User talk:Bede735

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Gary Cooper[edit]

Been rather busy, I'll give it another read in a day or two!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:07, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Doctor. Bede735 (talk) 23:11, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── It's been 11 days since the last comment. I think Gary Cooper will pass the FAC. What do you say, Bede? Face-smile.svgSsven2 Speak 2 me 07:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm hoping, Ssven2. I was thinking of reaching out to one of the FAC coordinators to see if there's anything else I can do, but they seem pretty busy with the backlog. I'll wait another day or two. I saw that Shrocat did a peer review for Enthiran. I think that article will be a strong FA candidate. Bede735 (talk) 12:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I hope so. I have trimmed the article considerably. I think it's almost the size of your article. BTW, for Gary Cooper's PR, I happened to notice that you closed it on your own. Can users close the PRs they have created? — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 13:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, you can close it. The guidance for closing PRs is on WP:PRG on the Instructions tab. Bede735 (talk) 23:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Mark Knopfler[edit]

Hi, I think my correction was right at the two albums of Mark Knopfler. If you navigate through the Mark Knopfler chronology you suddenly end up in the Dire Straits chronology without coming back into Mark Knopfler. The previous album of All the Roadrunning was One Take Radio Sessions and not Private Investigations. All the other albums by Dire Straits aren't in the Mark Knopfler chronology as well. Best regards, KuifjeNL

Hello, KuifjeNL. The Mark Knopfler chronology in the Private Investigations infobox is below the Dire Straits chronology—there are two separate chronologies. I just confirmed this sequence in the Mark Knopfler chronology (forward and backward): The Trawlerman's Song > One Take Radio Sessions > Private Investigations (album) > All the Roadrunning. Thank you for adding Tracker to the Privateering infobox chronology. I look forward to its release. Bede735 (talk) 16:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

ITN for Rod McKuen[edit]

--SpencerT♦C 02:13, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: Gary Cooper photos[edit]

Let me try working with things like tineye and the like to see what might be able to be done about these photos. We hope (talk) 15:53, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, We hope. Any follow-up or guidance would be appreciated. Bede735 (talk) 15:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
I think this works fine. I'll upload the better quality version and follow the Gable photo information as an example. Thank you. Bede735 (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • File:Gary Cooper-Helen Hayes in A Farewell to Arms.jpg This one should be fine now. I checked on the film and other materials (photos, etc. are in artwork); neither the film nor the material related to it were renewed. Have indicated this on the Commons file and found a larger copy I uploaded. We hope (talk) 17:16, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • File:Lili Damita-Gary Cooper in Fighting Caravans.jpg This should also be OK now. Checked the renewals and found the film and other materials weren't renewed. Changed the Commons file to reflect this. We hope (talk) 17:39, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • The news on The Virginian screenshot isn't so good. The film was, of course, renewed, and was re-released in the 1930s and 1940s (I stopped counting at that point). There are, however, photos of the film which were published in Paramount ads which had no notices and in film magazines. We can go with one of those as either PD no notice, in the case of an ad or PD-not renewed, if it's from a film magazine. This is from Picture Play magazine pages 78-79 October 1929, published by Street & Smith. I've checked periodical renewals for the years 1956 and 1957-the title wasn't renewed. I've found larger copies of these photos shown in the two=page spread: photo 1, photo 2, and photo 3. Let me see what else I can match from the film to ads or old magazines. We hope (talk) 18:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Talking Screen page 58 January 1930 Dell Publications. photo. Check of periodical renewals for the years 1957 and 1958. The title wasn't found on the renewal list. We hope (talk) 20:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • eBay photo front photo back Paramount on front with no copyright marks; none on back either with the first date stamp being January 21, 1930. The photo may clean up OK, but if not, here's another copy. We hope (talk) 20:24, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • File:Gary Cooper 1903.jpg Found a copy in a Modern Screen story about Gary Cooper from 1933. Checked the magazine for renewal and it wasn't renewed. I made the changes to the Commons file information so this one's good to go too! :) We hope (talk) 20:58, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
That is great news! I was hoping not to lose that one. Of the Virginian photos, I like two of the ones you found, which I'll upload. We can decide which one goes in the article later. You work fast. Bede735 (talk) 21:09, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
From my end of this work, I feel like I'm taking forever to get anywhere, so it's nice to hear that someone sees this as being fast! :) We hope (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
I like the one you found for Saratoga better than the previous one! :) We hope (talk) 22:48, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Enthiran/archive1[edit]

I have opened the peer review for the film. Please do suggest any changes that I should make before I go for FAC. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 06:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I will review the article and provide comments by the weekend. Bede735 (talk) 12:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
That's funny. You made that last FAC change just before I made it. Thanks. Bede735 (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

FLC request[edit]

Hi! Hope you are well. Would you mind commenting on Kareena Kapoor Khan filmography's FLC? If not, it's okay. :) --FrankBoy (Buzz) 13:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Frank. I reviewed the list and provided my comments on the FLC page. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 15:22, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I have responded quite promptly to your queries. --FrankBoy (Buzz) 21:19, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Cooper now a Featured Article[edit]

Congratulations! I am so pleased. Loud applause! Tim riley talk 17:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Tim, that is very kind. This first time through has been an adventure. I really enjoyed working with you and the other experienced hands who contributed so much to this effort. Sincerely, Bede735 (talk) 11:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
I award this Original Barnstar to User:Bede735 for determined and scholarly work in getting Gary Cooper to FA – Tim riley talk 17:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thoroughly deserved Bede, well done! Give me a bell if you'd be up for somebody like John Wayne..♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Doctor, for the kind words, and for your guidance, reviews, and support along the way. As for John Wayne, you're reading my mind. Bede735 (talk) 23:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Enthiran/archive1[edit]

I have opened the FAC for Enthiran. Feel free to leave comments. BTW, congrats on Gary Cooper. Face-smile.svgSsven2 Speak 2 me 14:22, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Ssven2. I will leave comments on the FAC page within a few days. Bede735 (talk) 14:36, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

The Sound of Music[edit]

The editor who keeps adding the Gene Kelly quote is becoming problematic. Can I get your opinion at Talk:The_Sound_of_Music_(film)#popular_with_people.2C_not_with_industry, and then we can start to formulate a discussion based consensus about what should and should not be in the article. Betty Logan (talk) 18:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I'll respond shortly. Bede735 (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello Bede735. Just wanted to let you know that you have not been mentioned by name but this post Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive269#forum shopping advice is about the situation that you have been involved in. I don't think a response is required but I did think that you should know about it. Cheers and have a good weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 00:15, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, MarnetteD. Yes, I saw that. I suspect this one will not be around that long based on their edit history. I admire the patience you and Betty show with this type of nonsense. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 00:39, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
You are welcome and thank you as well for your kind words. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 00:42, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

John Wayne[edit]

I was planning on requesting biographies through the grant at a later date once I've finished Kubrick but you could always do so and I help out with online sources. You can request as many books on Wayne as you like here See mine at here for how it works. They'll send the books to you if approved. If you could apply you could mention my name too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:34, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

This is a great resource, thank you. I have biographies by Eyman, Eliot, Munn, Olsen, and Davis. Eyman's is the most scholarly and comprehensive. I'm still working on The Sound of Music article, but I'll take a look at the Wayne article and start thinking about the structure and approaches we could take, and then send you my thoughts. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 12:04, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
That might just be enough I think!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Sound of Music box office[edit]

Glad to see things settle down at The Sound of Music article. The article is on my watchlist and I must say I am impressed with your work in the last few weeks. When I was researching the List of highest-grossing films I came across quite a bit of box office information for it (including archived contemporary news articles); I have it all bookmarked, so would you like me to post it all up on the talk page for your convenience? The financials were pretty sensational at the time and it set a number of milestones and records. Betty Logan (talk) 08:52, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Betty, I appreciate that very much. Your box office information would be very helpful in developing that section in a substantive way, following your example on Gone With the Wind. I also have some interesting repeat customer statistics that explain the impressive early numbers in key cities. In addition to the Box office section, I would like to add one more section to capture the historical assessment from more recent film criticism. The Television and home media section still needs to be sourced. I'll also update the lead to reflect the current article, and I'll do a copyedit of the plot. It goes without saying that any changes or guidance from you are welcome. After this work is done, would you have time to check the article against the B-class criteria? Also, I'd like to bring the article to GAN when its ready. Would you be interested in being the GA reviewer? Bede735 (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
I have dumped the sources on the talk page and attempted to organize it chronologically, but box-office wasn't tracked like it is today in the 60s so some of the dates it set records are a bit vague. Feel free to use/leave out what you believe to be relevant/irrelevant. I will be more than happy to check it against the B-class criteria, but it would be inappropriate for me to undertake the GA review given my involvement in the article. What I will do though is perform a thorough B-class assessment to iron out any potential hurdles ahead of the GA review, and of course I will be on hand throughout the GA review. Betty Logan (talk) 09:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
The box office information you provided is impressive. I will have a first pass by the weekend. Thank you for your help. Bede735 (talk) 11:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Re: Sound of Music[edit]

We're past 1963, where non-renewal could be hoped for, and by this time most posters, photos and lobby cards were copyright marked, what about trying to see what kinds of ads were available for the film? Most advertisers had not copyright marked their ads and you might be able to find some photos in them and then "match" the photos to larger ones. We hope (talk) 00:52, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I suspected it would not be easy. All of the publicity photos that I've come across are indeed copyright marked. I will start searching for old ads as you suggest, and perhaps something will turn up. Thank you. Bede735 (talk) 02:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Enthiran FAC 2.0[edit]

I have opened the 2nd FAC for the article. Please do let me know if you would like to make any comments. Thanks. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 02:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC) ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Happy to inform you that Enthiran has been promoted! My first FA success! Face-smile.svgSsven2 Speak 2 me 02:04, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations, Ssven2, on a job well done. You faced a pretty tough initial FA review back in March, but you stayed the course and did not give up. Now its on to TFA. Bede735 (talk) 13:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
The best bet would be 12 December this year, which is Rajinikanth's birthday. It is widely celebrated day all over India and Enthiran, Tamil's cinema's current highest-grossing film, would be a nice birthday gift to him from us. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 13:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Hemingway SunValley.jpg[edit]

Why did you change Bobbie Powell to Clara Spiegel against the source [1]? Materialscientist (talk) 00:26, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I see conflicting sources for the woman's identity, so I changed the image page description to indicate the woman is Bobbi Powell per the source. Bede735 (talk) 01:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)


Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Gary Cooper
Thank you, user with a minimal personal page, for quality articles, beginning with Lavant, Tyrol, and today Gary Cooper, improved by cutting and a clear infobox, for adding to the sound of music by improving the film and artists such as Gordon Lightfoot, for "Carpe diem", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für Ihre Freundlichkeit, Gerde. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Bede735 (talk) 11:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
A year ago, you were recipient no. 1206 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Kleine Scheidegg and Grosse Scheidegg[edit]

Hi. I notice that you reverted my moves of these two articles to append Pass to their names. I guess I'm trying to get my head around the naming of passes; for many (eg. Klausen Pass, Joch Pass, Susten Pass, Grimsel Pass and Brünig Pass) we include Pass as part of the name, whilst for some (and you are suggesting Kleine Scheidegg and Grosse Scheidegg belong in this group), we don't. Whilst clearly WP:COMMONNAME applies, this is more a case of WP:PRECISION than the more usual application of COMMONNAME in trying to distinguish between two different names.

Perhaps I'm trying to be over-consistent here, but surely the same WP:PRECISION considerations should apply equally to all passes?. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 12:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Chris. The common name for a primary topic typically governs the name of an article if disambiguation is not required. If you check reliable English sources on the topic, you will not find references to "Kleine Scheidegg Pass", but simply the place name "Kleine Scheidegg". WP:PRECISION states that "titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but no more precise than that." The current title is precise in that the mountain pass article is the primary topic and there is no other "Kleine Scheidegg" competing for that article name. The film titled Kleine Scheidegg (film) is not the primary topic, and so requires disambiguation. WP:NATURAL states, "If the topic is not primary, the ambiguous name cannot be used and so must be disambiguated." While there is value in consistency, it should not be applied simply for the sake of consistency alone. In the case of mountain passes, you can see the variety of mountain pass place names here: Mountain passes of the Alps. If you think there's value in exporing the issue further, perhaps open a discussion on one of the project pages—WikiProject Mountains or WikiProject Switzerland—to get a broader perspective from other editors. Both are beautiful places well worth visiting. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 12:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Gary Cooper[edit]

I see your point about Gary Cooper's "cause of death" as being multiple organ failure. Savolya (talk) 14:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Bessie Braddock[edit]

My grateful thanks to you for your kindly intervention, re images, on the Braddock FAC page. It must be tiresome to you when experienced editors are unable to deal with what are presumably straightforward image issues, but there we are; we need help. Please let me know if I can return the favour at some future date. Brianboulton (talk) 15:59, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Glad to lend a hand, Brian. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 20:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Olivia De Havilland[edit]

The page of Ms. Olivia De Havilland has improved enormously in quality over the past years and it is evident that you are the reason for this. I have no question, except this one: When will there be a discussion to nominate the page for Wikipedia:Good articles. Your opinion? Radiohist (talk) 18:36, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Radiohist (talk · contribs). That's very kind of you to say. I just took a quick look at the article, and it is currently rated at Start and C-class. So first it would need to be re-assessed to see if it meets B-class criteria. Right now it is close. I think with a little work it could be assessed a B-class article. After that, it's usually a good idea to do a WP:PR peer review using GA criteria as the standard. This will bring in additional editors (and a good copy editor) to review the article to ensure that the WP:GAN process goes as smoothly as possible. It's also an opportunity to identify additional areas of content and strengthen the article, possibly making it eligible for WP:FA in the long run. I think she deserves a featured article. I'll take a closer look this weekend and do some cleanup. If you're interested in working on it, please feel free. Checking citation links is a good place to start. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Wow, you did great work at the page since January. De Havillands looks already like a Good article and I hope it will be one in the future. Congratulations! --Clibenfoart (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Clibenfoart. That's kind of you to say. I'm preparing the article for Good Article nomination now—a small gift for her upcoming one hundredth birthday. Bede735 (talk) 22:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Bede735. I was stalking Corrine's talk page and I saw your request for help with Olivia's article so I jumped in too with some MoS edits that should help tip the scale toward a future FA promotion. Please ask me about each edit I made and I can tell you its significance to an FA. I know you are only going for GA now, but why not plan for FA? I noticed you appeared to be thanking Corinne for my edits, so I just wanted to clarify that it was her stalker that did the edits and not her 718smiley.svg I am not here for any credit; only to avoid confusion. By the way, I was shocked to learn she was still alive. She is one of the original movie stars, and the rest are all gone now. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
My apologies, Checkingfax, I misunderstood the message on Corrine's page. I thought she was using another account. Thank you for your edits. While my goal is for TFA on July 1, I know it's a long shot. We'll give it the old college try, though. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 02:54, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Peer review request for Eega[edit]

Hi, Bede. Been a while. How are things with you? Great job on the de Havilland article BTW. One of my fellow editors is planning to take the 2012 film Eega to FAC. He has opened up a PR here. Do feel free to leave comments there. Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 09:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Ssven2. I have not seen the film, but I will read it during the week and provide my comments. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 12:02, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


I'll try to look at this today but I've got Krimuk's article to review too and some other requests. I need a few more days off really!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:45, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Doctor. Bede735 (talk) 10:52, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Tomorrow, promise!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:28, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Nominate Olivia for GA and I'll review it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Will do. Thank you. Bede735 (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Doctor, I submitted the article for GAN. The banner is displayed on the talk page, but it has not yet appeared on the WP:GAN#STAGE page. Bede735 (talk) 15:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Eiger Sanction Soundtrack.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:The Eiger Sanction Soundtrack.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

The image should be deleted, as its original fair use is no longer applicable. Bede735 (talk) 02:19, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Olivia de Havilland[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Olivia de Havilland you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 17:00, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Olivia de Havilland may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Havilland and her mother moved to 2337 Nella Vista Avenue in the [Los Feliz, Los Angeles|Los Feliz]] section of Los Angeles.{{sfn|Matzen|2010|p=50}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Olivia de Havilland may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • to do with that English scene, I had nothing to do with that style of film."{sfn|Kass|1976|p=63}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:35, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Olivia de Havilland[edit]

The article Olivia de Havilland you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Olivia de Havilland for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

A teamwork barnstar for you![edit]

Team Barnstar Hires.png The Teamwork Barnstar
Good job with working collaboratively on promoting the worthy Olivia de Havilland article to Good Article status. Thank you too, for increasing the size of images proportionally instead of reducing their size to the detriment of readers that have vision impairments. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:10, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Checkingfax. I appreciate your focus on MOS:ACCESS. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 00:11, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
For getting Olivia de Havilland to GA status! Keep up the good work, Bede735. Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 23:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Ssven2, for the kind gesture and your improvements to the article. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Peer review of Olivia de Havilland[edit]

I'm somewhat dismayed that you have chosen to revert my copy edits on the above article. What on earth makes you think that your version is in anyway better? CassiantoTalk 01:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

You may also like to respond to my quite serious observation that the article is at a size which it really shouldn't be. The copy editing needed is far more than I think you realise. In its current state, the article will almost certainly get you kicked out of WP:FAC on size alone. The writing has elements of POV and the prose is a long way off of being what is considered to be acceptable at FA level. CassiantoTalk 02:03, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Cassianto. I agree that most of your recent changes improved the article. I reverted three changes. I generally avoid ending sentences in a preposition--an editorial preference. I also retained the "prestige" phrase because it sets up the quote that follows (appearing in a Reinhardt production back then was a big deal). Finally, regarding "plays" versus "played", I use the former convention, for example, "In Alibi Ike, de Havilland plays Dolly Stevens, the girlfriend of a baseball player ..." This sounds correct to me, because in the film she "plays" (the film still exits). If you feel strongly about this, I can make the global change. I see both conventions used in FA film articles. Lastly, I know the article at 12,191 words of readable prose is too long. I'm planning to trim out the sections dealing with the lesser known films. Bede735 (talk) 02:18, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Fine, but the whole point of a peer review is to discuss things. I assume you want to take this to FAC? CassiantoTalk 02:22, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Re the plays/played thing, I get that. But the moment has passed; she filmed the role years ago, therefore she played it. She doesn't get into costume to play the role every time the film appears on television. CassiantoTalk 02:24, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate your changes, Cassianto—most of which I agree with. I only reverted a few minor wording choices. Regarding "play" versus "played", I understand your logic, but the other convention is commonly used in many film reviews and articles. Let me look into it more, and if necessary I can make this change globally. This will at least ensure consistency in the article. Bede735 (talk) 02:30, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Again, maybe this is a personal thing, and you're right, consistency is key, but I've certainly never struggled using my version. See my last FA as an example. CassiantoTalk 02:36, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Olivia PR[edit]

Bede735, I do feel that its better for the article to get copyedited before FAC (you can ask fellow editors like Dr. Blofeld himself for instance; he did help me a lot in Enthiran.) BTW, Cassianto is quite right about trimming the article. I will probably, most likely face such issues with Richard Burton (Its already 70 kbs in its current state!). I see that you have begun trimming it; try aiming for Gary Cooper's size. Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 07:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Ssven2. As I mentioned to John on the peer review page, I am in the process of trimming the article, including removing some of the lesser important films. In the past few days I've reduced the article by over 1000 words of readable prose to 11,208 words of readable prose. I will have the article at under 10,000 by the weekend. If there are any sections you think should significantly reduce, let me know on the PR page and I'll address them. Gary Cooper became a featured article with 10,599 words of readable prose. Olivia is currently at 11,208 words of readable prose—not that far off. I'll have it under 10,000 by Monday. I'll also do the non-free screen captures over the weekend. Thanks again for that idea. Bede735 (talk) 11:53, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello Ssven2. Thanks for your help with the screen captures. The one of her accepting her Oscar is a great addition; I don't know how I missed that one. I think the article has a good number of images at this point, illustrating her varied roles. I will leave the lead image in place for now. Last night I completed my copyedit of the article. I reduced the size of the article by over 2,000 words of readable text (well under Coop), eliminated sections dealing with the lesser films, and reduced the number of quotations throughout the article. I invited John to do his review, if he's still interested. I invited a few others to provide feedback. If I get sufficient support for FA I'll move forward with it. If not, that's okay too. Bede735 (talk) 11:58, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Bede, I just want to apologize for not honoring my word to look over the Olivia article this weekend. It was on my to-do list until a couple of editors got into a mess overhauling some templates I had created so I felt obligated to prioritize that. I plan to look over your article today though. Betty Logan (talk) 12:04, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Betty, I appreciate you letting me know. I'll keep the PR open at least another week. Bede735 (talk) 12:10, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Great going, Bede735. Do try for FAC. Its not everyday you get to celebrate your centennial alive! Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 13:43, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Anbe Sivam PR[edit]

Hello, Bede735. I've listed the article for PR here as I wish to take it FA. Feel free to leave comments. Thanks. Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 01:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I am not familiar with the film, Ssven2, but will review it against WP:FA? later this week and provide my feedback by this weekend. Bede735 (talk) 01:27, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eega/archive1[edit]

Thanks for commenting at the now archived peer review for Eega. The article is currently at FAC and i look forward for constructive comments from you. Yours friendly, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 03:03, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


How are you doing? Did you decide against FAC afterwards on what Cassianto said or are you still keen on promoting it? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:38, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I have no plans for the article. Bede735 (talk) 22:06, 30 June 2016 (UTC)