User talk:Shoemoney2night/Archive 1

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:OnNoticeDead2Me.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:OnNoticeDead2Me.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Please be careful

When you created a recent AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Colbert Effect) you inadvertently deleted the <!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list --> hidden comment at the top of the list. A lot of automated scripts look for this when adding entries, it therefore broke at least one automated script "Twinkle". I've corrected it now so no harm done, but please be careful when making edits to these sort of pages. Many thanks.--WebHamster 17:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Freaky...

I was drafting a rewrite of the Jed Bartlet article only last week. And now you've done one. How utterly and incredibly freaky. Nice work so far! Brad (talk) 11:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Kudos

I'm a frequent contributor to a lot of the The West Wing-related articles and I wanted to tell you that I think you're doing a really great job in expanding and improving those articles, especially with the "Character development" sections you're adding to articles about individual characters. It's really helping to give the articles an out-of-universe perspective, which they need. Job well done! --Hnsampat (talk) 04:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The West Wing pilot script

FYI, the link to the script for the pilot of The West Wing that you posted on several West Wing character articles doesn't work. (It comes back with a "page not found" error.)

Also, I noticed how you wrote that Leo's name in the original draft of the pilot script is actually "Leo Jacobi" instead of "Leo McGarry." Interestingly, "Leo Jacobi" is the real name of actor Lee J. Cobb. Do you know if this was an intentional nod by Sorkin? (It seems like Lee J. Cobb is the kind of actor Sorkin might look up to.) --Hnsampat (talk) 16:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I'll fix that now. I didn't even make the Lee J. Cobb connection - There's nothing in the script to suggest that it's an intentional nod, although it sounds like the kind of thing Sorkin might do. Shoemoney2night (talk) 21:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Henry Spencer.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Henry Spencer.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Duck Soup peer review

Hi there, Shoemoney2night! Seeing how you like comedy, I've now submitted Duck Soup for peer review in order to find out some better ways to improve the article's (and other Marx Brothers articles) quality. If you're interested in leaving feedback, you can go to the article's talk page and follow the link. Thanks. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 22:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Shoemoney2night/Userboxes/WGA2 userbox

Thanks for this. Happy new year! miranda 09:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Colbert_Report - 2008 writers/staff

Hiya, Shoemoney2night. Thanks for cleaning up and filling out the writers. But i have a question. I saw the show that night and while i'm certain Tiki Barber is not on staff,... he, Kevin Bacon, and others were introduced as such. My question is, where/what is appropriate notation of the joke that these folks were on staff? it may be that that's just not ecyclopedic-info, which would make sense.

Regardless, you are clearly well informed; are there resources elsewhere with specific information on given episodes? thanks for your expertise! Iggynelix (talk) 05:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem! Personally, I'm not sure whether a mention of the joke is strictly encyclopaedic - it seems a little trivial to me. However, if you're looking for information on particular episodes - or, for that matter, anything Colbert-related - you can't go past No Fact Zone and its sister site, Colbert University. The former in particular has a fantastic, comprehensive episode guide. Hope that helps! :) Shoemoney2night (talk) 05:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nakedpicsoffamouspeople.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nakedpicsoffamouspeople.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: The Colbert/O'Brien/Stewart feud

Y'know, your message couldn't have come at a better time, since, as you have already expressed, you are a fan of all three comedians, too, and I was really just about to call on you to help me with the development of this article. What I thought was particularly interesting about this feud is that it publicly, if not somewhat ironically, reveals that these three are actually pretty good friends — they're supposed to be competing for viewers and ratings, and, although they indeed are, they actually decide to help each other out by dragging an admittedly silly idea to absurd, hysterical lengths.

But, then again, maybe it's just because I'm a fan of these guys... :)

With that said, however, could you at least give me time to really finish the article. As I pointed out in one of my edit summaries, I wasn't through expanding the articles as of yet, and still intend to add information concerning public reception of the feud and its immediate aftermath (which should, I hope, help establish its notability). Perhaps you could help out in that regard? Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I have seen the outtakes reel[1], and I've always wished there were some way I could embed that video on my userpage; it is very funny, indeed — especially at the beginning when O'Brien realises that he could have seriously hurt Stewart with that real beer bottle! :)

Concerning the notability of the "feud" itself: I'm pretty much done transferring the information concerning the "feud" itself, and will now focus on the media's reaction to the feud, as well as the ratings increase and public reception that resulted of it. I sincerely hope that will establish the notability of the article's subject, but then again...

Oh, well! I'm not going to have time to do that tonight, anyway. The shows are about to come on where I live, so I apologize for not being able to flesh the article out any further at the moment, but I've run out of time for the day's session. :)

Thank you for your comments though. I truly appreciate it. d:-) --Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source for Image:Tds cast 2007-1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tds cast 2007-1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 16:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: The Daily Show

Hi, future correspondence can go in the GA subpage. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 04:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The Good Article Medal of Merit
		I'm gonna give Shoemoney2night a tip of my hat and award her this Good Article Medal of Merit for her tireless work on bringing up The Daily Show article to GA quality. Congratulations! d:) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 15:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh wow, thanks! I'm really flattered! (Heh, I'm actually a girl, though. ;D) Shoemoney2night (talk) 15:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoops! *facepalm* Wow, I feel stupid now, especially after looking at all the obvious clues you have on your userpage. *bangs head against the wall*... Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 15:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha, no worries! :) Shoemoney2night (talk) 15:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

While I'm at it — and I hope you won't mind my asking — what are your favorite Daily Show moments, past and/or present? -- Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 15:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Now that is tough. The Prince Charles banana thing is always a winner, as well as pretty much anything involving Stephen cracking up/cracking Jon up (Ted Hitler! Goat-ball lickers!). And, though it wasn't actually in the show? Stephen's "Requiem For A Show That Was Daily" always kills me. ("This men's room is empty now... oops, sorry." I am SO immature.) Steve getting drunk was hilarious, as well as pretty much all the Even Stevphens. I always love Jon's interviews with Denis Leary and Jeff Garlin... and his utter pwnage of Chris Matthews never stops being awesome. Ooh, there are way too many. How about you? Shoemoney2night (talk) 16:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the Prince Charles banana scandal is definitely one of my favorites, as is the now-classic "Even Stevphen" where Colbert and Carell debate religion (it always kills me). Another funny "Even Stevphen" I like is the last one they had, with Ed Helms in the place of Carell — Helms was actually able to make Colbert cry ... gold! Another favorite of mine is the "toss" in which Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart, and Rob Corddry are arguing over The God Machine — it makes me kind of sad, though, that I wasn't introduced to the show until after Colbert, Carell, Corddry and Helms left, but John Oliver and Jason Jones are doing an excellent job themselves. More recent faves include, of course, that silly fight with Conan O'Brien, "Baracknophobia", and Jon Stewart's gad-awful Gitmo puppet sketches. There are many more, of course, but I guess I was able to narrow it down to these. :) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha, anything that results in Stephen fake-crying is utter gold (I don't know if you've seen Strangers With Candy? His character is inclined to weep in the middle of classes he's teaching and it's pretty much awesome). And the Huckabee brawl, of course, was wonderful. I'd love to see some more of Demetri Martin and Kristen Schaal - I saw her when she was in Melbourne for the Comedy Festival and she is utterly hilarious. But John Oliver is incredible. Pretty much anything he does is bound to crack me up. His pieces on blatantly political children's books and English as the national language killed me. Shoemoney2night (talk) 17:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I've yet to see Strangers with Candy, but I've heard good things about it. Maybe I'll do some Googling and watch a clip. And yes, John Oliver is incredible. I don't know if you caught yesterday night's broadcast, but it really looked like he was about to break character and start cracking up in the middle of his piece — you could see Oliver straining to keep a straight face for a little while there!

Speaking of such, I haven't seen much of Samantha Bee lately, which is a shame; I think she did an excellent job taking over the "This Week in God" segment from Colbert, another excellent sketch I'd like to see brought back. I hope they'll give Bee more airtime in the near future, what with her signature segment discontinued and all. One other thing: I've always enjoyed the "Even Stevphen" videos, and I've recently been wondering if Carell and Colbert were considering doing a brief cross-over reunion or something. Maybe Carell could make a cameo on The Report and engage Colbert in the "Formidable Opponent"? Or maybe Colbert could intrude during an episode of The Office? One can only dream... :) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 18:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Strangers is delightfully wrong. Most of the episodes used to be on YouTube, but Viacom unfortunately put an end to that. I suppose Sam's going to be relatively scarce for the near future on account of her pregnancy but I agree, you can never go wrong with more Bee! As far as a Colbert/Carell team-up goes? I saw an interview with Steve in which he said they'd discussed the possibility of having Stephen guest-star on The Office as Jan's ex-husband, creating a little rivalry with Michael. Which would pretty much be the greatest thing ever. And they sometimes say they might resurrect Even Stevphen for a charity thing or something. I personally had my fingers crossed he'd show up on The Report while he was promoting Get Smart, but I suppose they did do that podcast together which was almost as good. Shoemoney2night (talk) 02:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, if remember correctly, Carell and Colbert did publicly reunite at a promotional event for Get Smart the weekend it came out, during which Colbert, in character, cracked jokes at Carell's expense. Which reminds me — Maybe it was Steve Carell who gave Stephen that horrible face injury!  :) — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, wait — that was what you were referring to [2]... Eh, I need more sleep at night... :) — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 23:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha, it's okay! I think Stephen actually said that he hurt his face in some kind of boating accident? But a dramatic Even Stevphen encounter sounds cooler. Or maybe he and Conan have been at it again with the fisticuffs.  ;) Shoemoney2night (talk) 07:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

(LQ2M) Maybe so. After all, once O'Brien replaces Jay Leno next year, he and Colbert will be directly competing for ratings during the 11:30 pm slot. It'll be interesting to see how that plays out. :) — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 17:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Doug Anthony All Stars.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Doug Anthony All Stars.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? J Milburn (talk) 13:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Paul McDermott (comedian)

The article Paul McDermott (comedian) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Paul McDermott (comedian) for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Cirt (talk) 23:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for reviewing it, really appreciated! -Shoemoney2night (talk) 02:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Daily Show FA

Are you considering going for FA, now that you've fixed the comments in peer review? The only comment you appear not to have fixed was about campusprogress which looks to be a reliable source. Tom (talk) 14:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I've been trying to get some help with copyediting before I submit it for FAC - I guess I'm a little unsure about how to proceed with it because I've never had any experience with FAs before. -Shoemoney2night (talk) 02:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for not getting back sooner. I remembered I'd written this here and remembered you might write here rather than my talk page. I have little experience with getting articles promoted to FA, particularly recently, though I've looked at the process and been involved in getting some delisted where they don't meet the current standards - i voted Ludwig Wittgenstein for promotion a long time ago. There don't seem to be many similar tv shows that have a featured article, which might help an idea of the standard Category:FA-Class_television_articles. there is this: Stephen Colbert at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner, it's some while ago that it passed FA. my understanding is the main thing for an article to pass FA is that it must have a professional standard of writing that is engaging - comprehensive so every main point has elaboration and detail; and have solid sources. i'd have a look at wp:FACR, the guidance there, Wikipedia:Compare Criteria Good v. Featured and articles that are currently nominated and what people are criticising about the articles that have been nominated. let me know if you want any help on any projects and i'll try and get round to a copyedit on the article asap, Tom B (talk) 23:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Shoemoney2night/Howard

User:Shoemoney2night/Howard, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shoemoney2night/Howard and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Shoemoney2night/Howard during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response to that discussion - I do now see what you were intending with how the userbox was written and it's nice to know it wasn't actually intended to be an attack. But I'm sure you can see how it may appear to someone less familiar with Australian politics, so thanks for agreeing with the consensus at MfD. Cheers! ~ mazca ^{t | c} 20:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem. It honestly hadn't occurred to me that the userbox might get misconstrued by non-Australians, and I'm sorry if it caused any trouble. -Shoemoney2night (talk) 20:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)