User talk:You've gone incognito/Archive 5

Orphaned non-free image File:XX (2017) poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:XX (2017) 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) 17:35, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

British posters
It was once that quad posters were used almost exclusively. Now one-sheets are used just as much, and the poster I have uploaded for Bohemian Rhapsody is British. Okay? —  Film Fan  11:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected having just read Empire magazine's article on the design which states 20th Century Fox UK as its source. Will revert shortly, sorry for this inconvenience. Tks,  Slightlymad  (talk &sdot; contribs) 13:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:More.ogg
Thank you for uploading File:More.ogg. 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) 01:04, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Film leads
If you're going to do something like this, then you need to repair the lead to have this information somewhere else in that section, as it's key information about the film. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Employee of the month
I don't like it being used more than once, especially when someone says, "What is that Item?" When it should be "What is that Thing?"

Diabolik poster
Hey slightlymad, I changed the film poster for Diabolik back to an Italian poster. Per WP:FILMPOSTER, "Ideally, an image of the film's original theatrical release poster should be uploaded and added to the infobox". Per discussions in the past on File_talk:Mill_of_the_Stone_Women.jpg, we try to keep it the earliest theatrical public screening we are aware of, in this case, its the Italian one. If you have any questions, just hit me back on the articles talk page or on my talk page. All the best. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:02, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Jill Valentine
Hi. I noticed you commented at Jill Valentine's FAC1, which was a long time ago, so I understand if you don't want to get involved again (or even remember commenting in the first place). But JV's FAC3 was dismissed on the basis that I hadn't contacted previous commentators, so I've gone through all previous FACs and "peer reviews" and tried my best to address any issue which had ever been raised. I'm happy with the article as it is now (in that I believe it meets the featured article criteria), but I'd appreciate any feedback from any previous commentator. Is there something I could improve before renominating? Would you be into commenting at FAC4? I'd ideally like to address every issue anyone may have before renominating, so the FAC can be as uneventful as possible. ;) I'd appreciate your feedback, if you have the time. Cheers. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:53, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I've had a quick glance at the article and it looks extremely well done. However, I would suggest consulting new pair of eyes to have a look, such as FAC regulars on prose,  on sources, and  on images., with whom you've had the pleasure of meeting, crafted an unofficial essay titled FAC, Sources, and  You which is a neat guide on how to survive a strict source review (which is how I think it should be) so you ought to have a read of that. I thought I'd share that essay with you since I remembered Nikkimaria pulling it in a successful FAR some time ago; his/her prerogatives are most likely influenced by what is written there. Don't tell these editors that I sent you to them, though. Hope that helps, and best of luck achieving the coveted FA status. Tks,  Slightlymad  (talk &sdot; contribs) 07:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. You may have just provided me with the last piece of my puzzle: I had no idea who the FAC 'regulars' were, but their presence may go some way in tempering the "sexism" debate, so it'd definitely be a good idea for me to contact them before renominating. As much as I believe the article meets FA criteria, I'm still expecting a battle, unfortunately. This may end up helping quite a lot. Cheers. Homeostasis07 (talk) 17:36, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Novitiate film poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Novitiate 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) 18:12, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diego Llorico, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Filipino ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Diego_Llorico check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Diego_Llorico?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Ronin Theme.ogg
Thank you for uploading File:Ronin Theme.ogg. 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) 01:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Roe v. Wade (film)
Hello! Your submission of Roe v. Wade (film) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:55, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

The Hills Have Eyes
I can see that you are very interested in films and I was wondering if you would like to review an article I nominated for GA: Wes Craven's The Hills Have Eyes. Thanks for your consideration!MagicatthemovieS (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2018 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS

Darna (upcoming film)
Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Darna (upcoming film) has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, @Slighlymad, can you add 3 production companies in the darna wiki since jerrold tarog is the one working on it and in the list of star cinema films wiki it's already in the associated production company list — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcolacson (talk • contribs) 05:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry. Per WP:UGC, most wikis including Wikipedia are user-generated; as such, they are not considered as reliable sources. Wikipedia prefers citing independent sources to verify claims added in the website. Tks,  Slightlymad  (talk &sdot; contribs) 06:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tranquility Base Hotel &#38; Casino (AM).jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Tranquility Base Hotel &. 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) 18:47, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018
Please do not make personal attacks against other users, like you did to me with | this edit. Name-calling is never a constructive way to settle a dispute. Songwaters (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * What personal attack? You accuse me of personally attacking you because your ego was hurt for calling you out on your needless "good-faith" edits? Other stuff exists; meaning consistency between articles is not necessary as long as the edit in question is correct and constructive. It's you who's duplicating an ungrammatical sentence on film articles and I told you to stop doing this; rather, you deleted my talk post because you're afraid to admit your mistaking and then template me for "personal attack" because you want your ego fed. Yea, how about you assume good faith? Now, stay out of my talk page before I report you for harassment. Tks,  Slightlymad  (talk &sdot; contribs) 03:50, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Ben Shapiro
Shapiro, however, in a 2016 interview with The Rubin Report's Dave Rubin, described himself as "basically a libertarian."

What I added was something he said about himself in an interview with someone notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article, then I cited and linked the interview in question. I don't see any problem here, so perhaps you could explain to me what it is. Qehath (talk) 17:17, 29 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Since it's been almost a full day, I've put this back in. It's not controversial (unless allowing people to describe themselves to independent interviewers is controversial) and it's not unsourced. I've added your talk page to my watchlist, so if you have any further concerns, I'm happy to hear them. Qehath (talk) 14:12, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Jack Em Popoy: Puliscredibles
Hi, Please add distributor Star cinema in the information since the list of star cinema films included the film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcolacson (talk • contribs) 04:03, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I looked it up myself, and Star Cinema does not list the movie on their website at all, . Thus you should stop re-adding this claim in the article; otherwise, you may be banned. Tks,  Slightlymad  (talk &sdot; contribs) 04:12, 12 December 2018 (UTC)