User talk:TriiipleThreat/Archive 3

Active discussions

Chaos War

You're very kind. Thanks. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the accolade! Heaven knows you deserve one for your work on the various Marvel movies.
Yeah, sure, Siege. Good idea. Now that it's over, people will be a little less rabid to include every newsy update. Plus, we'll have perspective. Gimme a day or two, though! :-)  -Tenebrae (talk) 20:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Good idea. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Siege still needs some cleanup, but the heavy lifting, I think, is done.
When you get a chance, let's get together and talk about footnote style. I'm not sure about using two different styles of footnotes in the same article, as there seem to be at Chaos War.
Onward! --Tenebrae (talk) 03:52, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Ah. Differentiating between primary sources and other sources. Hmmm ... I think you may be onto something there. Let's expand on that at Chaos War since it's started there, and then show our results to other editors to see what they think.
Sandbox. Right. Geez. I forgot all about it. I guess in this case it was tagged and talked about and so egregious that no harm was done. Sandbox would have been the more reasoned way to go in most instances, like JHenderson and I did with Spider-Man's fictional history. Ah, well ... no harm, no foul, as they say.
And very nice it is to work with you. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:59, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Congrats

  BARNSTAR AWARD: I award you this token of esteem and respect for your tireless and careful work and your high standards of accuracy in Marvel movie articles especially. You represent the best of what Wikipedia is about. - Tenebrae (talk) 22:58, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Giants in Thor template.

Ok whatever works for you. The main reason why I left them in enemies is definitely they are a part of his rogues gallery. Anyways happy editing. Jhenderson 777 17:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I didnt mean to step on your edit. While Thor has fought the Giants as a group on many occasions, they are all not his enemies including his brother Vidar and his step-grandmother Bestla. They have also allied themselves with Asgard a few times.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
True that. I don't feel you stepped in my edit. What you have explained is one of the few reasons why I thought you did that and it's understandable. Jhenderson 777 19:44, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Critics

Please do not remove the paragraph break between review aggregation websites and individual critics. The gap is intentional as these two things are quite different.

Most editors also include a gap between the largely postive and largely negative critics. Very good or featured articles go further and look at the film based on how critics response to the writing, the cinematography, the effects and many other quite different details so it may be approrpriate to have more paragraph breaks. If you disagree with this feel free to discuss it at WT:MOSFILM. -- Horkana (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Films based on comics task force

Hello, hope you are doing well! I am noticing that the articles about films based on comics are in good shape. I am wondering if you think that it would be worthwhile to launch a task force, a collaboration between WikiProject Film and WikiProject Comics. The benefit of the task force would be to consolidate discussions about films based on comics, to share references or to call attention to discussion at a specific article. We could also have sub-guidelines, such as perhaps standardizing the "<comic book character> in film" trend and determining what's worth covering in such articles. I have not really done a head count of people who are actively working with such articles, but I know that you are one of the key contributors. Do you know how many others work especially on these articles and if a task force would be useful to everybody? Let me know your thoughts! Erik (talk | contribs) 14:31, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure I'd be happy to help out. Ive actually thought about it in the past but I have no idea how to set-up or run a task force.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey, me neither! It is worth trying out. Another idea for the task force is that we can list all the incubated articles in one place so we can know what is actively being addressed. We will be getting films based on comics for the next few years, so I think it would be useful to track it all. I'll identify the primary and active contributors of such articles, and we can start a discussion at WT:FILM, which I'll link you to. Anything to add before I do that? Erik (talk | contribs) 14:39, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Well one issue I think we need to resolve is notability, it seems since The Avengers film project was accepted I've seen a lot of film articles pop up effectively rendering WP:NFF null and void. Some of have just gotten by the issue of an abundance of reliable sources by labeling them a stub article. I think we need to determine approximately how many RSs on a topic it takes to merit inclusion in article space. This actually might effect the entire project but comic films tend to get a lot preporduction coverage in the media.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:57, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking about this as well, especially with the latest news about The Dark Knight Rises. It's the kind of film that warrants an article because every action related to the project will be followed pretty closely. What articles have been created despite filming not having begun? It's that kind of question that can be discussed by the task force, especially when we can track the general trend of such films. Such a film by Nolan is more certain to get made than First Class (which still weirds me out about the 1960s setting), which has stumbled a couple of times. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Very true, all good reasons to start a task force. Some other editors I think we should invite to the discussion for the formation of the task force include -5- (talk), Fandraltastic (talk), Jhenderson777 (talk), J Greb (talk), and Tenebrae (talk).--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the names! I think I will put together a sub-page which can serve as the first draft of the task force page, so we can provide our ideas in a structured way. I'll start a discussion at WT:FILM linking to it and inviting the editors you named. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Here it is: User:Erik/Films based on comics task force. Will start a discussion momentarily. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:42, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Here we go! Erik (talk | contribs) 16:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

BTW how many participants do we need before we can officially get started?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:21, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

We could launch it now, actually. I was hoping that a couple more editors from the batch you mentioned would join up first. So we can continue building up the page and adding content for all in the meantime. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:45, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Thats fine, we can give them and other editors more time. Its more important that we launch correctly than early.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:53, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I can't promise anything with -5-, contributing is more of what he does. Convincing him to join something, I don't know yet. As for Tenebrae, I am not sure of yet. I did invite him to my Spider-Man work group, no success on that. Even though he still has his moments contributing with Spidey related articles. J Greb doesn't always respond to stuff like that as well. Fandraltastic, I don't know much about him but I trust that he's a good editor since TriiipleThreat mentioned it. But I do recommend more time ;) Jhenderson 777 16:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

film project

See here for main topic. Jhenderson 777 01:18, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Secret avengers.jpg

 

Thanks for uploading File:Secret avengers.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 13:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Requesting third-party input

User:Horkana and I, who work together well and respect each other's work, have run into an impasse regarding a passage on which there's disagreement over including. At his suggestion, before going to the step of an RfC, we're asking for third-party input at Talk:Kick-Ass (film)#Controversy and subsection Talk:Kick-Ass (film)#The passage itself. With thanks, --Tenebrae (talk) 17:44, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

The Dark Knight Rises

The article The Dark Knight Rises was created due to a discussion with Erik. But I know due to his discussion that Erik also wanted opinions from the rest of the task force. So I am asking you to weigh in on the discussion page of the article about how you feel about it and suggestions on how it should be written. Jhenderson 777 21:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hawkeye

I share you concern. While The Wrap is a reliable source, this is an anonymously sourced claim, and the most we could say is "the trade-news site The Wrap said an anonymous source claimed to have seen an early cut of the film, which included Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye." When we express it like that, we can see how tenuous a claim that is. Even if it's true and not studio misinformation, anything can happen between a January cut and a May cut after test screenings, trims for lengths, etc. Finally, I think the fact that Renner has forcefully denied it injects enough doubt that an encyclopedia cannot report his appearance as solid fact, which is all an encyclopedia should contain. He may well be in the film, but at this stage it's just an anonymously sourced claim whose reliability is unknown. We don't have to report breaking rumors; we should only report solid fact. I'll go ahead and remove it, and leave these concerns on the talk page, and maybe you could keep watch. Good eye, dude. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:33, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

WebCitation.org

Very cool! --Tenebrae (talk) 18:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

As I say, it's always a pleasure working with you! --Tenebrae (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Colbie Smulders IS Maria Hill in Avengers

Please read this:

http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/cobie-smulders-closes-in-on-avengers/

"Deadline has learned that the role is Maria Hill, who in the comics was the ruthless interim executive director of SHIELD, who was not above blackmailing and bullying superheros to get her way."

Or this:

http://twitter.com/#!/BRIANMBENDIS/status/34850258206994432

Brian Michael Bendis (the creator of the character) confirms it.

Between those sources I think it's safe to add the news that's been circulating the internet for the past 24 hours.

The Deadline source does not explictly state that Cobie Smulders is Maria Hill only "I'm hearing that... Cobie Smulders is Maria Hill". The Bendis tweet makes no reference to Cobie Smulders or The Avengers. If you wish to discuss this further please go to the discussion at Talk:The Avengers (film project)#Maria Hill.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

DYKR

Just to let you know that I just finished the DYK hook for The Dark Knight Rises. So if it belongs on the stats I hope you can help me out on putting it there. ;) Jhenderson 777 02:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Hawkeye article

Thanks for taking a look at this one. Caged halo has rewritten this one entirely after Asgardian's version, but I think this is still a new-ish user. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 16:17, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I am fairly new at this but as you've seen I always try my best. I'll learn from my mistakes and try not to step on anyone's toes. Caged halo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:04, 24 February 2011 (UTC).

Erik Selvig

From that interview, the writer very clearly states the Andrews names are inaccurate and the character's name is Erik Selvig:

So it can be difficult when you see rumors about the set that you know for a fact are just vicious, gossipy lies. Of course, sometimes it’s just the little inaccuracies being reported out there that bug you, for some reason. For example, Stellan Skarsgard’s character has been mistakenly identified as both “Professor Andrews” and “Professor Andrew Ford.” I have no idea where those names came from. No character with either of those names has ever been in any draft of the script. The first time I saw it was on IMDB, and I’ve seen it mistakenly repeated on other sites — even in an interview with Stellan, which is odd. His character’s name is actually Erik Selvig. I’ve also seen Colm Feore’s character erroneously referred to as Ymir. He’s not Ymir. Wikipedia, take note!

Not sure why you changed my edit -Fandraltastic (talk) 05:53, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I was reading that just after I finished reverting your edit, I should have read FIRST! "Wikipedia, take note!", that is too funny!--TriiipleThreat (talk) 06:00, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Reply

The user most directly responsible for the Young Justice article is User:Mirlen. However, I don't know if he has an interest in the Avengers show. It may be worth it to get him to give it a look over.-5- (talk) 14:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't have a working relationship with him. We both just kind of worked on the article at the same time.-5- (talk) 14:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

request

This is just a request on if you feel like participating in the The Amazing Spider-Man (2012 film). I am mainly hoping for more commentaries like cast interviews on the cast section like what you did in Thor (film) and Captain America: The First Avenger and I admit I am not as out there in Wikipedia (purposely some times) as you are. I also admit I searched and they are not hard to find I even mentioned some on the talk page and I am always welcome for that article to have more constructive information to be a even more decent article and I know you are good at that. So please if you feel like it join along with helping. ;) Jhenderson 777 18:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll see what I can when I get a chance.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok good deal. Just curious though what do you mean "We shouldn't be in the habit of posting comments for the sake of having them." You think I do that? Ouch! I didn't think I was doing that. Jhenderson 777 19:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
No I dont, your a good editor that was directed at everybody who might be coming across that talk page. You're doing a great job there and elsewhere.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh ok thanks. Appreciate the kind words. Honestly I am an ok editor. I am mainly a responsible contributor and do what I can. And I feel that you are a good editor as well and it's nice working with and discussing with you. Jhenderson 777 20:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 5 Ronin

Materialscientist (talk) 10:05, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

S.H.I.E.L.D. template

Based on your previous edits to the S.H.I.E.L.D. template you might have an opinion on a discussion I recently started. Spidey104 22:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Good addition

Nice add with the translation in the footnote. You've really been doing excellent, excellent editing, if you don't mind my saying! --Tenebrae (talk) 22:58, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!--TriiipleThreat (talk) 09:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Thor cast order

If you look at the poster here (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/47780), Asano, Alexander, and Dallas are listed in that order between Dennings and Russo. Is it worth using that cast listing on the page in your opinion? Thanks -Fandraltastic (talk) 15:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah there seems to be a conflict between this poster and others and the official website. I think we go with the others since this is the only one that doesn't match.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
That makes sense, although it may have been a matter of limited space on posters that were actually sent to cinemas. -Fandraltastic (talk) 16:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar!

  The WikiProject Film Award
I, Jhenderson777 (talk), hereby award TriiipleThreat the WikiProject Film Award for his/her valued contributions to WikiProject Film. Your significant contributions to Thor (film), Captain America: The First Avenger and The Avengers (film project) aided in the unprecedented task of bringing a film project article up to standard!
Awarded 14:56, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

You deserve it too! Jhenderson 777 15:11, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! --TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

And thank you, TriipleT, for your own kind kudos on my page. Comics Project sure is getting to be a nice place to be. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Category:Former film project articles

I'd like to see a really good rationale for this category.

Really good.

--79.68.237.87 (talk) 20:07, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Former film project articles

Category:Former film project articles, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Xeworlebi (talk) 21:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I Don't Know How She Does It proof read

Would you do me a kindness of proofreading this new article i just created. Please reply. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 19:01 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll be happy to, when I get some time.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:41, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Superman: Man of Steel

I am creating the film project page for the film, and i could use some help. I know you are experienced in this area. Please Reply. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 18:59 27 March 2011 (UTC)

You should try creating it in the article incubator or in your userspace first then get community consent before moving it article space.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:11, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for stepping in on the Superman: Man of Steel issue. I was beginning to get very frustrated with User:Robsinden, and your intervention helped to defuse that frustration. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:22, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Wrath of the Titans

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the note.[1] Sorry to be tardy. I looked into the article, examined its current sourcing, looked into its potential, and then offered my opinion.[2] Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

I hope you don't mind the not feeling 100% sure of the "Film Project" article this time around. I don't think this needs to be a habit too much when some editors feel strongly about this. I can see where editors are coming from in both sides of the equation. Jhenderson 777 00:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Why do you apologize? There is no need. Wikipedia is a colloboartive project and as such differences of opinion are had. I just stated that the AfD process shouldnt be a deterent and infact is a valuable tool for determining consensus.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
And I agree with you. I apologize even though I do not need to really apologize sometimes. It was also the only name of a section header I could think of at the time. Silly me :b Jhenderson 777 15:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
And I apologize for apologizing. Just messing with you of course. Keep up the good work. ;) Jhenderson 777 15:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Monsters University

As one of the more active contributors on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superman (film_project) discussion, I thought I'd alert you to this "future film" article, and wondered whether you had anything to add at Talk:Monsters University#Changed to redirect as fails WP:NFF... --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Commented, thanks.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Green Lantern film

Will do. I am deathly under the weather and curtailing my Wiki'ing until those moments when I'm not feverish or working (the show-must-go-on thing. Fortunately I have no commute). Back at full speed soon, I hope. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:03, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Superman:Man of Steel (2012 film)

Would you mind copyediting and updating this a film article. The user didn't really want the information to go but he was fine with it as a article incubator. Jhenderson 777 15:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Input?

Based upon recent discussions in several places, I have begun work on an essay that seeks to clarify just how and when discussuion of a film-before-its-filming would per policy merit inclusion in some manner, or per GNG even merit a seperate article. Please look over User:MichaelQSchmidt/Future Films and offer your insights. Thanks, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

comment

Hi Triii. Would you please stop undoing good edits that I am making to the article? I mean, they are clear mistakes. White superemacists boycotting the film. No, that should be *some* white superemacists etc etc. Conficutus (talk) 15:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC) Still awaiting your reply on the talk page [3] Thank you. Conficutus (talk) 17:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

a related discussion

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Future films#Proposed ammendment to section on Process#Notability Your comments toward my attempt at clarity are quite welcome. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for rectifying the whole Idris Elba issue. I think you've done a great job on there. I just revisted the page today.

Conficutus (talk) 21:30, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, your welcome.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:21, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK Livens Large Gallery Flame Projectors

Thanks for the little tick on the DYK Livens Large Gallery Flame Projectors. There is going to be a programme on TV tonight all about this weapon. I was thinking it might be nice/useful to have on the front page at the same time. Is there a way to ask for this? No worries if not. Best wishes and thanks! (Msrasnw (talk) 13:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC))

No problem, unfortunately it looks like the queue for today is already full.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

it's live

See Wikipedia:Future Films Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:01, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

maintained

Have you ever thought of putting the {{maintained}} template on the discussion page of Thor (film). Just place {{maintained|1={{user|TriiipleThreat}}}} if you do. :) Jhenderson 777 19:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I think it's nice because it's pretty obvious that you are the maintainer of that article. Jhenderson 777 19:28, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I feel about that, even though it says it doesn't imply ownership, I'm concerned it might. I'll still watch recent changes and talk page discussions.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh no it won't imply that. But I understand. It's good to know who the main contributor is sometimes if there is and when there is a maintainer or maintainers like yourself the article seems to be better. Jhenderson 777 19:41, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Uncivility on Thor

You've just reverted 12 days of Idris Elba editing, including your own edits, without discussion. That certainly isn't WP:CIVIL. You're supposed to discuss first in a edit controversy. Clearly, you find that I have the better argument, so rather than conform to it you are undoing over 24 edits to the article. It's fine to be WP:BOLD but not when you are in the middle of a dispute and you have already said in a sedt summary not to be WP:BOLD but to discuss first, just today. ₭₦→ talkcontribs 12:00, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I am happy to have third party mediate, but this is not what happened. You started a discussion on the talk page at 12:53, April 19, 2011 and then updated the article at 13:15, April 19, 2011, not sufficient time for anyone to respond. Also I did not threaten an edit war I stated you were on the verge of edit warring with your revert of my revert at 13:29, April 19, 2011 and again at 05:03, April 20, 2011, after I explain to you the bold revert disccusion cycle. I have made no uncivil comments or actions.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:57, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification on my User page. I have given the talk page on Thor a break and follwoing advice, mentioned it on the WP:NPOVN board. You can find it here: Thor # Idris Elba (NPOVN) I'm addressing the undue weight in the Idris Elba section. Thank you. KN→ talkcontribs 09:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jack the Giant Killer (2012 film)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Casa de Mi Padre

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Since the main WikiProject Comics Noticeboard has not been significantly updated since 2009, and since the 2011 merger/move noticeboard is seldom used, I'm asking a few Project members to spread the word that this page exists and that there is a current merge proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Notice board/Requested moves/2011. Thanks, --Tenebrae (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Thor

I have reassessed the article as B class. I added an additional free image to the article and did some copyedits, please review them. I'd recommend expanding the lead section as well as the reception. Repair or replace the dead citations and after after a few weeks for stability, I'd recommend nominating it at GAN. Good work to all those involved in improving the article. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 04:39, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

X-Men: First Class (film)

The article Thor (film) is looking great. You wouldn't mind helping this article out as well to GA article likeness since it's one of the next superhero film going out in theaters. Jhenderson 777 14:18, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I have full confidence that the cast section will be nice when I am done with it so thanks for the sources BUT I am a little disappointed with the production section, I wish for it to be expanded a bit, when I first started it I thought it would go through more updating it didn't turn out as such. So if you find crew interviews in the future as well that will be swell. Thank you. :) Jhenderson 777 01:09, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The Amazing Spiderman - Mary Parker

This is confusing, IMDB is saying that actress Embeth Davidtz replacing Julianne Nicholson. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 11:56 12 May 2011 (UTC)

IMDB is often incorrect especially when it comes to upcoming films, so I wouldn't change anything unless it is referenced by a reliable source.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Jack the Giant Killer (2012 film) - filming location

It has been confirmed that they are filming in Norwich.

See the following tweets for info & photos:

http://twitter.com/vickidolley/statuses/68792488768438272
http://twitter.com/vickidolley/statuses/68793117045829633
http://twitter.com/vickidolley/statuses/68793356997763073

Can you update the Jack_the_Giant_Killer_(2012_film) wiki?

Cheers. :)

Tony Sutton (talk) 09:45, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, I cant use the twitter updates as a reference but I was able to find a reliable source.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

No

You're right, I hadn't read the source, I didn't think a frivolous lawsuit could potentially hold up a film or every case by a whackjob would have that potential so I didn't think such a thing was possible.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

ILM

Hi, Triiiple T. In this case, given the high reliability of ILM's own website, that if this news doesn't appear (yet) in RS media, my take is that we can say that, "According the ILM's website, it is involved in production of The Avengers in an unspecified way." That's the absolute truth, and we're not projecting, but putting it in context. And I'm flattered you asked my opinion!

I just saw X-Men: First Class. It's the best X-Men movie since the first. The ads had me thinking it might not be, but it's great. And every second you see January Jones onscreen, you're saying to yourself, "Oh. My. God." --Tenebrae (talk) 20:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

How are we to cite it though? I'm sure they will eventually update the website and that information will be moved and since its java-based I dont think we can archive it.
Lucky you! That's good to know, I like Matthew Vaughn's work but I have been highly disappointed in the X-Men (film series).--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:25, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I see ... I thought it was just a matter or archiving. I went there and took a closer look. Yeah, there doesn't even seem to be any way or loading just the frame. And "View More" just takes you offsite.
Perhaps this, and it might be a solution for other such Java-based or Fash-based sites: Give the URL followed by " > OUR WORK > IN PRODUCTION " --Tenebrae (talk) 21:23, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Total Recall remake

I have created the article. I'd like you to review it and see if it's up to snuff. Thanks. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 19:30 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately it appears that this article fails WP:NFF and there isn't an abundance of sources to surpass it. I suggest you move it to your userspace or the article incubator until it begins filming.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:52, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I noticed this article being made too. It looks like filming starts this Monday, so let's invoke WP:IAR and see if filming doesn't begin as planned. If it doesn't, we can take action then. Erik (talk | contribs) 23:10, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Jhenderson777/John Dies at the End (film)

Hey you mind helping out on this userspace draft per a recommendation on the discussion page. Jhenderson 777 15:24, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Ill be happy to after the holiday.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:25, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Thor (film)

You have an iPad? Coooooool! I'm waiting for the price to come down, but I'm starting to see them everywhere. Now what with the just-announced iCloud (I think they're calling it), that could make iPads indispensable when on the go. Nice! --Tenebrae (talk) 14:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Green Lantern Criticism

I just read up on Ebert's review and I don't think its fair to say it is negative, it seems positive tbh. Not praising but he says he liked it more than Thor (Which is something I think would be important to mention considering the movie type). I don't have the time right now to do anthing with it as it's 2am and I'm going to bed but I do think that needs changing as it appears he has given it 2.5 out of 5 and most of what I read seemed to say that he was ok with it, just that it was nothing special. He also specifically praises Hector Hammonds character, again something that might be worth mentioning. Just thought I'd pass this along as you seem to be the most involved editor. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, I changed it to "mixed". I hope that clears up the confusion.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 11:05, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

The Avengers (2012 film)

It's not a big deal either way to me, but don't you think there is something contradictory about saying that per WP:CRYSTAL we can't categorize an article as a 2012 film when "2012 film" is in the title? -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps, I just know we have usually kept such dated categories hidden until the films premiere. Maybe you should bring it up at the WT:FILM.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Good suggestion. Here it is: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Upcoming_films. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to say "thanks" for your recent revision to the "The Avengers" page. I saw that rather erroneous edit, and was about to change it back myself. XP CorinthMaxwell (talk) 21:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Question

Who was messingup the Green Lantern page of the order it's cast members were suppose to be in?Mark (talk) 18:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I believe it was Graviton4.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Stuntman

TMZ is usually pretty reliable — its owner is an well-known attorney who certainly knows libel law. And in this case, the site says it spoke with the stunt man directly. My gut instinct is to wait until a mainstream source says anything simply because while I'm sure this person did tell this thing to TMZ, we don't know if this person is telling the truth. Unlike a mainstream news outlet, TMZ (like RadarOnline.com) pays its sources — and people have been known to make up or exaggerate stories in order to be paid.

Of course, the standard we operate under is verifiability, not truth, which can be highly elusive, so if TMZ is considered a reliable source generally at Wikipedia, then guidelines say go for it. Just speaking for myself, I'd wait and look around some more to make sure this guy really is an Avengers stunt man and really was hurt on set (where he can get workman's comp) and not in his back yard. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

And y'know, I've just seen USA Today run a Charlie Sheen item, saying "TMZ reports," and MSNBC run a Sheen item with "according to RadarOnline.com." I don't know if that means an encyclopedia can trust them, but if they're good enough for USA Today and MSNBC...! --Tenebrae (talk) 20:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Monsters University

With reference to this discussion which you participated in, I see that the page has been created again, despite little further development. Would appreciate your input on the talk page. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hugo Weaving as Red Skull.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Hugo Weaving as Red Skull.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:45, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Well done on WWZ Hook

Passed you over at Template_talk:Did_you_know#World_War_Z_.28film.29. Well done. –NickDupree (talk) 20:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for World War Z (film)

NW (Talk) 00:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Howling

It's not. I was actually getting ready to put this cite in, which I found interesting: http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/movies/red-white-and-true-blue-captain-america-1.3025849

"Red, white and true blue 'Captain America'" Originally published: July 14, 2011 4:51 PM Updated: July 15, 2011 12:21 PM By FRANK LOVECE. Special to Newsday

In this origin story, Cap earns his stars and stripes fighting the unambiguous good fight against the Nazis -- particularly grotesque mastermind the Red Skull (Hugo Weaving) -- alongside a multiethnic group. Though unnamed, they're Marvel's "Sgt. Fury and his Howling Commandos," minus Nick Fury.
"They are commandos and at one point they do howl," Markus says with a chuckle. "They're called the Howling Commandos in the script, but no one says that out loud." Director Joe Johnston says at one point they were to be called the Invaders -- igniting off-base fan speculation that the same-name Marvel superhero team would appear in the movie.

--Tenebrae (talk) 23:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Grant Morrison photo

Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Pedantic Protagonists

Hi there, I saw that you reverted someone's addition of the standard "x is the protagonist" line. Could I get your opinion on [4]? I had removed a similar line only for it to be reinserted. Thanks! Doniago (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Avengers: EMH

I have added to the discussion on the page, Talk:List_of_The_Avengers:_Earth's_Mightiest_Heroes_episodes, and wished to inform you, as you have also contributed and I have so far received no response. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 11:30, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thor Tales of Asgard.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Thor Tales of Asgard.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Cap

Happy to. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thor edits

Do not remove my material. Seek to improve it. There is IN FACT UNDUE WEIGHT by this CCC organisation. They represent a 1/10th of a percerntile of the people upset with the casting. PeterHarlington (talk) 15:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Detroit Steel

Thanks. I don't create a lot of new articles from scratch, so when I do, I try to be comprehensive. The compliment is much appreciated. :-) (The article probably could use a few more secondary out-universe sources, though.) Just out of curiosity, what do you think of the Equus (comics) article? That probably the last comics character article I created and wrote from scratch. Nightscream (talk) 22:09, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've updated it. Nightscream (talk) 12:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
For that matter, what do you think of this article? Got enough secondary sources? ;-) Nightscream (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hundreds

It's not a big deal but they say he saved over 400 soldiers. EDIT: I don't care about it being added, just didn't appreciate it being called exaggeration. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

My mistake didn't realize the actual count.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Avengers: EMH

Again, waiting on a response... --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit-warring

As you have experience editing movies related to comic books and other adapted pop-culture characters, this is a neutral request to visit The Green Hornet (2011 film), where edit-warring appears to be occurring. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure I'll keep an eye on it.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 01:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Re:Phil Coulson

Please give an example of a "character description section" like you suggested for the Phil Coulson draft. Thanks. --Boycool (talk) 15:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the tips. That video makes a lot more sense after watching it a second time. I'll work on the draft some more and get back to you with the results. --Boycool (talk) 18:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
What do you think now? --Boycool (talk) 21:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Good enough to turn it into an article? --Boycool (talk) 03:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
So should I copy and paste it into Phil Coulson (which is a redirect) or find an admin to merge the two? --Boycool (talk) 13:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you and forgive me for misspelling your username in my edit summaries. --Boycool (talk) 14:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

My fault; made fix

Hi, TT. Nice catch, and it was my fault for not making my edit summary clearer. The Newsday sidebar citation was an Ibid. of the Newsday main-article cite and link, so this sidebar was already linked online above in the References list. I should have noted that in my edit summary. While I'm here, though,I want to ask if you think this Ibid. needs to include the existing link from the citation's first mention above? Would that be redundant, or would it make this clearer? Thanks again for spotting that.--Tenebrae (talk) 14:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I've tried making the cite clearer by adding a link — since it's just last name, I'm thinking users will understand it's an Ibid. Any way you want to improve it / make it clearer, go for it! (Also: Apologies for misspelling your name with three "p"s instead of three "i"s in the edit summary.) --Tenebrae (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

A: EMH, again...

Sorry for bringing this up again, but there's a problem with the page, which I noted a while ago. The paragraph about the Micro-series states that "Its 20 episodes are essentially small segments from the first five episodes". However, this does not reflect the table which shows the episodes in air order, rather than the actual order. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 06:55, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I think he only says that "Breakout" is essentially the pilot in his own opinion, but he actually says the words "first five episodes". So, there's nothing wrong with the paragraph. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 14:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
He does not refer to "Breakout" as a pilot because it aired first, but rather because it is a better "test" for the rest of the season to come, as it is the first episode where the "Avengers Assemble", hence the opinion thing. Besides, a pilot episode does not mean it is the first episode of the season. And when he referred to the "first five" episodes he was referring to the actual order. He also says "first five" that many times, that it shouldn't be ignored from the micro-series paragraph. I propose that the table be ordered by production code, so as to better reflect the paragraph. And also, because it makes more sense. Just because the channel that gets to air it first jumbles up the order, doesn't mean wikipedia should. Besides, the "first five" episodes did air before "Breakout", but in smaller segments. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 21:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
There is no guideline for TV episode order. However, whilst the convention is air order. I am proposing to make this an exception to the convention (not guideline), because the first five episodes are called just that. Not "micro-compilations", the "first five" episodes. So to avoid confusion, I reccomend production code be used as the order of episodes, rather than air order, but just in this case. Also, when you say "Production Code", it loses its true meaning. The production code IS the episode order - the order in which the episodes were meant to be shown. Then TV channels air things differently and we like to order it the way we saw it. So, after all of this, "Breakout" IS the sixth episode of Season 1. Many sources state that, and the paragraph should not be reworded as they reflect verifiable information (being that the "first five" episodes are just that - the "first five" episodes). To me, production code makes more sense all around anyway, as it is a page about the product, not a page about the different ways in which the product can be ordered. And the air order changes from country to country, but the production code never changes (a very rough analogy would be a list of the elements in the periodic table: If you listed them, you would order them in their actual order (atomic mass), rather than the order in which they were discovered (first viewed by the public)). Besides, the first five episodes aired before "Breakout", although this was in separated form. Also, for your information, if you desperately desire the usage of air order over proper order, you might want to look at episode 19. And yes, I understand that this conversation should take place on the talk page, but we had already started here. Do you mind if this conversation is copied to the talk page, so that others can contribute (which I doubt they would - there hasn't been an overwhelming number of interested editors)? --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 13:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
It's there. On the talk page. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 00:31, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

List of The Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes episodes

  1. Both of you - the edit war has gone more than far enough. It stops now. Use the talk page to discuss the issues and see where consensus is.
  2. With an eye to WP:BRD the page has been locked at the state prior to the bold edit (ProfessorKilroy's) that started this.
  3. Discussion and consensus means you to have work with other editors and respect their input. Not actively edit as though nothing has been said or that only you are right and only your version of the article has a right to exist.
  4. Original research has been mentioned on the talk page. This is a policy on Wikipedia, like it or not.
  5. This is not an invitation to discuss the locking the article, this post, indulge in personal attacks or disparagement of others, or bide time for the page protection to go down.

- J Greb (talk) 00:51, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


Not exactly civil

Thank you for reverting my edit to World War Z. We are all trying to make things interesting and factual but you really don't need to be so aggressive about it. Your rudeness is quite offputting.Rgnewbury (talk) 16:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TriiipleThreat. You have new messages at Talk:World War Z.
Message added 00:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- saberwyn 00:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments

I invite you to leave your thoughts here. I know you've had to put up with my thoughts on this page a lot, and you've already contributed a fair bit, but as you know, the discussion became quite messy, so I thought it best to take it from the top, because frankly, at least some of my points need some attention. Also, I've tried to summarise it neater in dot point form. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 08:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't just revert it! Talk, please... --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 15:29, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello? --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 15:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Please say something. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 15:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
FWIW: It may be that he shouldn't have beed the one to do it, but it did need to go back until the discussion winds down. - J Greb (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

  I originally came to thank you for adding an infobox the the DC reboot article, but then stole your tables from your userpage too, so double thanks are in order. Cheers and keep up the good work! Benny Digital Speak Your Brains 09:17, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I need your opinion

Hi. I have a question for which I need objective opinions. Can you offer your viewpoint here? I really need it in order to proceed. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:14, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah, sure enough

[5] I had to check out the sources; the way it was written was a little confusing at first. Good catch. EVula // talk // // 05:36, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Half Barnstar
As in countless examples in literature, I award this to you and the other half to ProfessorKilroy for your world-class efforts to reach common ground and achieve effective results at List of The Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes episodes. May your powers be greater together! Excelsior! -- Tenebrae (talk) 18:34, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

More Mightiest Heroes...

I think it's probably best that you put up the paragraphs that you've got already. They're good enough to put up there, and we can sort out the intricacies afterwards... --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 02:32, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Deathly Hallows Part 2 Awards

Hey!

Thanks for changing them from TBC to Pending, I knew there was a particular one, but could not remember it :P Thanks! B.Davis2003 (talk) 07:49, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem!--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:21, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Neutral notice

An editor with a recent history of disruptive editing and a block this month has returned to make the same edits at Marvel Comics and graphic novel. To prevent an edit-war, this is a neutral invitation to join the discussion at User talk:TheRoD1988 and to visit those articles. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Avengers (2012 film)

Will do. Might be a few hours, though &mdahs; afternoon deadline crunch... Hey, you in NY? You going to Comic-Con here next month?--Tenebrae (talk) 19:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I'm in VA.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:44, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, that's a nice part of the country, too. I looked at your edits, as requested. First, thank you for removing that racist edit by User:JohnC. Hard to believe someone would say shit like that in Wikipedia, or, more to the point, expecting it to stay. Bravo. The Elba and Hiddleston additions are certainly sourced very well, and I thought you encapsulated the Hiddleston quote perfectly. With Elba, I found "has plans for Thor 2" a bit vague — he can't cast himself in it, so I'm not sure what "has plans for Thor 2" means. I'm sure that's just a matter of clarifying. The only other thing is, since it's a video interview, adding a timestamp for where he says this. I'm pretty sure there's a template field for that; I'll try and look it up. Overall: the same high-quality edits as always! --Tenebrae (talk) 23:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Looks like the "minutes" field is only at the "cite episode" citation template. If I can figure out how to create a template for video interviews, I'll put that field in. (There's a "cite video" there now, but it's not specifically for video interviews.) --Tenebrae (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Red Dawn (2012)

This is regarding your recent deletion of reference to a review of the film "Red Dawn" at Red Dawn (2011 film). The review, which includes a detailed description of the film - and which has been cited by Variety, The Los Angeles Times and other media outlets - is the only existing account of the film prior to its controversial edits, and is clearly 'notable' in the most basic sense. Your merely calling the review 'non-notable' does not make it so. Please argue your case rather than simply hit the 'undo' button. --Thorpe79 15:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Let's be cordial in our approach to other editors. Not all editors may be familiar with WP:BRD, so it helps to take the higher road and start a discussion. If it's not vandalism, it's not a problem to keep around a little longer. After all, you know you can ask for additional opinions from WT:FILM about whether to include the content or not, and the issue will be resolved ultimately. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello, TriiipleThreat. You have new messages at Talk:Red Dawn (2012 film).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Toying with cast lists

Hey, since we talked about different kinds of presentations for cast members (I think at Thor or The Avengers), I'm curious what you think of this experiment of mine. I put a collapsible cast list at the beginning of the plot summary. I did this for a couple of reasons. One is that I find it frustrating to have the "Cast" section after the "Plot" section as I don't think the order helps people cross-reference (meaning that they wouldn't scroll down further to look up the actor for a role). That leads me to my second reason for doing this, that the cast list is not quite important (especially past the main actors) to show in full, but I still want to provide some readers to navigate all the actors that have blue links. You can see the presentation at Apt Pupil (film). I'm pondering other ways to use the collapsible list; maybe to collapse a film's supporting cast? Like in a comic book film, we could explain the main actors and roles in details, but we may have a list of people for which there's not going to be much direct detail. What are your thoughts? Erik (talk | contribs) 13:07, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, another reason I'm doing this is that I don't like to stuff the plot summary with actors' names. I find it distracting, and I don't think it's a good way to "get rid of" a basic cast list (by this kind of merging), especially when not all the roles are explicitly mentioned in a plot summary. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
To be honest, I am not sure if it is much of an improvement over a basic cast list (which I also find to be not very useful). Perhaps it could be useful as you say to list the supporting cast, for whom not much information is available. Personally I think the best cast sections offer some insight into the actors and their roles.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Are you referring to the presentation within the collapsible element? It can be a standard bulleted cast list within that element. I agree that prose is important. I was thinking that the collapsible nature could help separate the list from prose since sometimes we have a list of roles with shrinking paragraphs. I just included it in Apt Pupil's plot summary as an enhanced approach, but it could also stay in the "Cast" section and be collapsed until a reader wants to review all the actors and their roles. Apt Pupil does not have that many roles compared to other films, which is part of the reason why I moved it. For an ensemble film, it could be used as a kind of tucked-away cast list that is easily accessed. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:30, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
No, I was just referring to a table versus a minimal actor-role list. Though its use in Apt Pupil specifically is fine considering the style of that article's cast section. I would suggest moving it there or below the plot rather than above it, for purely esthetic reasons. Also I don't think there should be a "one-size-fits-all" approach to these cast sections as the level of detail depends solely on the amount of information available.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Galius Zed

 

The article Galius Zed has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The fictional character does not meet the general notability guideline and, without reception and significance in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject, the topic of the article is not suitable for Wikipedia as a stand-alone article since it falls into WP:IINFO.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jfgslo (talk) 02:23, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Galius super.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Galius super.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Galius-zed.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Galius-zed.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 20:38, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Re:X-Men Origins:Wolverine

No problem. Happens to me all the time. Cheers. Friginator (talk) 01:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thor

I opened a discussion as you said I should. Spidey104 14:30, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thor and Captain America GAN

It might be worth making a request at the Guild of Copy Editors to have them copy edit the text while it is awaiting review, unless it has already been done in which case disregard. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:05, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I've added them both to the Copy Edit page, but they may not be seen too fast, just depends on what editor takes an interest in them. The only other thing I can suggest is to move all your references into the reflist as this will make it easier for the copy editor and reviewer to check the work. Not necessary though, but you DO need to just check your references and make sure they are all filled out properly and use teh same formatting, (i.e. either 2011-06-01 or July 1, 2011 but not switching back and forth between both). Moving them into the reflist (remember if you do this you have to name them first) will make the second suggestion a lot easier. Also enable ProveIt in the gadgets if you haven't already as that also will greatly help you fill out references without searching through the code. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Don Markstein's Toonopedia is back

...but for how long? As you're probably aware, this invaluable resource went dead around July or August, when Markstein was undergoing some serious health issues. The site came back online within the last couple of days. I'm unaware of what's happened in the interim, but for however long it's up, I'm urging WPC members to archive as many of its pages as we can. (WebCitation seems to work with it; Wayback/Internet Archive seems be prevented from archiving due to a web-bot or some such.) I've gone through, so far, all 97 of the comics creators whose articles I created (listed here), and I'll start going through the character, publisher, etc. pages I've created.

In the meantime, I'll add this note to Don Markstein's Toonopedia, and if you could help spread the word, I think archiving its pages is an important thing we could do (and which, obviously, would take a lot of us to do). With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 17:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Captain America: The First Avenger

Nice job on this one! I just passed it at GAN! If you have not already, you may want to review another article at GAN!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:12, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Just a note. I didn't really notice the blogs as much in the CA piece, for some reason they jumped out at me in Thor. Try to find a non blog source for as many of these as you can, especially if you take either of them up to FAC.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:53, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for teh Barnstar 3threat, congratulations on your first GA. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:23, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar. --Boycool (talk) 23:38, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Your kind gesture

Well, thanks! Your own work on the Marvel movie articles is pretty amazing. It's nice to open a talk-page message without and have that feeling of dread suddenly dissipate!   :)  --Tenebrae (talk) 21:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, my! Well, believe me, if anyone deserves the lion's share of the credit for the Thor and Cap movies, it's you!
And given your experience with shepherding film articles to GA, you should probably join a conversation about a proposed change to WP:FILM guidelines, at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film#Box office revision. This is a neutral notice.--Tenebrae (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Additionally, another WP:FILM guidelines discussion, about keeping or deleting a template, is occurring here. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:18, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

  The Special Barnstar
For good work on two articles that have come to GA status. Hurray Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Black Widow

This appears to be some edit warring on that page, I think this is being done against consensus. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 15:36, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Jackson as Fury pic

Is there a good reason for downloading one image, uploading it again and then just copying the page docs?

And changing the file name isn't one - the files can be moved.

- J Greb (talk) 19:42, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

3RR

I'd hate to be the cause of your first block, so I'd suggest reverting yourself per WP:3RR, you've crossed the bright-line threshold with your 4th revert: [6], [7][8], [9]. Dreadstar 19:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Do what you must, but only two of those edits were reverts, the others were attempts at compromise. Per WP:BRD you should have engaged in discussion after the first revert, not re-revert, which I have politely asked you to do.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:34, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
BRD doesn't override 3RR. I've got your talk page watchlisted, so we can keep the thread together here. I'll not report you this time, because I think your edits were in good faith, but be cautious in the future. And I'm sure the other editor would have reverted me in a second or two more had you waited; therfore 'do what you must' is silly.Dreadstar 19:38, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
2¢ (old watch on this talk page btw)
Dreadstar, you comment reads as "You're at 3RR, back off or I'll force you over it." WP:BRD is designed to preempt edit warring. When an edit is contested it should be discussed on the talk page, not in the edit summaries.
Right now both of you could be blocked for edit warring. Which is a pisser since:
  • TriipleThreat is more or less acting within standing consensus with the MCU films - not to include information in the plot or related sections that is not explicitly in the film.
  • You are with in bounds to add sourced information related to "This is that in the comics" with relevant sources in the production or related sections.
- J Greb (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Righetti

I've added a 3RR warning to the anon IP's page. It looks like three editors are now monitoring that editor's behavior. Thanks for the head's up. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

The Expendables 2 poster

It's a fake poster

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/UPDATED-Expendables-2-Poster-Christmas-Tree-Badasses-27970.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.122.179 (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Ms. Marvel edit

I appreciate moving the reference to the explosion into the correct decade, but I think you've dragged the Ms. Marvel thing with it into the wrong decade. As you say, there's no suggestion that she was aware of the change at the time, though you can't really tell from Captain Marvel as she just disappears from the book at that point. IMO (without reviewing Ms. Marvel #1) the change occurred sometime later - in the '70s should be discussed there.
Now that I think about it, wasn't the change to Binary also due (at least partly) to her Kree genes? Dmforcier (talk) 20:19, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Just to say that I think you've done a good job on Ms. Marvel. Thanks. Dmforcier (talk) 20:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

The Amazing Spider-Man filming

Hey can you do me a favor. I just want to expand on the filming section of The Amazing Spider-Man (2012 film) and I haven't had much luck on finding sources for that certain topic. You don't necessarily have to edit on the article I just need some links to help expanding on it. Last I heard it sounds like they moved filming to NYC which isn't stated on the article. Jhenderson 777 20:28, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I didn't have a problem finding any through a quick google news search, here's one from the Daily Mail.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I have seen those images a lot on the web but that's a better source than just a article saying "I found images." Do you know the name of what Andrew is swinging on. Jhenderson 777 19:25, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't know what he is swinging on, but rather than describing the images, the article can be used to support that filming occurred in NY at a particular point in time.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok I expanded a little bit. I thank you for the source. I also noticed a lot of your articles have a marketing section. Can you give advise at what I can put there to make a section on. Should information about the teaser trailer and the website be added and that a action figure is about to come out? I never really created a Marketing section before. Jhenderson 777 20:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
The guideline to follow is WP:FILMMARKETING which states, "Do not merely describe the content of customary marketing methods such as trailers, TV spots, radio ads, and posters. Instead, use reliable sources to provide useful commentary about a method, such as a trailer's intended effect or the audience's reported reaction to it." So a trailer by itself is invalid unless accompanied by critical commentary or if there was something controversial about its release like The Hangover Part II. I would include things like viral marketing campaigns, promotional partners and merchandising (video games, etc.). Just use your best judgement about what readers might find useful even after the film has been released.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

This was my plan on the trailer information:

A teaser trailer was leaked on the internet and aired at the San Diego Comic-Con at July 2011 while being attached to the superhero film Captain America: The First Avenger.<--[1] --> Rob Keyes of Screen Rant felt that "it takes on a noticeably different tone from that of Sam Raimi-Tobey Maguire trilogy of Spider-Man movies, and presents itself in a similar fashion to what Christopher Nolan did with Batman Begins."<--[2] --> Germain Lussier of /Film felt that the trailer makes it feel like a small film when judging with all the leaked photos of filming going on that it is not going to be a small film. He commented that the trailer makes it look more like "a superhero Twilight." He states that "this is a big action movie with massive practical effects all shot in painstaking 3D with a hefty price tag. This trailer really doesn’t sell that."<--[3] --> Steven of the website Movie Muse Reviews feels that "there’s a sense of annoying déjà vu with the fact that we see the spider bite scene and watch Peter’s discovery of his powers again, something that will really test this reboot with audiences who feel like they already know where Spider-Man came from.<--[4]--> The end of the trailer where Spider-Man is swinging in the city has been reported as strikingly similiar to the 2008 video game Mirror's Edge. <--[5][6] --> Jhenderson 777 01:22, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Honestly, I think the /Film review is really the only useful one, as it is the only one that provides critical commentary of the trailer itself not the subject matter of the film. This will be handled in the Critical Reaction section later. Also the comparison at the end seems a bit weaselly, it is either similar to the game or it is not.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:46, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I am thinking of getting rid of the movie muse one. Because I am not sure if that's a reliable source at all. Weasel Words should be easily fixed when stating by whom or where the source came from. That's what a weasel word mostly is and I am pretty sure you are describing it as something else. Are you thinking it as a useless sentence all together even when explaining what sites feel that way. Looking it up at the internet it does seem that it's a notable claim for there's numerous sources (not just the one I put on there) on it but it can be a opined claim at the same time. Then again so are reviews. Jhenderson 777 18:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I said its a "bit" weaselly mostly due to the use of the phrase, "reported as strikingly similiar". It's kind of an unattributed claim. Who reported it? It is easily fixable however I don't think the remark is that notable anyway or at least it doesn't appear to be.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I fixed the whole who said it. I figured it as a kind of a "reception in between controversy". I added three sources on it although I found more than that. I just added some of the websites who have their own articles. I think the first source on the sentence is the first one to report it although these reports probably started by the videos that the article shows mostly. Jhenderson 777 20:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I hadn't seen the article, and I was right, the wording was problem, now I understand the controversy. Good Work!--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, good to know. I think me expanding the filming is mostly complete for right now so my biggest concern for the production section is expanding post-production since that's where the film is at. So if you can find sources for that subject that would be awesome. I am definitely wanting better of this article and I find that focusing one one article at one time is definitely helping at making the article better. So if you have time and if you feel like it, post production sources could come in handy. And I appreciate your help. By the way, The Avengers article is looking great. ;) Jhenderson 777 20:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Since the article is pretty much caught up to where the film is now, you should set up a Google Alert for new content or monitor websites that are tracking the film (remember to trace back to reliable sources). Good luck.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I will have to have some kind of Google homepage for that, right? Jhenderson 777 21:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

You can but you can also have them sent to you as an email or as a web feed.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:26, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok I will keep that in mind. Right now all the buzz in the news is the release of Spider-Man and Lizard PEZ dispensers. Which I am not sure is worthy enough for inclusion. (Correct me if I am wrong) So I will focus on the cast section for right now. Jhenderson 777 01:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: List of The Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes characters

The majority of the unsourced character voices can be found in the credits of their respective debut episodes, such as Ms. Marvel and Captain Marvel in "459", and Wolverine in "Meet Captain America". The primary exceptions to this are a bunch of the villains who first appear as part of big crowd shots in episodes like "The Breakout", "The Big House", "Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.", etc. I'll try to get a list put together sometime soon. I also know that Greg Ellis is, in fact, the voice of Rocket Raccoon in EMH, as was the case in Marvel vs. Capcom, thanks to a tweet by Marvel's Chris Baker; I'm working my way through the archives to try and find it so we can use it as a citation. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 00:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. If you're looking for a head start, I checked up, and unless I missed someone, all of Shield and Supporting were credited in their debut episode save for Mockingbird, who didn't talk until Widow's Sting, and Jimmy Woo, who didn't talk until Breakout. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 02:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thor God of Thunder.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Thor God of Thunder.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:29, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Scepanveliki's edits

Should we be accusing him of sock puppetry as well as spamming the A:EMH pages? He has made the same edit three times now, after Scepanmali made the same edit six times and got blocked. Is there some way we can block what he's trying to do, or just block him sooner? --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 22:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm fine to just keep reverting his edits, but there must be some way that wikipedia can block that link or something. And anyway, I should be thanking you on the Marvel films template. It was great that you came in to suggest that. We were both kinda blind to the fact that the series subdivisions were only borderlining on necessary, was contraversial, and complicated the navbox either way... So, thank you. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 14:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Meh, I looked at the page, and that stuff's all too complicated for me... I'll just leave it. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Comic com images

I have never uploaded free use images that aren't mine before so I need to ask this question. Is this and this acceptable as a free use image? Jhenderson 777 19:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

You have to look at image's license, the first has all rights reserved so we are not able to use it. The second is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic, so it checks out. See commons:Commons:Choosing a license#Common free licenses for list of acceptable free licenses. And I'm sure you already know this but free images should be uploaded to the Commons.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
I am a litte late but thank you. I appreciate your help. I knew it was all about the license but I just didn't know which one yet and I was trying to be cautious. :) Jhenderson 777 15:10, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
  1. ^ Jordan Raup (July 20, 2011). "The Amazing Spider-Man trailer". The Film Stage. Retrieved November 28, 2011. Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  2. ^ Rob Keyes (July 20, 2011). "The Official The Amazing Spider-Man trailer is here". Screen Rant. Retrieved November 28, 2011.
  3. ^ Germain Lussier (July 20th, 2011). "The Amazing Spider-Man" teaser trailer". /Film. Retrieved November 28, 2011. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  4. ^ Stephen C (July 20 2011). "Look Out! Here Comes The Amazing Spider-Man trailer". Movie Muse Reviews. Retrieved November 28, 2011. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  5. ^ "How Blatantly Does the New Spider-Man Trailer Rip Off Mirror's Edge?". Kotaku. Retrieved November 28, 2011.
  6. ^ Peter Hall (July 21, 2011). "The Amazing Spider-Man and Mirror's Edge-- Just How Similar Are They?". Movies.com. Retrieved November 28, 2011.
Return to the user page of "TriiipleThreat/Archive 3".