User talk:TheOldJacobite

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

If you cannot edit this page because it is protected, post here.

Your edit to Lucky Number Slevin

You put this revert in a while ago. The plot is intricate and the old version had issues. I looked for an explanation of the revert but there's none in the edit summary and the version you reverted to contained issues that were fixed but then undone by the revert.

Could you take another look and reconsider your revert, or perhaps take this to the talk page and let me know, so we can look for a better version somewhere between the two? Thank you FT2 (Talk | email) 13:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Midnight Cowboy

When did you last watch Midnight Cowboy? Mr Jolly (talk) 03:31, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Of what relevance is this question? ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 12:43, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Matilda-related

Hi. I'd like to let you know that Danny DeVito also did the voice of the narrator in Matilda. The narrator talked about Harry Wormwood as if they are two separate characters. I'm just letting you know that. --Rtkat3 (talk) 17:13, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

It's still not clear that this isn't an in-character voice-over in which he refers to himself in the third person. In either case, it's not of great importance. But, thank you for your message. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 19:52, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Adding categories

No problem. I'm already done and I wasn't about to add more articles to category Philosophical fiction. --Twilight Magic (talk) 22:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Fantastic Mr. Fox (film)

In case it escaped your notice I think I should draw your attention to this link: [[1]]

ArchAngelAvenger (talk) 01:55, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I hopefully fixed the link. Could you please look again?

ArchAngelAvenger (talk) 14:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Connie Corleone

WP:DRVPURPOSE point 3 states, if significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page. I've been here twelve years, reverting my edit without discussion is a violation of WP:AGF. There is also a concept called consensus through editing. The AfD has the support of DGG (talk · contribs), and the AfD took place in 2013. I've added new sources, I am confident that a new AfD will be closed as keep. This character is a major in the The Godfather series. Valoem talk contrib 13:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

This is a rubbish argument. The refs in the argument do not prove the character's importance and the bulk of the article – a retelling of the plot of the three films – is substantially the same as before. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 14:53, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Does not matter new sources are added, please AfD again, this is a major character. Also give the age of the AfD and the votes, 2 in favor of keep, 2 in favor of delete, a 1 merge is a clear lack of consensus. Thanks. Valoem talk contrib 15:08, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, I'm just wondering if you were aware that another editor changed your closure request at WP:ANRFC? I'm bringing it to your attention because not only did I not see anything wrong with the way you worded it in the first place, or that it was changed apparently without asking you first, but also because I don't think the change is supported by any policy or guideline. In fact, guidelines basically prohibit changing other editors comments unless they are gross violations, such as vandalism, copyright or BLP violations. Anyway, I'll leave it with you. - theWOLFchild 22:51, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate that, thank you! ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 08:14, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Ferris Bueller and the Fourth Wall

You've got to be serious - breaking the Fourth Wall is absolutely central to this film's audience engagement and its broad success. Rsarlls (talk) 12:36, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I was an extra in the film, and now am on your talk page. Talk about breaking the Fourth Wall! Randy Kryn (talk) 20:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
I know your intention was not disruptive in creating that category, but, as the discussion at the FilmProject indicate, breaking the fourth wall is largely a gimmick, and not central to the films in which it is used. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 02:26, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

The Falcon

Hi. I see you commented on a topic in 2011, and so would ask that if you have a few minutes could you drop by the talk page of The Maltese Falcon where I've added a new section. Would like to discuss a proposed change in the lede. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I'll take a look at it. Thanks for the heads up. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 02:27, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Suffix Strings

Courtesy of this edit I learned that wikilinks will automatically incorporate suffix strings. I've been editing for over a decade and had no idea! Thanks, mate. --DavidK93 (talk) 15:48, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that came as a surprise to me, too, and wasn't something to which I'd given any thought. So, yes, we are still capable of learning new things, thanks to the bots! Cheers! ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 16:38, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

The Usual Suspects

There is no sourced info on TUS being a gangster film. Deloop82 (talk) 13:41, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Keyser Soze is a Turkish gangster. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 13:42, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

25th Hour Rant

So you revert for "wrong section" but cant be bothered to move it yourself. Rsarlls (talk) 12:35, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

If you want it in the article, you are free to move it. I hardly see why that is my responsibility. The article is none the worse without it. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 12:44, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

April 2018

Hi, thanks for commenting on my talk page about changing the genres of films. You first left me a message about The Silence of the Lambs. After receiving your message, I accepted my mistake and have since adjusted my behavior. I just received a second message from you about a similar change I had made to Donnie Darko, in which you threatened to block me. However, the change I made to the Donnie Darko page was BEFORE your first message. You're threatening to punish me for something I did before I was even warned that my behavior was wrong. Please be reasonable about this. I've accepted my mistake, don't threaten me for past actions that I can't do much about. Whovian99 (talk) 12:56, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

You are correct, I should have paid closer attention to the dates. I apologize for that. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 14:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Losing Ground/no actors in plot

Hi, sorry to bother you here, but I wasn’t sure that if I tagged you on a post that you had not contributed to, that you’d see it. On this page for this movie Losing Ground I’ve removed actor names from plot, making no other changes, and my changes are being reverted, even though I cited my sources. Could you check out that movie page when you get a chance, and lend your expertise to support not having actors in the plot to the user that keeps reverting? Assuming your seniority might be seen as more credible.

Thank you MissTofATX (talk) 03:04, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I've commented on the talk page. I'm a little surprised this is even an issue, honestly. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 11:48, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I was very surprised, too, considering that the user appears to have been editing here for a long time. Thanks! MissTofATX (talk) 13:03, 10 April 2018 (UTC)MissTofATX

12 Monkeys

Do you feel a visit to ANI is warranted at this time, or should we continue to give them WP:ROPE? DonIago (talk) 15:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

No, something has to be done now. This nonsense has gone on long enough. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 15:53, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm getting mixed signals on that, but if you want to draft something up, or go there yourself, I'd be happy to review and contribute where I feel I can. DonIago (talk) 16:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Mixed signals on what? Going to ANI? ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 22:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Yah. You seem to be in favor of it, but another editor is opposed and a third is on the fence, in part because they don't feel ANI would result in anything more than a warning...though it could be useful for establishing a precedent. DonIago (talk) 04:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm in favor of it, but if we don't get other editors on board, I'm not sure what we'll accomplish. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 11:52, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
(nods) Well, I have an admin saying that if they don't drop the stick, they'll be willing to open a report at ANI, so I think we can hold back and hope for the best right now, though I have to admit that I'm pretty much done AGF with regards to this editor. DonIago (talk) 16:46, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear that. I've been hanging back and not commenting because this editor seems to have some animus against me for having reverted him the first time. So, I've decided not to fan that, but, yes, my AGF has ended. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 16:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

BattleshipMan

I have discussed with BattleshipMan about this issue you to seem to having. BattleshipMan has brought up that you have a history of removing these "minor characters", which from what I can see is true. He has stated that this is irritating and gives off an impression that you are trying to completely dominate and own the page your way, which I'm sure is not your intention, but may sometimes come off as ignorance. Regardless of my feelings on the matter, I believe you two should find common ground on the casting section of Die Hard and stop having this little spat in the talk page. Keep in mind, edit warring is disruptive to fellow editors. ---Ducktech89 talk 11:27, 15 April 2018, (WAST) Ducktech89 (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I have no interest in his edits or opinions. He's got it in his head that I have a vendetta against him, so he posts on other editor's talk pages, trying to stir them up. I am interested only in what I feel his best for the articles I edit and WP in general. Thanks for your message. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 15:36, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Yep cheers. Ducktech89 (talk) 15:41, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Actors in movie plot

I tried to ping you on a discussion on my talk page user talk:MissTofATX and I’m not sure if it went through. If you get a chance, could you please review the thread on my talk page? Thanks! MissTofATX (talk) 08:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Nope, didn't get it, but I'll take a look. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 11:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Ruthless People

Greetings sir. I know I'm speaking against my own revision, but doesn't 24.181.238.45 have a point? Isn't AFI's catalog more reliable than The Wrap's Powergrid, or at least at the same level of WP:RS? I know we usually replace Box Office Mojo/The Numbers as a budget source when there is a Film L.A. study's source available without really providing any reason (I guess because Film L.A. is known to provide gross budgets instead of ambiguous figures), so I was wondering why a reason would be needed in this case. It's one reliable source's word against the other. So perhaps a budget range would be more appropriate, until we get additional sources confirmation of one of the two figures? Thanks for taking a look and cheers. Punkalyptic (talk) 13:01, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I think this is something that will need to be addressed by the FilmProject – assuming it hasn't been already. My sense, though, is that if two sources disagree, simply replacing one with another is no help. The discrepancy should be discussed, in prose, in the production section. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 13:35, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

The Elephant Man

Hello. Thanks for this. I'm afraid that I have given up and unwatched the article as I was getting close to 3RR and high(er) blood pressure. But I admire your keeping it up! I would not like to speculate as to what is going on there exactly, or why, but it's ... not helpful! Cheers DBaK (talk) 06:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. I try not to speculate (too much) about what other editors' motivations are – little good can come of that. But, I do understand frustration and giving up on some articles. Cheers! ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 11:36, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Gangster films

I can find sources listing Goodfellas as Gangster films yet I find none about the Usual Suspects. Allmovie considers Goodfellas and Godfather gangster films. Why do you keep removing the gangster genre from these films? Deloop82 (talk) 14:52, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Goodfellas and The Godfather films don't belong in the Gangster films category because they are already in the relevant Mafia films subcat. We do not put articles in larger cats when they fit better into subcats. You should know this by now. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 15:56, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Dracula 1992

You already twice removed my properly sourced information from this article. I've took the issues to the talk page. You said two parts of the information would fit the article. I returned them, yet you removed them again. I asked you several questions on the talk page. You haven't replied to any of my questions, which are quite simple tbh and I don't see how they need a lot of time to reply if you know the subject.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SallyWicked (talkcontribs) 14:41, 14 May 2018 (UTC) 

Talkback

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, TheOldJacobite. You have new messages at Talk:The Breakfast Club.
Message added 20:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please consider this a formal warning on edit warring. Continued warring will lead to a block DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Teahouse

Hi, just to follow up from the Teahouse, in no way did I want to accuse you of edit warring – I haven't looked at the edits in question and thus, of course, have no intention of telling anyone they've done anything wrong in any way. My apologies if it came across that way.

I merely wanted us to explain to newcomers how our editing culture works rather than stating that editors have been around for a long time and therefore what they do must be the right thing – my comment had everything to do with the Teahouse, and nothing with your edits in particular. /Julle (talk) 11:45, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I didn't take your comment as an attack or accusation. I do understand what your intention was, but I appreciate your clarification. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 11:48, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Pulsifier220

I see you’re having issues with him too. He’s been doing the same thing at Operation Finale and it seems he’s been messaged and blocked for similar issues before. Rusted AutoParts 17:53, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I saw that, too. He's on the verge of another block if he doesn't cease and desist, probably a long one. He doesn't use edit summaries, either, so we have no idea what his thinking is. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 18:09, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
What I’m getting is he feels they should be there. Even in the face of being told no, so I feel he absolutely is deserving of another block st this point. Rusted AutoParts 18:11, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. Unfortunately, we've dealt with editors like this in the past and they came to the same end. They simply refuse to listen. NinjaRobotPirate was fairly patient in explaining the first block, but I don't think it had any impact. Alas... ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 18:16, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Confusing revert

Hi Jacobite, hope you're well. I was slightly confused by your revert on Bohemian Rhapsody, found here. Just to familiarize myself further, is the oxford comma not used in British English? I've never heard anything about it one way or the other, so this was news to me. MOS:OXFORD doesn't mention anything about it, while the oxford comma page simply says it's used "less often" in British English. Sock (tock talk) 16:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

My understanding from other editors is that it is never used in articles using British English. I assumed MOS:OXFORD made this clear, but I guess that is not the case. I think this requires clarification. If I am incorrect, I apologize. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 01:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Heat revert

How come these were inadequate references? laagone (talk) 07:11, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Sources must prove that these examples are noteworthy, not simply that they exist. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 12:11, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
What about "Viklund mentioned that [...] the film Heat was used as inspiration for the design of a track in the original game." for at least a part of the edit? laagone (talk) 12:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Also, for what it's worth, while I can't find more explicit statements by the devs, you can probably tell from this DLC info site that some of the content is clearly inspired by the movie. laagone (talk) 12:34, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
This should be discussed on the article talk page so other editors can participate. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 12:36, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

That British IP

Not to nitpick, but it's actually a block by Widr: Special:Contributions/86.157.161.110. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:44, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. Frustration was affecting my memory. Thanks. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 21:44, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Jaws (Movie)

I wanted to add that I am aware that my questioning and comment style tend to imply "tone", that is not my intent. My intent is to engage in a real discussion of what is acceptable editorial commentary on Wikipedia. I'm an engineer, so i tend to be simple and straight forward. I feel better having said that... Brian T. McDaniel (tAlk) 20:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

The section containing comments from Stephen Heath, even though sourced, are purely subjective editorial comments (and are they noteworthy relevant to the time?). One guy from Berkeleys' published opinion really has no place in the Encyclopedic format of Wikipedia. I've seen hundreds of similar "editorial comments" removed. We would flood Wikipedia with such sourced commentary. You seem very protective of this page with lots of reverts, perhaps this partly your addition. Why do you think this section belongs? Is it because of the current social view of minorities and women in film? Brian T. McDaniel (tAlk) 20:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Your opinion as to what is acceptable is irrelevant, as is mine. We have policies and guidelines that define what content is acceptable. At any rate, this matter should be discussed on the article talk page, not here. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 21:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
I see, sorry i typed some, not quite inappropriate, but not helpful stuff when i thought you just deleted my question, I went on tilt a little bit..... I deleted it. I see I put this question in the wrong order on your page. I would love to have the discussion about "published editorial comment", especially when it's reads as politically motivated. I will spend some time forming a better list of questions and comments and put it on that page. Thanks for the response. Brian T. McDaniel (tAlk) 21:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Monty Python's Life of Brian

Hi, What is the reason for not linking Terry Jones in the infobox Starring section when the others in the list are? Cavrdg (talk) 16:28, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

He's already linked as director. We don't link every instance of a name. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 16:56, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

The Departed

You recently edited the cast characters as named exactly in the movie credits. What is wrong with a full name description if it is accurate? Just curious.Eschoryii (talk) 20:59, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

The film is the source, so the cast should reflect the film credits. This needs to be consistent across articles, unless there is a local consensus otherwise. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 21:44, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Thanks.

William S. Burroughs

Hi TheOldJacobite. I noticed that you reverted my recent edit to the William S. Burroughs article. I've put it back again, and I've given an account of my reasons and sources on the talk page. Happy to have a discussion about it if you object though. All the best. Rune370 (talk) 21:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

The only change I made was to shorten the heading to be consistent with other articles. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 21:46, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I did see that, and I think that was a perfectly valid thing to do. I meant the slightly older change where I'd added the page to "Category: Chaos magicians". Rune370 (talk) 01:55, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I had forgotten about that edit. That should be discussed on the article talk page. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 11:02, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Twin Peaks

See Talk:Twin Peaks. -Inowen (nlfte) 02:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)