User talk:JohnnieYoung

Fair use disputed for Image:Party 1994film poster.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Party 1994film poster.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:CandaceKroslak-Demonicus.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:CandaceKroslak-Demonicus.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --OrphanBot 09:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Am Legend

Yes, why all the unnecessary byte adding? Alientraveller (talk) 20:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected the false statement that 'I Am Omega' is the fourth film adaptation of the Richard Matheson novel. I rewrote the paragraph to point this out. I was not just trying to add an unecessary separation. Go back and read the actual changes that I made. JohnnieYoung (talk) 20:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will take another look at it; I guess what we need is a citation which says one way or the other whether it is technically an adaptation (i.e. does it say in the credits, "Based on the novel..."). Back in a tic. Liquidfinale ^{(Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ)} 20:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's this, which is the first hit on a Google News search and says, "The Last Man on Earth (1964), starring Vincent Price, was the first film adaptation of the apocalyptic best seller. That, in turn, was followed by The Omega Man (1971) with Charlton Heston and, more recently, by I Am Omega (2007), a straight-to-video rip-off released just last month." Or there's this, which says, "Now the low-budget production house The Asylum, just in time for the new "Legend" adaptation, has released its own coattails-riding version". The relevant word there is "version." I think the problem here is, unlike something like Transmorphers, which shares with the recent Transformers film nothing but a similar-sounding title, this film does seem, on the surface at least, to loosely follow the plot of I Am Legend. That said, the Winston-Salem Journal, does call it a "completely unrelated movie". In summary then: dunno. The best information to hand at present is that it is a loose adaptation, but might not be. As I said before, more information may be necessary, like a pic of the DVD box to see if there's a credit to the book on the rear credits list. Best regards, Liquidfinale ^{(Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ)} 21:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, 'I Am Omega' does not say based on the novel by Richard Matheson because it isn't based on the novel. 'I Am Omega' is a film produced by The Asylum who make knockoff films that are borderline copyright infringement of bigger budget movies. Some previous films by The Asylum include "Transmorphers", "Snakes on a Train", "The Da Vinci Treasure", etc. The false information that 'I Am Omega' is based on the Richard Matheson novel or the Will Smith movie is the exact thing I was trying to correct with my edit. And you can't say loosely based on the novel either. The Richard Matheson novel is a copyrighted work and The Asylum has no rights to make a version of it and if they stated that their movie was based on the novel they would be sued out of existance. JohnnieYoung (talk) 21:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The silliest part of all this is not that my edit was disputed for its accuracy but that no one actually even read what changes I had made to the entry and just undid my edit because they thought I had made an unnecessary paragraph separation. JohnnieYoung (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was overly hasty; please accept my apologies. I believe what you say about the status of I Am Omega. As I say, though, we have citations referring to it as an adaptation outnumbering the ones refusing to do so. WP:V says we include it. I'm genuinely unsure as to the next step; perhaps ignore all rules or take it to the film's talk page? Liquidfinale ^{(Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ)} 21:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No hard feelings. I would just appreciate it if someone would reinstate my edit. In addition to my above comments, I present the following facts -- at the official site for the 'I Am Omega' film, they show "Written by: GEOFF MEED" with no Based On A Novel By Credit [1]; at the IMDB page for 'I Am Omega', they show "Writer: Geoff Meed" with no Based On A Novel By Credit [2]; also at the IMDB page for 'I Am Omega', you can see that the main character's name is Renchard not Robert Neville as it is in the novel and the Will Smith movie. JohnnieYoung (talk) 22:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, here is an article from The New York Times about the low-budget film company The Asylum that produced 'I Am Omega' and in a quote from the owner of the company it points out that all of their movies are original stories [3] JohnnieYoung (talk) 22:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on I Am Legend (film). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious? An edit war? This is crazy. Someone else has been posting false information which I am attempting to correct and you revert the content back to the false information and send me a warning? I have factually proved everything I have stated in the Talk section already. If you would read the changes that I made and follow this Talk thread I think you would certainly reinstate my edit and send me an apology. JohnnieYoung (talk) 23:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He was informing you of the three-revert rule, which states that even if you're right, you may not make more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Best regards, Liquidfinale ^{(Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ)} 23:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you bring up your points at Talk:I Am Legend (film) instead of using the user talk page. It's clearly not blatantly false information -- there are contradictory reports, and the situation needs to be laid out more clearly. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the current information on the 'I Am Legend (film)' page with regard to 'I Am Omega' is blatantly false information. You can say there are contradictory reports but there aren't. There may be confusion by misinformed people but the facts are the facts. 'I Am Omega' is not an adaptation of the Richard Matheson novel in any way, shape or form. 'I Am Omega' does not say based on the novel by Richard Matheson in its film credits anywhere. The owner of the film company The Asylum who made the movie 'I Am Omega' also does not claim that it is based on the Matheson novel. 'I Am Omega' is a film produced by The Asylum who make knockoff films that are borderline copyright infringement of bigger budget movies. Some previous films by The Asylum include "Transmorphers", "Snakes on a Train", "The Da Vinci Treasure", etc. Additionally, here is an article from The New York Times where the owner of The Asylum says that all of their movies are original stories [4] But the craziest thing of all is that the two people who removed my edit weren't disputing it for its accuracy but they hadn't even read what changes I had made to the entry and just undid my edit because they thought I had made an unnecessary paragraph separation. They have since apologized for their mistake and so I reverted it back and now you have changed it back again to the false information. I have worked in the Hollywood film industry for over fifteen years now and I am very qualified to write about this subject. I would hope that going forward anyone who wants to edit an article on Wikipedia would be very familiar with the topic they are editing and have a better eye for detail when it comes to editing or deleting people's changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnnieYoung (talk • contribs) 19:50, December 17, 2007

Qualifications do not apply for an editor -- see Essjay controversy. We need to deal independently with reliable sources since no matter how much you know or I know, others can't verify that implicit knowledge. We need to cite the information. I've laid out reliable sources that I could find regarding the I Am Omega situation and offered an approach based on the available information. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 02:33, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILMS Welcome

Welcome!

Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for November has been published. December's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!
Want to collaborate on articles? The Cinema Collaboration of the Week picks an article every week to work on together.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films December 2007 Newsletter

The December 2007 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films January 2008 Newsletter

The January 2008 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. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films February 2008 Newsletter

The February 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films March 2008 Newsletter

The March 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films April 2008 Newsletter

The April 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films May 2008 Newsletter

The May 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC) He loves Maddey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.115.181 (talk) 00:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films June 2008 Newsletter

The June 2008 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. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films July 2008 Newsletter

The July 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections

Roll call and Coordinator nominations

It's that time of year again – we're wiping everyone's name off of the active members list and doing a project roll call. Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name back to the Active Members list. You can also add your name to any of our many task forces!

It's also time to start the WikiProject Films coordinator selection process! We are aiming to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter

The August 2008 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation in Live Evil (film)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Live Evil (film), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Live Evil (film) is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Live Evil (film), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILMS Questionnaire

As a member of WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're Awful, I Love You

Sorry, but I'm gonna have to own up to that. I reverted your edits with the intention to re-add them once I formatted them correctly, but after I reverted it, I was called away and just forgot to go back and fix it. I'm going to do that now. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 03:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, now that I look at it, you didn't actually add anything new, you just added it in a different format, save for the pregap track. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 03:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bajtra

The article Bajtra has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable spirit. No evidence of awards, charting or in depth coverage in independent reliable sources.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bajtra for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bajtra 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/Bajtra 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. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

re:Scott Bennett - reliable, independent, published sources are the key...

Hello JohnnieYoung. You sent me an e-mail about Scott Bennett. I prefer to discuss Wikipedia topics publicly, so I am replying here. I'm sorry to have taken so long to reply; I was in an internet free zone for several days (Tottenham Bluegrass Festival).

An article about Mr. Bennett was created in 2013 and deleted shortly after (not by me) because it was written in promotional rather than neutral language. A draft article was started in 2015 and submitted to Articles for Creation, but it was turned down (again not by me) because the references provided were not articles by journalists, music critics and other authors in books, magazines or newspapers, but instead were mostly postings on personal websites and blogs.

Articles for Creation draft submissions are routinely deleted if no one works on them for six months, so to prevent that happening I redirected the draft and moved it to mainspace.

Now, any editor (you for instance) can load up the second-last edit, improve the text there, save it, and the redirect will be turned into an article. The catch is, if appropriate references aren't added, the article will likely be deleted again.

You sent me links to four news articles that were about a very negative event. Three of them are dead links, and the fourth is from a sometimes unreliable news source. To put something like that in Bennett's article you'll need several well-respected sources (see WP:BLPREMOVE. Also: many, many people have been convicted of similar crimes, and Wikipedia articles aren't written about them because of WP:ONEEVENT and WP:CRIME. To demonstrate the appropriate notability, it will still be necessary to add references from books, magazines, etc. about his music career.—Anne Delong (talk) 18:19, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That's good information to know. As for the links I sent you, all of those were recent news articles from major news publications and none of them were dead links so I don't what happened. But anyway, I don't need to update anything in Wikipedia myself, I was just looking for more information about Scott Bennett since he was in the news.—JohnnieYoung (talk) 20:35, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jay Woelfel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jay Woelfel 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/Jay Woelfel 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. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:11, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Proposed deletion of Tatum Adair

The article Tatum Adair has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to meet notability requirements as per WP:NACTOR. Small number of roles with no notable coverage.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Greyjoy^talk 07:37, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Timothy Prindle

The article Timothy Prindle has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to meet notability requirements as per WP:NACTOR, a look through the history shows that the article was created by the director of the film Ghost Lake. He appears to have created the article for that film (now deleted) as well as articles for each cast member.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Greyjoy^talk 07:41, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eric Swelstad

The article Eric Swelstad has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced BLP with no apparent notability after doing an online search. The two films listed below which do have WP articles are also not reliably sourced and may not be notable.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 19:06, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]