User talk:MichaelQSchmidt

Ongoing Running Waters discussion

If you have time...

Vanessa is back and applying for more film roles, with a new talent agency. I'm short of time at the mo but will block later today, or any passing admin can do the honours, I think 3 months is the current standard. If you get a chance to clean up her mess, be my guest. :) Franamax (talk) 19:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Following behind with my scooper and plastic bag? Glad to help out. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Well you know I think you should be using a mop and bucket... :)

Thanks MQS for cleaning this up while I was out climbing a hill. To keep the "book" up-to-date, I have 65.25.178.154, 65.25.179.39, 65.25.178.59, going back to April 2009. We will need to keep an eye out for when they IP-hop again. Regards! Franamax (talk) 10:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Take a look when you get a moment

Hello Michael, I found some new links on Tait. Take a look at my talk page when you get a chance. Thank you

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

Note

I started Samuel Benedict (film producer) after blue linking Nick Benedict an actor who appeared in the recent Memories of Murder (1990 film) AFD article you know. However I cannot find a single source to support it aside from imdb. Can you help? Dr. Blofeld 16:39, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

If you can't I will delete it. Please respond. Dr. Blofeld 21:32, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I will do some digging. Pity his name is shared by notable chemists and clerics. I'll report back. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:46, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Film cleanup

Hi Michael - I've added a section on the co-ordinators page here. Input welcome. Lugnuts (talk) 08:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Michael, you may be interested in this link that identifies newly-created articles about films: User:AlexNewArtBot/FilmsSearchResult. One of the tasks we'll need to do is to assess each new film article in the proper class (most likely Stub- or Start-class for the most part). Some editors who created new articles may be new editors to reach out to and welcome into the fold. I'm still considering the best approach for this, such as having a more casual-sounding welcome template than {{WPFILMS Invite}}. If you have any ideas, let me know. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:14, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

This may also be useful where article creation tends to be sloppy. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

When I return home from work, I will be quite willing to begin dropping these new users some friendly notes... thanking them on their contributions and advising strongly on the importance of references in reliable sources so as to have their articles meet WP:NF or WP:BLP... and I think it would be prudent to also include (where appplcable) links to WP:TOOSOON#Films or WP:TOOSOON#Actors, a "Find sources" created for their title, and with perhaps links to some of the other various other DIY welcoming pages... plus an invitation for them to review my Newcomer's guide. Friendly enough? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Yup! :) I was thinking about your newcomer's guide especially. I was just trying to figure how much information to give them. I don't want to bombard them, and I have no idea what first impressions are like for them. Mine was way too long ago. Erik (talk | contribs) 23:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to say, thanks for this and this! Mike Allen 00:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

December 30, 2010

New comments below this one. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.}

DYK nomination for The Stars Shine (film)

Hello! Your submission of The Stars Shine (film) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

And there's more. Please visit the DYK page. --Orlady (talk) 17:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Assistance

Yes, i would. Thank you. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 13:51 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I have been your fan even before now

Thanks for the great help you've rendered and still rendering to me especially as I should watch from a distance about the AFD on Jeff Unaegbu. I am a complete greenhorn when it comes to be an editor in wikipedia, not knowing the rules nor the moves, but I do believe I shall improve with time. My reason for being here is to help document authentic history for posterity and to encourage people to become notable and leave footprints on the rocks of time. Your movies keep me happy even now and I quite appreciate your obvious warmth in real life too. Recent efforts have gone into revamping the Jeff Unaegbu article especially painstakingly going for Internet sources. Thank you, Sir MichaelJeff Unaegbu (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Please read Newcomer's guide to guidelines. It may prove helpful. Best advice is to go slowly, and edit carefully as you learn. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Thomas Howes (actor)

Dear MichaelQSchmidt , would you mind if I recreated a page for Thomas Howes (which you and others voted to delete). I am just watching Downton Abbey again - a major (judged by viewing figures and comments) UK TV series, and Howes has what seems to me a sufficiently prominent role to warrant a page. I have added further refs. to his stage and radio career also, which helps I think. I have a draft here: User:Msrasnw/Thomas Howes (actor). What do you think? The Downton Abbey page's redlink on Howes looks anachronistic. RonhJones one of the deleting admins said I should contact you. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC))

• I would strongly advise that you not, as the page has been several times deleted already,[1] else you will likley find the article quickly deleted without discussion under Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#General G4. " Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion." What you might do instead, is build youir article at User:Msrasnw/workspace/Thomas Howes (actor) so that you can build the page and add proper sourcing to show notability as described at WP:ENT. And ONLY after you feel you have made the page as complete and well-sourced as possible, then you should ask this question of User:Cirt, the deleting admin, who will then compare the earlier deleted version(s) to see if your newer version has been improved to the point of addressing the issues brought up at the deletion discussion.[2] Best of luck. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi I think I have already done that which you ask here: User:Msrasnw/Thomas Howes (actor). And I am now wanting to put it back to the mainspace. Does it look much better than before. I have asked two of the three deleting admins. I haven't asked Cirt (The middle one of the three) as he seemed to be annoyed with me before on another request for restoration. Anyway Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 19:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC))

Only an admin can look at old versions and compare them to new. Get an admin's blessing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM December 2010 Newsletter

The December 2010 issue of the WikiProject Film 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 an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Major re-write of the Richard Adams (inventor) page

Hi there Michael, I was hoping to get some advice about what to do. Hopefully you remember the Richard Adams (inventor) page. The page has been severely cannibalized using justifications that have already been discussed and voted on, or outright deletions of sections that he didn't cover in my talk page when he made his intention known on Dec 22. Unfortunately, I haven't been logged in for quite a while. Could you look at the edit done on Dec 27? I would like to revert back to what it was before, but I'm not sure what the proper procedure is.

Thanks for all your help, Eggzactly (talk) 01:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Rathger than immediately revert, take your re-write out of mainspace to give yourself the luxury i\of time in getting it right. Place the removed parts from the earlier version into a sandbox User:Eggzactly/Richard Adams workpace and then study the text carefully. Modify any content that makes use of superlatives and trim and rewite to make it more encyclopedic and less POV. Then go through line-by-line what you have left and find sources for every sentence that might be considered the least bit questionable. And better, if reliable sources make some specific claim that he was a "pioneer" and "innovative" show the sources that make that specific claim. You might even expand on them in a recognition section as attributed quotes. For instance, the sentence "Thus far, seven unrelated instances of his work have been noted significantly by various media outlets starting when he was a pre-teen and continuing ever since." needs to be properly cited, and would likley make a postive contribution to a recognition section. That cameras at home were rare in 1967 needs to be cited and set in context. "Richard established cooperation with several adult friends in industry because of this project, and stayed in touch with them for years." needs to be expanded and cited. Which frinds? What's the source? If his creating an interface to connect an electronic organ to a computer, is considered a pionerring step, then tell us ny whom and source it. If his 16 bit home computer he began building in 1974 had a major impact on the home computer industry... identify just who made that statement and expand on what the source offered. A problem with such true statements as "Many sources show that Scott was a pioneer in the computer game software industry. The start of the process can be traced back to the 16 bit home computer Richard built, as mentioned by the referenced article" is that we cannot simply state that someone else said this. We have to show just who said specifically what and then cite it. Etc, etc. As youi work on it, check back in. No need to revert. Once content is proprly attributed... oversouced even... I would be quite happy to assist in returning the better content. Fair enough? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I will take your good advice and get to work on it. Thanks Eggzactly (talk) 18:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Evil Things

Hi. I'm bringing your attention to the article for Evil Things, which is currently a bit of a mess, especially regarding in-line referencing and external links. As a contributor to many articles, was wondering if you could help clean it up? FilmFan2011 (talk) 21:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

On it now. Have begun cleanup and sourcing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I feel I should also bring your attention to a number of sub-par film articles including Dark Nature, Deadwood (film), Jack Says and Jack Said, with the latter making no distinction whatsoever between the film and the graphic novel, which I feel needs a seperate article.

I'll look in after more work on Evil Things. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.}

I also noticed that Imogen Toner is now in two movie articles on wiki. One I started - Dark Nature, and also The Inheritance (2007 film). I am toying with the idea of writing an article on her. Do you advise this, and would she qualify? FilmFan2011 (talk) 01:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Imogen Toner's film career is fairly short,[3] so she'll appear a bit weak on meeting WP:ENT... UNLESS you show a more sourcable notability through her theater work, citing positive theater reviews with sourced analysis in a reception section,[4][5][6][7][8][9] and then simply include in the overall article that she has also done films. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Rebecca Cardon (2nd nomination)

Thanks. I really filed the AFD more out of assistance for whover didn't finish their work, because apparently I'm the only person on the planet who can finish unfinished AFDs. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 11:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Keep on smiling. --Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 15:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you again

You were extremely helpful in fixing the Matthew (Matt) Bennett article after it was so quickly tagged for deletion on Dec 20. Thank you again. It inspired a number of other editors' contributions as well. Now it seems the AfD finally closed on 2 January (no consensus which became keep), but the deletion tags remain on the article. I fear that if I remove them, I will be summarily chastised (I'm a bit gun-shy after that first one). Any advice? Thanks! --Silentcrow (talk) 21:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)