in helping... igordebraga ≠ 17:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Seahorse Seashell Party GAN
Your concerns have been addressed. Gage (talk) 08:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

GAN
I've begun reviewing Spooks (series 3) here (as I believe you have noticed) and have responded to your comments at Talk:Victory of the Daleks/GA1. Thanks for reviewing! Glimmer721 talk  17:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

"Now You Know" GA
Hello! Thanks for reviewing "Now You Know". I made the one change you suggested by removing the blogcritics review. After searching the internet for awhile, I came across a TV Guide review and added it in the old review's place. The article should be up to GA status now! Thanks again, Akcvtt (talk) 06:21, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Calvin  &bull; Watch n'  Learn 18:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Doctor Who Episode Improvement Idea
As a member of WP:WHO, I thought you may be interested in this idea. No one has replied yet. Glimmer721 talk  17:41, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Screams of Silence: The Story of Brenda Q GAN
Your concerns have been addressed. Gage (talk) 00:27, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

PR
I don't think you noticed but I commented at Peer review/Will Zimmerman/archive1 --Dweller (talk) 12:09, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Sorry, but I have been a bit busy lately. -- Matthew RD 17:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Strike Back: Project Dawn
I have placed Strike Back: Project Dawn on hold. Please respond to the concerns and I will strike them as I am satisfied. It is probably best if you respond to each concern on the following line.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited List of Hawaii Five-0 episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Internal Affairs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Hawaii Five-0 (season 2), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grace Park (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Pilot (Hawaii Five-0), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ABC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Whiplash (Selena Gomez & the Scene song)
Hi. I have re-nominated the above article for GA status, which you previously reviewed and failed. I was intending on notifying the original nominator, although it appears he has retired from Wikipedia. Till I Go Home (talk) 10:14, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Quick Question
As you're a little more local than I am:...what time zone is London on? Is it BST or GMT (or at least for May 2010)? Glimmer721 talk  23:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That would be BST, if you were referring to British Summer Time. -- Matthew RD 23:14, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks! Glimmer721  talk  16:48, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Stargate
I propose a conversion of this Project into a task force. You may improve a consensus by clicking WT:WikiProject Stargate and discussing a proposal. --George Ho (talk) 17:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Day of the Moon and The Doctor's Wife
Hello, I've been working on the series 6 articles of Doctor Who as series 5 is complete now (just awaiting GA review for the main article) and I know that you are the main author of "Day of the Moon" and "The Doctor's Wife". I was wondering if you were planning on nominating these for GA eventually. "Day of the Moon" is just about good; I have an idea of incorporating the "Outside references" into the production section and the lead just needs expansion. The only problem with "The Doctor's Wife" is continuity, though I now have The Brilliant Book 2012 which might help. I just wanted to check in as you are the main author of those articles and it would be unfair if I polished them off and nominated for GA! Glimmer721  talk  02:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I say go ahead and polish them up, I was thinking of trying to place series six of DW to GAT last year, but since forgotten about them. And shifted my focus to Spooks (since all articles were crap before I stood in and cleaned some up). So no, I'm not planning to submit them for GAN anymore, you can go ahead. -- Matthew RD 15:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay then. Spooks looks good! Glimmer721  talk  23:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Meat (Torchwood)
Hi. I'm aware you've worked on some GA Torchwood episodes and are quite active in television related topics so I was wondering if you could have a look at a userspace draft of the episode I've worked heavily on? I'm hoping to put it forward for selection for WP:Did you know as once I transfer what I have to mainspace it meets the criteria for fivefold prose expansion. What I'm wondering is whether the balance of sources I've used is okay and whether it's neutral enough. Thanks for any feedback Eshlare (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * After glancing through the draft, I certainly think it looks good enough for DYK, and GA. In my view I say the sources are okay, and it is neutral enough. Good job! -- Matthew RD 23:27, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Sanctuary (season 4) DVD
Since you tweaked the cover art, I did my best to upload it to the correct size for the Sanctuary Season 4 page. S_hannon434 3:40, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The Hounds of Baskerville
Hello! Just noticed your work on The Hounds of Baskerville. Some good work there well done!. The JPS talk to me  12:12, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, just until you see "A Scandal in Belgravia" in the next few days, and then probably "The Reichenbach Fall". -- Matthew RD 16:20, 12 May 2012 (UTC)