User talk:MichaelQSchmidt

Ongoing Running Waters discussion

DYK nomination of Joel Gilbert

Hello! Your submission of Joel Gilbert at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Prioryman (talk) 22:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

An invitation for you!

	Hello, MichaelQSchmidt. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 10:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MichaelQSchmidt. You have new messages at Wifione's talk page.
Message added 16:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wifione ^Message 16:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Autograph

Can I get your autograph please? --Tito Dutta (talk) 00:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't it unsigned? Anyway disregard it! --Tito Dutta (talk) 00:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK Review Request

Hey Michael! As you are a really helpful guy and also an administrator, I suppose you won't mind helping review Template:Did you know nominations/Leslie George Cole? Is that your cup of tea? Similarly, I would love to help review the Joel Gilbert nom, which has turned somewhat stale. (Unfortunately, you know I can't) Many thanks. Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 08:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey MQS- Thanks for dropping a Happy New Year note on my talkpage. I took a bit of an unscheduled wikibreak over November and the holidays to focus on job hunting. But it's good to be back! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 20:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Proper response

Hey Michael, something to ask you since you have the experience. On a separate note, I review pending submissions at AfC. And just today (I think), some clown vandalizes my user page. I guess that he or she is angered by my (reasonable) declination of his/her submission. The user then proceeds to e-mail me this joke warning (which is ironical as he/she had received a warning for vandalism while I dont) It reads as follows.

Is this serious? "Bonkers the clown" rejected a posting of a legitimate person? I'm not sure if this is spam, or just a joke. I highly respect and regard Wikipedia, and I sincerely hope the integrity of the site isn't being compromised by a hacker of some sort. I intend to look into this matter with the full extent of my, and my fellow fans, resources. Please be advised that you are now under our surveillance, and will pursue further examination of this matter.

Urm, what would be the more appropriate way to respond? I do not wish for others to harbor resentment towards me. Or should I repost this on somewhere else? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 10:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

If a one-time instance, silence (or asking input from another as you did) is the best response. So that I might better understand the instance, please send me the diff. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 11:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Found it all. Looks to have been gently handled by another. The editor is apparently brand new, but that is no excuse for vandalizing another's page in a fit of pique. If it happens again, this person will be facing a block to prevent further disruption. This person needs to spend time over at WP:PRIMER. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 11:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, though its no longer one time as the user has been spamming my email inbox with joke rankings about me being a hacker. Sometimes these people make me sigh.

Jami Floyd

Hi Michael, the sandbox article on Jami Floyd looks thorough enough... Would you mind if it was moved to the main space? Or do you feel that it needs a lil more? Thanks. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 05:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I've asked for input from the closer[1] and the editors who commented at the old AFD 3 years ago when the original article was practically unsourced.[2][3][4][5][6] While general content is similar (same person so this makes sense), it's now looking far better. They closer grants that the thing is better than what was deleted, but he's suggesting I take it to DRV. I'm going to see if that is really a requirement for a return of an article that is not a CSD:G4 violation. And too, I have written to Ms Floyd directly to ask her for some clarification of awards and years, and she actually promised to respond by Monday night. Let's wait a day or two. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright, sounds like a plan to wait for a while. Lets hear from Jami. Although I can't compare for similarities between the 2010 and the 2013 versions (permission rights), I'm quite certain the latter version would be better. I wouldn't suppose that it's necessary to bring it to DRV, but then again, it won't hurt. Cheers Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 09:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh yes, and by the way, how did you manage to contact her? Would it seem like a good idea to also at the same time request for permission to use one of the photographs found on her website? Thanks and cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 09:35, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

In appreciation

The Special Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		In appreciation of your editing on the article Simply Raw: Reversing Diabetes in 30 Days. Thank you. And Adoil Descended (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. And I do agree wholeheartedly with your closing summation. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Talkback

Thanks for the note regarding the Bansuri Guru The Film discussion. I'm always happy to reconsider my stance when new evidence comes up! Cheers,  Gong show 05:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Considering the topic, I think this one will only get better. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Buddha

I noticed you recently uploaded a pic of the DVD cover for the Gautama Buddha film. Nice touch up, but I'd suggest a file move (name change), as "Tathagatha Buddha.jpg" would usually be reserved for images in relation to Buddha himself (After all, that is one of his names)... And thus I'd suggest a name change to "Tathagatha Buddha film poster" or something. Nothing much, really, though I can't find any button that says "Move file". Is it due to permission rights, or should I be looking out for something else? Thanks. Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 13:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. easliy done. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I have...

...replied there. Good find! --Tito Dutta (talk) 03:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Romola Remus

Hello Michael,

I am back from a Wikibreak and ran across the article about Romolo Remus, the first film actress to portray Dorothy Gale, at AfD. I recommend keeping, and expanded the article a bit, and Clarityfiend graciously withdrew the nomination. I expanded it some more after that.

Knowing your deep knowledge of film history, I thought you might be interested in this actress, and might have access to other sources. Feel free to pitch in, and maybe we can get a "Did you know..." out of the deal. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Will do what I can, as soon as I can. Currently involved moving across town and my ability to get online is extremely limited. So much stuff to sort and pack... and toss after 20 years in one place. Yikes.Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:54, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem, Michael. Good luck with the move, and throwing stuff away.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:00, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Interstellar

Hey, Michael! I was talking about Interstellar (a film in development with Nolan recently attached) with a friend today and remembered dealing with the topic back in 2006. Thought you'd like to see how I was in a related AfD during that time: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstellar (film). I got a chuckle out of it, personally. :) Erik (talk | contribs) 21:32, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Shooting Star Productions

All done. Graham87 02:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Help with an editor?

Hi Schmidt! I've got a question- are you overly familiar with photographs in film articles? I've got a new user that's working on the article for Ölü Bölgeden Fısıltılar and he's fairly new at everything. There is also a slight language barrier here as well, but not an unconquerable one. He looks like he wants to upload an image of the director, but the image he tried to link to was of a stock publicity photo rather than an image from the film set. What's the general rule of thumb when it comes to this sort of thing? I've never really added any images to an article beyond something to put in the infobox. Any help or advice you might want to give the editor (User:Gulgun G) would be appreciated. I think he might be involved with the film in some way, or at least I'm hoping so since that would make getting photo permissions a lot easier. His edits are good faith, in any way. I'm going to try to find someone on the Turkey WikiProject to help out just because there is that language barrier as well. It looks like the film does pass notability guidelines and could be improved with the sources I'd used, but there's only so much Google Translate can really do here.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Forgive my talk page stalking, but here's my two cent's. As stated by film production expert Eve Light Honathaner in The Complete Film Production Handbook, (Focal Press, 2001 p. 211.):

"Publicity photos (star headshots) have traditionally not been copyrighted. Since they are disseminated to the public, they are generally considered public domain, and therefore clearance by the studio that produced them is not necessary."

Film industry author Gerald Mast, in Film Study and the Copyright Law (1989) p. 87, writes:

"According to the old copyright act, such production stills were not automatically copyrighted as part of the film and required separate copyrights as photographic stills. The new copyright act similarly excludes the production still from automatic copyright but gives the film's copyright owner a five-year period in which to copyright the stills. Most studios have never bothered to copyright these stills because they were happy to see them pass into the public domain, to be used by as many people in as many publications as possible."

So that said, the publicity photo most likely can be used when licensed correctly. In film articles, we can include not just photos of the set, but also key figures in the film (i.e. song composers, writers, director(s)). Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

We also see multiple websites reposting a photo of the director here. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

One example I can think of (for use of publicity pictures) would be Wacko Jacko's Childhood Flame. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks Bonkers! I hate to be all needy and stuff, but can you help upload them? I'm sort of clueless at this stuff. The official film website has a lovely set of photos to choose from here, but I'm also concerned with the photos overwhelming the article since it's mostly a stub at this point. In any case, the publicity photo used wasn't really that great, in my opinion. (It's the main actor, I realize now.) It's a tiny black and white that doesn't seem to have come from the film itself, but was probably taken before the film started. I have to admit a preference for set photos, although that's ultimately a personal preference.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

A little better than a stub; start I would say. Here's what, I'll take a look... After I'm done with my homework and fried rice. :) Cheers, Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 12:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Joel Gilbert

Hello! Your submission of Joel Gilbert at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

• A reminder that there are issues that need to be addressed in the next few days. Please stop by to review the comments. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:20, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing an SPA tag

Maybe you can clear this up for me (I saw that you labeled a couple IPs SPAs on an AfD) - can editors remove an SPA tag placed by someone else, or is that considered removing someone's comment from the AfD? Inks.LWC (talk) 17:27, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

A SPA tag is a SPA tag. It is appropriate to so tag an anonymous IP that makes few or any edits outside a certain topic area, specially when the SPA is doing so to create a false consensus. It is inappropriate to remove such without explanation or due cause. Any particular one in mind? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:33, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

It's on the page you tagged. I had added them back after different IPs kept removing them without explanation, and I put the uw-afd template on the talk page, and another editor thought that was abusing talk page templates. I explained to him that my understanding of the refactoring AFD policy was that you can't remove an SPA tag if it was placed there and it pretty clearly applies, but I didn't actually see anything in writing anywhere. I told him I didn't really care if he removed the tags - I was just curious (and meant to post something on a talk page somewhere but forgot), but when I saw you add it and noticed you were an admin, I figured I'd ask. If you wanted to see the whole conversation it's at User talk:PinkAmpersand#January 2013, and then there's some discussion in the edit summaries at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Menville. Like I said, I don't really care whether they're on that AFD - I think the closing admin will notice pretty easily what's going on with the IPs; I just wanted to know what the actual precedent was. Thanks for the help! Inks.LWC (talk) 17:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Yup, it falls under removing someone else's comments. And yes, a closer will notice the SPA activity. What they fail to realize is that a whole slew of SPA anon IPs can say "delete per" till they're blue in the face, but a closer should/will pay attention to only those editors who make comments based upon policy and guideline. AFD is not-a-vote. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Right, and that's why I figured it wasn't a big deal to argue over. Life's too short to edit war over something that really doesn't matter. ;) Thanks again for the clarification though. Inks.LWC (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK

No probs, can you sort out Template:Did you know nominations/Ved Vejen, it hasn't exactly been reviewed properly.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

It's a very clunky hook. I'll see what I might do. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Rizana Nafeeks' Image

Since 9 editors including 3 administrators(including Jimbo Wales) agreed that the image qualifies under fair use, I have added back the image to the page Execution of Rizana Nafeek. User:Future Perfect at Sunrise removed it. There is a revived discussion going on currently. Please let others know whether still you believe the Image has a Fair Use value?61.245.172.21 (talk) 15:08, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Schmidts' Primer

I have added your Primer for Newcomers to the Welcome that I use. Simple talk and description serve the new editor best. Thanks for you efforts in creating it. ```Buster Seven Talk 09:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Very cool. I wished to make things a little easier for the newbs. Hope it helps. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.}

(talk page stalker) Oh, this one: WP:PRIMER a.k.a. WP:A Primer for newcomers. Good to know. --Lexein (talk) 15:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

...as confusing as this place can be for newbs... heck yes. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 15:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for September Eleven 1683

 — Nyttend (talk) 16:02, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Cookie Jar?

This yummy cookie is so tasty, it is chocolate chip! I can dip it in milk and dip it in hot chocolate! CatScratch12345 (talk) 13:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

A Good Day to Die Hard

Hi Schmidt. Happy Lunar New Year, regardless of whether you celebrate it. Do you think the rule of WP:SPOILER does not apply for A Good Day to Die Hard? I wish to add the full plot, having watched it, but User:BattleshipMan disagrees, because it will "spoil the surprise for American viewers". What's your take? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 07:29, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

What is your own take on WP:FILMPLOT? Personally, I think for a major new release that is soon to make the rounds, that a plot should be minimalist and avoid blatant spoliers. We can give a summary overview of the film's main events, and avoid minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, and technical detail. We can say enough to entice someone to want to learn more, but not pop any bubbles or ruin expectations. Once a film has been out for a while, additional information can be added. For A Good Day to Die Hard I would not want to learn prematurely that John McClain has regrown hair or if he actually dies at the end of the film. Consider for example The Cowboys... In years-later retrospect, it is appropriate to tell that John Wayne died in the course of protecting his charges, but when the release was brand new, such a spoiler could have ruined a viewer's anticipations. Sometimes, less is more. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 16:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I did follow FILMPLOT quite well enough, no bias, no technical details, no dialogues... Bruce Willis has not grown back hair, but as for death... The antagonists did die, as expected. Is that considered a spoiler? You know, maybe they should have kept the "Spoiler Warning' template. That way, readers would be further warned that they would be reading a potential spoiler. One example I can think of: Skyfall was released in UK before US, and the full plot was already revealed before the US release. Die hard 5 has already been released in many Asian territories, should we wait for the US release to reveal the "spoiler" parts? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 02:09, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

It would seem that at the very least, the infobox needs correction to reflect the film's actual release date, and not only its anticipated American one. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:35, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Michael, could you clarify? When's the actual date? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 14:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, its been dealt with. When I first looked at the article it only had the predictive US date. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 16:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Cheers, Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 02:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the matter of INHERIT and Brady Haran's AfD

Hello there MichaelQSchmidt, thanks for trying to fresh things up, but I'm already familiar with inheritance regarding notability, generally it is accepted that notability is not inherit. There is a case by case analysis to show if the notability is in fact inheritable when the the article's subjects has a dubious precedence. For instance lemme summon a past case, Rebecca Black's article was deleted, but allowed to be recreated, but many people questioned its existence due to recentism and that notability is not inherit. Friday had a massive repercussion, but Rebecca Black was not notable, but suddenly things changed, because she received a lot of media attention and coverage, on her, and not only on her single. This is the case here, Brady Haran has notable projects, but there is lack of substantial coverage on him, BLP doesn't accept inheritance a person must have reliable evidences that show that the subject is independently notable. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 05:04, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

As your final sentence appears to contradict existing BLP-related guidelines of WP:CREATIVE and WP:ENTERTAINER and WP:ANYBIO, can you share the link where WP:BLP in some manner states that a person may not be found notable through the verifiability of their creative efforts meeting WP:N? As his works are covered in multiple reliable sources and thus meet the criteria of WP:N, how can they be notable but not he as their creator? WP:N instructs that in the absence of SIGCOV, "A topic is also presumed notable if it meets the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline listed in the box on the right." (the "box" contains a list of some subject-specific guidelines). Point being is that while SIGCOV of an individual is fine and dandy... in guideline and policy understanding that not all notable topics make headline or stay in the news forever, SIGCOV is not the sole manner by which notability may be determined. I certainly appreciate your strike-out at the aforementioned AFD, but I would like to explore this a bit more. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Jami Floyd

KTC (talk) 19:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Am I missing something? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 02:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Saw your talk page... so nope. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

No, I received the message too... But I can't find it in the recent additions. So. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 03:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's on mainpage for a while. Ask User:KTC. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh my, silly me. I missed that. :P They decided not to use the pic, I see. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 03:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

At least it was promoted. :) Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:24, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 03:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I have a dream

Hi (Happy Valentines by the way). I'm thinking of pushing Ah Boys to Men all the way to FA class. Do you think that's feasible? Could you provide some pointers? And would you like to help out? Thanks. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown 卐 (Nonsensical Babble) ☯ 13:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks do-able. You'll need input and assistance from those editors able to read Chinese and Malay and even Tamil language sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I can read Chinese and Malay at ease, but Tamil... Hm, not so. Just asking quality-wise, sources will be no prob. By the way, thanks for that "present". You'll be assured content is to come. Cheers, ☯Bonkers The Clown☯ 卐 ☯ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 06:41, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Yup, definitely do-able. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:53, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay thanks a lot, "Naked Ghost". :) I'm pretty sure I have all the reliable online sources on the abovementioned article covered. I'm admittedly quite proud of it; though I was quite surprised that short film articles like I Not Stupid and Money No Enough have GA statuses. Cheers, ☯Bonkers The Clown☯ 卐 ☯ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Decay of Fiction

Work in progress. Just wondering, no poster of any sort? ☯Bonkers The Clown☯ 卐 ☯ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:50, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

No non-free content allowed in userspace, or in mainspace unless used in an existing article. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:01, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I know that, but is a poster even in existence? Searched the Web, couldn't find any; seems strange for a film of this generation not to have a poster. Cheers, ☯Bonkers The Clown☯ 卐 ☯ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Will dig further. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

My have to find a upload a suitable and used-in-other publications Scene still. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but I'm not that familiar with uploading pictures of scenes. G images yields many scene results; you can have the honour :) ☯Bonkers The Clown☯ 卐 ☯ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. And perhaps you might expand the cast section some? I was only one of 45 actors... acting in multiple roles as a set of shocking visual entities without lines... among them, I was a floating head, a cigarette puffing angel, and a naked spector. Many of those who performed "sans chemise" declined a screen credit. Me, it is all part of the craft. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

About to do so. Cigarette puffing angel... Shocking indeed. :) ☯Bonkers The Clown☯ 卐 ☯ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:54, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

It was funny... leaning back in a chair, puffing away and using an ashtray perched on my tummy. I've just cited the awards, and linked a couple authors. 3 AM here. Gotta hit the sheets. Wanna keep on working in my userspace? You can move it to your own if you wish it. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:58, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

yeah, sure sounds funny. Okay, nights. Makes not much difference, really. So I'm fine with working at your space. (What a late sleeping time you have!) alright then, back to work. Only a lil past 7 p.m. Here. Cheers, ☯Bonkers The Clown☯ 卐 ☯ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I was just thinking Kiasma is the actual, proper name. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Easily fixed. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:08, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Does the cast need to be cited? Can I add pictures of the cast? :) Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Cast is "cited" to the film itself... and needs citing ONLY in films that have not been released. That said, while my particpation is citable through Allrovi, it does not need to be cited in the film article. And no... we do not add images for cast members. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:52, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, understand, so the film is a source on its own... Thanks. I already prepared the nom. Whatcha think? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Check it again. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 14:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Okie. Awake already? Good luck and have fun on that shoot. :) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:55, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I like the new one better. Thanks much. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Glad you like it. Wished to give some context toward the (now-demolished) icon which was the actual star of the film. Post the nom. About to leave. Set call in some 50 minutes at 8:00 AM... but first shots will probably not go off for several hours. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 15:05, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure thing, Mr Blooming. Just woke up, sunny morning here, too bad they don't offer Carl's Jr. Six Dollar Burgers here. Mm. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:28, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Renom of Aaron Schwartz for deletion

As you expressed an opinion in the first AfD, thought you might want to be aware of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Schwartz (2nd nomination). Article is much better sourced than it was then. Yworo (talk) 01:46, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

talkback

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

-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Chuck Palahniuk

Thanks for the information. Anyway there are two other novels of the same author which have been announced to be published in the next few years. I had added them on February 13 but they've been removed. The source is the most reliable ( the web-site of the author himself ) but I don't want to cause trouble anymore, so judge for yourself if they are worth adding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stergiosss (talk • contribs) 09:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

That's why I sent you to PRIMER. One might feel that the author's own website could be the most accurate, but that runs afoul of the Wikipedia requirement for reliable soucres... that is, a wesite that has editorial oversight and an established reputaion for fact-checking and accuracy. THough he did not, Palahniuk could have written on his website that the mon was made of green cheese... but being on his website does not make that statement accurate nor reliable. Hoever, if you recheck the article at Chuck Palahniuk#Fiction, you will see that I r-eadded the information contextually in the sentence "According to a February 15 2013 article in The Oregonian, Palahniuk has announced titles and release dates for his next three fiction works: Doomed is to be released on October 8 2013, Beautiful You is to follow in October 2014, and Make Something Up for an unspecified date in 2015."[7] The source I cite is the newspaper The Oregonian, a source with the required editorial oversight and reputation for fact-checking and accuracy... and the sentence develops from their reporting Palahniuk's announcement after they checked the facts. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review Maybe?

Hey Michael, fancy giving me a peer review? Thanks. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Please check a PROD

Just to calm a lurking twinge in my conscience, would you check that I was right to PROD-delete this? The reason for the twinge is that the PROD is the first and only edit by a new user (no edits on :it, either); but by what I can check, everything he says is right and AfD would be a waste of time. IMDb shows the guy only as producer for one unreleased film, the U of Pisa website doesn't have him, and searches for his supposed companies and films just return WP mirrors - the article has been here over 7 years, so it has spread all over the web. It was deleted from Italian WP in 2009. If you think it should have a chance at AfD, I will dig it up, but I am more inclined to give the PRODder a barnstar. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Cleanup

Hello, MichaelQSchmidt. You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks, Michael! A real pleasure being awarded by you, that would deserve hundreds of these honors! My best, Cavarrone (talk) 14:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For excellent work spurring on the improvement of Chicken Park. drewmunn talk 18:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brandon Ratcliff, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Newtown, Pennsylvania, Breathe and Kellie Wells (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) 12:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Decay of Fiction

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Madison Ivy

Hi! There's currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madison Ivy (2nd nomination) in which you may be interested to participate. Cheers! --Sundostund (talk) 22:59, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MichaelQSchmidt. You have new messages at TenPoundHammer's talk page.
Message added 21:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I responded at the AFD and invite you back there. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jenna Rose for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jenna Rose is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenna Rose until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

You had made many good faith edits and contributions to this article. I hope you'll understand where I am coming from with this. Rogerthat94 (talk) 10:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I consolidated my comment to make the discussion easier to read for future editors and admins. You had responded to this comment, and if you want me to revert it to the way it was, I would be happy to. I tried to make it easier to read while leaving the content the same. Rogerthat94 (talk) 18:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

You should revert for the sake of continuity and clarity, else the refactoring looks disingenuous. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the holiday greeting

Sorry I did not respond sooner, I've been on hiatus for quite a while. Best wishes to you and yours. --Nuujinn (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Kunjananthante Kada

Please share your views on the deletion tag put on Kunjananthante Kada article. I improved the article with some reliable sources now.
Anish Viswa 04:34, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

the film now shelved in Leela, not this one. Please see the last sentence int he article - 'Mammootty is currently busy with Salim Ahmed's Kunjananthante Kada.'
Anish Viswa 04:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

My bad. You're correct. How about we userfy this to you for a while? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Since shooting already in progress, we expect more reports and coverage now, Userfy may not be necessary. The magazine scans clearly state shooting is ongoing. Please check with a Wiki admin who can read Malayalam to confirm.
Anish Viswa 05:14, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I do not know of any... but certainly there must be some. Can you offer a translation if requested and use the Malayalam source to cite the article. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:21, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Please check with User:Tinucherian. He ia a Wiki admin, also Malayali.
Anish Viswa 06:45, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you send him your scan showing filming has begun? 06:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Obama Anak Menteng

Noting how you started this, how do you feel about a run to bring it up to GA? I've added a plot section, as I just finished watching the movie. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Go for it. Quite appreciate and respect your improvements to the article. I will help out as possible, but work in RL takes precedent. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:18, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

• Alright. My real-life stuff takes precedent as well, but it can be a long term goal. You've already brought it through DYK after all, so no need to rush. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:07, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Hello, MichaelQSchmidt. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Subir_Banerjee.
Message added 05:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tito Dutta (contact) 05:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Little treat ;)

'Sup Michael, March 20 marks the nth year of my conception. Thus, I would like to treat you to a treat! Hope you like it. If you decide not to eat them, I suggest making a suit out of em. ;) Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:22, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Well said. Thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 16:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Request

Hi. I like to request for you to delete two redirects. A few weeks back, I created an article for the upcoming film Transcendence. I had it as Transcendence (film). Today, an editor moved it to (2014 film) so that he could create his own version. I need that deleted so that I can restore it back to before his edits. Also, I inadvertently created one that was like this: Transcendence ( ilm). That one needs to be deleted too. If you can, that would be great.Rusted AutoParts 04:25, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Could not find Transcendence (ilm) , and both Transcendence (film) and Transcendence (2014 film) both currently redirect to Wally Pfister. What are your needs? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:35, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The (film) version redirect needs to be deleted. The ilm redirect has been sorted. With 2014's presence, it creates a conflict as there's no other film called Transcendence and therefore it is unnecessary. Plus I already had the redirect created.Rusted AutoParts 04:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

A redirect to a redirect. Haarumph. Transcendence (film) deleted as requested. Per it being an unneccesary diambig, go ahead and now WP:MOVE the Transcendence (2014 film) one to Transcendence (film) without leaving another redirect behind. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

GNG

Hello. You, another editor, and I were involved in the past in a discussion construing GNG. At the time you and I agreed, but perhaps you will not here.

He and I are discussing the notability of the subject of an article here. If you have any thoughts, either way of course, that would be helpful, since I know you spend a good deal of time thinking about these issues. In particular, discussion is centering on what "routine coverage" means under the applicable wp policy, and in regard to that article. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The Decay of Fiction

Could you help out (especially with the plot?) Thanks. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Please... Urgent! I am unable to watch the movie... So I guess you know more about the plot than I do. Thanks ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:29, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Will do what I can. The plot is a rather strange collection of visuals, and in some of the film's showings, rather than being only watchable in a liner fashion by an audience, it was sometimes shown in an interactive format where viewers at galleries could push buttons and decide which part of the film they could explore and in what order. Strange experimental piece. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks! (That is strange... One of a kind, I guess.) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

A related AfD discussion

As someone who participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jilla, you may be interested in participating in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jilla (film). -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:32, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.