User talk:K1Bond007
| Welcome to my talk page! |
| Feel free to leave me a comment, a criticism, a question or whatever. |
| Archive: 1 2 |
James Bond
Formatting idea
Take a look at the article on Philip Glass. Scroll down and you'll see that there's coding available that creates a column format so lists can be displayed side-by-side. Maybe there's a possible application for this in the Bond article or some of the others? 23skidoo 15:37, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Followup: I think you can safely delete the two other "James Bonds". They don't really serve a purpose. The Agatha Christie one could be moved to Inspirations ... but do we know that the character was an inspiration for Bond, or was it simply a coincidence? I think we can lose it as well. The only acknowledged Bond inspiration was the birdwatcher, and he's covered elsewhere. (BTW it might be worth checking to see if the Agatha Christie article includes the Bond reference, though). 23skidoo 20:29, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Bond girl
I'll let you decide whether this is worth including in the Casino Royale movie article. I came across this gossip website which has an item dated November 2004. Not only does it say that Mariah Carey has been signed to appear in the next Bond film, but it correctly guessed that the next film would be Casino Royale! Weird. The site says Mariah would play Vesper Lynd. All BS, of course, but still weird they'd get the film title right months before the fact, huh... 23skidoo 05:15, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah I was suffering withdrawal when Wikipedia went down, too! I'm 100% certain the rumor was a fake and I just remembered we already have Mariah listed in the rumors section anyway. I agree she'd be terrible, though probably not as bad as Halle Berry's hatchet job on Die Another Day (that's IMO of course but I couldn't stand her as Jinx). The most intriguing name on that list is Alizee who is like a 17 year old French Britney Spears (except with a better singing voice). Although listed as debunked I think Keira Knightley is still a good possibility, as is Kate Beckinsale, although she's tied up with the Underworld franchise right now. After decades of films with international actresses, I'd like to see a British actress get the nod as the main Bond girl for once. Miranda Frost in DAD wasn't a main Bond girl, so you have to pretty well go back all the way to Diana Rigg in OHMSS for the last time a British actress played the lead. Mary Goodnight was British but played by a Dutch actress, and considering Rigg actually played an Italian you need to go back even further to Pussy Galore who may or may not have been British before you find a British actress playing a British character. 23skidoo 05:39, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Jennifer Garner would be a terrific Bond girl, but you're right - it's just too obvious. Mia Maestro (her sister on Alias) would be pretty good, though. Evangeline Lilly (who hails from Alberta where I am) is hot right now so I agree she might be a good choice. Funnily enough I kinda liked the idea of Kylie Minogue as a Bond girl as she has that look and isn't a bad actress from what little I've seen (not that you need to be an Oscar winner to play a Bond girl). Problem is odds are the next Bond might be YOUNGER than Kylie! I agree that having an "average girl" would be a nice change, although going a bit against the grain. 23skidoo 18:35, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It's a prequel?
I was afraid of that. I wish people would learn that prequels don't work, certainly not in this sort of arena. People are already nitpicking Casino Royale at the TrekBBS and the script hasn't even been released yet. Enterprise was a prequel and it was rejected, Star Wars Eps I and II were pretty much rejected by a lot of people. And the Jack Ryan prequel sank without a trace. The irony is Orlando Bloom is starting to look more likely all the time. Maybe Bond 22 will be an adaptation of SilverFin? And here I thought it was funny that teen singer Alizee was tipped as a possible Bond girl. Maybe they'll just call it Spy Kids IV and be done with it. Sorry for the rant, but the last thing the series needs is a prequel. I'm fearful that this could be the end of Bond because some money-counter decided to appeal to teenagers. Argh. 23skidoo 04:38, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Followup It wouldn't be the first time someone misquoted somebody. And this is the New York Daily News, which isn't exactly the Times. I don't think the torture will make it into the film, since Die Another Day already covered that aspect. (Though I'd hope a prequel would explain where Bond learned how to stop his heart like that). I agree Bond films are hardly bastions of continuity (although the different Blofelds actually does fit in with how Fleming wrote the character). Having Dench would be problematic unless they are indeed going for a complete reboot, meaning this new Bond will have never dealt with Messervy or Boothroyd. The Spy Kids IV crack was tongue in cheek, but I am concerned with this overall skewing to younger audiences that I'm seeing. I wouldn't mind seeing Bond taken back to his roots to an extent - although livened up a bit; you've read Fleming, which are well written novels but cinematically a bit boring at first. A strong Bourne Identity like film would be great - although still with the Bond sensibilities otherwise it just becomes a clone of a clone. I really liked For Your Eyes Only which had a minimum of gadgets. But that's different than literally going back to the roots and starting over with a giant reset button. Having said all this, if the Higson series hadn't been launched I might have agreed that the idea of a young Bond was probably just a misquote on the part of the Daily News. But with Young James Bond being the direction Ian Fleming Pubs. wants to take for the foreseeable future, I'm not so certain. Maybe Higson will end up writing the novelization of C.R. after all... 23skidoo 06:08, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Anon edits
I just re-read that Casino Royale book report and man it was brutal. It seems we have another anon user dropping first person comment too (note the change made to the main Bond article). Maybe the guy thinks this is a blog or something? 23skidoo 23:06, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Reorganizing the main article
I like where you're going with this. I don't mind replacing the Goldfinger image with FRWL. I recently got my hands on a 1st edition Pan paperback from the late 50s which has a cool, classic cover and one that IMO would work better than the "nude" cover or the 2002 version from the book's article. I will scan it and upload it and replace the Goldfinger book image on the main Bond article. Incidentally, I have come to the conclusion that "franchise" articles have the deck stacked against them for Featured Article status because people want so much information included, yet at the same time it needs to stay close to the 32Kb limit. If you go back to my talk page, scroll down to the end and you'll see a fellow who wants to have the main Star Trek article removed from Feature Article status, and if you read his reasons why, it's clear the article would need to be 100Kb to include everything he wants. I'm thinking of putting forth a proposal that entire sets of articles be eligible for some form of Featured status - I'm quite proud of the Bond book articles you and I have worked on, particularly those for Fleming's books. Any idea how I'd make such a suggestion to the Powers That Be? 23skidoo 04:12, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Followup. I changed the image on the main article to FRWL. I'm torn as to whether to replace the "nude" cover in the book article with this version. I like them both, but the format of the article doesn't leave room for another image. (Maybe I need to write a longer synopsis?). Can you do me a favor? Can you make the call? Whichever one you pick for the book article I'm fine with, though in order to keep consistency with the other articles we should keep the 2002 version as the lead image. 23skidoo 04:24, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
SilverFin
I haven't seen it around yet. Being in Canada we sometimes get the books on the British rather than the American schedule so I half expect to see it sooner or later. If I don't find it by the end of April I'll probably Amazon it as well. I'm taking a break from reading Bond at the moment (I'm actually not reading much of anything) but hope to get started on Death is Forever, the next book in the series. SilverFin I'll probably read as soon as it comes out because I'm curious about it, too (and, well, I DO have a complete set of Bond fiction so I have to keep up! ;) ). What did you mean when you said you couldn't find FRWL at the link? Are you talking about the image? It works OK for me. 23skidoo 05:14, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
007 logo
You might need to add a bit more information regarding copyright for the 007/gun logo you just added to the main article. Last I heard it was still very much copyrighted by Danjaq, Ian Fleming Publications and EON. I'm not sure what copyright tag applies to what is essentially a company logo. 23skidoo 05:56, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Followup. I'll give the article a readthrough on Sunday when I have a free moment. Re:GoldenEye. I can't get the link to work (site appears to be down at the moment), but if you're talking about an image off the DVD, there's a copyright tag for Screenshot (check the Upload page for the proper code) that covers this. I used it to add images to the Modesty Blaise and Eleanor Powell articles amongst others. 23skidoo 07:48, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Someone is really taking a VFD a bit too seriously. In case you didn't see it, the page consists of the lyrics of a rap song that libels some guy. PS. Looks like I'm on someone's hit list - my page has been vandalised a couple of times today. 23skidoo 07:51, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Revisions to main article
I went through most of the main article including the new official films intro. It works for me so far, though I made some tweaks. I removed the statement that Thunderball was the only film in which "Bond, James Bond" isn't said because I'm pretty certain it isn't said in From Russia with Love as well, but I don't have the movie handy to confirm. I think Roger Moore skips it in one of his films, too, but I don't know which one. I also cut from the introduction the reference to "James Bond-style security". I've always felt this sentence was a bit clunky and unnecessary. Best to just say Bond has entered popular culture, IMO. One question: do we have a link for the website that has the "drink and smoke" count? A link is somewhat conspicuous by its absence at that point. I've only edited up to the end of Official films and will give the rest of the article a quick boo later today if I have time. 23skidoo 16:22, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Followup. The screenshots look terrific! I think the paragraph right above the photos (the one about everyone's favorite Bond, correct?) is fine. BTW the reason why I went with MI-6 instead of MI6 is because the first reference in this article is to MI-6. I'll gave things a look-see to make sure they are all standardized as MI6. In the meantime I have a few minutes so will give the rest of the article a quick peek. 23skidoo 21:35, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Bond trivia additions
I caught a couple of cut-and-pastes from IMDb among the latest batch of trivia additions (see Spy Who Loved Me and Diamonds Are Forever). I sent the user a warning about this - I've had articles tied up for weeks because someone reported copyvio - but I haven't had time to go through all the trivia items and cross-reference with IMDb. Most of them are either original or suitably reworded; there are just a couple I've notice that just come too close for comfort (especially when I recognized one that I wrote for IMDb in the first place). If I have time I should go through them all anyway (including older entries) just to make sure there aren't any that mirror IMDb. 23skidoo 17:35, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
re: Round 2
I still feel the official books - Fleming, Amis, Pearson, Gardner, Benson and Higson - need to be included under the James Bond main article even if only as a list because the article feels incomplete without them. Same with the films. For comparison, see Simon Templar, which has a similar format to the Bond article albeit simplified since only one author has ever been truly identified with The Saint. I think the Fleming and Gardner sections can be expanded, certainly ... but wouldn't it just be duplicating information already found under the articles for the two writers? That's why I never really seriously considered expanding the authors sections under the main article because it's been done elsewhere. I even added a James Bond section to Kingsley Amis' article and, for the heck of it, created a Robert Markham article to boot (which turned out quite well). If we created a "James Bond unofficial fiction" or "James Bond continuation novels" articles, it would create more hoops for people to jump through in order to find the information they need. I'm certainly not in favor of replacing the Gardner/Benson/Higson sections with an overview paragraph, which is what I think you're suggesting (beg pardon if I misunderstood). One possible way of expanding the Fleming introduction might be to take some of the trivia items seen in the list (i.e. the reference to Viviene Michel in SWLM) and make it part of the intro.
In terms of your other ideas I agree we should expand the EON section, maybe borrowing material from Dr. No. Dividing the character section up into film vs. literature is doable, though the two have similarities as well (i.e. the martini) and perhaps these should be listed first, followed by either differences or areas that one format emphasizes over another (for example, just about every Bond novel by Fleming and Gardner has Bond taking a scalding hot/bracing cold shower, and many novels describe in detail his breakfast preferences (the precisely timed soft boiled egg, for example); except for a quick reference to figs in FRWL I don't think this was ever covered in the movies. The other films list consists of mostly parodies I think, or certainly unauthorized in some cases like the foreign Bond films. The only "serious" one, so to speak, is the Man from UNCLE appearance. But we'd have to expand on the discussions of each film to make it a viable article on its own and except for UNCLE and OK Connery I know very little about the other films,
As far as the comics go, I have been planning for some time to start an article dedicated to this topic, and just add a "main article: James Bond in comics" notation or something like that to what we have. There are a few sources around - the Titan Books reprints and a couple of websites - that give plenty of information on the different comic book adaptations and original stories that are out there. What I see is a bit of a history, followed by "pretty table" formatted lists of the comic strips and comic books that have been published, careful not to copy the format of any existing site. I don't know enough about the plots of the comics to write about them, and The Bond Files by Andy Lane provides detailed synopses of all of them anyway. If I do decide to write up such an article it won't be until I have a lull in my work schedule since it'll involve a bit of legwork. Cheers! 23skidoo 07:03, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Followup. I stopped reading the FAC because I was just getting annoyed after awhile, but my first impression was that the folks there wanted us to essentially fold-in all the book articles into the main, which would have made things completely unwieldy. I think doing a table for the books is a good idea, and in fact I've considered doing so far awhile. I don't agree with filing Gardner etc. under "continuation novels" because that makes them seem less official. Yes, Fleming created the character and his books are the best known, but Gardner and Benson together have written more Bond fiction than he did. Replacing the lists under each author's name with a table and then including any trivia, etc. into the introductions I think would work and would be easy ways to expand the intro paragraphs. If we do a table, I suggest listing the stories in chronological order and include the novelizations in the case of Gardner and Benson. For example, here's what the table for Benson might look like (I did this on the fly so it's not 100%):
| Title | Publication UK/US |
|---|---|
| "Blast from the Past" (short story) |
January 1997 Playboy magazine |
| Zero Minus Ten | 1997 |
| Tomorrow Never Dies (film novelization) |
1997 |
| The Facts of Death | 1998 |
| "Midsummer Night's Doom" (short story) |
January 1999 Playboy magazine |
| High Time to Kill | 1999 |
| "Live at Five" (short story) |
November 1999 TV Guide |
| The World is Not Enough (film novelization) |
1999 |
| Doubleshot | 2000 |
| Never Dream of Dying | 2001 |
| The Man with the Red Tattoo | 2002 |
| Die Another Day (film novelization) |
2002 |
I think by including the film books, this would allow us to eliminate the novelization section (though we'd have to create a section for Christopher Wood to get rid of the other two books). Plus, I looked at Benson's section, and we can cut it down to a one-line intro just like the others if we want to since his other Bond involvement is covered in his biographical article, and the table eliminates the need for the lengthy short stories paragraph. Thoughts? 23skidoo 14:30, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Followup. Have you taken a look at the table used in Simon Templar which lists all the books - including non-Charteris continuations - together? Maybe that's the key, rather than splitting them up (talking the official books only). That way we could also eliminate the need for a Fleming section completely since the creation of Bond, and Fleming's influences, are already covered earlier in the article. A separate table for Young Bond would probably be needed because the books, though official, are of a very different type than the Fleming-Benson series. In terms of the unofficial books, we already have an article on Per Fine Ounce so we could probably cobble together articles for the others, but there would need to be some sort of introduction or write up explaining the existence of unofficial novels with links ... I think it would just end up being another list, but there are only a couple of books. Pearson's biography needs to be kept separate due to its special status, but if we simply list all the books, novelizations and stories as one table, with a subchapter on the biography, and another on the unofficial/lost novels, that might go a long way towards streamlining things. 23skidoo 23:11, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
What Do You Think of This?
It was posted on imdb.com http://www.freewebs.com/doubleo7/cliveowen.htm Durbanreginald 19:45, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)Durbanreginald
Oh Ok
Oh ok, I thought maybe you knew something about it if he had been signed or something, because I noticed a few other websites had said so, and then on that site it actually suddenly added him. Durbanreginald 19:17, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)Durbaneginald
My Reason for adjusting the pic size on James Bond
"Users hate scrolling left to right. Vertical scrolling seems to be okay, maybe because it's much more common. Web pages that require horizontal scrolling in standard-sized windows, such as 800x600 pixels, are particularly annoying.
From Top Ten Web-Design Mistakes by Jakob Nielsen (usability consultant)
With the pictures at a 125px width, you are causing people with 800x600 screens to horizontal scroll. Zzyzx11 00:06, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- So far, I found the following quote on Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Displayed_image_size:
- "Images should generally be displayed at a maximum of 550 pixels wide, so that they can comfortably be displayed on 800x600 monitors."
- I'm still looking. Zzyzx11 01:07, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- RE: In fact most of the articles I've seen and worked with were designed with 1024x768 as seen from most of the tables that take up half the page (in 800) and galleries that make you scroll.
- I think putting 5 images next to each other in a row like that is a special case because I am not forced to horizontal scroll on most of the other articles you describe. Tables are treated differently -- content in tables are displayed in 800 via word wraps. Zzyzx11 01:28, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I Found The Answer!!!
Wikipedia:Picture tutorial#Wiki markup and CSS Zzyzx11 01:49, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I guess we found the answer at the same time... I fixed the page just before you replied back to me. BTW -- Wikipedia does not have an absolute rule about 1024 vs. 800. But I think they encourage Wikipedians to use markups that adapt to screen width by wrapping just like this one. Zzyzx11 02:01, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I use 1024x768 resolution (as, I believe, do the majority of computer users), but I rarely use pictures greater than 300px wide, and generally line up images vertically rather than horizontally to avoid horizontal scrolling. I hope this helps. User:Rdsmith4/Sig 00:03, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
XBox 360
As for the 500mhz GPU and tri core, it's now been confirmed by those at GDC, and NDA's on that configuration has been lifted. Since I have three friends who were at GDC, and openly confirm this spec, i'd say its as good as gold. Other info, such as amount of pipelines in the GPU is still under wraps (which is all that really matters, the 500mhz is fairly useless by itself). Terrapin 06:06, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)