User talk:Opark 77

Welcome!

Howdy, Opark 77, Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions, you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! If you need help on how to title new articles see the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. For general questions goto Wikipedia:Help or the FAQ, if you can't find your answer there check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.

Additional tips

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

For Wikipedia policies and guidelines see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia and What Wikipedia is not.
Find everything in the Directory.
If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
Introduce yourself at the new user log.
If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.
If you have edits from before creating an account try this.
To Upload Images with the correct Copyright tags.
Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Be Bold!!

You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round.

Joe I 07:36, 23 April 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Bulk Edits

Hey Opark77, I've been looking over your contributions to the Sopranos and there is something you might want to consider. Instead of making lots of small edits, it's preferrable (but not required) to do them all at once so people do not have to load and look at so many edits. Also, if you are doing a minor edit, check off the minor edit box at the bottom left of the text box. It saves others time by letting them pass over your edit and focus on more substantial edits. Also, please sign you posts in user and talk pages by clicking the signiture icon at the top of the text box or using two dashes and four tildes. --Orion Minor 15:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advice Orion - I'll give the sig a shot now!--Opark 77 16:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To Do List

The Wire

Continue to flesh out and expand character guide
Add photo's of starring characters
Add photo's for series 2
Continute writing episode guides

Sopranos

Tony's mental health - ongoing project, episodes done: Pilot, 46 Long, Pax Soprana
Go through minor character lists in discussion adding entries

Zarbon

I have filed a request for comment here and I would appreciate your support, as another editor who has tried to reason with him and failed. Kafziel 04:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added my summary of my interactions with Zarbon and endorsed the overall summary. I hope this helps, what will come out of this request for comment? Or what do you hope will result? --Opark 77 10:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took me so long to reply; I accidentally took your name off my watchlist so I didn't see your question. The intended result of a request for comment is to bring the problem to the attention of the whole community, rather than just the few people interested in editing a particular page. The intent is usually to demonstrate that other editors share your opinion of the problem (that you're not just being mean or crazy), and often that is enough to give the other editor some perspective. If the problem is not solved there, it will go on to a request for arbitration, which usually results in the user being blocked or permanently banned. Fortunately, it looks like that will not be necessary here, so the request for comment has served its purpose. It's always better when we can all get along. Thanks for your help and support, and good luck in your future work. Kafziel 18:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kafziel, no worries about slow reply.--Opark 77 18:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

And thank you Opark, couldn't have done it without you. It was really a good team effort between me, you, WesleyMullins and anyone else who contributed. If you're a Six Feet Under fan please do not hesitate to help me with that episode guide. I have done like 6 episodes already. Once again, thank you for your help. Sfufan2005 19:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ashamed to say I've never seen a whole one. I watched 10 minutes of a season 3 episode decided I liked it but wanted to see it from the beginning. I do have the first series on the shelf as of 2 weeks ago. I missed it when it started on TV here in the UK and I've been waiting ages for a friend to buy it so I can watch it from the start! --Opark 77 20:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

inuse template

Seeing that you are doing a lot of work on The Wire's pages, you may want to use the inuse template. Wikipedia:Edit lock it's good for preventing edit conflicts. Without it if you are doing a half hour edit, someone else coming along and fixing a minor typo could mess up the whole job. For the same reason, I'll stay off the wire pages for a day or so to let you work.JeffStickney

Thanks for the advice Jeff. I'll try to remember to use it. --Opark 77 20:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sopranos

Hi Opark77, thanks for the heads up on that Sopranos entry. I see you put back in the entry in Luxury Lounge (The Sopranos episode) regarding Artie and his cookbook. If you look at the recepie Artie is using, its "rabbit" in Italian; and he pulls out a skinned rabbit from the fridge to cook it; his wife warns him that most people don't like rabbit. This is referring to the rabbit he is shooting at in his garden; so I thought that all of these items should be linked in the summary. Lgreen 22:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The clubber lang reference was spam. That was Mr. T's character in Rocky III

--MistaTee 16:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had the feeling it was some kind of spam but couldn't place the name. I've seen the Rocky films all once each and that was one time too many for in the case of all but the first! --Opark 77 17:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellanea

Bother! You're correct, now I have to change them all. I prefer miscellanea to trivia because trivia is stuff that's not worth bothering with, and hence has no place in an encyclopedia. Rich Farmbrough 13:04 6 June 2006 (UTC).

Big Love

Opark77, if you are into episode summaries of "big love", I will assist. I know its a lot of work and no one has taken up the challenge, just wanted to say I'd help out if you took the lead. Good work on the Sopranos. Lgreen 06:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your compliment. I'm working on The Wire at the moment but I do hope to get some Big Love episode pages done too and will be glad to have someone to tidy up my shoddy work when I get there! --Opark 77 08:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Wire

Thanks! I'm not really interested in writing episode summaries as I'm more of a wikifairy, but I can copyedit others' works. 69.116.150.174 18:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Opark, I noticed you've been writing a lot of episode summaries. I'll go through and work on them all. 69.116.150.174 03:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Little Paulie Germani; Mitchell Burgess; Dominic Chianese; Dan Attias; Tony Sirico; Steve Shill; Vincent Pastore; Bada Bing; Nancy Marchand; Tim Van Patten; Dan Grimaldi; Alex Rocco; Mario Puzo; Talia Shire; Edie Falco; John Ventimiglia; George Eads; Brian Bloom; Allen Coulter

Cleanup: Jordan wood; Jessica Darlin; Consigliere
Merge: Richie Aprile; The Finale (Everybody Loves Raymond); List of Everybody Loves Raymond episodes (Seasons 5-9)
Add Sources: Tasha Yar; J. Craig Wright; Criss Angel Mindfreak
Wikify: Christine Cavanaugh; Nikolai Stanislofsky; Enter The Fungus
Expand: Triumph (episode of Rome); Port Authority of New York and New Jersey; Tulip Era in the Ottoman Empire

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 12:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this barnstar for your amazing work in articles related to The Wire. Please keep up the good work and happy editing! east .718 23:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opark 77, just a note: when you're making a large edit to an article, it's preferable to put an {{inuse}} tag on the article, save it, and then edit and save again. It prevents the history from getting filled up with your edits.

Thanks! east .718 17:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lester Freamon

Thanks for all your contributions to The Wire articles! I do want to know, though, where you found the information that Lester is 30. I always assumed that he was at least 45-50 if not older. And his thirteen years (and four months) spent in the panwshop unit seem to go against him being so young. P.S. Here's the Wire fan userbox: {{User:UBX/Wire}} Andrew Levine 11:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response on Wire talk

I've left a response on Talk:The Wire (TV series). Andrew Levine 13:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your kind compliment on Big Love about the family tree--it was a real pain in the ass to make, since it was my first time. If you are ever interested, here is the info on it: Template_talk:Familytree I look forward to your future edits! Travb (talk) 15:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page references for The Wire: Truth Be Told

I think that every inidvidual citation to the Truth Be Told book needs a page reference to go with it. My copy is unfortunately at home in the U.S. (and I am in France for another month). You seem to have it on hand, though. Could you add the page numbers? Thanks. Andrew Levine 13:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the page references, I will go about adding them myself. As for the peer review, it's really not that odd; there are many articles up for peer review at a given time, and with limited attention directed towards them, some of the longer reads attract few or no comments. I recommend we leave it up for at least a full week, and maybe two, before bringing it to FAC. Andrew Levine 14:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Wire (TV series) Featured Article Candidacy

The page has been stable for almost a week, the peer review has run its course. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Wire (TV series). Andrew Levine 11:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Dennis Mello

Your recent edit to Dennis Mello (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 07:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Wire's TOC

No problem Opark, and thanks for the kind comments. east .718 21:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fleshy Part of the Thigh

I have moved The Fleshy Part of the Thigh back to The Fleshy Part of the Thigh (The Sopranos episode). Rather than for purposes of disambiguation the individual episode articles are titled with the show name as per guidelines from the wikiproject:television page. I just wanted to leave a quick note to explain why I moved it back.--Opark 77 07:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, yes, I see. Thanks for letting me know :-) —Mets501 (talk) 12:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lost characters

Thanks for your message. While I don't mind doing the odd copy edit, I'm purposefully trying to take a back seat from the article while season two transmits in the UK (currently, the last episode aired was "Dave"). As I stated on the Talk page, I think the list was better, since any spoilers were left to the individual character pages, rather than the main article. However, I think the rest of the article is shaping up pretty well. I've just copy edited the "Episode structure" section, as it contained info that was either duplicated elsewhere in the article, or pertained to TV shows in general and wasn't notable enough. Chris 42 14:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Lost (TV series)

Hi Owen,

It's already been removed. I only just noticed that someone else already uploaded the same image; it's been replaced with that. Feel free to put the image up for deletion, or whatever. SergeantBolt 01:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: image

Not to be annjoying, but isn't that the uploader's responsibility? -- Wikipedical 02:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Namond Brice

Hi Owen, In "The Wire: Connected," which aired on HBO last Sunday, they introduced the school-age characters and there were a couple of good tidbits about them in there. Namond is the son of Wee-Bey and was seen visiting him in jail. They revealed some bits about some of the other characters as well, but I didn't connect the names. One is a foster child with a mind for business (I think that was Randy but I'm not sure), one is living in a really desperate situation and is good with computers (pretty sure it was DuQuan), and the third is the quiet one, and the de facto "leader" of the group. At least three, maybe all four of them, are boxers in Cutty's gym.

Hope this helps! Can't wait for the new season.

J.P.

Lost

I thought that it would be more organised this way so you could clearly see the subheadings at the top of the page in the list but clearly you disagree so I will change it back. -- Sarz 00:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

image:Pilot2backgammon.jpg

Hello: please re-examine the information for the image you tagged. The image is clearly listed under the Screenshot fairuse template ("This image is a screenshot of a copyrighted television program...") and provides the source in the description: "John Locke (played by Terry O'Quinn) holds up the two opposing colors of backgammon checkers in part two of the pilot episode of Lost." This is used in the Lost article to illustrate the thematic element of the colors "black and white", and thus the image falls well within the realm of critical commentary. --Leflyman^Talk 17:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, please stop annoying me by re-inserting inaccurate tags and filling my talk page with excess template text. The image you have tagged was already examined by an admin, and returned. See additional discussion at Awyong_Jeffrey_Mordecai_Salleh's talk page. If you feel that the image is still lacking what you deem enough "Fair Use rationale" please be ever so good to add it yourself based on the extensive discussion already made. It's a wiki; you can edit the images, too. --Leflyman^Talk 17:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opark, please take this with due consideration, I'm sure you consider it "improving the article" to remove images, but I consider it a failure to understand some basic Wikipedia principles. Rather than tagging images you deem not to meet your standards for fair use, perhaps you might consider focusing on actual editing of article in areas you're familiar with. It's clear that the images chosen are discussed in the text, and that the images are identified as to their source. If you feel that's not enough, I'll again suggest: add the missing info yourself. Incidentally, you might want to note that I'm been editing on Wikipedia since 2003. I'm well familiar with policy; stating "Please remember that we assume good faith here at wikipedia" comes off as pedantic. (You may want to note that WP:AGF points out, "Accusing the other side in a conflict of failing to assuming good faith can, itself, be a form of failing to assume good faith.") Finally, users are given leeway in editing their own talk pages, and allowed to remove comments they feel are inappropriate. Users are advised not to remove warnings without cause, as this may be seen as uncivil; however, the excessive template you placed on my page was not such a case. Removing it was most certainly not vandalism, and your claim as such seems to indicate some misunderstanding of policy.

Please See: Help:Talk_page#User_talk_pages:

"Most users treat their user talk pages like regular talk pages, and archive the contents periodically to a personal subpage — either when the page gets too large, on a regular schedule, or when they take a wikivacation. Others delete comments after they have responded to them." --Leflyman^Talk 21:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I hope you don't mind me commenting here. I switched the tag from no source to orphaned fair use on this image a while ago and noticed this discussion when I was following up. According to Wikipedia's fair use policy, criterion 10, images claiming fair use must contain article-specific fair use rationale. It is the responsibility of the uploader or those placing the image in articles to provide the rationale, as they are the ones claiming that the image is protected under fair use. As with all images that do not comply with the fair use policy, if an image claiming fair use does not contain fair use rationale 7 days after the uploader has been notified (since this image was uploaded before 13 July 2006), it may be deleted without further warning. Feel free to contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. Pagrashtak 23:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(replying to message on my talk page) - You're welcome. :) I like the expanded rationale that you added, too. If there are any other Lost-related images that you'd like assistance with, let me know, and I'll be happy to take a look. --Elonka 08:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One Arrest (The Wire episode)

There's a problem with the "Title Reference" section that I can't exactly figure out. Though the name of the episode is "one arrest" there are two arrests by the case squad during the episode. One is of Bird and one is of Kevin Johnston, the one eyed drug runner. Either there is a philosophical reasoning for this or it's a screw up. –– Lid^(Talk) 10:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, as the creators would know, it's irrelevent if they released Johnston as the arrest applies only to the inital arrest. Anything after that is being released from custody. In addition to that, seeing as he was being cuffed, resisting arrest, and carrying a large amount of product, he would had to have co-operated of his own free will to be released but I can tell you he wasn't as he had seen the entire case squad and their dealings. It's actually probably a plothole as to what happened to him, considering we see later on that you can easily make phone calls from prison to snitch, so the One Arrest title is one big confusing fuck. If we can find a David Simon quote on this it would be appropriate. –– Lid^(Talk) 14:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also I added the Docks to Template:TheWire as well as added the freak disappearance of Frank Barlow from the series in The Target Miscellanea. –– Lid^(Talk) 15:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pilot2backgammon.jpg

Sorry for the late reply. I saw your message this morning but was busy in school the entire day and could only take a look at the article and the image in question just now. It appears that you have given Image:Pilot2backgammon.jpg an accurate fair use rationale. And it does illustrate the black-and-white theme section appropriately. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 12:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lost mediation

Lost WikiProject Newsletter - Edition 1

Hello! Thanks for signing up to the Lost WikiProject newsletter! This is our first edition, and it will from now on be sent on the eighth day of every month. This newsletter includes information about what the WikiProject has been up to and what's in store for our future!

Recent events

The WikiProject has been working at full steam over the past couple of months to improve all Lost-related articles in time for several events.

On the 13th of September, 2006 - Lost (TV series) was promoted to featured article status, with twelve supports compared to just one oppose! (You can view the candidacy here).

On the 28th of September, 2006, at 03:52 (UTC), the List of Lost episodes vs. Episodes of Lost (season 1) / (season 2) / (season 3) mediation completed, with a unanimous agreement on both sides to incorporate the season articles in to seperate articles. This was extremely successful, and now the articles are seperate and have been entirely cut down on fancruft and original research!

On the 3rd of October, 2006, Lost (TV series) was the Today's featured article on the Main Page. All editors involved worked extremely hard to cut down on the inevitable vandalism that occurred, and did an absolutely stellar job, making it a successful feature!

All editors were on hand on the 4th of October, 2006 to incorporate the new information regarding the season 3 premiere of Lost, A Tale of Two Cities. This was done quickly and efficiently and once again, everybody did a great job!

And finally ... according to the WikiCharts - Top 100, Lost (TV series) is the seventh most viewed page on the English Wikipedia! [1]

Things to do

Now that season 3 of Lost has started, new episode information will have to be added. You can help the WikiProject by expanding new episode summaries, making sure that original research and fancruft are cut down and that any new episode images are properly licensed and have correct rationales!

You can also help by correcting and expanding the new existing information from the season premiere!

That's all! Thanks for reading what's going on in the Lost WikiProject! The next newsletter will be sent on Wednesday the 8th of November! Thank you, and namaste!

NOTE: If you wish to recieve this newsletter in a different format, such as by email, please specify how next to your name in this list: Newsletter subscription list

SergeantBolt (t,c) 21:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Not lost on me

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		While I was mired in a remote corner of the Lost article, you were doing some heavy lifting, unperturbed. Your shaping of the article in August and September was visible all the way over to where I was standing. I remember, Owen. Loqi T. 08:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested to know that much of the turmoil of those days is evaporating away. But then again, you didn't seem to notice it; you just got down to business. Anyway, good work on Lost. During my time there, your contributions stuck with me the most. --Loqi T. 08:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus gathering at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)

Hello. Thank you for offering your opinion and "vote" to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#Episode Article Naming conventions!

We notice that there may have been confusing in collecting the opinions of yourselves and others. Thus, we would appreciate it if you took the time to voting again at the poll. Please choose "#Support" or "#Oppose" for the first option. Additionally, you may also make a completely separate vote for which disambiguation title with be used.

For example, you may vote to oppose the first policy and then support the convention that articles have the disambiguation suffix "(<series> episode)" appended to their name. We apologize for the inconvience and complexity. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 21:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of The Sopranos episodes

It made FL status! Good cooperation helped make it so. Thank you. Cliff smith 00:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contribution. Qjuad 13:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you email me?

jwales@wikia.com --Jimbo Wales 03:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on The Wire episodes

FYI, there's a group of editors that are working their way through Wikipedia, disrupting category after category of television episodes. Their next target is The Wire, which episodes I see that you created. I wanted to let you know, in case you wanted to weigh in at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#Proposed moves for episodes of The Wire. --Elonka 23:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Wire subheadings

Sounds good, thanks for fixing it. I didn't realize that consensus had been reached, and I had never seen anything like that in other articles, though I should have suspected the special formatting had been put there for a reason. Thebogusman 21:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have just re-watched the episode in which Bodie was murdered, and it clearly shows that it was Michael doing the shooting. You might want to revert that change.Arcayne 20:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Sopranos

Perhaps you and I can work together to make the Sopranos a GA or even an FA. It definitely deserves a better article. Aaron Bowen 13:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great I'll start working on it tomorrow and start by getting it sourced. Aaron Bowen 01:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any evidence on the internet so far that the pilot was ever developed for FOX or turned down by them. Odd. I did some work on the article and will add more sources. Aaron Bowen 09:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 08:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}[reply]

Commendation

Hey, I didn't know where else to put this, but...just wanted to thank you for your fantastic episode summaries on The Wire. I rely on them heavily to understand the plot after each episode. As smart as I'd like to think I am, I don't always catch what they're saying or the implications of it. It's all very thorough and well-done. Many thanks.

Lockeownzj00 21:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]