User talk:Erik

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Erik. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The topic of this film meets the basic notability standards but has not begun filming. As it is pushing at WP:NFF (paragraph 3), our policy tells us it can be spoken some place. I think the director's article is the best place. What say? Schmidt, Michael Q. 21:17, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank You / Query[edit]

I thank you again for your response to me on The Two Faces of January for changing it from "American" to "English-language. I have in the past tried to change pages with similar issues. I came in to trouble with an editor called Flyer22 (talk) who from what I could see for no god reason came to an instant dislike against me on Avatar (2009 film), a co-production labeled "American", even though I used a reference to a policy before leaving a polite message on his talk page. I have promised not to continue in the matter as I am not liked and will just make the matter worse. I would like to ask if you could please look in to the matter if you have time as you are arguably one of the best film editors on Wikipedia. Thank You for your time. WARNER one (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Reviewing the film article's talk page archives, the discussion that locked in the current label is here. However, that was in 2010, so you can start a new discussion and provide evidence, such as what countries AFI and BFI identify for the film. This is also an interesting read that could be mentioned. I'm not keen to start discussions about this sort of thing, but I'd be happy to participate once the discussion starts. Do be aware of edit warring; if you are reverted with a claim of consensus, then seek out the details of that and see if the consensus is worth revisiting. If you go back and forth too much, it creates a battleground mentality, and it's harder to have an amicable conversation with the other editor(s). I also hope that you can add content to some film articles; I don't think it is a good idea to have a narrow editing mission. It helps to vary your goals so it is easier to switch to something less contentious. It's just a website at the end of the day, after all. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
WARNER one, the reasons for my troubles with you are made explicitly clear on my talk page; I stand by all of what I stated there. And you did not cite a policy; I did. You cited a guideline, and it did not trump what I explained to you. And as previous talk page discussion at the Avatar (2009 film) article shows, Erik was also one of the editors for categorizing the Avatar film as American. But like Erik stated above, that was years ago. He might have a different opinion on the matter now. And in the future, if you don't want me to weigh in when you mention me, then don't link my username (per WP:Echo).
Erik, seeing as there is already a current discussion on that talk page about the aforementioned Avatar film matter, I don't see a need to start a new discussion there. Flyer22 (talk) 23:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
@Flyer22: Ah-ha, I didn't see that discussion. I was looking toward the end since I thought a new discussion would be there. I see now that the new discussion is piggybacking on an October 2013 discussion. I'll weigh in there a little later. What do you think of the book passage that I linked to above? Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 23:20, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
That book will help sort out matters. Flyer22 (talk) 23:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: Have a cookie :)[edit]

Collaboration time?[edit]

All right, so I think we're down to a waiting game for The FP; I really can't find any more changes to make. So, while I know we said we were going to work on Children of Men, I personally think we should focus our efforts on getting Edge of Tomorrow up to GA. I know I said I would work on that Reception section, and I actually will. I'm planning to after dinner today, which will be around 23:00 UTC so feel free to get on me if I haven't started by then. The one for Neighbors isn't going anywhere, and that article isn't nearly as close to GA as Edge of Tomorrow is, so it can wait. Anyhoo, after we get Edge up to GA, I think we should then go for Children of Men up to FA, and then see what else we can improve. We're like the Dynamic Duo, except both of us are Batman. What do you think? Corvoe (speak to me) 22:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure, it would be great to wrap up on Edge of Tomorrow. I've seen a few more headlines, like this about the film opening at #2 in Japan. There are also a few headlines that talk about the ending, so it may be worth including commentary about that in some fashion. I haven't really edited too much the past week or so; still recovering from the holiday weekend. I started a "References to use" section at Talk:Children of Men but it may be too ambitious to seek these out for FA status. :-P Look forward to it, fellow Batman! Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 22:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
It's worth a shot. I usually don't look into books for research, but this is a rare instance where I really want to (I passionately love this film). And yeah, I think Edge is very close. I'll look for those headlines. Corvoe (speak to me) 22:34, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I swear I'm going to have time to work on things eventually, I just haven't (outside of down time at work) for several days. Once I do though, I'm going to work on the reception section and try to extract information from those references you supplied. Once I know I'll be adding them soon, I'm going to put in a request with GOCE to give the article a run-through, then I think we can safely nominate it for GA. Corvoe (speak to me) 12:11, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
No worries! :) I'm not going anywhere. I get that life can get busy. I'm having a busy week myself, hence my sporadic edits. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 12:13, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Good to hear it. Not the busy week part necessarily, the first part. I'm thinking I'll have some time on Friday to really buckle down and work. If not, I guess the article isn't going anywhere either. No real rush. Corvoe (speak to me) 12:24, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── All right, so I finally have some free time (family was down this weekend), so I'm wondering; apart from a VFX section (which I've started working on in a .txt document) and a copy-edit pass through, what are we thinking we need to get Edge up to GA? Corvoe (be heard) 16:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Corvoe: Hope it was a nicely busy weekend! A section about visual effects sounds good. I am wondering how we can mention the ending coverage. A lot of sources referred to the Film School Rejects piece, so I think we should include the details of that in the article body. I would say we need a more spruced-up "Critical response" section (like I mentioned before, maybe replacing Variety and The Hollywood Reporter with other sources). We also need to expand the lead section to be an accurate summary of the article body once we make these changes. I was busy this past weekend too (really, the past two weeks) but this weekend looks fairly open. :) Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 18:56, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Right, totally forgot I still haven't done the critical response section. The lead should definitely mention the reception, in addition to the gender roles and video game comparisons. As for the alternate ending information, I think we could put that with the information about filming without an ending, towards the end of the sub-headerless "Production" section.
Good to hear you'll be free as well! I'm hoping to wrap up the first go at a VFX section tonight, and start on the critical response area either tonight or tomorrow. We're getting close, I think. Corvoe (be heard) 19:01, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Was that "Thanks" for moving you out of the lead? Haha. Corvoe (be heard) 13:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
No, it was for the nice description of me. :) Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 13:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, it's accurate :P I've vastly improved as an editor over the last few months/year, I think, and a lot of it is due to your help. You're one of few people that I can ask an immensive of questions and not feel annoying, haha. Corvoe (be heard) 14:16, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Exodus: Gods and Kings[edit]

The trailer for this film was just released and I've noticed a number of articles discussing the ethnicity of the cast. This article actually links to the Wikipedia article: Ancient Egyptian race controversy. I was wondering if it was mentioning in the article. There is a similar discussion at The_Last_Airbender#Casting_controversy. Thoughts?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Haha, the ethnicity issue is exactly why I started following the article. (Joel Edgerton and Aaron Paul as Egyptians -- really!?) There's definitely some interesting coverage to come. I don't think the Screen Rant article is quite substantial; it is foreseeing the issue like we are. I think we can wait for something more in-depth to include in the Wikipedia article, which may happen soon with the trailer now circulating. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Just found this! Maybe we can state something after all. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I just mentioned the Screen Rant article because it mentions one of our own articles. But there are few more that comment on it as well including; The Wire, Slate, and Vanity Fair. But the article appears to need some general expansion first so that the controversy isn't given WP:UNDUE weight.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)