User talk:Alientraveller/Archive 1

Welcome

Hello Alientraveller/Archive 1 and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you've chosen to join us. This is a great project with lots of dedicated people, which might seem intimidating at times, but don't let anything discourage you. Be bold!, explore, and contribute. Try to be civil by following simple guidelines and signing your talk comments with ~~~~ but never forget that one of our central tenets is to ignore all rules.

If you want to learn more, Wikipedia:Tutorial is the place to go, but eventually the following links might also come in handy:
Help
FAQ
Glossary
Manual of Style

Float around until you find something that tickles your fancy. One easy way to do this is to hit the random page button in the navigation bar to the left. Additionally, the Community Portal offers a more structured way to become acquainted with the many great committees and groups that focus on specific tasks. My personal favorite stomping grounds are Wikipedia:Translation into English as well as the cleanup, welcoming, and counter-vandalism committees. Finally, the Wikimedia Foundation has several other wiki projects that you might enjoy. If you have any more questions, always feel free to ask me anything on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Draeco 19:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings

First and foremost I would like to thank you for your additions to the Lord of the Rings article. Any help we can get is great and you have made valueable contributions. In addition I would like to add that if you plan on working on middle-earth articles in the future that you join WikiProject: Middle-earth. All of this aside, however, I would like to notify you that as agreed on the talk page for the LotR article your section has been removed. The reasoning behind this is three-fold. A. We are currently attempting to cut size from the article instead of lenght it. This is due to the article's FAC which is currently in process. Which leads be to B. We are attempting to show the article is stable and large additions like yours do not help in this. C. As said, it was a large section and I believe it best you make an article for. Themes of the Lord of the Rings would make a great article in my opinion and could be linked to from the main article. I hope you see the reasoning behind this and assuming you do hope to work with you in the future. If you believe the section needs to be re-added please say so on the talk page, or even mine. Thanks and good luck, SorryGuy 05:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Edit Summary Request

I have noted that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! -- Kukini 19:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Hulk (comics)

Thank you so much for your work on this article. I really appreciate it. --Chris Griswold 08:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Superman Returns

Would you care to explain why you keep reverting and destroying the referencing format on this article? CovenantD 20:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Batman

I put the 'bringing elements of Son of the Demon' bit back in, though frankly until Grant Morrison actually DOES it in such a way that we say 'yes, indeed, that's canon again', it's a little more spec-ish than I'd like to see. Bygones :) FYI, I made a LOT of other changes, trying to clean up and not duplicate information all over the place. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 19:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Speculation

It's not good form on a wikipedia page to leave spec or 'original research' on a page. Your comments, about how his attitude may stem from certain events is speculation simply becuase Batman hasn't said in an issue 'Too many people I like get hurt.' Sure, it's insinuated, but it's unconfirmed speculation at this time. And that's why it shouldn't be in the article. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 19:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

spiderman

Whats wrong of keeping indian spidey. That helps people to know that there is india version. I put it back in see also. Don't delete it. Are u mod here? or just doing it for yourself?

Star Trek XI and 3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.

I've already reported Jkress613 for violating the 3RR policy. I've had to cease reverting lest I violate the policy myself. Still waiting for an administrative response. --Erik 19:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I was reverting the changes that Jkress613 made, just like you've been doing. Don't attack me. I know he needs to write properly. --Erik 19:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Trivia on The Dark Knight

Please read the Avoid trivia sections in articles policy, especially the Other policies apply section, which reads: "It is not a dumping ground for speculation, rumor, hearsay, invented 'facts', or libel." The Talia Al Ghul rumor should not belong, unless you want to involve all the other casting rumors that have ever surfaced regarding the sequel. Furthermore, the Penguin rumor is scooper-based, and a refutation by the director doesn't make it article-worthy. Should we mention that because Nolan cast Ledger, Adam Sandler was overlooked for the role? Trivia should be kept to a minimum. --Erik 15:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen Wikia?

If you want to go deeper into SciFi, they have a number of good wiki projects, including Memory Alpha, Marvel Wikia and Lord of the Rings

Hell yes

I would be glad to work with you on Raiders and LOTR, although with regards to LOTR I'll probably work on the films instead. I don't know if you're aware of this, but there's an Empire Magazine issue coming out with interviews with almost every single cast member of all three Indiana Jones movies; a gold mine of references right there! Can't wait to work on these articles.--Dark Kubrick 14:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings film trilogy Class

Sorry, you're right, I think the article is better than B-class. I was just giving grades that seemed applicable at the time because there were a ton of unclassed film articles, but now I see it is probably A-class. I'm sorry if you feel I was under-rating you, it's just that there are very few A-class film articles, so I wouldn't have automatically given you A-class. The other two levels higher than B are GA & FA (Good Article and Featured Article respectively), and articles have to be voted upon to get that status. Cbrown1023 19:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the article cannot be nominated to A-Class unless it gets at least a GA-Class film rating, I suggest you find some way to nominate it for GA-Class or for a peer review. I am moving it back to a B-Class (not because of its content, but it can't be considered a A-Class until it gets GA-class status). Cbrown1023 22:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I nominated it for good article status. Just to let you know because you cannot pass or fail it since you are huge contributor to it. If it reaches Good Article status, you can list as A-Class on the grading scale (or GA-class, but A-class is higher). Cbrown1023 23:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

If it does not become GA for some reason, the editor will leave a list of reasons for failure and ways to improve it. You can then take it up with the editor or on the talk page. Cbrown1023 21:24, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The person who grades it will put suggestions on the page if fail and put pass if it passed. Then you can talk to the editor about it on the editor's (who we don't know yet) talk page or on the article's talk page. So if it fails, it will give suggestions for improvement on Talk:The Lord of the Rings film trilogy. Cbrown1023 20:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, the page is a Good Article. Cbrown1023

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Image use

Hi,

Based on advice from you, Oskar Mayer Nguyener and Peta, I recently overhauled the use of images at Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Originally there were 24 images in the article. 17 images have been removed in the past few days. That means that the article has only 7 fair use images left (and two free use ones). The remaining fair use images have been given detailed rationales on their respective pages. The seven images left are all very low resolution (I personally replaced high resolution ones with low resolution versions), and are (not in order):

Screenshots

1. A screenshot of the logo, - in the infobox (I feel that this image is very important to the article)
2. Buffy taking on a vampire in the Format section (this section talks about how the show was structured around Buffy's battle against supernatural evil, and the screenshot illustrates that battle)
3. Sunnydale High the main setting for early seasons in the Setting section (Sunnydale High - the school in which most of Buffy was based for the first three years - I feel that this image is very significant to the feel of the series, since for 3 years every single episode had many scenes in this fictional setting)

Promotional photographs

My own opinion is that these four promotional photographs have been delibarately circulated by the copyright owners who only stand to gain from the use of such images.

1. Gellar as Buffy from the unaired pilot in the origins section (I feel it is useful to have a photo of Gellar as Buffy early in the article, and I feel this is very appropiate to the origins section , since it is the first time Gellar was acting as Buffy. I also think it is useful to have an image of Gellar as Buffy early in the article, so that readers unfamiliar with the topic can have an immediate idea of what Buffy 'the Vampire Slayer' Summers actually looks like).
2. The cast as their characters in the Main characters section. Once again I feel it is useful to have an image of the main characters, and allows unfamiliar readers to have a reference point in their minds to what the characters look like.
3. Angel - in the secion about the spin-off, Angel
4. Cover: Buffy the Vampire Slayer #1 comic series. Whedon has said that these new comics will be an official and canon continuation of the television series, and therefore I believe this particular comic is very important in relation to the TV series.

I think that the remaining images illustrate parts of the series in a way that words cannot: I carefully kept only the images which I felt really belonged in the article and removed those I thought the article could manage without.

I hope I have addressed the issues you brought up, and you are willing to offer your support at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but regardless thank you for collectively (along with other users) bringing to attention the problem in the article. -- Paxomen 02:24, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Hiya, do you think the reform of image-use in the article means that you might be willing to strike through your comments about images at the Buffy article at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buffy the Vampire Slayer? -- Paxomen 22:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

GA Nominees

I'm glad to see you nominating articles for GA. However, I would like you to review the "How to nominate a page" section:

“ If you believe an article to be good according to the 'Good Article' criteria:

1. List the article at the bottom of the relevant section below using the syntax: # {{article|Article Name}} ~~~~ with an edit summary of "Nominating [[Article Name]]"
2. If the article is longer than 32 kB, add '''LONG''' to it.
3. Add {{GAnominee|24 May 2024}} to the nominated article's talk page.

When you nominate an article, please consider also choosing another article from the list to review.

”

Thanks for all your future contributions, Cbrown1023 23:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I am here with regard to more or less similar topic, so I let myself comment here. You have recently nominated Cyberman for GA. I left some comments on the talk page following that nomination, and in the course of the discussion we've had there we have established that perhaps it might not be the best to nominate it, as it is almost certain to fail unless significant changes are made, and there is little chance they will within a reasonable timespan. So, this nomination could potentially consume quite a lot of some reviewer's time with a certain negative outcome - therefore, I would like to ask you to take a look at the talk page and consider withdrawing the nomination. Bravada, talk - 01:44, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yes Minister

Hello. Thank you for nominating Yes Minister for FA, and your comments. I'm glad to see you think the article's worthy of that status!! There are many things, though, that need doing to it before it gets FA. Would you please consider withdrawing the nom for the moment? I don't know how it works... I'd expect you just leaving a message on that page saying you'd like to withdraw should be good enough. The JPS^{talk to me} 11:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for helping on the Alien article! Good work! - Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 18:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Using citation templates

If you have three pieces of information spread out in an article and have the same reference to cite all three pieces, start with the first piece of information in the article. Instead of <ref>, type <ref name="source">, and enter the rest of the information like usual (e.g., <ref>{{cite news | first=John | last=Doe | url=http://www.johndoe.com/ | publisher=John Doe | date=[[2006-09-30]] }}</ref>). Instead of "source", have something that's unique about the reference, such as part of the title or the author himself. After citing the first sentence, instead of using the same command again with the second and third pieces of information, just put <ref name="source" /> (with the space and slash) after the sentence. You must have the full citation in the first sentence. If you have <ref name="source" /> for the first sentence, then have a full reference later, Wikipedia won't be able to identify where the citation for the first sentence points. Hope that helps. Just look at the citations at The Dark Knight or Spider-Man 3 to see how they work. --Erik 18:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Heads-up

Hey, I appreciate the good-faith edits you've been doing. I'd like to give you some tips on using the citation templates, though:

• You can use "cite news" instead of "cite web" for online news articles. "Cite web" is generally for online items that you can't really subscribe a date to, like budget information for a film, for example. Both present slightly different formats, so please use "Cite news" when you can.
• "format=" is generally for identifying the file type of a URL. For example, if it was a PDF, then it would be format=PDF, or if it were an audio file, then it would be format=MP3 or whatever the format is.
• "work=" does not generally have to be used unless... well, I can't think of any off-hand examples, honestly. I don't think when we cite articles, we really have to worry about using that.
• "authorlink=" does not need to be used if the author does not have a Wikipedia article of his/her own. Just adds unnecessary red to the article, you know?

Just wanted to give you a heads-up on that. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 15:11, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Half A Year into Middle-earth is delivered as a news source, so you can use the "Cite news" template for that one. Use the "Cite web" template "specifically for web sites which are not news sources," basically. An example of when to use the "Cite web" template is the first citation at Spider-Man 3, which uses box office data. Hope that helps, keep up the good work. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 16:02, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Just to remind you, Cite news template is used for online news articles. Cite web template is used for something that doesn't have a date attached to the publication, like Rotten Tomatoes movie reviews or BoxOfficeMojo box office information. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 18:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The Cite news template can be used for magazine articles, too. You just don't have to fill out the url= attribute; you fill out the pages= attribute instead. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 19:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The Night Surfer

Can you go to the Spider-Man 3 talk page and write down the sentences regarding the Night Surfer from Empire magazine? A fellow editor and I are interested in the context in which Night Surfer is mentioned. --Erik 01:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Autobot Zack Snyder Bob Gale Forgotten Silver Nuke (comics) G. B. Blackrock Kraven the Hunter Cybertron Two-Gun Kid Jhiaxus A Scanner Darkly (film) Last Autobot Dead Marshes Marton Csokas Hellion Teletraan I Wonder Woman (film) Eldamar Bob Budiansky

Cleanup Minas Tirith Healing factor One shot (comic) Merge Elf (Middle-earth) Tolkien fandom Dwarf (Middle-earth) Add Sources List of highest grossing films in Canada Elita One Allspark Wikify Jetix Magazine Marvel Masterpieces National Information Infrastructure Expand Devil's Due Publishing List of supervillainesses List of superhero teams and groups

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 12:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Batman #1

Just to verify... at The Dark Knight, how do you know that Heath Ledger is referring to Batman #1 when he talks about the Joker's eyes vs. his laughter? Is there any source you can direct me to? --Erik 22:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I assume you got it from Stax's "Dark Knight Detective Work" article at IGN. I included a reference for it (since it hasn't been included in the film article at all, anyway) just to avoid original research. Hope this is agreeable. --Erik 23:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

LotR film trilogy terminology

(repost from the article's talk page)

Concerning terminology - we should only limit ourselves to what the films say, and omit details appearing only in the book. For example:

• Orlando Bloom as Legolas, an Elven prince who accompanies the Fellowship. He is an accomplished fighter and archer.

Is Legolas identified as a prince in the films? If not, we should only use archer and fighter. It should be rephrased as:

• Orlando Bloom as Legolas, an Elven archer who accompanies the Fellowship. He is an accomplished fighter.

Similarly, with

• Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins, Frodo's (much older) cousin.

If Bilbo was only called Frodo's uncle, we should use uncle.

Is the term "Rangers of Ithilien" used in the films? The merchandise uses "Gondor Rangers" or "Gondorian Rangers". If "... of Ithilien" wasn't used, we should use the merchandising terms.

Sorry, I've never seen the extended versions (unavailable), so if these terms are actually in those versions, I understand. Uthanc 12:31, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Uthanc 13:28, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Will You Tolerate This?

Hello. I hope you don't think I'm being too rude in nominating this page for deletion, but I just don't think that the series is established enough, after the broadcast of a single episode, to merit articles for each episode. If the parent article eventually becomes too long then sub articles may well become appropriate, but I think for the time being there's not a great deal of merit in creating these. Please don't take it personally, and I hope you're not offended at my view. Angmering 19:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, we'll see. I'm perfectly happy to go with what the majority think. :-) Angmering 19:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Response to questions

1.This is basically copied from Wikipedia: Subpages, but I'll post it here for convenience: To create a User subpage:

1. Edit your user page and add a link like [[User:USERNAME/name of subpage]] or just [[/name of subpage]] and save the page.
2. Then click on the new link; the text box that appears will allow you to edit the new subpage.
3. Put whatever you wanted to add there.

Please note that links are case sensitive.

I'm not sure if there's a limit on how many personal subpages you can have, but what can they do to you, huh?

2.I'll take a look either later tonight or tomorrow and give you some comments. From a quick scan it looks like the article is coming along great.--Dark Kubrick 20:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you still need some images for the LOTR film trilogy article? I'd be glad to help if you give me some suggestions.--Dark Kubrick 02:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Buffy nomination restarted

Since you have were involved with discussion before at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buffy the Vampire Slayer, you might appreciate knowing that the nomination for the Buffy articles has been restared at the same wiki page. I am letting everyone know who might not be aware (whether they were for or against the article becoming featured). Cheers -- Buffyverse 22:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

FOTR: What Happened???

I was working on updates on this article in the Differences section and saved them only to see you deleted the section???? Please restore. Thanks edwpat

Thanks

Thanks for extra = on PR of Banksia integrifolia Gnangarra 15:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The Dark Knight

Sorry about reverting your theme edit today! I really didn't read the citation closely enough -- was a bit too tired to actually focus on the words in the news article. So I'm glad you were bold and put it back in. I moved it to the beginning of the paragraph and re-worded it differently, so hope you don't mind. Otherwise, I like the changes you made to the casting information -- "Casting interests" does work better as a subsection, and we didn't need subsections for individual characters that may or may not be in the movie. Hope the Lord of the Rings work is going well -- I've seen a lot of LOTR edits in your history! --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 02:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

Hiding Talk 18:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Wizarding world

I disagree with your edit summary on Wizarding world. I have commented on the talk page. Please provide a response on the talk page. ColourBurst 15:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Image problem

I honestly don't know. Have you tried posting your problem on the help boards?--Dark Kubrick 22:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

When I click on the link you give me, it says "Forbidden. Error 403". But you say you're uploading it from Microsoft Word? Try putting it in Paint and uploading that file.--Dark Kubrick 22:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I've uploaded some images from the LOTR films: a pic of the Balrog and Gandalf, and two images of the ringwraith sniffing out the Hobbits, not sure which one you want, so here they are:

That third one isn't showing up for some reason, just click on it for the full image. Also, make sure you put these in an article soon with a fair use rationale, as they will be deleted soon if they don't find an article as a home. Any other images I'd be glad to get.--Dark Kubrick 21:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Novels Collaboration of the Month

You supported Doctor Zhivago, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 11:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

FA layout recommendations

Not sure exactly why production section feel small to you. The only other FAs that I've been able to find that have bigger sections are Casablanca and the various horror movies. However, it's not worth discussing because it's about how broad the information is, not the size of it. Let's just say my production sections are..... comprehensive. ;) Anyway, how much should write on set stuff? Accidents? Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh, sounds like trivia to me. But I don't know what the information is (as I haven't read the article yet), so you'll have to be the judge of whether it's encyclopedic or "interesting but not important". Filming locations are perfectly relevant and should be included. Weather? Only if it impacted the filming to a great degree. I write about in the A New Hope article, and even than I think it's only a sentence or two. It's not particularly encyclopedic if they were delayed by one day by rain. However if a tsunami comes along, and they end having to rebuild sets or move to another location, that is most likely encyclopedic. The Filmaker 14:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• I'd also suggest putting the production section on top, not only is it a personal preference of mine, but it's normally done to keep the infobox from extending into the synopsis section. If you do move the production section up, I think you could fit another photo in the synopsis section. :) The Filmaker 14:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

"Would it better to take information from a Design section and respin it into a 'Cultural references' section for ROTK?"

I was only able to skim through it, but I don't see enough information to fill out a whole section on cultural references. Your best bet would be to keep it the way it is.

"How would TTT look if I made the article focus on different areas of the film? ie. an entire section on Helm's Deep from script to film?"

Normally, I format my production sections to be in order of events. Therefore, one paragraph would focus on one area. The only time I would section off an area would be if the area had an abundant amount of information, or was not directly connected to any of the other information, but still belongs in that section, i.e. the Cinematic influence section in A New Hope. The Filmaker 16:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Superman sequel

You know you can't just removed tags. I put the "hangon" tag up for you so that it wouldn't be speedily deleted, but you need to go to the Talk Page and plead your case as to why you think the page shouldn't be deleted. Bignole 20:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

What happened with the sequel article? Did an admin ever address your concerns? --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 19:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe you could take it up with another admin, perhaps one that's aware enough of film articles to understand IMDb's unreliability and that there were multiple citations about the film's production. Maybe you can create a user subpage like my future articles citation listing and have the citations on there. I don't know if it's allowed to work on articles in user subpages to import at a later time. If you need a second opinion in addressing this manner with the admin, let me know. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 19:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILM. Find someone on one of the project's talk pages that's an admin and active. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 19:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

You helped choose Environmentalism as this week's WP:AID winner

AzaBot 18:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Environmentalism

Hi! The recycling icon actually was the image there until a few days ago. Someone changed it to the blue marble, which is a huge improvement. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 19:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:MovieVenom.jpg

Hello. Thank you for uploading Image:MovieVenom.jpg! We appreciate your addition to Spider-Man 3]. However, the image has no source data, and this makes the image's copyright status ambiguous. The summary "Leaked images of Venom in Spider-Man 3" is also curious. Please provide a source for the image and alter the summary as needed. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Uncited edits

I noticed that you reverted Kieranthompson's edit about the DVD release for Casino Royale. My suggestion for the future is that if someone, especially a registered user, makes an uncited edit, you can leave a {{ subst:needsource }} template on their talk pages so they can fully understand why their edit was reverted, and what they can do to remedy that. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 18:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Image request

Image:Rotkcombined.JPG. Here you go. I'm personally not entirely convinced as to the utility of this image, so I'll leave it to you to justify its inclusion with the other editors of that article. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 19:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you'll find the current version acceptable. The fiery sword image is most definitely from the extended edition. It's right before he "breaks Gandalf's staff." Just so we're on the same page, you get that I uploaded a second verion, right? You don't have to re-upload anything. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 19:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

No. It's the right one. See here. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 19:24, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

You helped choose Islam as this week's WP:AID winner

Dev920 13:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Simpsons movie talk page

Are you sure about the "TV series" bit? People are also discussing the movie, and if the TV series is singled out as what's wrong, it sounds like it's saying that it's OK to do so. _si»abhorreo»^T 22:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

...? _si»abhorreo»^T 12:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Removing tags

Please do not remove tags from images, such as you did to Image:VESPER.jpg, without resolving the underlying problems. Thanks. --Yamla 16:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Cheers

Dude, I have to applaud you for all your prolific contributions to Wikipedia. I like what you've been doing with the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and I appreciate the effort you've been making to keep film articles like Casino Royale and The Prestige in shape, not to mention keeping Transformers from backsliding into an uncited fanboy mess. So you get a special spot under "Wikipedia editors worthy of my respect" (don't worry, it's listed alphabetically) on my user page for your contributions. :) I'd do the Barnstar deal, but I don't really feel like looking into what that takes, so, this should do instead. Keep up the good work, and let's get Batman Begins into shape together. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 17:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

In regards to Transformers, I think that there are various bits of speculative statements throughout the article. I've listed some below:

• "It is unknown if Cullen will also reprise Ironhide, though he read both parts during his first of two auditions." The citations could be re-arranged to say that Cullen audited for both Optimus Prime and Ironhide, and that he was confirmed for Optimus Prime. Don't say anything about Ironhide until something comes up.
• "Those roles will require new talent, though there is no evidence that they would have received the parts if still living." This is pseudo-speculation. Just say that the original voice actors are deceased.
• "Despite some reports it is extremely unlikely that his voice will be used for any of the Transformers in the final cut." Who determined that it was extremely unlikely? Too POV.
• Production section seems fine, though a little dry (as it's probably expected to be). Maybe you can tie some information together for more full paragraphs, as that seems to be popular with FA-class articles.
• "Lorenzo Di Bonaventura admitted they attempted a computer generated version of Optimus Prime's comic book look, but it looked ridiculous." Specify that the "looked ridiculous" comment came from Bonaventura. Otherwise, it seems like a fanboy's having his own take of it.
• One subsection for Release? Can anything be broken down, or can it all really fall under just Release? Also, sentences in Release can be grouped together for more full paragraphs.
• References that are specifically online news articles need to be rewritten under the Cite news template, such as JoBlo, IGN, ComingSoon.net, etc. Some citations' date= attributes need to be wiki-linked to be formatted correctly for registered users' visibility.
• Maybe it's just me, but I have an issue with linking to forums (unless a moderator posts an interview in a new thread, like the Heath Ledger interview on Newsarama) and also image servers such as PhotoBucket. It seems unprofessional to link to such unreliable sources, even though the images within can be seen as verifiable. It's just that I don't think this Wikipedia article needs to stay that on top of the game by linking to leaked content. The only way to implement leaked content, in my opinion, is to ensure that the citation has been published as an article instead of being linked to forums or image servers.
• Cast section's wikitable looks like it needs fixing... there's a third narrow column that's probably added by mis-formatting.
• Plot section could be rewritten to sound more in-universe. It's a mix of "This source reported that so-and-so happened" and "So-and-so happened."

Sorry if that's a lot to change, but I've been generally hands-off this article 'cause I'm just not familiar at all with this franchise. Batman Begins looks good for the time being, but I think there's more that can be added (maybe so that the Production section can stand on its own and that its subsections can become their own sections with enough content). Good luck with ROTK. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 23:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Casino Royale

Hi there, just wondering if we could come to some sort of an agreement over the cast list on the Casino Royale page. I disagree that the short biogs are much better. All of the details about a specific character can be found by linking to the page in question. Also, trying to write a small piece has the problem of being occasionally subjective, giving away spoilers, and not being particularly detailed. For an encyclopaedic entry it is much more useful to find out the minor characters of the movie through publication of the entire cast list. This was the level set by the pages for the previous 20 Bond movies. Would be interested to hear your opinions on this. All the best. MrMagoo 05:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Invite

User:Clamster5/Invite Clamster5 21:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Casino Royale trivia section

I realize original research is bad, so maybe it would be possible to re-add the trivia section saying "such and such MAY BE a reference..."? Also, is the movie itself allowed to be used as reference material? I know not every source is on the internet.--Katana314 21:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

It's about time someone did! Great work, keep it up man. :) ↔ ANAS - Talk 09:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

New section on "The Prestige" talk page

Please look at the comments I've added to the talk page for The Prestige. Some of them repeat earlier comments in different places that you may have missed. Feel free to participate in discussion there. Cognita 02:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

E.T.

Sorry man, I don't even have the film on VHS, let alone DVD. I'm useless.--Dark Kubrick 17:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

I'm lost: how does a motion picture article rate "high importance"? RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It was my understanding that the importance rating was supposed to be an approximate measure of someone or something's importance to the grand scheme of things on this planet. It was a decent event as motion pictures go and it made teenaged girls swoon over Depp and Bloom but, if my understanding is correct, this couldn't rate better than a "low". :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, missed that; I need to read. Still, in the grand scheme of motion pictures (grin), I'd tend more toward medium. ;) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Eh... (wink) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

X-Men

Why did you change the article class to A? --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 19:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Re-ranking film article importance

I'm curious by what standards of "importance" Korea's first full-length animated science-fiction feature and the first Korean film to receive full digital restoration, and a film by Korea's equivalent of D.W. Griffith and Orson Welles rolled into one both rank "low," while a recent Johnny Depp action flick ranks "high." The only standards I can see in which this works are those of cultural myopia, and the sort of "judgment" which ranks Bartók lower than the Rolling Stones because the Stones made a whole buncha money... and cool people don't listen to Bartók. Unless the Film Project explicitly states current American blockbusters and pop cinema are all there is to cinema, then Korean cinema should be included, as well as other national cinemas. And Na Woon-gyu and Robot Taekwon V are cornerstones of Korean cinema and animation. To your credit, you seem to have at least heard of Kenji Mizoguchi... and even do him the great honor of ranking his importance in the scheme of cinema as equal to Pirates of the Carribean. Rizzleboffin 20:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, Wiki-newbie. I'm not bothered by your changing the rankings to "low" on these subjects just because they are my contributions. I find it unbelievable that Mizoguchi could be ranked anything below "top" in any kind of film project, but I don't think I've worked on that one at all. What bothers me is that these rankings seem to be highly subjective, and based on "Have I heard of it? / Do I like it? / Do people here know it today?" rather than an objective judgment of actual importance in film history. I've never seen Robot Taekwon V, and I doubt it's of very high artistic quality or originality, but literature and the judgment of Korean writers, as well as its historical position make its importance to Korean animated film undeniable. Na Woon-gyu's films are all lost, so of course they are not popular, though they were highly popular in Korea at the time. Even if one of his films were found today, it would be of interest to only a small group of film buffs. But still, the importance of his films and their influence on Korean cinema-- which is important in world cinema, and therefore in a film project-- is undeniable. But I'm not sure how important these rankings are anyway. Just thought I'd sound off a little. Have a good day. Oh, and listen to some Bartók sometime. Rizzleboffin 21:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Storm (comics) as Good article candidate

Hi, I just modified the cites as wished, using WP:FOOT. In particular, the cites are now directly after the punctuation, the web links are according to WP:CITET, and I added the publisher in the comic book references. I If you have anything else, just let me know! —Onomatopoeia 13:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I now corrected the tense when talking about comic book content. Real-life content is now past, comic book content in present / perfect. If you have anything else, just let me know! —Onomatopoeia 16:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I now corrected the offending POV sentence as requested, plus done some additional copyedit. I am looking forward to your input. —Onomatopoeia 14:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for moving it up to GA, and thanks for your numerous constructive criticisms. If I have time, I'll also try my hand in kicking it up to FA. I think that peer review and collecting input / feedback first is a good thing, and if you have some ideas on dealing with comic-character-related FAs, just let me know. —Onomatopoeia 15:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jurassic Park

I'd suggest just winging it. There's not really a template for extras on DVDs, including commentaries -- the references at FA-classes Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, and Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith just kind of set up something on their own about DVD commentary. Doesn't seem like there's a standard template for that kind of thing. Maybe WikiProject Films should work on making a template for DVD as it'd be specific to them. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 16:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

U2 Picture

Please leave the picture of U2 as it is. The picture back to which you changed it is a copyright violation. —ShadowHalo 17:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Chocolate Hills

During the dry season, the precipitation is inadequate such that the grass-covered hills dry up and turn chocolate brown. This transforms the area into seemingly endless rows of chocolate "kisses", hence the name in reference to a branded confection. --Pinay06 22:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

They are covered in green grass that turns brown during the dry season, hence the name.----Guest818 00:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The Fountain

I could use some input regarding The Fountain. Someone put the article up for review of its GA status. You can see the review at WP:GA/R#The Fountain, my rebuttal at Talk:The Fountain, and my message to the nominator at User talk:Kessingler. I feel that I've addressed all the claims the nominator has made (especially the "unsourced" one, which blows my mind). Please offer your insights and any possible compromise as well. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 15:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Appreciate your input. Also, in the peer review, I responded to your suggestion about cast information for the film. While franchise films would have fleshed out cast lists especially with characters that already had pre-existing articles, The Fountain is really a singular film where some roles aren't incredibly notable (like three in the list are lab technicians who don't contribute in any major way to the story). Your take on this would be appreciated. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 18:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Storm (comics) -- preparing for FAC

Hi there, I just put up Storm (comics) (the one you awarded a GA for) up into the peer review section (Wikipedia:Peer_review#Storm_.28comics.29) in order to prepare for FAC. You stated in the Storm (comics) talk page you already had some own ideas, so if you could drop a line (Wikipedia:Peer review/Storm (comics)/archive1), that would be great. —Onomatopoeia 18:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject

Since your big on the Jurassic Park editing please check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Jurassic_Park and consider joining.