User talk:JimDunning

   Discussion Conventions

• Please post new messages at the bottom of the page to prevent confusion.
• Please sign your comments. Type ~~~~ after your text or use the edit toolbar.
• Please use section headings to separate conversation topics.

See: Welcome to Wikipedia, FAQ, Wikiquette, Be nice, and Talk page guidelines.

Education Welcome

Feel free to educate me by pointing any errors I make, or by offering other points of view. This is a great way for me to expand my knowledge and I appreciate your help.

Hi Jim,

Thank you for your response to my entry in the discussion page about Mannatech. I did not wish to change the article about Mannatech. As you saw, I had attempted that last December and all that I wrote disappeared within 24 hours. I was moved to join the discussion to state some facts, given that my edit of the article in December prompted the swift removal of all that I wrote. I wanted to see if something I wrote would be accepted, if even on the discussion page.

I will read the references you suggested. I respect your quest for only accepting verify-able facts. I am still a little uncertain about the various examples you gave. Reading the reference will help.

I feel quite distraught about your comment regarding the first place award from Scripps for the poster. Have you seen the poster? Do you think that the award was given for the artwork on the poster or for the research depicted on the poster or for something else? There was a valid reason that poster received the award. Do you know exactly what that reason is? Please explain in detail before dismissing it as trivial. Regards, Lael —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.120.78 (talk) 09:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Malcolm in the Middle

Jim,

Please review your edit of Malcolm in the Middle. I do not pretend to know Wikki speak but I believe the article was better before. As an example, the last sentence in Victor & Ida is incomplete. Can you undo this or was it intentional? It could be part of the process.

I was a fan and wrote a few sentences of the article so I check it occasionally.

Best regards,

wsb@austin.rr.com Bill

Bill, thanks for raising this question, however, I don't think these mods were mine. The changes I made on 25 July 2006 were simple paragraph reformatting. But as I look at the revision history I see what you mean. These changes were unintentional and happened either because of a technical issue or my complete incompetence. ;-) I see someone has been good enough to revert back to the original version, so we're all set. In the future, I think I'll also do a version comparison in addition to the simple preview. Thanks.

Jim Dunning 18:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Watership Down

Hi, your edit to Watership Down has been reverted. If you're using Firefox together with Google Toolbar, you may find that long pages are cut off unexpectedly while editing in tabs; please be careful. --Kjoonlee 11:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

your question at helpdesk

Hi, if you want to include a template in an article, place {{Infobox Town NY}} at the appropriate section -- -- Lost^(talk) 17:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Town NY

I have edited this infobox in order to make room for your map. I have added your template to Brookhaven, New York, you can look for yourself. If you have any questions or comments leave me a message. --Zimbabweed 07:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks so much for helping out in Williamson, NY, as well as other New York articles. Stepp-Wulf 01:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC).

I will look into your recent inquiry regarding the red dot in IE. However, it may take a while, but I will get back to you before the day is over about it. --Zimbabweed 15:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, it seems Internet Explorer can't handle (or at least doesn't in v6 as I'm using, I normally use Firefox, I haven't used IE in quite some time) PNG images, so I have changed the red dot image in the template (Image:GBRedDot.png) to a JPG (Image:Red-dot3.jpg) in Template:GBNewYorkState. (I hope the creator of that template won't get too upset). It should be working now, if it doesn't let me know.--Zimbabweed 23:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if you're watching my talk page, so I'll respond here. A very quick Wikipedia search :) found me this: PNG#Internet Explorer incompatibility. That should answer your inquiries. Sorry I hadn't responded yesterday like I had said, but things had piled up around here. If you have any more questions, don't be afraid. --Zimbabweed 00:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your message. I hadn't intended to get so involved in the article, but once I got there, it turned out the page needed much babysitting. How exciting that your son worked on the film – he must have lots of inside anecdotes, AKA "original research." Cognita 02:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the Films WikiProject!

Welcome!

File:Transparent film reel and film.png

Hey, welcome to the Films WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• The project has a monthly newsletter currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
• Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!
• Want to collaborate on articles? The Cinema Collaboration of the Week picks an article every week to work on together.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Cbrown1023 03:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

69.119.119.178 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)

I haven't looked into it, but if your observations are correct, it borders on vandalism. You may want to start at WP:AN/I, find the appropriate link or page in the header and make a report. My guess is that there is an admin already familiar with this user, if it has a history of disruptive behavior. You may get a faster response if you track down the original blocking admin. Looking at the log, you might be better off making a report at WP:AIAV. —Viriditas | Talk 04:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

See also WP:TT for future ref. I just placed a warning on the anon's talk page for his edits to Zach Tyler Eisen, using the "verror" template. If the anon vandalizes again in the same manner, use that in sequential order to justify a block. —Viriditas | Talk 07:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Jim, I posted again at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sarah_Ewart ; please check this if the page isn't already on your watchlist.

Viriditas, we think the vandal is Zach. Cognita 08:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Jim, see my comments here about using Sarah's talk page. —Viriditas | Talk 20:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey Jim, sorry for the delay replying. I've extended the block on that IP to 6 months. I don't really want to go longer than that since IPs can be reassigned. We can always re-block in another 6 months if necessary. Sarah Ewart 03:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Subpages

See WP:SP. Easiest way to remember it is wikify, forward slash, foo: /Foo. —Viriditas | Talk 07:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

BRHS Revamp

Hi. I had a look at BRHS Revamp. I assume this is intended as a new version for Broad Run High School or something. I would propose to userfy (move) this to User:JimDunning/BRHS Revamp (or the like). Better not in main space. Merry x-mas! --Ligulem 13:53, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I've moved it to User:JimDunning/BRHS Revamp and deleted the remaining redirect. --Ligulem 14:56, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleting pages

To have a page under your userspace deleted, blank it and put {{db-user}} onto it. An admin will then delete it. Or you can ask an admin directly. --Ligulem 15:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Loudoun Seal.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Loudoun Seal.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Demographic Information of schools

Enrollment information can be found at this site. It goes back to the 1995-1996 school year. Schools are broken down by grade and ethnicity.

Some exceptions will exist here however, including on BR or any Loudoun school. I used to have a list showing enrollment at schools in fast growing school districts throughout a school year (including Loudoun County), but I lost it now. I used it for a senior thesis while I was in college. This would explain why BR had 1,670 students in 1999-2000 rather than 1,650 or so. Schools can grow by almost 100 people during the course of a school year if in a very high growth area (which can explain why Briar Woods and Freedom are growing faster than enrollment indicators suggest; Broad Run and Stone Bridge have settled out for the most part now).

Another thing you may notice if you look at the racial breakdown is that there are categories for Native Americans, Hawaiians, and "Unspecified/Other." I rounded out the percentages of Whites, Hispanics, Blacks and Asians to the nearest whole number, and though I don't want to sound politically incorrect, most schools in Virginia are under 1% Native American, but I would say a school is 1% Native American if there were a sufficient amount of people, at least for the purposes of Wikipedia. Next, you may notice that the percentage of Whites is higher than the Virginia Dept of Education suggests in some schools. This is because the "unspecified" students are assumed to be White, and this was the advice I was told to take from my professor when doing my thesis to count "unspecified people." Hope this helps. 20176 00:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Broad Run High School

The article Broad Run High School you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Broad Run High School for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Appraiser 16:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome again. A lot of people misunderstand the best way to use the thumbnail feature (you're not alone). If you click on "my preferences" at the top of your screen and then "Files", you'll see your default thumbnail size. Whenever an author didn't specify a thumbnail size, when you view the article, the width of the thumbnails will be equal to your selection. This is useful so that users with a 600 pixel screen don't have to see the same size pictures as users with a 1600 pixel screen. I've been in discussions with people who like the layout of an article with certain picture sizes, but the layout looks completely different on a smaller screen. It's really fruitless to try to control layout that way. Some people even read Wikipedia on a PDA. For that reason, I've advocated creating a new user preference option of 0px (no pictures), but that hasn't yet been implemented. There's some discussion about this topic here.

I hope you don't mind that I edited your picture. I self-nominated a picture[1] of my own for Featured Picture a while ago - and it failed the process miserably. One of the criticisms was that it was tilted. When I used my picture editor to fix it, I saw that they were correct - it was 1/2 degree off of true vertical, which I could barely perceive by looking at it.

Good job with all the references. I need to do work like that on my failed GA nominee, Saint Paul, Minnesota. But today, I'll be working on 110th United States Congress freshman class. I'm planning to nominate it for DYK, since it's brand new.--Appraiser 14:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:WayneCountyNYUSALogo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:WayneCountyNYUSALogo.gif. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 12:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The Prestige: current talk page?

Jim, thanks for archiving that discussion page. I don't know how to do such things myself. But if that page has slipped into the past to become Archive 2, where's the current discussion page? When I click on Discussion, I get Archive 2. Cognita 01:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Cognita, Mmmm . . . when I click on Discussion I get the current Talk page, so it appears to be where it's supposed to be. Weird. I'll check this out some more.

Jim Dunning 02:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I think I was misled before because some previous topics remain on the current disc. page – you split the old page at some date in December instead of archiving everything up to the present.

About not being able to edit the article or its disc. page, I don't know what's wrong. I may have mentioned earlier that my tech skills are pretty much limited to safe operation of a refrigerator magnet. All I can think of is that you might try a different browser. Cognita 06:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Viriditas made the first archive. He seems to have wandered off since, though. Cognita 18:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Jim, I don't see a need for a "differences" section. I haven't tossed my two cents on the table because I see no way to resolve the disagreement. There's no real governance structure here; for instance, majority rule doesn't carry a decision. Trying to act as a page guardian on this or any article frustrates me. People keep coming along and messing something up. Cognita 01:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you think it would help if I posted my opinion on the discussion page or on his page, arguing against the new section? Cognita 06:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It didn't seem to me that UNoHoo accepted anything I said. He just argued against each point. On another forum, I recently saw a discussion of the phrase "selling a salami one slice at a time," which sounds like the situation here, only in reverse. Do you really think we can discard successive slices of salami until it's all gone without attracting notice? And what if he finds these talk pages?

Why not suggest on Prestige:Talk that Adaptation is the natural place for such information? Cognita 01:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Schools Sidebar

Thanks! I'm glad you like it. Were you asking about the statistics table? It's automatically updated by a bot run by the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team for any articles listed with {{WPSchool}}. As far as updating the Things you can do list, I'm about to transfer that into a called "Template:WikiProject Schools tasks" for easier access --Jh12 06:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Your libertarian opinions

Wow, a double 100! I'd like to hear your opinions on a couple of questions which I disagreed or answered maybe:

1. "Replace government welfare with private charity"
2. "There should be no National ID card"
3. "Repeal laws prohibiting adult possession and use of drugs"

A fellow libertarian, Λυδαcιτγ 05:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I don't know if you mean for your blue outline div to only extend partway down the page. If you want it to automatically envelop new sections, you can remove the:

</div>

Λυδαcιτγ 05:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Stowe middle school

In case you need this: User:Jh12/Stowe middle school. Thanks! --Jh12 10:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Article restart

To tell the truth, I'm not really familiar with the rules or traditions associated with restarting articles. I know that if you simply replace the article, there is a pretty strong tendency to delete it; someone might even speedy delete it as a recreated article. If you add significant new information to the article (and say so on the talk page), then I think it would be given a fair chance. Personally (speaking of course as the person who AFDed the articles) I would recommend against recreating the articles; unless there is something special to say about the school, middle school articles tend to get deleted at AFD. (Several other mass AFDs that I just did failed, but the admin who closed them was a notorious inclusionist, and I will probably send one of those sets to "Deletion Review".) I think there are many other things to be done on Wikipedia other than creating articles on local schools that aren't really wanted. --Brianyoumans 05:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm just as unfamiliar with restarting an article as Brianyoumans would be. However if I had to guess, the article is going to have to be "notable", and needs to be backed up with references, etc. There should also be an admin from our area who would look primarily at Virginia related articles, and a couple guys have tried to do this. This is a double edged sword however, because if this admin is like Brian, a lot more articles can be deleted, but if the guy is an "inclusionist," then they are more likely to be protected, if you want to call it that way. I find it surprising that LCPS middle school pages are merged or deleted, while Fairfax ones got to stay (different admin oversaw those pages). I also helped get a wikipedia page of all VHSL districts and regions, many which barely state its name and members, and these empty pages are located mostly in Southwest VA too. It would help if someone familiar with that area started chipping in, but it's kind of luck of the draw too. But as I said earlier, if we were to restart any middle school in Loudoun, notability will be important, and/or references. Though a page can't be deleted for notability alone, that still will make or break a page in the eyes of somebody who will delete a page because he/she doesn't see anything notable, etc.20176 00:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Prestige

No, it was my mistake. WikiNew 17:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm definitely willing to help out. FYI...we don't need peer review for GA, but we do need it for FA. You must be very proud of your son. —Viriditas | Talk 00:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I tinkered with the lead. Details are in your sandbox; good use of a resource there. I'm too busy saving other parts of the world (adminning other forums and dealing with local justice issue) to put in much time on this one; haven't looked at the main article lately. Is there a deadline? Cognita 07:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Jim, people are constantly making changes to the page, including the Plot section that Viriditas and I once devoted much effort to getting into shape. What can a GA nomination accomplish if the article changes all the time? I'm still too busy with other projects to help much. Cognita 19:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The Prestige (film)

I've been helping out for the articles GA nomination, and a quick question over images. Which of these two do you helps supplement more regarding Angiers suicidal scheme?

http://uk.rottentomatoes.com/m/prestige/gallery.php?page=36&size=lores&nopop=1

http://uk.rottentomatoes.com/m/prestige/gallery.php?page=4&size=lores

WikiNew 19:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. As for IPs just wanting to make a contribution when it's not needed, I would consider it something more experienced users would simply undo. Things like that and vandalism isn't under the stability criteria: something like changing the structure of the article completely is a problem. Overall, it's up to the GA judge to decide. WikiNew 20:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Prestige (film)

The article The Prestige (film) you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:The Prestige (film) for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Mr.Z-mantalk¢Review! 01:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		I award you, JimDunning, this barnstar for your all of work in making Wikipedia articles better. After getting 2 good articles to your name, I believe that you deserve this as thanks for making Wikipedia a better place. Mr.Z-mantalk¢Review! 01:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Woo! We did it! WikiNew 17:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for making me a star

Jim, thanks for that nice blue star you dropped onto my page. It was unexpected; I didn't know that work on just one article brought barnstars. In fact, I know little about them at all. I kind of thought only admins could dispense them.

Viriditas should get one if I should. He put a lot of work into Plot. For a while, we e-mailed drafts back and forth to improve that section.

And you should get one too – which you did. Congratulations on it! Cognita 05:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Congrats to you both, and thanks for the star. —Viriditas | Talk 11:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If you happen to know...

Last November, I posted a film-related question on an article. No answer yet. Your user page says you're interested in film. Do you happen to know of a reference to support the statement that many Westerns have been shot on location in Columbia, California? I know the statement is true (one of the times I went there as a child, they were shooting Bullwhip and I got Rhonda Fleming's autograph). I just don't know how to support it. Cognita 06:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

New lead

I like what you've done with the new lead for Children of Men, but we've had problems with unsourced leads in the past; some editors (not you) see this as an opportunity to add original research, not comprehending that the lead is summarizing the body of the article. To prevent that from happening again (and again) we should cite sources in the lead section. —Viriditas | Talk 21:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Battlefield HS Advice Taken

Jim:

Thanks for your outstanding and constructive suggestions for improving the Battlefield High School article. I genuinely appreciate the effort you put into the review and for giving such clear indications for how to improve it!

Bhs itrt 18:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit: And thanks for the AWESOME help with the references and citations! Bhs itrt 16:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

User:DJvac

Since he's been doing the same thing to the Tops article, I've requested page protection as I just went to the fourth revert.

He won't discuss this. I am also taking this to WP:AN/I. I hope he gets blocked. I consider further additions of this content to be vandalism.

I strongly suggest that if he continues, you request page protection for the Wegmans article as well. Daniel Case 02:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

UPDATE: After I took this to AN/I, an admin there blocked him for 48 hours. Daniel Case 04:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

R. Madhavan revert

You said: "Yamla, I see you reverted a name change in the Infobox for R. Madhavan from Madhavan to Maddyhavan. I reverted that since I couldn't find any reference to Maddyhavan anywhere, thinking you were either wrong or vandalizing. However, after reviewing your contribs and user page and that of FA Maker I'm obviously more suspicious of him (although the Madhavan info seems fine). Could you fill me in on the situation, please? Thank you."

Sorry, I should have used an edit summary. I reverted an edit made by a banned sockpuppet under the theory of WP:DENY. Please feel free to redo that edit, but note that you will then be "owning" it. For example, if I reverted an edit which inserted libel and then you redo the edit, you would then be responsible for the libel, not the banned user who originally made the edit. I seriously doubt that's the case here, mind you. Please feel free to contact me again if you want any more information. --Yamla 15:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

You said: "So, if I understand this, you reverted the edit even though it appears to be a valid correction just to deny recognition to the suspected sockpuppet? I have no problem making the subsequent correction, but I should not revert, just make the correction as if the sockpuppet's edit never occurred, correct? Thanks for the education."

Exactly correct all around, yes. I mean, it's hardly like anyone would mind if you just reverted, but yes, the correct course of action is for you to go ahead and make the edit as though the sockpuppet's edit never occurred. Have a good day! --Yamla 20:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Children of Men

All right, fair enough. I very much appreciate your eloquence in dealing w/the NPOV situation. Yes, the critical response has been overwhelmingly positive, as well it should be. Children of Men is one of the best sci-fi movies I've ever seen.C1k3 05:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Last Mimzy

Thanks for saving my comments in the talk section. Not really sure what to do next. The article is woefully inadequate as-is. Much of the critical information about the movie's plot is left out in the current version.

I understand the desire to get "to the point" as it were. But I often find that many books and tv show articles that I've worked on have literally tens if not hundreds of pages of text. I'd be interested in giving it another shot if you could provide some more specific feedback of what you'd like to see on that page - and perhaps an example of a good film article that I could base this on.

Thanks.Jpittman 19:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

mimzy

I've taken another shot. Let me know what you think. I arranged the information into chronological order, but I had a tough time removing much. I freely admit that it is a bit long. Major themes in the movie include (family relationships including trust, spiritual/ecological/science conflicts, as well as journey theme). I really feel like you need almost all of this information to capture all of these elements. But, please, go nuts. I figure you can be more objective than I can since I was smitten with the movie. Cheers. Jpittman 15:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

List-to-prose tag removed from The Prestige (film)

Nope, I was just trying to clear up a debate. Glad everything worked out :) --gren グレン 15:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm

Interesting comments, [2]. but sensitive contributors could find offence even though on another users talk page page, please see Wikipedia:Civility. Besides, if forced to choose, I'd like to think of myself more as a B.A.. Cheers ;-) Deon Steyn 13:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Sivaji: The Boss

Heya Jimmy,

• Can you do me a favour by reviewing and peer reviewing and eventually rating the Sivaji: The Boss article.

Many Cheers, Thanks,

G Ganesh 18:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

The Ultimate Gift

Since you have edited this article previously, I wondered if I could impose on you to give your two cents in a small, really not a big edit war that started. User:Bbagot deleted all of the reviews for this movie yesterday. I requested dialog and we proceded amicably. I took his suggestions to shorten the length of the section, put into prose. I, in good faith, kept his desire to include IMDB user ratings, but with a qualification plus kept a positive review from a non-movie reviewer from Fobes. He reverted back to the laundry list of reviews, noting in the change log that he felt this gave more balance. I invited him for further discussion. After 20 hours of no word, I put back my rewrite. He reverted again and now I've made him angry. I know this is so much about so little but if you have a sec, I would appreciate a second voice in this matter. If you feel that I am in the wrong, then feel free to express that. User_talk:Bbagot does have a history of edit wars. I avoid them like the plague. Thanks. Therefore 23:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate that. If you check out (not the whole page, but towards the bottom) of Talk:Heather Wilson I think you will see that I try to keep a cool, level head. I mention this only because my contributions list is now flooded with my sandbox work on a article for David E. Kelley. Thanks! Therefore 04:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey -- I think we're going to resolve this on our own. He's a little hot headed, but does make positive contributions and is compromising. I appreciate your offer. At least I'm done with the David E. Kelley work. I'm exhausted. <wink> Therefore 19:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: The Prestige

I'm not sure; I looked in the Response section, but there were no other awards and nominations listed for The Prestige. If the Oscar nominations are the only major instances of recognition that the film received, then the end-of-lead mention would be fine. I guess it's my impression that the first sentence should be purely descriptive, even for films that won Oscars for Best Picture. That win can definitely be mentioned later in the lead, but I guess nominations in the other categories don't stand out as much. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 12:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

May 2007 Re: The Prestige (novel)

Hi, Jim. I guess you took issue with the alternate interpretation, that the prestige materials were not lifeless shells. Would it be more acceptable if I supported the interpretation with page references or quotes from the novel? It may seem a trivial point, but in fact the realization that the prestige materials are not "lifeless" is really the clincher to the whole book. Without this insight, the ending does seem inappropriately abrupt, which as I'm sure you are aware is an common complaint in reviews of The Prestige. Sirjaguar 18:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC) Lawson Reilly

May 2007

Tx for ur suggestions :) Will take care of it. And can u do anythin to stop good faith edits like these :? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sivakasi_%28film%29&action=history http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thirupaachi&action=history http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pokkiri&action=history Srinath2k1

180 px

Sorry, I'm having trouble seeing the images at that resolution. I probably shouldn't have changed it. —Viriditas | Talk 01:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Revert war continues

User:Srinath2k1 has begun revert warring here, here, here.

This account is being used only for this purpose. What action should be taken? Anwar 17:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Virginia Newsletter - May 2007

The May 2007 issue of the Virginia WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.--Kubigula (talk) 03:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Loudoun Seal.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Loudoun Seal.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 05:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Xaverian High School notable alumni

We at Xaverian realize that Wikipedia is a global endeavor of information but you must also realize that this information must be accurate. If someone places the name of an alumnus under the categaory of 'Notable', we must protest this event since this honor was not bestowed upon him by the school. If this were the case, every alum that graduated can place his name here as having attended or with a profession that cannot be verified. Notable alumni, distinguished alumni or any such data must reference our site link where all those names are listed. This link was placed there by us and was removed by you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Xaverianhs (talk • contribs) 07:59, June 7, 2007 (UTC)

There is no claim in the article that the alumni listed as "notable" are noted as such by the school. Hence your claim that such alumni "must reference [your] site" is false. You do not own that article and I encourage you to discuss your concerns on the article's Talk page.

I further encourage you to read and respond to the comments others have left on your own Talk page. Your actions raise serious concerns about conflict of interest and the use of a role account. --ElKevbo 13:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia New York Meet-Up

NEW YORK CITY MEET UP!!

Howdy! Please come to the First Annual New York Wikipedian Central Park Picnic. R.S.V.P. @ Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC
--David Shankbone 19:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for advice, but...

Who will make decision about slavian barbarians trying to destroy the article Red army crimes in Lithuania? This is only knowlidge (zero emotions) - only historical facts and wikipedia is collection of knowlidge and facts, but some nationalist from slavian countries are going to destroy facts and to hide real history of Red army - so they are according to the rules of wiki real barbarians and vandals who supports criminal activities. This is very nice case for the court! What does it mean tag - This article or section needs copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone and/or spelling? Is it in bad English? USA never recognised ocupation of Lithuania by Red army in 1940.

Ttturbo 18:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The real battle started. I/ve created category Red Army crimes Yeasterday night u helped. Thanks.

Ttturbo 09:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Could You imagine what is seeable for me, when I looking at my talk page, and for You?Ttturbo 09:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo marauders williamson (ny) high school.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Logo marauders williamson (ny) high school.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:26, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Lithuania

http://lt.wikibooks.org/wiki/Lietuvos_Wikipedijos_istorija_-_triumvirato_diktatūra

http://lt.wikibooks.org/wiki/Lietuvos_Wikipedijos_istorija_-_neteisėti_adminstratorių_veiksmai 66.171.224.214 18:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Ttturbo, mindset and goals.

Thanks for pointing that passage out, for although I follow the page, I missed that. Due to the complete mess that his page is in now, of course.

I agree with your suggestion of not addressing him personally anymore - e.g. contrary to what I had just decided for myself, I will not warn him. Though I will continue to vote in articles for deletion. If everybody in those same articles refrains from answering his comment, there will be no threaded comment either, and no need to restructure things - an added bonus. --Pan Gerwazy 00:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I do not know what to do either. I had just advised at the Russian portal to do the same as I. I warned User:GDonato, since he issued a warning when he last put it up on his user page. I think he is not an administrator, however. I suppose if the disruption continues, this must go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents‎. Everybody is trying to avoid that, because he still more or less behaves like a newbie. And we do not bite newbies.--Pan Gerwazy 01:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it was a good thing to put that warning at the Russian incident portal. User:IgorSF pointed out to me that our friend got banned at Lithuanian Wikipedia for a year. There is also evidence on Talk:Red_army_crimes_in_Lithuania --Pan Gerwazy 10:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

This user has been indef. blocked, temporarily. I am glad that you kept a cool head, Jim. On IRC, the bot was running like crazy for an hour in order to help this user. Miranda 12:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Ttturbo

You are, of course, quite right, and I see in his talk page that you have tried hard with him - much harder than I have. I was reluctant to apply my professional skills to use words implying psychiatric states, and perhaps will not do so now; but I agree that further engagement is pointless. I was, as you were, just trying to help him. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Internet is the great network of powerfull computers - "servers", connected to lots of personal and to other "servers" having necessary software for correct information interchange. Information interchage is performing using information packages. Servers and even PC usually has their own security codes. Hackers sometimes are lucky to break those codes and makes troubles even for Pentagon or Estonian sites - Estonia suffered russian hackers attack on April- May this year and there was discussion in NATO how to evaluate these attacks. There is possible even some foolishment by professional hackers intercepting at server some packages of comunication, changing their content and trying to make a quarrel among different users. You honourable proffessr of medicine, having NO UNDERSANTING or becouse of the other reasons wrote this - I was reluctant to apply my professional skills to use words implying psychiatric states, and perhaps will not do so now; but I agree that further engagement is pointless. - used your proffesional skills for accusement of wiki user Ttturbo who published lots of materials about Red Army crimes (now he is blocked forever and his articles destroyed by slavian and prorussian users and admins.}. Please, read more about internet, study situation - hacking in the russian style was detected on Lithuania wiki pages too.

Russian diplomacy

I am Lithuanian patriot, so I wuold like to discuss some Russian diplomacy. It is well known, that after second world war they sent some falsificated letters tryimg to make a quarell among western European leaders. I'll be not surprised if something simmilar appeared during negotians of user Ttturbo and Jim Dunning despite they are not high rank leaders of any country. Studying their conversation and editting I've noticed this: 1. Tturbo asked for an editing help at a help desk. 2. Jim Dunning editted his article Red Army crimes in Lithuania presenting it like a list of facts used in Ttturbo written article. Ttturbo was glad and thanked but continued o ask for help later becouse of redirection problems. 3. Miranda disrupted his askings aqqussing in some advertising. 4 Admin Jersey Devil warned Tttubo and blocked Tturbo later for 31 hour. 5. According to his story, Tturbo wrote the answer explaining his newcomer's problems and noticed devil's answer that wikipedia isn't a collection of lists noticed. 6 Later he have seen that this answer occured to be signed by...Jim Dunning who made the day before the list from his article and those transformations didn't left the trace on the history. 7. Tturbo mentioned this history on the talk page, but there was no any reaction at illegal jeering. 8. Ttturbo have wrote the articel abour hackedwikipage but it was speedy deleted. Admin Wimt appologised after some explanations and said that let the other more experienced in such tricks makes decision. 9. The renrwed article about wikihacking was speedy deleted again involving You Tony too! Unbelievable story but sometimes this happens! 10. Next Tturbo published the new article about Wikipedia hacking stressing some strange hacking of wikipedia on Nowember 2006m which was fixed, but for unknown reasons occuared in the archives and made some infection. This one was speedy deleted too (Miranda and others). 11. After sharp Mirandas and Mikalaj personal attacks (seems like provocations) Ttturbo was blocked indefinetely by Moreschi trusting tto the other opinions but not verifying the facts, allowing Tturbo only to talk. 12. The new accusements and adwices for blocked Tturbo occuared again on his talk page. Possibly, this is an example how russian diplomacy works against Lithuanian. 78.62.20.125 21:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Honourable Jimmy, what is Your opinion about this. Would You please contact FBI? 78.62.20.125 16:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't feed the trolls. Miranda 18:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I had the same Lithuanian Patriot, or at least the same IP, on my talk-page. I told him to go away, although not reacting at all might have been better. But, as you say, the fingers itch if witheld from the keyboard. It would be wholly inappropriate for me, having been involved in conversation ,to either warn or block, but if you feel that this constitutes vandalism WP:AIV is available. Or WP:AN/I. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Order of the Flaming Hellpot I, Miranda award JimDunning with the Order of the Flaming Hellpot for maintaining his composure with a disruptive user.

Miranda 18:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Grutter...

I've taken the liberty to speedy-close this alleged copyvio case. No need to fill the backlog of copyvio reports with it. Hope you don't mind. Lupo 15:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: "What steps do you take to expedite?" — I already did so: [3] and [4]. Lupo 15:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

American films

Please please!!! help fill in List of American films. Even if it is just a few details it all helps -any contribution you can make will be more than appreciated!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 17:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Barbaro

It's all part of a hoax involving The Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent, The Pugilist Club and List of collegiate secret societies. It all started with List of collegiate secret societies, which contained tons of red and black links, and links to pages which had the same name as, but were not about, secret societies, all with no references. I went in and deleted all of the unreferenced entries, and a fire storm and edit war began. So I put them all back, tagged all of them for citation needed, and said that I was going to re-delete all of them by August 1 if there were no references. I've been getting tons of abuse from anon editors, particularly one from Wesleyan University who says that WP:V doesn't require sources, bizarrely enough. Then all of a sudden, a new user wrote about the Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent on the List of collegiate secret societies page, and added a new entry for that and for The Pugilist Club, both supposedly at Purdue University. The Skull and Crescent article had references to somebody's papers which are not in general circulation, so I asked on the article's Talk page if those papers actually referenced the club, and was assured that they do. Then yesterday, User:Deor alerted me to the Barbaro family article and The Pugilist Club, which I didn't know anything about. All three articles written by the same newbie, all citing the same references. Google, Google news and Google books searches turned up nothing about any of the supposed unavailable sources, nor about the Skull and Crescent or the Pugilist Club. I went on the Talk page at Barbaro family and indicated that it looked like a great deal of it was a hoax, from the same made up sources as the two secret society pages. Just a cursory glance showed that "V. Barbaro" supposedly founded the Pugilist Club at Purdue in 1991, and that both of the secret societies are supposedly related to Project Blue Book, even though that program was suspended in 1969. The newbie user went on a tirade, swearing and abusing on one of the AfD pages, and User:Deor deleted all of the unsourced edits by User:Tiki-two, the newbie, on the Barbaro page. Tiki-two reverted, I reverted him once and explained that the sources are suspect. I see in the article's history that he and his anon, User:4.142.114.3 have been edit warring on the article to restore the unsourced information. User:Starblind seems to have gotten into it, and has now protected the page. That's all I know. Corvus cornix 15:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that about Fenwick. High school kids. Corvus cornix 18:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks to me like the kid got tired of playing his game and decided to quit while he was still ahead. Whatever works to get the articles back to the way they belong. Corvus cornix 20:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Fenwick High School (Chicago, Illinois) - your assumptions of good faith are much stronger than mine.  :) Corvus cornix 21:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

65.54.98.30 (talk · contribs) is now trying to blank the talk pages to wipe out any record of their hoaxing. Corvus cornix 23:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

65.54.98.30 has now been blocked for repeated Talk page blanking. But I expect to see one of his other sockpuppets show up any time now. Corvus cornix 23:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Vacation

Have a good one! Corvus cornix 23:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Worrying edits re: Barbaro hoax

The Barbaro hoaxer is currently attempting to remove and alter other people's talk-page comments on pages discussing the hoax, sometimes using deceptive edit summaries (i.e. "spelling correction" when removing large blocks of other people's comments), and has now been blocked from at least two IPs for doing so. What's worrying is that he posted that you told him to do this, mentioning you by name and saying "these changes are justified under Mr. Dunning". While I highly doubt that's actually true, I felt you should certainly know about it, as if the wrong person were to read that and take it at face value, it would look pretty bad. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

hacking

Have you ever got to the bottom of why tturbo thinks you hacked his page? I couldn't make heads nor tails of his complaint. --Fredrick day 21:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It's either we're not using the same definition for "hack" or he really thinks something hinky is going on. Ttturbo regularly makes accusations about secret police, communists and Red Army apologists being behind any actions he feels are threatening. It seems that he has difficulty believing that many of us are just average people who like editing articles in general. He's expressed many times the belief that only people with a POV would be interested in working on articles about certain topics; Ttturbo just doesn't see that I have more interest in encyclopedic accuracy than the Red Army itself. I think "hack" means that some editors aren't who they represent themselves to be. Very frustrating.
Jim Dunning | talk 21:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, there was absolutely no "hacking" of any king going on. For some reason, User:Ttturbo became convinced his user page has undergone some "hacking"; this most likely was because he failed to understand basic concepts of Wikiediting, such as people being able to edit anywhere on the page; he was probably used to forum-like communication. Instead of asking nicely, however, he started accusing everyone left and right of hacking and supporting Red Army crimes; this included not only those who voted for deleting the several articles he created, but completely neutral people who just happened to come to his userpage. To reiterate, Jim Dunning did nothing that can be taken as "hacking" with any definition of the word. IgorSF 07:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Russians want to hide their army crimes and wants to make new provocations. I need NO ANY HELP and NO ANY ADWICES from Jim Dunning. Your hands don't feed me! I have some understanding about script languages and I need no advices for the moment. I DO NOT ATTACK other editors - this is You and Miranda repeatedly and disruptive are cleaning my boxes. This is not the same - you plus Miranda and OTHER EDITORS. I have got soem polite conversations recently with the other editors and even opponents. So THE STATEMENT above is FALSE. I don't know - is it really you or someone using yours image attacks me trying to hide the commited crime. Neither you neither Frederick has no abilitie to have a look at my screen and have no possibility to make adequate decision wht happened.. You have no specific information about wiki security and packages interception and you said nothing informative about wiki hacking. It's very frustrative. Your comments about situation were false and coments about lithuanian diplomacy are false and jeerfull. If I started some experiments with boxes - I'll do it myself. You explained what do editors are waiting on the AfD pages - I've placed sources. If I need some help - I'm going to ask someone but not You. I expect Miranda again will not allow me to ask for help but I'm going to find her to be disruptive again. There was real hacking of my page not detectable from history and later there appeared one more strange mistake not allowing to edit normaly my page. Ttturbo 21:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I have indef blocked him. I respect you for your patience, but trust me, it is an absolutely hopless matter. Reserve your goodwill and patience to somebody who deserves it. Renata 03:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Yeah, I usually use edit summaries in disputes or if I feel the edit needs to be explained - Seems like I need to use them more often :) WhisperToMe 18:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Transition from Renaissance to Baroque in Instrumental Music

Thanks for taking the time to review the article and for your helpful comments. I have two responses:

• "The Influence today section needs some [references]."

There are, unfortunately, no references to be had for this. It is, I confess, my opinion, or rather logical thinking. However, I thought I could avoid an OR or POV charge by appealing to the reader's logic and experience with music today - i.e. pointing out things that are readily observable by any reader, which does not (as I understand it) constitute OR (it's not OR to say that the sky is blue without citations because any reader can walk outside and see that it is).

Basically I thought I was saying, "Such and such is readily observable in pop & art music today, and given what has just been discussed in the article (with citations), it logically follows that the reason for the observable characteristic of today goes all the way back to 1600."

Will that work, or does it still constitute OR/POV? If it does then I'm going to just scrap that whole last section because there's no point scrounging for references. However, I wanted to state my case because I believe that section does have some relevance, so I'd like to not have to jettison it if I don't have to.

• "Direct quotes like, 'impressing [the listeners] with the greatest possible effectiveness' need to be sourced."

The reason I didn't cite this is because it just restates a quotation from a few lines earlier, which is cited ("express the conceptions of the mind [or] how to impress them with the greatest possible effectiveness on the minds of the listeners."). I didn't think it was necessary to give another citation for the same quote right away, but I've gone ahead and added it anyway. Feel free to take it out if you'd like.

DC Meetup notice

Greetings. There is going to be a Washington DC Wikipedia meetup on next Saturday, July 21st at 5pm in DC. Since you are listed in Category:Wikipedians_in_Virginia, I thought I'd invite you to come. I'm sorry about the short notice for the meeting. Hopefully we'll do somewhat better in that regard next time. If you can't come but want to make sure that you are informed of future meetings be sure to list yourself under "but let me know about future events", and if you don't want to get any future direct notices \(like this one\), you can list yourself under "I'm not interested in attending any others either" on the DC meetup page.--Gmaxwell 22:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

question about retrieving old web material

Do you know a way to retrieve an old version of a recently revised website? I am asking this because in the exchanges on you-know-what page you seemed to be able to extract more internet-related info from some of the things posted than I know how to do. My memory may be faulty and I may be conflating content from two sites but about 2 weeks ago during the initial fuss about the article, I found [5] and I think I remember being impressed that it had a fair amount of what appeared to be reliable positive and negative information about the company in the history section. The version accessible today is cleansed of all negative information except for one reference to Barrett and MLMWatch, and appears to have been taken entirely from company promotional material. I want to be very careful not to put inaccurate info in our article, and I remembered this as a good citation source. Is there a way to find an older archived version from, say, last month that is no longer in my browser history cache? As you can probably tell, my expertise is medical and neither of the recent new contributors has made a single truthful assertion about the nature of research, about levels of medical evidence, about medical publishing, about conflict of interests, about FDA regulations, about glycobiology, about peer review processes, about the nature of scientific expertise, and about pharmaceutical competitition. I do not mean they have limited knowledge or make occasional mistakes --I mean that nearly every single assertion about those topics is demonstrably wrong, false, and/or deceitful. Like you, I have no particular interest or history in this topic, but I cannot stand brazen dishonesty in editing, argument, or health marketing and these people are the worst I have run into here for a long time. Anyway, thanks for your continued help. alteripse 12:02, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

These appear to be 2 more copies of the one I provided above. I was curious about whether it had been changed within the last 10 days. Perhaps I am just misremembering and being unduly suspicious. In general do you know a way to look for older versions of a website like this or are older versions truly gone forever when a site is updated? alteripse 20:29, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

New Article Improvment page for WP:VIRGINIA

Seeing as our old Collaborations page at WP:VIRGINIA had no activity in the past year it was decided to replace it with a new Article Improvement/Request Help page that would allow members to list articles in need of attention. Its also a place to request help for an article taht you are working on to see if any other members would like to volunteer and help out. Thanks. T Rex | talk 01:17, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Southern yarn.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Southern yarn.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 '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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Brewins

Users like that can just be reported to WP:AIV for quick reponses (and the response time there is generally great). WilyD 18:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Prestige speculations

I don't know, but just deal with it, or get the page protected or something. I have to deal with crap all the time on Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull because fanboys like spreading rumours. Alientraveller 19:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Howdy Fellow Wikipedier!

What's up Jim? Good catch with that NOVAMAN guy. That guy was a complete jerk. Hiding behind that mask, stating he was from Parts Unknown. He was really screwing up Wikipedia. Him and his posse. But as an outsider I do want to point out the fact that you totally took NOVAMAN's "Cho reference" out of context. I'm sure you have a good reason for conveniently leaving off the end of his statement. You know the one. The one that goes "person who did some bad things at a school somewhere in America" of WIKI EDITS! Notice the "Wiki edits" portion of that statement? I'm sure it was just your noted lack of copy and paste skills, but hey, we all have our crosses to bear. Because as I'm sure you are aware, it's kind of a dickish move to totally misrepresent someone's statment like that. I mean, that's the sort of thing me and you fight on the Wiki site on a daily basis, right? We can't have that. We want just the facts. I know you didn't intentionally try to paint NOVAMAN as a bad person, because the day a fellow Wikipedier starts doing that, well then, Wikipedia will stop existing as the most accurate repository of information on the World Wide Web. And that, Mr. Dunning, is something you nor I cannot have. Keep fightin' the good fight.—Preceding unsigned comment added by NOVAMAN1056 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call

Hey fellow Wikipedian! Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name to the Active Members list. You may also wish to add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. We also have several task forces that you may be interested in joining as well.

Also, elections for Project Coordinators are currently in sign-up phase. If you would be interested in running, or would like to ask questions of the candidates, please take a look. You can see more information on the positions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators. Thanks and happy editing!

An automatic notification by BrownBot 23:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Themes of the Prestige

Could you explain why you removed this important material without adding a cite request first? Priest has gone on record about the importance of this several times, both in relation to the book and the film. In fact, the book is based on the real life rivalry of Ching Ling Foo and Chung Ling Soo. [6][7][8]. I can find other sources if you like. —Viriditas | Talk 01:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

In a separate but related problem, Alientraveler's addition of 'Julian Jarrold's and Sam Mendes's producer approached Christopher Priest for an adaptation of his novel The Prestige. Priest was impressed with Nolan's films Following and Memento..." is sourced to Toy, Sam. "Magic marker", Empire, 2006-09-29, pp. 137, which was apparently retrieved on 006-11-13. Can you confirm this? I asked Alientraveller to help me verify this factoid, as I haven't seen it stated in any publication, and he refused to help me. Thanks in advance. —Viriditas | Talk 01:20, 17 September

Novaman

Yes, I blocked all those IPs for a week. I blocked that particular IP that you linked to again for a month. Let me know if more come back. Academic Challenger 05:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The Last Mimzy (3)

Hi Jim, Sorry to hear that you considered the cast list of The Last Mimzy to be "way-too-long" (personally, I've come across cast lists much longer than that! :-)), and also deemed the tagline to be not worthy of inclusion.

It just goes to show that Wikipedia editors just can't please everyone all of the time. Some people may be interested in having a detailed guide to a movie, including taglines and full cast list (which why I put them in to begin with), while others make like the Cybermen in Doctor Who and "Delete! Delete! Delete!" :-)

Another reason why I like to put taglines on movie pages is because sometimes they are not always readable on the theatrical poster images included, even sometimes on the enlargements, and including the tagline in the article does save readers having to strain their eyes trying to read it. With regard to the full cast lists, unlike sometimes on IMDb, I present the character names exactly as they are shown on-screen; also, I do think it somewhat misrepresentative to list under the 'Cast' heading, for example, only ten cast members when there were in fact forty-five in the film. This is why, on my latest version of the page, I have altered the heading to 'Main Cast', as well as reinstating one female character I felt worthy of mention (check out the page history to find out who!).

Anyroadup, I hope you enjoyed The Last Mimzy as much as I did, and all the best with your editing in the future!--Freddie R. Aldous 11:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Kiss my ass jim dunning

he was shot by a tank and that is critical to the plot--86.140.98.142 13:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

MWAH!! (not!)
Jim Dunning | talk 17:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Classically themed films

Thanks for your reply! The links were very helpful. 82.139.85.143 02:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Virginia Newsletter October 2007

The October 2007 issue of the Virginia WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.--Kubigula (talk) 02:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Preity Zinta FA

Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Plot

Thank you for your comment about the spoiler discussion! I wouldn't mind having even more succinct plot summaries, and I know what you mean about the popular films having extensive plot summaries in their articles. I guess that's the inherent fallacy with Wikipedia and the media -- articles, ranking as high as they do on Google, can be converted into vehicles for excess and indiscriminate detail. (Same goes for Trivia sections.) I guess such sections are the easiest way for novice editors to get involved, which is why we see such detailed fictional biographies. In my process, I've done my best to summarize films like at Road to Perdition#Plot or Surf Ninjas#Plot. I'd much rather remove extensive Plot sections in their entirety, but I've been reverted on the grounds that excess is better than none. Considering that such sections are usually found in an article that basically has the Infobox Film template, a Trivia section with 30 bulleted entries, and external links, there's basically no article for the plot detail to prompt up. By the way, are you still active with The Prestige (film)? I can try to find additional information for it -- my research skills have grown by leaps and bounds since I started on Wikipedia. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, I noticed how many comments were in the FAC process for Preity Zina. I didn't really respond because even though I know Blofeld, I didn't have a large interest in reviewing the article. I suppose my perspective was similar to the combative editor that complained about canvassing, but I didn't care to make my concerns public. As for The Prestige, I'll see what I can scrounge up. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

To find web sources, I've generally tried to utilize certain keywords. For example, writing something like "david fincher" "fight club" interview procures this. Different variations in the keywords can provide better results than a plain Google search, especially for a film with a fan base. Also, if you want to search a certain website for articles about a film, you can use something like this: site:ew.com "fight club" that would return results from only that website. You can do this for news websites. You'll have to figure out which ones have sealed-off archives and which ones are fully available. Another thing you could do is to utilize RSS feeds for film websites to watch new headlines from them. I've found websites like ComingSoon.net or Sci Fi Wire to be informative. If you have a Gmail account, you can also set up Google Alerts to field headlines that come through Google News. Google News only keeps headlines for 30 days, but since you get the link in an e-mail, you can visit the link even if it's no longer available on Google News and lost in the massive pile of regular results. There are also approaches for print sources, so it depends on what you have access to. I have a university account, so I've been able to formulate ways to retrieve information. I just did this for a good portion of Fight Club (film), which I've been expanding today. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, another way to dig up web sources (for films, anyway) is to go to the trivia pages at IMDb and to search for the keywords of items found there. There is usually some kind of truth behind each item, so you could find something. Also, you may want to check out User:Erik/Research -- just some techniques I've compiled, but I've been getting enough results from my current methods that I haven't really utilized the page. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Typo

Don't worry about it. I like most of your edits to that article so far, by the way. A sense of clarity amid the various trolls and such that come to put weird stuff in there. Cirt (talk) 00:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC).

The Prestige (novel)

Hi. I have checked and in my edition of The Prestige (Tor, 2006) there is no mention of the "turn" as the second stage of an illusion. And the whole description of the three stages is definitely in chapter 16 of part 2 ("Alfred Borden"), part 2 consisting of 39 chapters, some of which very short. Might it be that there are differences in different editions? Perhaps US version differing from UK one? Happy editing, Goochelaar (talk) 23:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Apparently I have happened upon an alternat(iv)e version of The Prestige: I was wondering why it was handwritten! :-) "My" part 2 closes indeed with incorporeal Angier's attack on Borden: the last section or chapter is numbered 39 and begins by "It is 1st September 1903, and I say that to all intents..." (page 114), and is preceded by a three-paragraph chapter 38, beginning by "I step forward to the footlights..." Possibly, for some reason, in different editions they have differently unified the chapters?

"My" section 16 begins on page 64 with the words "An illusion has three stages".

All the best, Goochelaar (talk) 13:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

York High School

The school colors on a high level have been said to be blue and gray. (Original colors) But over time they have changed to Royal Blue and silver although not officially stated anywhere. I'm not going to debate this endlessly, but as a former student there for 4 years, Royal Blue and silver are the accepted colors. Looking at any sports uniform will indicate that. But do whatever, it's not worth my time to debate it. I"m sure your "IP address" indicator will go off since I made the edit, so do what you will with it. I don't care. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.143.155.35 (talk) 22:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

A Canticle for Leibowitz

Sure, I will take a look and do what I can. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Light House: A Trifle

Thanks for promoting the article. I'm going to leave the article as a GA and if in a few years or maybe a decade there are academic papers on the novel then I'll add Themes, Genre, or whatnot sections. The next time I re-read the novel I'll be paying attention to further summarizing the plot summary. I like your improvement to the Publication section. If you have the time would you mind commenting on the List of works by William Monahan article that is currently at WP:FAC?-BillDeanCarter (talk) 15:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Translations

Sorry for the belated response. I saw your message earlier, but I caught up in other issues, like that ongoing TFD. I've never really been involved in any translation issues. I've collaborated with an editor who knows German at Valkyrie (film), and I've taken his word regarding the content of German articles. My thinking is that perhaps for descriptive information, translations might be OK, but when it comes to a foreign person weighing in their opinion about something, I don't know if translation is that simple. I'm in no way an expert on this, but I think that the best solution is to find out how non-film Featured Articles have addressed translating non-English resources. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Fenwick Sourcing

Hi Dunning,

Gorman was also talked about in the Sun Times after he died- I can use that as a source. Pan American Energy is a very important company for South American Energy. It is located in Buenos Aires (Hence the Spanish), but the source I listed did have a translation button to it. Kelleher was also just made CEO in June 2007- there might be more articles about him soon. Prior, he headed up financial for Amoco. There are also some pretty important alumns not listed according to The Fenwick Magazine published by the school, but I can't find articles about them on the net. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.142.236.101 (talk) 05:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Les Chouans

JimD, thanks for reviewing Les Chouans. Originally I simply translated the entire article from the French WP. Later I went back and got a variety of sources and rewrote nearly the entire thing on my own. The only part which is still from the French WP is the plot summary. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 12:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you kindly for your GA review and your positive feedback. I'm curious to know why you're concerned that it's the work of only one author? There are many fine articles on Wikipedia which have been written by a single person, n'est-ce pas? Cheers. – Scartol • Tok 02:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Fenwick additions

Hi Dunning,

I leave it up to your judgement. I added the dress code and tuition in case people were looking into the comfort level of the school as well as the expense. I also thought that there should be some mention of post-graduate activities to round out the complete picture. If you change your mind, you can reverse it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.142.236.84 (talk) 05:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

NCfOM awards list

Goodness, that is an endless and uncited list. My suggestion is to squash it down to describing the Globe nominations first, and then simply squash all the critics' awards to "the film won best picture from [everyone who awarded it]". Alientraveller (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Films

Certainly, I'll help provide resources for No Country for Old Men (film), as Google Alerts should provide some results! (I wish that it had more screenings -- I doubt I'll be seeing it until it's on DVD.) As for I Am Legend, let's just say it was a rare experience for me to read the book before seeing a film -- if I do both, it's usually the other way around: film, then book. The ending was underwhelming and conventional, and what I expected to happen with Anna and Ethan, didn't. I have to agree with the general consensus of most reviews that the third act was basically flimsy, but I really enjoyed the film for the first half. I'm a sucker for post-apocalyptic situations, just how people handle themselves in these civilization-shattering crises. Now, I can look at the plot-related discussions on the film article's talk page! :) What was your impression, anyway? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Novels WikiProject

Hi, and welcome to the Novels WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to fiction books often referred to as "Novels".

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated quite regularly. You can watch it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WikiProject_Novels_announcements}} there.
  While you are updating your userpage, don't forget our userbox {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Outreach/User WPNOVELS}}.
• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but other methods are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Starting some new articles? Our article structure guidelines / template outlines some things to include.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the members, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Alientraveller (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Don't overdo it on the fudge!

Spread the Holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaminglawyer/MerryChristmas!}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks!

Happy holidays to you too! Goochelaar (talk) 10:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent message

I have replied to your recent message on my talk page. --Pixelface (talk) 23:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Jim, if you have suggestions on the wording of the {{recent film}} tag, you're free to post them at Template talk:Recent film. And you're certainly free to change the wording yourself by editing Template:Recent film. As I said at Talk:I Am Legend (film), I added that wording because it existed in a similar template, {{current product}}. Wording about information changing rapidly and asking editors to expand an article is common in other temporal templates. The {{recent film}} template puts articles into Category:Recent films. I suppose I could remove any wording that has to do with information changing rapidly or asking people to expand an article and just change it to "This article is about a recently released film. Other articles about recently released films are listed here." If you want to get down to it, the main purpose of the {{recent film}} tag is so editors can tag articles about recent films and people can find them, using "What links here" or the category. Perhaps putting an article into Category:Recent films would be better than putting a template at the top of the article. The template {{recent death}} puts articles into Category:Recent deaths and I think it's a useful template. Instead of tagging articles about people, {{recent film}} is for articles about films. --Pixelface (talk) 02:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Jim, just a note that if you choose to file an RfC regrading Pixelface's actions, I'll not only support, but certify. This has simply gone on too long. Thanks, Chaz ^Beckett 02:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

What has gone on too long? --Pixelface (talk) 03:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

If you're unable to figure this out, after reading all the messages on your talk page (not to mention dozens of other pages throughout the project), then I'd say that's a big part of the problem. Chaz ^Beckett 03:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Which of my actions have gone on too long? --Pixelface (talk) 03:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

As I've stated elsewhere, this has already been explained, by myself and many other editors. Also, I'm not going to clutter Jim's talk page any more than I already. Use my talk page if needed, but please be aware I won't answer any questions that have already been beaten to death.Chaz ^Beckett 03:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

League of Copyeditors roll call

Greetings from the League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the new requests system, which has replaced the old /proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial backlog which still exists there. The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors.

Melon‑Bot (STOP!) 18:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Eight Below - "unencyclopedic content"

Hi, please talk on the Discussion page your deletions first before you edit the main article. For the deleted Trivia and Mistakes section was already a section on the discussion page. You may write your opinion there, but don't delete the sections with a comment as "unencyclopedic" content without having read and proofed them. Further Discussion may follow on the respective talk page. -- ReneRomann (talk) 19:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I am Legend

About this; I don't think that's unnecessary detail. The version in the text is wrong, as he kills the dog after she turns, not when she begins to show symptoms. Also, you could say that his treatment failing is a big blow because he can't save someone he loves but that would be WP:OR so I'll avoid that. Anyway, just thought I'd get your opinion. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 15:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Peer Reviews

Happy New Year, JimDunning! Given your vast contribs to film-related articles, I thought I could solicit your assistance. I've submitted two articles for peer review, and thought that you might be of some help in critiquing them:

• Duck Soup. I've listed this article for peer review because, even though I and other editors have contributed much information and references, I'm certain that there are other aspects of this classic film that have yet to be covered. I'd like to hear feedback from you, so that I can get help in improving this (and other Marx Brothers films) quality.
• Princess Leia Organa. I've listed this article for peer review because it right now seems oddly cluttered and, despite a lot of references as of now, lacks reliable source citations. Although I've already requested another peer review, as long as it helps the articles get better, I've got the time. Any helpful comments will certainly be appreciated, as this should help me in expanding other Star Wars-centric articles.

If you have the time, it'd be great if you could review those articles and assess their strengths and weaknesses. Thanks, and a Happy New Year to you! — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 21:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

Hi, I will be GA reviewing A Canticle for Leibowitz. I have not read the article yet so expect about two days before I write my review. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 15:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XX - January 2008

The January 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 13:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

A Canticle for Leibowitz

A Canticle for Leibowitz has passed the GA criteria. Congratulations for a job well done. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 03:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The Natural

Many of the items refer to other articles or to specific episodes. How can you claim those are "unreferenced"? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, when referencing the DVD specials, just what kind of reference are you claiming is missing? Do you want the exact minute and second in the DVD special that it occurs, or what? Please explain yourself instead of just posting this stuff and issuing threats. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Then the "citation needed" tags belong on those articles, not in this one. Also, you have still not answered my questions about the DVD. You put "citation needed" on stuff that's in the DVD. What do you want, a picture of it? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for you to tell me how to cite DVD stuff, which is verifiable by watching the DVD, and which is perfectly valid as a source. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 00:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The commentators in the DVD extras said all those things. Those are their observations. And if you had actually seen it, you would know this. That info is verifiable by watching the DVD "special edition". Maybe I didn't make it clear this is is the "special edition" I'm talking about. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I was just watching the DVD extras again. They talked about how this film's score is influential, how it's played at ballparks and so on. I have concluded (1) You either know nothing about this film or you hate it; and (2) you need to go watch that film AND ITS DVD EXTRAS before you write ONE MORE WORD in or about this article. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Several of the quotes and comments about the film I have someplace, but I have to find them. And I intend to that on MY schedule, NOT ON YOURS. Put your little "citations-needed" stuff there if you must, but slashing-and-burning is NOT FAIR. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Another thing I need to remind you of is that your argument about certain things, such as Simpson episodes being somehow "uncited" IS NOT TRUE. The information is verifiable BY WATCHING THE SHOWS, which are largely on DVD now, especially the early years. An editor has asserted that the song or the theme appears in the show. Now, if you have evidence to the contrary, you need to present it. Or, you need to go to the DVD to affirm it. But to claim it is "uncited" IS NOT TRUE. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 06:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

There are thousands of "plot summaries" in wikipedia, and I would guess that most of them are written by editors who have read the books or seen the films and have selectively reported what they saw. I say selectively because otherwise you get another book. One example was The Wizard of Oz (1939 film), whose plot once went on and on, with a great deal of detail. It was eventually trimmed back. But it was all based on watching the film, which as I understand it is perfectly OK because you're simply reporting what's verifiable, and applying editorial judgement as to the level of detail. The ones that are not written that way, are typically lifted from somewhere. That leaves two possibilities:

• Write it from observation, which you consider "original research"
• Copy-and-paste a "reliable source" version of the plot - which is a copyright violation.

Therefore, according to your interpretation, you can't ever have a plot summary. Good luck fixing that. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

As far as "interpretation" of The Simpsons, I don't need CNN to verify that a well-known piece of music like the theme from The Natural is being used. If it's an obscure work, maybe. But for a well-known work, that is not "analysis", it's reporting of obvious fact. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

See discussion on The Natural's Talk page for response.
Jim Dunning | talk 15:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The Last Mimzy Talk page

Hi Jim, I'm writing because Puellanivis has added a rant to the talk page of the Last Mimzy article, the talk page of the Responses section. I'm actually v. happy with the article itself and with the Responses section, but it annoys me that Puellanivis has included his/her original research to the talk page of that section stating that genetic damage cannot propogate from one generation to the next, and other 'facts' which are supposed to discredit the film. The overall point Puellanivis makes about the superficiality of some of the scientific concepts maybe could be supported in a separate academic article about science, but Pullanivis has added incorrect science in the talk page about responses to the film, and it's hard to see how this person's personal and incorrect opinion deserves to be glaringly there for any reader who presses the 'discussion' tab for further information.

I would delete the rant, but Puellanivis has also added a paragraph stating that to do so would be against Wikipedia principles. And I don't think it is right to again add yet further debate to the topic. I don't know what to do to get rid of text that should not be in a discussion page, without adding further irrelevant discussion. Puellanivis should just be informed that it isn't appropriate to rubbish the correctness of a film by stating that it contradicts his/her own (mistaken) beliefs about science.

137.205.56.18 (talk) 13:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

PS Hence, can you advise me how to deal with this, or give me your view what I should do about off-topic discussions unrelated to that article? Thanks.... (same person)82.26.90.36 (talk) 16:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I saw the restoration of the material and I agree it is not appropriate to an article's Talk page; it is not about the article so it should not be there. I had already removed a block of similar material. I'll remove it and leave a note on Puellanivis's Talk page explaining why. Thanks.
Jim Dunning | talk 06:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

the Natural, cont'd

I've left a rather lengthy comment in the discussion, and removed the section from the article again (oops, make that twice - I had to revert it now, which puts Bugs at four reverts that I can count). Hopefully the revert and the discussion will help him to realize he is mistaken in this instance. if I recall, this is precisely how my very first block happened, over a year ago. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 00:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Whenever I've been suspended in the past, it's been due to frustration with the likes of you two, acting in concert to have your way with a page, against a lone voice who would like the page to actually be interesting. And now that you've won, you both can move on to other things (as you have), satisfied that you all can defend the page together, against anyone who dares to disagree in the future. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, of course its someone else's faults that you've been blocked in the past. You know what? Screw being a nice guy and not reporting you for 3RR. Clearly, you are either incapable or unwilling to learn from our magnanimity - ie, the 'carrot', so perhaps you might better receive enlightenment from the stick. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Behold the stick. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The source of my frustration is that for every complaint the user had about the page, I had an answer, and he still got his way, ON A FALSE PREMISE. Most of the info in that list is verifiable. He finally owned up, though not in these words, to opposing it just because he doesn't like it. If he had been honest enough about that in the first place, maybe this would have gone differently. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

And as usual, I will take suspension quietly. My goal today was to see what your level of vindictiveness would be, and I flushed you out. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Lad, I am not vindictive, just determined that incivility not be rewarded. As for flushing, I think we are all pretty clear on who got flushed here. You've been given a brand new chance; don't spoil it. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I am mystified about your latest "citation needed" tags that reference the DVD's. Here's a link to a site that illustrates the "gift set" version of the special edition, assuming you consider the Best Buy website to be a reliable source: [9] Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 17:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The Natural - more yet

I still think there's a place for the slashed "trivia" stuff. That's on the far back burner at this point. Here's one that I would not add, as it's completely OR: The film came out on May 11, 1984. I went to see it on Saturday, May 12, and was blown away by it (and I agree with the critics that the ending dragged out too long, though I've seen worse). Afterwards I went home just in time to turn on WGN-TV and see Jody Davis slug a 3-run homer in the ninth that won a game against the Astros in dramatic fashion. I immediately had a premonition about the Cubs winning the pennant for the first time in 39 years. Well, they did go on to win the division, and then lost the NLCS in typical Cubs fashion. Anyway, that was my personal The Natural moment. Thanks fer list'nin'. d:) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Transformers FAC

Hey there, I see you're a member of the LOCE. I was wondering if you could copyedit Transformers for me. A request has been sitting around for a while and I've now had an FAC thrust upon me. I'd appreciate it anytime soon, thanks. Alientraveller (talk) 23:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, keep it up. Alientraveller (talk) 22:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Well the Scorponok scene was significant from a production point-of-view. Bay's commentary reveals it was the first major action sequence completed, and that it raised distributors' interest when it was screened to them. It was just funny on the DVD featurette to learn White Sands Missile Range was filled with unexploded mines, and that they would have to remove old explosives for safety, when they would be blowing it up later for cinematic entertainment. I think there's nothing wrong with the information about the pilots improvising their dialogue. It just supports the lead of how they made the film so realistic.

The whole thing about how the animators were Transformers fans who made a lot of unexpected references to the cartoon may seem out of place, but we are discussing the animation here. It just confirmed a fact that many fans recognized: Prime and Megatron's sword and mace are straight out of the show. I would also argue it supports how the section discusses the fight style Bay wanted. Alientraveller (talk) 08:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Is it done? Thanks very much. Alientraveller (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The plot section should primarily be about the plot: I've never liked listing an actor's names in the summary unless it's has a really small cast, like I Am Legend, Fight Club and Schindler's List. That's part of the reason I wrote the cast section like I did. Something about Lennox trying to get back to his family was extraneous in the epic scale of the movie and something I felt fine with placing in the Humans section. Indeed, we'd taken the WP:MOSFILMS edict of not having to explain the plot in the same manner as the film, which is why it's purely "Plot" and nothing like "Optimus reveals to Sam his great-grandfather discovered Megatron in the Arctic ... Sam deduces Sector 7 also has the All Spark" etc. Alientraveller (talk) 13:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, you can keep enlightening me with all the quirks of American spelling. Alientraveller (talk) 17:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

You might want to read the cast section. It covers a whole breadth of information focusing on the role of each character and the decisions made in their representation on screen: here vehicles are perhaps more important than actors in discussing each character. Kinda like the section in Jurassic Park where all the dinosaurs are discussed. I don't want to argue with WP:MOSFILMS but perhaps listing names in the summary could be overkill. If you want to add Duhamel, Gibson, Turturro, Voight and Taylor's names where appropriate, I will not object. Alientraveller (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

We have a problem. Tony1 (talk · contribs) has deemed you a bad copyeditor at the FAC: allegedly your prose is too clever. Thoughts? Alientraveller (talk) 12:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't want to argue with Tony though. He is right that realism is the common byword for verisimilitude in fantasy films, and therefore linking to that article is fine. We can influence what words people learn in subtler ways. Alientraveller (talk) 19:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Image

I based the rationale on Image:Superman ii ver3.jpg, but someone doesn't like it, so that means they will probably still mark The Natural image for deletion again. Yes, it's a royal pain, especially as they keep changing the rules. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I did the same thing and added some rationale from the Children of Men poster.
Jim Dunning | talk 13:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The deletionists on here drive me crazy. When it says "contributions" on their robot, it should have an asterisk or a question mark. I'm reminded of a story Groucho Marx liked to tell, of running into a Catholic priest, who said, "I'd like to thank you for all the joy you've brought into the world." Groucho came back with, "And I'd like to thank you for all the joy you've taken out of it." That priest = wikipedia deletion zealots. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Voice

Cannot find a source that explicitly says Levinson did the two lines talking to the Judge over the phone. The voice is similar to the radio voice, except for the effected "dese and dose" city accent. If Levinson couldn't find a guy to do the radio voice, I doubt he would have hired someone to do two lines. However, the DVD does not explicitly say it. Better to leave it out before someone at IMDB reads it and considers it factual. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Huck Finn Edits

I'm sorry about reverting your edits to Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. I must have accidentally clicked the rollback in Lupin's Filter Recent Changes Anti-Vandal tool. Once again, I apologize for my error and will be more careful in the future. Noobeditor (talk) 23:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

User:TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny

Hello, Jim. I was impressed by the kindness you showed this user in your comments on his talk page, but I think he needs a firmer hand in getting him to change some of his more egregious editing habits. First of all, he has a history of copying verbatim from IMDb listings and pasting the info into articles he creates, despite repeated warnings not to do so. He also has a habit of creating articles for subjects that are borderline noteworthy or so unnoteworthy they consist of just a few sentences. Because he's so young, I would not like to see his creative drive stifled, but in the meanwhile he's leaving a lot of messes for other editors to clean up. Should he simply be left alone, or is there a way to encourage him to adhere to Wikipedia requirements and formats more closely? Thank you for your input. MovieMadness (talk) 18:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2008 Newsletter

The January 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

image in By the Waters of Babylon

Hi, good question. I have started a section in Talk:By the Waters of Babylon. --Jtir (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Similar Roots

Jim, in the past two years of occasional exchanges with Virginia schools, I had no idea you were from Western New York. I now live in Fredericksburg, VA, but hail from Syracuse, NY. I was a teacher in a small school just outside Auburn for several years. Go figure!

Bhs itrt (talk) 18:53, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXI - February 2008

The February 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --11:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Censorship

Please don't censor.Xx236 (talk) 14:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Compliments

While I didn't agree with your interpretation of OR policy (a disagreement that thankfully hasn't manifested in a content dispute), I really like the way you think about and discuss issues, and am glad you're around on Wikipedia. Robert K S (talk) 06:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny Sockpuppet

Well, a couple of ways, actually...

1. Out of sheer curiosity, the number of articles that TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny claims to have created, attracted my attention. So, I started checking the article histories. TraceyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny wasn't the creator on the first five or so that I checked, however AshTFrankFurter2 was (or at least one of the early contributers).
2. AshTFrankFurter2 was blocked on July 26, 2007. TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny's first edit was on August 1, 2007.
3. They both seem to like to to vandalize the Novato, California article (which TraceyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny also says that he's from on his user page).
4. Finally, after noticing the name of the "notable" teen resident in the link above, I ran a Google search on it, which turns up a number of hits with quite a bit in common. As of now, the 13th result kind of confirms it. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't suspect anything either, until I noticed point 1 from above. Then, I started doing some digging. So, now I have a few extra movie articles (e.g. Hairspray (2007 film)) on my watchlist that I never had before. It's a shame, because it seems like overall, he's trying to contribute in good faith, but ends up screwing things up more than he's helping. If I stumble across him again and he's made substantial efforts to improve, I'll let it go, if not, I'll block him on sight. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 16:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Zach Tyler Eisen

I only stumbled on this article by chance, and saw that it was deleted before. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Zach_Tyler_Eisen. Apparently, administrator User:Sarah deleted the article by mistake, given the subject is a minor, but also somewhat of a public figure as a voice actor. I'd ask her to restore the edits not related to the "personally identifiable info about a minor", unless they existed from the start of the article. (I wonder if it's possible to restore them redacted?) --Geopgeop (T) 19:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Question

I remember you doing a fine job of copyediting for Transformers, and I was wondering if you had any spare time to run through Smallville (season 1). It's currently at FAC, and since I'm basically the only contributor to the article I'm a little blind when it comes to tightening my own words, if you know what I mean.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, season one is going to be the hardest article because it not only contains some redundant information already given in the main article, but also in Pilot (Smallville). It's all "the beginning". Anyway, I appreciate all the help though.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Everything looks great from my end. I've just been part of stupid edit wars regarding those commas (I don't think we personally need them if the code does it for us, lets save the unnecessary space), so I just make sure they're always in now to avoid such things. Other than that, I found peacock terms of my own in the article that I changed.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Constitution of Belarus

Constitution of Belarus has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 10:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2008 Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXII - March 2008

The March 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --16:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Excitement

Oh, believe me, I'm fine without that kind of excitement. It's not fun to deal with folks that rail against Wikipedia. My opinion is that Wikipedia is imperfect but here to stay. As long as it can be made understood to all that Wikipedia is not the gospel truth, you know? Whatever the version of Caveat emptor is for readers. As far as disputes go, I'm fine with combating vandals and POV pushers and spammers, thank you very much. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 05:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

million dollar baby awards page

List of awards won by Million Dollar Baby

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of awards won by Million Dollar Baby, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of List of awards won by Million Dollar Baby.

enchanted references

Hi Jim - it's been an ongoing battle on the Enchanted page to keep WP:OR and mere coincidence items off the list of references. What is currently there is (as much as we could) based on a document supplied by Disney to film reviewers when the film was initially released. The contents of that document are on the talk page, as it was rewritten in prose form on the article itself. The earrings the troll wears ARE supposed to be Ariel's shells, just like he is wearing remnants of other princess' dresses. We could go back and forth on whether the fact tag is needed for that one line or not (I'm not going to bother removing it), but expect that entire "referencess" section to be 100% completely rewritten when the D-Files segment on Blu-Ray becomes more widely available -- a list of references included on the film itself will be more than enough authoritative source than what we've had up to now. SpikeJones (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Jim. Separate article is probably a good idea (even snipping down to my suggestion in the movie article, linked by a {{main|other article}} tag for continuity). I am very concerned, as you would be, about keeping the OR to a minimum. Having a separate article would allow us to go back to a bullet list or a color-coded table, either of which I think is infinitely easier to track than the prose version has been. SpikeJones (talk) 17:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not in a position currently to be bold with you (doing it as a cross-tab table will require a bit of time-intensive editing that I wouldn't be able to get to until this weekend). Either way is fine. SpikeJones (talk) 19:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

FA review: Constitution of Belarus

Jim, please have a look at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Constitution of Belarus. You had a lot to say about this article on its talk page, but so far there has been little discussion on the FA review. Regards, ProhibitOnions ^(T) 12:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - 1st Coordinators Election

An election has been proposed and has been set up for this project. Description of the roles etc., can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators. If you wish to stand, enter your candidacy before the end of March and ask your questions of anyone already standing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/May 2008. Voting will start on the 1st April and close at the end of April. The intention is for the appointments to last from May - November 2008. For other details check out the pages or ask. KevinalewisBot (talk) 13:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Michael Clayton locations source

I added it, as well as some pictures of the locations in question (at this time of year they look exactly like they do in the film). Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Milkshake

I had previously posted articles about the popularity of that line at Talk:There Will Be Blood#Milkshake?. Sorry I didn't properly post it in the citations section. Alientraveller (talk) 13:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

No Country For Old Men

no problem at all, thank you very much for the kind words. I had been considering contributing to the article for a while now considering how much admiration I have for the film - but when I saw today that it had been nominated for GA status (a little prematurely i think) i thought i'd do my best to help bring it up to speed. I look forward to working with you and hopefully we can get that GA status in the near future. peace Warchef (talk) 15:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Nice job on the Enchanted article

Thank you, Ladida (talk) 23:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, which was why I supported your proposal. :) Ladida (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Cloud Atlas

The references to other David Mitchell has written seem useful to me, as one of the joys of reading his books is the inter-book references. I'm new to Wikipedia - should I cite the page numbers of his other books for David Mitchell self-references? I used my own copies as reference when I cleaned up the section, but I'd be happy to add specifics and references for these items. Let me know what you think would be best. Thanks! Ryan Nee (talk) 24 March 2008 (UTC)

No country...

Actually, I'd taken out the word "landscapes" b/c I thought it was unnecessary, kind of overstating the fact that the chase was across western TX. It had nothing to do w/the extra s's. Just trying to be economical, if you like it, that's cool. Tommyt (talk) 18:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but unfortunately for fans like us the synopses aren't supposed to be too descriptive in here. You're right tho, the shots of the TX scrubland are incredible AND they don't compare on home vid either! This film was much more impressive in a theatre, 1st I saw it was on a huge screen. Amazing! There might be some other place in the article where you could bring up the cinematography. Deakins is a genius!

Just a question

How often do you search for my IP address for edits? You're always the one that reverts my edits. No matter how long I've been away, you always seem find them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.143.155.35 (talk) 17:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Watership Down again

With regard to your recent edits on the misogyny theme, you may be interested to hear that in the Puffin Modern Classics edition of the book, the "Afterword" by Nicholas Tucker originally included a fairly critical section in which Tucker considered the treatment of the does to be (at least some of the time) as "passive baby-factories". However, in newer impressions of the same edition, that part of the Afterword has been omitted, with no indication of the change. I'll see if I can dig out something useable on this.

Another point that comes to mind is that, despite Tucker's comments, criticism of WD as sexist/misogynist seems to me (as a Briton) to be noticeably more common in the United States. I'm not sure how one would go about making reference to that without a reliable source who can be quoted as saying such, but my subjective opinion is that the criticism (these days, certainly: I wasn't born in 1972!) really pretty low-level in Britain. Mind you, I also believe that WD is now less popular in the UK than in the US: for example, Tales from Watership Down has been out of print in Britain for some years. Loganberry (Talk) 22:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello again; thanks for your reply and I'm glad you enjoyed my essay. I do have both versions of Puffin Classics paperback (and hence both versions of the Tucker "Afterword") lying around somewhere, but unfortunately the other two sources you mention as potentially useful were in old books in Birmingham Central Library, and I can no longer find them on the catalogue. (Libraries here have an annoying habit of assuming that with the rise of online material, old and/or rarely-consulted printed books can safely be tucked away in the stacks or even sold off.) I don't hold out enormous hope of finding them, but if I can I'll come back.

On a couple of other related points: I'm rather inclined to soften "Critics have identified a significant misogynic theme..." to "Some critics...", since the text as it stands seems a bit too strong considering that (at least, as I said before, here in the UK) that viewpoint is certainly in a minority; most criticism, even in recent years, is much less strong than, say, Lanes'. Secondly, I wonder if there are any sources which discuss this issue while paying due attention to the fact that WD started off as a story for Richard Adams' children... who were both girls.

As you'll know from my essay, my personal view is that Hyzenthlay is a major character, and one who is given less than her fair share of credit: perhaps it's at least partly that which is a result of sexism, but that's veering off into the dreaded original research! I do agree with you about the wartime influence: after all, Hazel, Bigwig and Kehaar (at least) are based on specific people from WW2. In real life, warrens are in some ways notably matriarchal, but of course WD isn't the story of a warren, as such. Loganberry (Talk) 17:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2008 Newsletter

The March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

transformer polygons

Could you make an edit there about the polygon numbers for the main character? Every edit i make isn't allowed. There were 1.8 or 1.4 million polygons for Optimus Prime character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.164.110 (talk) 17:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

re: Watership Down

Hi, Jim, I'm glad our paths have crossed once more; coincidentally again, I reviewed and passed No Country for Old Men for GAN, which I believe you nominated, earlier in the week. Small world, eh? I was glad to help with the review for Watership Down, which has always been one of my favorite books (despite the fact that I can't keep the characters straight :p). It's on the right track, but more time and research would do it good, I agree. Sure, I can look over A Canticle for Leibowitz. I must admit that I'm not familiar with the work, however, and it may have to wait until tomorrow. Novel articles are very rare at FAC, but lately there's been a rush. Do you want me to just leave comments on the talk page, or would you object to some copy-editing? I already see something funky going on with ref 4. :)

Randomly, I read on your userpage that you are interested in the Adirondacks. Are you familiar with Bob Marshall, of Adirondack Forty-Sixers and Mount Marshall fame? I wrote his article, which is currently languishing at GAN. Not much interest in the Geography section, alas. María (habla conmigo) 23:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I wasn't trying to con you into reading the article, honest; I suppose it's serendipity that Marshall was my latest project. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it, especially since I'd never even heard of the Adirondacks until I read a random quote from the guy in a nature/inspirational book one day and decided to look him up. The article was a mess, so I made it a mission of mine. I'll work on Canticle tomorrow when I get a break from homework. Take care, María (habla conmigo) 01:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

re: Mannatech

I had a feeling something was up... turned out my gut feelings were correct :-) Muzzamo (talk) 04:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Juno (film)

When there is an ongoing discussion in the talk page, please check that first before making a revision. There is a long-standing policy about AGF that is implied. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 12:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC).

Hi Jim, not Melty but my concern over the reversion as I had used edit summaries rather than the talk page to try to explain where I was going in editing. It is a complex argument that I was trying to advance in that the bibliography notation in publishing refers to reference sources in general and not to specific connection to direct quotes as it is often seen in Wikipedia. The use of the referencing section is one area that I am hoping to further elaborate upon and I have applied to act as a film project coordinator with this topic (amongst others) as an area to work on and provide a framework for discussion. The aspect of AGF is that reversion is normally used to combat vandalism or in a straightforward connection to a standard.

When Melty questioned why I would use the term "Notes" and reverted, I tried to establish the reasoning behind a endnote or footnote compared to a bibliographical record (bibliography). My point was to put in one source in a bibliography and show it as a "test" edit to indicate the use of reference sources. In publishing, all sources that are of importance are listed in a bibliography rather than the strict interpretation that some Wikipedia editors have made to only include direct connections to quotes or citations. The use of a "For further reading" section has appeared as a primarily Wicky phenom as these types of sources are routinely listed as part of the bibliography. Likewise, Wicky treats "External links" as a separate and distinct section wherein publishing houses treat these types of reference sources as part of the "non-print" sources (sometimes but not always separated in the full bibliography).

Sorry for running off at the mouth but I had "jumped on Melty" as reverting my work although the second reversion actually came later from yourself when you rightfully revised the section according to your "reading" of the issue. I simply want to tell you that additional aspects of the edit were involved and therefore have provided you a more fulsome background. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 22:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC).

Jim, let me clearly state my intentions. I responded to a request for assistance. I looked at the article and provided some direction as to references. I made a "test edit" to show that a bibliography section could be incorporated (I did not have current research information and placed a decidedly questionable source in as an example)/ I have found some additional sources for information that are more detailed and authoritative, given that this is a recent film with a scarcity of text material available. I placed the note above to indicate that it was possible to establish a bonafide notes and bibliography section, given that new material is provided. My intentions are as such, good faith edits not intended to disrupt or "irritate" folks. FWiW, take it as it is, or not; a request for help was sent out, I responded, nothing more. I do not intend to rewrite the article, nor "hijack" it for ulterior purposes such as are implied. I do not have a mission, but do wish to help people in referencing researched articles. Bzuk (talk) 21:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC).

No Jim, I didn't think anyone was "hijacking" the article in question, rather, I felt that other editors were considering my attention to the article as hijacking it for my own purposes, that of creating an example for others to "toe the line." I wanted everyone to be clear that this is not the case. I am an editor in "real and reel life" and have the sole mandate when I work with writers, to preserve the "voice" of the author. My intention is to assist, guide, help and be there for others in areas where I may have a miniscule amount of knowledge or background. I would prefer to work with others collaboratively and the request for assistance was the only reason for my being involved in the Juno film article, other than I really enjoyed the film. I was not prepared to be "jumped" as it was not my intention to go any further than to provide an interesting aside about the connection to a Canadian locale and also show that a bibliography may work (but as you may recall, that did not go well). After trying to explain my intentions further, this seemed to become even more murky as other issues were dragged in. My work is as a recently elected film project coordinator, that being said, I have no more interest in this article other than trying to assist in its development. I am continuing to tread very carefully into this arena as I do not have a past history with many film article editors, The reaction that took place in three separate occasions made me very wary of how assistance or advice can be offered. My attempt to set out reasoning did not go as planned, consequently, I am re-stating that my intentions are entirely in "good faith" and I ask for you to look a bit farther into my background, to see that this latest excursion is atypical of my work on Wikipedia. I look forward to discussing films with you. FWiW, again, not much, about 2¢ worth... Bzuk (talk) 19:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC).

Juno production info

Copyedit from my talk page:"Bzuk, it appears you added information about a continuity discrepancy to the Juno (film) article: "The Canada-as-America switch is common in cinema, but there were some noticeable lapses as West Coast mountain ranges appeared in the background of what is meant to be Midwestern Minnesota." You also went on to mention the set location of the Macguff's house. We currently don't have a cite to support these statements. Do you have the source(s) for this info? If so, please go ahead and cite it/them. By the way, for consistency, I've found using the citation templates helpful (and less work). I've unsuccessfully hunted high and low for sources for the info. If we can't provide a suitable ref, then it may be perceived as WP:OR and removed. Thanks.
Jim Dunning | talk 19:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Jim, the sources I found include an article about Diablo Cody where it mentions her Minnesota heritage which then became the setting for her film. The Macguff house is widely known and was discussed in a Flickr page. These are not the best sources, so that marking the statements with a fact tag is fine until I or other editors can find some more clear-cut attribution. Did you read my earlier commentary? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC).

Further, it is quite evident that the locales did not entirely fit a midwestern location as the principal photography took place in British Columbia. Most of this type of film production has been relocated to Canada for cost and expediency but in the case of Juno, the film director had another reason for using a Canadian location, that being a tie to his birthplace. The film later debuted at the Toronto International Film Festival to rave reviews. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC).

Jim, I have been around a bit so while I appreciate the Film Editor's 101 course, it really isn't necessary. If you can read between the lines, I'm trying to establish "niceties" and not really delve into the plumbing of writing an article. You have read my earlier notes, I assume. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC).

Jim, no offence taken at your sage advice. I was merely indicating that what was important to me was not the particulars of the edit or its suitability, but that a line of communication was being established. It was a very rapidly assembled edit and I have no qualms on its being accepted or not. If you recall, there was a request for additional information to develop the article, especially in the area of production. My submission was not based on a great deal of information about the film and was derived from a few sources. Typically, more authoritative reference sources are available for articles that I write or revise. In this case, with a paucity of contemporary sources, the production notes were suitably vague and not well-supported but it was what I had at that point. Karen Valby's article on "The Screenwriter: Diablo Cody" in Entertainment Weekly indicated that Cody did want to recreate her roots and was highly emotional when on location in Canada as she recognized that the film sets were mirroring to a large part her memories of a Minnesota childhood. A very brief mention in the article about the locales was the background to the note about the incongruity of mountain ranges in the midwest. As for the actual locations for principal photography, IMDb provided some background but I did find some other mentions in blogs about the specific school and house settings. That's all I have on the production notes. If more can be found, I will add a more substantive citation to support the note. FWiW, the most important aspect of this dialogue is not the rationale behind the submission but the dialogue itself. Bzuk (talk) 00:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC).

Jim, signing off for now, thanks for the conversation. Keep in touch. Bzuk (talk) 03:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC).

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIII - April 2008

The April 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 20:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

re: A Canticle for Liebowitz

No worries, Jim! As long as my suggestions helped, I'm glad. I'm very pressed for time at the moment, as well, so I know exactly how you feel. Thanks for showing up at Marshall's FAC, btw; I didn't thank you by name in my Oscar speech nomination blurb, but your input during the GA promotion stage helped greatly. Maybe our paths will cross again somewhere least expected? :) Keep me updated on Canticle's progress and take care, María (habla conmigo) 15:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Amazon as RS

Since you are member of book related wikiprojects, I am asking you that may I use some comments of reviewers published in amazon.com for the article Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil. For example the comments of Paul Raeburn, Rick Smalley and San Francisco Chronicle. The reviews were published elsewhere, Amazon gathered them in one place, my only hesitation here I have to cite the amazon website as reference. But I am confused if Amazon.com can be cited as RS or not. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Children of Men more

I have not seen this film, but I gather that you have, and I can't seem to get a straight answer from User:Viriditas about this: Over the closing credits, does the word "shantih" appear in print, or is it merely spoken? Thank you! Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Confusion

Are you doing the review or just offering a hand? I thought JayHenry had signed up to do it already. If you want to help out, that's great, but if you want to do the review, you'll have to talk to him... Wrad (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

No prob. More the merrier. Wrad (talk) 23:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2008 Newsletter

The April 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Removing 'Academy Award-winning' from NCfOM

Hi there. I noticed with this revert you removed what I figured was a peacock word, under the guise of MoS. Can you point me to the section of MoS you were referring to? I had gone and started making the same type of edit to other articles, but figured it more of a peacock thing than a MoS thing, assuming I read the proper portions of the MoS. Regardless, someone challenged me on it so I wanted to do my due diligence in making sure I'm doing the right thing. If there is sufficient information regarding the awards in the opening, I agree that 'award-winning' doesn't belong, but what if there is no mention of the awards in the opening? Still remove 'award-winning' and make a separate sentence about the awards? Thanks in advance. Tool2Die4 (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIV - May 2008

The May 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveCrossinBot (talk) 08:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Archiving Fenwick High School (Chicago, Illinois)

Can you help me archive some old talk on that page-I tried to follow the directions to do that and found it very difficult to do. Your assistance would be most helpful. thanksFriarguy (talk) 14:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks that will be great, I look forward to hearing from you about archiving. I tried the move proceedure, and also the paste one too, but I end up deleating what I wanted archived, it is kind of tricky. Most of the Fenwick talk is just old material from when the article was being constructed, and it can be archived away. I think just the sections on the bottom, of colors, Dominican University, and rivals have some additional value to remain out of the archiving procees.Friarguy (talk) 22:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The Muppets' Wizard of Oz

WOW. I can easily say I was shocked by this announcement. Well, the page has been cut down drastically (to me anyway), and I hope the article can stay as a GA. Limetolime ^{talk to me • look what I did!} 20:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I've answered your questions, and I'm wondering if whether or not I should add the commercial bit in the production statement. (Talk:The Muppets' Wizard of Oz#Limetolime's comments). Limetolime ^{talk to me • look what I did!} 02:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I have replied to the rest of your questions and completed all that you ask. (I'm still working on the references section now). I have another small question, if I were to list the article for another FA nomination, would you Support or Oppose it? Limetolime ^{talk to me • look what I did!} 20:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I withdrew the nomination. But you know, I've worked VERY hard, and mostly by myself, to bring the article to a respected class, and now it looks like that'll never happen. What do I do? Should I give up? Start on another article? Limetolime ^{talk to me • look what I did!} 13:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Primer

Many thanks! Your advice has been much appreciated. JMalky (talk) 15:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, I noticed that you made a lot of contributions to The Prestige (film). If you're interested, I've started work on the article for Christopher Nolan's first film, Following. JMalky (talk) 13:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Niagara Falls External Links

Jim,

Please take a closer look at the fallsviewcam.com/ site that I have removed the link for. It is inherently clear that the sites sole purpose is for advertising hoteliers in Niagara Falls and sells a huge quantity of banner links which can be found directly below the video stream and at most of the main links on the left hand side.

The prompting of the previous user to ban my IP and to maintain this commercial external link is not consistent with Wikipedia's external link policies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spam#External_link_spamming

American Graffiti

Hi Jim

Where does this article stand at the moment? I see it has been tagged for needing copy-editing and wanting peer review (and that you are the most recent editor to be working on it). Just glancing through the article, it appears to be mostly in great shape. Would you mind if I made a few very small grammatical edits in the Cast section? Is there any other way I could help make this article better? --AnnaFrance (talk) 16:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. I'm a fairly new Wikipedian and am still finding my way around rather slowly. From a cue in your message I went back to the article's talk page, found my way to the peer review discussion, and from there to the automated review results. I've learned a lot about the GA/FA process in the last 20 minutes, and have taken a page of notes. Your comments in particular were not only educational, but specific. Thanks --AnnaFrance (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Halloween

Personally, I didn't think the article was read to begin with. I really feel the music section needs to be cleaned up further. All I had a chance to do was remove the info that wasn't relevant to this article, or just didn't have a reliable source to back it up. I didn't have a chance to clean up the structure and reword things for better flow. So, that section just bugs me right now--and the same for the "Reception" section. But, I'm working 30 hours, and doing an internship for 40 hours a week...so my time is limited, otherwise I would have cleaned up as soon as the GAC started.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2008 Newsletter

The May 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Burger King legal issues

I understand you wanting to help, and you have made several suggestion that are for the better. However you have made some arguments that go beyond helping into what I see as nitpicking. You have some valid points that I have incorporated in the article. Just try to listen to what I say when I say it. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Look on the talk page, I put a more public apology for my "biting". --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I can understand you not liking the promotion, but I believe he was right.

"Why?" You are asking? Not because of the fact I authored the article and the squabbles we have gone through to this point, but because I think that while you and have been working on the article, we have already passed beyond the scope of a GA. We have addressed almost all of the major problems that existed and needed to be fixed in order to meet the seven criteria required to elevate it to GA. At this point we have moved into FA territory in regards to editing, and it is rapidly meeting those criteria as well.

Your "nitpicking", for lack of a better term, is now going into areas that a FA reviewer would be looking into, which I greatly appreciate. I think you have high standards, which is what is needed for someone in the copy editing Wikiproject. The "nits" you pick today will have this article as FA by July, IMHO. I have gone through a couple of GA reviews before on both sides and think this elevation will be vetted by others if you choose to appeal his promotion. I will accept whatever happens if you choose to do so, while I will be grumbling and bitching about it if its elevation is overturned.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 06:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you going to contest the GA elevation or ask for a reevaluation of the article? --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 18:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Reassessment request has been made by me. You can find it here. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 20:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

PS
Archive you page already. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...)

FAC

The article is now a FAC. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The Hustler nom

I think I may have messed it up by leaving a note on the review page. I substituted a fresh template. Otto4711 (talk) 22:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This page

Hi Jim, could you do a favour and archive this page please. It's start to get a bit overlong. Thanks, giggy _(:O) 09:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV serial)

Hi! I've been reviewing GA articles again and I saw what you wrote about Burger King legal issues. (Feel free to do what you want to the article). Anyway, I think Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV serial) has passed as a GA. Before I actually pass it, I want your opinion. Limetolime ^{Talk to me • look what I did!} 16:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Harrumpff

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Keep nitpicking. Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 16:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent Smithers

Very good addition to the article, I cleaned up the cites a little. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 01:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I rewrote the lead a little, ok allot. Take a look and comment. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 18:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Is there something you can do?

Hello, Jim, how have you been? Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will try to speak to him tonight (since I leave for work in a bit), but events may unfold in the course of the day. It seems that the issue has caught the attention of a few reasonable editors, so we'll see what happens. Been focusing on any particular project lately, by the way? Or see any good films lately? :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 10:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXV - June 2008

The June 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveBot (owner) 02:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

re: More GA process concerns

Yes. Yes, it is. Especially since I have issues with the first article being promoted. María (habla conmigo) 12:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to be clear I explicitly stated that I have no experiance in reviewing articles. I thought he wanted help. Anyway why didn't you or Maria at least raise the issue on my talk page? Why d'you have to let me find out this way? I wrote that he use a peer review and sort out any negative, crufty stuff before the GA process. There were no favours. I too became suspicious and now I'm having doubts that the article should have been passed for GA. I suggest you look at the discussion again before wrongfully suspecting me. Lord of Moria _Talk ^Contribs 13:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films June 2008 Newsletter

The June 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yertle the Turtle and Other Stories

This article has been under review for a fortnight, please can you post the review asap, thanks Tom (talk) 22:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Vanilla

Help! this article is in need of your nit-picking skills. I promise I will be good, no grumbling.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 05:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Can I please archive your talk page?

Pretty please!

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 05:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2008 Newsletter

The July 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 20:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter

The August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Calling all active WP:NOVELS members

WikiProject Novels Roll Call

WikiProject Novels is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:Novels editor, please add your name back to the Active Members list. Also feel free to join any of our task forces and take a look at the project's Job Centre to get involved!

Next month we will begin the coordinator election selection process. We hope to have more involvement and input this time around! More news will be forthcoming. Thanks, everyone! María (habla conmigo) 16:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels Newsletter - September 2008

Archives  |  Tip Line  |  Editors The Novels WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXVI - September 2008 Project news The Margaret Atwood novel The Penelopiad reached Featured Article status on June 29 and then appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 26. It is the first article created through Wikipedia:Articles for creation to become Featured. To Kill a Mockingbird appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 11. I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings reached Good Article status on July 1. Member news The members list is currently under review so we have moved all past active member's name to a Incumbent List and are doing a Project Roll Call. If you still consider yourself an active WP:NOVELS editor, please add your name back to the Active Members List. You may also wish to add your name to any of our many Project Task Forces. Task force news A Fantasy Literature task force has been proposed. Comments are welcomed on that proposal since we already have our own WikiProject Novels/Fantasy task force which is covered under our Novels WikiProject. Novel-related news Devil May Care, written by Sebastian Faulks ("writing as Ian Fleming"), has become Penguin Books fastest selling hardcover fiction title. It is the latest installment in the book series about British secret agent James Bond and was released to coincide with the 100th anniversary of late Bond creator Ian Fleming's birthday on May 28, 1908. Me Cheeta: the Autobiography, written by a ghostwriter, is the autobiography of Cheeta the Chimp who is listed in the Guinness World Records as the oldest recorded non-human primate at the age of 76. He has appeared in various movie roles which included twelve Tarzan movies and even battled addiction to alcohol and cigars. The book is not published until October 1, but judges for the 2008 Guardian First Book Award were sent a early version and were so impressed that they have included it on the 10-strong longlist. Stephenie Meyer, who is listed by Time magazine as one of its 100 most influential people of 2008, has decided not to continue with writing her draft for Midnight Sun after 12 chapters of the unfinished manuscript were leaked on the internet. Current debates Categories for Discussion has a series of discussions about whether to categorize certain specific types of fictional characters: double agents, dictators, characters with eidetic memory, etc. Advice from any Novels project members would be valuable in assisting them. WikiProject Media franchises aims to help editors with the coordination of articles within the thousands of media franchises which exist and has requested input from our members. They are currently discussing a naming convention for franchise articles. Since this may affect one or more articles in our Novel project, they would like to get opinions before implimenting any changes. From the Members With the Newsletter being almost three months overdue, I have decided to take on the position of Editor to make sure it reaches you regularly on time each month. The Newsletter is meant to inspire and encourage our team of Editors and so my goal shall be to make it informative and interesting each issue. We now have many positions vacant in our Project Team, so we are looking for members who have the time and interest to take on the various roles, details of which can be found at the Job Centre. Shortly a Coordinator nominations notice shall also be sent out to all members, which will commence the annual Coordinator selection process. Next month's Newsletter will include a message from our Coordinator Maria, who will introduce herself and speak on our forthcoming elections for extra Coordinators. Boylo (talk), Editor Collaboration of the Month This month's Collaboration has been selected by popular vote and is Look Homeward, Angel. The next collaboration is due for selection on 14 September, 2008 so cast your vote. Newsletter challenge Our last newsletter's challenge The Pure Land was completed by our member Maclean25, who also provided us with tipline news for this newsletter. The first person to start the article is mentioned in the next newsletter. This month's article is Leslie Ann Moore's first book in her fantasy 'Griffin's Daughter' trilogy, which was named by the Independent Book Publishers Association as the 2008 Ben Franklin Award winner for Best First Fiction, Griffin's Daughter. Note: This article was previously deleted due to lack of notability, but that now can be established since winning this award. To unsubscribe from further issues of this newsletter please remove your name from here.

This newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 14:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Elections

As you were a latecomer last year I thought I would remind you of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/October 2008 elections is coming up. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:31, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Hi - curious why you removed the Shmoop external link from Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. The link went to a site produced by Stanford and Berkeley Ph.D. and Masters. Holds over 125 print pages worth of analysis of the novel. I've checked out the External links guidelines and believe that the link is appropriate. Would love to hear your feedback so I get a better sense of how to place an external link. Barriodude (talk) 08:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - November 2008

Archives  |  Tip Line  |  Editors The Novels WikiProject Newsletter Issue 28 - November 2008 Member news Coordinators election voting and question time is now open. Project members should vote for any candidates they wish to support by November 28 at the Coordinator Elections. Yllosubmarine, aka Maria, has decided not to be reappointed, her work as sole Coordinator since the last elections in May is highly appreciated by all members of the project. The Novels Project now has 88 active members. 18 positions remain unfilled at the Job Centre. Members who are active project contributors are encouraged to apply even if they can only do a position for a short time. Ladywitchthought has taken on the position of coordinator for the "Lemony Snicket task force". Project news On September 26, a fact on Shea Ohmsford, the protagonist of Terry Brooks novel The Sword of Shannara appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column. On September 29, the expanded article about the novel Thrones, Dominations written by Dorothy L. Sayers and Jill Paton Walsh appeared on the main page in the DYK section. On October 11, the new article Going, Going, Gone written by Jack Womack appeared on the main page in the DYK section. On October 18, a fact from The Dragon Lord by David Drake appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column. On October 22, the expanded articles The Sirian Experiments and The Making of the Representative for Planet 8 written by Doris Lessing appeared on the main page in the DYK section. On October 25, the new article A Real Basket Case by Beth Groundwater appeared on the main page in the DYK section. - Contributors are the_ed17, Maclean25 & Captain-tucker (who searched the archives). Task force and related news WikiProject North of the Rio Grande has begun. WP:NRG is an educational project aiming to "improve a selection of articles on Chicano and Latino literature to featured article status (or as near as possible)." Among the articles they are working on are How the García Girls Lost Their Accents and Who Would Have Thought It?. They welcome any advice or help that members of WikiProject Novels may be able to offer. If interested drop a note on their talk page. – Position of editor for 'Task force news' is still available at the Job Centre. Peer review and assessment news Peer Reviews are still open for three articles – At Swim-Two-Birds, The Emberverse series & Flowers for Algernon. Feel free to submit any novel-related article that you are working on for review, and please consider stopping by and reviewing an article, as we need more reviewers for our articles! – the_ed17 (talk), Editor – Peer review and assessment news Member in Focus Hi, I have been around this project for quite some time now. Bit of a hiatus earlier this year, but back now just contributing. The Novels WikiProject wasn't started by me but my interest in the subject initially attracted me to what was here. It has developed substantially in the last few years and now takes in all forms of Narrative Prose Fiction within its scope. We are about the content not the format of the prose so WP:Books differs a little in that an implied format is entailed; also they can also focus more clearly on non-fiction. WP:Literature are the "new boys on the block" and are a little more focused on the "quality" aspects of literature, and again they have less emphasis on pure fiction and the prose aspect. Our biggest problem is to maintain a certain focus of interest across such a broad subject area and we need workers who can develop task forces, teams for assessment, teams for peer review and so much more. "So much to do, so little time, I'm late, I'm late, I'm late" to misquote from Alice in Wonderland. Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) Current debates The featured list Narnian timeline has been nominated for removal. You can comment here. The Narnian timeline is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. Novel related news Indian writer Aravind Adiga wins the Man Booker Prize for his debut novel, The White Tiger. From the Outreach Department As I shall be leaving Wikipedia, this will be my last newsletter. Any member who is interested in taking over the role of editor can sign up for the position at the Job Centre. Over the last month I have been working on a portal for our project. So am happy to announce that the Novels Portal is now up and running. Boylo (talk), Editor Boylo: Thank you for getting this newsletter back on its feet and going again. No Boylo equals no Novels Portal...heck, without you, we wouldn't have had a newsletter for these past months...so, for all of the members of the Novels WikiProject, I want to thank you for the time and effort you have put into this project, and I wish you the best of luck in all of your future endeavors. Thanks, pal. the_ed17 (talk) Collaboration of the Month This month's Collaboration has been selected by popular vote and is : Novel. As this is our Project's premier article, all members are asked to assist. The next collaboration is due for selection on 21 November, 2008 so cast your vote. Newsletter challenge Our last newsletter's challenge The Cater Street Hangman was uncompleted. The first person to start the article is mentioned in the next newsletter. This month's article is Mindplayers by science fiction author Pat Cadigan. Announcements and open tasks WikiProject Novels • (inc. novellas, novelettes & short stories) Announcements and open tasks (watch • edit • discuss • changes) → Please help with tagging articles! Critique (Featured article): 33 achieved Novels WikiProject Peer reviews: • Sector General • Petals of Blood • Flowers for Algernon Improve: Oberon Old and New • The Age of Reason • Furies of Calderon • Wolf Brother • The Monk • The English Patient • Bones of the Moon Create: To the Vanishing Point • Spoilt City Recently a new worklist had been created and quietly arrived, the Cleanup listing which gives a fairly comprehensive hit list of "novels" related articles that have been tagged for something or other. Since then a new Article alerts listing has also been added of more topic and "urgent" items worthy of our attention.

This newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 05:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

The Muppets' Wizard of Oz

In regards to the reference issue, it WAS addressed before. But, good old Awadewit just NEEDED referecnes. I'll remove the statements. Limetolime ^{Talk to me • look what I did!} 18:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Over the Rainbow covers

Hi, What I'm trying to get at is that it was used in a scene in a film in which you have cops and robbers shooting at each other, blood spilling, bombs going off, all hell going loose, and in the middle of it all a little boy listening to one of the sweetest songs ever written. Quite a contrast to the scene in which Judy Garland is simply walking around the farm and complaining about the dullness and unfair aspects of life in Kansas.--Marktreut (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Image-graph.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Image-graph.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Great Escape

Your last set of mods is fine and not controversial. It was only the conversion to US spelling in an article full of "trousers" and "motorbikes" that was problematic.

Forty years ago, at school, we all knew that the James Garner character in real life was a Canadian and we were definitely not happy about his change of nationality. Varlaam (talk) 07:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

So, like, what the fuck is your problem? 99.9% of the universe would be pleased to read the stuff that you go around deleting. Go fuck yourself. Piece of shit.

35 years ago I didn't know what people were saying in that movie because they were saying it in fucking German and French. And so I was the only one wondering what was being said there? Maybe some other people were wondering too?

So I spend an hour or more figuring out what they're actually saying, and do the translations, IN TWO FUCKING LANGUAGES, and then some self-appointed clown comes along and screws it all up.

You're pathetic. You are exactly what is wrong with Wikipedia.

And why would anyone possibly want to know what David McCallum is reading? Eh? Most people don't read German, and they aren't familiar with World War II-era newspapers.

Why don't you try making an actual CONTRIBUTION to Wikipedia for once, instead of just wrecking what other people are doing?

How do I get your editing privileges revoked? Why don't you tell me that, since you obviously know everything.

Varlaam (talk) 19:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC) (in Toronto)

Try Building, not Destroying

Why don't you consider making that your New Year's resolution?

Sincerely, Varlaam (talk) 21:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The Great Escape

Dear Jim, Sorry if I have taken a long time to answer but I have been very busy lately.

I understand your points but I still think that The Great Escape (film) fact versus fiction article is valid. Many people wonder who Vigil Hilts was and thus it is good to have an answer to their question. The real-life Great Escape is not that well-known. I have read several books on escapes and it is only mentioned in passing rather than being the subject of a major article. The film is far more famous and it is thus appropriate, I believe, in knowing what inspired it, who the characters were based on and how fact and fiction compares.

The film itself acknowledges its real-life inspiration by dedicating the film to the 50 POWs who really were executed as a result of the escape.

You "question why this treatment — which would nicely augment the Production section of the film's article if done well — is being done as a separate article rather than at the film article". I seem to recall that some people thought it made the article too long and thus removed it completely. A compromise needed to be found and putting it in a separate article seemed the best solution.

A lot of work has gone into this article already and it would be really sad (even if the rules say so) to simply remove it. If you do question some of the points that they raise then could you please consider using tags — which I notice you already have. Cheers.--Marktreut (talk) 22:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Questionnaire

As a member of WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Good gravy, Jim, how about some archiving!? :) Is there any chance you can participate in the questionnaire? We will be keeping it open for a couple more weeks and pursue some venues to publicize it further. —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

LEIBOWITZ PUBLICATION DATE

Your point about copyright vs. publication date is good--look at Freud's The Interpretation of Dreams nominally published 1900.

My sources for 1959 are only the ones indicated: the Bantam Book in my hands with "PRINTING HISTORY/Lippincott edition published October 1959/2nd printing..........March 1960/Third Printing...............April 1960" etc.; and the Wikipedia article on its author Walter M. Miller, Jr. Stuart Filler (talk) 23:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Defiance

Just wanted to express my admiration for your outstanding work on Defiance (2008 film). I think the combined section is great. However, I believe that responses to the criticism, contained in the Times and Forward articles, need to be inserted and I'm in the process of doing so. Stetsonharry (talk) 14:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi there - am writing to raise in a reasonable and respectful manner our disagreement about using Leslie Bell as a source. She is a niece of the Bielskis and wrote an article about her father/their cousin, a Polish Army officer, in response to a screening of the film. Her article is fascinating and adds to the Defiance entry in an objective way. There's really no distortion by adding her item. It is a critical reaction to the movie. Why would you delete my sentence with a valid citation? In a spirit of good will I'm politely requesting that you, rather than I, put my sentence back - and please go ahead and choose the location you prefer, if that was the issue. Best regards, Banjojojo (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

{Not responding to the previous comment. I have no idea what he is referring to.) I was away for a few days and I see that much of what you tried to do was reversed, what I added for balance was removed, and the article has become something of a battleground concerning not the movie but the geopolitical events taking place some years ago that are controversial today. I think the solution is for more neutral editors from the film project get involved in this article, so as to make the article better and less political. I have really no idea how to do that and my patience with that subject is growing thin. Thanks again for your good work. Stetsonharry (talk) 20:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Re your note: thanks. Your patience is a marvel. Mine needs a retread. Stetsonharry (talk) 05:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

The Reader plot summary

You're welcome! I had thought, when I originally wrote it shortly after seeing the film, that we just needed to keep it under a thousand words ... and yes I wrote the novel article's plot summary as well. Unlike the other film/novel pairs I've worked on (The Devil Wears Prada (novel/film), and The Nanny Diaries (novel/film), the movie follows the book's plot very closely. I had thought of just lifting the book's plot summary after you tagged (almost no one would notice other than the change of Michael's illness and the end), but then I reviewed MOSFILM and saw I needed to get it down to under 700 words. Since I had done this at The Devil Wears Prada (which required a more extensive trim), I knew I could do it here. I do appreciate the thanks.

I also noticed that you had removed the forced pixel size of the images. I had done that, at least with the first image, because it's opposite an infobox and I generally try to keep them smaller if they are, since the MOS also discourages squeezing text between two images (I have my own preferences set to the 300px default, since I have a large monitor. One day, I like to think, we'll be able to have MediaWiki pick up not only the display size but how large the window in which the article being viewed is and adjust the image size accordingly, because 300px is one thing on a 1920x1200 widescreen and another on an older 800x600 CRT).

I suppose that problem may eventually solve itself as I will be renting the DVD when it comes out and taking notes from the commentary track (that's the reason The Devil Wears Prada is as long as it is ... the commentary track features the writer, director, producer and costume designer and they are all talking constantly about the creative decisions behind what you're seeing. And likewise on the deleted scenes' commentary). Meanwhile, I suppose, we could add some stuff to both the reception section and the intro about criticism of how the movie deals with the Holocaust (which is very similar to the complaints that have been raised about the book). Daniel Case (talk) 17:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Enchanted (film) peer review

Hi. I recently requested that the article Enchanted (film) be peer reviewed. The semi-automated review is here: Wikipedia:Peer_review/Automated/January 2009#Enchanted (film). I was wondering if you would like to help out in improving the article for a FA nomination. Thanks, Ladida (talk) 03:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Synthesis in Murder on the Orient Express (1974 film)

Dear Jim,

The points about the actors and director having worked together on more than one project may not be the sort of earth-shattering news that would make even a footnote in a film review, but I think that it adds a touch of irony and charm to the article. It's clear that Lumet and Connery have a history — much like Cary Grant and James Stewart had with Alfred Hitchcock, or Chow Yun-Fat and John Woo — and I think it only fair to point this out. It is a long time since I saw Psycho and thus did not realise until reading this article that Balsam had already appeared in a film investigating a crime with Perkins as a suspect. Isn't that a point of interest, a little touch of irony in the careers of both men?

If we restrict our contributions to solely what other writers and critics have put down in writing then Wikipedia would be that much poorer. When I contribute a plot summary of a film or book or other work of fiction, it is based on what I have seen and read, not a summary provided by a third party. It would be rather absurd if I had to check up on Jonathan Ross or Roger Ebert for my summaries when I can watch a film and guess the plot quite easily. I do not see why that cannot be the case for background information surrounding the subject of the film and book as well.

Yours Sincerely,

--Marktreut (talk) 21:50, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Rules, Rules, Rules. One is born, one faces rules and one dies. There are times when I think that anarchy which, in its simplest form, calls for a society without any rules at all, is not such a bad idea after all.

There is a scene in this movie in which Bianchi (Balsam) refers to Beddoes the butler (Sir John Gielgud) as a "stuffed shirt" and quite frankly we are getting quite a lot of them here at Wikipedia. The fun is being taken out of this project. I simply want to add what I think are interesting and very amusing facts which only take up a couple of paragraphs and I am being threatened with exile.

Do you want Wikipedia to be a fun place where all sorts of information can be provided on all sorts of subjects from all over the world, or do you want it to be minimal, elitist, restrictive and narrow-minded?

The fun and the sharing of knowledge is being taken out of Wikipedia. I hope you are proud of being a contributor to this sad state of affairs. --Marktreut (talk) 18:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Because I'll lose the discussion anyway, so what is the point? All I want to do is put in a few genuine facts which are quite harmless and add a bit of charm to the article, but there are some people out there who for some strange reason want all the charm and fun of Wikipedia to be cast out and replaced with just formal details cast in stone by a third party. Wikipedia is getting too puritan for my liking.--Marktreut (talk) 14:24, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Just a little wind-up. I still think there should be a little element of fun in Wikipedia. --Marktreut (talk) 23:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)