User talk:MarnetteD/archive 2

Wilde archive

Looks fine. No big deal if the archive page is big: they are rarely edited. And if someone wants to revive a discussion, I'm sure they will. Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 21:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		Great job on wikipedia, expecially fixing small little tidbits here and there. I Arjun am proud to give you your first barnstar. You deserve it!

--02:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Well deserved I must say.--Seadog 20:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey there

Thanks for your note. I didn't really put much work into those Criterion boxes so it doesn't bother me so much but it was kind of you to take the time to write. They do good work, those Criterion people, I agree. Seven Samurai's one of their best. And that "the" needed to go, mos def. --Doctor Sunshine 05:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

About the Up Series

I don't know if other members will look into it too, but what exactly happened in the Up Series? Were there separate articles that got merged? Hoverfish 20:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC) Oh, sorry, I just noticed it was already moved properly and that's why I couldn't find the problem. Hoverfish 20:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Your entries on WP:AIAV

I noticed your entries on WP:AIAV. Thanks for reporting them. Just to let them know, you dont really need a long explanation. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 00:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Morse Music/Pheloung

My source for this was an interview with Barrington Pheloung on BBC Radio 4 (in the UK), some seven (or so) years ago. Pheloung noted that whether "strict" Morse Code readers heard "M.O.R.S.E." or "T.T.O.R.S.E." was a matter of training and proficiency: he admitted, that, "strictly" it was closer to the "T.T." form.

Unfortunately, I don't recall which radio programme (sic!) carried the interview - except that it _may_ have been "Start the Week". I am attempting to find out! If all else fails, I will try e-mailing Pheloung himself - assuming that I can find an email address for him!

Hair Commodore 12:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Was vs is in bios

A random check proves you are right in the term "was" when referring referring to deceased actors et al. Just doesn't sound right to me though. Seems to diminish the importance of their career, sort of like saying he used to be. Alas, guess death changes a lot of things. Thanks for the heads up. Philbertgray 12:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Fall of Eagles

in terms of the mdashes, do you know how to add them without typing in the symbol? Otherwise, thanks for the work cleaning up the list. As I said, I was mostly interested in linking the historical figures to their articles, which I think is generally a useful activities for enormous miniseries like that. I just watched the miniseries, so it was fairly fresh in my mind. Anyway, thanks for the work cleaning it up, hopefully it'll all work out. john k 21:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

If you mean the one next to the zero, that's a hyphen, not a dash. If you mean the one on the numeric keypad, I've got a laptop, which doesn't really have the numeric keypad. — isn't so bad once one is used to it. john k 21:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's odd, it won't nowiki the mdash. john k 21:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Miss Marple

Thanks for the Thanks. There's still some more work I want to do on the Miss Marple page, but it does look so much better with seperate pages! --Berks105 13:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

W.Somerset Maugham

Given your previous or current interest in Somerset Maugham - can you please add any thoughts you might have at Talk:W. Somerset Maugham#What next? Peer Review? so that we can move the article up a notch? VirtualSteve 09:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Corey Taylor Article

Hey, I've been working a lot on the Corey Taylor article recently, trying to get it to a decent quality article from the negelected and abused stub it was before. I understand that under the touchy subject of WP:BLP that sometimes its smart to edit first and ask questions later, but the section is properly sourced. It comes from a newpaper, so the source should be reliable as well. If you feel that the format of my citation is wrong, please feel free to change it. I don't pretend to be an English major and I am sure that my writing style can leave something to be desired at times. I just don't want to see the section eliminated, as it is a fact that has been popping up in the article's trivia section since its inception and it would be nice to see it finally get the treatment it deserves, complete with sources.Warhorus 18:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

So you can see my reply to the editors talk page I am posting it here also. My apologies for any problems caused at the article you are working on. I was tracking bad edits (mostly blanking vandalism) from an anonymous editor who had vandalized several pages and assumed (very incorrectly) thaat they had vandaized this page also (ie no edit summary). Thanks for fixing my mistake and keep up the good editing. MarnetteD | Talk 19:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

No harm, no foul. Thank you very much for your efforts to try and stem the damage vandalism causes to wikipedia!Warhorus 20:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Wilde things

Hi. Have you read Peter Ackroyd's 'The Last Testament of Oscar Wilde'? - a pretended Wilde memoir, in which Oscar looks back on his life during his last weeks. It's a far, far more penetrating and vivid portrait of the fading Wilde than the one given in 'Diversions and Delights'. Ackroyd's novel benefits from being written by someone in the same intellectual league as its subject, and who has a perfect grasp of Wilde's world. 'Last Testament' is subtle and elliptical, and brings Wilde to entirely convincing life, without (as far as I can tell) using the real Wilde's words. It's a work of perfect impersonation. 'Diversions and Delights' is more a string of quotations and Oscar-by-numbers dialogue tics; I didn't think the author had the refinement of intellect needed to produce a convincing representation of Wilde. For all that, D&D is a great vehicle for an actor who can Go Big. I saw Donald Sinden doing it; I'm sure Vincent Price would have been terrific as well. Regards from cold, damp England, Notreallydavid 18:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I responded on my talk page to your remarks about the Wilde article. I'm willing to discuss concrete matters on this one, but not really willing to wade in. - Jmabel | Talk 18:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that he may be quoting himself in some areas, but he has given some references which he should be encouraged to expand. His typos and spelling were what put me off mostly. Dabbler 12:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Santa Fe Opera

Thanks for the revert. Yes, it is mostly poorly written and misguided vandalism. It is correct to say that the opera company was founded in 1956 and that the first performance was given in July 1957, but that information already appears in the text. Viva-Verdi 17:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey there

Yeah, just curious about what was wrong with the criticism on Drac I put up. I realise it should be obvious from the edit history, but I wasn't entirely sure what to make of (rv original research and unsourced opinion).

I figured that if whoever wrote before could state various interpretations such as Van Helsing being the embodiment of both the modern and old worlds, or (to put it crudely) Dracula as an STD (you'll probably know what I mean), then I might as well put up the fact that much of the novel is used as a vehicle for Stoker's own beliefs. Or was it the whole Dracula being presented as something of a bi-sexual degenerate thing? Anyhow, I'm being too long winded.

I was wondering if the issue was with the interpretations themselves or lack of quotes etc. to back them up. If its the latter then fine, I'll find my copy and be more eloquent next time. If its the former I wouldn't mind having a chat one way or another. It's been a while since I've had a debate with someone on this book.

Helen Mirren edits

Hi, I was reading your recent edit summary:

it looks like the ed thinks that they are putting the awards in chrono order but due to the diff nature of the way the various awards label themselves this is incorrect-most pages have AA 1st)

and was wondering if what you were referring to was part of WP style or some guideline. I hadn't heard of it before, and would be interested in reading the relevent info. Arcayne 22:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Heya! I was taking a look at the recent edit summaries for the Helen Mirren article. You seemed a bit upset; I hope you are doing okay and not taking this stuff too seriously. I am sure that some people contributing are making the same mistakes as others. Don't let it get to you. :) I think that what is tripping up some of the contributors (I guess I can include myself in this list, which is why I have not really weighed in on the subject) is Russian gender-specific naming conventions. I know there are some rules, but they may not have been followed by Russo/Soviet ex-pats like Mirren's parents. Is there a way to find original references to the actual name? Someone on the talk page referenced some county birth lists noting the date and place of Mirren's birth. And since her parents were Russian, I imagine that there is likely citable informatin about her parents during the Cold War and in the aftermath of the Philby affair (when all Russian emigrés came under greater suspicion). I think that if we can somehow provide clear proof, we can politely point to the references. I would really like to tighten up this article so we can get it to GA status sooner rather than later.Arcayne 22:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, I wasn't criticizing you, MarnetteD. I was just making sure you were okay. Your work on the article is valuable, specifically because you know the subject as well as you do. And you do offline research, which a lot of contributors simply won't take the time to do (I once actually called a film company to set up a brief telephone interview with a director to answer some questions about a film; still waiting on that).Arcayne 02:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Rowan Atkinson Link

I revised it to maintain the visual consistency of the list. As it is not within the body of the article and nor is it a garish use of over-linking, I felt that it was a reasonable change. Perhaps we could discuss this and come to a conclusion upon it. Naravorgaara 20:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

That blanking vandal

Thanks for your kind words. Well, he finally attempted some justification for his action.... Who knows if it will work.... (There was so much "stuff" on my page, I just wipede it all out...)

Viva-Verdi 05:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

PS: Thanks for that Admin link - very useful to know. Viva-Verdi 05:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

re:User:62.85.192.81

I have watchlisted 62.85.192.81 (talk · contribs) so if they return to vandalise again, I will block again for longer. I'm sure you understand why I'm hesitant to block an IP address for a long time though. Yes, I forgot to put a note on their talk page, thanks for reminding me ;) James086^Talk 09:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, in my opinion (and it is clearly shared by many FRUSTRATED EDITORS who have to spend time reverting this nonsense), blocking is the ONLY THING you can do to prevent some one(?) or many(?) from this constant vandalism.

If there is one thing which will drive me away from bothering to contribute to Wikipedia, it is this constant and annoying vandalism from unregistered people who seem to take a delight in their actions.

I do not buy into the bullshit of "anyone can edit" if this is the kind of thing and the kind of people who keep on doing it...... Viva-Verdi 18:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Editsummaries

It might be easier to communicate via the talkpage rather than expecting people to notice editsummaries after wasting a lot of their and your time. Agathoclea 18:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note Agathoclea. It came right as I was in the middle of leaving a note on the User:INXS-Girls talk page. It is a little more detailed than yours and you may want to check it in case I have written anything that is misleading. Thanks again and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 19:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Your AIV report

I think you have the wrong IP address; the one you gave has only edited Dracula to remove vandalism. -Amarkov moo! 14:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The semiprotect status on the Lon Chaney page

Hello Tariqabjotu and Malcolm. As this was my first foray onto the request for protection page I just wanted to make sure that I did not do anything out of line. As Tariqabjotu pointed out there have been five acts of vandalism in the last three days and this is what prompted my request. I do appreciate Malcolm's note that I wasn't violating the three revert rule. It seems that I may be one of a few (or the only editor) that has this actors page on a watchlist, thus the time delay on getting any vandalism reverted so I appreciate the semiprotect status that it now enjoys. Perhaps in a couple of months this person will have moved on and it can be taken off. Again, please feel free to let me know if I have violated any policy and thank you for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 22:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

No, you didn't do anything wrong, as far as I can see. I set the semi-protection to expire in fourteen days, but someone can always remove it earlier (or extend it) at his or her discretion. -- tariqabjotu 22:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Category:Criterion Collection films

My apologies. InnocuousPseudonym 21:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)