User talk:-5-

Archives
March 2006 — January 2009 February 2009 — August 2009

Other media

Simply appearing in a film or a video game is not notable. This is a common misconception (it's a big issue once you get to fiction articles). Basically, unless a reliable third party source discusses it at length, a song appearing somewhere is not notable. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question

Can you Esplain why Soundgarden is not a feature Article????--Kisskisskissme (talk) 14:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Singles

In theory all infobox fields should not require citations, as they contain information that should be in the prose. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

A possible solution is to simply indicate year. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

There's no mantatory standardization for discogprahy pages, like there are not for regular articles. Each page will be different, and there's no need to force a certain structure if the present one works.. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

He's already violated the three-revert rule, so you can report him to an administrator. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:34, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Not necessary, because he was reverting both of us and basically POV pushing. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

The main thing is we need to explain to him that there's no reason for the page to have the same formatting as certain other discographies, because variation is allowed. If he doesn't get that, then move to dispute resolution. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for August 2009

The Alternative music WikiProject Newsletter Issue 29 - August 2009

"We've been having lots of sex, and we're pregnant with the new baby already. It's vicious! It will have claws, like Freddy Kruger's lovechild.'" - Tom Meighan Project news Alice in Chains was featured on the Main Page on August 27. We collaborated on "Panic" (song), Daydream Nation, Kings of Leon, Goo (album), and Suede (album) during the past month. During the month of August, Nevermind and "Harry Patch (In Memory Of)" were promoted to good article status. This month's "Recommended Alternative Album" is Galaxie 500 - On Fire (1989).

New members Dylan620, SteelersFan UK06, Guitarherochristopher and Thatguykalem joined the alternative music fold during August. Editors User:WesleyDodds

SoxBot (talk) 15:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

PJ live

hey man, you know of any other pearl jam songs that are played differently live than on records? 24.47.51.86 (talk) 21:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of live shows, -5- are you off to any of the shows this month or in October? I'm guessing you're in the US based on the time of your edits (or you work night shifts in the UK!). Lugnuts (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Shame you've only seen them once! You don't need me to tell you how good they are live. Excellent work BTW on the Backspacer article. Is it worth nominating it now for Good or Featured article status or is it too early? IMO it's at least as good as the article for Dookie, which is at Featured. Lugnuts (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I've got a few of them on my watchlist. I'll keep an eye on them. Hope to see you back soon! Lugnuts (talk) 08:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Sure. Any reason why you're leaving? I'd hate to see such a good editor gone for too long. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Sad to see you leave -5-. One thing I will say though is after all your work on Black Gives Way To Blue and associated articles, you deserve to pick up a copy of the album. You won't be disappointed. It has some great songs on it.--Sky Attacker Here comes the bird! 05:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I was fully prepared to hate it as I was a huge AIC fanatic back in the DJ'ing days, but its actually pretty damn good. I forget that Cantrell was such a great contributor to the vocals as well that the sound on the new CD it still quite similar to the glory days. So anyways, a lot of ppl just need a break from time to time. Think about it at the start of the new year maybe, see if the batteries feel recharged. Take care. Tarc (talk) 13:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Leaving?

What the hell man, what happened? Pearl Jam's articles will become s*** without you. we need you back, at least tell us why you're leaving...

Soundgarden-related articles

		The Music Barnstar
		For your good work in all articles related to Soundgarden.--Cannibaloki 02:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Finally..

Good to see you back —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fifthhorizon (talk • contribs) 18:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II on the PC

The reliable source is here. And on Wookieepedia they tell that the PC version will be developed by Aspyr. 84.86.199.99 (talk) 14:54, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

List of Pearl Jam band members

Hello! I recently came across the List of Pearl Jam band members, and I noticed that it was a former featured list candidate. I, however, believe that this is a mistake. The list easily meets all of the criteria, and I had a pleasure reading it. Even though it was nominated before almost two years ago, I was wondering: Would you want to re-nominate the list with me? My goal on Wikipedia is for all of the members by band lists to achieve featured status, and I believe that your list is of quality to become one. I read through the comments from the first nomination, and I feel as though the comments are ridiculous. This list is exemplary, and I think it deserves a second chance. Are you willing to renominate the list with me? If not, I understand. Thank you for your time! WereWolf (talk) 14:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Does that mean you don't want credit as one of the nominators for the featured list candidate? WereWolf (talk) 00:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay. When I begin the nomination (I'm waiting for my current nomination to close), I'll link you to the page so you can sign your name under the "Nominator(s)" section. WereWolf (talk) 00:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The List of Red Hot Chili Peppers band members was promoted to a featured list, so now I'm going to start the nomination for the List of Pearl Jam band members. Is there anything in particular you want to say about nominating the list? WereWolf (talk) 23:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, nomination has begun. Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Pearl Jam band members/archive2 WereWolf (talk) 23:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic Four template

Why did you undo my revision and then put it back in yourself a minute later? Spidey104^contribs 14:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Alfred Pennyworth

Why did you undo my revision of that page, if you think it doesn't belong there then do the same with Barbara Gordon Shadowhawk27 (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah well she's listed as a doctor when she never worked in hospital or clinic before. Shadowhawk27 (talk) 21:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I tried but this User:J Greb won't allow it. Are you going to do something about it? Shadowhawk27 (talk) 22:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism

Thank you for your report on 75.53.101.92 at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. However, there have been no edits within the last 6 hours, and no changes of dates within the last 7 hours. IP vandalsim must be currently continuing: see the instructions at the top of the Administrator intervention against vandalism page. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

X-Men: First Class

Thanks for helping out in my X-Men: First Class sandbox. I appreciate it. Happy editing. Jhenderson777 (talk) 17:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

RE: Articles for Ultimate Spider-Man and new Batman animated series

Can we not just keep these pages as a placeholder for new information as it arises? It would be better to create pages for these shows ahead of time as opposed to simply cramming information into existing articles or worse, not documenting information at all.

Clean-up work can be done later, it is a work in progress, but I object to simply deleting the articles because we don't have enough information. Little information is better than none whatsoever and I don't think that it fills the Wikipedia criteria for bad articles. Maybe that's bias, but oh well. Zero no Kamen (talk) 10:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, you seem to know what you're doing. Zero no Kamen (talk) 10:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Spider-man SD

Shouldn't this be prof that mystrio is the final boss? look at the last achievement. I think its pretty offical becuase where else would they get that? http://www.xbox360achievements.org/game/spider-man-shattered-dimensions/achievements/ .--Lbrun12415 15:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Isn't there a video that shows Mystrio trying to steal the tablet or something like that? I think its pretty obvious that he will be the boss.--Lbrun12415 16:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

X-Men: First Class (film project)

Since X-Men (film series)#X-Men: First Class (2011), is itself an already pretty hefty section at the series article. An idea of mine is to create an very in-depth and well cited "(film project)" article, since the article is Wikipedia:Article size and starting to overburden the parent, and that as per WP:SPLITTING a proper spinout should be considered. I want input from you since you recurringly helped out. This discussion to you is per the discussion in User talk:MichaelQSchmidt#Question. Jhenderson777 (talk) 22:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Appreciate the fixes.[1]. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: The Message on the talk page

Firstly, the source that tells us they wont appear reads as if its speculation, it does say that they wont appear, but only says that Singer said its based in the 60s, & then that that means they wont appear, it never says Singer himself said that, but that because the film is in the 60s then it means they couldn't appear, or at least thats how it reads (& judging from the comments on that page then if it is true then the film wont be doing that good). Secondly, if that is true, then it completely changes the film's point, the concept was the original X-Men when they're first learning (The name 'First Class' as in its their first class), if that informations true then it turns the film into what the Magneto film was originally about, Magneto & Xavier's original split up. Thirdly, the entire film wouldn't be based in the 60s anyway, as if its showing their journey from friends to enemies, its going to take more then just the 60s as its cast list also lists 'Young' versions of the characters. Lastly, it doesn't make sense them not appearing since they already casted Havok, Scott's younger brother, if Scott isn't appearing, along with the rest of the X-Men, solely because its based before he was born, then why is his YOUNGER brother appearing? Surely if Scott isn't appearing then his brother, who has never appeared beforehand & can be assumed as he left the X-Men before the first movie, wouldn't either. So the Source has speculated & made mistakes, which are now on Wiki, yes maybe I'm unwilling to believe it, but I'm still being Civil About it, I'm not going to change it back, until either argument is prooven right or not, as I don't want to start an edit war, good day. Oh and lastly, be civil, yes that source may have been correct, I didn't notice that line when I originally posted it, but thats no reason to call it Bullshit, this is wikipedia, not some Forum, don't Swear/Curse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.231.156 (talk) 13:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Multiplayer Possibly Confirmed for Batman AC

http://www.xbox360achievements.org/news/news-6215-Multiplayer-Coming-to-Batman--Arkham-City.html

http://arkhamcity.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=262

http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/09/01/batman-arkham-city-screens-leaked-multiplayer-possibly-confirmed.aspx --Lbrun12415 16:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Recent changes to Christopher Nolan

Hi, you left me a message regarding the changes to Christopher Nolan as being incorrect. I have again looked at the rotten tomatoe ratings reference and they do seem to be correct. I may have misunderstood them but if you could check them out I would be grateful. Regards. Shaunthered (talk) 23:55, 2 September 2010 (UTC) OK I'll watch out for that, thanks. Shaunthered (talk) 01:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

X-Men: First Class (film project)

Please do not revert this - this should be a redirect, as it fails WP:NFF. There is no reason for it to have its own page just yet - this can all be covered on the individual film series page. This "film project" title seems to be a new phenomena, but unnecessary in my view, as this does not yet warrant its own page. Rob Sinden (talk) 18:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Spiderman 3

What is your reason for removing the article about the cancelled 4th? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.192.69.124 (talk) 19:09, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Film project article

If you could find more sources to make the article more well covered. Please put it on the article. Also there is a recommendation to write two sources sentences in the series article and then redirect them to the larger spinout topic. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 20:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

A note for consideration....

Inre this note about this discussion... It could be quite helpful to now take the time to add more sourced content in order to show that the "project topic" is now too well covered to be be folded into the series article. As is seen in the two examples given at the AFD, in order to support a "project article" is is imperative to sometimes oversource to show the overwhelming coverage that meets GNG and meriting the guideline supported exception to NFF by showing the persistence of coverage and its depth. Also, it might be prudent to write two sourced sentences in the series article that then redirects to the larger spinout topic. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

3rd opinion request regarding Spider-Man 3

I've been asked to look at Spider-Man 3 regarding the section on the aborted sequel and the reboot film. I've posted my comments at Talk:Spider-Man 3#3rd opinion on sequel/reboot section.

I would strongly suggest all editors involved with this section address the issue there instead of continuing to edit war on the article regarding the section.

- J Greb (talk) 19:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

As has just been pointed out to the IP: Continuing to edit war over the section can and will result in either the participants being blocked from editing for a short while or the page protected to facilitate discussion. Considering you request on my talk page and your comment after I posted the 3rd party opinion, you really should know better than to make your 9th revert within 48 hours.

- J Greb (talk) 22:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Message for User talk:5

I don't remember what I exactly wrote for Batman: Mask of Phantasm. Do you remember what I wrote for Batman? I think that I wrote the mysterious person wanted revenge by killing Chuckie. If I wrote mysterious man, then I'm sorry. How's that personal analysis? It's obvious that Chuckie's an evil man. It's also obvious that the mysterious person had a good reason for killing Chuckie. Please don't block me. (99.88.78.94 (talk) 21:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)).