User talk:Bradley0110/archive4

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tom Hooper

Template:Tom Hooper has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Resolved

Copyedit

Hello, Bradley0110. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi, apologies for the delay, but I've just been through and given Fay Ripley a copyedit for you. I've left a few notes on the talk page for you. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I see you nominated her for FAC. I've stuck it on my watchlist and I'll help out where I can. Have you looked for images on flickr? If not, I'll have a trawl through and see if I can persuade anyone to release their work. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

• Hey, don't see much point in creating a new section, but I'll be reviewing Christine Langan for you! I'll have some comments for you before too long and you know where my talk page is if you need me! Best, HJ Mitchell | April Fool! 18:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick review of this article. Regarding a couple of your points in the review: I left her family status out of the body of the article because there is literally no point in having a one-sentence "personal life" section, and it can't really be squeezed in anywhere else chronologically as there is no indication of when she and her husband met (plus the personal life of a film producer few people have heard of isn't really that important); I've recently taken to including as much publication data as possible for print sources (issue number, page number) simply because of the number of paywalls going up around newspaper and magazine sites (the Broadcast and Screen International sites were free to access when I wrote the article and The Times is putting up a paywall in June). Including the page numbers in this case allows for maximum ease of verifying references for people who don't have subscriptions, and leaving in a courtesy link to the website for those who do. As for a good topic, I wasn't really planning to do that, since the cast of Cold Feet isn't really as concrete a topic as, say, Simpsons actors. However, I do intend to eventually have all of the main cast members at featured status and the main production staff at GA. Unfortunately that means forcing myself to wade through all the boring crap that constitutes Helen Baxendale's career. Bradley0110 (talk) 19:05, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries. I was perusing GAN for my next victim of the backlog clearance and thought I'd review something a little closer to home! Btw, I've listed her under Actors, models, performers and celebrities because I can't think of anywhere else, but if you have any ideas, feel free to move it. You could just go for "Cold Feet" and that's your main article problem solved (and it's FA- bonus!). I would have liked to have done something similar with The Bill but that's not heading to FAC any time soon and most of the other articles that would make up a FT/GT are in an appalling mess! You ought to try getting in touch with them and begging for photos! lol! Unfortunately nobody bothered to reply to me on Flickr about the Fay Ripley photos. I managed to score an excellent photo earlier today, though. Never ceases to amaze me how willing some people are to just give up the rights to their photos, but I'm grateful to them! HJ Mitchell | April Fool! 19:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Bradley0110. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

deflag?

Curious why you de-flagged Runaway (Television film) - is this a policy somewhere? --Lexein (talk) 20:03, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! WP:MOSFLAG#Flags tells all. --Lexein (talk) 20:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Going to Australia

The article Going to Australia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Going to Australia for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Pyrotec (talk) 09:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Tim Sullivan (British filmmaker)

-- Cirt (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

David Morrisey

Thanks for your note. I have had concerns with this infobox field for awhile. The start date is never sourced but I'd be willing to bet that 90% of the time the first IMDb listing is used - and we all know what wikipedia thinks of IMDb. Since this is a TV or film listing it completely ignores stage work. As I am sure that you are aware most actors (with the notable exception of Bob Hoskins) are "active" in their profession long before their first TV/film role. I would even argue that they are "active" when they are amateurs but I understand your point. I think that your suggestion of using the date that they obtain their equity card is a good benchmark for this number. Do you think that we should suggest this at the Actor infobox and/or the filmprojects talk page?

I also wish that we would acknowledge that some actors aren't "active" at certain times of their lives. Audrey Hepburn, Jodie Foster and Daniel Day Lewis have all taken time away from acting but their infoboxes do not reflect this. Oh well one thing at a time I guess. Thanks again for your note and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 18:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I still like your equity card idea but it has just dawned on me that (at least in the US) you can't get your card until you have been active in the profession for awhile. Ah well so it goes. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:29, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again. First, I forgot to mention that I am watching Cause Célèbre and although he was 23 when he performed in it he looks like is about 16 years old. Next, do you have any info on when Jim Broadbent got his card. IMDb lists his first performance as 1978 but I have a hard time believing that he didn't start acting until he was 29 years old. In fact it seems so absurd that I have placed a "?" there until more accurate info can be found. If you can help it will be much appreciated. If not don't worry about it and thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 20:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Many many thanks for taking the time to research my question. What you found was interesting and the time you took is much appreciated. Have a great week. MarnetteD | Talk 23:10, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

TTSS

Hi again. I noticed your addition to the Tinker Tailor page today. Do you think this film is going to happen? I know that this makes me an old fogey but I don't know how they will improve on the TV version. The story has so many subtleties that will disappear in the time constraints of a film. Oh well that is just my POV and, sadly, it isn't neutral. As an example I've not yet been able watch the film version of Brideshead Revisited. From an editing note I always worry about these per WP:CRYSTAL. Getting a film made can be such a tortuous process (again as an example the BR film that I mentioned took 5 or 6 years from the first time I head about it til it hit the big screen. I can also remember at least two announced cast lists before the one that wound up in the film.) I trust that, in your usual thorough good editing fashion, should this TTSS film project fall apart that you will update the page accordingly. Have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 19:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note

Hi again. I am working of off both WikiP's page for miniseries and other things that I have read over the years. The UK programming that I grew up with consisted of multi part series - in the 70's most often 13 episodes though they could be any length. But the thing that kept them from being true miniseries was that they were a part of block of drama, comedy etc that stayed somewhat the same from week to week and month to month. In other words an hour length program at (just to pick a time) 8:15 pm would always be a drama. It might be To Serve Them All My Days for 13 weeks and that might be followed by Flambards. Please note that I know that I am taking some wide ranging license with this and that the particular titles I am using are incorrect I am just grabbing them from memory as an example. I know that this started to change in the late 80's (and maybe earlier) with multi-night showings of things like Prime Suspect, but I don't think that they were referred to as miniseries by the Beeb or Granada/ITV etc at the time. From my end the most confusing entity is IMDb which calls anything, US or UK, that isn't a mult-year show a miniseries. Now that I have explained all of this from my end I hope that you don't think that I am disagreeing with you. I know that things change with time and things like seasons 4 and 5 of Murphy's Law and Torchwood season 3 really do fit the description of the term and if you want to change the ML ones back please do so. Well, I have taken up enough of your time thanks again for your input and for improving the section header on James N's page that I changed. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 21:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Partial Terms of Endearment

Hello, I am a member of WikiProject Family Guy. I noticed that you added a review by The Mail on Sunday of the episode Partial Terms of Endearment. As I am not familiar with the publication, being from the United States, I was wondering if you could clarify their review of the episode. In the article, your wrote that they gave the episode four stars. Is this generally positive, like four out of five stars? Or is it out of ten, or what? Also, this isn't essential, but was an actual author of the review given? Gage (talk) 03:05, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Images

Requests have been sent to both authors, will let you know if I get a reply back. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

That was quick, got permission for the first image, available here. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

U Be Dead

Good afternoon. it is me who created this article is you had been quite right to put a bandage to redo the summary. the thing is that the summary is detailed, but I made many mistakes (in my opinion) because I'm not English, I do not speak English fluently. I would like you correct mistakes if it does not bother you. thank you in advance, cordially. Cl;nintendods. go to contact me on my French talk page. do not you embarrassed express yourself in English. my talk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cl;nintendods (talk • contribs) 13:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Tryouts

Hi. Thanks for the message. Yes, I think they are "tryouts". The timing of the two short tours seems to be for the purpose of getting feedback on the show before going to the West End, which is what tryouts are for. More broadly, I think that all the word "tryout" helps explain that the regional runs are in preparation for the West End run of the same production. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:40, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Film templates

"Please don't remove the years from film writer and director templates and try to justify it by calling it "elegance". Having no years for reference undermines the purpose of navigation boxes that are designed to help editors move between articles with ease."

So long as the films are in chronological order, what difference does it make? How does cluttering the navboxes with years "help editors move between articles with ease"? Why priority given to editors? Is it that important to the reader that the five films released in the 1970s were in 1971, 1973, 1974, 1977 and 1979 rather than 1971, 1973, 1976, 1977 and 1979? Please consider these questions. Too many navboxes here are cluttered with secondary (and usually unlinked) information. If there have to years, at least make them less prominent than the links, e.g. by using a smaller font and placing them without brackets before the links. 212.84.100.119 (talk) 23:38, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

"When I said "editors", I meant "readers". You'll find many aren't in chronological order; {{Peter Morgan}} is divided into three sections, which bounce around four different decades. Years are used in every one of these navboxes. If you'd like to make such a dramatic change, you'd be better off posting your proposal at WT:FILM, outlining your reasons and arguments, rather than just removing them."

That looks like something for more "hardcore" contributors to try. I just thought I'd edit the templates as and when I came by them, in the spirit of "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". Sorry if that causes a problem. 212.84.100.119 (talk) 23:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Your question

Hi again. I have to admit that I am lucky enough to be able to purchase almost all of my dvds. I am one of those who can watch a film several times if I find it interesting. I also like being able to walk over to the shelf and grab a given film if the urge strikes me to see it again. I am also one who likes the commentaries and making of extras that come with most dvds. Thus, I prefer owning them so I can do these extras at my leisure. I do sometimes use the library or my next door neighbor will get a film thru netflix. I know that one can now stream films through ones computer but I am just not techno savvy enough to try this. I am sure that it is easy and I am being too lazy to learn it but that is the way it is at the present time. Friday I watched "The Last Station" with Helen Mirren and Christopher Plummer and I was very impressed with it. Having said that I know that everyone's taste in film is different so you might hate something that I recommend so my apologies ahead of time if that ever happens. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 18:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I have just realized that nothing I wrote above may be of any use to you. My friends who have netflix swear by it. They enjoy the convenience of having the DVD come to them and returns are simple. The drawbacks seem to be waiting on certain films if they don't have adequate numbers of copies in the stock. None of us have used a rental store for several years although I know that there are still some Blockbuster stores out there. Hopefully this is a little more helpful. MarnetteD | Talk 18:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Rats I am sorry that it is only available in region 1. FYI I purchased a region free DVD player last year for about 70 dollars US. I wanted access to all sorts of Brit TV that just wasn't available over here. Tenko and By the Sword Divided are just two examples. I have been amazed to find that when a series is available in both region formats it is often less expensive to by it from Amazon UK with shipping costs then it is to buy it over here, even from Amazon. I saw The Deal when it was on HBO. It to be very well done. I wouldn't mind having it in my collection. I will put it on my list but I can't make any guarantees of when I would get it. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk 22:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I was just checking both Amazon's for The Deal. The first thing I found backed up my point above. Amazon UK has it for about $20 with shipping and the US version is $21. Are you sure there is a DVD commentary? The only thing that Amazon is telling me is that the US one has an interview with Stephen Frears. I'm not doubting you so just give me an update on what info you are using and that will point me in the direction I want to go. MarnetteD | Talk 22:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I always forget about that website and I shouldn't. They were one of the sites that helped put out the word about the screwed up DVD release of John Huston's final film "The Dead" last year. Lionsgate released it with 10 minutes of material missing and then we had to go through all sorts of hoops to get the corrected version. I got The Damned United thru Amazon UK a couple of months ago. Do you think that Michael Sheen will have played all of the important people in British history before he is done :-) Just kidding. He is such a good actor and I always enjoy seeing him. Well, like a say The Deal is on my list and thanks to your help I will be getting the version "with" the extras. Have a great week. MarnetteD | Talk 23:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. I found something else to order from Amazon (the television version of Shadowlands with Joss Ackland and Claire Bloom - much better than the film IMO) so that and The Deal are on their way to me. It will still be a couple of seeks until I get them. Are you looking for anything specific from the commentary or would you like just my general recap of it with a few specifics that strike me as interesting thrown in? I don't know if you are interested in it but I see that the third film of Sheen's performances as Blair entitled The Special Relationship does not come out until the end of November. I don't know if it will have any extras. I just thought I would let you know about it. MarnetteD | Talk 00:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello again. Just wanted to let you know that the DVD arrived yesterday. I also wanted to mention that life is a little hectic right now so I may not be able to get to it for a week or so but I will try. I had one further question (based on the fact that as a wikignome I don't deal with creating references as often as you.) When citing DVD commentaries do you need the exact time that a given mention occurs? As in "David Morrisey was cast without a screen test" said by "A" at 23 minutes of the DVD commentary. I have your previous message about what you are looking for but if any other thoughts have come to mind just let me know. I am looking forward to watching this again so thanks for making me a part of your efforts to improve the article. MarnetteD | Talk 14:12, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. Wanted to let you know the I'm getting closer to fulfilling our goal. I am trying to wedge out time to absorb the extras and write down what you are looking for. I did get to watch the film without the commentary Sat. night. It had been five+ years since I had seen it and I thought it would be good to refresh my memory of how the story unfolded. I had a couple observations that I wanted to share with you. First, have you ever seen the excellent series Our Friends in the North? It aired in 96 and one of its themes is the rise and fall of the Labour party in the second half of the 20th C. The Deal views like a sequel to that series with its story of the rise of New Labour. Next, there is a cute scene in the restaurant towards the end of the film. Blair notes that the newly cast EastEnders lady is under more pressure than he is? Do you think they were referring to a specific person? We used to get the show on one of our PBS stations but we were always two+ years behind so I wouldn't know who would have been entering the show at the time of the Brown/Blair meeting. One last thing, should my observations get lengthy do you have a sandbox that you would like me to post them in? Or should I just put them here on your talk page? Hope you have a great week. MarnetteD | Talk 22:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Just a quick note to let you know that I have just finished adding what I learned to your sandbox. Thanks again for asking me to do this research and let me know if you have any questions. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your messages. I am glad that my efforts will be of help. I forgot one thing - and this is totally a nitpick so please ignore it if you wish. The article opening states that the film begins in '83. As you will remember it actually begins just before the meeting and then uses the flashback method of storytelling for a bit. That only lasts about 15 minutes or so and then they go to a linear narrative. I don't necessarily think that it is important to change the current wording but an editor more obsessive/compulsive than I am might. MarnetteD | Talk 22:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Well...

...that was a bit good, wasn't it? The JPS^{talk to me} 22:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey up. I'll be away for the rest of the week at the Edinburgh Fringe. Will you keep an eye on Sherlock for me, and police OR, etc. Ta. The JPS^{talk to me} 22:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Foz Allan

hello, I hope you remember me. I calling your name because I only know you on Wikipedia english. I created the above article. you can to fix it? I thank you in advance, with friendship; Cl;nintendods (talk) 14:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The Special Relationship

Hello B. I just got to see The Special Relationship on my cable TV. I don't want to comment on it so as not to color your viewing of it - though I will say that it contains some remarkable performances. I would be interested to read your thoughts when you get to see it after it comes out on DVD. If you have the time just drop me a line but if you are too busy please don't worry about it. Hope you are well and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 12:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I am not in any hurry. If/When you get a chance to see it later this year just take a moment and let me know what you think. Your words about its release in the UK are so apropos. The bean counters seem to be wrong more often then they are right about film/TV. They turn their back on as much money as they make. It also sounds like there might be more to the story then the public face that they put on things. Thanks again. MarnetteD | Talk 22:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Just dropping by

Hey, how are you? Long time no see. Anyhow, how's Fay Ripley? I'm guessing you've still not had any luck with getting an image? Have you considered taking it back to FAC? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

FL

Good job on bringing the list up to FL status. I don't think I had ever heard of Bathurst before reading the list, so I again got to learn something new from Wikipedia. Let me know if you pursue any other FLs in the future and I'll be happy to take a look either before or during the nomination. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:57, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

List of The Simpsons Treehouse of Horror episodes

Please weigh in on Talk:List of The Simpsons Treehouse of Horror episodes#Inclusion of episode segment links, so we can generate a consensus. Thanks, Fixblor (talk) 09:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Seesaw

Hello... thanks for following up on that. There has been a rash of spammed links to the Seesaw site as of late; I had to clean them up a few hours ago, so apologies if it appears to be directed at you. The site is not one we would normally link to in the EL section, similar to how we don't typically link to Hulu's site either. --Ckatz^chat_spy 22:37, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

If you think it is genuinely beneficial, I suppose you could restore it. It may be a moot point, however, as the link appears dead and I was unable to find the video in question through the site search. --Ckatz^chat_spy 22:52, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Fay Ripley's date of birth

Hi. This is something that has puzzled me for a long time! I can't confirm her date of birth, but it seems very likely (so long as the press are accurate, and that of course may not be the case...) that her birthday is in February or at the very latest March 1st. My inference comes from a source from an Australian newspaper from March 2000. On 2 March 2000, The Daily Telegraph (Sydney) ran a snippet article, 'Fay's feet firmly on ground' by Peter Holder and Jo casamento in which it was reported that: 'FAY Ripley was delighted to learn that Channel 7 had offered to spring for a chopper to fly her around Sydney Harbour for her birthday. But the star of British series Cold Feet wasn't expecting the trip to make news. "It was a fantastic experience, but the only thing I'm struggling with is why it appeared on the Channel 7 news," she said. "I felt obliged to break my leg or sprain my ankle or something on the way into the chopper, but it didn't happen." Cold Feet centres on the stories of three couples, and is proving to be a huge ratings winner. Since its debut two weeks ago, Cold Feet has won its timeslot in every capital city in both weeks. Ripley says she is delighted with the success but disconcerted by stares from strangers. "I'm starting to be recognised out here now. People look at me like they're not sure if they've slept with me or seen me on television," she laughs. END The fact that Cold Feet had been running for two weeks suggests to me that she might have been there on some kind of promotional tour to Australia? So it seems to me that her birthday must have fallen within the two weeks before 2 March. I don't have a URL for the article as I discovered it on the Nexis UK database of newspapers and magazines which requires a log-in. If anyone has access to the archive of Channel 7 News in February and March 2000 then surely the date can be pinpointed exactly? 1966 seems to be the most frequently ascribed year of birth for her, and this seems to tally with most press reports I've seen about her, although I have also seen the odd one which would put her a year either side of that. I also don't know where the oft-mentioned 28 June date has come from either as there seems to be no evidence to support this as her d.o.b. So on balance, I would suggest the second half of February 1966, but can't really be more specific than that. Hope this has helped. Philippe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.147.176 (talk) 17:51, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Greetings of the season to you and yours!

Happy Holidays, Bradley0110! At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a very Merry Christmas and happy editing in the year ahead! MarnetteD | Talk 20:55, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

This lousy t-shirt (talk) wishes you peace!

Spread peace and goodwill by adding {{subst:WikiPeace}} to other's talk pages with a friendly message.

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pooky Quesnel. Steve Dufour (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your note. It was good to hear from you. I hope that the snow did not make your holidays too difficult. We experienced a dry December. Since then we have had a couple storms of 3 to 6 inches so things feel a bit more normal. Cheers for the year ahead to you on wiki and off. MarnetteD | Talk 03:28, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

The Turn of the Screw (TV 2009)

Hello Bradley ! I hope you remember me. I created this article there is little time. Can you read the plot, please ? I think I made mistakes, (recall : I am French). Cordially, Cl;nintendods (talk) 16:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Freedom of Speech related articles

Hi Brad, hope you are doing well. ;) I was recommended to you by Bearian (talk · contribs). You may be interested in some new articles I wrote, pertaining to the subject of Freedom of speech:

1. Beyond the First Amendment
2. Net.wars
3. Freedom of Expression (McLeod book)

Enjoy, -- Cirt (talk) 15:07, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

The King's Speech

Hi Bradley,

I've noticed the decidedly mixed bag that is The King's Speech article, given the current attention the film is getting (30k-60k page views per day), and with the Oscars coming soon, I think it's a shame that wikipedia can't do a little better. I'm hoping to make a little push towards GA status over the next few days. Would you consider helping out; your knowledge of the director and experience on film articles would be most helpful. Best, --Ktlynch (talk) 14:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Btw, I noticed your comment in the Vanity Fair website. The penicillin comment really put the Bieber thing in context. I'm sure the problems in a serious film article are nothing compared to a teen pop sensation! Best, --Ktlynch (talk) 23:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Rachel Bradley

Hey, I was happy to wave this through its GA review. There are a couple of points at Talk:Rachel Bradley/GA1 for you if you want to take it further. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)