User talk:MarnetteD/archive18

Here's to 10 years of Wikipedia, MarnetteD

File:Verre de whisky.jpg

Ktlynch (talk) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:User:HJ Mitchell/WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 23:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Existentialist films

It came up on my watchlist last night as Koavf was doing some cat. housekeeping. When I saw it, I almost laughed, 'cause it's an absurd claim. My guess is that the category will probably need a close examination and pruning. I am going to add the category to my watchlist, for what little good it will do. Likewise, would you mind adding Category:Surrealist films to your watchlist? I recently edited that cat., as numerous inappropriate films had been added. The problem, of course, is that having a category on your watchlist does very little good, since articles that are added to the category do not show up on the history. I wish there was some way to change that. We must remain, as the man said, "Ever vigilant!" ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:42, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I started a discussion in regards to the above, in case you want to add your tuppence worth. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 03:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Recent messages

If or when you have a moment, would you mind taking a looking at the recent messages left on my talk page, and my response to the first (I did not regard the 2nd as worthy of a response), and tell me if you think the other user is in the right? I feel I made an appropriate response, but his attitude has not changed. Thanks, as always, for your time. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 03:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

OK I think that I am caught up. The personal attacks on you are unwarranted. Having been through them so many times now I now try to ignore them (as you did with the 2nd one) - though I freely admit that I am not always successful at it. I think that your response was correct in detailing the inaccuracies in their 1st statement. On the other hand the last sentence leaves you open to possible chastisement depending on the admin. As to the specifics of the page in question - Is a film made in Canada a Canadian film? - that is one that the discussions keep going in circles and any "final" decision gets changed a year or so later. So when this comes up anymore I try to get feedback from the members of the filmproject and then let the chips (wood not buffalo) fall where the may. Hope this was of some help and my apologies if anything caused offense. MarnetteD | Talk 01:36, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the last sentence was unnecessary. I should have simply ended with the detailed summary of the article history and been done with it. But, his attitude got me riled up and I responded in kind. I appreciate your thoughtful response. I think that I will bring this up on the filmproject talkpage and see how other editors feel about it. I am not convinced this is a Canadian film. At any rate, cheers!

Oh, and sorry to hear about your modem. I have been there, and it is a pain in the keister. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 05:14, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Lon Chaney, Sr.

Would like your input on his birthplace ....

According to http://www.ci.carroll.oh.us/LonChaney.html Lon Chaney was born on a farm two miles west of Carroll, Ohio at the corner of Winchester and Lockville Road on April 1, 1883. The family moved to California soon after his birth. Unibond (talk) 02:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes I have seen this. All of the biographies written about him state Colorado Springs. The website maintained by his descendants states the same [1]. His parents met at the Colorado School for the Education of Mutes this later became The Colorado School for the Deaf and the Blind and it exists to this day.

The spurious claim (sorry for the rude wording but that is the nicest thing that I can say about it) from Carroll states that his family moved from there directly to LA. Yet the theater in Colorado Springs is named for Chaney [2]. Indeed Chaney began his acting career in vaudeville at that theater. To the best of my knowledge Chaney's parents never moved to LA.

As I have been researching this tonight I found quotations from Michael F. Blake's book Lon Chaney: The Man Behind the Thousand Faces here [3] It turns out that it was Lon's father Frank Chaney that was born in Carroll in 1852. He moved to Colorado Springs in 1877. Whoever made the post at the Carroll website was very sloppy (I'm sorry but that is the kindest word that I can use) in their research. How they could ignore all of the biographies is beyond me. Who knows what it would take to get them to correct their info in regards to Ohio's connection to the Chaney family. Mistakes like this occurred before "the web" but they seem to happen faster because of it. That is why one should never stop their research with just one article/book/biography or website. MarnetteD | Talk 04:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Please note that I am posting this here and at the talk page for Lon Chaney in case it comes up again. MarnetteD | Talk 04:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Marnette, you have cleared everything up beautifully :-) Unibond (talk) 13:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The plot thickens ! I wrote to the Carroll website to point out the error and got this reply from Tammy Drobina ... As president of the Carroll Area Historical Society, believe me this is a common question! According to folks who were here at the time and passed the story on, Lon's parents were visiting family in Carroll when he was born. In those days, visits often lasted for weeks or months. His parent were indeed living in Colorado Springs at that time, so as residents of that city they listed Lon's birth there. Unibond (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Erin Burnett

I started a discussion about the IP address's edit here, if you'd like to contribute. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:13, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

This guy seems familiar...

You know who on you know what article. (I was just about to put the message on his talk page.) —Prhartcom (talk) 17:54, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I had just finished researching the same La Jolla vs L.A. also. Notice that it is from a University of California IP just like last time, no matter what city. Glad to see you are also watching. You can sic the bulldog on him (me) when/if the time is right. Have a good week. —Prhartcom (talk) 18:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Off-Broadway

Would you kindly give your opinion, either way, at the Off Broadway article talk page, either way? I am looking for a consensus to move the article. My feeling is that the two four links sources cited give a good enough basis for making the move. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the ref and the comment. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM January 2011 Newsletter

The January 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film 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) 03:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Oscar Wilde

Hi - cleaned crap & added this and that to OW bibliography article yesterday but notice its undone wholesale now, i think it was more or less ok was it not, but i hadnt logged in (sorry) if you log in they less often undo you have noticed that much. Well I'm a big admirer & happen to know bit of OW so thought spruce things little bit up as them OW articles do not seem too high quality, i think i know what i'm doing tho they quarel with me on Arthur Seville article you can see but i was right right right. Will take the liberty to undo your undos if that's a problem box my ears i'm not too serious wiki contributor & ignorant of conventions. Then btw do you think it's ok to merge Decay of Lying & Critic as Artist into a single Intentions article like it is for stories & fairy tales a single article for a collection not for each story (only exception Canterville Ghost), then i could add a word about Pen Pencil Poison & Truth of Masks which definetly do not deserve seperate articles. (Created Critic as Artist stub myself last week & Decay of Lying is not much better) Karlis44 (talk) 13:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

You are removing referenced items which is not the way to do things here at WikiP. You have been making numerous small changes without using an edit summary, thus, it is difficult to determine which, if any, of your changes may benefit the article. I suggest you take a look at the WP:TUTORIAL and the WP:MOS for suggestions in how to improve your editing. Your numerous spelling errors and mangled syntax lead me to think that English is not your first language. That is true for many editors and does not preclude you from editing here, but, you will want to make yourself familiar with the MoS. You should also take a look Help:Edit summary and learn how to use the "Show preview" button. MarnetteD | Talk 15:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

there's an article riddled with (spelling) errors disjointed ugly incomplete with incoherent irrelevant references which dont work. I make it state-of-art, improve beyond recognition. You change it back. Doesnt make sense. What is your problem? Karlis44 (talk) 16:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Considering how many spelling errors there are in your two posts here I'm not sure that you understand in the least what you are doing to that article. There is also a difference in UK v US spellings that you don't seem to understand. Removing referenced material is NOT making the article "state of the art" and they do work. If the link no longer works there are ways to retrieve the info or a "dead link" tag can be added. Please take advantage of the links that I have provided to learn how to edit here. Continued removal of sourced material can be construed as disruptive editing. MarnetteD | Talk 17:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

gee i woudnt qurel. what do spelling errors here can possibly matter or signify lol. please point out a change ive made to the article in question that you object to is all. "To the aesthetic temperament the vague is always repellent. we desire the concrete, and nothing but the concrete can satisfy us." http://www.wilde-online.info/the-critic-as-artist-page29.html Lets have a chat. Or kick me off your wikipedia. English is my third language ok but i believe i have a better command of it now than your avarage native speaker Karlis44 (talk) 18:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I do not have time for this. Again, I have given you several links where you can begin to learn how to become a competent editor. Whether you chose to use any of them is up to you. MarnetteD | Talk 19:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

The Beatles definite article vote

Talk:The_Beatles#Consensus

Would you like to participate? It's been going on for a few days; thought you might be interested if you ignore how trivial-sounding this contentious issue is. Before you do, ask yourself this question: Do you like the Beatles? Are you a Beatles fan? Or do you like The Beatles? Are you a The Beatles fan? Cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 16:41, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely no problem from my end if you don't participate; I am not vested in this at all, thank goodness, although I do have my own opinion on it as you can tell (and natually it is correct). Yes, icy here this week and apparently no one but I has lived in Denver therefore no one knows how to drive on it. XLV is about to happen here, right across from where I work; not as interesting to me as wordsmithing. Cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 18:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)