User talk:Paleface Jack

Heads up
New Texas Chainsaw film incoming.  Dark knight  2149  03:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC) Pretty exciting! Been working on a couple of articles in the mean time before going back to the old Leatherface article expansion. I have sort of been putting that off considering how big a scope that article is.--Paleface Jack (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Featured article candidates/Begotten (film)/archive2
Hi Jack; I'm really pleased to see you've brought this back to FAC. I'm not sure I'll have the time for a full review, but I'll try. It's definitely a worthy topic. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I do encourage you to go through the references with a fine-toothed comb... I'm still seeing lots of bizarre formatting. I fixed a few very quickly, but, for example: "Anon. (September 25, 2016). "Begotten & Shadow of the Vampire Double Feature with Director E. Elias Merhige in Person!". DO312.com. DO312.com. Retrieved July 15, 2017." The repetition really isn't needed! Josh Milburn (talk) 20:32, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I did some looking over the sources and one of the websites I use as a source is down and was not archived and I do not know what to do about that.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:38, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This is some of what I'm getting at. You may get some opposition based only on the source formatting, but I think you're going to get questions about the reliability of a lot of the sources you're citing. Just one example -- what is the Dennis Schwartz source? In fact, I think some of your formatting is going to lead people to question the reliability... Revolver is surely a perfectly reliable source when it comes to claims about Marilyn Manson's influences, but the formatting of the source -- Bennett, J (January 5, 2019). "Marilyn Manson's 'Antichrist Superstar': The Story Behind the Album Cover Art". RevolverMag.com. J. Bennett. Retrieved July 12, 2019. -- is a bit all over the place. I think it's going to be worth your while to sit down with this for an hour or two and try to tidy this all up. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I went over the sources and removed the ones that had the listed issue. in terms of Author/Publisher issue, are you saying I should not do "Author first and last name" and just list them as the publisher when appropriate?--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:11, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not. List the author as the author; the author is not (usually) the publisher. You don't need to include a publisher for periodicals (newspapers, magazines, academic journals, etc.) -- the periodical name is enough, especially if you can provide a wikilink. Meanwhile, there's no need to repeat the name of (say) a website as both the "work"/"website" and the "publisher". Josh Milburn (talk) 17:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I think I understand what you mean now.--Paleface Jack (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--Paleface Jack (talk) 18:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The Gift
In 2016 you tagged the Critical response section of The Gift (film) with Expand section. I've expanded it with several reviews and removed the tag. Please do take a look. Article could still do with some Production information though. -- 109.79.172.81 (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amsterdamned, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Point of view.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Billy (Black Christmas), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unsolved murder.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Maintenance categories
Hello, Jack. Just a small favour, please. Could I ask you to comment out the project banners in User talk:Paleface Jack/Judge Holden (Revision) as they create invalid entries in their various maintenance categories. We use these to track project status. Thanks and all the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 07:29, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Orphaned non-free image File:Billy, Black Christmas, 1974 film, screenshot.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Billy, Black Christmas, 1974 film, screenshot.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stephen Dee Richards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alias.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Paleface Jack: Enjoy the holiday season&#32;and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ★Trekker (talk) 18:19, 25 December 2021 (UTC) Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Disambiguation link notification for January 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Possum (2018 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Jones.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Possum (2018 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Possum (2018 film) 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 Gerald Waldo Luis -- Gerald Waldo Luis (talk) 15:40, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey there, just wondering if you're still able to respond to the review. I've purposefully left it on the non-prose so you can work it out bit by bit.  Gerald WL  01:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah just a little busy at the moment. Been sort of quietly editing the article. Will be able to do more edits during the weekend.--Paleface Jack (talk) 05:01, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Of course it's fine! :) I'll keep the reviews to non prose first, no need to rush.  Gerald WL  06:01, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Possum (2018 film)
The article Possum (2018 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Possum (2018 film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gerald Waldo Luis -- Gerald Waldo Luis (talk) 19:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stephen Dee Richards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Newton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Help
ım a fictional character pages lover too can you help me with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Gordon_(character) page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Volkan1881 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)


 * @Volkan1881 I will take a look at it as soon as I can. I currently working on a massive expansion project on a major/influential horror character at the moment so that has been pretty much occupying my time. But i will look over this character you have been doing.---17:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)~ Paleface Jack (talk) 17:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * thank you so much Volkan1881 (talk) 04:39, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Request
Dear Paleface Jack I understand you like horror movies so much that's why I have a request for you for the article horror film on its history section can you split the 2010s to present content into two decade contents to restore the 2010s content and the 2020s content that why they can match other decades like this. 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s These are what the decades are supposed to be on there can you restore 2010s and 2020s? ScarfaceJohnny (talk) 05:41, 25 July 2022 (UTC)


 * @ScarfaceJohnny Hey mate, sorry for the late reply. Unfortunately I am currently swamped working on a massive expansion project on a horror character so I will most likely be unable to look over that article for you. I agree that the article really needs some attention but I think it will be a lot more in depth than anyone thinks. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Please be aware that user:ScarfaceJohnny is a sockpuppet of a banned user "Jinnifer" who haunts the horror film article and badgers other users into making her WP:OR vandalisms and otherwise edit-warring on her behalf.--Mr Fink (talk) 20:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Apokryltaros had a feeling thanks though Paleface Jack (talk) 23:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

hELP AGAİN
hello paleface jack ım doing tf2 soldier page ı learned making character pages on wiki but ı still not know how ı found not copyrighted photo for pages can you give me a advice? Volkan1881 (talk) 12:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC)


 * @Volkan1881 usually with things like that they are always gonna be copyrighted. I would look at other images from either similar video game characters on Wikipiedia and see how they do theirs. there is something you can look up in our help search that shows how to properly use copyrighted images as long as their fair use. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:46, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * thanks Volkan1881 (talk) 15:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Collaborations
I'm sorry I haven't been as active as I should be. I'm stretched pretty thinned. However, I am going to have to force myself to make time pretty soon in order to finish the Hellraiser reboot draft, because Hulu just announced that it's coming out in October (which puts me on a times table). I'll try to put some more work into the Leatherface draft when I get to work on that.  Dark knight  2149  19:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Darkknight2149 thats fine mate. If memory serves me correctly you dont need to work on the reboot draft since there is an article already created. i have been working on the leatherface article a lot and have not gotten to the newer films just yet so take your time. I can try to pitch in on the hellraiser reboot if you like. Paleface Jack (talk) 19:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Leatherface
When you say "yet to get" do you mean you're waiting for the DVD that has this feature? Is that what you're wanting assistance with, or something else? I think you have enough to just move the information to the article and finish the article from there.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:27, 26 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Bignole There is a dvd that has that info. I have not found it in stores as of yet. It seems like it would be a big point of critique would be the missing info on the Leatherface film. Call me a completionist, my goal is to get this up to FA. Also I have ideas for alternate images that are gonna be used for the main infobox. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:45, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * that and I am just trying to figure out if there are any sources that I can use that tell who did the design of the character in that film. Paleface Jack (talk) 16:25, 26 December 2022 (UTC)


 * If I have time, I'll check my copy to see if they cover it. Is it under a specific feature? As for the article, you can move it without it going up for FA review. Here's the catch, if you completely revamp the article, you will be automatically denied at an FA review if you have just recently moved it into the mainspace. One of the things they are going to look at is public access for peer reviews. Jason Voorhees went through peer reviews and a GA review before ever seeing the FA review after I rewrote the page. It had other editors fine tuning in the mainspace for a bit of time.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  17:05, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Bignole yeah I kinda figured. FA status is the end goal cause of the significance of the character. Did you know and GA status will be goals once stuff gets transfered but FA is final goal. As for the information i think its in the "Man Behind the Bloody mask" featurette, I have the exact name of the featurette that might have the info in the userspace draft I have in the design subsection ("crafting the mask" as its called). Anyways thanks for the help and advice man, really stoked to finally reveal all this hard work to the outside world. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:10, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Just to be sure, which film in question are you looking at for this featurette? There is technically more than one film with "Leatherface" as the title.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  14:54, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Bignole yeah. It's the 2017 prequel. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

If I get a chance, I'll try to view the bluray featurette this weekend for you. In the meantime, is the "cancer" stuff from the most recent movie? I don't recall him ever having cancer? The same with superhuman strength. He's strong, but not any stronger than the average person his size.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC) The 2022 entry has no mention of cancer, as that was a part of the remake timeline. As for Superhuman strength, he does display this on several occasions from some entries in the franchise but I dont really explain or explore that cause it is irrelevant to the article atm. Anyways, rn I am not only fixing citations and whatnot but also trying to colorize a black and white image of the original character cause I cant seem to find a color version of the image and I really want it as the main image for the infobox. Thanks for the help mate!--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)


 * He's shown to be strong, but not superhuman. If it isn't identified that way, then the category could not be appropriate. As for the other, I see Wikipedia mentions "tumors", but I only recall the films identifying it as a basic skin disease that ate away part of his face.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:26, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bignole he is shown superhuman strenth in 2 entries and in the remake series he is said to have skin cancer and is mentioned to have it. Paleface Jack (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * i can always find a reference for that Paleface Jack (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bignole If you are referring to the main article space then ye that wouldnt mention the cancer or the strength. The article I am referencing is my revision draft. Looking over some pieces of information there are a couple mentions of Leatherface having superhuman strength. I might include those in the draft then tranfer all the info to the main article.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:05, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Who mentions this? It isn't stated in the films themselves. As for the cancer, I don't recall that and would have to watch the prequel again. I recall them mentioning a skin diseasae. Cancer would have killed him, as his family wouldn't have had money for treatment.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:19, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bignole they mention it in the first remake and ans is published in multiple sources, filmmakers also mention this in interviews. its skin cancer for starters, and its also a movie so... Paleface Jack (talk) 15:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * As for superhuman strength, only the third film and the 2022 film versions display superhuman strength. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What are you referencing with the superhuman strength?   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bignole for now CBR but I am gonna look for more sources Paleface Jack (talk) 21:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What are you referencing in the film itself? Someone's interpretation that because he's so strong it must be superhuman doesn't mean that it was superhuman. CBR says some stupid shit all the time. If you use a category for a film character that is based around characteristics, then they need to be things established in the official lore and not interpretations.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bignole yeah thats why I am lookin around. Paleface Jack (talk) 21:59, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * btw did you find anything in that special feature of leatherface (2017)? Paleface Jack (talk) 22:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leatherface, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Michael Myers, Jigsaw and Comico.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks mate, much appreciated. Happy editing yourself, you deserve just as much appreciation as I!--Paleface Jack (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The McPherson Tape (UFO Abduction) 1989 film poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:The McPherson Tape (UFO Abduction) 1989 film poster.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lake Michigan Monster, 2018, release poster.webp
Thanks for uploading File:Lake Michigan Monster, 2018, release poster.webp. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leatherface
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leatherface 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Leatherface
The article Leatherface you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Leatherface 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. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:22, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Quick Fail
I don't understand the "Quick Fail" and I've posted a note on the GA page to see what it's all about and for help in understanding how Leatherface meets criteria for it. I also still not sure why people suddenly dislike some of the section headers and how no one can actually provide direct guidelines on them having to be some basic title.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:44, 10 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @Bignole same. i mean I get some of the criticism to the length which is why I removed some things. But because of how complex leatherface is, it needs to be that length Paleface Jack (talk) 21:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm about to go into a meeting, but I'll do a passover of the plot when I'm done. With the exception of the most recent film, I can go through the rest and trim them up. That should cut quite a bit of the length off.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:57, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good. you can always ask questions if need be.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I trimmed the plot outside of the new film. I'll try to go through it more when I have more time and look at the rest of the article. I was actually surprised that it has 3k more words than the Jason article. LOL.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  23:57, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bignole well it took a year or more to do. that and the complexity of the character necessitated the length. Paleface Jack (talk) 23:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't think the complaint is that it isn't covering enough or that the character isn't complex, only that there's probably a lot of fluff within the writing.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  15:58, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, information that is best suited for individual film articles and whatnot.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:39, 12 August 2023 (UTC)


 * The best advice I could give you is to go join GA and FA reviews of articles you haven't worked on. Pay attention to the feedback given and requests for changes.  While not all 100% is good feedback (i.e. subjective), you can learn a lot viewing from a neutral eye (i.e., you didn't contribute to the article and thus have no stake in the game).
 * Next, go hang around the Guild of CopyEditors and the projects being worked on.  You don't need to contribute, so much as you should see how they copyedit articles.
 * As far as Leatherface goes. Re-read the article and if you read something that has nothing to do with Leatherface directly (e.g., discussion about changes to Erin in the novelization) then it should probably be removed.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  17:48, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Will go back to that article a little later as I am working on creating one for a film.--Paleface Jack (talk) 17:51, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Troika (1969 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Troika (1969 film) 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 09:21, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Troika (1969 film)
The article Troika (1969 film) 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:Troika (1969 film) and Talk:Troika (1969 film)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 18:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @Vaticidalprophet sounds good. I will get started on some edist tonight and the rest of the week. Paleface Jack (talk) 18:10, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Troika (1969 film)
The article Troika (1969 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Troika (1969 film) for comments about the article, and Talk:Troika (1969 film)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 17:22, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Sankebetsu brown bear incident
Please, can you help me with that request? Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.180.136.168 (talk) 09:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)


 * @80.180.136.168 I will see what I can do when I have the time. The Japanese wikipiedia article has over 50 citations, though it's a matter of sifting through reliable ones. Paleface Jack (talk) 14:52, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you very much. I wait for good news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.152.8 (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @193.207.152.8 unfortunately the article is really poorly written and undersourced. Paleface Jack (talk) 21:08, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Have read well? My request is to create those five pages related with that incident, translating them from Japanese to English, not a revision of the "Sankebetsu brown bear incident". I've already edit their red links there.

I am fully aware of that request. It would not make sense to leave the main article it is based on in such a poor state. But the one film article I will take a look at.--Paleface Jack (talk) 23:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, but don't forget those five pages when you'll have time. Thank you very much.

Takao Yaguchi
Many of his manga series are only in Japanese Wikipedia: ja:おらが村, ja:新・おらが村, ja:マタギ (漫画), ja:かつみ, ja:ニッポン博物誌, ja:ふるさと (漫画), ja:激濤 Magnitude 7.7. Can you translate them in English, and maybe also expand his own page and Fisherman Sanpei? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.2.62.220 (talk) 10:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Can you do it? 79.16.244.59 (talk) 10:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Translations
Please, can you help me with these translations from Japanese to English: Kotanbetsu (ja:古丹別駅), Onishika (ja:鬼鹿村), Brown Bear Storm (ja:羆嵐), Japan Hunting Friends Association (ja:大日本猟友会), Hokkaido Government Police Department (ja:北海道庁警察部), Haboro Police Station (ja:羽幌警察署), 28th Infantry Regiment (Japan) (ja:歩兵第28連隊), Japan Action Enterprise (ja:ジャパンアクションエンタープライズ), Kaoru Takagi (ja:高木薫), Hokkaido Wine (ja:北海道ワイン), Karasumaru family (ja:烏丸家), Taisha Station (ja:大社駅), Motoko Baba (ja:馬場元子), Maiasa Shinbun (毎朝新聞), Champion Futoshi (ja:チャンピオン太)? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.113.11 (talk) 22:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Can you do it? 79.16.244.59 (talk) 10:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Tarticles such as these are not my specialty so, unfortionately, no.--Paleface Jack (talk) 21:56, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy Holidays Paleface Jack!
 We wish you a Merry Christmas, We wish you a Merry Christmas, We wish you a Merry Christmas, And a Happy New Year! May your holidays be filled with peace and joy. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! ★Trekker (talk) 13:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

''Adapted from Xmas6. Spread the cheer by adding to their talk page.'' Hope to see a wonderful new year of great work from you on horror articles. ★Trekker (talk) 13:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks Paleface Jack (talk) 20:56, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Varan
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Varan 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Grungaloo -- Grungaloo (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Varan
The article Varan 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:Varan and Talk:Varan/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grungaloo -- Grungaloo (talk) 16:45, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Varan
The article Varan you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Varan for comments about the article, and Talk:Varan/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grungaloo -- Grungaloo (talk) 00:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Troika (1969 film)
I hope you wont be offended if I do a critique of your prose on the Troika talk, or else can do it here. You are a VERY skilled researcher, and from following your articles have learned a lot) and while you need a little help with prose, and I do think you are inches away from producing a series of FA standard articles. I'm not a great writer myself, but do know the common pitfalls...the most common being "too many words".. which can be resolved by following this guide. Best. Ceoil (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * First and foremost, would go into edit mode in each article, CTL F for "the film" and delete as many instances as possible...most are redundant. Ceoil (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil Agreed Paleface Jack (talk) 19:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As you are writing about art films, your going to be reviewed by many snooty people who dont like false titles...so "the" weird filmmaker Joe Bloggs, not weird film maker Joe Bloggs.
 * Avoid stubby paragraphs In 1979, Troika had brief airings on television in the UK and Canada, from May to December of that year.[26][27][28]. Also re redundancy should be   "Troika was airied on UK and Canadaian television between May to December 1979." - less words Ceoil (talk) 19:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil yeah. Unfortunately, the GA Nom and peer review kinda had me do it that way, along with some other edits. I will work on it. Paleface Jack (talk) 19:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Its ok to sometimes tell reviews no and to feck off. Ceoil (talk) 22:42, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The article is only 2,300 words long - reflecting the amount of sources - I think we can easily knock it into shape prose wise in around a week if we pinpoint the types of wording that should be copyedited. Ceoil (talk) 20:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I agree. Kind putting off my edits in the Texas Chainsaw expansion for that and also cause it has gotten a bit complicated. Paleface Jack (talk) 20:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Just to state again I also have the same problems, so hopefully am not seeming arrogant or patronizing; but getting this artice right might help you a lot with bigger projects like the Texas Chainsaw. ps, hoping you might also c/e one of my pre-FAC pages in the not so distant future. Ceoil (talk) 20:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil no apologies needed. One of Gog's complaints for the plot section was unavoidable. Since there is no way of watching the film to make my own synopsis I had to rely on existing synopsis' and those are kind of scattershot in how they give details so I had to condense and modify wording to make the most sense with as few words as possible.Paleface Jack (talk) Paleface Jack (talk) 20:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Havent gotten that far in depth, but in my experience, Gog is very perceptive and thorough, so once prose issues are sorted will look at coverage. Ceoil (talk) 20:17, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Nothing against Gog, for the "Blue/Purple people" thing seems inconsistent to cap it then not if its the character names. Then again that's just me. Paleface Jack (talk) 21:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The guide is interesting, slightly vague but I see how certain portions can be shortened in the article. Paleface Jack (talk) 21:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Will look. Just trowing out there, but the imagery seems very similar to Goya's The Disasters of War series; see the lead images on both articles...have you seen any mention in the sources? Ceoil (talk) 21:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Not at all. Hobbs was always vague on things even when he was interviewed by Thrower. Paleface Jack (talk) 21:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Fuck. Ceoil (talk) 21:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * "Watch your profanity". Also just trimming superfluous fluff, yet gutted when it comes to the casting section. Character names and titles should be in quotations or no? Paleface Jack (talk) 22:31, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No re quotations. Re Goya, did any critics suggest the influence? Ceoil (talk) 22:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil not really. Paleface Jack (talk) 00:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm guessing will support this on this candidacy but two more issues:
 * You often use the same word a few times in close succession, eg with succession here.
 * I see Gog's point re the plot; sometimes you capitalize character descriptors (eg "Chef). More importantly, you mention characters without explaining who/what they are.
 * Some of that has to do with how the existing plot synopsis is written and how vague that is. The caps I have been working on fixing.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Avoid words like "embarks" which are never used in the real world and are pure journalese. Ceoil (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil Have been doing some extensive copy editing and removal of fluffed words from the article. I feel like I have done all I can to get it as best as it can be now. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. Will look again over the next day or two and update the FAC page. Ceoil (talk) 21:44, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil sounds good Paleface Jack (talk) 22:04, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If I sign off here, can you notify Gog. Ceoil (talk) 01:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil sure Paleface Jack (talk) 01:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

After much mulling and procrastination, have reverted the page back to using his section titles. The article explains where that came from, and its a confused mess without them. Wot. Next concern is how it fits into the overall contemporary art film scene, which is currently not well done. Laters. Ceoil (talk) 06:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ps, re "you mention characters without explaining who/what they are" - latitude is give on this within the plot summary, as the film itself is the source. IE you can state the obvious as to who characters are without out having a specific source saying that. Ceoil (talk) 06:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil as in the cast section or the casting section? Paleface Jack (talk) 16:34, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil Analyzing the most detailed of sources on Hobbs and Troika, which is frustratingly vague at times, I have noticed certain pieces that could be considered a connection to the art film scene. It would seem that Hobbs' "transition" from purely physical art to film he deliberately incorporates his style and art influence into them. He himself has stated that he never rewrites his scripts and has offered vague hints on potential themes and inspiration for the sections in the film (too vague for any reasonable conclusion). I think looking at the history of the art film genre and how Hobbs is connected to the avant-garde garde art form will be the best we can do for linking it all together without becoming tedious. Paleface Jack (talk) 16:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with that aim, but to note !again!, the attempt in the current version of the page to tie in the film with the late 60s/early 70s art film movement is a mess. For one thing, we get no sense of his place in it all: a fly-by-night chancer or an unappreciated genius? Dunno. Anyways, you are getting there. Besties. Ceoil (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I agree, as difficult as it is, Hobbs' early work in the art scene before film might be the key. Paleface Jack (talk) 16:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Im reading up on the area, and might be more helpful shortly. Meanwhile, a tune . Ceoil (talk) 17:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I will too. Thrower offered a glimpse into Hobbs and his work within the art scene so it gives me something to go on. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:01, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * One last thing as I can see you are frustrated by the lack of available sources; for FAC, concise is better than long. If the sources only allow a 2,000 odd word article, then padding it out is the last thing you should do. The best article have submitted is also the shortest, and nothing wrong with that. Ceoil (talk) 17:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil Agreed. For Troika, it's more about the vagueness of some of the sources that forces one to really decipher and extract the information into digestive tidbits. Length is not any issue with that particular article. On the opposite spectrum, with my TCM revision draft, I will be splitting that into separate articles because there is a literal flood of reliable sources so as to be overlong. Troika is manageable cause of the few sources that exist to make it easier (sorta) to push across the finish line. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * On that note, linking Hobbs and the art film movement is rather simple as connecting his work in fine arts and his adhering to that style fits if written correctly. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I had to refrain from making an alzheimers joke when I edited that section. Those section titles for the segments were not placed properly (I.E. Chef and Blue People). Oddly, that beginning segment is never titled by Hobbs in his interview, it's just a beginning segment that starts everything. Though I hear ya, I felt like I was having a stroke when I read the plot details provided by Thrower. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Im glad that you fixed it. And maybe that you didn't have a stroke. Ceoil (talk) 18:43, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil probably. the plot summary Thrower has in the film can be disorienting Paleface Jack (talk) 18:53, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I found something interesting. Not sure it is good enough to cite:
 * |Fredric Hobbs motion pictures--outtakes
 * Paleface Jack (talk) 01:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It's an excellent find and source. Ceoil (talk) 22:18, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I wonder how to cite it. Paleface Jack (talk) 22:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * probably web. might also look into Hobbs earlier works too for inspiration and connections Paleface Jack (talk) 22:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Look at the first ref in Black Hours, Morgan MS 493, which is also from an institute database. But yes, webcite. PS, I found a reputable video essay during the week that mentioned that Hobb's earlier artworks were influenced by Goya; I haven't had a chance to dig into it yet, but I'm hopeful that the essayist wasn't making it up. Ceoil (talk) 22:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I rered the book and it compared the earlier works to that Paleface Jack (talk) 22:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * also discovered more tidbits in the book that mentions connections to Hobbs fine arts, specifically the exploration of spiritualism. Paleface Jack (talk) 22:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Great! Ceoil (talk) 22:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * From that new source, I'd like to get the fact that the footage is "unavailable" anywhere earlier into the lead, and would switch from calling it a film with three tales/segments to "three-part". Ceoil (talk) 22:36, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil agreed. Maybe have it "three stories or tales". In terms of Begotten I am gonna redo the entire themes section in the future. Paleface Jack (talk) 22:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * "three stories or tales" implies that they are not connected, but I'm reading that they are, so to me at least "3 part" seems better." From that source also like (for lead): 16mm print, surrealistic comedy and reflective of the San Francisco psychedelic scene. Ceoil (talk) 22:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I also reread the plot synopsis and found some more info on them. makes it a little confusing Paleface Jack (talk) 22:53, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Also as the prints are now practically "lost", I wonder if we could use fair use claims to use more of the available stills. 22:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I am a bit resistant to that as I feel there is enough images there already. Maybe have the publicity stills in a further reading section, a behind the scenes still or a photo of Hobbs at the time of production could be added to the development subsection, other than that I think its good as it is.--Paleface Jack (talk) 17:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It's (sort of) art film, and Hobbs was a painter & sculptor, and the film is regarded for its visual imagery rather than its plot. If you're worried about too many images, how important is the pic of the San Francisco Art Institute vs. one that shows what the film actually looks like? Ceoil (talk) 23:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil I prefer an image of Hobbs from around the time of the film and also have one from a behind the scenes if possible. I also found another source from the time they restored it. Paleface Jack (talk) 23:25, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Great, but re an image of Hobbs, the article is about the film not him! Behind the scenes is fine, but not really what the article should be focused on. My take, is that this is basically a visual arts page. ps, the new sources you've found are great....well done :) ps, hope I'm not coming across as too cranky here, you are doing great work, and wouldn't be engaging if I wasnt impressed. Ceoil (talk) 23:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil true. As for a picture of Hobbs, I am going off of other FA film articles that do this. it shows the people behind it. considering he has not explicitly stated his inspiration, I am going off of what can be done. I know there are images that I could possibly use and there are stills that exist that I can use as well. Paleface Jack (talk) 23:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Eh, I don't think you are listening to me, unfortunately. Ceoil (talk) 23:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ceoil Oh I am. Looking back, I see a couple things I have been wanting to use. The promotional still of Thurmond fits nicely in the cast or development section. Goya has been mentioned here and there but never been taken from Hobbs himself so idk if I can use an image (It is always nice to have a specific piece highlighted cause it shows me what I can use). It's all more difficult to pin down, unlike Merhige who was very explicit in his influences. Something that inspired Hobbs is crucial (image wise) in the development section and fits well with the artistic nature of the article. Paleface Jack (talk) 00:11, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Eraserhead (another art film) is kinda my template for that sort of thing as it does that exact style. Paleface Jack (talk) 00:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hm. Turns out all his fine arts was inspired by Goya and not just one piece as far as I can tell. Not sure that helps, sadly. Paleface Jack (talk) 00:28, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Trojan Horse appears in the film, In the press book, the second slide shows it. That (might) be a good one for the development section as it ties to the film.--Paleface Jack (talk) 00:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Troika (1969 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hollywood.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lake Michigan Monster
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lake Michigan Monster 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d -- Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 03:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lake Michigan Monster
The article Lake Michigan Monster you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lake Michigan Monster for comments about the article, and Talk:Lake Michigan Monster/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d -- Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 06:04, 20 July 2024 (UTC)