User talk:Earthh

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Earthh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Tehw1k1 (talk) 03:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Randall Jahnson

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Randall Jahnson, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.randalljahnson.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:22, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Sunset Strip (film)

Your addition to Sunset Strip (film) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

September 2010

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sunset Strip (film). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ttonyb (talk) 14:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately a slight reformulation of the text is not enough to remove the copyright violation. ttonyb (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Earthh, you may be blocked from editing. ttonyb (talk) 14:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

That isn't a slight reformulation. Read it.--Earthh (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Sunset Strip (film), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ttonyb (talk) 14:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Hangon...are you saying you wrote this for Wikipedia or you are the original author for another publication? If you are saying you are the original author for the Wikipedia text, the problem is there are direct quotes from other sources, that somewhat negate you claim. If you are saying you are the original author in other publications, it is still a copyright violation. Can you please advise which is the case. There are some remedies if you are the original author. ttonyb (talk) 14:53, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I wrote it, so stop delete it. Read it.--Earthh (talk) 14:55, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sunset Strip (film). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. AussieLegend (talk) 15:47, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Sunset Strip

Hi. I've protected the Sunset Strip article so you guys stop edit warring on it. Please use the talk page there to discuss your edits. Thanks. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I think it's the best way.--Earthh (talk) 15:54, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hollywood High (documentary)

The article Hollywood High (documentary) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 03:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Chapter 27 screenshot.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chapter 27 screenshot.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It isn't that important. I did notice that you personally prefer Chapter 27, so much so that you uploaded a photo from it. Hotcop2 (talk) 00:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Not really. I uploaded a photo to illustrate the weight gained by Leto for his role.--Earthh (talk) 00:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Films

Don't delete references.--andreasegde (talk) 18:48, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

As I explained in the edit summary, both films have had low budgets and received mixed to negative reviews from critics [1] [2]. And the source you are using for The Killing of John Lennon is from IMDb, which is not reliable.--Earthh (talk) 18:59, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Death of John Lennon (film)

As it is now, there are NO references in this section. If you do not put references in, the whole section will be deleted. Get to work.--andreasegde (talk) 23:20, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jared Leto. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Nymf _hideliho! 18:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Consider this another 3RR warning, as you are close to violating it again. I suggest you resolve it at the talk page before editing any further. Nymf _hideliho! 16:34, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chapter 27

The article Chapter 27 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Chapter 27 for things which need to be addressed. GRAPPLE X 23:30, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say I had completely forgotten about this review. I've been unable to fix the plot summary, but having removed any unreliably-sourced information I still felt the article was good enough to pass. Sorry again about the delay. GRAPPLE X 00:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Starting blocks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Starting block (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) 10:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Plateau Award

Thanks for this article; could you add an inline citation to the first para, please? :). Ironholds (talk) 03:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Done.--Earthh (talk) 12:24, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant! Thanks :). Ironholds (talk) 14:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Anthony Marinelli

The article Anthony Marinelli has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Bihco (talk) 14:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Anthony Marinelli

The article Anthony Marinelli has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 17:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. When you recently edited Saturn Award for Best Science Fiction Film, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pitch Black (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) 13:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Unspoken.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Unspoken.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Geoffrey Enthoven

The article Geoffrey Enthoven has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. --IShadowed 00:00, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect referencing in Mr. Nobody article

Hi again Earthh. I couldn't help noticing your latest edit to Mr. Nobody. You cite as a reference for the (false!) statement: "Mr. Nobody received mostly favorable reviews from critics" the following article from a French newspaper: "«Mr. Nobody» bien incarné sous la patte de Van Dormael". 20 minutes. January 14, 2010.

Do you realize what you linked to is just one favorable review? It does not constitute evidence that most reviews were favorable, so why would you use that as a reference? It's also odd that you chose a positive review in a French paper, since, as you surely know, French reviews were largely negative in the major newspapers (Le Figaro, Le Monde, Libération, Journal du Dimanche) and culture/cinema magazines (Télérama, Inrocks, Cahiers du Cinéma) "Critiques Presse pour le film Mr. Nobody - AlloCiné".

I really wonder why you engage in such misleading editing of a Wikipedia article. Please try to improve the article, otherwise we're going to have an argument (if I can be bothered to engage in such a tedious exercise). There's really an interesting story to be written about this movie. For example, unlike in France, reviews in Belgium were mostly positive, perhaps because it was a Belgian director and the movie world in Belgium is quite small "La création belge vue par les Belges". But it is a disservice to make the movie seem something that it isn't. Imagine that at some point in the future, the movie is recognized as a masterpiece, studied in schools, and so on. Wouldn't it be interesting to know that it was poorly received when it came out? Isn't it in everyone's interest to make every Wikipedia article as true as possible? --Kai Carver (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand what's your big problem, man. In the article is already written that in France the film received mixed response from film critics and had a disappointing box office performance. I picked that source from the Italian article of Mr. Nobody. And now that I'm saying to you the same thing for the fourth time, if French critics were more critical this doesn't mean that the film's general reception was mixed. I added Rotten Tomatoes as a source for a general consensus. I hope that you will not claim that the website is fake, false, unreliable and so on..--Earthh (talk) 13:51, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

There was a problem with your reference, so thanks for trying to fix it (and you're welcome for me calling attention to your error). The problem remains, though: Rotten Tomatoes has a grand total of 5 reviews! That's too few reviews to justify saying the movie "received mostly favorable reviews". And out of those 5 reviews, only 2 are from "top critics", and both of those are negative. How does this justify "mostly favorable"?

As for the significance of French reviews, since France was pretty much the only major market where the film was fully released, it is significant that the reviews there were negative, so yes, it does mean the general critical reception was mixed. There are few reviews on Rotten Tomatoes because the movie did not have a major release in the US. You can't characterize the critical reaction in the US if the movie was hardly reviewed at all, or else you'd have to mention the fact that almost no one reviewed it, and that therefore critical reception in the US is not representative of the global critical reception of the movie.

My problem with this article is that it still has statements and general content that are misleading and poorly referenced, see above and my previous comments on the article talk page. "Critical response was generally strong"--what does that even mean? "Mr. Nobody has appeared on many critics top ten lists of 2010"--no it hasn't, where's the evidence for that? It's good that the poor reception in France is referenced, but it should be mentioned in the Critical Reception section, otherwise it is too easy to miss, and quite inconsistent. The Critical Reception section lists numerous quotes, all of them positive except for one, which is half positive. So again, my problem with this article is that it continues to fail to meet Wikipedia standards for accuracy and neutrality. I really don't care about this movie, but I do care that Wikipedia has poor-quality information, and would like that to be corrected, preferably by you, since you obviously care about this subject.--Kai Carver (talk) 08:25, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Critics in France were divided, this means that some were positive and others negative. But film critics of any other country gave the film a positive review. Since on the net there isn't a reliable source for a general consensus that fits to you, I added the positive critical reception that the film received upon its premiere at Venice. For more answers to your repeated questions, I suggest you to read the article talk page. Thanks.--Earthh (talk) 12:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I haven't really followed this since I made my last edits, but I see you've kept the quote from Le Nouvel Observateur, although I really liked the one from Cahiers du cinema. Still, now there is a direct quote of one negative review in the article, so I am satisfied and won't bother you anymore. Thank you for creating this article. – Herzen (talk) 06:31, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Jared Leto

I'm sorry if it wasn't you, but why have you made up all those award nominations for Jared Leto? You know very well they didn't happen and I don't see what's the point. You might as well have claimed he's been Oscar-nominated for every one of his films. I don't understand how this could go un-noticed. 86.61.101.127 (talk) 13:10, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually it wasn't me, those awards were taken from IMDb.. I have no time now but you can look for reliable sources.--Earthh (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

You were right, some awards were made up. I removed them and fixed the filmography. The current awards are sourced by a book, Jared Leto by Hilmar Bender. Thanks for your notice.--Earthh (talk) 19:45, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Magritte du Cinéma.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Magritte du Cinéma.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Thirty seconds to Mars

I posted regarding this move to the talk page seeking consensus, and today I noticed someone went ahead and moved it (which I was going to do today, actually, since no one objected), and you reverted the move. I'd like to understand your objections to moving the page. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:44, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

And looking at the history of that article I'm thinking maybe you consider a move to be vandalism. If you look at what I posted on the talk page you'll see that's not the case. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:27, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Paul Fedor (director)

The article Paul Fedor (director) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 21:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paul Fedor (director), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Flyleaf (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) 00:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edge of the Earth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (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) 12:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Edge of the Earth

Discogs is more attendible than Allmusic. The first report that exist a promotional disc that was sent in the US, while no informations exist about the digital release (iTunes, Amazon or 7digital didn't report "Edge of the Earth" as a download single). --SuperVirtual (talk) 16:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

With what sources Allmusic write that there is a digital copy? Discogs is very attendible because it reports all version of various release, with also catalogue number (excluded if these items are digital singles/albums only, or particular promotional recordings). And now, I can't edit the pages for edit warring. --SuperVirtual (talk) 19:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Also User:RazorEyeEdits notice this, so I'm not the only. --SuperVirtual (talk) 19:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Earthh actually pointed out on my talk page that there is a listing of the single on digital download on Allmusic. It's not 100% reliable, but Allmusic generally doesn't lie or make mistakes about releases too often. Actually, to my knowledge, i've never seen Allmusic list a release of any kind under any name in error, so I trust this.

RazorEye ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 20:17, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring

The next revert by either SuperVirtual or Earthh related to "Edge of the Earth" will result in an immediate block.—Kww(talk) 18:43, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, it was not my intention. I told him that there was the same doubt just a week ago with another user. Then we find a reliable source (Allmusic) and a consensus. I wrote on his talkpage, but he said that Allmusic is not a reliable source and that Discogs, a database edited by registered users, is a better source. He is ignoring what I write and I don't know what to do.--Earthh (talk) 19:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Generally trying to get a consensus among all interested editors is the best approach. If you can't get people talking about it after trying on the talk page, starting an RFC might be the way to go.—Kww(talk) 19:24, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

You probably want to look at this discussion as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_48#Discogs —Kww(talk) 19:29, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I've determined that SuperVirtual was an account being used abusively by User:ItHysteria. All of his edits are invalid by policy, and can be be freely undone by any editor, including you.—Kww(talk) 20:16, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

re: 30 Seconds to Mars (album)

I don't get what your on about, the source clearly states the album is those genres, and completely qualifies as an RS. I started a discussion about the source on the reliable sources noticeboard [3], which no one has bothered to respond to. A response there would be appreciated. I call the big one bitey (talk) 18:37, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Paramore Platinum in Ireland

Hi, I am just wondering why you keep changing 'Brand New Eyes' and 'Riot's platinum status in Ireland. IRMA does have down in 2009, that Brand New Eyes went gold, but according to the twitter account @ParamoreIreland , which is run by Paramore's irish record label, Warner Music Ireland, 'Brand New Eyes' had gone platinum in 2010 (one year later) and 'Riot' had earlier as well. Warner Music Ireland also uploaded a picture with the band holding up a plaque with both albums on it in platinum with the irish flag at the top right of the plaque, confirming they both went platinum. Here is the picture to prove it - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonyburkejnr/4730056434/sizes/l/in/photostream/ . The o2 Arena, MCR and musicscene.ie have also confirmed that 'All We Know is Falling' has gone gold, and that 'Riot' and 'Brand New Eyes' have gone platinum in their articles, which can be found as sources on the paramore discography page. I would ask that you stop changing this information as Brand New Eyes is no longer gold in Ireland but platinum in ireland, and riot is also platinum. It has even been confirmed by the band's record label which would be very sure of this, and other websites. ♦BobbyRing96♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:44, 8 July 2013 (GMT)

I don't see any source by the record label. IRMA has yearly archived certifications since 2005. The only album listed is Brand New Eyes, certified gold in 2009. You said that it had gone platinum in 2010 but here it is not listed. Same thing for Riot. That plaque could mean a lot of things, maybe that the two albums combined reached a certification, but I don't see any platinum or gold there. The o2 Arena, MCR and musicscene.ie do not specify where the album was certified (it could be the Australian or British certification).--Earthh (talk) 10:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I have found a source on Warner Music Ireland's website. http://www.warnermusic.ie/index.php/component/content/article/34-artist-page/138-paramore.html#TB_inline?height=500&width=600&inlineId=bio_item In the bio they mention that 'All We Know Is Falling' has gone gold, and that 'Riot!' and 'Brand New Eyes' have gone platinum, because it is the irish record label, it would make perfect sense for them to be talking about the certifications of their own country, or at least they would specify if they were not, but the certifications they have given the Paramore Albums links up to many of the sources that can be found on the internet about their cert.'s in Ireland. And the photo with Paramore with their irish plaque would have to mean they are both platinum, because record labels don't give out plaques for two albums to accumulate together to make up a certification. One album only. Hope this clears everything up. ♦BobbyRing96♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:34, 10 July 2013 (GMT)

We should not interpret the sources, they should be clear and specific. I removed your (bogus) sources, use the talk page and discuss with other editors. If these certifications really exist, they should be listed in the official IRMA archive.--Earthh (talk) 18:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh my god, why would you delete them? >.< It is extremely obvious, that these sources are legitimate. The IRMA archive is hardly ever updated and there are so many sources to back up my claims, including one with a plaque and the band and their very own record label >:( What is not specific enough about a picture, with the irish crest in the corner, the two albums on the plaque, the irish flag in the corner and the caption "Brand New Eyes" and "Riot!" go platinum in Ireland!? Plus, the record label have stated that that the albums have gone number one in Ireland on their paramore twitter support page. @ParamoreIreland is run by WarnerMusicIreland

Orphaned non-free media (File:Mr. Nobody (film poster).jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Mr. Nobody (film poster).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 03:28, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Revived interest in the film Infernal Affairs

Invitation to participate in the poll for Infernal Affairs.

From your edits for the film Infernal Affairs there is presently a poll taking place on The Departed film Talk page regarding whether you believe a separate subsection should be included for (a) Infernal Affairs as a source for the plot of The Departed film, and/or (b) a second subsection for the recently captured crime figure Whitey Bulger as the source for the character played by Jack Nicholson in the film.

The recent capture of Bulger has revived the question from two years ago of Infernal Affairs from when it did have a separate subsection on The Departed film page which was deleted by User:RepublicanJ, now known as User:OldJ. Invite to visit The Departed Talk page, to the Bulger section at the end of the Page, to participate in the Poll currently taking place. 208.120.96.227 (talk) 11:14, 7 September 2013 (UTC)