User talk:MiB-24/Archive 1

Hello MiB-24, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! cOrneLlrOckEy 17:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

24 mergers

I want you to know that I am with you on the latest ridiculous ones; this is out of control and someone needs to draw the line. I wanted to get rid of nobodies; soon we will be rid of everybody. asyndeton 17:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

It looks like this over for now guys. Head over to my talk page to view an account of what happened, but Theresa, one of the admins, has removed ALL of the merge tags from the remaining major characters. She suggested, however, that we continue to research independent and credible sources to support our stance for keeping the individual pages. But for now, it's settled. Thanks for all of your input. Angelriver 17:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps AnteaterZot is someone's special friend. And what's with all the ruckus over some TV characters anyway? Bloody, self-appointed Wiki police.....Angelriver (talk) 18:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I've deleted Lucy's tags for Mike Novick and Martha Logan. They've been there for at least 3 months, and she failed to garner any support. An admin also just deleted her merger tag for Karen Hayes due to the same reasoning. Angelriver (talk) 06:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Where is lucy whining about me? I would like to defend myself.--Lan Di (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Argh, found it, anyways, I turned her own argument against her. This should hold her off for now--Lan Di (talk) 20:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Now she's claiming I am breaking rules because I brought up POINT, which she says is irrelevant in this case. I thought all rules were always relevant in all cases. I guess when she thinks the rules apply to her view, they work, when they don't, they're irrelevant. She's threatening to get me banned now, and she can't hold an argument of her own. Then she claimed I want every character having their own page, when I countered that I wasn't in total favor of Lynn McGill having his own page.--Lan Di (talk) 03:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Cabal

Thanks for the heads up. TunaSushi (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Mediation Case on Hold

As a case is currently occurring at the Arbitration Commitee, i have placed the current MedCabal case on hold to prevent conflict occurring between any consensus that occurs at MedCab and any decisions that are made at ArbCom. I recommend you watch the outcomes and discussions that occur at ArbCom as you could be affected by them.

If you do do not want me as a mediator and wish for someone else to mediate after the ArbCom case is over then feel free to place a request on the MedCab talk page and then notify me so that i can see if your points are valid enough for me to recuse myself. I hope that this case will be dealt with soon. Seddon69 (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

RFC

If you receive this sometime soon, could you post a message on my talk page? I talked to Lan Di about someone, and I wanted your input as well. I'll explain on my talk page, thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) 06:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

• Just a reminder, drop a message on my talk page when you can. Steve Crossin (talk) 00:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Reiko Aylesworth

MiB-24, If you are going to work on a collaborative project, you should learn to assume good faith on the part of your fellow editors. I made the edits to improve the article. Chronological lists on Wikipedia are supposed to begin with the earliest item and go to the latest item. Having years span multiple rows makes the table code unnecessarily complicated, making it harder for others to edit, and harder to reorder if required. (Also row-spans cannot be properly sorted under the sortable table style.)
With respect to Shooting Vegetarians, all online source including the New York Times list it as a 2005 release (which is the dating convention used on Wikipedia for films). Regardless of when it was filmed, it has to be shown publically (such as at a film festival) or released for sale, to have a release date. Can you provide a source for a showing earlier than 2005?
Sincerely —MJBurrage^(T•C) 02:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

MiB-24, I looked over the Lexis-Nexis articles and they boiled down to the project being filmed in 1999 and 2000, followed by:

• Woodstock Film Festival, September 2000
  • Planned to show Shooting Vegetarions, "A Work in Production" by Mikey Jackson
• Nodance Film and Multimedia Festival, January 2001
  • Planned to show the "world premiere" of Shooting Vegetarians (Mikey Jackson)
• North By Northeast music festival (NXNE) June 2002
  • Planned to show a "world premiere sneak preview" of Shooting Vegetarions (This suggests that the film did not actually run at Nodance 2001.)

There was no other mention of the film until 2005, no reviews, no comments etc.

While IMDb is not perfect, it is generally pretty good on release dates. Furthermore, every source I found that dates the film gives it a date of 2005.

From all of this I would guess that the film was unfinished from the end of principal photography in 2000 until is DVD release in 2005.

Do you by any chance know what the copyright date is on the DVD, or do you know of an article that gives more detail than the above? —MJBurrage^(T•C) 05:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

In your response to the above, you say that if it was shown at a festival then it must have been complete, but the first festival listed specifically say it was still a work in progress. The second festival says it will be a world premiere, but so does the third from a year later. You can't have two world premiers. Also all of the Lexis Nexis articles and the related festival pages were written before the festivals happened. If a finished version was shown at the third festival, then why do all sites about the film including for example the New York Times say it is a 2005 release. All I am looking for is even one review or description, after the fact, of a showing from a festival before 2005. Basically a citable source to contradict the film distributor's 2005 release date. (Since Wikipedia's guidelines are for films to be listed by release date rather than production date.) —MJBurrage^(T•C) 06:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)=

MedCab Case

Heya. i was wondering whether you could be interested in continuing to participate in the 24 characters medcab case. I believe that this dispute can be resolved given a little time and more patience from the parties involved. Seddon69 (talk) 18:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• Well, hmm, probably like to discuss your POV on this case. Not on Lucy however. I'd like to see your point of view on these articles, as they stand at the moment, and why they should not be merged. Steve Crossin (talk) 01:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Reiko Aylesworth

Please take the time to read and check out the Edit summary before accusing another editor of vandalism. Your edit will be reverted. Further reverts will lead to a request for administrative review. Thank you. 99.140.227.222 (talk) 23:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, MiB-24. You have new messages at Steve Crossin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, MiB-24. You have new messages at Steve Crossin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• I've filed a request with an admin, for a possible block due to edit warring. However, things like "If you want to call for an administrator, go right ahead." only brings you down to their level. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 00:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• Well, the admin denied my request, as they haven't strictly violated 3RR yet. However, the addition of false info into an article about a living person is deletable under our BLP policy. If you have sources to back up your statement, add them in. Reliable sources will always be used over non-reliable sources such as IMDB. If any more trouble occurs, or you just want a chat, let me know. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 00:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• I'm getting an admin to do something about right now. They will probably semi-protect the article. Regards, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 01:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• Hey, MiB-24, I checked out the information, Evanston is just outside of Chicago, Il. It is either a section or suburb on the outskirts of Chicago, so both Chicago and Evanston are valid locations sincee it is on the border area.--Lan Di (talk) 13:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, MiB-24. You have new messages at Lan Di's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• Evanston is a township apparently. That means it is part of Chicago, but a particular section, so both Chicago and Evanston are correct. Evanston is just more accurate. Technically it can be said that she was born in Evanston, Chicago, Illinois.--Lan Di (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Misrepresentation

Just see what has happened on the page for Reiko Aylesworth to see examples of why good faith should never, EVER be assumed. A recent editor has ruined the page and even with I used sources such as USA Today and the Chicago Tribune, he just removed it and went back to his version.

— MiB-24, User:MiB-24 (2008-03-31)

According to the history page of the article in question, the editor didn't "just [remove] it and went back to his version." He cited reliable sources to back up the revision. That is a pertinent bit of information that you left out, to further your agenda of proclaiming that "good faith should never, EVER be assumed." Please be more objective and responsible in the future, if you choose to continue editing. Wizmo (talk) 21:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I really don't care what you have to say and I hate people who butt into a situation in which they know nothing about. --MiB-24 (talk) 22:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Leaving Wiki

Hiya mate. I wondered if you were seriously considering leaving wiki permanently? It would be a real shame if that happened. You could always just take a wikibreak. Seddon69 (talk) 12:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you want me to see if i can help out? Seddon69 (talk) 23:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

kk mate. No worries, any idea whether you'll be continuing in the 24 medcab case? Seddon69 (talk) 23:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject 24

Theres a new 24 WikiProject, well, it's being revamped. I'm now the co-ordinator. Care to look, and maybe join? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 01:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You may not know, but me and Lucy have made a truce. Additionally, I feel that she takes what I think into consideration, per her recent comments on my talk page. I'll talk to her myself, but she values my opinion, she's even asked for my opinion as well. However, that said, I'd appreciate it if you cut her some slack, to be honest. I issued her a request not to go through with a merge, and she hasnt yet. Just cut her a little slack, OK? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 17:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)