User talk:JuneGloom07

Hey there!
Welcome to JuneGloom07's talk page.

Please remember to sign your signature using the button or placing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post.

Happy New Year!

Hi June

Just popping by to say a Happy New Year for when it happens. Hope all is well with you :) --5 albert square (talk) 21:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Happy New Year to you! You've become the first person to leave me a message on my nice, clean talk page, I thought I should archive my last one as it was getting quite long. Hope you're having a good New Year's day. :) - JuneGloom07 (talk) 14:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

To our newest Rollbacker

I have just granted you rollback rights because I believe you to be trustworthy, and because you have a history of reverting vandalism and have given in the past or are trusted in the future to give appropriate warnings. Please have a read over WP:ROLLBACK and remember that rollback is only for use against obvious vandalism. Please use it that way (it can be taken away by any admin at a moment's notice). You may want to consider adding {{Rollback}} and {{User rollback}} to your userpage. Any questions, please drop me a line. Best of luck and thanks for volunteering! upstateNYer 23:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'll definitely practice before I use rollback properly and I'll head over to WP:ROLLBACK to read up on the rules now. :) - JuneGloom07 (talk) 23:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Good luck and happy new year! upstateNYer 23:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Ooooohhh welcome to the rollback club! This will make you laugh, apparently at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dougie Swallow everyone who thinks this article should be deleted are all sockpuppets of one another! Oh that made me laugh! Thank god that discussion is now closed! --5 albert square (talk) 02:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Ross Kemp

God, have you seen the vandalism I had to revert tonight on the Ross Kemp page? I've had to request for the page to be protected it's that bad and I will personally eat my hat if it's not protected. Had a wee rant about the vandalism too at Talk:Ross Kemp! Bloody mindless vandals people! --5 albert square (talk) 03:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Woah, that was a lot of vandalism! I saw your 'rant' on the talk page, totally agree with you. I see the page was protected, so that's some good news. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Totally confused!

Hi

Thanks for the info on Neighbours. I'd forgotten about the 2004 fire! So that means there's at least 2 notable storylines as I remember Annalise Hartman accidentally blowing up the bar too years earlier.

Anyway, one editor has managed to totally confuse me tonight! Days ago I made an edit to the Max Tyler page, I removed that box that's appearing under the personality bit and said I was doing this as per WP:MOSFICT. Anyway tonight I got a message saying that Wikipedia doesn't have such strict rules and that just because Wikiproject EastEnders goes by this rule doesn't mean to say that Max Tyler should. Er, firstly, why would the rules apply to one article and not another? And secondly the character is from TV programme Waterloo Road, nothing to do with EastEnders, so what the hell has Wikiproject EastEnders got to do with things?! --5 albert square (talk) 22:00, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I think there has been some minor storylines too, but the only one I can remember at the moment is Stingray's memorial wall. I think Steph became a councilor to stop it being painted over/removed. I don't know if the park is included in the Lassiters complex, but there has been a few storylines involving it, including Libby finding Bridget's date, Chris Knight, close to death and I'm sure there has been a wedding or two there.

That is quite confusing. I don't understand what Wikiproject EastEnders has to do with it either. I would say Wikipedia has strict rules and what applies to one article must apply to all. I've just checked their user page and they've been blocked for possibly being a sock puppet. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Nor me, never mind. I asked an admins advice on him because I thought he was a sock puppet of User: The Twelfth Doctor but I wasn't 100% sure and I didn't want to go reporting newbies in case they're innocent! I had to laugh though reading their talk page and they ask why they're blocked, er what part of "suspected sockpuppet" do they not get!

Did you see someone posted on Neighbours that they had really low ratings toward the end of 2009? I reverted as there's nothing to back this up. --5 albert square (talk) 22:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha, 'why am I blocked?' I've just seen the Neighbours edit. I don't remember seeing or hearing anything about low ratings towards the end of 2009, I might have a quick look later just incase there is anything out there. Neighbours returns to Oz on Monday and I can't wait to see the first episode. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:55, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Susan Bower

Template talk:Did you know Check it out under articles created/expanded on January 10th?

Nominated it myself, but I don't care. I think she deserves it!

Wonder if she'll get a wee mention! --5 albert square (talk) 01:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

That's so cool, I hope she gets mentioned. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, me too, I'm hyper now! Too hyper to get some sleep! I think they send you a message if your nomination was successful or something but I'm not sure as I've never nominated anything before. I did think it was just for newbies at first but when I checked out the competition below her, the previous article was created by someone with over 24,000 edits! Was just thinking there I know Susan Bower probably doesn't use Wikipedia, but if she did and she logged on when she was mentioned on the main page, I'd love to see her face! --5 albert square (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, just done some checking on the new WP:DYK, Susan Bower is 297 words long and apparently has to be 1,500 words long before it can be considered for the list! --5 albert square (talk) 01:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Right, I'll try and find some more information on her tomorrow and see if we can get the word count up. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Ignore me, I'm trying to get used to some new Wikipedia software tonight and I've found that practising it on Susan Bower was not my best idea! The article is in fact long enough as it has to have over 1,500 characters and hers is over 1,700 according to my software! I think she's in line with WP:DYK now lol --5 albert square (talk) 01:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Woo!! Susan Bower has been accepted on to the main page! Apparently now the information I put on to the template will get removed, the admin I asked I think said within the next day or two, and moved to some sort of preparation area and will appear on the main page shortly! They'll never get me off Wikipedia now so I can see it on the main page! --5 albert square (talk) 07:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Excellent! I can't wait to see it. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 13:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

		The DYK Medal
		For all your help in getting Susan Bower mentioned in the Did You Know section 5 albert square (talk) 18:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Hiya

That editor that we reverted the edits of yesterday on the Neighbours page is posting on my talk page not understanding why we reverted the edits. I've tried to explain but I don't think he gets what I'm meaning. I did try and explain more clearly before but believe it or not I'm at work and our fire alarm went off so I posted a VERY brief response! Ever since I came back in my Wikipedia page is all strange so I don't know what the heck I'm doing half the time! 5 albert square (talk) 15:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, JuneGloom07. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, JuneGloom07. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, JuneGloom07. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• You should have mentioned you had Inglourious Basterds up at GAN- I would have reviewed it for you sooner. Anyway, give me a few hours and I'll get round to it. HJMitchell You rang? 20:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Omg, thank you! I've just seen that you had created the review page and was about to leave you a message. Wow, when did I nominate it? November? December? There's been a few changes to the page since then I think. Btw, I saw you patrolled the Doga (Dog Yoga) article. I cracked up when I saw the name in the list. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC) ‎

No worries. I did a quick check of the history and saw a lot of IPs and new editors (I actually only saw about half a dozen edits by experienced editors in the last 50) so you may want to check any MOS issues and ensure it's all up to date. That cracked me up, too! I had to check to see if it was real, but I found articles from the BBC and the New York Times so there's not much I could do put patrol it and put a couple of tags on it! Dog yoga! Btw, I'll watch your page and the review page to save the blue bars! HJMitchell You rang? 20:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll go check the article now and see what I can do. I think the plot section is going to be a problem, it's been changed more times then I can remember. I don't think anyone can agree on how it's supposed to be laid out. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Neighbours is 25!

Keep your eye on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/March 18. I've just posted asking if it's ok to nominate Neighbours for the front page for this date as it celebrates 25 years on screen then --5 albert square (talk) 20:09, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I hope they say yes. Doesn't EastEnders also turn 25 this year?- JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, EE has a similar discussion at Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/February 19 --5 albert square (talk) 20:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

oooooooooo edit edit edit edit edit! I just checked EastEnders page and it's been nominated so I don't see why we can't nominate Neighbours! Gonna wait a day or two though in case anyone objects! --5 albert square (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit edit again, so has Neighbours! --5 albert square (talk) 20:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Yay! Neighbours is slowly taking over the main page! lol. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, had an article for years, never appeared on the main page before, then it's mentioned twice within 3 months! It's like the buses, you wait an age on one to appear then they all appear at once! When I create the article about the Lassiters complex I'm going to see if that can get mentioned on the main page too. I'm also going to create a page at some stage for Neal Kingston, Neighbours producer --5 albert square (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Patrolling

You marked Guru Guru Kuro-chan as patrolled. It is uncategorised, it has no references, it's been included in no WikiProjects and it might well not be notable. Why did you click the "Mark this page as patrolled" link without dealing with any of those issues? I've redirected it to Cyborg Kuro-chan#Opening music, as that's what it is. Fences&Windows 23:25, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for that over sight. I've only just begun patrolling and guess I should go back and read the tip/rules again. Thank you for letting me know. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 23:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I apologise for being abrupt, I didn't realise you were a newbie to new page patrolling. Thanks for joining in the effort. What I said might not be in the 'rules'. The way I look at new page patrolling is to not just tag articles or be a filter to weed out speedily-deletable material, but to also bash the articles into shape. So I try to add appropriate categories, add pages to WikiProjects that they fall under, wikify articles, add references and external links and hopefully expand the article, and if appropriate merge, redirect or propose deletion of the article. If NPPers are doing a good job, all the articles that are 3-4 weeks old (see [1]) should be at least decent stubs, and there shouldn't be any unsourced or obviously non-notable topics among them. As many NPPers do "drive-by tagging", many actually still need improvement (or deletion) and may not be cleaned up for months or years. This is particularly a problem with BLPs, there are 50,000 unsourced BLPs dating back to October 2006, and hundreds or thousands more make it through the NPP each month. Fences&Windows 23:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'll definitely try to expand the new pages and find reliable sources. Do you think you could give your opinion on this page, Comparative anatomy (band)? I've searched for further references and all I can find is the band's MySpace page, which leads me to believe the band/page has a problem with notibilty. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia:No one cares about your garage band applies! I've also checked and there's no coverage in reliable sources (and barely any in unreliable sources) and the style is typical of someone talking up their band: "the band has recently become a growing force in the experimental and noise music scenes. In spite of the band's short existence...". PROD it, then AfD if removed. Fences&Windows 00:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I've never seen the Wikipedia:No one cares about your garage band page, it's an interesting read. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Stephanie Scully

Hi

This is to let you know that I have started a discussion at Talk:Stephanie Scully about recent edits to the page --5 albert square (talk) 02:47, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Inglourious Basterds

Hi June, I've just got round to looking at this and, I'm going to be quite frank (don't take it personally. Please!) and say I could probably quick-fail it based on the lack of refs, the lack of formatting and essential data in the refs and the massive plot summary. As with Neighbours, though, if you have the time and inclination to bring it up to scratch I'll be happy to leave it on hold for as long as it takes, but I just wanted to warn you- it will take some work. HJMitchell You rang? 04:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh no, don't say that!

I should get to work on it then. I'm trying to find the date when the plot summary was changed, the current one is too long and the previous one was a lot better. I think it'll be easier to find refs for this article then Neighbours, since I don't have twenty-five years of news stories to go through. I've found a couple of other films that have already got GA status to help me out. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 13:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

As long as you know what you're up against- it won't be easy, but I'll do as much as I can as a reviewer to help you. The first thing I suggest you do is search google and google news/archives for any decent sources. I know (from my random perusing of WP:GA and WP:GAN that Hancock is a very good article on a relatively recent film. Giv me five mintes and i'll translate my hastily scribbled notes into a review and we can start this off. I won;t be far away if you need me (though I am going for lunch when I've done that!). All the best, HJMitchell You rang? 13:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I think the article is really looking good. I saw the note on the GA review from HJMitchell about cutting down the plot. I think it looks pretty trimmed already, but that's just me. As far as using semicolons after the cast section names, I think it would look better to have colons, but again, that's just me. Atlantabravz (talk) 14:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I've been working on cutting down the plot, but it still needs trimming. It should be around 700 or so words. I was working on it last night and I think I've got it down to a better number, I'll upload it soon. The semi colons were used in place of ====, the contents table looks much shorter and neater for it. I don't know if colons work on Wiki in the same way. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 14:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Neighbours

Hello, since you're the one who reversed my edit a couple months ago (forgot about it), please read the following : Talk:Neighbours#International_broadcasts. It was difficult to find sources, but found them anyway. Hopefully you or someone els will edit, cos I don't like wrong information on Wikipedia. Thank you Ziyalistix (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your message. As you mentioned, I reverted your edit last year as you changed information without providing reliable references to back it up. Well done for finding the sources, I know how hard it can be to find them. I've asked another editor to add the information and refs to the Neighbours page as I'm currently in the middle of preparing an article to be uploaded. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for the quick response. If you have any further questions, I'll try to answer them. Ziyalistix (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, thank you for taking the time to find the references and mention the problem on the talk page. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

It's Barnstar Time!

		The Userpage Shield
		Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage before 5 albert square (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Aw, thank you! You didn't have to do that. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Neighbours Edits

Hi

Someone's been active on the Neighbours page, this time removing info about the actors under the notable actors section. They say it's because the info belongs on the actors page rather than the soaps page. I thought the whole point of the section was to say why they're notable, as in the case of Delta Goodrem, they've not only been in Neighbours for a couple of years and then not gone on to anything. Therefore would that not include a BRIEF explanation of what they've gone on to afterwards? I was just going to revert it but thought I would get a second opinion first --5 albert square (talk) 03:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I agree with you. I was following the example set by The Bill when I added the notable cast members. Surely if the information wasn't supposed to be there HJ would have mentioned it in the GA review? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 12:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pamela Paulshock‎

An article that you have been involved in editing, Pamela Paulshock‎, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Paulshock‎. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Enric Naval (talk) 01:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Lynn Bayonas

Thanks for the info, I added it to Susan Bower and also used it to create a page for Lynn Bayonas. What do you think? I also nominated it for the Did You Know thing --5 albert square (talk) 02:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Whoop!! Lynn Bayonas is going to make an appearance on the front page! I hope it's on Friday as that's when her funeral is, but I doubt it. Still I'm glad she'll be on the main page --5 albert square (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Yay! Well done, I hope it's up at a time when you get to see it. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:59, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Ta! I hope it is too! That's the second time within a month that someone related to Neighbours has been mentioned on the front page, and Neighbours itself is hopefully appearing on the front page in March! If Neighbours doesn't appear on the front page it'll definitely be appearing on the On This Day section somewhere. Bet you nobody related to Home and Away has ever been mentioned! --5 albert square (talk) 23:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Neighbours (again!)

Just to let you know, I've started a discussion at Talk:Neighbours that may be of interest to you. HJ has advised that we keep an eye on this page just now as some people seem to be trying to drag it down the road of an edit war. You might also want to read up on three-revert rule. Fed up of edit wars tonight! --5 albert square (talk) 03:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Can I ask a favour?

I'm about to create an article. I can assure you the subject is notable, don't worry, but drive by tagging by new page patrollers pisses me off when I'm trying to build an article so would you mind patrolling it for me? You can use this link to isolate my edits from the rest. Just reply here to let em know you're online and I'll click save! HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 19:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I'm online and ready to patrol! - JuneGloom07 Talk? 19:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, JuneGloom07. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I know you're watching my page, but... HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 19:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Paulshock

An article that you worked on, Pamela Paulshock, is now up for deletion. You are welcome to comment on the deletion page. Thank you. Ikip 23:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

you can change your !vote. You can also contact Pamela on her talk page, or email here, if the email still works. I have done that before several times. She would know sources about herself better than anyone else. Ikip 00:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Mexicali

Hi June, I'm restoring the changes that user Talpis done without any talk/discussion, apparently the account was created to make such changes in English and Spanish wiki, please check the user contributions. Cheers.Jcmenal (talk) 18:55, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I hope you understand that I couldn't just warn them and not you. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 19:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes I do, np.--Jcmenal (talk) 19:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, JuneGloom07. You have new messages at Tadija's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: Inglorious Basterds

Yes I posted on the talk page. I'm not sure that MOS if graded by GA, but I was working on that. I noticed that one reference was to the IMDb trivia page (yikes), so I added an "unreliable" tag next to it so someone can try and find a better source. I've split up the Production section into mini-sections per WP:MOSFILM; would like to add more to it, like "Casting", etc. The "Cast" list is too long and detailed, IMO. Some of the details and sources could be moved in a said, "Casting" section. Some sentences seem choppy, and doesn't flow very well. I haven't seen the film, yet.. I rented the DVD today and plan on watching it later tonight. I had seen that the article was going for a GA, so I figured it must be a good movie. Oh and Brad Pitt is in it. LOL I'm about to go somewhere, but should be back soon and look further into the article. :) —Mike Allen 00:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll search now for another ref to replace that IMDb trivia one. I was thinking that the cast section was still too detailed. You should have seen it before I edited/cut it down! I'm thinking of using the example set by Precious (which has just been listed as a GA), and have all the details of casting seperate. I might have a play around with it in my sandbox. I hope you enjoy watching the film, but if you hate it, will you still help me out? Lol. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

It has a 89% rating on RT out of 255 reviews.. so it must be good. I have no idea what it is about, only that it involves Nazis. I've never seen a trailer either. About to watch it in a few and yes I'll still help if the movie sucks. ;) —Mike Allen 04:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, what did you think of the film? I've been working on trimming the cast section this afternoon in my sandbox, I've based it upon the layout used at Precious. It'll look better with the two pictures added to it, but it's no longer over detailed and long. What do you think? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 17:08, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

It was really good. Best I've seen this year, after Angels & Demons. Brad Pitt's accent got on my nerves at times, and I'm from the south too. lol Anyways, I should have explained it better. Normally the "Casting" section goes under the Production section. The Cast list, is just a list. Although some editors (me included) believe a Cast list should be removed if the cast is covered in the plot. For example: "In France in 1941, SS Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) [...]" etc. What do you think about this? Your summary looks a lot better for the Cast. Also, what date format (for refs) should be use? The US format or German (which I assume is like 30 January, 2010)? Usually it goes by the country of the film. PS. You don't have leave talkbacks if you don't want, I have your page on my watchlist. —Mike Allen 20:11, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad you liked the film. I do think covering the cast in the plot is a good idea, but maybe for smaller casts? We can put the casting bit in the production, I was just using the same layout of Precious. I'm not too sure about the refs, I've been using the '30 January 2010' format, but that's just me. We can change them if you think they should be done a different way though. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Well the dates usually go by the film's main country (such as the main production companies), and I see it's a "German" film... and I figured maybe they do the dates like the UK does. Also, most of the dates were in the US format, and I think the GA review checks the consistency of all the formatted dates (maybe it's the FA). So I changed them all to January 31, 2010 format. I also noticed a lot of citations of the site Tarantino.info, which appears to be a fansite and a wiki. What do you think about it?  :-\ —Mike Allen 20:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed the Tarantino.info refs too when I was trying to sort the refs out (they were a mess when I started work on the article) and I replaced a few. It has to be a fansite as Quentin doesn't have an official website. I'll have a look for some new sources now since I'm not busy. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you think we should leave the headings "The Basterds", "The French", etc? —Mike Allen 21:30, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't going to, what do you think? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:31, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I would say no.. I haven't seen any good or feature articles using headings like that. Probably something the Wikia would do. :P —Mike Allen 21:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The cast list was just a waste of space, and I have to go with what I originally thought to begin with, it's best in the plot and casting section. I just don't think that a list is not very suitable for an encyclopedia and is best put in prose. Ok, not I will begin searching for better sources. —Mike Allen 21:52, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay. I've found a new source for the part about Eli Roth directing Nation's Pride, so I'll replace the fansite ref now. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't tell me.. it is Collider.com? Because I am adding that (and archiving it) as I type this. LOL —Mike Allen 22:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Oops, I've just added one from Variety. I'll leave the next one (35) to you though. I've just found an article about Brad Pitt's casting, so I might play around with a couple of sentences in my sandbox. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:09, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

No, it's fine, I found a way to add it. :P —Mike Allen 22:23, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

• Well we have been busy! I'm glad to see the article is coming on despite my weekend away! About those dates- for the refs, you can use any format you like (as long as you give the day, month and year) as long as it's consistent. You could use 31 January, 21; 31 January 2010; 2010-01-31; 31/01/10 etc etc. Quite why there are so many different ways of formatting the same thing, I have no idea! Anyhow, I'll around-ish (somewhere) if you want me. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. I went through and changed it all to the US format, because that's how most were used in the article. I also can't stand the 2010-01-31 format, and I think it's frowned upon for the FA review (depending on the reviewer, I guess). I've read that the January 31, 2010 (written out) is preferred anyway, and I agree, it looks more encyclopedic. Also an editor yesterday went through and added italics to all the "work=" parameters. I guess they didn't know that WP automatically renders "work" in italics. Also, in case you didn't know June (it took me a while to catch on), Variety is the work, while Reed Business Information the publisher. Los Angeles Times is the work, while Tribune Company is the publisher, etc I used to get it all backwards. If you want I have a list (not complete) of most of the popular publishing information that is used on WP, like who the correct publisher is for a body of work, if you want me to add it in your sandbox, I can. —Mike Allen 22:23, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I didn't know, so please add the publishing info to my sandbox. That'll definitely come in handy. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:47, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm having a difficult time finding a source saying that Tarantino had a cameo role. —Mike Allen 23:09, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I was just thinking about that, I think we should remove it. We can always add it back if we find a ref for it later. I was just wondering if we should mention somewhere in the article that Tarantino is planning a prequel to the film? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 23:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I've added CNN (Time Warner) to the publishing info list, I was just looking at the site when you added the info to my sandbox. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 23:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I've removed the QT cameo info as I can't find a ref for it, I'll keep on looking for one though. On another note, I've just watched Quentin on the red carpet at the Grammy awards, the Inglourious soundtrack was nominated, but lost out to Slumdog Millionaire. I think he's going to be presenting an award though. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

It was my mistake on not knowing that "work=" puts the name in italics. I found a reference for what Tarantino says is only his voice in Nation's Pride: Quentin Tarantino "Inglourious Basterds" Interview with Kam Williams It also has some other good stuff in it. Another good reference that mentions some interesting production information: Eli Roth barely survives acting in Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds'; the latter mentions that the swastika wasn't supposed to fall and that the structure almost collapsed on them. What do you think? Atlantabravz (talk) 13:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Don't worry about the "work=" thing, I didn't know about it either. That's a very good interview there in the first source. He mentions you could hear his voice "a little bit", so I'm not sure if that counts as a cameo. It does have some info on a potential prequel though, which could come in handy. I'll find out if we're going to mention the prequel in the article and we can add the ref for it. The second source is definitely good from a production point of view, we just need to work out where to put place it within the article. I like how the interview is conducted with Eli in a record shop, lol. Thank you for taking the time to find them! :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 19:24, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if we have enough for a Sequel/Prequel section: "Or I could do a prequel to this movie, because I have half of it written. It's actually a story about the Basterds with a bunch of black troops. The truth is that I don't really know what's next, but I really like being in that square one position." I suppose it could be briefly mentioned in the Development and writing section?

Also things like this ""We almost got incinerated," Roth exclaimed during a recent outing to Hollywood's Amoeba Music, where he was riffling through racks of DVDs. "The fire comes up. They thought it was going to burn at 400 degrees centigrade and it burned at 1,200. That's like 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit! You see the swastika fall. It was not supposed to. It was fastened with steel cables; the steel liquefied." would be good in the production section. You writing about the seven-inch vinyl, could go in the soundtrack, unless someone challenges it as "trivia". —Mike Allen 21:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey. Sorry for the late reply, got a bit side tracked with L'Homme Qui Marche I yesterday evening. I'll have a look at adding the prequel info to the Development and writing section. I won't worry about the single, I don't think it's that important and it can always be added to the soundtrack article. Do you want to add the fire info to the production section? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I added it, although it may sound too bland. And congrats on the ITN. :-) —Mike Allen 02:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Someone from AOL [2]. That figures. It was kind of disgusting too. Another IP reverted most of it. I didn't catch it in my watchlist. —Mike Allen 20:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I had an IP come to my userpage and put that I suck *****, just randomly. LOL! I have never had a run in with that IP. An admin quickly reverted it. Strange people on here. I was wondering if he was going to review again, or if you have re apply it through GA. I added Saw VI to GA, but I'm sure it'll be months before someone grades it. Do you think I could ask him if he could check it out when he has time, or can you do that? Thanks for jumping in and reverting those edits on Saw VII, I was close to 3RR.  :-) —Mike Allen 23:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, there sure are some strange people on here. I'm sure HJ would be happy to take a look at Saw VI, I think he's around if you want to ask him. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 23:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Yup, it's legit. Probably just got some reports from another countries box office results. Also, is it worth noting DVD sales? [3] —Mike Allen 01:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Rebecca Robinson

Hi

I've had someone complain on my talk page about the Rebecca Robinson page. They're complaining that I keep putting Declan's father as unknown. Now I vaguely remember it being mentioned that Richard Aaranow is his father but as there's no reliable sources that I can find to back this up, I put his father as being unknown. I can find references that state that Aaranow is heavily implied as being his dad but there's a difference between heavily implied and actually being named!! This person has reverted my edits so I've just stuck a citation template on the page to see if anyone can find any sources that comply with WP:RS. Do you know if there's any? --5 albert square (talk) 00:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey. I'm the same as you, I can remember Richard being mentioned as Declan's father. I'll just have a quick search to see if I can find any references. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Got one. I just remembered that I added a ref to Richard's article a while ago that mentioned Oliver and declan shared the same father. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Ta! Hope you're well :) --5 albert square (talk) 01:12, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem, the ref is Oliver Barnes' Bio from the official Neighbours website. I'm fine, been working on Inglourious Basterds, trying to get it up to GA status and I've been hanging around the recent changes page too. How about you? Is it just me or has there been a slight decrease in the activity around the Neighbours character articles lately? No one's added any plot spoilers or vandalism, even the infobox editors haven't been as active. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you add the ref again then please for the confirmation. I've just added info on the creation of the character to the article. It's already starting to read more like a work of fiction. :) Raintheone (talk) 01:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I've already added the ref to Rebecca's article, is that what you mean? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, yeah I had noticed that, it's ever since two of the rollbackers said they didn't know how Neighbours and The Bill passed GA status and thought they should fail as they had refs the wrong side of the full stop? Anyway we basically told them to go ahead, contest it see how far they got and we've never heard a peep since so I'm presuming they came up with the answer not very! --5 albert square (talk) 01:48, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Only just noticed you added the ref. Woop. I added more info, think it helped? Only just got around to editing the character articles, always said I would, think i spoke to you on here before about it.Raintheone (talk) 02:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I need both of you to help me out on something. I've made quite a few edits now to the page. I know of a good casting piece I want to add, but don't know how to include it. Basically Jane Hall nearly quit the series on her first day of filming after she was unhappy with the pace and the fact she messed her first scenes up, I've searched for this. I found this Video, but it's on Youtube, it says everything I need for a source there, but we can't use youtube can we. I know that cites can be done from factual TV programmes if you get the date etc... how do I go about it then?Raintheone (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how to cite TV programmes. I know it can be done as I've seen it too. Perhaps, you could ask at the Help desk, I'm sure someone can help you out there. :) Good work with Rebecca's article, btw. Once I've finished getting Inglourious Basterds up to GA status, I'm going back to focusing on the Neighbours articles. Some of them need a lot of work. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 17:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello again. Thanks for the links. After asking about with the people at the top, even a youtube video can be used if it adds to the article, but it has to have the correct info, so in this case it the cite tags will have Ten network, rove, the air date, access date and the youtube URL... now how helpful will that be for fictional character articles. So many videos containing interviews on the net that will make these articles better. Glad I inquired to you and them now. :0 thanks again. Raintheone (talk) 20:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Is it just me........

Or is there a heck of a lot of vandals about tonight?

For someone that's not been anywhere near WP:AIV in the last week or so, I've been there 4 times within the last hour now! --5 albert square (talk) 01:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

It's definitely not you. I've been hanging around the Recent changes page this evening and I thought there was an increase in vandal activity. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Erm...

I hate to be a spoil sport, but I think I'm right in saying you've nominated L'Homme Qui Marche I for DYK. Trouble is, if it's been nominated for ITN, it's ineligible for DYK. Anyway, more people will read it if it goes on ITN but I suggest you take it off T:TDYK beofre someone else finds an even more complicated rule (DYK is full of them). HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 01:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll go remove it now. Thanks for letting me know. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you! I didn't know about that myself until a few weeks ago. Never mind, it'll likely see its way on to ITN and it'll get more views (I think the average DYK hook get <5k views but the average ITN blurb get ~17k). I'm probably going to retire for the night after a check of the enormous watchlist. If you can get L'Homme Qui Marche I to good start class or low C class standard, it has a better chance of going up- don't forget to search the news archives ;-)! HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 01:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I need to retire for the night too before I fall asleep at the keyboard. I am searching the news archives, not sure how much more I can add to it tonight though. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

It looks good as it is- and you've swung Physchim round by creating an interesting article! The world won't end because it takes an extra few hours to get on the Main Page! HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 01:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

In that case, I think I'll go to bed and carry on working on it in the morning. I'm sure there'll be some more stories on it by then too. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

ITN for L'Homme Qui Marche I

On 4 February 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article L'Homme Qui Marche I, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 08:43, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Nice work! HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 09:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 11:58, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Home and Away

Hi!

Are you a fan of it?

If you are, could you please check out List of current Home and Away characters when you get a chance? Someone has put that Kate Ritchie is returning but I don't know how accurate that is --5 albert square (talk) 23:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey! I'm not a fan of Home and Away, but I do read the news stories about it on Digital Spy (mainly to pass on the info to a friend of mine). Kate quit in 2007 and I can't find any evidence that she's returning to the show anytime soon. I think the same IP went around adding Harold, Sky, Carmella and Valda to the Neighbours returning characters list. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:10, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah it is. I know that Ian returned to Neighbours as part of the 25th birthday celebrations, however the character of Harold did not return. The same person also added to Anemone Projectors subpages that Stacey Slater is pregnant by Bradley Branning. In that case I must be watching the other side because I'm sure I heard Stacey say that she's pregnant by Archie Mitchell, and judging by his edit, so did Anemone! I know sometimes EE verges on the unbelivable but even they'd be stretching it if they said that Stacey was going to have 2 babies by 2 separate men at the same time! --5 albert square (talk) 00:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Lol, I'm pretty sure that I heard Stacey was pregnant by Archie too. I think that IP is either part of a group who can't accept that Harold left Neighbours or just one person using multiple computers. I've had to revert the same info so many times now. If Harold was returning, even for a few episodes, I think we'd hear about it. Oh, I reverted some vandalism on your user page earlier, someone wasn't happy about a warning you gave them on the 29 Jan. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 12:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Alfie Moon

What is with all the vandalism on his and Kat Moons pages tonight? I mean seriously! I've requested protection for Alfie Moon by the way.

Nothing compared to the vandalism I came across last night at UFC 109. Never even heard of the thing until yesterday when I had to ask for protection. Even ClueBot wasn't getting a look in to revert the edits! --5 albert square (talk) 00:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I was just about to ask you the same thing. I was having a look at the Recent changes page when I saw the first IP vandalize the article, I've just been keeping an eye on it ever since. I'm also keeping an eye on the Super Bowl pages, they're getting chnaged/vandalized left, right and centre. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Now also requested for Kat Moon **sigh** --5 albert square (talk) 00:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Well that's it

My page had to be locked because of all the vandalism. Locked for 3 days so it's joining the likes of Kat Moon and Alfie Moon meantime. All because I reverted vandalism! **sigh** --5 albert square (talk) 23:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

So I see, Beeblebrox had to protect his too. They came here, but only the one time so far. Are they still around? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 23:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think so, from what I can see the last edits were an hour ago. They must've got fed up when me and Beeblebrox protected our pages lol --5 albert square (talk) 00:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Peter O'Brien

Hi

Just to let you know that some of the Neighbours pages may need changing as someone thoughtfully moved the page about Peter O'Brien to Peter O'Brien (actor) without any consultation! --5 albert square (talk) 03:47, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

That's helpful, not. Hopefully it was just that one and the others are okay.

Thank you for giving that IP the warning btw, I went to their page and saw you'd beaten me to it. Might have to take Beeblebrox up on his offer to protect my talk page for a few hours. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I told them off for not starting a discussion about it in the first place, specially since they could've set up a page for something like Peter O'Brien (filmmaker) and left ours alone!

Yeah, the vandals have started vandalising my userpage now. No sweat, it carries on I'll just lock it :) --5 albert square (talk) 20:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Well Peter O'Brien thickens! The page that some editor put there in place of ours has been moved to Peter O'Brien (filmmaker) and a disambiguation page has now been set up at Peter O'Brien which is now marked for deletion! If that is deleted, I am proposing to move ex-Neighbours actor Peter back to where he was in the first place haha --5 albert square (talk) 22:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Would you like me to call you up a page protect...

....or can you handle things? HalfShadow 20:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, please. This is a problem from last night, which I thought had gone away. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection HalfShadow 20:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

S'alright; it's just I keep an eye on where I talk, so I note replies even if they don't happen on my page. HalfShadow 20:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I totally missed the box, till I saved the page. Thank you for asking for the page protect. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected — Kralizec! (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

ITN: Alexander McQueen

On 11 February 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Alexander McQueen, which you substantially updated and recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

-- tariqabjotu 19:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

F**K ME!! 392K! Nice work giving those nice people something to read! HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 02:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you. :) I had a look back through the history of the article yesterday and found that it was created by an IP in December 2003. I wonder if they've seen what's happened to their article since? I see there's been a little debate about whether Alexander's death should have gone up on ITN. I understand that he wasn't as widely known across the world as some fashion designers (say Chanel, Versace & Dior), but he was important in the fashion world and many news outlets across the world have had reports on his death. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 14:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

It's attracted a fair bit of controversy on WT:MP and WT:ITN (both on my watchlist!) but I think 392k ought to shut them up! HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 15:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikibreak

I thought you were trying harder to stay away from Wikipedia until 16th Feb :p! --5 albert square (talk) 00:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I know! I had to change the date to the 16th from the 12th, since I haven't gone away yet. I'll definitely take the weekend off, I need to recover from my cold and actually look at my Uni work. I didn't mean to get involved with the Alexander McQueen article as much as I did today. I thought I'd nominate it on ITN and see if it was supported, then I took a look at the article and saw it needed some work. On top of that, I created another Ugly Betty episode article, Smokin' Hot, earlier this afternoon. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 00:17, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Well you say you'll take the weekend off...........

By the way I see that one of the IPs that vandalised my page the other night has been blocked again. I reverted one of their edits earlier without even realising who they were lol. They're even insulting the admin to get unblocked and the admin are even surprised at the level of their personal attacks. So was I the other night --5 albert square (talk) 00:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Ugly Betty

I've noticed overly long descriptions of episodes, and when I went to read the overly long description of the latest one, it wasn't there. I like those long descriptions but have always realized they shouldn't be there according to the rules of Wikipedia.

So is it fair to leave all those excessive descriptions of other episodes? I like having them since at home I'm reluctant to visit a lot of sites due to potential problems.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:39, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi. You're right that the overly long plot descriptions shouldn't be there, plot summaries should follow the guidelines set in WP:PLOT. I understand that long plot summaries can be useful to readers, but most of them turn the article into a blow-by-blow account of the episode. One of the Ugly Betty episodes was recently up for deletion because it pretty much only contains a plot summary, it was kept with the consensus to trim the plot. All of the Ugly Betty episode plot summaries will need to be looked at and trimmed eventually. Ideally they should look something like How About a Friendly Shrink?. The references used in the Smokin' Hot article detail the plot of the episode a lot more and I've had no problems accessing/using them. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 22:11, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess you're right, according to the rules. I find those play-by-play descriptions enjoyable, but then that makes them a rule violation anyway.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2010

JunGoom, Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent reverts, such as the one you made to Titin, did not appear to be constructive and has been re-reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.