User talk:Dr. Blofeld: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 00:30, 23 June 2014

User:Dr. Blofeld/Archives User:Dr. Blofeld/Awards

Film suggestions

I saw your recommendation on Krimuk90's talk page. I have not watched it yet, but do you have any others? You can find some of my favorite foreign films at User:Bollyjeff#International_films_tour. Have you seen any of these? BollyJeff | talk 13:15, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Bollyjeff: Yes I've seen about half of those. There's still a lot I haven't added to my User:Dr. Blofeld/Great films! I recommend any of those! Particularly the ones in bold! What sort of films are you into? If you really like emotionally touching ones then the film I most recommend is Ikiru, one of the best films ever made IMO and Kurosawa's best film. I presume you've seen City Lights and The Kid (1921 film)? Sayonara had one of the most incredibly moving scenes I've ever seen in cinema when a couple commit suicide because they couldn't bear to be parted which won them both Oscars I think. Days of Wine and Roses I think deals with the frustrations and emotions surrounding alcoholism brilliantly and has some great scenes like Jack Lemmon going apeshit in a greenhouse. The Turkish art film Bal also a masterpiece. A lot of people complain about the length but IMO Novecento is a brilliant film, just needed cutting by an hour or 90 minutes though! It's sort of like eating 10 big plates of your favourite pasta though, too much of a good thing.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:28, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can second all of Dr. B's recommendations Bollyjeff. Back when userboxes were all the rage I always wanted to make one that read "I thought Seven Samuarai was Kurosawa's best film until I watched Ikiru". Another mark of its greatness is that you can watch at different points in your life and your reaction to it will change. By that I mean that your life experiences will heighten and enhance your appreciation of the film. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD | Talk 16:31, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dr B. Back in the 1980's one of my cable stations showed 1900 on Saturday and Once Upon a Time in America on Sunday. I still describe it as the weekend that I spent with Robert de Niro :-) MarnetteD | Talk 16:31, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a top notch crime film Jeff try The Killing which I think is Kubrick's most clinical film, even if not his very best in terms of artistic brilliance like 2001 and Clockwork.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:38, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should watch 10 Rillington Place too. It really creeped me out! -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 16:39, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I forced Krimuk to watch that one hehe! The creepiest film I've ever seen. The scene where he murders the pregnant girl by gassing her and then raping her in that musty old flat room with the horrid decor and then the look on his face as he does it would be a good candidate for creepiest moment in film history! Peeping Tom also a masterpiece! The Tenant is also a must see, seeing Polanski as a woman!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:40, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am waiting for the film to grow on me. But naah, I can't. It was too creepy. LOL! Peeping Tom was excellent though. KRIMUK90 ✉ 16:45, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That ranks up there K but Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom is hard to top for sustained creepiness. MarnetteD | Talk 16:47, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

True! Sodom does have some really creepy scenes, disgusting, but overall I thought 10 Rillington more creepy because of the realism thing, and being in the same street it happened in. Sodom is more shocking/disgusting than "creepy" as such I think...The house Krimuk in 10 Rill was very much like Fred West's house at 25 Cromwell Street which had bodies hidden in the walls and gardens and stuff. That horrible sordid mustard yellow colour and the evil wallpaper!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Shivers!* -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 16:51, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you haven't heard of him read all about it in the article, although isn't not a very good one. Fascinating, but the creepiest house ever, Rosemary West's "parlour" for "entertaining" black male visitors and the decor and all that, I can't think of anything more repulsive!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:54, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That reminds me of Kathy Bates' character in American Horror Story: Coven. Delphine LaLaurie, the creepiest woman I have ever read about! -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 17:01, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Devil in the White City tells the story of H. H. Holmes another creep in human form. At one point there was a film in the works but nothing has happened with that. MarnetteD | Talk 16:58, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Polanski's Repulsion also quite disturbing for the period.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, this thread grew in a hurry! I literally have not seen a single film listed above here. BollyJeff | talk 18:15, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Sunset Boulevard ? A good place to start would be watching this. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:17, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Kid I had seen brfore, but it was worth another look. BollyJeff | talk 23:52, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Emailed you a link to watch Ikiru.♦ Dr. Blofeld 05:54, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Checking your list, I see Ben-Hur gets a high rank, but not some of Heston's other works, such as The Ten Commandments, Planet of the Apes, and Soylent Green. You don't like those? BollyJeff | talk 15:54, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ten Commandments and Planet of the Apes should be on the list, but yeah, a lot of his films I don't find particularly great. He often turns me cold as an actor. El Cid was beautifully shot for instance but he lacked chemistry with Loren and the screenplay was pretty average. I would add it based on visual merit, but it's difficult to really consider the film overall to be "great". I've seen a fair few like Pony Express, The Wreck of Mary Deare, Midway, El Cid, Julius Caesar etc and don't rate them. The Big Country is a very good one though, as is Greatest Show on Earth, Khartoum and Touch of Evil which I already had. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Bollyjeff: @Krimuk90: I've created a key for User:Dr. Blofeld/Great films and the films which I really think are great rather than just very good are now in bold. All of the ones in bold are the ones I highly recommend!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ashford, Kent

Hi. I think I've gone through most of the suggestions in the GA review, and trimmed out quite a bit of unnecessary fluff. I think my main problem now is the history section for the Middle Ages is looking a bit bare, though that might just be because I liked the aesthetic look of the church picture (which now belongs elsewhere). What do you think we should do? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:06, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just glancing it already looks much improved. Better for the history to be bare in parts than unfocused and jumbled! I'll have a look tomorrow most likely.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:15, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not good enough, Blofeld, I want my green blob now goddammit, and if I don't get it I'm going to throw a total and utter hissy fit, complain on ANI, and get boomerang blocked ... no wait, this is all sounding like a bad idea, actually. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:19, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: Transport could still do with some cutting, but the article is much improved, well done!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Albertas Gurskas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Albertas Gurskas 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/Albertas Gurskas 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. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:59, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for the congrats :)--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:18, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tintin in Tibet!

Morning Blofeld. Apparently, User:Prhartcom is aiming to get Tintin in Tibet through FAC. Thought you might find it of interest. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:11, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting choice!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:00, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bartholomäus Sastrow

On 14 June 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bartholomäus Sastrow, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Bartholomäus Sastrow's autobiography does not give the birth dates of his children? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bartholomäus Sastrow. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sir William Hamilton

Re this edit, do you have a source for linking to William Hamilton, 11th Duke of Hamilton? It's unlikely, though not impossible, that so grand a nobleman would be teaching University classes on logic; but even before he succeeded to the Dukedom he was Marquess of Douglas and Clydesdale and would not have been referred to as "Sir William". JohnCD (talk) 16:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's highly likely it's the wrong Sir William Hamilton. I picked it up on Charles Matthews's talk page which had a huge list of articles needing dabbing. Perhaps you should ask him which one it was.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:00, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Digging about a bit, it was evidently Sir William Hamilton, 9th Baronet who was "elected in 1836 to the Edinburgh chair of logic and metaphysics". Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 17:24, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP Film in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Film for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 22:53, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Siddick

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

Does not establish notability

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. DJAMP4444 15:28, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There seemed to be some obscure edits that removed the description of what the article was actually about. DJAMP4444, I removed the Prod, populated places are generally notable enough to have an article, or at a minimum, merged into a larger, related, article (following discussion).--kelapstick^(bainuu) 15:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Societaetstheater

Check it out; I finally got to it. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:30, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Brandon J. Dirden (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Morehouse and Prelude to a Kiss

Christine Noonan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Malatesta

La pequeña señora de Pérez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tito Gómez

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Anniversary!

	Happy 8th Anniversary!
	Thank you for all your contributions, Dr. B. Wikipedia wouldn't be the same without you. Eight years... so cool! Here's to many more! Rosiestep (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Scott Sowers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Scott Sowers 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/Scott Sowers 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. LADY LOTUS • TALK 14:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PC filmography on Main Page

I'll take a look.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:04, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. You still haven't changed have you? I haven't anything against you or the list LOL. I said it would be very nice to see it listed on that date, but it's not the end of the world if it doesn't. He did have a valid concern about too many Indian lists at once, even if I don't fully agree with him. I'd like to see it appearing on that date but there's no use kicking up a storm and crying over person who opposes it is there? Why is it when something doesn't go your way you take literally everything personally?♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:09, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're a good editor and much appreciate the work you do on Indian cinema, although your prose quality and English isn't always as good as some of the other Indian editors on here (particularly in conversations) but it must be difficult writing in language which isn't your original one. But I do think whenever you see anything slightly negative you overreact and can become quite rude to people who are even on your side and dig a hole for yourself which is completely avoidable. I hope given time you'll learn to curb that. I'm pretty easy going and rarely hold grudges against anybody, but if you do ever rant at me about something then I'm more likely to remember you as being a childish fellow rather than a decent contributor. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:27, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prashant!, do not ask for personal details on a user's talk page. You really need to stop this fishing for admiration expedition. Take what is here and for heaven's sake move on with you life! Cassianto ^talk 12:09, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Sowers

I really hope you don't hold the AfD against me, I didn't realize it was your article to begin with, otherwise yes I would have come and said something. Thank you for the work that you did to it :) LADY LOTUS • TALK 11:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lady Lotus: This OK, I've emailed you!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:56, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chopin

For your esteemed interest - best, --Smerus (talk) 19:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Smerus: Excellent will look in on it this weekend.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Restaurant Karel V

I will unprotect the page. If there is any more edit warring then the editors involved will be blocked. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 13:14, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CambridgeBayWeather: The problem is that most of us will agree 7 or even 5 citations is excessive and this is confirmed in the guideline. Yet if I or Schrod remove them we'll be blocked for reverting again. If Banner had been any normal editor on here he'd have thanked me for my edits and carried on elsewhere. You are aware that he's only been permitted to return to editing on condition that he doesn't edit war and assumes good faith. Sure this isn't about Irish parishes but he's reacted in a way which was the reason why he was initially indefinitely blocked by HJ Mitchell. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:30, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So you assumed I was thinking when I left my message. Of course I wasn't. Really what I meant was edit warring from the unprotection, taking the unprotection to be a clean start. I did notice that reference two and three were the same thing. That could be merged into one reference. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 13:36, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I proposed replacing them with a single source [1] but Banner claims it isn't reliable. Clicking the about in Dutch it mentions it has 7 million odd newspaper in circulation which would indicate otherwise. I'm not sure what to do, if you edited it you could resolve it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Luz del Fuego

The actress, Luz del Fuego, may interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:03, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll work on some of those Brazilian actors/actresses/directors within the next couple of weeks. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'm working on Lourdinha Bittencourt and if there are other actresses with a pt article, I'll do those, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rita Cléos and Dulcina de Moraes and Alda Garrido and Betty Gofman may interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Akshay Kumar filmography

Hi Dr. Blofeld, in the past week I worked a lot on the above list and when I felt that it fulfills the FL criteria I nominated it (My first FLC). So far there have been no comments on the list's nomination (surprises me). I would be glad if you leave a few comments regarding the list. I'm a bit nervous about this list.--Skr15081997 (talk) 13:30, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian films

Yeah, it's true! Sadly, hardly we can find such a list there (this kind of list is really hated in Portuguese wiki). However, to expand List of Brazilian films of the 1980s I looked into this category. Translate from Portuguese wiki can be somewhat useful; I've noticed a lack of pre-1960 films there, though. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 16:47, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Karel V

Could you use your influence to calm down SchroCat. It looks like he wants another edit war. For the moment, I have restored the historic information you removed after the article about the building was written. That give SchroCat his beloved history without an edit war. The Banner talk 19:01, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ow, and now Cassiant joins in at the ball. The Banner talk 21:20, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Banner, I am entirely calm, apart from being surprised that you've decided to go into edit war mode YET AGAIN. Despite your lies above, I certainly do not want an edit war, although it seems you are either desperate to edit war, or have such a claim of ownership that you cannot see anything straight. I suggest you self-revert, take the article off your watchlist and move on. Having said all that, I know have further evidence of you failing to AGF and lying to go with the rest of abysmal behaviour recently. - SchroCat (talk) 19:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you already forget your block for edit warring that ended this afternoon? The Banner talk 19:27, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, and I have not edit warred here. I reverted a bad edit: you took the opportunity to revert for a second time. I suspect that if another editor rightly reverted you, then such is your strength of ownership claim on this article, you'd STILL revert again and again. I have not come across an editor with such a poor attitude before. - SchroCat (talk) 19:38, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have such a lovely negative attitude. Everything is always my fault and you are never edit warring or rude. Why don't you try to live up to AGF? The Banner talk 21:20, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...and if the cap fits Banner! Cassianto ^talk 21:35, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

Although I haven't worked on WP:CHINA for a while, please take a look. "My master, Annatar the Great, bids thee ^welcome!" 00:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 191: / Line 191: @@
 :You have such a lovely negative attitude. Everything is always my fault and you are never edit warring or rude. Why don't you try to live up to AGF? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">[[User:The Banner|<span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The&nbsp;Banner</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:The Banner|<i style="color:maroon">talk</i>]]</span> 21:20, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 ::...and if the cap fits Banner! [[User:Cassianto|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#0000ee">Cassianto</span>]][[User_talk:Cassianto|<sup>talk</sup>]] 21:35, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
+== AN/I ==
+Although I haven't worked on WP:CHINA for a while, [[WP:AN/I#Proposal: Indefinite block|please take a look]]. "<span style="font-family:Buxton Sketch; color:FireBrick">My master, [[Special:Contributions/Lieutenant of Melkor|<FONT COLOR="#DAA520">Annatar the Great</FONT>]], bids thee <sup>[[User talk:Lieutenant of Melkor|welcome!]]</sup></span>" 00:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC)