User talk:Erik

Looking for assistance.

Thanks for your comment on WT:FILM. Sorry for misreading you (disputing/disrupting). I have just been warned on my talk page here: User talk:99.192.91.3 for removing "Top Critics" scores from Stargate (film) and threatened with being blocked. If you could post a message to editor "MisterShiney" pointing out the validity of the edit I would appreciate it. Thanks. 99.192.91.3 (talk) 20:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Let's centralize the discussion at WT:FILM. You didn't have to start one at WT:MOSFILM. I'll message them to weigh in at WT:FILM. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:58, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I should also add, editor "MisterShiney" has now complained at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism that my edits are vandalism. 99.192.91.3 (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I've messaged MisterShiney. In the meantime, let's not edit the "Top Critics" scores out of film articles. There's no rush to get the content off Wikipedia. :) Let's go through with the WT:FILM discussion and see what everybody says. Sometimes if you run into resistance, it's good to just stop and start dialogue. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree again. So long as MisterShiney does not get me blocked, I'm happy to discuss the matter further first. 99.192.91.3 (talk) 21:25, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, feel that under the neutrality of Erik, I should point out that I didn't complain, I just asked for an admin to take a look at your recent edits. Didnt call you a vandal, just asked them to take a look to see if there was justification for your edits considering that you edited an essay without consensus based on a couple of editors on a single film page so that it reflected your views on the topic and then proceeded to make edits based on this. It was the only place that I knew of to make admins aware of edits. As for the "Threat of being blocked" that was a warning of being involved in an Edit War and about to go over the 3RR. MisterShiney ✉ 21:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Dispute resolution would be the first step. One does not have to involve an admin to resolve a dispute; an admin is just an editor with a few extra tools. It is really about starting dialogue, and it can be tough to accomplish that when opposing parties want the article to show or not show specific information before having any kind of dialogue. When neither party can concede even temporarily, the situation escalates. So dispute resolution is about dialogue, starting with the two editors, then including others as necessary. I also think that WT:FILM is active enough that if you run into film-related concerns, you can post there and get help from one of the regulars. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:40, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll bear that in mind next time. I will admit, all I saw as an IP user removing content and changing long standing essays. MisterShiney ✉ 22:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Question about WT:FILM discussion

So it has been 24 hours since the last comment (mine) was added to the "Top Critics" discussion and I am wondering how one is supposed to know when a discussion is over. Also, how is one supposed to know what the outcome of a discussion is? It looks like people contributing have just been happy to have their say and now have wandered off to other things, but (as you might suspect) I would like to edit some pages as a result of this discussion, so I'd like to know how I will know when we are at that point. Thanks. 99.192.87.126 (talk) 23:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

One more thought while I wait for your reply: I just discovered this discussion: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Film/Archive_8#Rotten_Tomatoes. In short, 23 months ago four editors contributed to a discussion about using RT's "Top critics" scores. All four agreed that they should not be used. One editor (you) suggested that WP:RTMC be edited to reflect this. You wrote, "We can modify the 'Top Critics' bullet under 'Limitations' to indicate not to use it." Betty Logan, who also has participated in the discussion over the last few days agreed, writing "covering it at WP:RTMC should be sufficient". At that point the discussion ended. WP:RTMC was never modified nor was there any further discussion of so doing that I could find. I worry that the same thing could be happening again. 99.192.70.9 (talk) 14:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC) (=99.192.87.126)

I'm not sure if you are around, so I have added the same questions I asked above to WT:FILM. They should be simple enough ones for someone to be able to answer. 99.192.75.232 (talk) 23:09, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's tidings!

To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:06, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

The Day

You asked how you could help with The Day (film). Mainly just keep watching it! And try and work out why so many different user names are tinkering with it! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I will take a look. :) Erik (talk | contribs) 13:44, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Merry

Season's Greetings, Erik! At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD | Talk 18:54, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

• Also best wishes for your 2013 and happy editing whenever possible :-) Your return to editing here is one of the best things that happened all year. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk 18:54, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

  Aw shucks. :) Thank you for your kind words, and it is good to be back somewhat. ("Real" life always beckons...) I've enjoyed working alongside you; I can always expect good insight from you in discussions. I wish you a festive holiday as well! Erik (talk | contribs) 19:01, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Holiday cheer

		Holiday Cheer
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings.

Thank you very much, Michael! Happy holidays to you as well. :) Erik (talk | contribs) 16:24, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Merry Christmas Erik, enjoy yourself Darkwarriorblake (talk) 03:01, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Merry Christmas to you too! Erik (talk | contribs) 16:25, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Les Misérables (2012 film)#Cast billing

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Les Misérables (2012 film)#Cast billing. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)Template:Z48 Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Also, in addition to the above notice, I want to wish you Happy Holidays as well! Keep up the good work, as usual, Erik! All the best for the new year, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy holidays to you too! :) I looked at the discussion, and I'm not quite sure what to recommend. One possibility that comes to mind is putting Les Amis de l'ABC in a side table (like you see at Panic Room#Cast). Perhaps you could do the same for the main cast members -- they could have their own side table with prose discussing them (since some characters like Cosette/Marius or the Thénardiers can be grouped). That would mean two side tables, if that's palatable at all. Erik (talk | contribs) 00:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Stalk Page Stalker comment. I have been looking at that conversation and dipping in and out occasionally. Why are they notable enough to be mentioned in the cast section when they are all played by "nobodies" who have no star credits before this film? MisterShiney ✉ 00:31, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Some of the actors mentioned are those who were involved in stage productions of Les Misérables, so I can see some value in identifying them. As for actors in the last paragraph, there are blue links, so there could be some value there. There's no obvious cutoff when it comes to identifying cast members, but it may be more appropriate here because there are numerous adaptations with the same characters being recast repeatedly. Erik (talk | contribs) 00:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

International Online Film Critics' Poll

Hi Erik, thank you a lot for your comment in the the discussion about the International Online Film Critics' Poll. I invite you to tell my what do you think about my example of the page here: User:PassionFilm/sandbox. What do you think about it? Best wishes, PassionFilm (talk) 16:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

It looks like a good start! I will want to check the sources for reliability to see if this award is notable. My initial impression was that it did not quite cross the threshold. I'm busy tonight but hope to weigh in this weekend. In the meantime, I recommend WP:REF#Repeated citations and using {{Cite web}} and/or {{Cite news}} templates for the links. Please nudge me if I have not responded by the end of the weekend! Erik (talk | contribs) 23:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Erik, thank you for your answer. I think that the award has an excellent notoriety... I think the sources are very reliable, and above all HitFix and Filmweb. Sources from different countries (Italy, Poland, USA, United Kingdom etc...) indicate international fame... Not only, I asked help in the wikipedia live help chat where, they told me that the sources are very reliable. PassionFilm (talk) 11:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Erik, I've moved the page here: Wikipedia:Articles for creation/International Online Film Critics' Poll. Best, 95.252.231.213 (talk) 19:48, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

To make sure that I understand you correctly

Dear Erik,

Thank you for answering my call for help on The Matrix article. I'm not sure I understand you correctly about your offer in looking for books for the article, though. You offered to provide a list of potentially useful books for me, and to look for them for me, but the problem is, I have no idea what's in them, and what part in them I can cite, so I can't tell you what I need nor can I read them and make use of them. As I said on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film, I simply can't access an English book physically. Wouldn't it be easier just to have to join us in the article, and then you provide whatever statements you can provide from offline sources? Anthonydraco (talk) 18:42, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

(I was going to put this on your talk page, but I saw that you commented here.) Hi, Anthony. Regarding your comment at WT:FILM, I'm unfortunately hard-pressed to commit to a collaboration. I've tried a few times with other members of WikiProject Film, but the collaborative spirit just isn't there. Our preferences and interests are just too different most of the time. One time, I planned to collaborate on the Kill Bill articles (and outlined a lot of resources here), but the other editor bailed. In general, I tend to personally work on articles about films of relatively limited scope, like Panic Room. A future potential project is 25th Hour, for which I've already done some research. (I find it easy to do research but do not quite have enough time to tackle actual article work.) The problem with The Matrix is that there's no appealing deadline. I worked on Fight Club to bring it up to snuff in time for its 10th anniversary. I got it displayed on the main page of Wikipedia for the anniversary. The Matrix's 10th anniversary would have been that same year, 2009. At User:Erik/Sandbox#Anniversaries, I've listed articles with upcoming anniversaries that can help serve as a goal to get Featured Article status and to have it on the main page. That kind of target can motivate me.

For The Matrix, I am in the States and have access to a really good library, so I can get my hands on most of everything related to the film. The problem is that the incentive is not there. I'd rather do something like work on The Birth of a Nation for its 100th anniversary in 2015; it would be a tougher project than The Matrix, but there is something to shoot for. For what it's worth, the more appropriate film articles for you may be those not really covered in books, but more in periodicals like film journals of those of related subject matter. (EDIT: I say this because I can retrieve electronic copies and send them to you, as I've done in the past with some other editors.) Erik (talk | contribs) 18:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)