User talk:Sir Rhosis

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place   on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Arundhati bakshi 18:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

All is well


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Where No Man Has Gone Before (TOS episode)
Hello. Thanks for the work on Where No Man Has Gone Before (TOS episode). You may have or may not have noticed that I've requested Peer review on it, with an eye to nominating it as a featured article in future. Any comments you might have on it, or leads for more information I could add, would be great. Thanks! Morwen - Talk 16:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

To boldly go
My understanding is that the narration in the February 1966 cut was basically an extended version of the "Captain's Log" entry that made it into the final cut.

Now, this narration :


 * "Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five year mission: to explore strange new worlds... to seek out new life, and new civilizations... to boldly go where no man has gone before."

There are memos in Inside Star Trek detailing how was developed, in August 1966.interweb has it

I think the article used to be saying that the credits narration was a cut down version of Kirk's initial narration in the Feb 66 cut : this also seems to be what you are implying in your last edit. The textual history presented in Inside Star Trek doesn't support that idea. Morwen - Talk 10:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, this edit changed

"The episode's name is the first usage of the phrase "Where No Man Has Gone Before" in Star Trek. The phrase would be incorporated into the opening credits sequence in following episodes, as part of a longer voice-over given by Captain Kirk"

to have "shorter" instead of "longer".

My intent behind this sentence is to note that


 * the episode coined the phrase "Where no man has gone before"
 * then in August when they were scrabbling around for a catchy credits voice-over they used the episode name "where no man has gone before" as part of the phrase
 * this is not in any way linked with any of the narrations at the start of "Where No Man Has Gone Before"

The 'longer' in my version is comparing the voiceover in the subsequent episodes to the episode name. I don't know what 'short' compares with : it seems to be saying that there "Space: The Final Frontier" speech is a cut-down version of some other narration, which it patently isn't. (it has somewhat similar thematic content to Kirk's log entry at the start of the Executive's cut, I'll grant, but none of the wording is the name, and we get a cut down version of that log entry in the final episode anyway) Morwen - Talk 21:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok. By the way, may I note that is an excellent resource you have there.   I noticed the other day that we had acquired a list at List of Star Trek: The Original Series episodes of unproduced scripts/stories - it seems entirely genuine and fits with material I have read elsewhere but was uncited - I wonder if you could help find a source for it?  Morwen - Talk 23:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, yes, I'd expected that might be the case. I'm wondering now as to how easy it is for other people to get hold of these scripts legitimately?  I'm guessing not easy.  Perhaps just citing that website will be the best option for now.  Morwen - Talk 23:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

If roddenberry.com is selling copies of unproduced or other people's that's certainly good enough for me (although he it may not be good enough for Harlan). Morwen - Talk 23:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Tania Lemani
Hi, what's your source for Tania Lemani being in STOGAM, please? She's not mentioned in the reference you cited, nor have I found any other corroboration. Fayenatic london (talk) 20:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. I have trouble with these Ref tags too. They have to be  around the first ref. to re-use it - note different positions of "/". Hope this helps! - Fayenatic london (talk) 22:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

penultimate
I full well know what the word means. I refer you to the Talk Page of the article in question, where I explained my position in full. Dogru144 04:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Albeit, incorrectly. Sir Rhosis 05:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Please be civil
I know that editing can get everyone hot under the collar sometimes, but it's important to remember to be civil, even in your edit summaries. This] will only inflame matters. --Haemo 07:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Cloud Minders
Thank you for your revert of my edit and your explanation. I was so silly not following the link Star Trek: Enterprise when I made my edit, otherwise I would have noticed myself that not TOS was meant. Maybe I was a bit confused because here in the german television, TOS was broadcasted under the title "Raumschiff Enterprise", literally "Starship Enterprise" – it took some time before I learned that its real title was "Star Trek", and I still sometimes mix it up... --Cyfal (talk) 15:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No worry, Cyfal, I can't count the number of little mistakes I've made. Best.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Please
Please stay away from my liver! Cheers! --Kevin Murray (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

re: your note
I saw the note you left on the Gordon Scott page about the photo. If you'd contact me through the email link on the left side of my talk page, I'll send my regular email address and be glad to upload the photo for you. I'll need a bit of where and when for the free use license notes. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

re: Houlihan vs. O'Houlihan
Maybe it's just me then.. I guess I don't pay enough attention to the dialogue. Maybe I need to listen closer next time I watch it. Thank you for your explanations. (Professor2789 (talk) 22:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC))

Tarzan Films
(copied with reply from my own talk page.—BPK2.)


 * You changed my edit about Tarzan in the original novel. Have you even read it? You stated disinformation. I referenced the first book of Tarzan, your revision was the disinformation . . . Ncsr11 (talk) 21:36, 18 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I have the novel TotA on disk. A word search shows that the word "Bowie" (as in Bowie knife) does not appear in the novel.  Any reference to a knife only refers to one.  The words "leopard" and "skin" do not appear together.  The words "temple" and "ruins" do not appear either.  So, what version are you reading that states this?  Sir Rhosis (talk) 22:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, glad to see another fan of the movies has been creating articles. I've done quite a few myself recently, including all three of Mike Henry's. Hey, I was planning to do articles on Buster Crabbe's "Tarzan the Fearless" and Glenn Morris' "Tarzan's Revenge" in the next couple days. I wanted to get with you and make sure I didn't step on your toes in case you were planning to do them. Let me know. Thanks. Sir Rhosis (talk) 07:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and created the articles. Again, hope you weren't planning to.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 12:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope, no problem. Will be interested in reading the articles. Thanks for checking. BPK (talk) 18:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, me again. I'm getting ready to do the article for Tarzan and the Huntress, so by the time you're up and read this, hopefully that link won't be red.  Wanted to run a couple things by you.  One:  I'm considering writing an article for the cheapie 1999 Sony Wonder animated film called "Tarzan of the Apes."  Yes, it was cheesy and has no voice credits and would be a skimpy article, BUT it was made with ERB Inc.'s permission and is an "official" release, just like the other animated Tarzan films.  Would you consider putting it in your Tarzan film box if I do the article?  Two, have you ever considered doing a film box (I'm talking about that big blue box you made and attached to all the Tarzan film articles, in case my inaccurate language may confuse you) for the various Tarzan TV shows.  There'd be the Ely series, the "Lord of the Jungle" Saturday morning series, the Joe Lara Tarzan in Manhattan telefilm, the Tarzan the ecologist series with the tick mark over the second "a", the Joe Lara 1996 "Epic Adventures" series and finally the early 2000s animated series based on the Disney film.  Just thought it might be something you would like to do.  I could give it a go if you don't want to, but I'm fairly slow at these things -- whenever I create a film article, I just copy and paste an old one into the new article's blank box and go through and change the names, dates, casts, plot, etc., by hand.  Anyway, I enjoy your articles.  Your plots synopses are so much better than mine -- I just put enough in there to get by with, meaning to expand them someday.  Best to you.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 09:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, Sir R. To answer your questions in turn:1. Yes, it does sound like the Sony Wonder film ought to be in the film box. If you notify me when the article is done, I will see to it.2. I think I will leave the box on the TV shows to someone more knowledgable on them; if you want to do one, it's fine with me.Thanks for the kind comments. When I've done Tarzan film articles I've usually looked for information on the films on the net, starting with the IMDb, gone through all the plot descriptions, and written a new one based on all the relevent material. I may go back and give similar treatment to some of the articles others have created where the plot descriptions are skimpy.BPK (talk) 13:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * As promised here is my review of the Sony Wonder animated film: Tarzan of the Apes.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've added it to the film box, and also corrected the preceded by/followed by links in Tarzan and the Lost City and Tarzan to take it into account. BPK (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem
You're welcome. Leonard(Bloom) 01:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I have a quick question. Do you have a copy of Shadow of Suribachi: Raising the Flags on Iwo Jima? If so, can you isolate facts used in William Genaust? That would make referencing it much easier, seeing as the 'book' citation template calls for page numbers. Leonard(Bloom) 01:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the pg. numbers! I can ref' it! Woo! Nothing gives more pleasure. :D Leonard(Bloom) 01:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

ST TAS
Is it true that ST TAS is still *Not* part of Star Trek canon? (It is featured on the startrek.com site but that is all AFAIK) I think Roddenberry didn't take it seriously even though he produced the shows. In wiki's article on it, I had removed a comment that it was now Canon...but someone (MikeW) soon reverted my edit as you can see in the article's history


 * Is my understanding correct? I could revert Mike's actions but he would soon revert mine. The url footnote Mike cites doesn't really claim that TAS was Canon...I think. (just that the star trek site now acknowledges its existence) Any ideas? PS: I've never seen the show myself but the fact it won Star Trek's first Emmy says to me it was not bad at all.

Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 04:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

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

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Tannhauser Gate. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Shadow of Suribachi: Raising the Flags on Iwo Jima


The article Shadow of Suribachi: Raising the Flags on Iwo Jima has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * fails WP:BK, I cannot find any sources that reference this book or review this book.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RP459 (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I added an outside review to the article's Discussion page. Should this be put on the main article?  Sir Rhosis (talk) 20:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That is likely a good idea. Thanks! RP459 (talk) 20:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Amazing
Love your user name, but I don't recall seeing it before today. I'm amazed you've been around so long and have so few hits on your talk page.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Sir Rhosis! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Adam Nimoy -
 * 2) Kim Crosby (actress) -
 * 3) Joyce MacKenzie -

Happy Sir Rhosis's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:47, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Re: Meyer &c.
The reason he's not on the credits are due to the idiocy that is the WGA and verbal agreements; as far as I know, we're not beholden to parrot their information when we've got better sources (that come closer to the truth of the matter). Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Logan's Run - Carrousel vs carrousel
Have a look at http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8zn8r_logans-run-1976-part-1_news and tell if if I'm wrong about the lowercase c for carrousel... Londonclanger (talk) 12:47, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I also answered on your talk page. Let it be known I admit my mistake -- I was wrong, and Londonclanger was correct.  I must pay more attention (and quit relying on memory).  Sir Rhosis (talk) 19:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Nary a worry, my good man. Would you mind awfully updating the Logan's Run page with the lowercase c. Much obliged. Londonclanger (talk) 22:28, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello again. I've just noticed a load of edits made by an unregistered user to the Logan's Run page. I feel the edits don't add a great deal apart from minor, unnecessary detail (and a copious amount of typos and grammatical errors). I'm in half a mind to undo the lot. Just asking for your opinion. Have a look and let me know what you think (I'll check back here tomorrow). Londonclanger (talk) 16:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree wholeheartedly. Worthless edits.  Undo the lot, and I will back you up if the anon comes back adding the typo-filled mess in again.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 23:14, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Is there a way to block delete all the entries that editor did? I'm getting a notification everything needs a manual edit... Londonclanger (talk) 11:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll go in and save a version of the page before his edits. Sir Rhosis (talk) 23:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Tarzan
Hi Sir Rhosis. From what I've gathered 'Tarzan and the Brown Prince' DID get authorisation from ERB to use the name. According to Steve Hawkes/Sipek, with the first one one story was that they didn't have enough money, another story was some con men our unscrupulous businessmen (tautology?) took money from the producers when they met in Rome to use the name of Tarzan and absconded with the money.

As a lifelong Tarzan fan having seen all the sound Tarzans, it was a surprise coming across it at the local cinema in Suva, Fiji in the '70s. I had read in I think, Gabe Essoe's 'Tarzan of the Movies' that there had been some unauthorised Indian made Tarzans. As Fiji has a large Indian community I thought it may well have been one of them, but was pleasantly surprised to see it. At the time it seemed a cross between 'Daktari' and 'Tarzan's Three Challenges'.

Also in all the publicity of Sipek/Hawkes dealings with his tigers on his property, Time and the Chicago Tribune stated he had appeared in Tarzan films, unlike say, the films that Joe Robinson made where he was christened someone else.

So, long story short, I strongly believe that this is an 'authorised' Tarzan, though it to my knowledge had no USA or UK release by one of their studios.Foofbun (talk) 04:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Listen, Ellen speaking. I still don't like that horrible computer animated remake to my favorite Disney movie. I don't like the plot and I hated how this happening! It's just a horrible film!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.10.118.189 (talk) 19:59, 7 November 2013 (UTC)


 * No one says you have to like it. I may hate it, myself, when I do see it.  But if you're the person who keeps adding "The film has a negative reaction" to the "Reception" section, then realize that you MUST cite it with a link to an article, a film review, or something of that nature from a reputable source.  Period, end of discussion.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 00:26, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

But there's a 3D re-release of Disney's 1999 version of Tarzan next year. Disney's working on it for a theatrical 3D re-release. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.68.17.143 (talk) 13:31, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
Even when the novel is the novel of the film? I'm pretty sure that a novelisation of a film is still canonical. Not picking a fight, just asking a question. a_man_alone (talk) 08:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * No fight at all. We just reasonably disagree.  The authors often flesh out the screenplays with their own material, especially Vonda N. MacIntyre.  I've seen novel info put into sections called "Apocrypha" sections.  Perhaps you could do that.  Best.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28
Hi. When you recently edited Savage Sam (1962 novel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native Americans (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) 15:18, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

List of The Twilight Zone episodes
You may be right. But when a drive-by deletes something without explanation, I generally take it to be vandalism. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:24, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David Gautreaux


The article David Gautreaux has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Harry the Dog WOOF  09:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Space Seed
Although your change is appreciated, I was hoping the nominator would fix it himself per my concern expressed in the review. In any case, it's fixed now. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 05:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

You lost me there. Nominator? Edit to add: Just saw the second message with a link to the page you referenced. Thanks. Sir Rhosis (talk) 05:51, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries; thanks for your excellent edits. Viriditas (talk) 06:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Quentin Smith (American military) redirect
While searching for Quentin Smith, I came across this redirect, at first I thought of placing a Hatnote because of two similar title-sharing pages. But I'm quite puzzled as to its relation to the target article, could you elaborate? It seems unnecessary and if it's distantly related, maybe it should be RFDed or CSDed? Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:57, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm honestly at a loss. I do not recall ever seeing this article before or having redirected it.  Perhaps I did, but I don't remember.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 16:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Then I shall CSD it, per G8 or this discussion (or if that isn't appropriate, RFD it). Hope there's nothing else regarding it. Good day, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:57, 20 July 2014 (UTC)


 * The only thing I can think is perhaps one day I saw that the name incorrectly directed to the philosopher, also named Quentin Smith, and that this Quentin Smith had no article of his own, but rather was connected to the Tuskegee Airmen, so maybe I directed it there. Best, Sir Rhosis (talk) 17:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

YahwehSaves
I'm not sure if you can facilitate, but I might also suggest keeping an eye on YahwehSaves, continuing to use 75.79.31.20 as a sockpuppet. I'm active-duty military, so I can't dedicate the time necessary to back-track/research all the uncited/unreferenced/original content edits made (Chesty Puller, George Armstrong Custer, Fergie Jenkins, "A" Device), some resulting in edit wars. He's been disruptive for years, I just don't have the time to pursue him anymore. Sorry for any inconvenienceBullmoosebell (talk) 02:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry it has taken me a while to respond. I agree with you.  I hate his pedantic rewording.  For example, he feels a need to constantly put something like "They raised the flag and flagpole" in all the articles having to do with the famous Iwo Jima photo by Joe Rosenthal.  Christ, just say "They raised the flag."  The articles already describe how they used a pipe for a flagpole, so one can easily assume that they didn't raise the damned thing without it being attached to it!  Sir Rhosis (talk) 04:28, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit reverts
Hi Sir Rhosis,

Thanks for mentioning in the edit summary the reason for the reverting of edits.

The idea was posted on the talk page of Talk:List of The Outer Limits (1963 TV series) episodes to see if there was any consensus, but there was no input for about 2-3 weeks, so content was redirected according to the guideline of Be bold.

FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 01:32, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tarzan of the Apes (1999 film)


The article Tarzan of the Apes (1999 film) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "No sources, may fail WP:NFILM."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kirbanzo (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion implemented
I was just reading over Adam Nimoy's page and found that you'd made a suggested correction waay back on 15 June 2006. I can report that apparently an unregistered user (67.160.103.11) changed one digit in the IMDB entry on 2006 July 17 at 13:28, and it now points to the correct article.

Figured you'd want to know. WesT (talk) 20:29, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Little Arliss cover.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Little Arliss cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION : This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:05, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Flag-raisers graphic
Hi there. To clarify this edit of mine that you reverted, I trimmed the from the article until it can be corrected or recreated at Commons. Rene Gagnon is listed by name in that graphic. I'm hoping that an editor at Commons can simply identify the flag raisers by position number instead of name, since the image has had to undergo a number of revisions. — WFinch (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Got it. Sorry for the revert.  Yeah, God knows any day now, research will prove that Harlon Bloch or Mike Strank isn't in the picture.  FWIW, Ira Hayes is easily identifiable in the Genaust footage, and Strank is not wearing his helmet, just his soft cover, but by the time the picture was snapped Strank was all but totally obscured.  Posting this on my talk page and yours.  Best.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Star Trek TOS episode numbering
The episode numbers listed in all the articles are correct based on when they first aired on American television. People who watch Netflix and see the season and episode number listed there think they are correcting our articles by changing the episode number to match Netflix's. However, this is incorrect, as Netflix numbers "The Cage" as episode number 1 when we know that The Cage never aired as part of the original series. So all of Netflix's TOS numbering is off by one. We see this "correction" all the time for TOS episodes and have to revert the edit, just as you did. Thanks! StarHOG (Talk) 13:18, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I guessed it was because of "The Cage." I also seem to remember that "Space Seed" and another episode have for years been listed in the wrong order, but I don't know enough to change one way or another.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 22:07, 19 October 2021 (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) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ulysses Paxton


The article Ulysses Paxton has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines -- character does not seem notable independently of book"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Moriwen (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Logical quotation (WP:LQ)
Hello. Please do not make unexplained reverts of edits that aren't vandalism, especially when I provided a reason for my edit. The comma doesn't belong inside the quotation marks because it's not part of the song title. It appears you've been a registered editor since 2006 so I would think you would know about our Manual of Style telling editors to use logical quotation on all articles, regardless of the variety of English they are written in. See WP:LQ, which is what I linked to in the first place. There was no reason to make an unexplained revert of this. Also not sure why you decided to revert it considering if anything, I was making the article consistent with how it renders punctuation outside of quotation marks—there are no other instances of commas or periods inside of titles or sentence fragments on the article.  Ss  112   08:57, 30 September 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) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Joyce Muskat


The article Joyce Muskat has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Doesn't meet notability under WP:AUTHOR. Known only for writing one episode of Star Trek. Her biographical details can be included in the article for that episode."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Muzilon (talk) 09:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Agree with merging her page into The Empath. Not really sure how to do so.  Please go ahead.  Sir Rhosis (talk) 09:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Re: The City on the Edge of Forever
The "Writing" section in "The City on the Edge of Forever" still has a lot of unsourced claims, many of which are perceived as controversial. It would sadden me to delete it. Any chance you can help add sources to avoid this? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 20:36, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * How's that? Sir Rhosis (talk) 21:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Much better, thanks. Any chance we can source the entire paragraph with citations? Viriditas (talk) 22:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)