User talk:Sugar Bear/Archive08

Juggalos Wiki
I didn't even know of the site. I will certainly do some work over there.Juggalobrink (talk) 13:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2009 Newsletter
The July 2009 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Ralph Bakshi FAC
Hi there, I don't know if you've checked in on the FAC page recently, but I don't think the article is far away at all now. A few minor prose tweaks notwithstanding, the only issues are ones that will require your access to the offline sources. I list them here for clarity: Many thanks, Steve  T • C 15:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Does "Ralph became fascinated with the city's structure" refer to the architecture or something else, like its social structure?
 * Does the source tell us what his father's "business opportunities" were? Is it the family store? Did they set up the store right away?
 * The description of Bakshi's job says he removed "dirt and dust from animation cels as a base level position"; it's not clear whether "base level position" refers to Bakshi (i.e. in a low-level position in the company), or the cels in preparation for some another procedure.
 * Your comment here is unacceptable. Steve is a veteran FAC reviewer (as well as primary author of a featured article). To call his legitimate concerns, even if you disagree with them, "nonsense" reflects poorly on you. I suggest that you redact/refactor your comment ASAP. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The FAC has been closed as not promoted. Suggest that you (Ibranoff) work with Steve and DocKino to address the issues brought up at the FAC before re-submitting. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * archived the nomination, not me. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Flickr
I've been wanting to use some images from a user on Flickr, and I was wondering if you could be of some help. I know the images should be uploaded onto Wiki Commons with the user's permission, but I couldn't find any page on all of the details of how to correctly upload the picture and cite the user's permission. Do you happen to know if there is a page anywhere that can help me with this? Juggalobrink (talk) 13:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's great, thanks. Juggalobrink (talk) 02:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter
The August 2009 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

System of a Down
I believe that an RFC for the genre is about to go up again, since you were one of the ones finding the consensus I'd just thought I'd let you know.-- SKATER  Speak. 21:12, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The RfC is now on. I'm looking forward for your comment on the RfC so the genre could be settled. Solino  the Wolf   10:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Duk Da Fuk Down
I've undone your edit to DDFD (changing it to a redirect), as the AFD has not yet run its course. Cheers,  I 'mperator 22:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Archiving
I noticed that when you tagged Talk:Cool World with the ClueBot that it immediately archived all the recent conversations, was this the intention or an unforeseen consequence? It looks like they were still potentially active and the page didn't seem large enough to require an archive. Tyciol (talk) 12:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting
The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter
The September 2009 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

You are acting in bad faith
Your edits to various albums are borderline defamatory. I made none of the edits you are undoing, some of which have you ADDING progressive rock into the genres table.

I have the feeling that you are only looking to pick a fight. Please read WP:Consensus to understand that consensus is not determined by the minority view, especially when the sources disagree with that minority view.

If you continue to dig out my edits specifically, yet not even undo them, I will go to the admin noticeboard, as you are masking your revisions behind false summaries. Thank you. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  20:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Howard the Duck feedback
The Production and Release and Response sections both need considerable re-working. There's a lot of solid material here, and everything appears to be well-sourced, both very good things. The article also has the makings of an excellent story, great failures being as interesting as great successes. The downside is the writing, often within sentences, but also between them, meaning how things flow and fit together. It seems that at every turn the writing takes off in another direction, and that's not always because of a change in subject, rather the lack of care in how information was added over time. In many cases where this is true, routine editing (re-writing sentences and changing words) can resolve style problems without having to make any appreciable changes in substance. While that may be possible here to some degree, there are too many instances where you'd have to be able to access the sources for clarification and additional material. This is also true in places where the meanings or implications aren't clear and need to be straightened out. I don't want to be discouraging, but I see only two ways to get this up to GA standards: to have a team of editors who know the subject, have access to the sources, and can work together in making wholesale changes or to empower an editor (who also has access to the sources) to do a clean sweep without having to deal with too many objections from other editors. That's my input for now, though I'd be happy to provide additional feedback. I'd also be willing to take a whack at a couple serious edits, for example, revising some paragraphs. At the very least, that would give you some concrete examples of the type of re-working that I think needs to be done. Feel free to respond on my talk page. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 05:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)