User talk:Pegship/Feb2007

From Mr. Blofeld
Hey Pegship I solemnly kept my promise to stay away from categories!! I promise my "old habits" are gone forever! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Novels newsletter : Issue IX - February 2007
The February 2007 issue of the Novels 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.

Delivered by grafikbot 16:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

cfd
Sorry about the lack of strike-throughs here Pegship. I'm still fairly new to this side of Wikipedia. The context you refer to can be found over at the Organizations WikiProject. A few of us have moved forward in this scheme and are hoping to garner support amongst other wikipedians as well. It's basically just me and one or two others at this point, with me putting in the largest share of work thus far. We're moving slowly with the Project but we are moving nonetheless. Oldsoul 06:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

New stub type for films
This is about a new problem we face in films. There is a massive inpour of sub-stubs and we face the problem of core members fighting to add infoboxes to an ever increasing lot. So I thought we might create a film-sub-stub category for such sub-articles (couple of lines, plus cast at best). Like this we have a place where we don't worry about maintenance unless they get developed to basic film-stubs. I ask you before I suggest anything outrageous elsewhere. Hoverfish Talk 23:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * If "sub-stub" means a very very small article, then it's still just a stub; there are no relative sizes among stubs (and the stub-sorters would not go for creating any such distinction). Are the mini-stubs all for films in a particular genre or from a particular country? My only thoughts are (a) Whoever is creating the "sub-stubs" should be encouraged to expand the already existing film stub articles! (b) Meanwhile, maybe a little recruitment might be in order for the film project? or (c) Can we tag a category as needing attention? a couple of templates come to mind: catdiffuse and verylarge... I know sometimes the backlog seems insurmountable, but it's like the tide -- sometimes a flood, sometimes a trickle. Hope this helps - Her Pegship  (tis herself)  23:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. No, I won't go any further with the sub-stub idea. Your opinion is sound advice to me. We do try to encourage editors that bring in minis to expand, but usually they are just content with what they do. In a recent case the opposite from the desired effect was the result. As for recruitment, we got several members (look at the WP Films project page), but as the number of articles needing infobox started from 800, then went down to almost 600 and now rocketed to 900, I guess many got discouraged. Also, as Nehrams says too, many minis are not worth the effort of infoboxes. He suggests that we differentiate stub class in the talk page film template, which would mean running through all 900 articles and reassessing stubs in two classes and removing request tags from the talk page for "minis". So there would be no need to diffuse the category, as all (say) class=mini-stubs will become a (talk-page) category of their own. Of course this has to be discussed first. And don't worry about me getting tired of the stub pool. I just try to make it more encouraging for participation. I have other problems to worry about for the moment and all this is just a refreshing pastime for me. Cheers! Hoverfish Talk 11:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I know it's no stub-sorting matter any more, but if you would like to give your push in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films, I may start somewhat sooner in relaxing Category:Articles that need a film infobox from the present overload. Hoverfish Talk 18:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Infobox
Why did you remove my from The Treasure of Monte Cristo? TonyTheTiger 17:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I see you moved it. Apologies. TonyTheTiger 18:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
I've seen your edits to articles related to the Bay Area, such as The College Preparatory School, so I'd like to invite you to WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area. It's a WikiProject that focuses on improving Wikipedia's coverage of the Bay Area. If you're interested in joining, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading! — Emiellaiendiay 22:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
Right now we're focusing on tagging everything Bay Area-related. You can pitch in by adding to the top of talk pages of articles. It helps if you do this with obscure local articles others may not know of. Thanks! — Emiellaiendiay 03:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)`

ESB
I am -Storyliner is now doing a good job its just I know he is potentailly a very good contributor to films so if I can convince him that these assets are very important I know he'll do a good job! I have been equally praising of himErnst Stavro Blofeld 20:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Indiscreetdvdcover.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Indiscreetdvdcover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Port of Seven Seas
Your Pegship, I just wanted to let you know how impressed I am with your notation of the Marcel Pagnol trilogy of plays in "Port of Seven Seas." That was a hell of a good catch. Now I'm inspired to put up an infobox there just to try to compensate for my own lapse of scholarship on that one. Cheers, Storyliner 06:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Four Walls and Eight Windows
Your Pegship, you seem so well-versed in Wikipediana: can you correct the title on the entry about the late, great indy press "Four Walls and Eight Windows" to the correct "Four Walls Eight Windows" (from off their book covers)? tx Giachen

Fantasy story stubs
Thanks for your note - trust you are doing fine - I'm just leaving for the weekend so I won't respond straight away. Get to it maybe Monday! :: Kevinalewis  :  (Talk Page) / (Desk)  17:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Film-editor-stub category
User:Luigi Bob has recently been creating articles on some notable film editors and has brought it to my attention that a stub category doesn't exist for film editors. As film editors are a part of film and help to rid of red links in films please lend your support or opposition at WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. There are hundreds not stub categoirzed as editors and there are many many missing from wikipedia and I beleive they are an important part of the film making process. Thanks Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

A question on categories
Hi! Should a film article like Gentlemen Marry Brunettes have also the novel and musical categories, when no mention of them is given in the article? Hoverfish Talk 21:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and req. for sanity check
Thanks for the WSS/P closure. I am presently cogitating on a multi-stage revision to the WSS/NG to hopefully help prevent drawn-out "battles" like that. I think the first stage would be a general rewrite just to make the document actually make sense (i.e. fix clarity issues, self-contradictions, several passages being in the wrong sections, etc.), without any substantive changes. Later stages would get more substantive, probably bringing up the sports/arts kind of stuff last, since they may well be the most controversial (other-than-the-hyphenation-stub >;-) I think that might be conducive to a lot of progress instead of the continual arguing and confusion. Thoughts? &mdash; SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;contrib&#93; ツ 23:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to Stub tag!
Hello,Dear Pegship.Thanks to add and sort stub tag! Very very Thank you. I Editting That article And Explore That Cronicle. Oh! Heavy Construction and build.Will be Write more better version,and cronicle.Σ:)<Good job! --Gikoneko 19:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)