User talk:Chris 42

Hi. Any questions, just drop me a line here. I'll do my best to respond as soon as I can.

Chris 42 23:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just a brief note to say thanks for your work improving grammar, wording, etc. in the Little Britain articles.

I also notice that no-one seems to have left you a welcome message. Judging by the quality of those edits which I've seen, you already seem to know what you're doing, but here goes in case you find some of the links helpful... CLW 09:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

>>>thank you from me too, for some reason I wrote that edit late at night and my English skills weren't at their best Plch 15:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Chris 42, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• [[Wikipedia:Tutorial|Tutorial]

• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Little Britain/Matt Lucas

Hi Chris. You're absolutely right - I hadn't seen that para on the Matt Lucas article, so I've now removed it from there, too. Thanks! And of course, there's no copyright problem with copying stuff from elsewhere on Wikipedia. In face, stuff can be copied outside Wikipedia, too, as long as the terms of Wikipedia:Copyrights are adhered to. Oh, and when you leave comments on other people's talk pages, it's common practice here to sign with four tildes (~~~~), which generates a signature and time stamp like at the end of this message. That way, it's easy to see who left a message and when. Welcome again, and happy Wikying! Cheers, CLW 18:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for ndash work on Doctor Who pages

Hey, Chris. I just wanted to give you a note of thanks and encouragement for your ongoing project to fix the hyphens to ndashes on Doctor Who pages. That sort of work is tedious and probably not noticed or appreciated by most contributors, but it is important and worthwhile. Thanks for taking the time to do it. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome! As of tonight, I've nearly finished doing the Fourth Doctor articles, so not many left now... Chris 42 17:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I hereby award Chris 42 the Working Man's Barnstar for his painstaking work correcting punctuation on Doctor Who serial pages. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

wind-up line

Not actually implied by the quotes, the wind-up line happens at the end of the show, whereas "the antidote to panel games" is at the beginning. - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] 17:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: UK Lost airdates

I'm not sure what the airdates in the UK are, but you can easily fix them. Each column in the table is separated by ||, and the UK airdates are the third to last set of dates in each row. If that doesn't make any sense, you can look at WP:TABLE for a tutorial on how they work. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 21:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Zoo Quest

Do you think Zoo Quest needs its own article, or should it just be discussed in David Attenborough? The reason I ask is that apparently no complete episodes have survived. Perodicticus 18:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I've made a start on the article now; I'll add some more details from the autobiography this week. Thanks for letting me know about the BBC's written archive! That should help with a lot of articles here. Perodicticus 16:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

David Attenborough Template:

What's the harm in making David Attenborough a link. The boxes are a the bottom of the pages. And the link to DA is at the top, people will sooner click on it as when they have to go back to the top. Two links are better then one.

And I know the life collection DVD box does not contain Life in Cold Blood but it is part of the series. And know the box has no link to that page. And then again we miss a chance in making a page more excessible. And sorry for my poor English.

Yes it is perfect now, let's leave it this way. At least the lay-out.

Planet Earth

Hi Chris, you've done a great job on the Planet Earth (TV series) article. Have you considered emailing the BBC to ask them if they'd be willing to place a link in the Elsewhere on the web section [1] to this article? That would be fantastic. Cheers, jaco♫plane 11:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Chris

I noticed an earlier version gave the correct credits , where did this go?

You haven't signed your comment, so I'll reply here. Do you mean the current ones are incorrect? If you're referring to the infobox that appeared briefly, I actually removed it myself for a couple of reasons. The series has no "star", and since all the episodes will be broadcast during 2006, the "from & to" dates of "2006–2006" (which I could either leave or amend to "2006– " — implying an open-ended series) just looked clunky. There were few other scant details within it, and all are given in the article. I don't recall there being a version that gave credits other than those of Attenborough, Fothergill and Fenton that are currently shown. Could you point out which revision, maybe? Chris 42 15:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Great work on the Lost (TV series) articles

In recognition of excellence in editing Lost (TV series)
presented by Leflyman

Hi, Chris,

Just wanted to say that I've noticed how you've been watching out for bad edits on the Lost articles, and appreciate your dilligence in keeping them accurate and cruft-free. I haven't had the opportunity to do so in a while, so it's a pleasure to be able to award you the "Lost barnstar" (of my own design) for your hard work. Thanks for all the great edits! Please feel free to give it to those likewise deserving. —Leflyman^Talk 16:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Use of "prior"

Hi, Chris,

Perhaps it's a difference between American and British usage. As you note, "prior" can be used in adjective form to modify a noun, such as in a "prior engagement" or "prior year"; and it is commonly used in the form "prior to..." When the "to" part is obvious, it can be left out-- in other words, synonymous with "earlier".

Here's some random examples of the similar usage:

• "Five years prior, her parents -- hardworking greengrocers who forfeited personal happiness for their children's gain -- were brutally murdered in an apparent robbery of their fruit and vegetable stand." http://www.sukikim.com/
• "In the days prior, the tombs are cleaned and whitewashed." http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/travel/sdwells/oaxdd/Image14.html
• "If you would like statistics for the years prior, please contact us." http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/police/pages/-4258-/

In the case of the Lost season synopsis, it might have been clearer to say, "...prior to their arrival on the island." However, that same subclause is actually used two times in the article already!

The change to "previously" sounds like the best solution.

Regards, --Leflyman^Talk 21:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Harry Potter

Hi Chris, thanks for your copy editing of the article recently, but I was just looking over your recent edits and I was wondering what exactly your quarrel was with the lead's sentence structure?TonyJoe 19:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

In truth, it did bug me a bit at first, but your way makes more sense, even though I liked the long sentence. TonyJoe 21:21, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Fame Academy2

Thanks for your corrections - however, you changed "shows were" to "shows was" and as "shows" is the plural of "show", what follows should be in the plural as well, so I have changed it back. Cheers! Jud 18:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Superman Returns

Please review the talk page before you delete sections of the trivia. There is clear cut inconsistency in the usage and effects of kryptonite in this film. Bignole 17:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that normally that would be right, but because there was so much that didn't flow with Kryptonite, it needed to be mentioned. Also, I went with my friend, and she is far from a Superman fan, she basically knows about as much as the average person and even she was like "how was he able to get away with all that". I mean, he lands on the mass and loses his powers, but he lifts it later with no problem. Then he falls to Earth and survives with kryptonite inside him. It was just a big issue that should be noted, though I think it should be a bit more ambiguous. Bignole 18:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd have thought the correct titling of the 1978 movie was 'Superman: The Movie' - terrible title but, y'know, the actual one... Thumbsucker-UK 11:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

'kay, I'll stand corrected on this one. It's the last time I pay attention to my posters, album and DVD covers, s'all!! I blame Lucas (for pretty much everything, actually) - Indiana Jones and The Raiders Of The Lost Ark, my arse... Thumbsucker-UK 11:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Relative

Holmes: 'world they are set in': relative facultative in such a sentence. Pliny 23:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

http://www.answers.com/facultative&r=67 - i.e. the restrictive relative pronoun is (in English) optional (a non-restrictive relative pronoun is not). So it wasn't really a grammar point. "The book that I lost is new" (relative clause helps define book being talked of) "The book I lost is new" (relative can be left out in English of the above) "The book, which I lost, is new". (relative clause merely adds a detail, the book being talked of it already known, 'which' can't be left out) Some writers don't distinguish between 'which' and 'that' in that way - but even if you say "The book, that I lost, is new" 'that' can't be left out Note the commas help to show the parenthetical nature of the phrase. Note in speech non-restrictive relatives are a lot rarer than restrictive so imagine the sentences occuring in a perhaps old fashioned novel (modern novelist might write in a style closer to spoken English) http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000255.htm Pliny 19:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Preposition at the end: I think that is just the world we live in. That is not the God I believe in. It's not place I'd go to. Pliny 12:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Pink Floyd Live Performances

I reverted a couple of your copyedits on this page. In the first one, I felt that "onto" would be more appropriate than "on to" since the "on" is not attached to an infinitive verb. In the second, the "it" had no antecedent (obviously it was supposed to refer to the glitter ball, but the previous sentence reads "Several generations of glitter balls..."). Thanks for catching the misspelling of "spectacle" though. InTheFlesh? 02:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I will remember to consult askoxford.com in the future as opposed to American English dictionaries for this and other articles. InTheFlesh? 14:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry I havn't a clue

Neither do others have any clue as to whether you own shares in Tesco. Although that information is usually regarded as a private matter, it becomes a legitimate concern when a contributor supports a sycophantic account of a commercial organisation's business activity while suppressing fair dissenting views. 81.155.197.56 20:14, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Lost

Thanks for your great contributions to the lost series of articles particularly in removing inappropriate edits. Today I converted the lsit of characters into prose format. The new prose section was edited to include lot's of information that I feel is inappropriate. I note that you have copy edited this new section and would like to ask if you have time to participate in the discussion about it on Talk:Lost (TV series)#cast and characters. I've also made a range of other suggestions about improving the article, many based on suggestions from the peer review and FAC that I'd appreciate feedback on. Finally the article now has a to do list (I found a request for it in the talk archives) on the talk page and anything you think might need doing would be welcomed there.--Opark 77 13:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Rm dead link per MoS?

Hi Chris. I was wondering about your edit, where you unlinked to an article yet to be written. Isn't it customary to leave such a link, so that readers reach an empty page and are encouraged to write it? -- Tomlouie | talk 15:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right, there's no point in peppering an article with non-notable links. Cheers! -- Tomlouie | talk 13:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes Minister Episode Guides

Thanks for the hard work on creating the first couple of YM Series one episodes; all very comprehensive and detailed. The One00 15:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Am continuing to be impressed with the amount of work you've put into these. I had an idea regarding the quotes on each page. Yes Minister Files has a real clip of each quote. We could ask them if they mind us copying the sound onto the relevent episode page. Can you do that on Wikipedia, and would there be a copyright issue involved?The One00 18:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

On Death List Article

Nice article, but I think it needed a spoiler warning at the beginning of the plot, so I put one on. -- P.B. Pilhet 18:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC), Newpage Patrol

Yay

Yes Minister's passed GA!! Congrats. The JPS^{talk to me} 16:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Date formatting

Hi Chris - I've reverted the article The Smoke Screen (Yes, Prime Minister) to the version with wikified dates. I think that all dates in Wiki articles are required to be wikified in order that the user preference for date formatting works correctly - see Manual of Style - Dates, quote: "If a date includes both a month and a day, then the date should normally be linked to allow readers' date preferences to work, displaying the reader's chosen format." -- MightyWarrior 17:03, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I won't re-revert the date in the above article, but I think you will find that even in the Manual of Style section you mentioned, the "Dates and Numbers" paragraph implies that all dates should be wikilinked to enable user formatting preferences to be implemented. Linking dates is not about allowing the user to click on them - it's really about the formatting that this then enables. Therefore I don't see that the guideline on multiply linking the same word applies - dates are a special case. I will ask some more experienced Wiki editors for their opinion on this matter. -- MightyWarrior 11:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for making all the changes, Chris, well done. :) -- MightyWarrior 13:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Little Britain

I thought I'd let you know that I am going to remove the comment tag from Little Britain regarding relinking of actors' articles and reinstate the links (You were involved in at least one revert that led to the comment tag being added). The links vastly improve accessibility of those articles for users who only scan the Little Britain article, and are completely compatible with WP:MOS-L. I have explained my reasoning more fully at Talk:Little_Britain#Links to actors' articles. I'm happy to discuss further if you want. Cheers, Chovain 07:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

All You Need Is Love

Re: Your edit summary content about the source of the Paul McCartney quote: I saw the unsourced quote and found in the Anthology book, so I cited it that way. Given the choice, I think a citation to the book, with a page number, is more useful to a reader or researcher than a citation to the documentary. I do not feel strongly enough to change it, but I thought I would at least share my opinion. John Cardinal 19:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Differences in quote (book vs. documentary): I stand corrected. I thought I checked that when I cited it but I now see it is different. Thanks. John Cardinal 19:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:Films with no title

Hi Chris, as the creator of Category:Films with no title, your input would be welcome at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 March_24#Category:Films_with_no_title, where it is proposed that the category should be deleted. As you will see from the discussion, contributors so far support deleting the category as trivial and misnamed, but as the creator you may have a different view ... and either way your thoughts would be helpful in reaching a decision. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Forests of "Home"?

Hi Chris, I'm very impressed by how you've basically singled-handedly started and maintained the articles on the Attenborough documentaries. I like your summaries so much that I printed them out and used them as my trusty episode guides when viewing the series. I like how these handy summaries incorporated a lot of specifics and yet still are succinct in style.

I have a question you may be able to answer. In "Seasonal Forests", after the Valdivian forests of Chile, Attenborough said: "spring is arriving in the northern hemisphere. These are the deciduous forests of _____ [I think he said something like "home" or "Homm"]. Dormant throughout the winter..."

I'm not sure if he said "forests of home"? or what exactly..... I guess that would mean a British forests, but it seems a bit out-of-character for the narrator to be so self-referential. Or is it "forests of Homm", with "Homm" being some place in Europe?.....

Any idea? Thanks, --Menchi 19:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

User:TTN

Are you sick of TTN's so-called "editing" as well? A lot of people that I have met have. Angie Y. 11:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

When you speak of quality, what are you talking about? The writing quality of the plot summaries is fine, but if that's all you can do, it isn't quality in an encyclopedic view. You need reception and development to have any sort of quality there. Your plot summaries belong on tv.com or Wikia, not here. TTN 12:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Letting them be improved by others does nothing. You are the only person that has actually edited them. Forget about shows episodes for now. The articles in question are the Yes... ones. To actually reach a good level of quality, the plot summaries would need to be cut to about one third, and they would need what I have mentioned. Can that happen? If we go by mediocre "let them be" standards, we may as well leave everything that comes on this site. TTN 16:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I said "mediocre "let them be" standards", not "mediocre articles." It doesn't matter if people enjoy them (see WP:NOHARM). They are not encyclopedic as they stand. The plot summaries seem well written, but they are too long. They need to be short, concise, and only a part of the article. If they are really that important to the UK, find sources that prove it (it shouldn't be that hard if what you claim is true). If we only have plot summaries, nothing needs to be salvaged. A few sentences is good enough. The summary exists only if the article does. Articles need verifiable information from multiple sources. It doesn't really matter if people are grumpy as long as I'm removing useless information. TTN 17:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Please stop copying these. For one, that discussion is large. You're beefing it up with a separate discussion. This is about the Yes Minister series, not all articles. TTN 17:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Award

		The WikiProject Doctor Who Award
		This award is presented to Chris42 for his sterling work cleaning up the italics into quote marks requirements in the Doctor Who serial articles. I am sure that it feels like an unending task but you are doing a GREAT JOB! MarnetteD | Talk 18:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Chronology of the Doctor Who universe

Can you run AWB over this page again, please? Will ^(talk) 21:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

A question

I have left a message at List of Sherlock Holmes inspectors.

I am asking for a little help creating a table. It doesn't have to be any thing formal with boxes. Just two columns.

I found your interest in SH and you seem to have some familiarity with editing in Wikipedia. I am not sure where else to take this. ThomasHartman 00:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

Re: this diff -- disambiguation pages have their own style guide: WP:MOSDAB. I undid your edit there. Let me know if there are any other issues, and be careful with AWB formatting vs. disambiguation pages. Cheers! -- JHunterJ 21:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Back me up! :(

Please back me up! I need your help! Angie Y. 22:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Please check

I have started a new page at List of detectives, constables, and agents in Sherlock Holmes. I would appreciate your advice. Thanks ThomasHartman 20:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)