User talk:TheOCflash: Difference between revisions
| Line 694: | Line 694: | ||
Many of my links to Film Noir of the Week - were wiped out by Themfromspace even though most of the articles are written by published film writers that have written dozens of books on noir and have even done many of the movie commentaries on DVDs. Somehow I can't post links to my own site because ... well I'm not sure. What do you think I should do? Can you help me possibly return these links to the pages? |
Many of my links to Film Noir of the Week - were wiped out by Themfromspace even though most of the articles are written by published film writers that have written dozens of books on noir and have even done many of the movie commentaries on DVDs. Somehow I can't post links to my own site because ... well I'm not sure. What do you think I should do? Can you help me possibly return these links to the pages? |
||
Edit: I've also posted here. Please go there and comment! Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films |
Edit: I've also posted here. Please go there and comment! [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films]] |
||
[[User:Noirish|Steve-O]] ([[User talk:Noirish|talk]]) 20:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
[[User:Noirish|Steve-O]] ([[User talk:Noirish|talk]]) 20:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 21:41, 9 November 2008
What's All The Hubbub, Bub?
| Leave A Message for Luigi |
|---|
|
Hey, from Steve Eifert
Luigibob: Great to hear from you. I'm glad someone's looking at the noir pages. (And I'm glad people keep correcting them!) I think this will be, in a few years, a great site for movie buffs. IMDB is great, but this could top it. I read your bio. I used to do PR in the Navy about 12 years ago, and now I work in television. Anyway, keep up the great work! Steve-O 02:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
How do u know Nava/Thomas r divorced?
Anna Thomas' website says she is still happily married to Gregory Nava. You edited that "today they are divorced." Please provide a source for their divorce.
I even asked on imdb and imdb replied that they are still married. Thx! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.58.196.156 (talk) 15:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC).
- Yeah, it seems you are right. Not sure where I obtained my bogus info. Now corrected in films. Ooooooops. Luigibob 08:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Not too sure anymore, someone edited they are divorced. Luigibob 13:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. You are, however, encouraged to add appropriate content to the encyclopedia. If you feel the material in question should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. JoeSmack Talk 04:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- SNAP. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines, for example, one is encouraged to use AMAZON or Imdb for pictures and the like. I was only linking to an Amazon page where I obtained information for a film so as to document fully. So you removed a reference/footnote link. Besides thousands of links found on Wiki are selling something, a subscription to a newspaper, for example, or the ads found there. Luigibob 14:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Film infoboxes
Hi Luigibob, my gnoming happened to cross American Me, so I did what I usually do, i.e. linked all persons in the infobox, and some other minor wikifications. Then I got to visit your other film articles and your website (!!). Glad to meet you. I thought to ask you for your opinion on linking all names in infoboxes. WP Films says yes, even if they turn out red. But the more opinions we hear in WP Films Talk the better. Hoverfish Talk 09:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Saludos Compañero
Nice job on the Luis Valdez article. I especially like the fact that it has a photo now. (I had to take the other one down.) 8( KUTGW, --Rockero 22:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi
You sound like a nice, intelligent person. - Chocolate24. 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding edits made to Pizza, Beer, and Cigarettes (film)
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Luigibob! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 16:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- What the freakins! I have another link by Angel on another article and no problem. And, no, I'm not selling anything. Bots can sometimes be a nuisance. However, the producers of the film did decide to use the Angel site as the "Official Film Web Site." Ha! Jokers... Luigibob 13:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Titles of Spanish-language films
Hi Luigibob. I noticed you've recently moved a few articles relating to Spanish-language films such that their titles are all capitalized (e.g. El abrazo partido to El Abrazo Partido. Just to note that the convention in the Spanish language is that only the first word in a title and proper nouns are capitalized, so where we have an article at the Spanish-language title instead of at a commonly-used English-language translation we should capitalize accordingly. Thanks! --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\talk 10:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Discussion started
I have brought up the capitalization issue in Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)#Foreign language titles revisited, without attempting to expand on it. As I said, I have not followed all details, so I only gave the issue in a general way. Please, start a new section and mention the full issue as it should be presented, so that a wider discussion/consensus can start.
I would also appreciate it if I get an answer to my previous comment (here above) about linking names in film infoboxes. The infobox guidelines state that we should link (once) each name. Practice varies in case the link turns out red. The most common way is to let director and 1-2 primary starring actors in red (which helps the starting of articles on them) and to remove links from all other red linked names. I also noticed that you considered redundant the external database links and removed them. The point is: the infobox should sum up key data that exist in the article. The infobox is an additional stand-alone quick-reference box which does not substitute article content. So IMDb, amg and official website should appear both in the infobox and in the "External links" section. I would like to be in agreement with you about such details, because my work may cross yours again in the future. My gnoming edits follow WP Films guidelines and I like to maintain good feelings with content editors. Cheers! Hoverfish Talk 08:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Latin Award for Mr Luigi
|
  The Latin Cinema Barnstar
| |
| I Ernst Stavro Blofeld present you with this Latin barn-star for all of the hard work you've done on Argentine cinema and Latin film is general -your contribution to New Wave Argentine film and all cinema personalities is much appreciated!Sir Blofeld |
♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "I've been expecting you" 10:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining
I think you took me on a different note on red links. I did mention the infobox guidelines, but opinions differ. I usually talk with people who mainly do massive auxiliary work. So I am definitely interested to know opinions from editors who mainly create and develop articles. I also think that red links should serve a purpose, and that is, as a mark that something needed is missing. As you may know from Blofeld, I am regular (I started the sub-project actually) in the lists of films without article, mostly trying to find notability criteria and filter out of the main name-space "red" films of little significance. So I am also encouraging the growth of awards, festivals, important directors' filmoraphies, etc. So thanks a lot for your explanations, I may be using some if it comes to it. Have a nice time editing and if you come to problems on film edits and film-related AfD's, I am always available and if I can't help myself, I can link you to the right resources. Cheers! Hoverfish Talk 19:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Foreign film titles
To save you the time of having to look into all WP Films archived discussions, this issue has come up quite often. Long things short, we have agreed to remain a bit unclear about WP:UE. There are some films whose translated English version is almost unknown to most, while their foreign title is mostly known. Now this glitch leaves the door open to a lot of discrepancies, which means that at some point we "should" organize a general cleanup/renaming. At this point none of us would dare it. I am compiling now the List of French films and I just let titles as given. It is a mess both ways. Hoverfish Talk 20:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed that you edited capitalization of the (original) French title of The Red Balloon. As far as I can see, both WikiProject France and the French Wikipédia version of the article indicate "Le Ballon rouge" as the proper capitalization in this case. What are your thoughts? ENeville 00:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Greetings in return, and thanks for the considered response. As you, I don't know what to say about cinefeed.com. <shrug>. Compliments on the timely creation of White Mane. ENeville 00:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: The Dove
You are most welcome! :)
Glad that, you have noticed my nomination. Hope it gets featured and makes into the main page.
Regards, - KNM Talk 17:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Good evening. I have just seen the renewed article on Bonbom. Thank you for making it more professional. I loved the film, and extended the plot narrative. I appreciate your edits. Best wishesLuckyles 21:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Caps in Spanish titles in an English Encyclopedia
I'm afraid I have to invite you to calm down a little: ranting on my talkpage is hardly a helpful thing to do. I left you a perfectly polite message several weeks ago about the capitalization issue: given that you didn't take the time to reply, I simply assumed that you had taken my comments on board. I was therefore a little bit surprised to find an angry message from you threatening me ('don't ever change my work...'). You may need to read up on WP:OWN and WP:CIVIL.
- My bad. I guess I had a bad day. Luigibob
You write that 'I can by all means change most Spanish titles to English as per Wiki policy': I think you're conflating two issues. You're right that many articles currently at Spanish-language titles should be at English-language translations per the naming conventions (although it's worth noting that these conventions are guidelines, not formal policy). However, this is a different issue from capitalization. Certainly there are some articles that should be at Spanish-language titles: a good example would be something like Pepi, Luci, Bom y otras chicas del montón which was given two different English titles for its release in the US and elsewhere. Until some consensus gets worked out (discussion ongoing at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)) there is neither a policy or guideline that supports you changing the orthography of those titles to something that is, for the language they are written in, objectively wrong.
For the sake of keeping related material in one place I suggest we continue any discussion of this at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films), where I've already made essentially these points, rather than having it spread out to cross there and our talkpages. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\talk 12:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
On 24 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Dove (1974 film), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
--Carabinieri 18:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Reference in The Adventures of Robin Hood
A reference is used to back up something that might be disputed. Nobody is going to contest the bare facts about a movie, so it is not necessary. Also, I have not seen IMDb used as a reference in any of the hundreds of film articles I've edited. Clarityfiend 03:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- I suggest you check the FA-class film articles, e.g. Blade Runner, Casablanca, Jaws, etc. If you can show me a single reference used to support uncontroversial facts, I'll be happy to shut up. Or, if you prefer, ask for a second opinion of one of the other editors in Wikiproject Films. Also, see WP:Attribution#How to cite and request a source - "Material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and quotations, should be accompanied by a clear and precise citation". Clarityfiend 04:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- There is no need to refer to policy about this. It is something that is practiced in most of the thousands of film articles that have gone past the "sub-stub" stage (OK this term is deprecated). It has been established that each film article has a section "External links" where IMDb, IMG, Official website and possibly other acceptable sources are mentioned. Once these are present we don't reference them for simple film data. What we need to reference is claims about the content of the film (beyond clear "plot" outlines or cast, crew and tech specification data) and this by referring to professional critics or the official website rather than contributor based IMDb and AMG comments etc. I hope this helps. Hoverfish Talk 07:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Release dates & Being bold
Release dates
Hi, I see that you're the editor who put together the ratings box for Casino Royale. I'd like to thank you for your contribution, but I'm not sure why the supplementary content should exist in the article. My opposition to the box is explained here: Talk:Casino Royale (2006 film)#Peer review. I'm not a major collaborator, but a list of ratings does not seem to adequately complement the article's content; it leans more toward WP:IINFO. Any film these days can draw upon a multitude of sources regarding its production or its reception, but there are limits to be had. Is there a specific reason why you feel that it should be included? I'm not sure why the Ratings Template exists myself; it may be something that needs to be explored.
I don't want you to get disillusioned about working on such articles. From my point of view, a lot of the franchise films' articles on Wikipedia -- Spider-Man 3, Pirates of the Caribbean 3, and so forth -- are stringently locked into following specific standards. You should see the bickering over at the article for 300; probably a controversial example, but the editors there are debating over a handful of sentences from a single reviewer. I apologize if the revert of your information appeared too cold; sometimes editors' boldness gets the better of them.
In the future, I would recommend presenting the idea of a potential contribution on the talk page of a well-monitored article before starting the mini-project. Cheers. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 16:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- The funny thing is that some of these reverting guys aren't even enrolled in the running collaboration. "Being bold" can be interpreted in a variety of ways, mostly according to one's character. When I see such behaviour, I always pick a more pleasant topic to work on. / One note about your last message: admins, as such, don't have any particular role in content decisions or what should come in the instructions of the infobox. That's us, ordinary wikipedians, who through discussing and organizing we get some guidelines laid out, which in their turn, last only until a decision to modify them gathers consensus. Admins are simply entrusted some special tools, like permanently deleting or protecting pages, which can happen only according to decisions taken by a clear majority. I hope you don't lose your good feelings about editing here. "Free" has its ups and downs too. Hoverfish Talk 14:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words to me! I have always liked watching The Brotherhood of the Bell since I was 15. It was described by critics as above average. Thank you again!--Drboisclair (talk) 01:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Films November 2007 Newsletter
The November 2007 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 02:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Great job on the noir pages
I haven't done much work here at WP lately. They changed all the rules about images so a lot of my work got blown out since I've been inactive. I hoped guys like you would expand the pages, but every time I log in I see more of my poster scans deleted by a bot when a rationale for having them there would be very easy to add.
Anyway, I still use Wikipedia and I hope the noir section continues to grow. Steve-O (talk) 00:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
About the picture
Hi Luigi! Yes, I am a fan of "And God Created Woman" and wanted that there were more pictures on the page about it. I am new to Wikipedia and still need to learn a lot about editing pages. This picture is a screenshot that I took myself on my computer, that's why I didn't add an URL - there simply isn't any. I guess it should be hosted somewhere on the net. I'm not sure I know what to do in this case. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! ~Kerner
Joyous Returns on the Season
Today being St. Stephen's and Boxing Day I am returning your Yule greetings. Please e-mail me with the information. I recorded "The Brotherhood of the Bell" off local stations and off WGN on cable some 20 years ago. They are good copies as far as they go. I have scoured the internet for copies, but the one site that said that they have a copy must mean that they did the same as I. I would be glad to send you what I have, best regards, David--Drboisclair (talk) 19:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Quotes from Office Romance
Hi Luigi! Thanks again for your suggestions. I reduced the quotes section. The reason why I added so many quotes is that this film is one of those Soviet comedies that are almost unknown to the Western world, hardly even been translated into English (or translated not accurately enough ot too literally, thus the original humorous meaning was lost), so I thought that my translation of some phrases from the film would help others figure out better what it's all about. I consider this movie quite interesting and worth watching - not only is it good-humored but also displays the way of life, customs, particularities and peculiar humor of the socialist society. (I guess I should add this description to its page) Anyway, I deleted those that is possible to do without. And I am considering adding it all to Wikiquotes. Thank you again for your assistance. Happy holidays to you too! :) Betty kerner (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, and a question
I see you've been changing "Footnotes" to "References." Is footnotes inappropiate? Why? Is it worth the effort to change since both seem appropriate. Let me know as inquiring minds like mine want to know. Best and HAPPY NEW YEAR! ♦ Luigibob ♦ "Talk to Luigi!" 22:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. It's an appropriate question. The MOS recommends that the reference section be named as ==References== - Wikipedia:Ref#Section_headings_for_footnote_referencing - and for consistency between articles it seems appropriate to have the same name for the reference section, and as the majority of articles already follow the MOS suggestion and use References it seems worth the small effort to continue that consistency. Same with Plot and other sections within a Film article - WP:FilmPlot suggests using ==Plot== as a section name, so I've set my AWB to change other versions of that section name to Plot. If you feel there is valid reason to stop what I am doing, please let me know and we can talk about it on the appropriate MOS talkpage. And a Happy New Year to you! SilkTork *SilkyTalk 00:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Super cool. I edit and watch a whole lot of articles, so I'll make the changes from Footnotes to References on an on-going basis. I too like uniformity. I'm glad Plot is the norm as you described (I've changed lots of Primary Cast, etc). I've also moved sections around to conform with MOS (like "Cast" after Production/Background). Hey any specifics on film reviews? I like "Critical reception." If this is wrong, let me know ASAP. Finally, I hate Trivia sections and try to move them into the body or eliminate if inane. Thanks for your courteous response. P.S. I love the bouncing wiki-ball. I may borrow that for a while! Ha.Luigibob (talk) 00:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm glad you mentioned "Critical reception". There are several names for that section, and I've mostly just lumped them together under Reception for ease - but you're right, it's appropriate to look at Critical reception as part of the general Reception or Release as in I Am Legend (film) - an article I've recently been working on. I found User:Erik to be a very sensible film article writer, and someone whose views on structuring film articles I like to follow - his example of Fight Club (film) is very neat. So, yes - a "Critical reception" is an appropriate sub-section section within the general Reception section (or Release as it's termed in I Am Legend). I'll take a closer look at my AWB to make sure I'm not making crude title changes. Thanks SilkTork *SilkyTalk 01:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Part two
One additional thing: because PLOT denotes a work of FICTION, should not the PLOT section in documentary films be/remain synopsis? I think it should. Thanks. ♦ Luigibob ♦ "Talk to Luigi!" 18:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- O shoot - have I been changing documentary films? I thought I was keeping an eye out for that. I'm wary of documentary films, music videos, porn, etc - but it's likely that one or more have slipped by me. I've been at home these past few days with a cold, just wanting to do something simple like run an AWB sweep. There are things I could be doing, but I just don't have th energy for it. I guess my concentration is not what it should be. Do you know of any documentaries I have changed? Regards SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 18:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Silky: You changed American Dream (film), but not to worry I'll change it back now. I'm glad we're in synch. I like you're comments re CAST in 12 Monkeys. I don't like those CAST TEMPLATES as they look terrible. I prefer the "cast as" as per WP:MOS. More on this type of stuff later. If I have a question, I add to "part three" of this on-going dialogue. Best-- Luigibob (talk) 21:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I've seen what you've done to Cast on 12 Monkeys. Much better. It's now flexible so people can easily add information if they wish, in the true cooperative spirit of Wiki. As I no longer have a cold, Ive been getting on with other stuff and haven't had a chance to run my AWB again. I'm off to Brussels now for a few days, so won't be doing any editing after today for a while. But when I get back I'll have another go at films. Warm regards SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 11:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind message, and the tip about her latest flick! I'll keep an eye open for it. Aille (talk) 02:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
A question
Hi Luigi! How are you doing? As I know, you contribute a lot to articles about foreign cinema, so I'd like to ask you to help me (please!). I'm confused about the following thing: when starting a page about a foreign film, should I choose its English or original title as a name for the article? In my understanding, since it's the English-language Wikipedia, the English title is preferred. Still, I often find articles about foreign films where the original titles are used as the default names. (for example: Fantômas se déchaîne, Les malheurs d'Alfred) And what if the film is widely known under its original name? I'm not consistent at this point: I started a page about one French film as Le Distrait, and as The Twin about another. Could you please explain what to do in this case? Also, believe it or not, I still can't figure out how to make it that if one clicks on Le Jumeau, he'd get on The Twin (which is the same name for the film, but in English). I'd be very thankful for your suggestions! --Betty kerner (talk) 18:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Luigi, thank you so much for your help! Much appreciated. And yes, you are right about "Le jumeau", however, in French Wiki and some other sources it is listed as Le Jumeau, so I chose to keep this spelling. Seem that they sometimes capitalize nouns that come right after articles... =? Guess I forgot French completely. Best!--Betty kerner (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Barnstar
Your welcome. Note that isn't just any old award. It is the coveted film silver barnstar which is given to only the best film editors - the elite - it was ages before I had one. Your name should be announced in the newsletter at the end of the month -so a few hundred other editors will learn of what work you do, Yes I've barely edited film this year so far. Only a few like Sous Le Sable, Day of the Idiots etc. Not concentrating like I was on it. But I;ll get more into it again in a month or two. I'm currently adding French towns which I see as a major priority - notice the article count has jumped from 2,228,000 to 236,000 in a day and a half. I saw the Motorcycle Diaries the other day, a rare screening of an Argentine film on TV in the UK. A brilliant film isn't it. Makes me want to travel through south america myself!! PLease continue to add new articles!!! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 02:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC) Image sourcesGreetings again! The second is "source" - for Book covers, film posters, and album covers, you'll see my solution here User:SkierRMH/My Sandbox. Of course I do put the source when it's available, but even with some of the "stable" sources for images, their internal links change (so some just put a generic "amazon.com"), which means that they're not directly tracable. IMHO, for these three at least, the source is irrelevant, as they're all digital scans that can be done by anyone. It looks like your're doing the same for the few recent ones that I perused. As long as there is something legit in the source (even the generic ones), the both shouldn't pick it up as unsourced. Of course, that doesn't mean that some zealots won't be going through and challenging them, but wih probably over 3000 Fair uses added, I've only run across that once or twice. Hope that answers the questions, if not, just drop me a line. SkierRMH (talk) 03:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC) Re: Keaton templateHi Luigibob and thanks for the kind comments re: my work. You're right about the Keaton template - it does look too intrusive. I've overhauled it using the same template I used for the Pathe serials, so it now looks like this. This auto-collapses in the articles it's used in. I think the problem with the old design was that it had layers within layers so it didn't auto-collapse. Thanks again. Lugnuts (talk) 19:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Amarcord - PlotYes, by all means please use plot given WIKI's guidelines. Thanks for your message which is greatly appreciated.Jumbolino (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC) Well, I first thought that the link would have been best placed in the "external links", but looking at the site, it is just a general info, nothing specific about the film itself. As there's substance about Kubrick at the site [1], the link would be appropriate for Stanley Kubrick Archive, which is also interlinked at Stanley Kubrick#Additional external sources. The link, as you thought, isn't really appropriate for the film sites, unless there's a specific page there that I didn't see that discusses the film directly. SkierRMH (talk) 07:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC) Thanks......for the reply regarding my priority re-assessment of John Alton. Another editor and I have opened a discussion regarding (especially) the articles rated as Top- and High-priority, and who belongs where and how we determine that on the project talk page, if you'd like to weigh in on this. Thanks again! Wildhartlivie (talk) 13:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC) Well done
{{filmrationale}}The only problem therein that I can see is that it doesn't answer the "source" issue, so you still need to add a separate line/section for the source. SkierRMH (talk) 01:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC) RE: CATSHi! Let's take one of your articles as an example: The Pretender (film). As [Category:Crime drama films) is a subcategory of both [Category:Crime films] and [Category:Drama films], you don't need to put those two cats. Also [Category:Crime thriller films] is a subcategory of [Category:Thriller films]. In a short only the subcategories are needed there as they already include the main cats. But I wouldn't worry about goofing up the cats, somebody is going to fix them sooner or later. Oh, and about Seven chances: I already explained my point to EraserGirl (her talk page) before reverting her edits. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do, should I wait for her answer before reverting? I'm not quite up to date with all the Wikipedia policies. Sorry about my English, I hope that all makes sense. :)--Dblk (talk) 15:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC) Thanks a lotThanks a lot for your barn-star! This means so much, and it was totally unexpected. I really didn't know that what I was doing was being noticed by other users. This can only encourage me to work even more on film-related articles. Regards. BomBom (talk) 12:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC) WikiProject Films February 2008 NewsletterThe 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. You've been busy. Good to hear from youThanks for the update. You are doing really good work. I'm nobody, so I can't give you a barnstar (or whtever) for your work, but the catalog of Argentine films is quite impressive. Best regards. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Stan Re: Verónico Cruz articleNo probs. Justin talk 19:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC) Argentine filmsYou mean Argentine films of 2007 and Argentine films of 2008? I know. I'll see if I can get them started but I would appreciate your help with the lists anyway as they are central to Argentine cinema on wikipedia ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 12:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC) I haven't checked for notability yet but here we go : Argentine films of 2007 and I started Encarnación (film) and Cuando ella saltó and Chiche bombón as well. Perhaps you could expand? Its a shame there isn't more people working on them on here but these films are very much a part of the spanish speaking world , which is pretty different from ours ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 20:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC) Hola amigo. I couldn't agree more. There are a few people on here that are super, and are a credit to the site but the majority aren't like this unfortunately. I don't know what it is but I think an intellectual site can attract the wrong sorts of people, you know the stuck up geek types who try to rule over people to compensate for inadequacies in their own life or just stupid kids, fourteen year olds who like Pokemon and wrestling who don't know what is relevant to an encyclopedia. As you can see I could have become an admin 18 months ago but it is precisely this kind of bureacracy that I want to avoid -what fun is there in that? (although I agree I could use those admin tools at times). As you can see I put up with a lot of crap from people given the amount of work I do on here, fortunately there are those who appreciate it but it seems at times that many don't. My relationship with wikipedia blows hot and cold almost on a daily basis. Sometimes I feel very enthusiastic and think wow there is so much missing and go into creation mode but other times I think; the site is huge enough as it is, do we really need to spend so much time developing it when we are faced with criticism and abogados? Most of the time I remain optimistic and try to block out these niggling editors and concentrate on the actual content of the site which potentially is endless. Admins apart from the Skier man I would suggest are User:John Carter, User:Riana (particularly with images although she is often busy), User:Darwinek etc. Hope you are well. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 12:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC) Need more than just "No"Re: The Motorcycle Diaries (film) It isn't enough for you just to declare "no" on a change that I make. Some actual rationale would be appreciated in the future. "No" implies you to be the sole arbiter of Wikipedia like a proverbial Caesar giving a "thumbs down." I would contend that such behavior does not represent the spirit behind Wikipedia. Is there a specific rule behind your refusal to allow quotes within a quote box? Redthoreau (talk TR 01:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks CompañeroI am glad you contacted me and that now I know where you stand. I am thankful for your contributions, and look forward to working in unison with you. I trust your judgment and in the future let’s build a productive working relationship on matters of similar interest as I believe we could be an effective duo. If I make a change you don't agree with, just let me know why you think it would be better without it, and I will most likely comply. All the best and Hasta la Victoria Siempre ;o) Redthoreau (talk TR 13:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC) Re Footnotes v. References, part duexHey it's me. I trust you are well. I just got pushed back by an editor who changed Rerences to Notes. I rev and said as per MOS:FILM it's References. See: Anatomy of a Murder. Whatchathink? Any news in this area? I mean is there a difference when writing in Wiki? Most of the articles I do use Footnotes as is standard in scholarly work, but I've changed to References as per you suggestion. Let me know your thoughts? Best -- Luigibob (talk) 19:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
NO POINT OF VIEW ON: Anatomy of a MurderOn the critical review section, good point of view. That is, yours. You have a valid criticism. The reviews at rottentomatos were almost uniform. Great place to find relevant reviews. If you look at the discussion page, I mentioned one review, with a link that I thought was particularly good. FWIW. We (you) could cut and past from several reviews. I made a lot of additions and changes (big and small) to that article. I've kind of exhausted myself on this one and am ready to hand it over to a fresh set of eyes. Have at it. Thanks for your help. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 03:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC), Stan. Anatomy of a Murder and other thoughtsDear Luigibob: You could fairly say that I have a legal background. I am a lawyer by training, worked for the Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission (see Michigan Supreme Court for a quick overview), was a litigator (both civil and criminal) for twenty five years. I have been a labor arbitrator for thirty. Thanks for the thumbs up. I am pleased that you liked the thoughts, even though some of them are "original" (even though I've now put in a quick reference). I wanted to add something to the readers understanding of this movie, which really is a great trial flick, written very carefully and knowledgeably by a good writer who has the perspective of a justice of the Supreme Court and who had also been a real practicing lawyer. I tried to add a listing of colour films and did not know what is available, even though there is one for black and white films. If you would take a look and fix that, I'd be appreciative. I am thinking about the Trial movies article. If you have any suggestions, I'd be most appreciative, too. Thanks. Stay in touch, please. 7&6=thirteen 16:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Stan
======Luigibob: Thanks for your encouragement. Unfortunately, the Wiki process sometimes moves way too quickly. It's like they want you to go from 'nothing to finished product' in one day. Well, it takes time, to come up with thoughts and to find sources that will complement them. Or vice versa. All of that takes time. You are right about Wiki. This is a complicated collegial process. Even if one reads the rules, etc., there is a lot going on, and one sometimes jumps into the middle of a gunfight. Because of my professional background, I am particularly in a position to know and understand a movie like Anatomy of a Murder. I know the article is not supposed to be 'original research' etc., and that we need sources. But putting that all together in an instant can't happen, as I actually have to earn a living. I'm working on it. Anywayz, if you have more sage advice, I'm all ears. Stay in touch. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 00:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC) stan ======Anatomy of a Murder gets a "B" I was really pleased when it got upgraded from Stub Class. The argument over footnote and link names is of no consequence. 'Some call it a spear, some call it an arrow.' I enjoy hearing from you, inter alia, because you have a sense of humor and perspective, plus some real Wiki competence. Best. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 12:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Stan =======Luigibob: Some interesting links (with really good info) are now in this article. I know you monitor it, but you may have missed this. This could help cure some of the kvetching in the most recent evaluation. Your friend and fellow conspirator. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC) Stan  Presented by SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 23:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC) I've looked at what you have been doing and feel you deserve some kind of pat on the back. SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 23:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC) WikiProject Films coordinator electionsThe 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) 04:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC) SilenceWhat do you mean amigo? I left you this message only a day or two ago: Hola amigo. I couldn't agree more. There are a few people on here that are super, and are a credit to the site but the majority aren't like this unfortunately. I don't know what it is but I think an intellectual site can attract the wrong sorts of people, you know the stuck up geek types who try to rule over people to compensate for inadequacies in their own life or just stupid kids, fourteen year olds who like Pokemon and wrestling who don't know what is relevant to an encyclopedia. As you can see I could have become an admin 18 months ago but it is precisely this kind of bureacracy that I want to avoid -what fun is there in that? (although I agree I could use those admin tools at times). As you can see I put up with a lot of crap from people given the amount of work I do on here, fortunately there are those who appreciate it but it seems at times that many don't. My relationship with wikipedia blows hot and cold almost on a daily basis. Sometimes I feel very enthusiastic and think wow there is so much missing and go into creation mode but other times I think; the site is huge enough as it is, do we really need to spend so much time developing it when we are faced with criticism and abogados? Most of the time I remain optimistic and try to block out these niggling editors and concentrate on the actual content of the site which potentially is endless. Admins apart from the Skier man I would suggest are User:John Carter, User:Riana (particularly with images although she is often busy), User:Darwinek etc. Hope you are well. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 12:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks! Here is an odd question: I see you are working on Little Fugitive. There is a scene where the kid goes into the shop of a photographer, who is obviously not an actor but a real Coney Island photographer. He has a Superman standee for his customers to pose as Superman. The Superman insignia seems to come from years earlier. My question is: Why is the insignia reversed? Was there any camera back then that reversed the image? If so, why? Pepso2 (talk) 09:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC) Ciao - I see that the image question has been resolved. I noted on the talk page, they were apparently never were protected or requested for protection. Also added a cite to the Cannes film festival. The list was also made into a paragraph. I'll keep it on my watch list for a while, but let me know if problems aren't being taken to the talk page. SkierRMH (talk) 04:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Edits wars huh? Now thats a surprise. Just try to ensure it is written from a neutral viewpoint and the reviews are balanced ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 11:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC) You too amigo!!! Don't eat too many eggs!!! (or hatch too many chicks) ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 19:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Happy Easter to you! re:CategoriesHello! Is there a reason why categories should be in a-z order? I'll try my best to sort them, but I probably wont over time! Cheers. Lugnuts (talk) 12:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC) Just A General Lift-up...Hi there, Luigibob! I just wanted to stop by and drop you a little note. I wanted to thank you for your truly invaluable contributions to many Wikipedia film articles, particularly to film noir. As a fan of film noir myself, I find it encouraging to see someone help polish and upgrade articles related to a genre that certainly deserves more coverage by this encyclopedia. BTW, the Bugs Bunny quote you have at the top of this page makes me suspect that you are a fan of the wabbit. Is there any chance you might consider becoming a member of the American Animation WikiProject? You would certainly be a very-welcomed participant! I generally spend most of my time trying to revise and update animation-centric articles, but, as I am a relatively inexperienced editor, I realise such articles are in dire need of polish to upgrade them to the high standards of articles on other art forms. Once again, I just wanted to thank you for all the great work you've been doing around here, and to encourage you to keep up the good work! :-) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 02:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Screw itYes, there are plenty of other articles to edit. Which one where you having problems with? I'll take a look and give you my thoughts on the matter. SilkTork *YES! 17:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC) WikiProject Films March 2008 NewsletterThe 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. Thank you......for your kind support of me as a coordinator! I appreciate the note of confidence, and I welcome any thoughts from you about WikiProject Films or films in general. :) Hope to run into you around the mainspace! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC) Thanks for the comment!I appreciated your comment on my bio -- if only I could be as terse as you in summarizing an entire life; I envy your talent for brevity! :-) Keep in touch! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manushand (talk • contribs) 04:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC) Re: The Hitch-HikerYour plan sounds good. I was going to have a go at making a "production" section first. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 18:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
P.S. I don't know if you saw my note in an edit summary on "Lolita". It's no longer necessary to remove the "px" from the "image_size" variable in the infobox, since that bug has been fixed in the template. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 01:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC) CategoriesI edited the categories in your sandbox subpage per Wikipedia:Categorization#User namespace. -- Alan Liefting- (talk) - 09:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Malèna posterHi I am BeedoxI hope you could understand why i removed your image from the page. I just want Wikipedia to e suitable for every person, after all it is a universal encyclopedia or everyone to enter it. I hope you can accept my apology and thank you. Beedox.
Re: italicsHi Luigibob, I'm doing well, thanks. How have you been? Actually I didn't know that foreign words like noir should be in italics in the English language. You certainly hint at my edit in the Fallen Angel article, right? I thought that the italicised words "film noir" looked kind of weird, that's why I changed it. I've also taken a look at the film noir discussion page. I do not doubt that you are right about this issue. So, should I revert my edit or just leave it? Thanks for the cue! Dutzi (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Invitation to an RfCI have initiated a WP:RfC re. User:Ed Fitzgerald's behavior. You are cordially invited to add your two cents worth here. Clarityfiend (talk) 17:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC) Sorry if you didn't understand my shorthandRe: Amarcord Luigi: I changed all instances of as in the Amarcord entry to make it consistent with other film entries on Wikipedia. In the edit summary box, editors are asked to give an edit summary. I used shorthand that Wiki administrators can understand, i.e. "punctuation (Wiki style)" translated means "I inserted the proper punctuation marks in the cast list for Amarcord to make it consistent with other Wiki entries, per the Wikipedia Manual of Style." (Whew!) I think you can see why I used shorthand. I'm not going to bother changing it back because someone else will eventually correct it — preferably someone with a sense of "style" (pun intended). Cheers. Kinkyturnip (talk) 03:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Re the GetawayUser HergeMoore removed several titles from the film noir list including such obvious examples as Goodfellas, Cape Fear (Scorsese's 1991 version), Ronin and The Getaway (the original 1972 version as well as the remake). He simply wasn't right to do that since all these films actually are neo noirs. Thanks for your endorsement. Regards. Dutzi (talk) 14:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC) WikiProject Films April 2008 NewsletterThe 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. USC SCAJudging from your recent edits, you made an assumption that I created that list from scratch and had anything to do with the honorary diplomas listed. Please, check the edit history. --Bobak (talk) 13:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Photography creditsHi Luigibob. Our image use policy states "All photo credit should be in a summary on the image description page". Additionally, our caption guideline states "[captions are] only included in the caption if the photographer is notable" - notable means "if the photographer has a wikipedia article". Of course attribution for an image should be included - it is a violation of GFDL for this attribution not to be excluded. The attribution, however, goes on the image description page, not on the article. I hope that makes sense, and I haven't put you off contributing images. Best, Neıl ☎ 21:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Hurricanesounds.jpg) 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Stifle (talk) 14:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC) Normally it's OK to mention the soundtrack within the film's article as was done herein if the album/soundtrack doesn't warrant an article of it's own. As a section, it would follow the 'normal' format of an album article. I've added the infobox for the soundtrack, which should appease any question about it's use therein. SkierRMH (talk) 18:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC) O brother of Mario Hey plumber guy. How are you amigo?? Today I've been editing the Las Vegas article baby. Its odd but I have lost count how many core American articles I have had to develop. Given all the Americans on here it is often left to a bald belgian-welshman to sort out!! How is the film work going? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 16:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Well Deserved
Re: Cats in alpha orderSUMMARYHi. You may want to review MOS:FILM. It does state to keeps cats in alpha order for easier reading. Luigibob (talk) 23:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Luigibob - can you explain this edit? As you are a prolific editor, I'm not implying anything negative, but this blanking took place 2 months ago and was not corrected until now. Vishnava talk 22:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Acceptance speechI'd like to thank all the people who made this award possible, especially John Macreedy (although I heard that he later changed his name and came to a bad end). Clarityfiend (talk) 21:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC) Hola amigoHey Luigi alright? Howz the film work coming on. Hey have a look at SPECTRE'S latest adventure. Here is the directory of what will be adding an article on everything friggin village on the planet from Afghanistan to Vanuatu! Over 1.4 million articles to be added over the coming months by FritzBot which SPECTRE spent money in hiring to dominate the world. By the end of the run I'll be able to say I or at least FritzBot and I are responsible for over half of wikipedia's articles! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000?
WikiProject Films May 2008 NewsletterThe 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. JustmanThanks for the image of Robert Justman. Its sad that Justman, Joseph Pevney and Alexander Courage all passed away in May 2008. The original Star Trek directors, prodicers and songwriters are really dying out now. I guess we still have Herbert Solow...for now. Its just a pity that there are no free images of Pevney's Wikipedia article. He directed some of the best Trek shows. Leoboudv (talk) 00:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC) Confusion reignsWhazzup with A Man to Remember? I see that you've had two discussions with SilkTork, where you've agreed on the supremacy of References over Footnotes, yet you've restored the latter to go along with the former. A bit redundant, wouldn't you say? Plus all three entries are specifically references. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC) Seems to have died down & the anon has disappeared for the time being. Doesn't warrant protecting the article, as it's not high profile & as of yet doesn't have frequent vandalism. I've watched it and will keep an eye on it for a month or so - but if you see that (or another) "fixing" it, let me know. SkierRMH (talk) 03:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC) Hi Luigibob, I don't really have any problem other images being used, but if it's not a free one, it'll just need a good fair use rationale. I see no problem though, and whatever is needed to improve the article is fine with me. Rossrs (talk) 13:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC) ThanksHi, thanks for the star. The film had just been on TV here in the UK, so the plot details were still fresh in my mind. I have now archived my talk page - you were right, it was looking very untidy! Jud (talk) 15:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC) I put in a new reference to another list, this time from the American Film Institute. We should probably do something more with this. Please take a look, and see what you can do. Thanks. Best to you. 15:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC) Stan 7&6=thirteen (talk)
WikiProject Films June 2008 NewsletterThe 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) 23:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Welcome to the Hotel WikipediaSo Ed is expanding his horizons, eh? To paraphrase the Eagles, "we revert it with our steely edits, but we just can’t kill the beast." Clarityfiend (talk) 01:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC) Just a quick note- you released this into the public domain, but claimed that attribution is required. If in the public domain, attribution is not required. Perhaps you would rather release your images under a free license that requires attribution? GFDL or CC springs to mind- perhaps you could take a look at our list of free licenses for some ideas. J Milburn (talk) 18:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey SilkyHow have you been..... Luigibob (talk) 05:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Happy Fourth of JulyHey Stan. I wish you the best 4th of July ever....your friend.... ♦ Luigibob ♦ "Talk to Luigi!" 20:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Blofeld going spanishHi Luigi. I'm beginning a change in my main work on wikipedia towards translating articles from spanish wikipedia into english. I;m learning spanish and have known the basics for some time and with my dictionary and translation engine help will be able to do this. I'll be concetnrating on developing articles in Latin America, I've begun translating La Guerra Gaucha. It is an FA on spanish wikipedia. It would be great if we could work together and promote it to GA as it is considered one of the argentine classics. Interested? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 18:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
La Guerra Gaucha is a film! It has now been translated but needs copyediting. It would be good to see a GA on an Argentine film The Bald One White cat 16:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC) WikiProject Films July 2008 NewsletterThe 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. A B.S. kinda noteBravo. Sympatico!. B.S. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC) Stan
Image:Angela.jpg listed for deletionAn image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Angela.jpg, 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. TiusP (talk) 21:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
HelloHey there Luigibob... I was looking over all your noir work and you've done a great service to Wikipedia. I want to make sure all the Noir of the Weeks have Wiki articles to link to, but I'm not sure if I'll have time to write them all. I'll probably do some very short stubs. Steve-O (talk) 00:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC) WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator electionsGaslightHi Luigi, I for one wouldn't put it back. Let's have a quick look at the most important/typical noir characteristics: 1. Film noirs often feature convoluted, sophisticated story lines, like e.g. flashbacks, flashforwards, voice-over, POV, etc...
2. The protagonist is usually a hard-boiled character, like e.g. a private investigator, police cop, criminal or something else.
3. Femme fatales often play an important role.
4. Pessimistic tone/ big sinful city as a setting/ dark visual style (Low-key lighting).
Of course there are far more aspects to be considered, that define a film as a noir, but these are generally regarded as the most important and most common ones. They will do for our discussion. So in my opinion, only one characteristic is not enough! Every horror film features a dark tone and dark visual style, and they obviously can't be considered noirs. I have noticed that film historians/critics have pretty different opinions as to this particular film genre. I remember that some critics (sorry, I can't remember their names/book titles, it's been a long time) do not even consider The Maltese Falcon a film noir because of similar reasons (no flashbacks, no voice-over, etc...). Of course that's nonsense. I think it's much easier to identify a film as film noir than to argue why it is or is not noir. Best regards. Dutzi (talk) 22:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
The Narrow Margin photo descriptionHello, Thank you for listing one of my favorite noir films. The photo you have listed as the LA train station is actually the Colorado whistle stop where the thug and McGraw send telegrams and the kid gets his Indian headress. Please do not regard this as any form of criticism, more of an assist on an important article. Best, Phil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.145.202.58 (talk) 22:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
You may be interested in a project which includes Brazilian cinema?
WikiProject Films September 2008 NewsletterThe September 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. Please also note that after the roll call for active members, we've cleared the specialized delivery lists. Feel free to sign-up in the relevant sections again! WikilinksHi Luigi, I've got a little problem and since we have already discussed several issues I thought I might ask you. I recently edited the article to the film The Wiz. In the lead I linked the release year as follows: Orphaned non-free media (Image:Traverspic.jpg)
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Films October 2008 NewsletterThe October 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 suggestions or comments related to the newsletter, please leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you and happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC) Problems with external links in your film editsHello, thank you for all of your contributions to film articles. One issue I hate to bring up though is that the external links that you like to add to articles, most notably the links to dvdbeaver.com, do not comply with WP:EL. Over the next few days or so I will be deleting the references, since as they stand they constitute spam. Themfromspace (talk) 10:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC) A little helpMany of my links to Film Noir of the Week - were wiped out by Themfromspace even though most of the articles are written by published film writers that have written dozens of books on noir and have even done many of the movie commentaries on DVDs. Somehow I can't post links to my own site because ... well I'm not sure. What do you think I should do? Can you help me possibly return these links to the pages? Edit: I've also posted here. Please go there and comment! Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films Steve-O (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}