User talk:PhantomS/Archive/February 2007

Barbara Bouchet
Please add Barbara Bouchet to the category of Living People, as I believe only an Administrator can do that. Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tovojolo (talk • contribs) 10:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

Bergman
Good edits, but do we have a citation on the 1976 divorce date for Schmidt? Plenty of sites, and at least one book, give 1975. Biruitorul 01:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I had been relying on IMDB and ingridbergman.com for the date, since I could not find it in either her autobiography or the As Time Goes By biography. However, I decided to follow up by researching her obituaries. The New York Times, LA Times, Miami Herald, and Philadelphia Inquirer all had the divorce as 1975. Therefore, I have corrected the dates on the Ingrid Bergman wikipedia page, and I am going to see if I can get the IMDB listing corrected as well. --PhantomS 10:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Good luck with the IMDb; you'll need it. And thank you for making the change. Biruitorul 19:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Gösta Ekman (sr)
I just want to say thank you for your work and editing of the biography and the rest of the page; the text really became much better and tighter (and also grammatically), and the page also better looking with chapters and such! There are times when you can get frustrated when someone totally re-writes an article you created just to show off, but you did it delicately and with the main goal of improving it. Much appreciated!

Thanks again,

Nostalgia swe 14:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I was glad to, since Gösta Ekman is someone I'm interested in knowing more about. However, the article does still need references. --PhantomS 07:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Ève Salvail
Why did you move all of the references for the Ève Salvail article into the external links section? Kaldari 00:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Both the official site and web directories fall under external links as per WP:EL. The article was placing links into the references section that both policy and practice place into external links.--PhantomS 01:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:EL states that "web pages that have been used as references in the creation of an article should be linked from an article's References section." Would you mind if I move them back? Kaldari 00:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:CITE states "When writing a new article or adding references to an existing article that has none, follow the established practice for the appropriate profession or discipline." In addition, her measurements seem to be hard to verify, since IMDB reports slightly different measurements from Celebrity Sleuth. --PhantomS 04:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * After reading Biographies of Living Persons, it seems that her representative website can be used as a source, as long as the information used follows the rules, which it appears to. Therefore, I agree that the official site should go under sources, but I don't think the databases should because of the reason stated above. --

PhantomS 04:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Lauren Bacall
I'd like to thank you for your continuing efforts to make the Lauren Bacall article better. You have certainly been an important contributor there. Now, I'd like to ask if you agree with me that we desperately need more pictures of her, and furthermore, do you have any idea where we could get some without infringing copyrights? The article's pretty good but it desperately needs some illustration, and if you could help here it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!--Downtownstar 20:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree it needs more images. As for where to get them, I am able to make some fair use screenshots, since I have the Big Sleep, To Have and Have Not, and Murder on the Orient Express. As for public domain images, I'm not sure where I could find any at the moment. Since you've taken an extensive interest in the article, what would you be interested in, and I'll see what I can do? --PhantomS 20:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the prompt reply. Screenshots of these films would certainly come in handy, especially Murder on the Orient Express, seeing as there are no pics of her during her later years. I also think that the main picture should be of her and her alone, not with other people, even if it's Bogart. By all means, do enhance the article with some screenshots. Maybe a close-up could be used as the main picture? Just a thought.--Downtownstar 20:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll try to do the screenshots later today. As for the infobox picture, I think I read somewhere that it can't be fair use. --PhantomS 20:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh okay. Too bad... I firmly believe that the infobox shot should feature the person in question and no-one else. Thanks for your effort once again, can't wait to see the screenshots placed in the article!--Downtownstar 20:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added screenshots from Murder on the Orient Express and To Have and Have Not. --PhantomS 02:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It looks way better now.--Downtownstar 10:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Infobox film
You may find the improved Template:Infobox Film more helpful as it contains more categories. Regards Orbicle 09:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Old time radio "policy"?
Hi. I noticed you posted a query at the Old Time Radio article about possibly starting a wikiproject. Have you heard anything about a so-called "Old Time Radio Policy"? Some anonymous IP is going around removing links to public domain radio show webpages citing some policy that I cannot even confirm exists. You can see the damage he/she is causing here. Any ideas what this guy's is going on about? 23skidoo 21:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * From his response on his talk page about the MBS artwork being taken from his site http://www.digitaldeliftp.com, it appears to be Dnyhagen, who had a large and heated debate on the 'old-time radio' talk page a few months ago. From what I can tell from a brief skimming of the page, there were two fiercely opposed sides in the debate. However, there is way too much text for me to find out if anything was finalized into a policy. --PhantomS 23:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If it is him, it doesn't make sense to be doing these deletions from an anonymous IP. I checked and it's not as if he's permablocked or anything. And there definitely is no policy that I can see. Wikipedia makes policies on larger-scale issues such as fair use, not specifics like "old time radio". At best there would be a guideline which people can choose to ignore if they wish. If it is this fellow, he's overstepping the bounds a bit as I don't see what this has to do with a dispute over artwork. It'll be interesting to see how this develops. I've already given the anon IP a reminder to register and a subtle hint that his edits might be considered vandalism unless properly explained, so we'll see if that generates any reaction. Cheers. 23skidoo 04:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Clearly there's no end to which certain 'old time radio' proponents won't stoop to, to defame, demean, mischaracterize, misrepresent, or flat out lie about the targets of their pathetic whispering campaigns. 23Skiddoo's continual smearing of either/both digitaldeliftp.com or Dnyhagen are beneath any of Wikipedia's civility citations, and yet 23Skiddoo continues unsanctioned by the 'even-handed' editors of Wikipedia. There's clearly multiple standards within Wikipedia, most notably within the utterly commercially co-opted pages of the now infamous Wikipedia OTR articles. If 23Skiddoo wishes to continue to smear others then I suggest that anyone reading his nonsense take his utter lack of attribution, utter lack of proof, and utter lack of a rational connection to his absurd allegations with a grain of salt--if that.24.147.40.136 (talk) 06:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!
I should have thought of contacting the old-time radio fans earlier. Thank you for doing what I, in my silly stupidity, forgot to do. Badbilltucker 00:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Request...
Hey, I saw what you did about alphabetizing the articles with the Needs film infobox template, and was wondering if you could do the same for Film needs synopsis. I tried to do it myself (by copying and pasting your code and changing the names), but was unsuccessful. I would be very grateful if you could help! -Elizabennet 21:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. However, I did leave a question on that Wikiproject talk page about changing the template name and category to fall more in line with the 'needs film infobox' wording, in order to prevent confusion. This confusion would definitely show up when someone tries to manually tag 100's of articles. By the way, I am usually on IRC a lot if you have any further requests. --PhantomS 22:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems to be alright. It takes time for the database to go through each article and reinsert it into the right place in the category. --PhantomS 23:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Aligning a template
Hello. I saw you listed at Category:User_template_coder. It seems really simple, but I can't figure out how to align a template within an article. The template Politics of the Philippines has an unusual effect in every article that uses it. If used at the top of the article, it becomes full-screen and bumps the body of the article far down-screen to somewhere in the middle of the template. If it is moved to the bottom of the article, then it "behaves" by aligning itself along the right-hand side and not messing with the text. Is there a simple way to use this template so that it shows along the right-hand side, starting at the top of the article, like an infobox? I've tried several things but none of the previews worked the way I was hoping. Thank you for any assistance you can give. SWAdair 09:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * At the moment, it appears to display correctly. In addition, it looks like it was edited a couple hours after your post by Bluemask. However, if there are still display issues, could you please elaborate upon them? --PhantomS 17:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It has been fixed -- works great, now. Thank you, though, for checking and being willing to help.  SWAdair 15:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Radio
The project is now officially active. Thanks for signing on, and I look forward to working with you. Badbilltucker 16:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps after the holidays; my involvement right now is very sporadic, as in, here a few minutes, gone a while, constantly. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c)  03:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Fix It at Blue Network
Thank you for going to the trouble to, as you (accurately) say, align the pix in the Blue Network entry a bit more creatively. Eric O. Costello 22:02, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Blue Network Shows
I take it, from the request you left with me, that you'd like material on individual shows that happened to be on the Blue Network. I certainly think I can do this for Cavalcade of America, since there is quite a bit of material out there. I'll let you know what other shows I can do, as well. Eric O. Costello 02:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Actor
All fixed in rev. #97827151 - leaving the field empty, or with white space will result in the default colour, sending "transparent" will result in no colour, sending a hex code will result in that colour. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 00:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Blue Network Footnotes
Thank you for the editing efforts in the bibliography. I changed that Metropolitan pamplet to Misc., since it really isn't a book. The templates are noted, and I'll gradually slog my way through to tighten that up. BTW, I'm trying to snag a copy of the key book on the Cavalcade of America to make an entry for that. Eric O. Costello 21:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Actor
In the 'notable roles' section of the infobox, should the character's name in the role be bolded? I assume this is the standard form:

Rick Blaine in Casablanca

Or should the name be preferably unbolded? I personally prefer the bolding, but I have come across another user in an edit war over the bolding on the Jack Palance article.Fistful of Questions 01:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Personally, I've never used the field. However, in my opinion, the bolded text seems better. --PhantomS 19:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Programming skills needed
Hi PhantomS, your programming skills may help us clear out if an idea we are discussing with Nehrams2020 is possible. The problem is with short and long plots. Some like it short and don't want to find in the article too much said and some like more said. Trying to satisfy both parties (I belong to the second), we have discussed about creating separate articles for the "Extended plot", either as subpages or in own namespace. But it seems these are no options for Wikipedia. So the idea is to have both short and long plots in the article, but the long one hidden unless a "show" button is pressed. Not knowing much on programming, I thought that maybe there could be a conditional section, but you may know better. Could you help us, please? Hoverfish Talk 08:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, can it be applied to a whole section? Is there a help page on using such code? If not could you give me a clue? I'm surprized it's not used in main namespace articles but only in templates. Hoverfish Talk 09:25, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, that's great! I like it. Maybe a small text note could be added right after Long synopsis informing users that the section is actually there (like To display section, click on [show] ). I didn't even know this CSS property. The old CSS compatibility chart I'm using needs updating. I hope this saves our day in the project. Thanks! Hoverfish Talk 13:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I have aired the news in the project talk page. I gave links to the template and to your demnstration, so now it remains to be seen how it is received. Nehrams may be off the net for a few days, but it's no hurry. Hoverfish Talk 21:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
is still trying to add "weight" as a parameter too Template: Infobox Actor, as can be seen here.Fistful of Questions 23:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you edit Template: Infobox Film
Can you edit Template: Infobox Film to add an image_size parameter? It currently works and be used, yet it doesn't appear in the block of empty syntax on its talk page. Fistful of Questions 04:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems to have already been added. --PhantomS 20:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks someone else did it.Fistful of Questions 20:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The Wild One
Thanks for cleaning up the article. Just curious, how'd you find it 5 minutes after I marked it?Fistful of Questions 22:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I sometimes browse the contribution lists of people who appear on my watchlist. --PhantomS 22:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh I'm on the wishlist? Alright.Fistful of Questions 23:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You posted to the Infobox actor template's talk page, which is on my watchlist. --PhantomS 00:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Holm
I am 64.12.117.5 Ms. Holm was born in 1917. I am one of her sons. I have a few more editing suggestions. How should I do this. I can be reached at hhfarm5@hotmail.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hhfarm5 (talk • contribs).

Radio Station Callsigns
Ok, now I'm confused -- at WT:RADIO, you've stated that the preferred format for a station's article name is WXXX (FM) rather than WXXX-FM. Later, however, you reference WP:WPRS, which seems to contradict that statement. As I've already gone through and made the majority of Michigan's radio article consistant with the former, I'm afraid now that I've made them all consistently WRONG. Your clarification in this matter would be helpful. (And, btw, if there is a difference between the standard for FM and AM, please let me know.) JPG-GR 05:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I have just now read your comment on the talk page for WP:WPRS. Seems there's lots of confusion, no? JPG-GR 05:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The statement I gave earlier referenced the clarification note in the call sign section. However, you could see from the radio station wikiproject's structure section that the note and the examples didn't exactly match. Furthermore, after looking at WP:NAME, I saw that the Radio Station project needed major rewriting. Therefore, I ended up rewriting and reorganizing the entire Radio Station project page. I apologize for the misunderstanding, but the information should now be clearly presented. --PhantomS 20:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox Film
I'd like your opinion on some topics I've suggested.Fistful of Questions 23:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Your work in Village pump
The collapsible synopsis is being intensely commented in Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Collapsible synopsis sections for films. I wasn't sure if you wished to be mentioned by username, so I left it at "a knowlegeable member". There is an additional films template issue in need of tech help, but wouldn't want to dump it off on you, unless you are willing and have time for it. If so, please let me know. Hoverfish Talk 09:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, it did turn out that there is no consensus in using this method and it seems the issue of plot lenght will be endlessly disputed. I also lost interest after reading all the comments. Hoverfish Talk 07:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

New stub types
Hi - it has come to our notice that you have recently created a new stub type, Radio-comm-stub. As it clearly states at WP:STUB, at the top of most stub categories, on the template page for new Wikiprojects and in many other places on Wikipedia, new stub types should be proposed prior to creation at WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, in order to check whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies, and whether better use could be made of a WikiProject-specific talk page template.

In the case of your new stub type, it is already covered by existing stub types, and the definition of exactly what it would be used on is vague, to say the least. There is also no clear evidence that it will reach the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type. Your new stub type is currently listed at WP:WSS/D - please feel free to make any comments there as to any reason why this stub type should not be proposed for deletion at WP:SFD. And please, in future, propose new stub types first! Grutness...wha?  22:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * (Copy of my post to WP:WSS/D)
 * This stub type has to do with the use of radio for communications between parties, which is entirely different from its use in broadcasting. In broadcasting, radio is transmitted in a single direction and is intended to be received by a large audience. In contrast, in communications, two or more parties send radio signals back and forth, such as in ship-to-shore communications, airline transmissions, two-ways, etc. In addition, these communications may use special voice protocols, etc. Furthermore, in response to the post above, radio goes far beyond just communications, as can be seen by the radio article and by the hierarchy of stubs at WP:RADIO. The base radio-stub would need to cover a huge range of radio-related topics with communications only being one of them; therefore, I saw a communications-specific stub as necessary.


 * I checked through all of the radio stubs, and I did not find a single stub type dealing with radio communications. In fact, the main radio-stub had to deal with 'radio broadcasting'. Therefore, I also moved the old radio-stub to radio-broadcast-stub and made the new radio-stub as generic as possible.


 * I did not realize that I needed to propose new stubs beforehand, but, as can be seen from my post, the stub will cover an area that did not have adequate coverage, at least as far as I've been able to find. However, if an existing stub can be found that can properly cover the same material, I'll speedy delete this one. In addition, I have posted notes to both WP:RADIO and WP:WPRS, in order to dissuade other members of those projects from adding stub types without proposing them first. --PhantomS 02:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * (Copy of my second post to WP:WSS/D - first one has not been answered yet)
 * After looking at the list of stub types, there is a wireless-stub. However, it claims to be for wireless technologies, wireless service providers, and cell phones. Subsequently, all the articles that have been tagged with it have been about WiFI, cell phones, and wireless service providers. Articles about CB radios, two-ways, etc., since they do not really fall under this scope, have usually been tagged with radio-stub, originally a radio broadcasting stub. Therefore, by making the radio-stub tag generic to all of radio, all of these articles have become properly tagged, while stubs about radio broadcasting are still properly tagged.


 * As for the radio communications stub, it has a broader scope than the wireless-stub's scope, while having much less of a scope than the telecomm-stub's scope. Therefore, it covers a middle ground that was previously not well-covered.


 * As for the confusion pertaining to radio vs. wireless communications, it comes from the fact that the radio wikiproject is only about a month or so old. Originally, the only projects covering these types of articles were for amateur radio, telecommunications, and amateur radio, leaving a large number of radio articles without an associated wikiproject. With the founding of the radio project, the goal is to lessen the load on telecommunications, while also filling in the areas that the radio station and amateur radio projects can not cover because of their limited scope. As a result, radio categories need to be more than just broadcasting. --PhantomS 05:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Radio portal
Great job there! To be clear, what relevant expertise I have is more in media history generally than in radio specifically. I decided to conquer MBS largely as a result of dealing with RKO General, which in turn was a consequence of working on RKO Pictures—cinema being the area I'm most knowledgeable about. I'd certainly be happy to take a crack at writing something if you think I can be useful; I'm just not quite clear exactly what you're looking for and where on the page. Best, Dan—DCGeist 05:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Template - Infobox Film
I've never used the above until today but have a small problem that I thought you might be able to fix. Would you mind taking a look at the infobox on the article Je me souviens (film), the printing "imaqe 200px" shows up but I can't figure out how to correct it. Thanks if you can help. Phinius T2 20:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA! It succeeded, and I now have The Tools – which I'm planning to use as wisely as I possibly can. I hope I will be worth your confidence. Thanks again! :-) –m y s i d ☎ 20:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Stub upgrading template
We have created a template to help in upgrading stubs. It's in my notebook. However, since we have thousands of film stubs, we thought it would be far more practical to include it in the template, so that it shows as a separate box right under it (as it is in my notebook), only IF class=stub is given. In all other cases it should stay collapsed. You can work on it directly in my notebook, if you wish. The warning that appears over it is because it should be used only in talk pages. If I am not clear on something, please ask me to explain further. And thanks for offering help. Hoverfish Talk 08:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Good job, PhanomS! Thank you for your time. I will let Nehrams and the others know it works now and will be back when we are ready to pass the changes in the existing film template and create the new one as in you sanbox3. Hoverfish Talk 09:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems we are ready now to make the change. I notified Cbrown, as I am not sure how to go about the protection, so we will soon know. The additional template can be named Template:Upgrading needed. Hoverfish Talk 18:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I see the line you added. As soon as I find how the protection thing works I will do the change. Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 19:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed a message that was then deleted. The template is now in use and everyone is happy with it. At least no one has complained. If there's anything to be changed, please, let me know. Hoverfish Talk 08:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if the changes are about the stub upgrading or not. I left an unsure note in the tempate talk page. I would be glad if you drop me a line on it. Hoverfish Talk 08:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for being somewhat slow in understanding: in the new version will the stub upgrading be integrated (collapsibly) into the Film template, or will it keep on being a separate box under it? Hoverfish Talk 14:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for explaining. I was very busy and didn't look into it. I see you put a lot of work. Looks really good now! Hoverfish Talk 15:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Formatting issues
How do you prefer filmographies to be formatted? See Charlton Heston to see my current standard that I use for filmographies. I don't know whether or not the years should be linked or left unlinked, though I prefer linked because there's no reason not to link. Also, should the year and the film title be separated by a hyphen or just a space? Pugno di dollari 21:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Where should flags appear in an infobox? See Ben-Hur (1959 film) to see my current standard for using flags, one in both the release date and one in the country. I think country should be given, but should it be used in the release date? Some films such as The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, have multiple release dates, and I like to mention both the original and the US release. Pugno di dollari 21:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Abbott and Costello
I notice that you've removed quite a few of the links on this page. I was wondering if they fall afoul of any particular Wiki policy? I ask because I went to some of those sites yesterday and thought they were quite good. They strike me as being useful to the reader. Apart from that I do think the article needs work, as do the other articles on the duo. I have at least one biography of the team and will go through and fix and add sources and references when I get a chance. Cheers, --Silverscreen 15:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The sites limelightmovieart.com and www.clown-ministry.com are spam sites. In addition, there were something like 8 clown-ministry entries, when the max for any sites should be 1. As for fan sites, they should be kept down to an absolute minimum. I usually go for one well-representative fan site or none at all. The baseball hall of fame link was brief and wasn't notable enough to be included. Impressionist links should never be included, since those are pure advertisement. Radio logs are available in many places, and many are more complete than the one that was included. As for app.com and the web.archive.org links, they were dead when I tested them. --PhantomS 15:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for clarifying. Incidentally I have begun an article on Sidney Fields. Hope to flesh out all these articles from books that I have.--Silverscreen 15:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposed changes to Template:Film
Would it be possible for you to make the peer-review=yes to appear outside of your new template, as it does currently on the main template. This will aid in the reviewing of the article and is what is done already. Thanks, Cbrown1023 16:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I assume you wish you sandbox pages to be deleted now? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cbrown1023 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

Audrey Hepburn
Why were most of the external links on the Audrey Hepburn page deleted as fancruft? I can understand weeding down the links list as it was getting a bit long, but don't you think it was a bit much to delete all but the database links? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Megami.san (talk • contribs) 03:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC).
 * The article was marked as needing massive fancruft and spam cleanup per WP:EL. Looking at a diff, there were 8 fan sites and 1 spam site. The spam site was an automatic removal, since it was self-promoting across numerous articles. As for the fancruft, the general guideline is to keep fan sites to a minimum in the EL section; typically, there should be at most a representative fan site that comprehensively covers the topic. After looking at the fancruft, I saw one that was comprehensive enough to keep, and I removed the rest. Remember that Wikipedia is not a link farm.--PhantomS 03:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

MBS
Thank you for the many helpful comments. I'm always happy to deal with another punctuation stickler. And yes, I did find one ", with" construction where the comma was not called for. Excellent.—DCGeist 06:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:Films Newsletter
The January 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. Nehrams2020 06:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Grace Kelly
Either way, I think someone's trying to keep it a hopeless mess. Gwen Gale 23:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Geraldine Newman, Barbara Bouchet
Please add Geraldine Newman to the Categories of : Living People, English Actresses, 1934 Births and Barbara Bouchet to the category of Star Trek TOS actors.

Thank you,

--Tovojolo 18:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Jimmy Durante
Hey, thanks for fixing up that "As Time Goes By" issue. I knew it was something like that, but I just didn't know exactly what happened. 'preciate it! 216.199.161.66 02:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
I saw that article and noticed Simone worked with Steve Allen, another favorite radio personality from my days of old. My Dad and Mom loved the Allens and Dad had his radio always tuned into Allen. Ronbo76 07:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * BTW, Steve Allen could use the project tag too. I was just looking at his page. I wonder if Vin Scully has the tag. Ronbo76 07:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Allen was a pretty canny guy. He always knew you were always one day or step away from losing fame and kept his wits by jockeying back and forth, hence his longetivity. His early days, yes, were radio but he returned as evidenced by Simone's article for another stint that I was unaware of. Ronbo76 07:39, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Stub status on some articles (Dick Biondi)
I agree with your edit and kinda felt the same way. However, with my involvement in the WP:CAL project, I have seen small articles that cannot be expanded. Sometimes I want to change them to stubs but with some of our ghost towns, know that start status is as good as it is going to get.

Biondi seems to be one that with being a Hall of Famer should have more stuff but as with lots of radio announcers like Jerry Doggett, their accomplishments are not noted in the same way as actors or other notable people. Ronbo76 03:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree. Ronbo76 03:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

About Bill Cherry
Please see the article creator's talkpage: User talk:Billysea. It may be this guy had a radio connection as he claims on the talk page to know Steve Allen etal. It would be sad if that is the truth and he was a radio broadcaster but the issue of WP:COI edits might do in the article unless some other editor took over the article. Ronbo76 04:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sadly, I agree again. Do we wait for the notability issue to be resolved in a reasonable period before an AfD? Ronbo76 04:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Just found a reference for him with the search American Airlines Music till Dawn Music 'til Dawn Unfortunately this a blog type site but does mention Cherry, American Airlines, etc. Ronbo76 04:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree again. I just found a 1953 Times magazine article on Music till Dawn. This guy probably had the connection as student DJ at Tulane.


 * I have been at both ends of AfD debates - as a nominator and attempted savior. Savior usually loses out especially if a lowly editor like me is the Lone Ranger. Ronbo76 04:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have four or five articles. The notable article would be about American Airlines' contribution to old time radio with its program, Music till Dawn. Cherry would hardly be a footnote in that. The only other slight reference to Cherry I found was in a blog by another person who remember him from his WWL (AM) days. I wonder if his 2005 Texas Radio Hall of Fame is legit?


 * The Amazon site was the best one personally I found for him. It would last like WP:SNOW. I just wikified his article. Ronbo76 05:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The Book of Fantasy
You really think it is "children's literature"? --Gwern (contribs) 01:48 12 February 2007 (GMT)