User talk:Darkwarriorblake/Archive 4

Prometheus

Edit it properly, the reference is poorly edited. Thanks. --80.31.49.83 (talk) 16:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

What have you done in the references section? Do you know how to reference? The reference is not placed in that section but in the text. Please edit properly. --80.31.49.83 (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Refs can go in reflist. Which of them? Your reference? I only see yours. --80.31.49.83 (talk) 17:01, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting my edit; I didn't intend to make it. --199.173.224.32 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.224.32 (talk) 18:48, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

T2 table

Hi, I'm not sure, regarding this edit, why you said I had no reason to remove it. I did so because of a comment from Betty Logan at the article's GAN page calling for its removal,

"I think the table in the box office section is excessive. WP:WHENTABLE states Tables should not be used simply for layout, either. If the information you are editing is not tabular in nature, it probably does not belong in a table. Clearly the information is not "tabular in nature" because there is only one row in the whole thing. I recommend remvoing the table and leaving it as prose."

Now I did explain my removal by stating "Incorporate info from table into prose" as the edit summary -- I'm not sure that has anything to do with or is similar to my earlier edit summaries of "Add" and "Tweaks". By the way what do you mean by "That said I'm restoring the table because you had no reason to remove it"? Unless you can produce the reason, then I hope you don't mind me hiding the table due to the guideline at WP:WHENTABLE. --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 05:05, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

It is a guideline only. The table allows for easier dissemination of information presented in prose. I've passed 2-3 articles with such a table in them, they do no harm. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:40, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

2263 IS The Fifth Element year!

2263 Alarm Clock — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamEtches (talk • contribs) 21:11, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

The Grey

Stop undoing changes. Thanks! Your last warning! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.99.247 (talk) 10:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

As more of an explanation, the small Private Defense Contractors text is part of the company's logo. Secondly, the executive producers must be credited on this page. They were a large part of this particular film and deserve the listed credits. Unless you can find a way to add them additionally in the info box, please keep the credits where they are at. We have tried to add a separate category altogether for the executive producers, but the infobox will not accept the changes. Thanks for understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthseeker8907 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!

Although you were initially sceptical about my effort, thank you so much for helping out during the GAN; Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a GA! --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 23:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Saturday Night Live, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paramount (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Saturday Night Live, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 48 Hours (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for correcting my recent error with respect to the Die Hard article. After watching that movie again last night, I realized that I had those two characters misidentified, and was going to revert my previous edit when I noticed that you had already done it. --TommyBoy (talk) 04:33, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

RE: Thanks

You're welcome. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

clearly by by universe scott was reffering to the "fictional alien universe"

thanks for proving my point. Nex Carnifex (talk) 04:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Piranha 3DD, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matt Bush (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Epic films

Thanks for your contributions to the conversation on WP:FILM. I've tried cleaning up the article but other users have been reverting me after I cleaned up URLs and removed non-cited information. I've tried discussing it on the talk page but no one replies, they just revert and accuse me of vandalism. Can I get a bit of support from someone who thought it was a good idea as well? Thanks! :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Film's January–February Newsletter

The January 2012 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.

To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the distribution list. GRAPPLE X 00:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

Hi. When you recently edited Project X (2012 film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Time Out and The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

TDKR

Double check your source - it paraphrases something Nolan apparently told Heat Vision, the self proclaimed fanboy wing of THR. I could also post half a dozen debuked cases of speculation regarding Nolan apparently changing the audio mix without a quote or any verification. If you can post a single direct quote from Nolan, or anyone involved in the production of the movie I'll gladly admit error. --Williamsburgland (talk) 21:54, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure why Boycool is the be all and end all of decisions made here, but he just fixed an issue (that I was unaware of until now) with the reference; he didn't restore your edit. I'm not sure why you're so fixated on this, but again - my issue was that the entry in question inferred that Nolan plans to change the mix in relation to Bane's voice, when every indication he's given is that he doesn't plan to. Again, if you provide anything indicating that he does plan to change it in any way at all, I'll happily admit error. --Williamsburgland (talk) 22:07, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Marketing

I saw your edit summary at The Dark Knight Rises and to answer your question per WP:FILMMARKETING, Merchandising does fall the under its scope. However the guideline does state you have to demonstrate its relevance just as when you are dealing other customary marketing techniques so in my opinion simply listing toys and other common merchandise wouldn't pass.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input 3Threat. Reading that it seems like it's passable if the source is independent of the studio and someone who profits from the toy, like a shop. I was using it largely as evidence of the scope of external merchandising going on. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Neutral notice

This is a neutral notice to members of WikiProject Comics that two discussions of interest are occurring at Talk:Comic Book Resources#Requested move and Talk:Comics Bulletin#Requested move. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

Hi. When you recently edited Project X (2012 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Yorker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Burt Wonderstone

I think Alan Arkin is in the cast. [1] RAP (talk) 19:55 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I struggle to find references that say this and aren't referencing IMDb. I will try to find some later and add it if i can. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey thanks...

For letting me know about the Portal 2 BAFTAs via that edit summary at B:AC :-) (j/k of course, but at least it wasn't Skyrim that ran away with everyhing...) --MASEM (t) 01:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Skyrim didn't win anything strangely enough, but at least Hamill got some recognition for his voice work. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:12, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

RE:Administrative Administrator intervention

Try ANI. Nice heading, by the way. --Boycool (talk) 02:31, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

"Administrator intervention". Aren't those called headings? Nevermind. --Boycool (talk) 02:38, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Just has a nice ring to it. Idk. --Boycool (talk) 02:42, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Some people just don't know when to stop. --Boycool (talk) 03:25, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Avengers

just letting you I answered responded to you through edit summary, feel free to revert if you strongly disagree.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 02:50, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Not that I disagree, with Box Office sections I've been told that the term Domestic is inappropriate even when the country of origin is clear (I experienced it on Fast Five) particularly, so it was better to specify the country of origin. I don't know if that is the case entirely. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 02:54, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Would North American be better?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:04, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds OK.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:24, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edit at Talk:The Dark Knight Rises

WP:AGF is not a requirement to be dumb, but your recent speculation about an editor at an article talk page seems unnecessary. Please stick to the article content at the article talk page, or consider taking your concerns about the editor to their user talk page, WP:SPI, or the appropriate noticeboard. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 18:35, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

changes i made to saw franchise actors list

Why can't I do that? can u plz explain? doesnt it look better and doesnt it make more sense in the way i changed it? I wouldnt mind if u had explained so that i wouldnt make the same "mistake" again. --Oskars Čaikovskis (talk) 23:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

RfC

The is a neutral request for comments at Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe#FeatureFilmCasting. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:46, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Shawshank Redemption

Thanks for all your good work on the plot summary. I did some additional trimming--hopefully for the better. This article seems to attract more than its share of strange edits. Thanks for helping stem the tide. Cheers, Blake Burba (talk) 01:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The Thing (2011 film)

Thanks for the lovely warm welcome to the The Thing (2011 film) article, Darkwarriorblake. So, in your own words, the edit direction is a timesaver that you have added to make editing here more convenient for you personally. So, I have "no idea what I am talking about" - can you please show us any rules that prevent addition of a link to the other film there? I never claimed there was any overlap. Where is the consensus for your view? Does anyone else agree with you? If someone disagrees with, you why do you see it as helpful to start swearing? I am perfectly familiar with the content of WP:OWN - are you? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't recall swearing, asterixing maybe. It's nothing to do with you disagreeing with me, I'm sick of having the discussion with anyone. Do whatever you want, I'm seriously sick of hearing about it. As for OR, what does that have to do with this? OR is saying it leads into another film when you cannot say that. They could land and have a burger for all you know, I described exactly what I can see and nothing more. Where is the OR there? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 11:19, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, I meant WP:OWN, as it seems you felt that you could personallty direct how this article was written. I don't see that stating that "one films leads into another film" counts as WP:OR. If so, an awful lot of film, and book articles would also need to be corrected. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd be fine with them being updated. I can understand a link, maybe, where something is incredibly complex and simply cannot be understood without further information, which is why we generally wikilink things. But The Thing and The Thing 2011 are not reliant on each other for understanding, there's nearly 30 years between them and the 1982 version has not been incomplete all that time, and in the same way the 2011 film takes place before the 1982 one and so is not reliant on that film for explanation at all. I believe that since it is made clear it is a prequel, that if you want to know what happens next you would look up the sequel using available links or searches, the same way you would for Terminator 2 from The Terminator, or Harry Potter whatever from the previous film. As such with the Thing, it comes across as unnecessary and also looks at leading a reader away from the article instead of allowing them to continue on reading to see other information that has been added by users, relevant to this particular, individual film.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 11:40, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think links are reserved for matters that are "incredibly complex and simply cannot be understood without further information", but rather can used for anything that is connected or germain and that is not a "commonly used term". The plots of prequels vary - some have a gap, some have an overlap, some show direct scene-to-scene continuity. In a series of flims, especiallly where the order in which they were created does not match the chronology of the overall plot, I think an explanaton is usful for the reader. Even moreso when the titles of the films are not in a numbered sequence, e.g. when a film shares its name exactly with a different film. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:53, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Smile!

A smile for you You’ve just received a random act of kindness! 66.87.0.115 (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2012 (UTC)