User talk:Nehrams2020/Archive 2

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

Contents

WP:FILMS Newsletter[edit]

The November 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 23:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Samuel L. Jackson[edit]

Two problems:

  1. The sections should read: "Fair use rationale for Samuel L. Jackson"
  2. You need to state why it is important to use those images in the Samuel L. Jackson. Right now it reads like a fair use rationale for use in the film articles themselves. Basically, you're probably going to add something about how those films are the paradigm roles that he's been in.

--SeizureDog 01:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thing needed[edit]

I saw your message in film project. Just wanted you to know I have applied for AWB, which can add tags and preset corrections to a series of articles much faster than doing it by hand. I haven't been approved yet, but I think I qualify and you too. I would suggest you apply too (unless you are not using Windows). I could also help you out once I get permission to use it, but even so two are more effective than one. Hoverfish 09:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Fims box[edit]

Thanks for the note; I actually was the one who made the new infobox tag, I just wanted to make sure that it'd be acceptable for me to create one. Oh, and thanks about the heads-up for putting the infobox needed tags on the talk page; I'd always thought they went on the article page. On that note, are the copyedit and wikify tags supposed to go on the talk page as well? I always see them on article pages (which is why I assumed the infobox needed tags went there too). -Elizabennet 01:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

New lists of films appeared[edit]

Hi Nehrams, look please here for this new issue: User talk:Cbrown1023#Note to the editor and follow links from there. We have to either integrate this new series or take some decision all together. Hoverfish 22:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Seconds before your message I voted for keep under condition (see afd). I am not sure what is the right way to proceed with the lists. Ernst has so much enthusiasm and is able of making things presentable too. He is asking for help but doesn't notice we have our hands more than full. I'd rather he would post in film project, but he keeps posting in user space, so we don't get wider feedback. I even asked him for sources but got a reply without any answer. I warned him he would be tagged too. I wish he would join in with our efforts, but surely he is free to do as he wishes. On the lists by country I can offer no important opinion, as I haven't checked how many of his lists overlap other project work. The presentation looks good. He also went along with my suggestion and stoped giving red links for films without an article. About the films in year, there definitely has to be a merger before it all gets out of hand. I am still in doubt which is the best way to merge. On the one hand it would be good to merge his lists into the existing ones (unlinked reds, unless notable). Yet we may start getting feedback that the comprehensive years in film are getting overly long. I really wish we would get more members to decide on this properly. For my part I have my hands so full lately (wiki and everyday) that I don't know where to start. But that's not the point. I am also trying to make an newsletter article to mention the need for guidelines in red linked titles, but my concentration is very poor at the moment. Hoverfish 07:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, here's a link: List of 1896 films, but the navigation takes back to years in film, some earlier lists have been turned to redirects (to years in film). It is a mess presently. Have to run :) Hoverfish 09:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Edit Count[edit]

Dude, you are gonna hit 10,000 like any edit now... like 2 more at last count!!!! Big milestone.... good job! Cbrown1023 23:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

About the 10,000th... be careful! You are cutting it close. For the GA, I now you were thinking about it, I feel a little guilty, I was kinda "eavesdropping" on you by seeing the note you posted on Hoverfish's talk page (all your user talk's are on my watchlist...). We have a listing of films and film characters (basically stuff in the project) already at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Assessment#Distinguished items (but it is gonna be moved soon, so that link won't be right forever...). However, we don't have one for other film-related topics... if you want to keep one up, that would be great!!! (it's also great that you want to contribute to the newsletter!) Just make sure you know, it is a lot of work! It's so confusing, the GA nom page is huge and you've got a ton of stuff coming in. You also don't know when they are added to WP:GA. I'm just having trouble keeping up with the project ones! All in all, congrats on your 1k and if you want to keep a listing up, great! Cbrown1023 23:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Good work[edit]

Thanks for adding the movie poster to the Emerald Forest page. I really love that film which was why I started the article. It looks much better now, thanks :o) Tom Michael - Mostly Zen Baby tao.jpg (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

New navigation in lists of film !!![edit]

I know you are busy with other things, but can you please take a look at what this navigation is useful for in the Lists of films, between Years in film and By lettes? Hoverfish 18:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, what you say makes sense, presentation-wise it's a fine template. But no decision I know was ever taken that we take all the Films released in 19xx from the Years and start with them a series of Films in year (which if properly decided I will contribute also work to forward it). What is my main concern is that E.S.Blofel had been compiling some early years of films where the Years in film lists were almost empty. So I asked if we should bring all these films simply in the years. But if we take some decision on something clear we can act in some communicated way abpout it. Yet no discussion about it in Film Project or List member circle. So since he was refering to Pegship about it, I even asked Pegship to tell me what is going on, because this pushes my patience with sudden undiscussed moves that will involve a lot of our time to make happen. Hoverfish 19:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

One note, is that if we do this change, we can't just strip the years in film from "Other films", but we will have to filter some descriminating factor and let some films there too. So, who does what and how? Hoverfish 19:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I wasn't meaning to put it on your shoulders, but if you feel more detatched, maybe it's best you make an introduction. I will follow when needed. Hoverfish 19:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Read my proposals on the main wiki film talk page. Everyone will realize my full potential soon I hope!!

If the lists of films are at present regarded as unencyclopedic I propose that changes are made to List of films by country and List of films by date maybe years. Rather than delete them I think each country should have the list of notbale films in order by year of release rather than an A-Z that the categories will eventually create anyway. This is far more useful which I believe Thai films and that have already done. Alos the format could be changed to a box With year and date of release in chronoligcal order and director of film by country. I notcied debate over the dates of film releases. If lists were drawn up of films by year then the same could eventually be done, from Januray 1st to december the 31st by year. This will not only be an expansion of the main pages e.g 1947 in film and Cinema of .... but will give more specific infomration about date of release in chronological order which is not present. This would also be a highly knowledgeable part of the Cinema of each country and year. Also the probelm with the redirects would be avoided if the lists accomplished somethin which categories cannot. E.g List of 1947 films would have pages as part of 1947 in film conveying infomration about films with date of rleaease in order of that year. So eventually we end up with an extremely useful timeline of all notable films released from 1894 to 2007. Can you see the potential for this?

Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments on Drew Carey[edit]

Not a bad start. It is definately close. A few issues:

  • Mix of reference styles. At least one of the references is a parenthetical reference. Fix this to an inline reference like all of the others.
  • Organization: Its a little jumpy. I might try the following organizational structure:
    • Early Life
    • Stand-Up Career
    • Acting Career
      • Early Roles
      • The Drew Carey Show
      • Whose Line is it Anyways
      • Other Roles & Appearences
    • Promotional Work
    • Writing
    • Personal Life
      • Political Involvement
      • Sports Involvement
      • Photography
    • Awards & Honors
    • Filmography
  • His professional relationship with people like Kinney and Stiles needs to be better developed. Kinney's connection to his work seems very important, and it is confusing the way it is handled in the article.
  • If you use the organization I list above, or something like it, then use the {{main}} tag for The Drew Carey Show and Whose Line Is It Anyways.

The article is well referenced, which is a great start, and I like it mostly, but the jumbled organization is a weak point. Fix that, and make the minor fixes I recommend, and I think this could pass Good Article status. I hope I have been some help. --Jayron32 03:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Responding to comments on my talk page::
      • By promotional work I mean notable ad campaigns. Right now some of this is shoved in with the Drew Carey Show information. Move to a new section and expand.
      • Copy and paste THIS to reference the book with an inline reference: <ref name=auto>Carey, Drew (1997). Dirty Jokes and Beer: Stories of the Unrefined. New York: Hyperion. ISBN: 078688939X</ref>. If you want to reference the book in other locations, use the following tag: <ref name=auto />.
      • Looking at it now, the organization is MUCH improved. I would also recommend expanding the early roles bit (I assume his early relationship with Kenney will be fleshed out here). Also, in his stand-up career, I do remember some notable 1/2 hour and full-hour comedy specials on major netowrks like HBO, showtime, Comedy Central, etc. You might want to add those to the Stand Up section. Not required, but it would be nice. IMDB should have info on these. I am impressed with the work you have done in such a short time. --Jayron32 04:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Further responses: Hey, the article looks GREAT now. Just one minor issue: The information about the A&W/McDonalds ad campagain is still entirely non-sequitur. That it occured during the filming of the Drew Carey show is incedental. Either move it to a new section on advertising and promotional work, or expunge it. It seems like it belongs in the article, but its too short to be an entire section to itself, and it doesn't belong where it is now. Also, the sentance: The show ran for a total of 215 episodes between 1998 and 2006 (a couple of episodes were released this year). Is awkward. Skip the parenthetical comment. That the show aired 215 episodes from 1998-2006 is enough. Oh, and I am not actually a member of WP:GA. Membership is not required to promote articles. I drop by occasionally to nominate my own articles from time to time, and when I do I fins a few to comment on. I don't really spend enough time there to consider myself a member. I just try to apply the WP:GA criteria in a fair and equitable manner, and promote articles that meet those criteria, which is all that is required and any editor can do it. Also, my involvement in the article to this point is substantial. While I feel it should be promoted to GA status, I must recuse myself from promoting it directly since I feel I have been so involved with it. Plus, seeing an article get nominated and passed so fast without anyone else getting the chance to see it and comment on it smacks of collusion and conflict of interest. Please go ahead and nominate it, and see what happens. I have a pretty good sense for these things, and I am quite sure it will get passed. Good luck! --Jayron32 06:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
You know, based on your comments, I may end up officially joining after all. I have really enjoyed working with you on these pages, and look forward to doing so in the future. If you have any other articles you want me to look at, let me know, and I will see what I can do! If I put my humility aside for the moment, I do feel I have a skill for this sort of thing. To answer your question about GA vs. Featured, the vetting process for a featured article is MUCH more involved, and requires community consensus. GA's need only one editor to like the article to promote it. Also, GA criteria are MUCH less stringent, and many GA articles, by the very nature of their subject, could never be promoted to Featured status. Featured articles also have a chance to make the mainpage, and thus are under much closer scrutiny. For all of these reasons, the GA notice only appears on the talk page. People who are committed to improving an article should always look over the talk page anyways, and will see the GA status and act accordingly... --Jayron32 07:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Congrats on getting this to pass. You worked really hard on it! You deserve a barnstar:

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
for tireless work in getting the Drew Carey and Samuel L. Jackson articles up to GA status! Jayron32 21:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

List of recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry[edit]

You are one of several people who was instrumental in cleaning up my List of recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry page. This page was the first page I created and still remains the page that I have made the most edits to on wikipedia (95 edits). Thank you for your assistance. Since this page received so much more cleanup assistance than most of my other pages I am wondering if it was a focus article of a WikiProject Group. Do you know of any such designation? It would be helpful because I will be self nominating for admin tomorrow or Tuesday. Please reply at my userpage with any info you may have. TonyTheTiger 17:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

You mentioned you would be receptive to a candidacy notice. Adminship candidacy posted at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship. TonyTheTiger 01:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the support in my RfA! What article are you working on right now (GA's for... Samuel L. Jackson, Drew Carey!)? Cbrown1023 21:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that makes me sad :(. Plus, the fact that he isn't really in good standing means he shouldn't vote anyway (you said 3RR, he blanked a page he did not like, obviously does not know policies). But, I'm not going to try to get his vote removed because he is entitled his opinion, I just hope it ends well! :) Good luck on your finals! Cbrown1023 22:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Blind audition[edit]

Hello,

Thank you for your stub submission. You may wish to note that it is preferable to use a stub template from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types instead of using simply {{stub}}, if you can.

Thanks! --Vox Causa 03:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Support for a potentially great admin[edit]

Thanks for letting me know. From my first day in Films I noticed Cbrown's potential and wished him success in adminship. Now about politics, I'd rather have Zaphod Beeblebrox for president, but I don't let this overshadow my evaluation of worthy wikipedians. Hoverfish 08:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

66.99.49.36[edit]

Hi Nehrams2020,

There are no strict policies governing the vandal warning system. Essentially, it's just a matter of judgement and picking the method that works best for you. In this case, I decided not to block 66.99.49.36 because his last warning was issued on November 8. That's more than a month ago. Additionally, 66.99.49.36 seems to be a shared IP (most likely a school), so the long history of vandalism is probably the work of numerous curious students not a single malicious user. I hope this answers your questions. Feel free to contact me if you ever need help dealing with a vandal. Best wishes, Canderson7 (talk) 23:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for voting[edit]

I appreciate the feedback that I received during the RfA process. Unfortunately, I withdrew my candidacy. However, your participation is appreciated. I have made my New Years Resolution (effective immediately) to attempt to vote on at least 50 WP:XFD/week (on at least 5 different days), to spend 5 hours/week on WP:NPP, to be active in WikiProjects and to change the emphasis of my watchlist from editorial oversight to vandalism prevention. I have replaced several links that I had on my list to some that I think are more highly vandalized (Tiger Woods, Barry Bonds, my congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr., my senator Barrack Obama and Jesse Jackson). My first day under my newly turned leaf was about what I hope a typical day to be. I quickly found a vandal, made a few editorial changes to Donald Trump, voted at WP:CFD and WP:AFD, continued attempted revitalization of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chicago and proposed a new stub type as a result of WP:NPP patrol. I hope this will broaden my wikipedia experience in a way that makes me a better administrator candidate. I hope to feel more ready to be an admin in another 3000 or so edits. TonyTheTiger 16:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The Mummy 3[edit]

I'd like to request for The Mummy 3 (film) to be moved to The Mummy 3. Per naming conventions for films, (film) should only be added if there are other articles about The Mummy 3. However, since there are none, it's not necessary to have (film) at the end of it. The Mummy 3 was a redirect to The Scorpion King, which is inaccurate, and I've fixed it to redirect to The Mummy 3 (film). I think the pages should be reversed. Is this possible to do? —Erik (talkcontrib) - 04:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:Dec News[edit]

Yeah, we have a listing. I keep it up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Spotlight... However, I don't have the actors ones on there... I just have the films and film characters. I would be more than happy to have you add your information on other film-related items to the newsletter. :) We should probably get the newsletter out this week (like before the 22nd) because of all the Holiday's coming up. Cbrown1023 03:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. It's four GA so far this month, "She Shoulda Said 'No'!" was just added. :) Cbrown1023 03:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
How about we just mention December's articles but add a link to the full listing. In the newsletter, feel free to talk about the other film-related (actors/directors...) in the newsletter. For your listing of actors, directors... I had added the Other film-related section. Feel free to fill it all up as you see fit. Also note that the Main Author(s) doesn't need to be filled, I don't really like it since this is a collaborative project but kept it anyway. It can also be tough to figure out who the main author is sometimes. A definite yes to your new templates. Cbrown1023 03:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Another thing, films and film characters go in the regular ones because they are both within our scope as opposed to actors and directors which just relate to our scope (so they go in the other section...) I feel like I sound confusing, contact me if anything is unclear (well, all of it is probably unclear... contact me if there is anything you do not understand...) Cbrown1023 03:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm gonna be working on it, too... I'll be doing the department update. You can do the templates and GA/FA listings... If we ever edit conflict, let's just merge our changes. Then, we'll proofread and copyedit each other. I've already done the collaboration update. Cbrown1023 04:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, we should post that in the from the editors section for this months newsletter or, if you are talking about for the current newsletter, on the project talk page... we should also come up with a monthly deadline that is the same for every month to keep it less confusing. Cbrown1023 04:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. This month is just weird though because we have all these holidays: Christmas, Hannukah (I probably butchered the spelling...), Kwanza, New Year's Eve, New Year's Day... which make it so that fewer editors are on at those times (we assume this because it is the the english wikipedia...) Cbrown1023 04:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

How ironic, I was just thinking about that last night... but I'm wondering whether to put it in the newsletter or on the Project page or both... that's funny, I guess great minds think alike. :) Cbrown1023 04:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, just added some, I get an e-mail from AMC every week that has the next two weeks... please add any that I missed, especially the Christmas ones. Cbrown1023 04:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
What should we do about the rating? As you saw, I included it also... but it may be a little too America biased... I don't know... it's helpful so I guess we can just leave it. Cbrown1023 05:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Idk... I'm gonna add some stuff on our peer review department probably... I know Hover wanted to add some stuff, but I don't know if he still is. He wanted you two to write about the in film lists and about the Blofeld incident thing... I'm gonna go ask him... Cbrown1023 05:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Definately, you can put them in the genereral one if you would like... or a special one that just show those types (Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Spotlight#Other film-related)... Do whatever you think would be better. I trust your judgement. :) I'm gonna go to bed now cause I'm on the east coast (it's like 12:20...) and I'm gonna go see Eragon (film) tomorrow at like 11.... so g'night and happy editing! Cbrown1023 05:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a Miss Piggy?[edit]

What one hell of a job you've done getting the references together for The Blues Brothers (film). The article is looking good. I'm sure Jake and Elwood thank for your efforts. — WiseKwai 08:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Also my congratulations for your contributions (future ones too) to the Blues Brothers article. I hope it gets GA. Hoverfish 16:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! and a minor point of usage[edit]

Thanks for the congratulations and for splitting the references into two columns on Ginger Snaps. However, the endspoiler template should not have been added. I did not know this until I was peer-reviewing The Public Enemy and suggested to Cbrown to do the same thing that you did. He linked me to the template's usage (here) which specifies that it should not be used at the end of a section. It is definitely an obscure point, and one that I wouldn't mind changing. I'll look around to see what the general usage is and then ask for consensus on which way it should be.--Supernumerary 18:15, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Cinema navigation[edit]

Hi Nehrams, do you care to take a look at the bottom of my talk page and see if the new navigation is OK? Hoverfish 21:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

RfA & Newletter[edit]

Thanks. :) I'd appreciate it if you notify me of any help you'll need. About the newsletter, there should always be candidates on the page, so we shouldn't have to wait for that. I don't mind on the date, it's just that if it is after the 21st, I can't help (so you'll need to do it yourself or get Hover to help). Cbrown1023 03:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I do it using AWB (if you don't have it already, you should get it, the insturctions are on that page). The Outreach Department the information you need (link-only is what you want to use, unless they want full/no delivery). I just load the users from Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Participants/Member List, remove the users who want no/full delivery, run the program, and then later, deliver the full delivery ones by hand. Cbrown1023 03:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


RfA thanks!

Admin mop.PNG Thank you so much, Nehrams2020, for your gracious support in my RfA (48/1/0)! I am very happy that you trust me with this great honor and privilege. If at any time you think that I need to step back and take a deep breath or just want to talk, please contact me. Happy editing! Cbrown1023 03:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Smiley.svg


Matchmaker[edit]

Re: The Matchmaker (film), the camel case given in the IMDb profile may be wrong. The DVD cover clearly shows "Matchmaker." House of Scandal 09:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Pineapple[edit]

Hey Nehrams, I think you mave been too quick to call 71.146.70.233's edit vandalism. The edit wasn't just clearing content, he also rephrased one of the trivia items, and positively in my opinion. It may have been a good-faith edit. -SpuriousQ 08:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

New gnoming field[edit]

Hi, I'm trying myself with putting categories in films. Here's one I did for a test: Forget Paris. Do you think they are any not needed or any I missed? Hoverfish 19:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Still in thoughts about it. Shouldn't American films be sub-cat of English language films? Oh, don't worry about me. I've just recently read the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Library of Congress Classification and being very impressed, I'm vaguely trying to figure out the WikiProject Films Classification, if any. Hoverfish 22:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:Newsletter[edit]

I don't care either way, but it would definately take a lot of boring work to do it without it... I guess I'll just deliver it tomorrow unless you have any other ideas. I've also added the rest of the release dates for January because of your idea. This has caused me to also move the location of it down so that discussion comes first. If you need anything else, don't hesitate to contact me again. Oh, and I left Hoverfish take a peak, he is asked where it was on my talk page. :) Cbrown1023 22:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Tar pits[edit]

I saw your tar pits image and the rabbit. I can't help thinking of Sam n' Max. Does it ring a bell? Hoverfish 22:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Are we a go for the newsletter in like 10 minutes? or do you think we should wait. I know you are looking into AWB, so... what's the plan? Cbrown1023 23:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I was approved for AWB but even with Ms Network 2 I can't get it to install, so I gave up trying. Hope you have a better luck. About cats: I proposed to Her Pegship that she helps us start the Film Categorization thing. It will be a good day in Film Project when we have it straightened up. Oh, Sam n' Max are also comic books? I meant the superb adventure game Sam & Max Hit the Road. For better or worse, since I became a wikipedian games have faded in the past. Hoverfish 23:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Newsletter[edit]

The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Approved for AWB![edit]

Thank you for your recent application to use AutoWikiBrowser. I have approved your request and you should now be able to use the AWB application. Be sure to check every edit before you save it, and don't forget to check out the AWB Guide. You can get any help you need over on the AWB talk page. Feel free to contact me with any questions, Alphachimp 05:52, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

List of film series[edit]

Hi. I thinks it's about time to interfere in List of film series. Someone tried to do the only rational thing (ie. move its content to hexologies/dodecalogies). But another one put it back and wants it there. Could we start some vote on moving its content it permanently to where it belongs and turn this page to a small list of links to the actual series? By the way I did some category work in Category:Lists of films (rearranged some of its articles to subcats. I'm warming up for the creation of the Film categorization department. See my sandbox for first ideas. Hoverfish Talk 22:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I will start discussing in WP:Films as soon as I know what to say. I need to do some more research. For the moment I have created Category:Lists of films by genre and Category:Lists of films by technical issue (I didn't say "technology", because there as more technical issues that can fit here). Both are subcats of Lists of films. So I populated them and reduced a bit the amount of lose articles in the parent cat. Hoverfish Talk 11:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Notice[edit]

This is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Categorization has started. Any contributions in further developing it are warmly welcome. Hoverfish Talk 15:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

There is discussion going on about breaking down Category:American films. Your opinion about it would be most needed and appreciated in categorization. Hoverfish Talk 22:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Image Question[edit]

The type of license to use will depend on what type of permission the author gives you. It could be GFDL, Creative Commons, Copyright Free Use or the author might decide to release to the public domain. To credit the author do something like Image:Zebra finch.jpg. The source can be the link back to the Flickr page. Please post the text of the e-mail granting permission on the image talk page like I did at Image talk:Zebra finch.jpg, so there is no question about receiving permission. Remember the e-mail must be specific about what rights the author is granting, not just "permission" but "license under GFDL" or "permission for free use", etc. If the image on Flickr is already under a free license then you can just use the image and choose the same license as is used on Flickr. And also it cannot be a noncommercial type license or the image will eventually be deleted. -Regards Nv8200p talk 03:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The acceptable licenses are the "Attribution License" (Wikipedia tags {{cc-by}}, {{cc-by-2.0}} and {{cc-by-2.5|Attribution}}. {{cc-by-2.5|Attribution}} is the newest and preferred "Attribution License") and the "Attribution-ShareAlike License" (Wikipedia tags {{cc-by-sa}}, {{cc-by-sa-2.0}} and {{cc-by-sa-2.5|Attribution}}. {{cc-by-sa-2.5|Attribution}} is the newest and preferred "Attribution-ShareAlike License"). The other licenses are unacceptable on Wikipedia as they do not allow derivative works and/or do not allow commercial use. Hope that helps. -Nv8200p talk 13:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

LOL[edit]

Lol... that was a pretty funny vandal! ;) Happy New Year! Cbrown1023 02:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It was good and fun, thanks! It went to the Caribbean (sp?). I'd ask you how your holiday was, but, if I recall correctly, you are still on it! Is is going well, at least? Cbrown1023 02:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
No, not really. I just see a more tabs at the top of the page (like "history" and "edit this page"), "protect" and "delete". I get to see some special pages and features that regular users don't get to see (Special:Unwatchedpages, Special:Undelete/Wikipedia (3)). But yeah, I feel pretty comfortable with the tools, they're easy when you get used to them, it's the descision-making (such as when to delete/block) that's tough! ;) Cbrown1023 21:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm sure that you'll be able to use that camera to help WP greatly! Cbrown1023 21:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Country and language (Template discussion)[edit]

Shouldn't we wait a bit on these two kitties? Actually I would be happy to see you step in a bit on this issue in categorization. Hoverfish Talk 22:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

That's what I meant, but as you say, it's not big deal. There is this user who said we shouldn't be afraid of big categories, and I thought you may have to comment something for. I feel very strange about it. On the one hand I like one all inclusive "Films", on the other "your" A-Z-# lists are even better, since one finds also the years. About country, it's good to have also an A-Z list, but since to create too many comprehensive lists needs too much continious updating, the cats would make it better. Then there was the storm with Blofeld's changes. Finally I see so many long named categories (for awards and what not) that if we go too far, no one will be able to find anything, even the useful bits, in the categories of an article. If there was any mechanism which could combine given categories (for example we give 1985, American, English, Comedy as separate cats and "it" places the film in a composite "1985 American English-language comedies", where we can find all such films) it would be great. But I think this cannot happen in wikipedia. Hoverfish Talk 22:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Very nice edits you did. As I was going throught them I felt the need to see links for some entries. For example WP:LEAD would be useful after intro. Are there any articles for the other entries? Also WP:IA, WP:TRIV, WP:CITE could be of help. Hoverfish Talk 13:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, some good examples will help. Do it! Did you know about the new sortable tables? (see in my Notebook) Hoverfish Talk 18:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It might be repetitious or frustrating (thinking it links to various pages and getting the same). But I would let it so till we present it and hear other opinions. Hoverfish Talk 20:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC) - Actually whenever you think it's ready you can present it in the project and we take it from there. Hoverfish Talk 20:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I missed you edit in my talk page because of multiple messages. You have to make the table class="sortable" and read m:help:sorting for details. Hoverfish Talk 20:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to draw your attention to the project talk on the template. We could include it in the Film template with an IF switch for display/hide. Later we could do the same with the further upgrading tags. Shane sais he can do it. Hoverfish Talk 20:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

On photography interests[edit]

If you are interested in photography, I have some rather good ones I made in Munich few years ago. If you use my emailing facilitiy I could send them over. Hoverfish Talk 22:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

On what basis should I upload them? Does wikipedia welcome photography indiscriminately? Souldn't it be meant to accompany a certain subject? Hoverfish Talk 23:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I looked in Commons. I must first overcome this newcomer feeling that everything is too complicated, before I upload anything. Hoverfish Talk 21:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I got help from user Nv8200p and uploaded my first photo in Commons: Image:Ducks in Munich.JPG. I also started a gallery (via categories) for my next uploads. I'm waiting to hear if I did it right before I proceed with more. Hoverfish Talk 21:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

AWB update[edit]

No, it's just me. Actually the update is that there is something with my Windows2000 (I got NET v.2) and can't install it. But I will be soon installing a special version of XP (I think it's XP Fundamental), so it may work. "I'm going to go through all of the start articles" has an AWB feeling about it. Hoverfish Talk 20:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Outside program? It's in Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/fixer. Are we talking about the same thing? Hoverfish Talk 20:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

It's called CorHommo, I downloaded it but it asks only for disambiguation pages. So how do you navigate in articles? Hoverfish Talk 20:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Thanks[edit]

That's nothing, look at this one from Brad's page! No problem, though, it's fun reverting vandalism! :) (to some extent) Cbrown1023 21:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Edmond[edit]

Thanks for adding the film poster to the infobox -- it's a vast improvement. -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 15:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 2 8 January 2007 About the Signpost

Special: 2006 in Review Another newspaper columnist found to have plagiarized Wikipedia
Blogs track attempts to manipulate articles Nutritional beef cooks PR editor
WikiWorld comic: "Facial Hair" News and notes: Fundraiser continues, milestones
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Mee-Shee[edit]

I've been expanding this article, please take a look. If you think it now meets B class or have any comments on what's needed please tell me. (I know the plot section is short, but I've never seen this movie). CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Please also note there's not a lot of sources available on this movie. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm still working on it, I just found some stuff and added it just as you left that message. There is no Boxofficemojo info or Rotten Tomatoes info on it. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Newsletter: Spotlight[edit]

OMG, we're not even half-way through the month yet and we already have that many GAs and FAs!? I think they took your comment to heart! Cbrown1023 23:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Anything and everything should go into the newsletter, it should be concise enough to give all members information on where to find their little niche where they can contribute the greatest. So, yes, definately. :) Cbrown1023 23:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Night at the Museum[edit]

After a lengthy discussion, the general consensus appears to be that less is better. The majority has supported a brief overview of the plot, so please stop adding your detailed description that renders seeing the film unnecessary. Thank you! SFTVLGUY2 20:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Some users simply don't like Wikipedia to be informative[edit]

In particular User SFTVLGUY2 seems to decide what is enough for an article and even removes stub templates, considering "enough was said". How does one reason with this logic? I agree that long synopses should be an additional altenative to short ones. We had talk in the Project, but when we learned that subarticle with extended plot can't stand alone, the talk died down. So we are left where we were: Nothing was decided. We are still at the 500-700 word limit and that's guidelines. I am trying to find an argument, but you have met a particular trend of users there. Did you see my gallery link, btw? Hoverfish Talk 20:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

We have to ask our software experts if they can make a feature of hidden sections, that upon a click-here can expand. ;)Hoverfish Talk 20:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The last few hours there seems to be a problem with images in Wikipedia. It's happening to a lot of pages I visit. I commented on the film's talk. Hoverfish Talk 20:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way of plots, here is one you may like: The Blob (1988 film). Hoverfish Talk 20:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I know :) That's an extreme case I found adding infoboxes. The bad thing with the hide option of templates is that we will need subpages to put our extended plots in, and it may be a no-no again. I meant like the hide/show that appears for page elements. But I did find an editor who might help clear out if it's possile or not. Have a good trip back to student life and high speed internet. Hoverfish Talk 20:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Shooter[edit]

Whoops, how about that. I wasn't even focusing on adding film posters. That was stellar timing, haha. Cheers, fellow editor. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 20:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 3 15 January 2007 About the Signpost

Special: 2006 in Review, Part II New arbitrators interviewed
Cascading protection feature added WikiWorld comic: "Apples and Oranges"
News and notes: Fundraiser breaks $1,000,000, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Infobox request for Cypher[edit]

I added the {{infobox film}} that you requested in Cypher and I removed the {{needs film infobox}} from the article's discussion page. Check it again if you have time. --Dead3y3 Talk page 05:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back[edit]

Glad you like my photos. Once in a very long while I get in the mood for some good shots. The movie cameras were part of a profi job I did for our local archive. I have also some photo cameras but am missing the best one, so I won't upload any until I find the misplaced CD. The infobox campain has picked up speed. I'll do some now to warm up. Hoverfish Talk 13:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Recordings preserved in the National Recording Registry[edit]

You have contributed as an editor to the List of recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry. It is undergoing an overhaul according to the recent peer review that generated the following feedback. In addition to the changes there, it is undergoing stylistic changes that prevail at lists that have been selected as featured lists. Conversion to wikitable format began with 2002 today because most articles that reach featured list status are in this format. Feel free to convert additional years, add more columns, or add further details. Hopefully many of the editors who have helped edit this page to its pre review state will help improve it to a featured list quality level. I may not return to make further edits until next week. TonyTheTiger 21:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Spotlight[edit]

Yes, it is related to the project and should go under the normally heading. A way to check this is to see if the project banner is on its talk page. Cbrown1023 01:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure, and anyone can welcome a user, paste the following {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/Welcome|~~~~}}. Cbrown1023 01:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: WP:Films[edit]

Hey, thanks for the notice but it seemed almost like a welcome notice. I joined the project a number of months ago and have made a bunch of contribs. for it, adding article to the project, rating. I mean it's not big deal, but you might want to check who's new and who's not before you send a bunch of those things around. Ganfon 01:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

    • Oh yeah thats right! I did add to the participants late. I actually joined...probably around September or Aug. But only recently realized...I never listed myself under participants. I thought I did, but I didnt. So I'm sorry for the confusion. Keep up the great work though, you seem quite dedicated to the project. Ganfon 01:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Village pump (proposals)?[edit]

Hi, I am thinking of posting there about the collapsed/ible synopsis issue. Opinion? Hoverfish Talk 08:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and did it. See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Hoverfish Talk 17:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Today I did lots that haven't even been tagged for infobox. The thing is I also add images, categories and what not, unless they are really unimportant (IMO) entries, so it takes some extra time (but saves some from the next maintenance round). Hoverfish Talk 17:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Film infoboxes[edit]

Thanks for the reminder about updating the talk pages. I'm not as active in WikiProject Films compared to regular contributors such as yourself and your complement is appreciated. Alan Smithee 06:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Very easily done.[edit]

I just need an entire day to code it.... and I have one more full day before work kicks in full-time. Shane (talk/contrib) 08:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to say that generally it's better to make a board for all film members with programming skills wishing to help out with such things, so when we need something technical we don't load it on individual members, but post it there. For the collapsible synopsis, PhantomS volunteered. I don't want to misuse his good intention, but he could also be asked if he wishes to help in this. By the way the template is still up for work in my notebook, so we shouldn't modify/work on the archived version. Hoverfish Talk 08:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way, do you know how I can work on a template in my page without it showing in the categories involved? About the "tech board", I will gather soon info on members/admins and ask them if they want to participate. Hoverfish Talk 09:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The noinclude, as far as I can tell, works only within a template to exclude any extra text from transclusion. I have passed the issue to PhantomS, who volunteered and notified Shane about it. Hoverfish Talk 08:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Tomorrow Never Dies[edit]

Thanks, I'm (eventually) aiming to get all the Brosnan films to A-class. Trebor 20:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Template ready[edit]

Hi, I was caught up in an unexpected sockpuppetry case yesterday and didn't post you the news. PhantomS has the template ready, take a look at his work via my talk page and let's proceed. Hoverfish Talk 15:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No need for running around. Template upgrading will be its own template page, but template film will be modified (as in the demonstration) to transclude it IF, and only IF, class=stub. So once Template films is modified the upgrading template will appear in all stubs. Hoverfish Talk 17:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No approval beyond WP Films consensus. Can you please take a look at the discussion and see if there was enough particpation to be considered consensus, or if anyone objected. I am multitasking at the moment, which is something I am not good at. Hoverfish Talk 17:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 4 22 January 2007 About the Signpost

Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Talk page template, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

About Snakes on a Plane[edit]

Believe it or not, vandalism was not my intention. Merely accuracy. I assume you are referring to me changing the link from trouser snake to penis. Well, I couldn't help but notice that the former was just a redirect to the latter. So I changed it to what it was actually going to. I meant no harm, and apologize if you were offended in any way. Master Deusoma 16:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Tasks[edit]

I have made the information located at the Peer review announce page appear as an active transclusion, exactly like what I did for the CinCollab. Normally, the requesters don't close them, so we have to by ourselves when they have had little activity or reached their ideal status (as stated in their opening message). :( Cbrown1023 21:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Deslisted GAs and FAs[edit]

Seems like a good idea (both of them, actually). We could use the "red" color that is used for FARs and just include it in the "notes" section. They should both go in the tasks. Cbrown1023 21:03, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Optimism is good[edit]

Optimism is good at this point. You have cleared all major filmographies! Great. Yet you haven't cleared all the films ESBlofeld is starting (or have you?). I hope I've prersuaded him to take care of some infoboxes a bit later. I will make a round soon and add the film=stub to as many as I find started. He firstly wants to start sub-stubs for all he finds notable enough. So, if he keeps going at such speed through all the countries, we will have infoboxes coming in till the end of this decade. And there are now several editors helping with, say, Bulgarian films and other countries. Which is, of course fine. And since they are being compiled in the by country lists, all the new films can be easily found there. So I suggest we don't tag then as needing infobox yet, we go ahead with the ones we already have (it will help to see their number reduced), and at some point when more directors and actors and other crew from all the other countries have been developed, we can make a future round and infobox them. Hoverfish Talk 07:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately no AWB yet. It won't install and I am waiting to reinstall Windows. But maybe I'll get a second (used) PC which might install AWB and run it just for these tasks. Till later. Hoverfish Talk 08:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:january Newsletter[edit]

Yes, it is really good this month!!! I see that you are approved to use it, but have you downloaded it or tested it yet? I really don't care either way and am postive that you wouldn't have trouble with it. Cbrown1023 talk 01:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

lol, I turned green yesterday. Do you like it? On the Outreach page, it gives you most of the information.
  1. Under "Make from", access the pull-dowbn menu and then click "Links on page".
  2. Still in the "make from" section, go to filter, and make sure only "user" and "user talk" are checked. click apply.
  3. Go onto the list and right click, then select "conver to talk pages"
  4. Remove the users who have set "No delivery" or "Full contents" from the list, using the tools provided...
  5. on the "Set Options" tab, un-check all the "General" options and the "skip non-existant pages" options.
  6. On the "More Options" tab, go onto Append/Prepend text, check enable (it should then be alraedy set to "append"), and paste the "Link-only" code found at the Oureach page.
  7. go to the "Start" tab", set your options and then "start"... continue normally.
  8. After it has finished, go back to the "full contents" users, and manually deliver the newsletter's full contents to them using the template given on the Outreach.
If anything seems unclear, please don't hesitate to ask me. Oh, and just so you know, this doesn't mean that you have to do it, I'll still do it you want. :) Cbrown1023 talk 02:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
If you need any fast help, you can always instant message me, but remember I am UTC-5 (Eastern Standard Time), so I may be asleep. :) Cbrown1023 talk 02:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
No, I just like the color green, and another user told me that I should get a better sig than the default. :) Cbrown1023 talk 02:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Cat:Unassessed[edit]

It really is nothing. :) I haven't graded in a while because I've been busy with other things, but then I click on stats in the NavBar and was like 127? wth? na-uh! and I can't grade any for a bit, cause I'm gonna be busy in real-life for a bit this week. Cbrown1023 talk 02:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

It probably doesn't, but we'd have to nominate it for deletion because it doesn't seem to be "speedy-able". Cbrown1023 talk 20:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
i bet you told me on purpose, just so I'd feel guilty and review one... one down, 3 to go, (but I can't do the other... book reports... hmph :( ) Cbrown1023 talk 22:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I was just kidding, I know you wouldn't really do that. :) Anyway, it would be postive peer pressure. Cbrown1023 talk 02:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Satisfied Customers[edit]

I can't take credit for it. A fellow editor, Bignole, got someone angry enough to create an account called Shut Up Bignole. I told Bignole to document it for fun on his user page, and he used that heading. Then when I encountered vandalisms/personal attacks, I ripped his heading to use for myself. :) Just wondering off-topic, are you focusing on any film article right now? I'm thinking about gearing up The Fountain for FA (as soon as I expand Reception and do some copy-editing), and I'm expanding both Spider-Man (god, it looked awful before) and Ghost Rider. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 04:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 5 29 January 2007 About the Signpost

Foundation names advisory board, new hires Court decisions citing Wikipedia proliferate
Microsoft approach to improving articles opens can of worms WikiWorld comic: "Hyperthymesia"
News and notes: Investigation board deprecated, milestones Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 18:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:Films Newsletter[edit]

The January 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Nehrams2020 05:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Good work on filling in the missing film boxes most of the films have then and any I start from now on will. Wondering why I haven't ben sent a newsletter? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

E.g films like El Faro. Is there a template for film Awards because I want to add it in a section Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks friend. Yes most of my Argentine films had info boxes anyway but there were a few I wanted to sub-stub quickly to rid of the red links. Now every film i start will always have an info box unless it is e,g a 1906 film or something where there is no info in screenwriters etc. It saves other users time in adding them later.

What I meant was an award box not in the info box but at the bottom of the page similar to the tables for the Oscars - films that have won awards. I guess I could make one quite easily I didn't know whether a template for it was available thats all.

Argentine films are going well though, and I am in the middle of compiling the chronology for the List of Argentine films in User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld/Film sorting. It will take time though to complete all of the tables fully with all the details but I am hoping that soon it can be done and will prove very useful by country. All the best and thanks again! Keep up the great work Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Also I have devised the Template:Argentinefilms for multi page navigation and other countries can be drawn up similarly. As these lists are intended to be a key part of the main cinema pages of every country I have given them the same look as the cinema temmplates with the film image at the top and linking to their relative cinema page. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

I have also made a list of the several Argentine films I stubbed without info box found at User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld/Blofeld's Secret Note Pad (my to do list) this will help although most without info box are in the central column of the category anyway. It saves multiple edits adding the info box first anyway so I can promise you won't have to worry about that from now on. I have found www.acceder.buenosaires.gov.ar an excellent site for pictures of the films - very useful in setting up the pages nicely- As these films are started I have seen many sites in SPanish giving great details on the plots etc - luckily I can translate these later and eventually turn most of the starters into full quality articles. My main task though is to set the foundation by country. I really appreciate your help. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

It's raining films[edit]

I think the films from WP Indian cinema started pouring in. I know one at least from their project is adding infoboxes. The problem is imdb gives names diffently than stated in the articles. Today I did many in films that weren't tagged yet. I fished them from the uncategorized lot. Thanks for delivering the newsletter. Hoverfish Talk 21:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award[edit]

Smiley.svg
For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

--TomasBat (Talk) 02:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I just want to check but does the award table I created on El Faro look ok? I think Hoverfish was slightly concerned it might face opposition but I can't see anything controversial about it-I think it looks good. I have learned to tread carefully as I don't want to go down that pathway again!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I think in regard to the Argentine films - in Argentina a Silver Condor award is similar to the oscar -the biggest award event in the cinema so I think I'll add this in the opening sentence if the film has been nominated or won the award like so e.g El Abuelo (1954 film) is a 1954 Argentine Silver Condor winning film directed by Francisco Mugica. etc. The full list of titles is now complete for List of Argentine films:1980s but I need to fill in the mass of info!! The other wikipediam who has been working on Austrin films tells me German wikipedia already has a decent list that can be replicated (Austria being the next country to complete) . Saludos! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Then off course the red links need to be removed asap and all of the films put into date order.Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Oklahoma City bombing picture question[edit]

Although the image is famous and can probably be considered iconic by now, unless there was something in the article specifically about the image, its winning of the Pulitzer or the firefighter and/or child. I don't think it would stand. See Battle of Iwo Jima for example, showing how the image is commented on in the article. There is a mention of the image in the second paragraph from the beginning and again in the fourth and fifth paragraphs in this section. -Regards Nv8200p talk

I missed that text. That would probably be enough to justify using the image, but the more you could expand the commentary on the image, the stronger your case is for fair use would be. I think the tag on Image:WW2 Iwo Jima flag raising.jpg would be the tag you want to use. Make sure you include all the other necessary components like the source and fair use rationale for using the image in the article. Good luck! -Nv8200p talk 05:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Empire of the Sun (movie) vs. (film)[edit]

Hi, thanks for letting me know! I thought that may be the case, since I have split a few articles into Yadda Etc (film) before, but seeing as how Empire of the Sun (movie) already existed as a redirect, I thought it may be easier to just use that redirect article rather than creating an entirely new article. That's what I get for thinking. :) Anyway, thanks for fixing my blunder! María: (habla ~ cosas) 20:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Roger's film articles[edit]

Nehrams2020, thank you and I just joined WP-Films. I also wanted to direct your attention and the attention of other editors to my three projects Gaumont, Pathe, and the most problematic American Mutoscope and Biograph Company. --Roger the red 19:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nehrams I have found a gem of a missing article in Greta Garbo's The Temptress. I happened to be browsing the new pages earlier and found a three line unwikfied uncategorized stub. I looked it up and found it is a big film missing and felt like writing it! I have written it up its looking good but I am thinking with references and a bit of copy editing sorted and a bit of extra info I could propose it for a main page did you know? It would be good to have a film in the new section . What do you think? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 20:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I have labelled it as a B article I think it qualifies now rather than a start. I'll speak to the guy I know I have spoken with several times to get my articles on the main page and succeeded -he deals with the decisions -I'll see if he can give me a hand refencing it -it still needs a bit more info anyway. Ideally every stub on Argentina would be started like this but I think it best to map out the films first and then research them into full quality articles afterwards. There are a finite number of films for the past anyway so once all the notable films are started they can be improved. Good luck on the feature and those papers whatever they may be and I'll let you know if I decide to pursue the DYK. All the best Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:All night longposter.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:All night longposter.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 01:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Hatchetmposter.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Hatchetmposter.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 01:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:All_night_longposter.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:All_night_longposter.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 15:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Nehrams2020, sorry for not deleting that image at that moment. I did not notice that you were the author of the image. The reason given was not sufficient for speedy deletion according to criteria. But, as you were the author of the image, you could tag the images with speedy-deletion by {{db-author}}. Thanks for notifying me about this. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 18:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Boards?[edit]

Hi, can you please help me find a place and a little text for the Tech Board in WP Films? I still don't quite understand what the "Film Board" will be for. Inspite of my 10-per-day the infoboxes are going very slowly down. I keep also finding some untagged, but let's say I do an average net of +6-per-day. Hoverfish Talk 21:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, in the Oklahoma article, section 2, paragraph 1, the last sentence is out of place. It stands in between descriptions of events. It feels like it belongs in another section altogether. Hoverfish Talk 21:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

New Flag system available[edit]

Would you be interested in some templates that I developed for the "Where I have been" section of your user page? Check out {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetCountryFlag}} and {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetProvinceFlag}} for just flags. For nation and/or province names, use {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetCountryName}} and {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/GetProvinceName}}.

Or you can use the most capable version that I use. It's {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/Nation Flag Entry}} and {{User:Will Pittenger/templates/Province Flag Entry}}. Enjoy them. I created them for myself, but knew, and somewhat hoped for, that they would be used in user boxes and other users' pages. Will (Talk - contribs) 01:50, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 6 5 February 2007 About the Signpost

Foundation organizational changes enacted Group of arbitrators makes public statement about IRC
AstroTurf PR firm discovered astroturfing WikiWorld comic: "Clabbers"
News and notes: More legal citations, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I have got Wikipedia:WikiProject Argentina/Cinema of Argentina up and running as part of Wikiproject Argentina who beleived it was a great idea - and can be linked on the Wikifilm page as a related or sub project. I hope that it will encourage more people to work on it. The same can be done to other countries that have major cinemas later as I work on their cinemas and lists -creating organizing for each industry. All of the films that need starting are linked to our WikiFIlm missing articles page and the page can be used to organize articles that require attention etc , missing actors and ddirectors -the list of articles without an info box creating order for each country monitoring the indivudual industry. The sub project is intended to simultaneously be a part of WikiProject Film and WIkiProject Argentina but is not a formal project of its own (see the slash after Argentina) just a sub branch for organization.

I want to ensure that everything is done methodically and in systematic country for each cinema industry -this way accessing each industry is there for WikiProject Film at our fingertips and are alos useful components in the respective major country projects themselves. It highlights the work needing doing in each industry. I hope you think it is a good idea. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

Chocolate Hills WP:GA nomination[edit]

Thank you soooo much! I will work on these ASAP. Indeed, your comments/points are very valid. I guess I would miss those after having spent soooo much time on the article. Hmmmm...these were missed during the peer review? Anyways, I will let you know once I am done with the corrections and addressing your suggested points. It shouldn't take me 7 days. I will get back to you soonest. Best regards. --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 00:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello! I know it is last minute, but is it possible to ask for 2 more days? I am waiting for 2 important documents from DENR EMB, and I should be getting them today. I need them for the citation. Please know that I have and am doing everything within my power to pass this nomination. The Chocolate Hills deserve it, as well as the people of Bohol and beyond. Thank you very much for your kind understanding... --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 00:02, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! I appreciate your kind concern and understanding. --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 06:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I am about done! I striked out the corresponding corrected suggestion Hills here. I will be standing by just in case there are still some additional corrections/suggestions you would like me to address. Nevertheless, thank you for this chance to collaborate with you and to enhance the article. My pleasure and honor! --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 21:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Please! I need this now! I mean the people of Bohol need this now, to boost some confidence in an otherwise difficult times for us. Let me double check. Thank you for the patience and kind understanding. --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 00:09, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Did I do that right now? or please be kind enough to point me in the right direction. Thanks again. --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 00:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
That was pretty challenging! I have done/fixed all suggestions. I need a third eye sweep for final comments. Will work on those, if any ASAP. will standby for your FYI. --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 01:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

(reset indent) Thank you! You do not know how much this means for Bohol, its people, and beyond. Thank you for giving us the reason to rejoice, have hope and be grateful as a people!!! --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 01:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


<font=3> Thank you for the help in making Chocolate Hills a good article!
From: User:Pinay06
NonFreeImageRemoved.svg

WP:Films Infobox Backlog[edit]

Hey,

In responce to your comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Infoboxes, would you be able to create a project explaining clearly what you want done. Use Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/Infobox City Poland as an example (everything before the first header, including the infobox). Also, link to this on the main project page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes#Current Projects).

Thanks --TheJosh 02:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Holy Cross[edit]

I've added my comments to the deletion nom for Holy Cross, including some background on the nominator's tendency to go after church articles. Hope this helps, but better sourcing for the Holy Cross article would certainly help; perhaps you could check the local library for newspaper coverage, particularly around the 50th anniversary? P.S. The church's historical records won't help you much; if they're unpublished, that arguably qualifies as original research - but there might be other sources for the same material. MisfitToys 20:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

*sigh*[edit]

...(deep breath)... [1] Hoverfish Talk 21:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

You may want to check out User:Storyliner who is indeed creating the stubbiest of stubs and can't get him to stop!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I have tried adding infobox and categires for Song of the Sarong as an example of how to set out new stubs but he won't listen!! I haven't got the time to sort all of his rapid new entries out!!!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I would go beyond posting to editors about sub-stubs. I suggest we remove all talk page Film templates from stubs that are a couple of lines, plus a copied cast from imdb, and we assign them a special category for underdeveloped stubs. So if anyone cares to develop them further, they can return to the care of our services (proper categorizing and requests for infobox, image, plot and what not). This way we regain a hope of ever completing a full infobox round, plus we have a nice massive incubator (in the form of a talk page category) for anyone concerned. I also suggest we remove all categories from the main page except for {{film-stub}}, or we can propose some new stub-type for them. Hoverfish Talk 22:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

It isn't a full blown seperate project like India and Iran it is intended to simultaneously be a sub project of film and argentina. It now has 3 members and I'm hoping it'll encourage people to realise it is an important project in its own right and a vast missing one at that. I feel it a very useful asset for film because quality film members such as yourself and several others can access it and see what films need an info box, what films are missing, what actors and direcotrs are missing etc, which articles need to be concnetrated on developing e.g CInema of Argentina page et etc and attmept to gain the full understanding of the cinema of each country through a high level of organization.

As I generate and fill in the lists I am hoping to set up the wikicinemas for each of the major producers this will tell us everything about what needs doing by country. I'm glad you approve Ernst Stavro Blofeld 09:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


I think Hoverfish has a very good idea here. The official main stub templates should remain the same on the main space pages but if wiki film has a template in the talk page with a new level of classification -sub-stub rather than stub for the poorest ones -for film project organization I feel this is very useful and then ther eis no obligation for us to rapidly have to clean up the sub-stubs to a stub level s quickly. It wouldn;t affect the mainspace stub sorting system as Her Pegship is worried about but would be a category under film project to root out the sub-stubs from the stubs. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 09:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The only problem is the sort of people who create such tiny stubs are the ones who are unlikely to categorize properly making them difficult to find. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 09:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Film Infobox Thingo[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Infoboxes/Films_Infobox <== that is your project page. Get everyone working from there. Any pages listed for conversion, people in WP:Infobox will help with. You can probably also improve the description if you want. --TheJosh 12:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Oakland Raiders GA nomination on hold[edit]

Hello. Thanks for the helpful comments regarding the Oakland Raiders article. I believe all of them have been properly addressed, so please review at your earliest convenience. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 13:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Vestibule review[edit]

Thanks for putting the time into reviewing this article. --Selket Talk 19:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Marc McDermott is on the front page which I aided. The article was only started because of the red link in The Temptress. I told the organizer of the DYK and created McDermott. I didn't pursue with the Temptress as it disobeyed the limited picture rule on the main page or somthingErnst Stavro Blofeld 21:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Yes sometime next week I am thinking of starting one of those major missing classics of the 1920s or 1930s that I still see red-linked in iconic actor filmogrpahies from time to time which have a wealth of info which i may make into a B-class as soon as possible. We'll see. I see they've dropped the new article rule anyway so even if you develop an existing article a lot within a five day period it can qualify for a DYK. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thescelosaurus GA[edit]

Hello, Nehrams2020. I got all of the changes you wanted, except for two: Agility was a disambig page that had no helpful links, but a reasonable definition, so I thought it made more sense that way; Browser was similar, and it's odd that no one has written an article specifically on browsing as a type of herbivory. J. Spencer 02:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your suggestions, time, and effort, and have a good day! J. Spencer 03:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

One of the other dinosaur editors was asking me about submitting it for an FA, although I think it's a bit short, and perhaps not as interesting to a wide audience as other dinosaurs. Since you just reviewed it, do you have any opinions/suggestions beyond what you've already written? J. Spencer 17:56, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! I plan to have another look around for material after I've gotten farther on Iguanodon. J. Spencer 03:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr.[edit]

Thanks for the feedback on A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr.. I've made all the changes, save one, which was the "academic track" bit. Not really sure how to explain that further, any suggestions would be appreciated. Cheers, JCO312 03:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hurricane Ignacio (2003)[edit]

Thanks for assessing it. I got most of the issues you addressed, and responded on the talk page. Hurricanehink (talk) 22:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 7 12 February 2007 About the Signpost

US government agencies discovered editing Comment prompts discussion of Wikimedia's financial situation
Board recapitulates licensing policy principles WikiWorld comic: "Extreme ironing"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, milestones Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Amonite Cropped.jpg[edit]

You are very welcome to use the image for the fossils userbox! - Zephyris Talk 09:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


please advise[edit]

I have been working my way throught the "infobox needed" list for Film, and did Jesus of Nazareth (film) this afternoon. Three things are puzzling me.... 1) I can't understand why the layout is wrong nomatter how hard I try. 2) There are two other films of the same title on imdb (much older, less well-known... but they ARE films whilst this is a miniseries)... should they be listed too? 3) searching for Jesus of Nazareth in the search bar without (film) leads only to Jesus. I'm presuming this is due to a systemic problem and not devine intervention.

I'd appreciate any advice you can give me on any of these matters. Thanks! :) High Heels on Wet Pavement 19:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


Thanks, yes that does answer my questions 2 and 3. The layout thing is, that there is a massive gap beside the infobox rather than the beginning of the article, which begins beneath the bottom line of the box. i don't know if it's the tag or what. Have messed about and previewed but can't solve it. Thanks for your swift reply, Nehrams! I'll put the Jesus films on the list of films without articles, and pick them up when i feel brave enough to start a stub of my own, hehe.  :) Best Regards High Heels on Wet Pavement 20:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


Good articles[edit]

Thanks for the comment. This is the first time I've worked on GA and I was selecting the articles based on the GA criteria. I also followed the Pass and Fail guidelines. However, the part about "Leave a comment about your reasons for passing the article (with suggestions to improve the article, if you can)"[2] was unclear on where that statement should be left and even if it was required (i.e., if I felt the articles followed the GA criteria do I have to actually state that). That said, I just rejected one article because of POV and reference issues and left a message about why it was rejected on the article's talk page. I'm also about to list the articles I've passed on Wikipedia:Good articles. If I'm doing this wrong, please advice further. Best, --Alabamaboy 20:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Congrats (sigh of relief)[edit]

Congrats on Holy Cross getting the thumbs up. The article I'd previously worked on got through with no consensus, but I think the references I added should get it by if it's ever re-nominated - though I hope it's more substantial by then. MisfitToys 21:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Albert Fish[edit]

Do you think the article is good enough for you to restore it to GA status? It needs someone to give it a thumbs up or down. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 03:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Please note that I just recently delisted the article as a good article, because of some issues I brought up on the talk page. It's your decision now, not mine, but I hope you can look at the issues I brought up and judge whether or not they're important enough to you, and if they are, whether they've been adequately resolved. Mangojuicetalk 04:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by "Fix redirects for: child molester, Washington, District of Columbia (also in the infobox), death penalty, religious mania, heart attack, Washington, DC, homosexual, prostitute, St. John, San Francisco, Brooklyn, New York, boogey man, psychiatrists, urophilia, masochism, Frederic Wertham, death sentence, Far Rockaway, Queens, Frederic Wertham, sadism and masochism, genitals, & sado-masochism." Do you want them delinked? or do you want them to go directly to the article as the article is named? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 04:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you are asking me to change the wording to match the article name in Wikipedia. Is that official policy or a personal preference. I think its very bad form to change: "the boogey man took him." to the "the boogeyman took him." The quote would no longer be accurate. Can you show me some policy concerning this. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 04:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I understand what you are asking for now, but can you show me a reference to that Wikipedia policy? I can make all the changes you requested but I need to be sure I am following stated policy. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 16:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I have made the changes for you, and some of the directs to their article names.
  • As per Mangojuice, I have complied with all but two: He wants the article in a pure chrono order, but both the online biography at crime library and the book on Albert Fish use the same timeline I use. All three have the events as they unfold to the police, since there was no connection to Fish until he was caught and confesses. I want to preserve that timeline. Mangojuice also requested that the connection between Fish and Hannibal Lecter be mentioned, but there is no connection. Just a hunch by Mangojuice. Thomas Harris never discussed what influenced him, and that fact is mentioned in the article on the author. I don't think its proper to speculate in the Fish article. It will just perpetuate a myth. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 19:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
  • done!

2006 Bangkok bombings[edit]

Hey, I've just gone through the 2006 Bangkok bombings article and addressed the suggestions you had for it on its good article review. Thanks for eyeballs. — WiseKwai 06:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your efforts in reviewing the bombings article. It was quite a surprise to see it up for GA review. A lot of collaborative work went into it. — WiseKwai 09:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

List of premature obituaries[edit]

Apologies, I didn't realise lists couldn't be GAs (the previous reviewer wsn't clear on the point). Ben Finn 23:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

other WP:GA nominees[edit]

BTW, the other articles currently on nomination for WP:GA are Eskaya and Philippine Tarsier Foundation. Perhaps you will consider on working/collaborating with me on this as well. Also another cause for celebration today is the launch of Portal:Bohol. Thank you for your time, outstanding expertise and dynamic professionalism! --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 01:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Will do as per suggestion. --Ate Pinay (talkemail) 02:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Template suggestions based on what I see on your user page[edit]

FYI: I have some templates listed at User:Will Pittenger/templates that you might be interested in.


Will (Talk - contribs) 09:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)