User talk:Bovineboy2008/Archives/2009

[Untitled]

HEY SSSWIPE! I was workin on something just now n u messed it up with your stupid editing! work on something else! go look up the Britney Spears article n edit dat!, lol with all the complaining u guys R doin n supposibly trying to ban me of editing LMAO u guys have not told me what is "WRONG" with my article editing by now u guys now I'm focusing mostly on release dates now what is wrong with dat???????? is there a "NO" on how much u can put limit on the info bar on the right of the article where is has the release dates n other info there, if there no limit then leave it alone my information is mostly correct n there's nothing wrong with! TELL ME at least "1" EFING thing that is wrong with it? go ahead tell me what is wrong hmm??? thought so ......good luck tryin to ban me cause it ain't gonna work there million of people editin here doin da same thing.......what u gonna do ban them too?? man please there's nuttin wrong with ur editin u n your friends r just lil babies! n u know that u can go back to your preferred version of the edting here with is fine but just don't edit at the same time I'm editing I don't know if u can tell if i'm editing or now b4 u start editing but if im editing just wait or go do another article ! when I'm done u can go back in the history section n look up yours for all i care just don't do it at the same time cause u interefere with my editing n it causes a conflict n pleassse u n ur friends grow up cause u know very well u have no reason to ban me n its not gonna happen cause I'm not playin with the site i'm puttin good info on ,I'm not here to mess up articles n delete them ...I could have just easily erased all the articles (which by the way can be restored) but i don't because I'm here to help not fck up everybody else's work ,this website gets updated on a daily basis atleast so I'm not the problem ,u guys just have a problem with Sharing the website...there's a reason Y this websites lets just about N E 1 edit we don't even need 2 to log in all da time but the point is this website lets ppl edit 4 a reason n I'm not a here to wreck it I'm here to help it so like I said B4 if ur tryin to ban me 4 doing something good believe me I'm not the 1 thats gonna get banned here n theres millions of ppl trying to do good here,u guys should focus more on the people dat is just playin around with this site not the 1s who are actually interested in editing for good reasons here so good luck tryin to ban me or the milions of others that u guys probably bother 2 so don't get your hopes up......the administrators here would rather focus of people fckin around with the site just for the hell of it than the 1s like me tryin to help it so u guys just .......GIVE IT UP! IT AIN'T HAPPENIN! IF I'M NOT DOIN NUTTIN WRONG HERE! NUTTIN IS GONNA HAPPEN 2 ME or MY REGISTRATION HERE SO JUST U GUYS JUST GROW A PAIR 4 GOD's SAKES!,just a tip:WIKIPEDIA wouldn't exist if it weren't 4 the millions of people here helping it.--XMORPHEUSX (talk) 22:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Accessibility

I've noticed you removing alt text a lot, such as in this edit. That text is needed for blind readers or other non-visual readers, and its removal puts the article out of compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines. Wikipedia:Accessibility explains this in more detail. Pagrashtak 17:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Just to be clear, does alt text just apply to Images or other things aswell? Bovineboy2008 (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "other things". Pagrashtak 18:03, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind. I did my research now; I still am not always sure of the syntax. Bovineboy2008 (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

[Untitled 2]

HI! this message is to Bubbleboy I mean Bovineboy! it seems that U really seem to like ur own editing that's Y is there alot for example in the Resident Evil article,U cant really tell people to stop on a website that anybody can edit "correctly n accurately" just because u want urs on top every time.....so grow a pair n let people edit too without u or any other of your kind btchin all the time I focus on the resident evil franchise especially the release dates,my name might seem different but I talked to u B4 ,if ur smart enuff u know what my past name used to be if u know how u can tell that is....N E way I'm tryin to be polite n not get pissed but just sayin....CHILL....its an editing website I'm not sure if u r getting paid 4 this or not but the point is U'r not the only 1 here .....I talked to u or ur other buddies B4 so I'm not gonna explain it all I'm sure u already got several of my letters I sent u or ur other friends.....not saying that ur version of the article sux which can be reverted N E time by the way I'm sayin ,Look at my Version of the Article n UR's ok? who's look more informative for people to know more about the article especially when a title was released,Im not sayin mine is perfect 'no 1 " is perfect in this world but u can't tell people to "STOP" on a website that can be edited by N E 1 LOL! now I'm sure if u work for the "Wikipedia" website itself n u disagree with my article n den keep tellin me to stop or threaten me by havin my user name or names erased from the wikipedia account I will "I WILL BATTLE 4 IT"n u WILL lose.....I doubt highly doubt UR superiors would look at my version of the article n say"THIS IS WRONG U R PUTTING WRONG INFO! WHERE R UR SOURCES" which I already have told u guys many times soo just keep changing the article versions I'll just change em back to mine which N E body can reverted to their own version now I know that we could see our own version of the article without saving it but I just put mine n save so everytime I come here my version would pop automatically.....BUT I'm not sure if it can be done in wikipedia or not but "DON'T"Erase my articles especially the latest revised 1 ....me just like u n others who probably don't get paid 4 it have put many hours into gathering information in my case the release dates for the games in the RE franchise" I don't think i can't be done in wikipedia but im just sayin "I would be seriously pissed!" if my articles get deleted ,I'm not worry about N E threats u or ur other editors say 2 me I'm makin at least my version of the article better n better ,if u don't like it u can just reverted back to ur version N E way,so don't tell me to stop wen millions of ppl in this site edit. that's the point of this website be thankful u have millions of ppl helpin u with these articles ,it might not be for ur benefit but there own but it still helping this website no matter what so unless I'm putting wrong info which is unlikely I don't want to hear from u or ur other friends keep it to yourself .....I love editin here in Wikipedia to help me n millions of users who come for research purposes,editin,etc....so if ur tellin me to stop ur tellin millions of others da same N for the record ,this is not vandalizing ! this is a website that N E 1 can edit which is mostly good but bad sometimes cause ppl would just play around n put N E thing but for the 1s that are actually helpin the website ,KEEP UR mouth shut n be thankful we r helping this place!even the 1s with the good intentions of helpin this website makes mistakes includin me but its because some of us r new to this but we do with the best intentions not to mess up the site so please unless I'm not contributin to the article in some way or if I'm messin up information which is rare I don't want to hear from u or ur other buddies .....GET IT? GOT IT ? GOOD! LETS WORK TOGETHER N NOT BICKER LIKE LIL KIDS I'm not sure how old u r but I'm old enuff to act like an adult so less complainin n more helpin in this website N by the way I love "Survival Horror" especially from the Resident Evil n Silent Hill franchises so u don't gotta worry much about messin up of somethin I love n that is horror! PLUS I'm a gamer n more specifically an "Otaku" if u know what what means so let me do my thing n u do urs.....we might have different opinions on things but we r both n millions of others trying to help this website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XMORPHEUSX (talk • contribs) 22:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Receptions

Hi, can you do the receptions for these two articles? Tales of Symphonia: Dawn of the New World and Mega Man ZX. I can't seem to do the VGreviews template right. How did you find out the website's symbols? What do you do if those sites are not on the list? Please reply, thank you.DragonZero (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The Sound of Music (film)

Hello. This edit[1] that you made to The Sound of Music (film) inadvertantly included a typo that turned a Wikilink red. I have fixed it. --Thomprod(talk) 16:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Strike-through text

[copied from your Guestbook:]

Just wondering why all text on your talk page is strike-through? --Thomprod (talk) 18:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I received notifications that the images that I have uploaded had been orphaned and once the image was deleted, I "strike-through"ed the the notification. I don't want to delete it entirely so I can keep a record. Bovineboy2008 (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, but it looks like all of the posts on your talk page show up that way, even those that have nothing to do with an image, like mine. --Thomprod (talk) 20:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I think I found the problem: You added the tag <del> before the first section you wanted struck-through, but didn't add the end tag </del> afterwards. This results in the rest of the page being struck-though as well. Just put </del> after the last text you want struck-through and you should be good. --Thomprod (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Dates on Tomb Raider

Hi. Just noticed your cleanup on the Tomb Raider: Legend article. While it is much appreciated, please note that Tomb Raider articles are of British origin, so please don't change the dates from British to American style. Thanks ~~ [ジャム]^[t - c] 10:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Cookie!

Maddie! has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Maddie talk 00:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Obama Inauguration speech

There is no such policy that forbids this information. That is the article that it belongs in. As a historian, I am appalled by the president's apparant lack of knowledge on U.S. History. I have no idea why. Perhaps it comes from his many years going to school abroad, but he has a serious lapse in that department. There is no other article or section to place this information. It is best suited there. Regardless of party or support, the sentence was cited properly and has been placed in its proper section. Any removal means that those removing it are not interested in improving wikipedia, but are only here to protect Obama's image.--Jojhutton (talk) 18:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Weapon lists

Just wanted to thank you for your help. DurinsBane87 (talk) 10:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (January 2009)

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 00:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

XMORPHEUSX

He did the same edit again...I managed to revert it...seeing as XMORPHEUSX is clearly PaPiRiCoSuAvE, can't he just get blocked for XMORPHEUSX' AND PaPiRiCoSuAvE's offences as well???OsirisV (talk) 12:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the policy is on sockpuppetting, but if we could get an administrator to help, that would be best.

I guess 67.81.60.133 is the IP version of the two.OsirisV (talk) 15:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

LOL! I got my own section here....aren't I special! LMAO.......come on really...hehehe this is childish can't we all just work together or at least let each member do their own thing.....u know it could be reverted back anyway and u know for a fact the ppl in charge of this website won't do anything for many reasons for example...I'm not messing anything up...I'm actually helping the article in my own way just like the millions of others doing it....that is the point of this website..as u can tell I'm tryin to be polite so don't ruin it n just let bygones b bygones or whatever...the point is we r "ALL" contributing to this site ...most of us 4 free so just chill out...u others know very well I won't get in trouble because I'm not messing up the site n everything could be reverted N E way so if I make edits in my versions than i save it n it would be the latest revision of the article n then u come for example n go bakc to yours n do what u want in yours...now I could just be an ass n put wrong info n mess up the article....delete things n such....but I don't cause just like me other ppl spend their time here mostly to help so just let it be n I noticed other ppl getting critisized(did I spell dat right?)....so Im definitely not the only 1 being critisized....u,me,osiris V n millions of ppl are so let it be we r all not gonna agree on everything but we could at least try to work together in our own ways...that what dis website is for... N yes I could create as many or up to a limit of accounts here so I don't care if u know who I am or not....I could be Gahndi for all I care just let us do our own thing n work together in our own way ...we all got different ideals on how to do things.....just because I want to put more info on things than most ppl would doesn't mean its bad just as you do your things in a different way so just let it be ......cause Im not the only 1 with an opinion here....now I was thinking of putting a regular box chart but I havent seen 1 done here sooo can somebody make one n put in any of the resident evil articles so I'd know how to do it.......n yessss I could read the articles n how to's on doing things on this website but I don't want to spend all day reading....I don't know bout u but I'm just a lil lazy when it comes to reading all dat....so what have we learned today? "WE ALL SHOULD WORK 2GETHER...in our own way but for the same cause...there is no I in team I'm as grateful I have ppl helping out this site more specifically sections I go into just as I assume other members being grateful with my knowledge n contributions to said articles or articles so 4get all the banning jibber-jabbin n lets just be wat we want n honestly there's no point in ppl tryin to band each other here especially the ones who are not messing up the site so u might or might not work for wikipedia directly but I know nothing will happen to me or others doing the same thing as me cause they'll be a riot here ppl would know about this cause they'll put N E thing in the media.....u could have a dog shitting gold shit n ppl would put it on the news cause they aint got nuttin better to do so lets just BE ALL DAT WE CAN BE ...LOL... n just do our thing (in our way....but for good intentions on helping Wikipedia not harming it.) PEACE N LOVE ! PEACE N LOVE! hehehehe...I'm gonna go outside n draw a rainbow.......```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.60.133 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 27 February 2009

I'd count that as spamming.Just dropped bye to tell you that if you get tired of "it", try　ｔｈｉｓOsirisV (talk) 19:47, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Coraline (film)

Can you give an explanation as to why you reverted the expansion of Coraline (film)? What was wrong with what you reverted? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

The Cast section was tagged for being long, it used a blog as a reference and the production section lost good information. If you think it should be contested I don't mind, I just think this version is more helpful/readable.BOVINEBOY2008 02:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a particular opinion, I just thought your edit summary was a bit bitey. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

banned user reverts

From WP:BAN: " By banning a user, the community has decided that their edits are prima facie unwanted and may be reverted without any further reason. " When I find one of these socks of this user, I don't even look at what he is doing, I just revert. The point is to deny recognition to abusive users like this. This[2] will give you some idea of the scope of this problem, and those are just the socks verified by checkuser, there are about 100 more suspected. I take a revert, block, ignore approach to this problem, quickly reverting the edits, reporting to WP:AIV and moving on. Giving him support, as you have, will only encourage him, we want to convince him that his efforts are futile and he should go away instead of trying to sneak back in every week. Getting banned from Wikipedia doesn't just happen, you have to repeatedly prove you are disruptive. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

FG Episodes

Can you watch the List of Family Guy episodes‎‎ page? I'm already over my 3 reverts, I've requested full protection till the issue is resolved. CTJF83Talk 20:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Vgrelease template

Hello there. Just noticed you reverted some of my changes on the Extreme-G articles (to do with formatting - I used {{vgrelease|NA=whatever}}{{vgrelease|PAL=whatever}}, you reverted to {{vgrelease|NA=whatever|PAL=whatever}}). When you stack release dates in a single template call, they appear to get sorted randomly, rather than chronologically (as they should be sorted). It's not a problem in this case, put if you look at something like Twilight Princess, it would cause problems. Just letting you know! Thanks! Fin©™ 16:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I do realize it doesn't sort them chronologically, but there is a specific order that they source and when happens to align with the releases chronologically, it might as well be collapsed. Thank you, though. BOVINEBOY200816:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair point, I wasn't aware there was a specific order to them, I'll look into it and use it in the future! Thanks!Fin©™ 16:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Nintendo task force membership update

I am currently gauging the active membership of the Nintendo task force. I have split the members list into an "active list" and an "inactive list" and have moved all members (except myself) to the "inactive list". To confirm that you're still an active participant in the task force, please go to the membership list at WP:NIN and simply move your name from the "inactive list" back onto the "active list". If you no longer wish to be a member, simply remove your name from the list. After two weeks (around 23 March 2009), I will remove all names on the inactive list. Thank you, and hope you're still interested, MuZemike 20:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Tony Hawk Soundtrack Lists

hello, i see that you've been deleting the soundtrack lists from the TH games. let me remind you that wikipedia policy is against such lists when they list random or irrelvant information. In the case of the TH soundtracks I believe they are indeed notable and deserve to be included. Let me also remind you that The Tony Hawk games have spawned numerous successful commercial CDs based on these games. Many which used to have their own pages, but were merged into the games' articles, eventually only to see themselves deleted from the games pages (most notably the soundtrack CD information for the TH3 CD which you recently deleted). Going back to your comment about lists, it is true that lists are undesirable under normal circumstances. But let me point out that many pages for other games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero contain such song lists. And although it can be argued that those lists are justified for those games being considered "musical" games, the Tony Hawk games were some of the first games to feature actual spoken songs as background music. On top of that, the Tony Hawk games contain some of the best soundtrack music in gaming. So much that this has led the franchise to win numerous nominations and awards for them (most notably Tony Hawk's Underground, which was nominated for best Outstanding Achievement for a Licensed Soundtrack by the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences. Anyway, regardless of what I have to say or can be argued, people have been deleting these lists without warning and ignoring ongoing discussions on the talk pages. This is can be considered edit warring and this is, unquestionably, against wikipedia policy. You are not above all the editors who have been contributing to these articles. So if you feel very strongly against these lists, I suggest you go and make your case against them in the talk pages like the rest of us before you start deleting them again.---djsinietro (talk) 08:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

VGInfobox

Hiya. Just a minor point on your tidying of collapsible lists in the vginfobox - it's still a good idea to keep the platforms as a header for the first release date, just makes for easy reading. Like this as opposed to this. Good work though! =) Thanks!Fin©™ 15:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah cmon man its not cool

Cmon mate. Please stop deleting the soundtracks off THPS 2 and other Tony Hawk articles. It just screws up the whole.

De Mattia (talk) 07:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Talk 2 me bout it ok man

Hello

When an actor dies, it is not customary to describe him or her as "late" in the articles about their films. If that were the case, every film article would need to be amended every time a cast member passed away. LiteraryMaven (talk) 16:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I didn't add the term late, I simply removed the comma between March and 2009. But thank you for letting me know.BOVINEBOY2008 17:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I know what happened, I didn't remove the term when I edited it and for some reason it added it back!BOVINEBOY2008 17:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

external links in infobox

Just a FYI, I hadn't noticed that the external links in Template:Infobox Film had been deprecated. It would have been helpful to me if you'd mentioned that and included a link to the discussion in your edit summary when you removed the links. Might not hurt to do going forward, especially when reverting. Cheers. -- Intractable (talk) 18:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Knowing

Hello, glad to have a helping hand at Knowing (film). I still need to see the film, otherwise I would work on the article a little bit further. I'd just expand the "Reception" section myself with Ebert's review and other reviews if I didn't want to avoid spoiling myself. Have you seen the film yet? Any chance you could do a small expansion? Everyone seems to want to mention Ebert, which I don't mind... just that not everyone saw the film his way. —Erik (talk •contrib) 21:17, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I haven't seen it yet, but the reviews do need to be balanced and notable. That's the only reason I've been removing it.BOVINEBOY2008 21:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright, just wanted to check. I may drop a request at WT:FILM if the obsession with the Ebert review continues. Just to nip the situation in the bud. Happy editing! —Erik (talk •contrib) 21:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Battalion wars

I'll start with you: read what I had written and you'll find it hard to deny what I wrote.--Krasilschic (talk) 00:29, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Read WP:OR. BOVINEBOY2008 01:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, I've heard it before, but think about it: KAISER Vlad, he even looks like wilhelm a little bit. And M17... come on you'd have to be brainless not to realize that it's not a spoof of m16: they look very similar. and tundran territories: TSAR Gorgi. They use something similar to AK's too. plus X-Day was an invasion by sea with the kind of boat used in d-day, of enemy territory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krasilschic (talk • contribs) 19:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, Wikipedia is for verifiability. BOVINEBOY2008 19:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Succession boxes

Hello, I noticed earlier this week that you were combining succession boxes at various film articles and thought this was a good idea. When someone added the UK succession box to Knowing (film), I combined them, but I did not realize it meant deprecating the {{Box Office Leaders USA}} and {{Box Office Leaders}} templates. Do you think they are now useless? Or could there be a better designed approach for using one or more succession boxes? —Erik (talk •contrib) 00:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Those templates are useful, in my opinion, if the film is a #1 in only one country. It seems rather jarring to have two different sized boxes. Maybe if the start and end were taken out, they would be more useful, but that would break a lot of the templates.BOVINEBOY2008 00:13, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason for the templates was people were typing in any old thing into the boxes (Not mentioning the country, for instance). If it's broken, the template should be fixed, not discarded. - Richfife (talk) 01:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Have you seen this: User:Richfife/MultipleBoxOfficeDemo - Richfife (talk) 04:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

There is something to be said about collapsed boxes, generally down upon. And perhaps a manner of style needs to be disscussed about succession boxes. BOVINEBOY2008 04:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Philosopher's Stone

Hello, could you tell me why you have marked my question as vandalism? 86.29.238.198 (talk) 14:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Really sorry about that, just found out my new spell checker automatically changed other peoples posts. Vicky86.29.238.198 (talk) 17:12, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

The only reason was the random adjustment of other posts. Your question was a forum post, though, which still isn't acceptable for discussion pages. BOVINEBOY2008 17:14, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Veggie Tales

Why did you revert this edit onVeggie Tales? (a) There is a German version and website of Veggie Tales, and (b) "Moe and the Big Exit" (story of Moses) is a sequel to "The Ballad of Little Joe" (story of Joseph). Both edits were correct... TheAE talk/sign 01:13, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Listing every language is not notable and indiscriminate. The fact that Moe is a sequel to Little Joe is not that notable and unsourced.BOVINEBOY2008 02:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

It isn't available in every language, I'd be surprised if it is in hardly any. And even if some part of it is translated into another language, they don't have fully made websites. As for the sequel, how can it be sourced? It is a work of fiction, and has a different notability guideline. The Dark Knight isn't notable as a sequel to Batman Begins, and that fact alone doesn't have its own source. It is just notable because it's true, and shouldn't be reverted without explanation.TheAE talk/sign 03:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Hi, when you revert vandalism, I'd suggest you add a warning on his/her talk page so that an admin can eventually block the account if the vandalism keeps on going. The rule is usually that after four warnings, the account should be blocked. Laurent (talk) 17:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. BOVINEBOY2008 17:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's film-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Films? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's film-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. We also have a number of regional and topical task forces that you may be interested in joining as well. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! —Erik (talk •contrib) 14:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Glad to have you on board! Nice work with the box office succession boxes! —Erik(talk • contrib) 15:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Welcome

Welcome!

Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

• The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for March has beenpublished. April's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
• Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
• Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality ofevery film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

"Clarify me" cleanup

When cleaning up {{Clarify me}} and similar tags, please do not simply delete HTML comments that follow them explaining why the tags were put there, nor comment out the entire sentence to which the tag was added. If you find something like {{Clarify me|date=June 2008}}<!--Some reason or issue expressed here-->, please update it to {{Clarify me|date=June 2008|reason=Some reason or issue expressed here}}, or later editors are in many cases highly unlikely to know why the tag was placed there. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 05:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

COraline Cast

it is not within wiki standards. THEREFORE. not "better" why place the name of the cast member yet explain the character? thats vandalism. the character description is already in the coraline book article, therefore no description in the movie. simple as that. also it looks wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by24.249.176.77 (talk) 17:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure which edit you are talking about, but here is the manner of style that the cast should be for a Film article. BOVINEBOY2008 01:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Knowing

Hello, would you mind if I reverted your edits to the dates at Knowing (film)? Non-breaking spaces were inserted because month and day are paired together, so end-of-line displacement would be awkward. See WP:NBSP for more. I would revert you, but I was not sure what other clean-up tasks you attempted. —Erik (talk •contrib) 01:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, yeah go ahead. Sorry! BOVINEBOY2008 01:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

a tiny request, only for me

Hola. Feel free to ignore this and continue doing what you have (correctly) been doing to the UP article with regards to removing the MPAA rating info. I know you reverted my initial edits along those lines, and in reading the FILM:MOS subsequently, I agree that I was wrong for putting it in the article and have joined you in removing it as it has been added since. So far, so good. My one teeny compaint with how you make that specific edit is your edit summary of "POV" - only because the ratings edit isn't a POV item, it's a MOS issue. The info being added is factual and correct, it just shouldn't be a part of a film article (there's even a current TALK item about it on the film style page). POV makes it sound like the info isn't correct in the first place. Anyway, I'm sure that this only annoys me, but it might be what is leading those who aren't paying attention to the MOS to think that you're fighting the factual nature of the ratings edit. (I hope this didn't come across bitchy, as it's not intended to. More of a "hey, dude here's what I think kinda thing".) SpikeJones (talk) 13:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that makes more sense to me. I was putting POV because it seems like giving a certain point of view of a certain country, giving only that rating. MOS seems more accurate to me though. BOVINEBOY2008 14:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2009 Newsletter

The April 2009 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Coraline Cast

its wrong

there are three ways to show the cast and character properly

1) voice actor (main character) and than continue to talk about voice actor and her/his thoughts on the main character

OR

2) main character (voice actor) than continue to talk about the main character.

instead you mixed the two examples by saying voice actor as (main character) than all of a sudden continue to talk about the main character (even though it started off with the voice actors name)

you see how it interupts the flow of the voice cast description? —Precedingunsigned comment added by 71.36.116.62 (talk) 23:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't make the guideline, I just use it. BOVINEBOY2008 06:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

User:XMORPHEUSX

You probably shouldn't edit war on his talk page. He is allowed to remove warnings. Just thought I'd let you know before you wind up getting in trouble over something silly.  :) Lychosis ^T/C 06:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. BOVINEBOY2008 11:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Meryl Streep

Excuse me, but according to this source andthis source, both of which I saw before making the change, the role has been determined and recorded. Also, the template you used isn't generally used in the manner you placed it in her filmography.Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

That's fine, just make sure you provide one of those references. BOVINEBOY2008 02:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Protection of VeggieTales?

I've been watching you revert a lot of unsourced IP nonsense from VeggieTales (as well as some other VeggieTales pages). Do you think this warrants temporary semi-protection? Just wondering. American Eagle(talk) 03:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it seems most of the problems are coming from a roaming IP address, but I don't know how to do any kind of protection.BOVINEBOY2008 03:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

If more IP nonsense continues, you (or I) can report it to WP:RFPP and an administrator will protect it. ;) American Eagle (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Got 'im.

The IP turned out to be a school IP...no big surprise given the history. I blocked it for 48 hours. Thanks for letting me know.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure!

What do u say then to changing the source on all of them to the same one,thanx--Aldamira (talk) 21:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2009 Newsletter

The May 2009 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Jon And Kate

Feel free to delete this after you read it, but I would direct your attention to the talk page of the article, and the history of the dispute regarding the page. The overwhelming consensus is for inclusion of the information about the affairs, and there is a large amount of documentation there. Instead of removing information from an article if you disagree with it, please check the talk page to see if it has already been a point of contention and well sourced before your arrival. I understand that some people will move things around and citations can get lost temporarily, so I am asking you to please type[citation needed] instead of deleting the information, that will allow the other editors to get the page to a higher standard, instead of being distracted by the fact that large amounts of information are sometimes deleted by fans of the show.Pink-thunderbolt (talk) 17:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

disney animation articles

Please join the convo at WP:WikiProject Disney/Animated Film Article Cleanup if interested. SpikeJones (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

American Idiot

Hi. Can you please explain why you removed the background and recording section here? Timmeh!_{(review me)} 20:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

A good majority of it was unsourced and seemed crafted. BOVINEBOY2008 20:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

To me, it seems most of it was sourced. Although I can't verify the sources, I think we should assume good faith from the editor who wrote it. You could ask WesleyDodds if the information is correct, as it looks like he contributed a good amount to the section. Timmeh!_{(review me)} 20:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

As for the other changes in that last edit of mine, I seriously don't remember making them. I must have accidentally restored an old version of the page. You were in the right reverting those. Timmeh!_{(review me)} 20:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing that section to my attention. BOVINEBOY2008 22:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

NOTICE to all members of WikiProject Pokémon

Following a discussion on the Project's talk page, we will be updating WikiProject Pokémon's list of participants. To do this, all users previously listed as "Active" have been moved to the "Inactive" list; after this change anyone may add/re-add their name to the "Active" participants list. As your name was one of those on the Active memberslist, I am notifying you in case your active interest remains. Thank you for your cooperation in our efforts to keep our list of active participants as accurate and up-to-date as possible. ~ Amory(user • talk • contribs)04:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Dragonball Evolution

Clean up[3] isn't necessary nor is it helpful. The changes you are making are not improving the article: changing the article structure to go against the MoS and introduce unnecessary sections, removing content, and changing the dates without discussion. You boldly changed the structure. Feel free to bring up individual issues you have with the article on the talk page, otherwise please do not continue reverting. --Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Charlie Tahan

Hello Bovineboy2008, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion ofCharlie Tahan - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of notability, sufficient to pass A7.Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Closedmouth (talk) 08:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Ellen Page

Nice work cleaning up Ellen Page. Rob Banzai (talk) 13:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! BOVINEBOY2008 13:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Jon & Kate Plus 8 DVD Section

I know that Region 1 is both Canadian and American but for some odd reason, the first four sets of DVDS have a different release date in Canada, but not for the one coming next month. I put Canada because everyone needs to know that the third date is Canadian.

Other shows have more then one release date listed for Region 2 DVDs and it says in brackets which country they're for. If it's allowed there, why can't it be allowed for Jon & Kate? R7604 (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Bypassing redirects

Please read WP:NOTBROKEN. With a few limited exceptions, there is no reason to "fix" links to redirects that are not broken. -kollision (talk) 03:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Ice Age etc.

Thanks for your note, the bot actually only changes a very small subset of templates, and only when it's doing other work. This one was a bad choice since it was, as you say at the (technically incorrect) location, so no purpose was served. Thaksn again for your note.Rich Farmbrough, 17:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC).

Filmographies

Hi. I noticed you'd changed back the filmography heading on Helena Bonham Carter to one that is based on the now defunct prettytable class. The WP:ACTOR project came across issues because that style is defunct, so we have updated the style we're using to one that basically displays the same style but uses wikitable, which is the style class that is supposed to be used. The main WP:ACTOR page looks the same but uses the new style coding. I have a page on my user space that has the style displayed as a template to copy and paste, and you're very welcome to use that when you're working on filmographies. It is at User:Wildhartlivie/Projects Filmography and has both the basic filmography template plus one that can be used whenever two filmographies (such as for film and television) are needed. Some project members have been working quite hard to convert these to the wikitable style before someone runs a bot to do it that might result in table errors and it gives us a chance to clean up awards links and correct any errors we've noted. Also note that the project is urging editors to use one line for each of the items in filmographies such as:

|-
| rowspan="3" | 1998
| ''[[Dil Se]]''
| Preeti Nair
| [[Filmfare Best Debut Award]].<br> Screened at the ERA New Horizons Film Festival<br /> & the Helsinki International Film Festival
|-
| ''[[Soldier (Indian movie)|Soldier]]''
| Preeti Singh
|
|-
rather than all of each line of data on one line as used to be used:
|-
| ''[[The Nearly Complete and Utter History of Everything (film)|The Nearly Complete and Utter History of Everything]]'' || Lily || TV film
|-
| 2000 || ''Carnivale'' || Milly || Voice role
|-

It makes it much easier to locate errors in the table layout and work with the content if each is on one line. Thanks so much!Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Wildhartlivie! BOVINEBOY2008 03:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Your recent House edit

Hey, thanks for trying to help out the House article. Your edit looks to have cleaned up the reference pretty nicely, but you also changed a couple things for the worse. You can read the full explanation andrespond here. LonelyMarble (talk) 18:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

International Grossings Not Yet Calculated

I'm tellin' you, man, Mojo still hasn't updated last weekend's international takings yet (except for the ridiculously successfulTransformers 2 right now). [4] The Hollywood Reporter may have truncated, estimated numbers, but they're a reliable source. It's closer to the overall international gross of a film than Mojo. In the end, when a film has ended its theatrical run and Mojo has all the numbers, it's good enough to put them up. But right now, it doesn't have the closer overall gross, which has made it unreliable (for now, of course). - Enter Movie (talk) 00:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I think your misusing the "unreliable" term. Information is unreliable if it is not sourced or if the source is not reliable. Just because Box Office Mojo isn't up-to-date doesn't make it unreliable, it makes it out of date. And I implore you to wait until you have a "worldwide-gross" total versus adding domestic and international grosses. Sometimes companies overestimate their intake which can cause a skew in estimates.

And couldn't you say Mojo could be one of them? I think you're getting the gist of what I'm saying. I mean, the total domestic gross for Transformers 2 is $293,459,000, which is obviously truncated as well. Mojo has even put up an "estimated" note by the side. The same could be said of Terminator Salvation 's $122,700,000. It's out-of-date. It wouldn't hurt to put up the Hollywood Reporter's numbers when it's usually off by a couple thousands, which I'd like to add is very reliable since it gets its news from the entertainment industry itself. - Enter Movie (talk) 14:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems that you are only interested in how Terminator is doing, which is fine. But notice that every other film article on Wikipedia uses Box Office Mojo as the reliable source for box office grosses. I also think HR is a reliable source, and it may be appropriate to bring those numbers up in prose, but mixing sources doesn't seem to be a reliable thing to do. There is nothing wrong with being out of date, the numbers will be "accurate" eventually. And for your information, BOM gets its data from showbizdata which also comes straight from the industry. BOVINEBOY2008

Well, yeah, but Terminator is not the only film to have updated figures. And just because other pages are doingit doesn't mean that page should as well. Like I said, BOM will have the final figures, there's no doubt about it. But for now, it's been out-of-date for the past two weeks or so, which goes the same for "showbizdata." BOM has the domestic total, which are always updated by them and the Associated Press, Variety, Hollywood Reporter, etc. However, the latter is the only one who updates on international takings. Wikipedia should stay up-to-date as possible to make it more reliable, wouldn't you agree? - Enter Movie (talk) 15:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe so, but I don't think anyone should be combining data from two different sources based from two different dates.BOVINEBOY2008

WP:ANI

Hello, Bovineboy2008/Archives. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. This is regarding User:R7604's edits on Jon & Kate Plus 8 and his constant reverting of any changes made to "his" sections (including several you've done). --13² 00:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Kung Fu Panda protection

Hi! Sorry about the mess. That was one of several articles which I'd protected "en masse" under the default setting...which is admin only. I assure you that I didn't mean to do so and I've reduced the level of protection so that you can edit the article. BTW, I've been meaning to thank you for your patience and your diligence regarding Bambifan. Folks like you are a genuine asset. Really. Anyway, if you stumble across any similar articles with too much protection, please let me know and leave word at WP:AN as well. If I can't get to it right away, another admin will. Feel free to refer back to this message so that another admin won't feel uncomfortable lowering the protection level. Regards, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank You! BOVINEBOY2008 04:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

And thank you for the cookie. :) In fact, I'll go you one better:

User:Bovineboy2008/Awards

Disney features work

Hey, thanks for helping stop that IP Disney vandal. I also wanted to say thanks for your work on the various articles for the Disney animated features. Keep up the great editing! --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank You! BOVINEBOY2008 16:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ditto. You might be interested in this link as well. SpikeJones (talk) 17:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Source material first

Well, I don't think it's an established guideline but almost every featured film article use it. Also, the source material is almost always mentioned first in the article.–FunkyVoltron ^talk 18:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I brought it up here if you want to put your two cents in. (hate ending in a preposition)BOVINEBOY2008 19:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Done.–FunkyVoltron ^talk 20:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

2008 limited releases

Hi Bovineboy, I just discovered your purge of limited releases from the 2008 in film list back in April, and I'm considering adding them back, but wanted to get your input before making any big changes or potentially causing conflict. What was your reason for removing these films? There are several award-winning (Man on Wire, Oscar winner for best documentary; Happy-Go-Lucky, Golden Globe winner for best actress in a comedy; In Bruges, Golden Globe winner for best actor in a comedy) and award-nominated (In Bruges and Happy-Go-Lucky also both Oscar-nominated for best original screenplay; Rachel Getting Married and Frozen River, both Oscar-nominated for best actress) films that were lost in this change, not to mention various films made by prominent directors and actors (e.g. Cassandra's Dream, Elegy, What Just Happened). It looks like you left limiteds that went on to reach wide release, but even some of those are not entirely correct (e.g. Che was marked as going wide, butaccording to Box Office Mojo was only ever in 39 theaters in its widest release). Ultimately, I think we lose a lot of important information by eliminating limited releases from this list, as there are many significant films each year that never go on to receive a wide release. –Fierce Beaver (talk) 22:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I only purged because most of the early 200X in film articles had only wide release films. And I thought that after time, limited films naturally would dissipate. Certainly a lot of the films you mentioned are definitely notable and should be mentioned. But I don't think they should go in the table. The table is a good indicator for release dates all across the United States and since most of the films weren't release nation-wide it doesn't seem useful. I don't know, that's just my opinion.BOVINEBOY2008 22:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess for me it would be finding a happy medium between including everything and many/several of the limited releases. Obviously there are some titles that are so obscure that I don't think anyone would mind eliminating them, but for me I think we ought to at least include limiteds that: (a) won some kind of award or recognition (b) featured a well-known director/writer/actor (c) garnered strong critical praise (d) went on to achieve some kind of other significance or cult status, or (e) broke some kind of record or earnings threshold (that one's a bit of a nebulous definition, I suppose). After all, these lists are supposed to be comprehensive of the years they represent, so I think we ought to be as inclusive as possible, within reason.

I definitely agree with these limitations and will be willing to work on them when I get around to it.BOVINEBOY2008 23:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

That actually hits on another issue I've been thinking about for a while now, which is how the various "<year> in film" articles have essentially become large U.S. theatrical release schedules. I like the format and find it useful, since I live in the U.S., but obviously the U.S.-specific dates would be of little use to someone outside the States, which made me think of shifting the current schedule-based formatted content into country-specific pages, where each release region could maintain a release list specific to that region, and then the main year articles would contain lists of the various significant films and the date and country of first release. I think such a change would greatly benefit readers in the UK/Australia/NZ/etc. and would also address issues such as where to place films likeMongol, Earth, and Taken that were released in other regions one or more years before they were released in the U.S. –Fierce Beaver (talk) 23:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

On this point, we start turning into a database, which Wiki is not. I think the US releases are used because the film industry is mainly American. Here is a quote from 2009 in film:

Please note that following the tradition of the English-language film industry, these are the top grossing films that were first released in the USA in 2009.

I'm not sure how to solve this problem other than keeping it this way and adding a huge disclaimer or eliminating the table entirely.BOVINEBOY2008 23:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Hangover box office milestones

When you removed the sourced information about The Hangover becoming one of the highest-grossing comedies ever, you said you were going to take it to the talk page, but then you never did. Would you mind doing that when you get a chance?–Fierce Beaver (talk) 15:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not really my need to take it to the talk page; I suggest for you to take it there.BOVINEBOY2008 15:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Well if you're going to remove well-sourced material that is particularly relevant to a topic, it would be a nice gesture to provide more discussion behind your reasoning on the talk page, especially if you specifically directed someone to go there. I'll expand more on why I think that information is relevant and notable... feel free to weigh in. –Fierce Beaver (talk) 20:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Helping out

Added to my watchlist. On the brightside, the fact that they've reverted the edit on their talk page is evidence enough that they at least read it. (eg "I am a winner!", if that means anything to you...). SpikeJones (talk) 21:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Horton Hears a Who!

The credits of the film show other voices for the daughters (and they correspond to the IMDb cast list - curious, I didn't know IMDB wasn't reliable?). A Daily News article quotes Selena as saying she voiced them all - the only reference I could find to the fact. I tend to believe the credits, but I don't know. —Precedingunsigned comment added by 98.218.77.31 (talk) 02:30, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

By the way

The edits by Whoaman35 on It Ends Tonight did not appear to be blatant vandalism so WP:3RR applies to you as well. WP:CHARTis a guideline, not policy, and can be subject to exceptions which must be discussed. I didn't see any attempt at engagement with the user to try to form a consensus. Comments in edit summaries don't count. -- Mufka^{(u) (t) (c)} 11:06, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Here was my attempt.BOVINEBOY2008 11:42, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes. It was the "stop reverting or I will report you" that moved it from "hey, let's talk about this" to "stop or I'll shoot". Rather than jumping to that extreme in the first communication, it might be better to suggest that if the user disagrees with current practice, they should discuss it on the talk page. Remember to assume good faith and that consensus can change. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t)(c)} 12:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

In retrospect, I did overact. Thanks for calling me out on it. BOVINEBOY2008 22:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Box Office Mojo needs accessdate

I see you just updated the figures in 2009_in_film#Top_grossing_films, but you left the "As of July 19, 2009" statement on the table, and the citation uses only a bare reference without an accessdate. I appreciate this is a pain, but for these rapidly-changing statistics I think you must use <ref>{{Cite web}}</ref> with the accessdate parameter, and if the table has an "As of" legend that had to be updated too, which means all the statistics covered by the citation have to be updated the same time. I do hope you can take a lead on this: I've just been fixing up the box office stats on the Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (film)article and it is clear some editors have no idea how to handle data that changes day-to-day! Thanks - Pointillist(talk) 00:15, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem. It seems to have slipped my mind while I was editing. BOVINEBOY2008 01:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks - Pointillist (talk) 08:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

International Grossings Not Yet Calculated (cont.)

Okay, sorry for not continuing our disucussion last month. Anyway, the last you said was, "Maybe so, but I don't think anyone should be combining data from two different sources based from two different dates." The Manual of Style guidelines state that box office numbers can be sourced from Box Office Mojo as well as the Hollywood Reporter. The latter updates international figures every Sunday at the end of the weekend. Box Office Mojo updates its domestic totals every day or so, but its international takings updates (from what I've seen) about a week or two after the actual week it got the money. By that time, it's reliable, but in the time between, it's out-of-date and not as reliable. I think it's okay to combine sources. I mean, Box Office Mojo isn't the only source to update on domestic takings also. If we cannot reach an agreement, may I start a thread at MOSFILMS, so that we can reach a conensus with other members? - Enter Movie (talk) 21:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you are using the word "reliable" incorrectly (maybe "out-of-date") and MOS doesn't say anything about combining information from two different sources. But I would be willing to start a thread to get a consensus.BOVINEBOY2008 21:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

All right, I made a thread. -Enter Movie (talk) 17:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the Actors and Filmmakers Project

Welcome Bovineboy2008!! I hope you enjoy editing here! Welcome aboard! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 13:08, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

R7604

I went and told the admin who has blocked her before that she's back again. I'll keep an eye on the page as best I can so you don't get reported for 3RR. Cactusjump (talk) 16:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! BOVINEBOY2008 16:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The Fox and the Hound

Bovineboy2008, you answered me that I'm feel free to write and then hastily retracted your opinion. Why? What made you change your mind?OckhamTheFox (talk) 17:21, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

It really wouldn't add anything substantial to the article. BOVINEBOY2008 17:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I this your point of view? My point of view is Characters section combined with Voice cast can be helpful for some readers.OckhamTheFox (talk) 17:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes that is my opinion, and you did right by presenting your opinion on the talk page on what would be helpful, but there was a consensus against your opinion. BOVINEBOY2008 17:33, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

re: you're question: The Fox and the Hound of course! A classic Disney movie! Until Disney went downhill, now we have "G-Force". See here andhere. Ableblood369(talk) 14:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, just fyi, that isn't per MOS, that is just per common sense. I wasn't contesting your edits, just be more clear when you delete entire sections. BOVINEBOY2008 14:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I could see that. I was just answering you. But (I know this isn't a chatroom, but, I'd like to know), do you think the Disney movieThe Fox and the Hound is a classic too? Can you do mos cleaning to it when protection expires? Ableblood369(talk) 14:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

I am just a fan of Disney films. BOVINEBOY2008 14:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Me too, but this perticuler film is brillent and one of my all-time faves. Don't you think? Also, I agree with user:DGG atTalk:The Fox and the Hound#Character section. And I think when protection expires you should clean it per the mos. Correct?Ableblood369 (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

You still haven't answered me to this question. Ableblood369 (talk) 16:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Ableblood369

I saw your question on Collectonian's talk page. She's blocked today (unfortunately ... I don't think it was justified), so I'll answer for her. Yes, clearly this is a Bambifan101 sock.—Kww(talk) 15:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! BOVINEBOY2008 16:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your diligence. If any user asks you to edit a protected page on his/her behalf, especially a clear-cut BF101 sock, please report it immediately. This kid is never going to learn otherwise. A huge block of Bell South IPs have been rangeblocked and yet he keeps on coming. This is not a normal or sane person we're dealing with. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Where do I go to report, for future reference? BOVINEBOY2008 02:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops...sorry! You can take it to vandalism in progress and the admin incident noticeboard. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:53, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! BOVINEBOY2008 02:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

You're more than welcome. Back to my break, but I will be checking in on occasion. Thanks again.  :)

Hello, Bovineboy2008. You have new messages at StephenBuxton's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

high school musical 3 soundtrack

I realized you inexplicably removed the legitimate international versions table of high school musical 3 soundtrack. Doing so outright constitutes vandalism. If there is something you object to, please address it in the talk page before removing an entire elaborate section. Imperatore (talk) 17:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Well the typical studio album is not material for foreign language versions, so right there 99.9% of album pages would naturally not have this unique feature. In the case of musicals such as this one, it's a different story, because it can interchangeably be translated and rerecorded with different lyrics. These versions are notable because they are heavily marketed by Disney alongside the movie and soundtrack's release in other markets. Furthermore finding sources shouldn't be a problem. Disney Music Group outside of the US is handled by EMI, so a source on every national EMI company should provide details. Imperatore (talk) 18:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

How are the international versions notable? Did they sell well? Were critically acclaimed? I don't see the notability, but that is just me. Convince me otherwise. BOVINEBOY2008 18:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

They are pitched to pop radio, they have music videos tied together with the original music video, and some of them are performed by notable national pop stars who have coverage on English wikipedia as well. The music videos are also released on the high school musical DVDs in those markets and are generally advertised as a main part of the "bonus features". Furthermore just the shear fact that they are official licensed versions marketed by Disney themselves (and distribution partner EMI) merits at least a mention on the page, even if you object to an entire table with all the details like singer, title and market. Imperatore (talk) 18:19, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd be okay with the prose, and even mentioning what you have just mentioned, just find the sources. But a list isn't necessary.BOVINEBOY2008 18:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I still feel the table is necessary to capture a meaningful scope of coverage. Without one and with just prose doesn't cut it. I do not see how it is not encyclopedic and arguments against including at least the essential details can be deemed too American-centric. I will be posting links from EMI websites that can confirm the singers, or possibly from other sources. This issue needs to pass onto the talk page so that a consensus can be reached. Imperatore (talk) 18:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, about continuation of talk. BOVINEBOY2008 18:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I have this idea that since on hsm3 it was mostly just individual songs that were remade and not the entire album, the information can be transferred to the page of each single, much like i did for right here, right now. HSM1 has 4 international albums in their entirety and those four are now listed on the albums page. The other very lengthy table on individual songs of HSM1 can be omitted and broken up to the individual singles pages. Finally, a new page on international spinoffs can be created to be devoted to the complete tables (since a lot of the versions are based on songs that were not released as singles from the original, and hence do not have their own pages to place the information). This scheme will ensure that HSM3 will be limited to prose only, HSM1 just a table of four listings, and only about 3 singles pages with small tables. The information will also have more correct/relevant placement overall with this scheme.Imperatore (talk) 20:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

That sounds appropriate to me. I realize that I over-stepped and thank you for bringing it to my attention. Sources would be a great addition though! BOVINEBOY2008 23:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

X2

No problem and thank you for the note. I feel like I learn a new policy every week or so... Everything counts (talk) 15:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Poll At SpongeBob Season 8 Page.

Hey Bovineboy2008! There's A Poll At The SpongeBob Season 8 Page. If You Wanted To,You Can Vote Too.Also,Thanks For Telling Me About What Was Going On. Open 3 Days.Narnia2514 (talk) 12:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Succession boxes

I recall that you were prolific in providing succession boxes, but there is some consideration against them. Can you please share your thoughts at WT:FILM#Succession boxes? Thanks! :) —Erik (talk •contrib) 04:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Anne Hathaway (actress)

Thanks. Is that the most hideous picture of her you've ever seen? I've reported the guy for massive 3RR violations, but I don't know how long it will take.Wildhartlivie (talk) 17:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

No kidding. I have been watching it happen and thought I would step in! BOVINEBOY2008 17:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Glad you did, he's been blocked for 31 hours for the 3RR violation, but there may end up being a need to make some case against that photo. Thanks for your efforts on the actor articles, I notice your name. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Adam Lambert straw poll on including/removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section

Hi, this may seem rather trivial but I'm trying to gauge community consensus on including or removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section on the Adam Lambert article which you have been in some way recently involved. The poll is here. Your time is appreciated. -- Banjeboi 21:28, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Stop Vandalizing

• You are maliciously deleting the US film The Hurt Locker from every 2009 page it is listed on. That is VANDALISM. The film, per WP is a 2009 release because that is the release date in the ENGLISH-speaking COUNTRY OF ORIGIN, the U.S.A. Again, this is per WP. This is the English version of Wikipedia and the release dates are based on the release in English-speaking countries. So a pre-release in Italy does not make the film a "2008" film. It was officially released June 26, 2009 in Los Angeles, which is also per The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences rules pertaining to release date. You removing it from lists does not improve the chances of the animated film(s) you likely are trying to promote. Please stop deleting things from Hurt Locker and stop removing it from inclusion in US release dates and years in film. Thanks. Inurhead (talk) 01:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Bovine, take a step back and breathe. :) No need to get one's blood pressure up over a website. I've commented at the film article's talk page, and I don't think a compromise is inescapable. While it is a 2008 film, it was released much more widely in 2009. Thus I think we can include the right kind of prose to explain this. Let's see what we can figure out on the talk page. —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I asked Ckatz to weigh in, too, for the sake of another sound opinion. I'll keep my eye on the article. We may need to develop some additional consensus on how to word everything, but there's no rush. :) In the future, try to disengage from such encounters. It helps instead to discuss your disagreement on the talk page, and if the other editor continues to be, well, nasty, then just notify fellow editors at WT:FILM to shape consensus. I'm off for the night, but let the discussion simmer and work elsewhere for a little while! :) —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

List of Nintendo GameCube games

Hey! Just got your message about the List of Gamecube Games page. Sorry if this isn't the right place to put this message -- let me know if you'd rather discuss the edits somewhere else, perhaps on the article's discussion page.

Regarding the potential confusion once you're halfway down the page:

You'll notice that I've modeled this change after the List of Wii games format, and that if they haven't run into this problem over there yet, they will soon. In terms of actually fixing the problem, I can think of two solutions to this problem, both with drawbacks.

First, splitting up the table into smaller tables by letter. The drawback here is that this renders the ability to sort by columns more or less useless, because if someone wants to see all the games released in JP, for example, he'd have to sort every table individually, which defeats the purpose.

Second, keeping the table as a single table, but reinserting the header at each new letter. I don't know if this is possible without messing up the sort ability. If it is, I'm not sure how to do it, but if you happen to know, go for it.

Regarding the increase in filesize:

I don't really know what a reasonable filesize is for a Wikipedia article, but I don't see a way to decrease the filesize on this page. If you think the page is unacceptably large, feel free to revert the changes -- it took me all of 15 minutes to change, no hard feelings.

Thanks for your feeback!

How do I leave a sig ... ColdthroatEskimo (talk) 13:16, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of succession boxes

Provide proper summaries to explain your deletions! I reverted two of your deletions of succession boxes because you failed to give any reason. I see from another editor that there was a discussion "Removing Box Office Leaders succession boxes per TfD using AWB". There are more rules to wikipedia than most people can be reasonably be expected to know, not to mention the amount of acronyms, abbreviations and entirely contrived jargon, all of which should be avoided by anyone who isn't trying to exclude other users. In future please provide a summary to explain your deletions. It is good to know your deletions are in good faith, but without explanations it is virtually impossible to know that. -- Horkana (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I thought "rmv box office succession boxes" was pretty clear. There was a consensus in several places to delete these. Trust me, I know how much work they are, I made a majority of them. Here is a discussion about it: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 August 3‎#Box office succession boxes. Message me if you have any legitimate complaints :)BOVINEBOY2008 02:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

"rmv box office succession boxes" is not at all clear, it would have been clearer to write "remove box office succession boxes" but that would have only described what you did but not in any way explained why you did it. It is unreasonable and assumes to much to expect others to magically know there is a consensus to delete these sections. I restored the two instances I noticed. Note the verbose explanation I provided in the edit history clearly explaining why I reverted your change. User:ContiAWB made the same deletions later and provided links to the relevant consensus with the deletion making it very clear why the deletions were made. --Horkana (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

And are you going to go through and revert the legitimate edits made by User:ContiAWB and User:LiteraryMaven or just mine? I really don't appreciate attacks. BOVINEBOY2008 02:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Creating articles and adding content takes a lot of effort. Deleting takes very little effort and is very difficult to distinguish from malicious vandalism. Far too many editors delete before even asking for a citation or giving editors a chance to improve whatever mistake they might have made which discourages people from even trying to contribute. A clear explanation for deletions makes a huge difference, if a policy exists by all means state it. If you can write the extra few characters that make the difference between rmv and remove then you make it abundantly obvious what you mean even to users making their first wikipedia edit and it cost you maybe a fraction of a second to type those extra characters. I don't want to waste time reverting reasonable deletions any more than I want my contributions to be deleted. It is impossible to know all the constantly changing wikipedia rules or know there was a dicussion somewhere about a change of policy. Once User:ContiAWB made it clear what was happening I could see what you were doing and since you seem to be a conscientious editor I wanted to let you know this all could have been very simple if you'd written a little bit more in your edit summary. (it is disappointing that the beta version of wikipedia provides an even shorter box for the edit summary, further discouraging editors from properly describing what they did and why.) -- Horkana (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Horkana, thank you for explaining your reasoning. I sometimes am in a hurry and had just developed a short-hand. (It takes a long time for me to go through my 1300+ watched articles). If anything is still unclear from my edits, just let me know. I'll attempt to do better. :) BOVINEBOY2008 02:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

"Removed per Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines#Succession boxes" is the edit summary I used and was a clear indication of why the edit was made. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 13:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Marley & Me

Hello. A single award shouldn't be listed in a table. In the infobox, it's common to specify if a gross is domestic or worldwide, so I don't understand why you removed that information. Since John Grogan is Wikilinked in the infobox and the lead, to Wikilink him yet again in the cast list is excessive. I also don't understand why you changed acceptable section headings. You clearly have a strong interest in improving Wikipedia, so why not spend time expanding stubs and cleaning up badly written articles instead of making insignificant changes that really aren't necessary? Thanks. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 13:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

May I suggest you engage in a friendly discussion before reverting changes, especially after another editor has left you a message? Since foreign box office figures aren't always available, it's a common practice to specify if the gross is domestic or worldwide. Critical reception, box office, and awards and nominations are separate entities and shouldn't be lumped together. I agree Home media is a correct heading since the film was released on both DVD and Blu-Ray. Thanks. LiteraryMaven (talk •contrib) 13:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, I have never seen it "common practice" to specify in the infobox whether gross is domestic or international. I understand it is common where prose is concerned, but since we are trying to provide a worldwide view, worldwide gross would seem to be obvious. Also, notice that in the infobox it says "Gross revenue". Without a qualifier there, it seems to be automatic for me to provide worldwide. Also, if you see MOS:FILM, "Critics", "Box office" and "Home media" are included under the reception section. In most film articles, those section are in fact "lumped together". They may be separate entities, but they fall under the same category: how the film was received. BOVINEBOY2008 14:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your courteous response. Just because we try to provide a worldwide view doesn't mean it's "obvious" the box office figure in the infobox is "worldwide gross" since, as I mentioned, foreign figures frequently aren't available. Based on your reasoning, I certainly hope if only US box office was available you would specify the gross revenue was domestic only. As for MOS:FILM, I think this is open to interpretation. I can see how you arrived at your rationale, but it actually doesn't specify "Reception" must be a main heading with "Critics," "Box office," and "Home media" as sub-sections. Nor does it include awards in this section. Please keep in mind these are simply guidelines that have evolved - and changed - over time. That which is acceptable today might be considered unnecessary tomorrow. I think we can both agree there are thousands of Wikipedia articles in need of major improvement. Quibbling over minor formatting is unnecessarily time-consuming, especially when there's no argument that the data is accurate. LiteraryMaven (talk •contrib) 14:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

True. I've moved past it :) And certainly, I would put "Domestic" or something if only the US gross was available. And true, no where does it say that those sections must be subsections, but since the sections were so short, I thought it would be better just to combine. Anyway, thanks for holding me to it :) BOVINEBOY2008 14:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers

Thank you for being civil in our discussions back and forth at The Hurt Locker and elsewhere! If only Inurhead could see what wonders rational discourse can do. —Erik (talk •contrib) 02:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Not really much else to do. Thanks! BOVINEBOY2008:) 02:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

tx

thanks. not sure how that happened, as all I was seeking to do was add the missing comma. tx again.--Epeefleche(talk) 05:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Prose?

There is "no prose"? If you're going say something, could you just say it? Not only do I not know what "prose" is, I've never heard of it before.

As for the info box, if a user does not know where the U.S. is or what language English is, then they've been living under a rock. Especially after 9/11.

Also the channel the the Gosselins aired on originally is called Discovery Health, not Discovery Channel. Try looking it up and you'll see Discovery Channel was changed to Health, long before the show aired on this channel. TomHarison2 (talk) 18:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Prose is text that isn't in list form. And you can't decide what a reader knows, plus links are there so readers can get a better understanding of the topics linked. It is very common practice to link everything in an infobox as long as it doesn't appear twice in the infobox. BOVINEBOY2008:) 18:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

And it appears you are right about the change of the original channel. It is hard to take you seriously when you are making sweeping changes without discussing them after they are reverted. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 18:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm "sweeping" with the changes? Where's my broom? Apparently I'm the only one who can look things up.

As for the info box not everything has to be or is linked. Something shouldn't be, because there is no link and something because it is not necessary. You really don't know what English language means or where the United States is? Really? Then, please go back to school and learn these things. I hate to break it to you, but English is the most commonly spoken language in the world. As for the U.S. they've been a big influence on the rest of the world, materialistic things wise. After 9/11, you should at least know where the US. Tsk, tsk, tsk. TomHarison2 (talk) 18:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't seem you have any interest in the value of learning. If you would read Template:Infobox Television, it clearly says to link to language articles. BOVINEBOY2008:) 19:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

o_0 --13² 17:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No kidding. It was clear that he was R7604 and he has since been banned for block evasion.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 18:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

There have been a few others as well (I've reported the ones I've caught on Tom's talk page). I just don't see how she could possibly think we wouldn't notice the edits and/or figure out it was her. It boggles the mind. --13² 19:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMRELEASE

On this edit you removed the release dates in majority English languge speaking countries along with an edit summary that states "remove ratings from infobox per WP:FILMRELEASE".WP:FILMRELEASE, among other information, states the following:

"Release dates should therefore be restricted to the following:

• Its first release dates in majority English-speaking countries only (because this is the English Wikipedia); e.g., United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc."

The release dates you removed are allowed per the very link you provided as proof for removing that same information.

Thanks! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 20:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No you are reading the information wrong. The first release in an English-speaking country would be the American release.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 20:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

This does not mean "list only the country in which the film was first released if that is a majority English speaking country", it means "list the first date on which the film was released in any majority English speaking country". Big Bird (talk • contribs) 20:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, please take a look at the example infobox at Wikipedia:FILMRELEASE#Infobox. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 20:35, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I know I have asked this before, but I can't find where. If we are going by the interpretation you have presented (which is the interpretation I had originally thought) then we would have to list the "first" release date of every majority English-speaking country. Including:

• Akrotiri and Dhekelia
• American Samoa
• Anglosphere
• Anguilla
• Ascension Island
• Australia
• The Bahamas
• Bahrain
• Barbados
• Belize
• Bermuda
• Botswana
• British Indian Ocean Territory
• British Virgin Islands
• Canada
• Cayman Islands
• Cook Islands
• Dominica
• Falkland Islands
• Federated States of Micronesia
• Fiji
• The Gambia
• Ghana
• Gibraltar
• Grenada
• Guam
• Guyana
• Hong Kong
• India
• Republic of Ireland
• Jamaica
• Kenya
• Kiribati
• Lesotho
• Liberia
• Little England beyond Wales
• Malawi
• Malta
• Isle of Man
• Marshall Islands
• Mauritius
• Montserrat
• Namibia
• Nauru
• New Zealand
• Nigeria
• Niue
• Northern Mariana Islands
• Pakistan
• Palau
• Papua New Guinea
• Philippines
• Pitcairn Islands
• Puerto Rico
• Puntland
• Rwanda
• Saint Helena
• Saint Kitts and Nevis
• Saint Lucia
• Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
• Samoa
• Seychelles
• Sierra Leone
• Singapore
• Solomon Islands
• South Africa
• South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
• Swaziland
• Tanzania
• Tokelau
• Tristan da Cunha
• Turks and Caicos Islands
• Tuvalu
• Uganda
• United Kingdom
• United States
• United States Virgin Islands
• Vanuatu
• Zambia
• Zimbabwe

This is obviously not right. The confusion (for me) comes with the plural on "dates" in the policy. I don't know, it is certainly something that needs to be adressed. BOVINEBOY2008:) 22:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The Amanda Show Spyro reference.

The IP address was correct. The theme and ending theme for The Amanda Show was also composed by Stewart Copeland. Wizard Peak's music actually sounds very similar to it, as seen here. The Amanda Show ending can be heardhere (skip to 33:58) on a the video I made using that theme for the credits. Now, tell me, those sound very similar, don't they? - Zhang He (talk) 18:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if you or I find them similar sounding. That constitutes as original research. You need a reliable source to back it up. BOVINEBOY2008 :)18:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I gave you two sources right there! - Zhang He (talk) 20:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's another source: http://www.stewartcopeland.net/discography/discography03.html - Zhang He (talk) 20:18, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Youtube is not a reliable source. The second will suffice to say that Copeland wrote the Spyro piece.This one says he wrote the Amanda Show theme. You can't say that latter borrowed from the former without constituting as original research. I will add back that Copeland wrote the piece, though.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 20:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Help.

Hi, I am newbie, don't know much about works here, yesterday i had done one edit i.e. Added official website to Lord of rings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Lord_of_the_Rings:_The_Return_of_the_King&oldid=308913055

But you edited it back & removed the Official website. Why so? Please Guide.

-- Abu Torsam  01:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem Abu. The website you provided is definitely an Official website, but from my look at it, it seems to be the website for the entire trilogy. You should definitely add it to the trilogy's article. It seems to be more appropriate there. BOVINEBOY2008:) 20:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Fg

BB08(do you mind if i call you that) how good are you in family guy. --Pedro J.^{the rookie} 20:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Feel free, and in what facet? I have seen many of the episodes but don't know too much about the production/behind-the-scenes aspect.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 21:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I am in a let's call it proyect to boost up family guy to GA or FA, or at least the characters, and looks to me that your a good editor, and if i see what you have better then me, so i was wondering if you have free time, will you join me, i already have some expirience and if you have any dout tell me. are you abored. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 21:07, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry i can wait =D. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 21:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I can take a look at them in a while. BOVINEBOY2008:) 21:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

right thanks.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 21:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I want you to help me but family guy up for GA and later FA are you willing. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 01:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea. I think hulu in general doesn't work overseas because of copyrighting, but if you can find the same video else where, you should have no problem. Actually I am looking for that same info, so let me know if you find it.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 02:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes I will probably help you. I don't make any guarantees, though. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 01:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help man, appriciate it. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 16:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

is the this artical GA matirial Patriot Games (Family Guy) . --Pedro J.^{the rookie} 18:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

No, not really. It is rather short, the cultural references are not sourced, and there is not reception or reviews section.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 21:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

BB08 can you see this video and tell me what it says it cannot be seen out of USA, which i am[5]. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 23:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, hulu has weird copyright laws. I did find another version of the video though[6].BOVINEBOY2008 :) 02:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

BB08, what would you think of putting a gallery with the voice actors images on family guy like on the simpsons. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie}03:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I am still against it. It probably should be contested there and knowing what the voice actors look like don't help with the readers understanding of the subject. I think with new review guidelines, it would never make FA or even GA with it. I have finished going through the article. I may try to find some more articles to expand a casting section and would like to add more about reception, but I probably won't be working so intently on it for a while. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 03:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Alright, i see your point i'll see what i can do, and you take a deserved rest, you have done a great job. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie}03:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh I forgot i told some wikipedians to check out the page, and tell me what we could expand so i will keep you posted.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie}04:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I found the rest of the videos but it those not talk about the rest of the cast, it is more about the show. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie}02:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you have links, there may be more to them that we can add though. This is definitely some kind of interview for a TV show or something and I wish I knew more about it. BOVINEBOY2008:) 02:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Here:[7][8][9][10][11]. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 14:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you think it has inof refrences or it needs some more. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 19:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't think of it has having enough, think if everything that isn't obvious or is controversial is sourced, then you have "enough".BOVINEBOY2008 :) 00:46, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

should i put a crossover with AD, i have refernces. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 19:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is notable enough and even if it were, I don't know where I would put it. That is definitely something to put in episodes article but probably not the overview. Can you do one thing that is really bugging me - could you move periods and other punctuation marks in front of the refs? Instead of

"blah blah text blah blah<ref>cool link about family guy</ref>."

it should look like

"blah blah text blah blah.<ref>cool link about family guy</ref>"

CTJF83Talk 21:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

fg sources

regarding sources from tweets. They seem legit as long as the twitter account is authorized, and ive read over the sources page again and as long as its not about a living person or is the basis for an article a tweet seems like a valid source. In this case its only a date, and its confirmed by the creator and producer on their pages. What part of the resources section actually bans twitters for info that doesnt directly relate to a living person... Grande13 (talk) 03:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

If you (or I) read WP:TWITTER correctly, you definitely can use twitter as a source. I really don't have a problem with it and you probably could use it again and I wouldn't say another word. Having said that, the guideline does state

if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.

Since there was a question of the reliability of the source, I automatically expect a third-party source to back it up. I really think if you are going to use tweets as a resource and someone contests it, you should back it up with a third-party source.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 03:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Im sure it can be backed up eventually, but it was the first time the information has been available, and im sure it will be updated with more sources eventually, but if the correct information is out there and can be sourced with at least twitter, it can help prevent vandalism by users putting in rumors they hear or etc. Grande13 (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, but just remember that there is no deadline. It may be worth waiting until a different source is available.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 12:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand. I'll try to find as many sources as possible and i'll also keep it more vague as not to focus on that specific source at least for the time being until more info is releasedGrande13 (talk) 13:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Invite

Hello Bovineboy2008/Archives. You have been invited to join WikiProject Family Guy, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the Family Guy-related articles on Wikipedia. You received this invitation due to your interest in, or edits relating to or within the scope of the project. If you would like to join or just help out a bit, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of project members. You may also wish to add {{User WikiProject Family Guy}} to your userpage. Welcome --Pedro J. the rookie 23:19, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Have I Gone Crazy?

This isn't me, right? I haven't stumbled into the Spanish Wikipedia or something, have I? -WarthogDemon 20:09, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I thought I had tried to revert back to the English version. There must have been an edit conflict. Sorry for the confusion.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 20:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah okay. No prob, just makes the day more interesting. Cheers. :) -WarthogDemon 20:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: List of SpongeBob episodes

Sure, I'll help out. I've been dealing with this guy for the past few days now. Mokoniki | talk23:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. S/He doesn't seem to be harming anything, but most of the things s/he adds is either unnecessary detail or fan-made labeling (a big pet peeve of mine). He has brought it up here if you want to weigh in.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 00:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a big pet peeve of mine as well. Mokoniki | talk 16:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

S/He doesn't seem to be getting it. S/He's still reverting the edits. Mokoniki | talk 20:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

YgoFan90

Just to let you know, I've already filed a 3RR report on YgoFan90. So now there's 2 reports for the one user on WP:AN3.--Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Bill, I must have missed it. I removed mine and added my comment about him/her to your report.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 21:51, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. --Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

BB08, man is YgoF90 srtasing, i have reverted him, i talked with him how the hell are we going to calm him down i mean i got into a fight with another editor he dose not listen, we gotta solve this. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 21:42, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

It is really frustrating. S/He is a good-faith editor, but doesn't discuss anything and doesn't seem to want help from others. There has been a report filed. Usually after the block, the user calms down and will discuss things more. Just try to wait it out or try getting him/her to talk. BOVINEBOY2008:) 21:51, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I have been there, it is true he will probaly calm down later. --Pedro J.^{the rookie} 22:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting YgoFan90's edit to the SpongeBob episodes list. I would have done it myself, but I've reverted enough edits on the article already. Mokoniki | talk 13:10, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep. It's the last time I can really do it though. BOVINEBOY2008:) 13:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

SpongeBob characters article problem

Apparantly, some anon user believes that Mrs. Puff was born in 2025. I don't want to get myself in another edit war, so I only reverted once, and decided to come to you about the problem. Can you help? Mokoniki | talk 00:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I added it to my watchlist! BOVINEBOY2008:) 01:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Family Guy

As far as resources go, I don't really have any. TV is a lot harder to find resources for than film, because it's such a weekly thing and not as big a production. Most of my Smallville stuff comes from books that I buy that have all of the production info in them.Google News, Google Books, andGoogle Scholar will probably be your best search engines. I'd stay away from Google Web, because it's mostly unreliable sources there. Since I don't watch Family Guy, I cannot really say (beyond Google) where good resources would be. If you have a LexisNexis account then you should probably be able to find some good resources from print media that's online (if you don't, I know that Hunter Kahn (talk · contribs) does).

As far as suggestions for the article go. Here are some quick things I got just from scanning over it:
1) Go through and clean up the sibling pages. Family Guy: Live in Vegas probably doesn't meet the WP:GNG, and should really just be merged back into the main article into a well developed prose section. The same goes for Family Guy (pinball). There are probably others, but there are far too many mini-subsections on the page. There is probably a better way to organize them all so that the page doesn't look like a skeleton.
2) The lawsuit section could/should probably all be one collective section. I would scrap the sectionings. Clearly there isn't enough there to warrant a true section for each lawsuit, so I'd just drop the pseudo-sections and just let the paragraphs sit as they are (except bring that one sentence paragraph up to the one above it).
3) Speaking of, I would probably separate lawsuits and the writers' strike away from "reception and achievements", as neither fit that category.
4) The same goes for the "DVD" section. Personally, I would separate it by itself, rename it "Home video release" (as that's a bit more formal than "DVD") and include a table that lists the release of all the seasons in regions 1, 2, and 4 (for comprehensiveness). I would use the DVD prose info as the opening before the table.
5) If you can find the data, providing a table that lists the Nielsen Ratings for each of the seasons would be nice for the reception section. Just a thought.
6) "Settings" should probably be under "Production", given that it's sort of tied to the same process. They have to recreate those settings in the production of an episode. In addition, I don't know if you have access to those sources, but I'd check the info from them with regard to the "Setting" information. As I'm reading it, it reads like it's original research. The image appears to be using synthesis to support the idea that the show recreates specific landscapes. If so, then we cannot use any of it (whatever's not sourced).
7) Per the MOS on images, images that are left justified should not be directly under a section header. So, I would suggest either reordering the page so that the Production info is lower than the infobox (so that Seth can be moved to the right), or moving the image of Seth to another section. Personally, I'd put all in-universe stuff at the top, and get it out of the way (character list, storyline description, etc.).
That's basically it. Overall it looks good, it just needs some restructuring, IMO.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you much! BOVINEBOY2008:) 11:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi - Why did you remove the image of Providence and the similar animated skyline?--DAW0001 (talk) 05:41, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

There is no reason for it to be there. Proof that those are similar are not supported by references and thus constitutes asoriginal research. BOVINEBOY2008:) 14:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I read it again and the ref does call for it so I put the image back. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 14:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

The Parrot

Isn't his name Potty? That's what I always heard. Mokoniki | talk 00:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Talky back - Late But Replied :-)

Hello, Bovineboy2008. You have new messages at Collectonian's talk page.
Message added 00:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FG 2

How much help are you providing to get Family Guy up to GA status? Pedro appears to be having lots of problems with grammar and spelling. CTJF83Talk 21:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I went through once copy-editing, spell checking, flushing out refs, etc. once but since then Pedro has added a lot. I am going to go through it this weekend again. I really don't have any articles to add anything, but am looking to expand the cast section to have more casting info and then adding some positive reception to balance the negative. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 22:22, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not really wanting to take on that project right now, as I have a few other major ones going. Once you think it might be GA ready, I will gladly do a read over/copy edit before it is nominated. Pedro is just gonna need a lot of help, and I'm not willing to put effort into FG just yet. CTJF83Talk 04:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

How is FG coming, i cleaned it up a bit, just wanted to know what you think about it. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 02:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Its coming along. There are actually too many sources for somethings so I am trying to go through and see which ones are the most reliable & verifiable. I am also working on the DVD release chart as I type. The content is getting better though.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 02:14, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Is the page complete BB08, and if not what those it need. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 00:26, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

And I took some of the refrences too so i think it's fine with the refrences. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 15:13, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm reading it over now, and will get with you when I'm done. CTJF83Talk 20:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I've done some clean up and fixes and have made several suggestions on improving the article before it is nominated. Let me know if you have more questions! CTJF83Talk 21:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Bovine I think that the thing that is missing from the FG artical is a theame section but the laast time i did one it was horribly, so if you could help me out and kind of start a peace so i have an idea of expanding it. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 17:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure what a themes section would entail. I am doing some reading once I get the chance, but there needs to be some research done about the show that a simple news search isn't going to have. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 18:26, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes it is true, the google news won't be inof, i made a good reception section with the refrences that the bot and i where able to find, so you may want to take a look at it, and pepole tell me to lppk in the simpsons theams but i get no where. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie}18:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Nintendo task force membership update

It's that time again to update membership status with the Nintendo task force, which we try to do every 3-4 months to keep our membership up-to-date.

All participants have been placed on an "Inactive participants" list. To confirm that you're still a member of the Nintendo task force, simply go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Nintendo#Members and move your name from the "Inactive participants" list to the bottom of the "Active participants" list. If you are no longer an active member in the task force, you may simply remove your name altogether. After 1 month, on October 1, all entries under the "Inactive participants" list will be removed. Hopefully you can stay with us and continue to work on Nintendo-related articles. Regards, MuZemike 17:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Help me please!

I think you can answer this, am I a bad editor? Just save me from the madness! (and see my reply for the FN vandalism - I'm not the first person to wanna vandalize that page anyway.) CDrive655 (talk) 23:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Why are you asking me? From your edits, you do a lot of blanking calling it vandalism. In some cases it is and in others is not. If you really think a whole section is vandalism, you can put a {{tl:clean-up}} tag on the top of the article or in the section and you can come to more experienced editors and/or the talk page of the article for questions and/or help. Try doing smaller edits until you get more a hang of editing and try doing positive, constructive edits and not blanking. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 23:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

But you know, edits like this doesn't help.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 23:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Ignore him, BB. It's Bambifan101 again. If this moron even so much as puts another keystroke on your talk page, you let me know and post it to WP:ANI as well. Thanks for all your good work. Don't let this pest drive you nuts. PMDrive1061(talk) 02:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you PMDrive. BOVINEBOY2008:) 02:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

You are more than welcome.

PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:40, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, how do I link to the article Buck-teeth? I need to link to it on Up (2009 film). TBC9883 (talk) 01:09, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

There is no article on buck-teeth, but if there were, you would put this [[Buck-teeth|bucktoothed]].BOVINEBOY2008 :) 01:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Same little jackass, BB. He just asked me for "help" as well. My suggestion would be to take any request for help of this type with a seriously large grain of salt. If it happens again, please report it. If I'm online, I'll clobber his butt so fast he won't know what hit him. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Becoming a coordinator

Hello, hope you are doing well today! If you have not yet noticed, the selection process for the WikiProject Films coordinator election is currently underway. You have been a great contributor to articles under WikiProject Films, and judging from our interactions, you are an editor who can discuss reasonably and civilly. If you are interested in being an active voice and help WikiProject Films along, I think you would be an excellent candidate for coordinatorship. I hope you will consider! Erik (talk | contribs) 13:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I responded in a last-ditch effort. :) Erik (talk |contribs) 14:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi there; I see you don't feel ready right now for coordinatorship. All well and good, but I hope you don't mind if I try to talk you into it! The position is quite informal, with no official authority, and doesn't really require any more experience than you already have. Some of what you would be doing is pretty much what you do already—contributing thoughtfully to WT:FILM and other film project talk pages. Other open tasks are ones that you can tackle at your own pace, with no requirement to spend all your time on coordinator responsibilities. Plus, with only a six-month term, if you reckon the position isn't for you then there's absolutely no obligation to run again. I hope you'll at least reconsider. All the best, Steve ^T • C 09:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags

Hi. Users are allowed to remove speedy deletion tags from articles as long as they aren't the creator of the article. I'veundone your re-addition of the tag at Toy Story 4. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Premise section of Hurt Locker

From my talk page you wrote:

Hey Inurhead! It looks like your premise section was removed again. I am trying to figure out what your intention for such a section is. If it is to summarize the plot, would it be more appropriate to merge into the lede section? What you have written is good so the removal isn't personal or because of poor writing, but the section is redundant of the plot section.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 20:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I updated the LEAD section per your suggestion. Good idea. (And I don't blame you for not wanting to take Erik up on his offer. Just looking at his "to do" list is enough to make anyone's head spin... Isn't that when it becomes "not fun" anymore?)Inurhead (talk) 03:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

ANI FYI

I have started a new discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Inurhead continued incivility and edit warring at The Hurt Locker regarding the issues at The Hurt Locker and with Inurhead. FYI in case you wish to add any comments about the situation. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 05:04, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Collectonian. It seems most of the discussion has been covered but if there is anything else I can add in the future I'll jump. It's on my watchlist. BOVINEBOY2008:) 10:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

House infobox

"remove "House" from caption, remove flag from infobox"
"common practice to include these."
"no it isn't, in fact flags should not be used in infoboxes"

I'm pretty shure it is. Take a look at Band of Brothers, Stargate Atlantis, Stargate Universe, Arrested Development, Prison Break,Fringe and a whole buch of others. There was even a discussion[12], which had a 12-9 vote in favor of keeping flags (Flags should no longer be used in Television Infoboxes: 12 opposed, 9 in favor). Unless there was a new discussion since I last checked… _Xeworlebi^(t•c) 18:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Your right. The Film Wikiproject has contradictory guidelines and was kind of on that track. Thank you for calling me out.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 21:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

12 to 9 is no consensus. This article has not had a flag ever, therefore there is no reason to add one in now.LonelyMarble (talk) 22:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Fame

Hi. Since the same anonymous IP reverted your edits to Fame (2009 film) by adding uncited, unverified cast-member claims, I thought you might want to be notified that he's doing it again. I've removed the unverified names, but he's reverted once and may do again. With regards, -- 207.237.223.118 (talk) 00:36, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look. BOVINEBOY2008:) 00:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.

I'd like to personally thank you for reverting the vandalism to both my personal user page and The Cleveland Show page. --HELLØ ŦHERE02:24, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem JpGrB. We have to look out for each other as well as the integrity of the articles.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 02:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Jennifer's Body article

Hello, Bovineboy2008. I am more familiar with your screen name than I am with your editing, but I know that you are active with film articles. Would you mind commenting at the Jennifer's Body talk page? An IP there is simply not getting something in regards to Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic...and how Wikipedia works at large. Flyer22 (talk) 10:15, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

do me a favor

i created the Iron Man (Film Series) and i was wondering what if you can check it out. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 19:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Not Another Teen Movie

It has been tagged the template since July 2008, and there has no improvement for 14 months now. Wiikipedian 12:47, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

So fix it. BOVINEBOY2008:) 12:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Please update your status with WP:VG

Dear WikiProject Video games member,

You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or {{User WPVG}} somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in the recent months.

The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.

All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:

• Editing video game-related pages in the Article namespace
• Participating in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD,WP:GAN, etc.)

Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.

—WikiProject Video games (delivery by xenobot 03:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

dot, new ip

dot's back with a new IP range to monitor with a ton of bad edits. Looks like 78.16.x.x (today was 78.16.219.126).SpikeJones (talk) 03:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. I'll keep my eye out. BOVINEBOY2008:) 03:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

FG

I have nominated Family Guy for a GA if you want to check on it it would be great. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 12:14, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

FG is now a GA thanks for your help man. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 01:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Coordinator welcome

Hello, Bovineboy2008. You have new messages at WT:FILMC.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

List of Family Guy episodes

In this section, do you think OR about when the episodes will air is ok? Grande13 feels the need to add episode titles with out official Fox press releases, based on the OR of Adult Swim airing one week after Fox. Please comment here. CTJF83 chat 17:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

They are on the OFFICIAL schedule from adultswim. Fox has exclusive rights for 1 week before they can air on adult swim, this isnt anything new here Grande13 (talk) 17:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

"remove incorrect cats"

Hi. Listen, your edits to articles such as Twenty One (game show), Shop 'til You Drop, and To Tell the Truth are counter-productive. You are removing categories that detail the specific runs and condensing it into two years which, to people who do not know of such things, will seem very much incorrect. (Truth did not run straight from 1956-2002.)

As for the Infobox, that is different – individual runs are listed during the article. The categories that you removed delete this important information from those pages and do not recognize each individual run.

I have reverted your edits for the time being. If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. Thanks. :-) Daniel Benfield (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Addendum – your edits also happened to Supermarket Sweep. Again, if you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page.Daniel Benfield (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

"So, just to clarify, the debut/ending cats should be for each run of a show?" Yes, since there are various runs. And yes, technically the show is debuting again; for example, the brand-new version of Let's Make a Deal – it's a premiere, and it has been off the air for enough time to be considered new.

(This also applies if the show comes back after a long stretch of repeats, such as Shop 'til You Drop {reran by PAX, now ION, from 1999-2000 before the network actually brought the show back in first-run}, unless the show normally does Summer repeats.)

A better example might be Hollywood Squares – when the Tom Bergeron version began in 1998, some viewers did not know the show even existed prior to that. This especially includes the original Peter Marshall era.

So basically, if a show comes back after a hiatus it can be considered a re-premiere. What's My Line? aired from 1950-1967, then 1968-1975. However, that is two seperate runs because A) It was on two different networks (CBS, then Syndicated) and B) One year passed between runs. Different networks get different run lengths unless the show moved from one to the other over the course of a weekend (Let's Make a Deal, the original Price is Right).

Sorry for the long-winded explanation (^_^;), but I hope you understand. If you still have questions, ask on my talk page. Daniel Benfield (talk) 19:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright. Thank you for the clarification. BOVINEBOY2008:) 19:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

SpongeBob Barnstar

-AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 16:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! BOVINEBOY2008:) 17:25, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

FG

do me a favor can you review the FG peer review, i want to take it to the next level to an FA. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 01:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Pedro. I'll take a look when I find the time! BOVINEBOY2008 :) 06:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

great i really need it.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 15:20, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Release dates.

I agree with your removal on The Hurt Locker, after reading and educating myself on what dates are most notable. (I shall keep an eye out and see that only Festival releases--if it's a premiere--and American releases are listed; and, of course, foreign countries when applicable. Is that the right guideline to follow?) I was debating keeping the UK and TIFF dates, but did so, because I was simultaneously working on (500) Days of Summer. And UK's AND Australia's are listed. And it seems to lack even more notability than THL's Toronto Fest dates. So should I remove them and merely keep the Sundance premiere and American theatrical release dates? Or should I lessen it further by removing the "wide" date, as the "limited" date was its theatrical premiere and is really the more truly essential date? Thanks in advance, fellow cinemaniac.--Cinemaniac⁸⁶_{Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire} 05:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! For (500) Days, I would include the Sundance date and the limited release date. The fact that the film opened wider could and should be explained in the article. BOVINEBOY2008:) 05:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Welcome and excellent, I shall tackle that instantly. Three USA dates are excessive anyway. I'll factor it into the intro paragraph. Anyway, I'm glad that I can channel my film fanaticism into contributions here. Hope I can soon be one of the pinnacles of film/awards article editing around Wiki!--Cinemaniac⁸⁶_{Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire} 05:38, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

"What other uses does it have?"

• Who Framed Roger Rabbit (computer game)
• Who Framed Roger Rabbit (Nintendo Entertainment System)
• Who Framed Roger Rabbit (Game Boy)

also we should link people to Who Censored Roger Rabbit?, which they might be looking for, although that is in the lead.

Can I suggest moving Who Framed Roger Rabbit (video game) to Who Framed Roger Rabbit (disambiguation) and reinstating my edits to that page and Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

Thanks,

--MegaSloth (talk) 15:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I added a disambiguation notice for the video games. The other has a different title and is already linked. I don't think there are enough links to warrant a disambiguation page. BOVINEBOY2008:) 15:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:D, "If there are three or more topics associated with the same term, then a disambiguation page should normally be created for that term". There are at least four in this case, so the page should normally exist. Also, WP:DDAB: "When a more specific title is still ambiguous, but not enough so to call for double disambiguation, it should redirect back to the main disambiguation page (or a section of it)."; that is, Who Framed Roger Rabbit (video game) should be a redirect to Who Framed Roger Rabbit (disambiguation). This is what I am trying to achieve. --MegaSloth (talk) 15:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, go for it! BOVINEBOY2008:) 15:44, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience. Cheers! --MegaSloth (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Brian's Got a Brand New Bag‎

I don't have cable or dish, so I can't confirm if the episode has aired on Adult Swim or not. Are you able to confirm or deny its airing?CTJF83 chat 17:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not able to. BOVINEBOY2008:) 17:59, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok, Grande13 confirmed it did not air, thanks anyway :) CTJF83 chat 18:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

FLC

can you help me in the fg cast lead, it is in FLC but i am not good at leads.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 19:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Scrubs

scrubs ius being reviewed for ga could help me get the requests done.--Pedro J.^{the rookie} 00:12, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Reply

It's OK, I tried to revert the Disney vandal too. For Open Season (film), is the cast and the characters section neccery? It looks like all plot and names (which are in the plot). Also, the species part could be OR. Snehvide og de syv dværge (talk) 17:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

The cast should be noted but the characters section can be done away with. Cast/character sections should be about the casting of the roles and character development and choices cast members made. See Star Trek (film) for a (pretty) good example. Of course, this is harder for animated films. BOVINEBOY2008:) 17:30, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, will note and do. This section seems unneccery here and bongs down the tone. You can help. Snehvide og de syv dværge (talk) 17:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I have a question: I looked at the article The Fox and the Hound and it seems to be the primary Disney vandal target. I seeMersealt2004's version looks better, yet is not allowed. Then I found User talk:68.220.168.186. Do you think I should edit this or will it be reverted? The user in question that reverts this is a primere Disney vandal hunter I see. Snehvide og de syv dværge (talk) 17:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit which? BOVINEBOY2008:) 18:01, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

The Fox and the Hound. The biggest Disney vandal target ever. Snehvide og de syv dværge(talk) 18:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

If you make small, constructive edits, it shouldn't be reverted. But making sweeping changes can set off red flags, even with me and even I might revert you. BOVINEBOY2008:) 18:11, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Owl City

Hi Bovine: First off, thanks for writing to me. Sales I think are always more notable than airplay and in most cases, airplay-sales combo. I have yet to read any policy that states that so-called component charts can't be used...I checked. Also, I've yet to see a "consensus"...where is this consensus? Even if that were all true, who's to say that that's the way it should be...so long it's an official, legitimate source (Billboard, Mediabase, SoundScan, Nielsen), what's wrong? That's what Wikipedia is all about. Also, you might think of SoundScan as a component chart, but it stands alone as its own entity - a list of the most popular songs based on sales. Finally, I know there is a rule about reverting...but I can make the same argument that you reverted my edits too many times. I know you don't mean to, but your words can be interpreted as sounding rather arrogant. Talk to you later.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.66.137.230(talk)

I have only reverted twice, you thrice (even more, assuming you are the other ip). And the consensus is what the policy page I pointed you to was. Here read this: WP:Record charts. These can of course be discussed, but as it stands, the policy considers sales charts obsolete once a single enters the combo chart. BOVINEBOY2008:) 05:12, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS' Tag & Assess Drive and Roll Call

Um, dumb question, but one I've never ran into in my Wikipedia circuit. Does a film character article fall under WP:FILM?? And if it does, would you use routine class criteria to rate it? Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes and yes. BOVINEBOY2008:) 12:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Uh huh, huh huh

you said "asses"!  pablo_{huh huh.}20:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Oops! Sorry about that. BOVINEBOY2008:) 21:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Chicago

Would you please explain why you feel that a long, vertcal "cleanup" box, generating a large block of whitespace is preferable to my attangement? The way I did it, a smaller whitespace was hidden next to the infobox, not placed within the "Plot" section.B00P (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

It really depends on the resolution of your/mine screen. What looks better on your screen actually looks worse on mine. All it did in mine was move the table of contents and the start of the plot down further. The Plot in your version actually starts next to the "Starring" section in the infobox. I hope that helps! BOVINEBOY2008 :) 20:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Spoilers

I know that spoilers are not worried about, I thought I had seen somewhere though that they don't belong in the introduction. I apologize. Icefall5 (talk) 14:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I just asked for clarification in the Video Games project, and I was told that spoilers are supposed to be kept out of the lead paragraph. Would my edit be okay then? Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Spoilers Icefall5 (talk) 15:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Per your edit summary query

The MoS tends to favour following the nationality of the subject. The "xth grade" construction would be a definite shibboleth in Canada, unless it's different out west. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright. I didn't know that. Thank you! BOVINEBOY2008:) 12:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

ANI Notifications

Dear Bovineboy2008, I just wanted to drop you a kind note and let you know that you forgot to inform an involved editor in the thread that you opened on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Don't worry! It's been take care of it. Just wanted to gently remind you to make sure to do so when and if you open a new ANI thread in the future. Thanks!!! Basket of Puppies 22:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Basket of Puppies. I'll be sure to do that in the future. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 22:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

FLC

Can you review this artical Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Family Guy (season 5)/archive2.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 01:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Link "The Men Who Stare at Goats (film)"

This is a opera.com images.google.de link (Is not out of order. You can open this link with wikipedia.org)

• http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.bsw-energie.de/papi25.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bsw-energie.de/wassinds.htm&usg=__93cK1U3G0DhU_BQy2CL1-XqBj0Q=&h=480&w=640&sz=34&hl=de&start=17&tbnid=80JxutXbqTT_FM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=137&prev=/images%3Fq%3DParabol-Kocher%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Dde%26sa%3DG82.109.84.114 (talk) 17:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Family Guy merge proposal

Hi, I proposed merging Seth & Alex's Almost Live Comedy Showwith Family Guy 3 weeks ago, and haven't had much feedback, so I'm requesting your opinion (along with other major project members) on whether the page should be merged or not. Thank you, CTJF83 chat 09:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I've responded. BOVINEBOY2008:) 13:28, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Amy Adams

Thanks. I was sitting here debating on whether to do what you did. I spent hours last night updating that filmography table and I've yet to sort out what this brand new editor did to the rest of the article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Could we suggest to the editor to put his edits up on a sandbox, so we can see if we can combine the versions?BOVINEBOY2008 :) 01:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if he's amenable to that or not. He mostly seems to want things his way. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

New Moon (2009 film) and Eclipse (2010 film)

Both these two articles were recently submitted for a name change. I did agree with this name change in February, however, now I am a strong opposing factor in why the name should ramian New Moon and Eclipse with the signifigant other name in the first line of the articles.

WP:NCCN and WP:PRECISION both state the title should be "terms most commonly used", "A good article title is brief and to the point", "Prefer titles that follow the same pattern as those of other similar articles", "An article can only have one name; however significant alternative names for the topic should be mentioned in the article, usually in the first sentence or paragraph". "And despite earlier reports that the movie would be known as The Twilight Saga's New Moon, the title will remain New Moon according to the movie's rep. They just have Twilight Saga in the artwork to identify it for anyone less devoted than your average fanggirl."Source.

Also see WP:PRECISION. I quote from there: "Articles' titles usually merely indicate the name of the topic. When additional precision is necessary to distinguish an article from other uses of the topic name, over-precision should be avoided. Be precise but only as precise as is needed. For example, it would be inappropriate to name an article "United States Apollo program (1961–1975)" over Apollo program or "Nirvana (Aberdeen, Washington rock band)" over Nirvana (band). Remember that concise titles are generally preferred."

However, I personally do not think we have had enough input and would like input from people who might not like these movies, or just edit them to help wikipedia out. The pages are: Talk:New Moon (2009 film)#Requested move and Talk:Eclipse (2010 film)#Requested move. Any help/input would greatly be apriciated. I am not stressing weather you should oppose/support either of these.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 21:09, 8 December 2009 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Miley template

Hello Bovineboy2008! Thanks for explaining and removing the Template:Miley Cyrus from the The Last Song (film) article. I hadn't realized that films had been removed from the template. I checked the edit history on the template, and youredit summarystates that other people and films were removed per consensus. I agree with removing other people but disagree with removing films, so I was wondering if you would link me to the discussion so that I can read the comments. Thanks! Liqudluck✽talk 03:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I can't find the original, but there is one going on right now here. Also, it has been used for many TfD's, here are two for Heath Ledger and Jim Carrey. BOVINEBOY2008:) 03:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

fac

Wanted to let you now i have nominated Family Guy for FAC and informeing major FG contributers.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 18:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Help

can you help me agian with Family Guy--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 21:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Film templates

I seen you removed cast and crewin the Scream template per consensus. Where is that discussion located and does it go for all film templates? --Mike Allen ^{talk ·contribs} 20:48, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

WT:ACTOR#Actors padding TV and film navboxes BOVINEBOY2008:) 21:11, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I read the link, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me, so maybe you can help explain the consensus to me. In my mind, the purpose of a navigation template is so that people browsing one topic, particularly a major one, can easily navigate between items that might be of interest them. While I think that I understand the argument being made, I think that it grossly over-complicates things. Why are we making it more difficult for people to access the information they want? I understand why it doesn't make sense as an editor, but the majority of people who read any page aren't editors, they're readers. Why shouldn't they be able to have all the cast members grouped in one spot so that they can easily flip through them? Of all the topics on that template, people are probably going to be most interested in the actors. Cheers, CP 03:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Navigation boxes do aid in navigation, but only to closely related articles. In fact, navboxes should be placed on every article they link to and every articles should have a similar close connection. While cast and crew members do star/work on shows and films, it isn't the only thing they do, and usually they don't work exclusively with specific actors (of course there are exceptions). There is also another problem of overlinking on actor/crew member pages. For example, if every series/film navbox would contain the cast and crew, Ed O'Neill would have upwards of 50 navboxes on his page. Certainly this is excessive, but deciding which ones to be included would ultimately give undue weight to a specific job the person had. These ideas have been discussed before and have been used as rationales for TfD, but they aren't often upheld. I'd be happy to answer any other questions you have!BOVINEBOY2008 :) 03:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Well I had a long reply, then I realized that it was turning into a rant about Wikipedia more than the topic itself, which I don't care much about to be honest, so while I do think you've made good points, it's just my personal opinion that the list of actors better serves Wikipedia's primary function as a portal of information that can be easily accessed. I do think that it'd be ridiculous to have a dozen infoboxes under Ed O'Neill, but then I do think it's useful to have the one under Married... with Children (with the actors of course), so I guess I just want to have my cake and eat it too by putting the infobox on the latter and not the former, haha. I would think that people going to Married... with Children would want to know what's going on with Ed O'Neill, but most people on Ed O'Neill wouldn't need to link back to Married... or at least they wouldn't need to have all his works/associations piled in one place. In any case, the consensus seems clear and it's not really that large of an issue, so there's better things for us to spend our time on. I do think the MWC template will be going to TfD soon though, because I don't think it has much use anymore. Cheers, CP 04:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! BOVINEBOY2008:) 04:06, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm that looks like it just applies to TV series, and not films? --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs}04:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Why would it not apply to films? BOVINEBOY2008:) 04:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I was hoping you could tell me! lolSee here. I am very confused about this. --05:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

? That discussion really doesn't support names in navboxes. I don't see the problem here.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 14:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

No there is no "problem", other than my lack of memory. I didn't come here to chastise you for anything, I just wanted to know where the policy was, so I wouldn't look stupid when I started remove the same from navboxes. I went to that page to ask where the policy was, because I forgot where I seen it (obviously here), but they couldn't tell me where or if a policy existed, so I thought I was just going crazy per usual. Well until someone commented on your talk page and it showed in my watchlist. I just want to go by the guidelines and I try not to hack a way or change things without getting a clear picture of the current consensus. I'm sorry I bothered you about this... --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 18:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) No its okay! I can't seem to find the original discussion either! Maybe we could take it to WP:ACTOR to see if anyone there knows. BOVINEBOY2008 :)18:30, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

How do you feel about this template being placed on all the actors of Law and Order: SVU? I just seen this (on Dann Florek, B.D. Wong and Stephanie March, just to name a few). Is this a legimate template per guidelines?--Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 17:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

It needs to be deleted. I'm putting together a TfD for all the actor navboxes once the consensus has cleared up on WT:ACTOR. There is a whole list of them:

• {{Charmed_cast}}
• {{Buffy_and_Angel_cast}}
• {{Simpsons_cast}}
• {{Actors_in_Law_and_Order:_Criminal_Intent}}
• {{Actors_in_Tyler_Perry_works}}
• {{Actors_in_Law_and_Order}}
• {{Actors_in_Law_&_Order:_Special_Victims_Unit}}
• {{Las_Vegas_cast}}
• {{Reba_cast}}

If you catch any others, feel free to add 'em here. BOVINEBOY2008:) 17:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Templates

Sorry, didn't realize that. I'd seen that in lots of other places (Template:Navbox House (television series), for example) and thought it was okay. Sorry. Kevinbrogers (talk) 03:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Its okay. Thanks! BOVINEBOY2008:) 03:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

{{Bewitched}}

It would probably be best for you to withdraw the TFD for this template since you gave an incorrect rationale in your nomination statement. Bradley0110 (talk) 13:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

How do I close it? BOVINEBOY2008:) 14:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Just add withdraw nomination to the top of the TFD. Bradley0110 (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to withdraw it, I want to close it. Those are two different things. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 14:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Email

Do you have an email I can reach you at (about Wikipedia of course)? If so you can email me (address is on my page). Thanks.--Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 03:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't. I try to keep my email personal. Feel free to ask me here, though if you have a more private question, I can forward you to reliable WikiUsers. BOVINEBOY2008:) 03:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Well I come to you because I seen you had been active on subject in question's talk page. I just got contacted by who seems to be a celebrities brother (Kathy Griffin). He was not happy that I reverted information he wrote on his sister's article. I didn't really know what to say, other than that's not how Wikipedia works, but he could make a topic on her talk page and see if other editors would add it to the article. Have you ever gotten contacted like this before? lol --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs}04:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

It has never happened to me, but you may suggest he read our policy on conflict of interest editing. You may also point outWP:OR. BOVINEBOY2008:) 04:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I did. It'll be interesting to see if he actually discuses it on her talk page. By the way it's her brother John (username: Cinput727). Yeah... this is new. :P --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 04:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes it's really him (he sent proof). He said he won't be editing it anymore as he admittedly doesn't understand Wikipedia policy and thought that of course it would be ok to add information that he knows is correct about her and family. I explained what aBLP voilation was, etc. I'm just flabbergasted about this.. I tell ya. lol --Mike Allen ^{talk ·contribs} 07:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I'll ask...

In what way isn't Leap Year the early 1900's film not have the same name as the one from Aughties? - Hexhand (talk) 04:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

The title of the film is the same, the title of the article is not though. "Leap Year (2010 film)" clearly talks about the film Leap Year that will be released next year; the title of the article is not ambiguous. "Leap Year (film)" could refer to the 2010 film or the 1921 film titled Leap Year; the title of the article is ambiguous and needs a hatnote to disambiguate it. Hope that makes sense! BOVINEBOY2008 :)11:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Imdb question

You deleted WWGB's edits that were used from Indb, and is this original research or just an unreliable website? The reason I'm asking is he has posted a helpme on his/her talk page. Thanks, Cubs197 20:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a diff? I'm not sure which edit it is. BOVINEBOY2008:) 23:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

2009 in film

Hi! I was going to add something to the 2009 in film article, but I'm not very good with tables, especially the more complex ones. I looked at the article history and noticed that you're a frequent contributor. Would you mind adding something for me? Normally I would try to figure out a way to do it myself, but looking at the source code for that table nearly gave me a panic attack. Thanks,BMRR (talk) 05:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Of course. BOVINEBOY2008:) 05:14, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The film I wanted to add is Make the Yuletide Gay, released on May 17, 2009. Thanks for the speedy reply! –BMRR(talk) 05:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done BOVINEBOY2008:) 05:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! :-) –BMRR (talk) 05:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for resolving the issue over the release dates on Avatar (2009 film), it was starting to become exasperating. Betty Logan (talk) 20:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for the message. BOVINEBOY2008:) 20:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Editing Plain White T's article

Um, "Plain White T's" is PLURAL! This is singular-Tom Higgenson is a Plain White T. So, the first sentence should say "The Plain White T's are"! —Preceding unsigned comment added byYouTubeaholic2009 (talk •contribs) 22:19, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

If you look at the predicate of the sentence, "a band", that is singular. The lede treats the Plain White T's as a group, a unit. That's English for you. BOVINEBOY2008:) 23:15, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Template:Simpsons writers

Gee, thanks for notifying me that the template was up for deletion. I created it, and I don't keep a close eye on my watchlist, so it completely slipped by me and didn't give me a chance to defend it. At the very least, you should have notified the project (you know, like you're supposed to, but users generally don't do that because it tends to create pesky opponents). The template was resisted when the category was deleted and we (The Simpsons wikiproject) were told by the closing admin to create a template, so we did. I'm considering asking for a deletion review. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

You're right, I should have notified you, but I did notify the TV WikiProjecthere. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 00:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Not good enough. Considering how many pages are affected, you really should have notified our project. We most likely will ask for a review. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Sucession boxes

Hi -- can you point me to where sucession boxes have been deprecated? Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:37, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Succession_boxes BOVINEBOY2008 :) 02:40, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Great - thank you very much. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:01, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. BOVINEBOY2008:) 12:59, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

The Hurt Locker award cleanup

Just want to call your attention to some cleanup of The Hurt Locker's award section. I've outlined what I'm thinking about doingon the talk page here, and would appreciate your thoughts and comments! There's been some contentious editing on this article in the past, and I'd like to avoid that here if at all possible. Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 20:32, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

NON-notable reviews

Do not exsist, all reviews are reviews. simply stating something does not make it trues otherwise, especially in the case of websites with millions of viewers(christian answers)(american culture). You offend those people and make yourself look arrogant towards them. So please stop vandalising Julie & julia, by removing criticism section.Evilhenny (talk)

Please read WP:N and WP:RS. Anyone can write a review but not all reviews are notable in Wikipedia standards. I'm tired of arguing this with you. BOVINEBOY2008:) 20:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. —Preceding unsignedcomment added by Evilhenny (talk • contribs) 20:11, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Help me

{{Help me}} I would like to add Watchlist sorter so I added the code to my monobook, but it didn't seem to do anything. BOVINEBOY2008:) 16:54, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried purging your browser cache? Intelligentsium 17:16, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

You have to create a monobook.css for that tool as well (there's a header that says there is an accompanying css thing), seeUser:Misza13/watchlistSorter.css. Killiondude (talk) 20:30, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, I got it to work. BOVINEBOY2008:) 23:02, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings:_The_Return_of_the_King

Hi, I responded to your message on the talk page for the Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Inomyabcs (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Film classification

Since "Sherlock Holmes" is a children's classic, the rating is particularly significant for this film. The rating is notable in and of itself. No less so than the film's length. The rating will be of interest to many readers as I pointed out in my edit summary. At least two editors have restored this information. Please do not delete it again without discussion and substantiation of your point of view.--Robert.Allen (talk) 22:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it does not stand up to Wikipedia's notability or worldview guidelins. I am removing and you must establish notability in order to include it. Sorry! BOVINEBOY2008 :) 23:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia notability guideline is directly related to whether an article in toto should exist or not. It specifically does not govern whether a fact should be included in an article or not. See WP:N#NCONTENT. Occasionally, it is may bear on items in a list. See also Notability_in_Wikipedia. I would back Robert.Allen on this one.

--WickerGuy (talk) 16:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

The proper sections to refer to are WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:INDISCRIMINATE (instead of WP:N. Even here I would say that Robert Allen's edits on the rating pass the test of inclusion.--WickerGuy (talk) 16:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Good Cleanup on Clockwork Orange, but....

It should be pointed out that the abbreviations of "UK" for Britain and "US" for America are extremely frequent and common in Britain/the UK, while much less widely used in America/the US. (I have lived in both.) But since WP policy is to maintain Brit usage (including Brit spelling for example) for British items (including British films as well as article on Brit politics, music, etc.), wouldn't that be a case for the Clockwork Orange article continuing to use the phrases UK and US?? Not reverting, since I don't think it's terribly important, but just proposing the thought for now.--WickerGuy (talk) 16:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I understand that (at least for the States, cause that's where I'm from), but I don't see any problem with spelling out words when possible. Also the inconsistency with US vs U.S. really bothers me. That is just how I prefer it and wouldn't mind anyone changing it back. BOVINEBOY2008:) 17:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Madhouse on Castle Street

Hi, I reverted your edit as the website is the official BBC website for the programme and thus belongs in the infobox as perTemplate:Infobox television film. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Start date

Hey I noticed that the documentation of using the {{Start date}} template states: Use {{Start date}}for the earliest." So should be use start date for all releases, or just the first, as it states; or is this guideline wrong too? lol —MikeAllen 01:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

No, its right, I just don't really know what should be used other wise. I like using templates as they let us be consistent with formating, so I started using {{Dts}} for other releases. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 01:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Well I'll use that too. I also noticed you have been using a {{small}} template to display text in small letters. I didn't know that existed. =)—Mike Allen 02:17, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't either until I found it (...captain obvious, I know...). It is easier than the html format though.BOVINEBOY2008 :) 02:20, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

"The Suite Life" character articles

You recently moved The Suite Life on Deck recurring characters to List of recurring characters in The Suite Life on Deck to matchList of recurring characters in The Suite Life of Zack & Cody, which seemed a good idea to me. Somebody has now moved List of recurring characters in The Suite Life of Zack & Cody to List of recurring The Suite Life of Zack & Cody characters, which just doesn't seem right to me. It doesn't flow properly. I've moved the article back, but I'm not confident it won't be moved again.--AussieLegend (talk) 09:30, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it. BOVINEBOY2008:) 12:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

watchitfree.net socks

I started an SPI case so we could track down any more socks this guy has.Blueboy96 19:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Alright. BOVINEBOY2008:) 19:17, 31 December 2009 (UTC)