User talk:Nehrams2020/Archive 9

Film posters and other images

I've finally been through all of my images (and a few others), and all are now suitably reduced in size. No doubt they will all be dealt with in time, but if you're in the mood the full list is here:

User:PC78/image checklist

Regards. PC78 (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! PC78 (talk) 10:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ArtofWar.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:ArtofWar.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: GA Sweeps update

Feel free to add something to the newsletter. It's not exclusive to anyone. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:09, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can write a not-so-lengthy article on the 2nd column of the newsletter on more info about Sweeps. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't know what to write for. You can take my place because you're much more of a content-writer. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have to check with Derek. But if you leave him a note he'll delay publishing it. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome! =) I've made a list of task templates at my Open Tasks page. I've watch listed the discussion page as suggested however, again: Thanks for the welcome! =)

Cheers,
Neuro√Logic 05:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving WP:Films

Sorry Nehrams but I've quit WP:Films and all of the task forces. I'll continue to work on film from time to time but I no longer want to be a part of a project where I feel belittled by Giro everywhere I turn. I think the whole lead coordinator thing is a joke to be honest, its basically a way of saying "I run this project you abide by my rules". It has made a project which was supposed to be fun into a bureacracy. Several coordinators to do the important tasks is a good thing but our lead coordinator seems to think its entails being some sort of moral dictator. I've lost count of how many times that Giro has "intervened" to make me look like a lesser person. There is something very wrong if an editor can't make a comment or speech in a project without an editor who believes he is in an elevated position to pass a judgement on what another should say. I think that editors contributions and viewpoints have some validity on here, wheras Giro is under the belief that you can put hours of work into something and not feel that in any way you are involved with it as it is "public property". I think he has done a great job with tagging and maintenance for films on wikipedia but there are some areas where I believe he leaves the impression that he is in a position to control others and this to me is not what wikipedia should be about. Best of luck for the future ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 09:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for your note. I think the coordinator thing is a good thing to put responsibility in the hands of a few who do the important maintenance tasks (such as yourself Giro and Erik). I didn't mean that, its just the "lead" coordinator title that I disagree with and think they should be just coordinators rather than implying one has the final say over others. If I felt free to address any of my concerns with the group without being prompted personally for whatever i have said I would gladly return. However I don't like to join in a discussion and have somebody criticise me for something I've said (or what I was perceived to be saying) but rather respond to it constructively rather than critically. I may decide to return sometime in the future, only if other editors can allow me to function more freely within the group without the policing. I will still contribute to films, particularly Italian/French cinema, Bollywood and Hong Kong, although as you know I have numerous other committments in wikipojects on here, namely developing Latin America. It was always a pleasure to discuss things with you and always appreciated your input on various discussions we've had in the past for which I thankyou for. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 13:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA mentorship

Hey, remember me? Anyways, I have a question. I provided a bit of feedback Talk:Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith/GA1 here but no one has responded to them. I tried asking the nominator here but he/she (I don't know his or her gender yet) hasn't responded. One of the more pressing issues is under 2.a it provides references to all sources of information... Right now, the soundtrack section has 0 in-line cites, and the Cameo appearances IMO doesn't have enough. I think under fail it under this, but I'm not sure. Any suggestions? Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 15:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind providing a second opinion at the GA? I think I covered everything, but I'm not sure. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 20:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See if anything else is needed on the article. igordebraga ≠ 23:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I would like to know what change have I made on Wikipedia, which was nonsense, or vandalism? 172.191.142.29 (talk) 04:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know for what am I being penalized, a page, which I have not even viewed? That is wrong, and an illegal accusation. What you are doing is actually vandalism! I would much appreciate it, if you were to NEVER wrongly accuse me EVER AGAIN, or for that matter, anyone else! 172.191.142.29 (talk) 05:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand that this was at a much earlier time, but why am I being accused of it now? And I am the only one who uses this computer, and know what pages have been viewed. I would appreciate it if there is a problem with your server, you fix it immediately, so it does not record the wrong data for the wrong IP Address! 172.191.142.29 (talk) 05:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I am in a private residence house, my IP Address would not change, and I would like it if you were to understand that I am the ONLY person using this computer, as I have put a username and password on it, and view all my activity logs and internet history. Please never falsely accuse me ever again. And I am concerned, as I was warned that I will not again be able to change a page again if I were to get another warning, regardless of my IP Address belonging to me or NOT! 172.191.142.29 (talk) 05:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Doomsday

I added the category to the film article, but after looking at the category page, I've removed it. I don't think that Doomsday is considered a cannibal film, but if there was a category called "Films involving cannibals", that would probably be better suited. Sorry for the delayed response. By the way, do you have any thoughts on the whole non-free images component that may be added soon? It's a bit of a big step. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, the funny thing is, when I skimmed the subsection, I felt like I saw the word "ass" somewhere but figured that my mind was playing tricks on me. Guess it wasn't! Thanks for catching that. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the old one looked like #2, but it had colors in the frame, maybe? It really has been a while. :( Thanks for reminding me about LMS; it's hard to go back to an article that's not topping the watchlist. I think you suggestion works great, since the pageant is a big (cited) theme for the film. If you still want to get a cast image in, the American Cinematographer article talked about the challenge of filming in the bus. Perhaps there's an angle that can depict this challenge and encompass all the cast members. Want me to look at AC again for this possibility? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use this instead -- it doesn't have the IGN watermark. It would definitely be a useful shot! Lemme look at AC and see if I can find any relevant text about it. It looks like a production still, by the way... most of these immediately available pictures from films are that way. Have you taken an actual screenshot using your computer before? I found out how to do so for the Doomsday images, which didn't seem to exist elsewhere online. I just woke up, so I gotta get ready for work and all... I'll try to get back to you on LMS content. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 10:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to get back to the LMS image discussion tomorrow. I just drove home from my internship in the course of two days, so I'm just a vegetable right now. Hope all is well! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 04:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: GA newsletter

If you can write a column on sweeps, that would be good. The newsletter wasn't sent out aug. 1 because I was out of town until yesterday. I plan to have it delivered by friday or saturday at the latest (there's no "rule" that says I have to deliver it by the first of the month, is there? ;-). So plenty of time. Thanks! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Skier

Hi Nehrams any idea what happened to SkierRMH? All of a sudden he left on June 30. I've done a lot of work and had many discussions with him and his dedication to the project particularly with images and tagging was unrivalled. It will be a great loss if he doesn't return ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 11:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Images should not be used for simple "display" of the album cover. Unless there is critical commentary, then there shouldn't be an image. The film's poster covers the "identifying" image used in association of the entire article. If there was a page on the Tropic Thunder soundtrack then I could understand using it there, but not in the film's article. It's purely decorative as it stood (stands? I don't know if someone reverted me or not). All images (and in reality the infobox image of the poster too, but we've managed to convince the fair-use guardians that they represent the article as a whole) must meet all 10 fair-use criteria. Which means there should be critical commentary on the album cover itself. I seem to recall when I visited the page that the only thing there was a track listing. They really shouldn't be present in other articles either. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:56, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:TropicThunderSoundtrack.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TropicThunderSoundtrack.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Palace city.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Palace city.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tropic Thunder

the recent update you did was incorrect. dreamworks did not screen the film with the coalition member groups, infact they put the screening off until monday. patricia bower, a bloger, who is nto a member of the coalition, screened the film and a disability advocate found out she was screening the film and went with her. dreamworks has been delaying the screening for the coalition groups and finally scheduled it for monday. the original paragraph stands as fact and it is more then merely insensitive. you have changed the meaning of what i wrote. Thevitogodfather (talk) 20:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You still have not corrected the information on the article. they did not screeent he film with the groups, they said they were going to set up screening but they delayed them until monday. patricia bower, who is not a member of the coalition, screened the film and an advocate went wither her. dreamworks set up all of the screenings for 10 a.m. monday, the same day and as the primer. so the statement "DreamWorks met with the groups and screened the film with them to determine if the film still offended the groups" is an inaccurate statement and is not true. i know this because my mother si going to a screening monday at 10 a.m. in Washington d.c. set up for the member of the coalition groups.

Thevitogodfather (talk) 22:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i want the line below still in the article because it is factual and is part of the controversy and shows exactly what the baises of the controversy is.

Further, video clips of a scene between Ben Stiller and Robert Downey Jr. repeatedly using the “R-word” and other terms that disability advocates find offensive are available through YouTube and links from various websites.

ref “DreamWorks "Retard" Scandal Update: Disability-Rights Groups To Watch "Tropic Thunder," See If They Are Offended” http://www.businesssheet.com/2008/8/dreamworks-retard-scandal-update-disability-rights-groups-to-watch-tropic-thunder-see-if-they-are-offended#comments Retrieved 2008-8-10.</ref> ref http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChN3ykk2hIw </ref> ref Bauer, Patricia. (2008-08-08). “Internet trailer features footage of Simple Jack” http://www.patriciaebauer.com/2008/08/08/internet-trailer-simple-jack/ Retrieved 2008-8-10)</ref> Thevitogodfather (talk) 22:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the clips are very significant because that is what caused the controversy that gave birth to the coalition. plus the web is full of hateful propaganda about individuals with intellectual disabilities on websites that have the trailer links.Thevitogodfather (talk) 22:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

however, those trailers are not offensive and have not caused a national outcry. these trailers are apart of the films advertising. you mentioned that " he film's advertising has been altered but none of the scenes in the film were edited as a result of the opposition.", however none of the trailers were removed or edited either and that is as significant as what you wrote.Thevitogodfather (talk) 23:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason i undid Wikipedical's edit is because the movie deals with intellectual disabilities specifically, not disabilities as a whole. also, it is no longer called mental retardation, it is called an intellectual disability. Thevitogodfather (talk) 21:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly what people are protesting about, it is no longer the politically correct or correct. it is similar to calling an African American person colored, something you wouldn't do on wikipedia. i further propose you change the mental retardation article to be called intellectual disabilities.Thevitogodfather (talk) 21:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so, can you change it so that it reads intellectual disabilities, formally known as mental retardation?Thevitogodfather (talk) 21:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have it on my watchlist, but I don't quite focus on it as much as I could. I'll keep a closer eye on it. It's kind of amusing the various kinds of craziness this film has had -- the Tom Cruise cameo, the Downey blackface, and the retarded-role background. Do you plan to bring it up to GA? I tend to avoid working on articles when films are so recent (like with The Dark Knight). No problem with LMS -- you mentioned your FA goal, will it be for that article? I can get the cinematography content to you and whatever else seems easy to grab. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I'm not sure if I going to be able to deliver it to user talk pages anymore, though. There was some kind of update to AWB, which I've been using, and now it's totally unusable. First, the update only lets you get 10 links from a page, instead of all the links, so I can't even pull up the entire GA participants list to send to. In the talk pages, they mentioned an "update", but the update is chock full of bugs and is even more unusable than the first time -- every time I go to login, and every time I go to try and save a page, I get this "microsoft debugger". So there are apparently MAJOR BUGS in AWB right now. Dr. Cash (talk) 23:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a thought about the newsletter. Is it possible to transclude a template in the newsletter that can outline all the past newsletters? The category is a little hard to follow, and not everyone may really visit the Outreach page. I thought that a template like 2006: or 2007: having links to each month's newsletter would be a navigational improvement. If we used it, it's early enough in the history of newsletters not to backtrack with an overwhelming number of edits. What do you think? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be better if we went by month in shorthand. Like Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, etc. Numbers seem too hard to think about. :) Sorry I haven't been around... graduate school is in full swing these days. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was hilarious! I saw The Pineapple Express before it, and I thought that this was much more fun. I think it's probably my favorite comedy of the year (not that there are many gems in 2008). I'm sorry I didn't get a chance to help look over the film's article... when I got home from my internship, I was busy catching up with friends and getting ready to come back to graduate school. Thanks regarding Doomsday -- I had been without a Good Article for some time. And the template looks better! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CHICAGO

According to my records, you have nominated at least one article (The Blues Brothers (film)) that includes a category at WP:CHIBOTCATS and that has been promoted to WP:FA, WP:FL or WP:GA. You are not signed up as an active member of WP:CHICAGO. If you consider yourself either an active or semi-active member of the project please sign up as such at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/members. Also, if you are a member, be aware of Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 3 and be advised that the project is now trying to keep all the project's WP:PR, WP:FAC, WP:FAR, WP:GAR, WP:GAC WP:FLC, WP:FLRC, WP:FTC, WP:FPOC, WP:FPC, and WP:AFD discussion pages in one location at the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Review page. Please help add any discussion you are aware of at this location.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rain of Madness

Just found this – seems like a good merge candidate to Tropic Thunder to me, but I figured I'd ask you since you've been involved with that article. Regards. PC78 (talk) 18:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some developments

Hi. Just to let you know that Category:Film stubs by country has been created along with the Mexican film cat. You probably saw this on the talk page of Wp#:Films but I thought I'd let you know. Also I've created Template:American films where we are discussing the possibility of administering the template at the bottom of all American film articles for consistency and using a bot to implement a standard once we come to a consensus. ANy comments or thoughts would be appreciated. Also have a look at La Guerra Gaucha, translated from the featured article on spanish wikipedia. It will need a great deal of copyediting and rewriting its many awkward translations and propbably moving some of the biographical information into the relatvie actor articles but it is promising isn't it. I'd imagine it could get up to GA with a lot of work ensuring it is all written correctly. I remember somebody saying before that all of the Argentine films would never be developed beyond a stub! And this is from 1942. Potentially we know we could get most film articles up to this sort of length if we are resourceful enough. I'll see if I can some more spanish language film articles into english in the coming weeks. There are some other Argentine and SPanish GAs needing transferring too! The Bald One ^{White cat} 22:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with infoboxes

I couldn't find anything about this so I thought I'd ask a highly decorated user, that has earned an award for helping newbies.
I want to use an infobox template, but I want to add a field that is not in the template.
Let's say I'm using the organization infobox template and I want to add a field called former name (the name the organization was given at first), which the organization template doesn't provide
If I was editing my own infobox, I would have done it like this | label1 = former name | data1 = Yoyoyo.
How can I do that, if I can do that ? As in Use an infobox template (like organization) and add a field to it.
U can edit my sandbox if it makes it easier, I prepared it for this purpose, Thanks.
--JB (talk) 09:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jadbaz (talk • contribs) 09:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Table

Hi, I hope you don't mind, but I used your GA table on my user page, just thought you should know. --Music26/11 21:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dracula ver2 poster.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dracula ver2 poster.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.

Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 05:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 31	28 July 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2008 wrap-up	WikiWorld: "Terry Gross"
News and notes: Unblocked in China	Dispatches: Find reliable sources online
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 32	9 August 2008	About the Signpost

Anthrax suspect reportedly edit-warred on Wikipedia	WikiWorld: "Fall Out Boy"
Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, July	WikiProject Report: WikiProject New York State routes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 33	11 August 2008	About the Signpost

Study: Wikipedia's growth may indicate unlimited potential	Board of Trustees fills Nominating Committee for new members
Greenspun illustration project moves to first phase	WikiWorld: "George Stroumboulopoulos"
News and notes: Wikipedian dies	Dispatches: Reviewing free images
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 34	18 August 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Help wanted
WikiWorld: "Cashew"	Dispatches: Choosing Today's Featured Article
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LMS

Sure, I'd be glad to take another look! Thanks for letting me know, Steven Walling (talk) 20:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

Hi, I noticed this. Linked dates are no longer encouraged, see WP:MOSDATE. I invite you to revert your edit. --John (talk) 04:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted it back. I'm surprised there wasn't more widespread discussion on the proposal, and I don't necessarily agree with it. However, I'm not going to keep readding the links to it. This is definitely going to take a while to undo all of the articles that have full dates. Just for future reference though, I'd recommend mentioning in the edit summary the change since other editors may not be aware to the modifications at MOS. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 06:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a fairly recent change to the MOS guideline. I will take up your suggestion re edit summaries. Happy editing to you too. --John (talk) 07:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

KFP Assesment

Thank you for your assessment and helpful grammar edits. I'll work on the points you have noted, but I believe that the plot is of adequate length. The plot for WALL-E has 30 words more then the KFP plot, and that article is a GA. The plot was longer, and has been shortened repeatedly since I started working on it. I guarantee that when you see the film (it really is fantastic) you will not believe that the plot is excessive. Once again, thanks for your time! --Simpsons fan 66 23:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed the points you noted, can I make the article B-class now? --Simpsons fan 66 07:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since the film has been released so recently, there is really no information besides "OMG! KFP SEQUEL!". The official site itself may have a character description like you suggested. Under the "production/the film/five fighting warriors" section, there is an extensive description of each of the Furious Five, mainly in real-life prose, not in-universe. Would that be OK? Apart from the image and the plot, is the article still good for B-class, or failing that, C-class?--Simpsons fan 66 10:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Little Miss Sunshine FAC

Sorry about the no-doubt-multiple edit conflicts there; I've been examining each source in turn to help prove/disprove their reliability during the advert breaks on Bones. Hence the fractured nature of the comments. I also apologise for the huge list of issues I posted; it's all Girolamo's fault :) He's been banging on for a while now about project members' contributing to film article reviews, so I thought I'd take him up on that before I put my name forward for a co-ordinator position next month. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 20:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that it wasn't promoted. I really thought that it was FAC-worthy. One thing, unfortunately, was that it was hobbled by a horrible comment structure, which made it very difficult to see the supports from the forest of comments. I hope that you aren't discouraged - keep in mind that you can immediately put a failed articled back into the FAC pool if it's clear that you've addressed most of the issues brought up in the previous one, so there's no reason why you couldn't clear the hurdle this time (IMHO). In any case, you did a brave job, and I hope to see the star there in the near future! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 06:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Though I was a mute spectator to the FAC, I'd like to say that the article was very well on its way to the FAC. I'm sure with a little more work as pointed out by the reviewers, it will not face as much resistance as it did. Hope you are doing well. Mspraveen (talk) 16:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your nice words about the DYKs. Good luck with the new FAC. By the way, I wonder about the time taken for typical A-class reviews to be completed. Rang De Basanti has been languishing there since quite some time now :( Mspraveen (talk) 03:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Anything Goes.jpeg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Anything Goes.jpeg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link removal on Ben Stiller

Hello: You removed the external link on the article Ben Stiller stating as your reason "no fansites." This appears to be a misreading of the External Links guideline, which makes clear that it is acceptable to link to sites that directly relate to the subject, and contain material beyond what would be included in WP (such as news, interviews or images). Nothing in the WP:EL guideline (which is not a policy, per se) says "no fansites", but that external links should be chosen carefully. Seeing as how the link I added is the only active Web site that deals with Ben Stiller at all then it is entirely appropriate to include. --HidariMigi (talk) 02:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spotlight department

Hi Nehrams2020. How you've been doing? I was quite curious to know as to who updates the Spotlight department. I observed that the DYK section lacks at least 5 DYKs from Indian cinema. FYI, they are Anasuya (2007 film), Krazzy 4, Vanaja (film), Amma Cheppindi and Woodstock Villa. (Source: User:Mspraveen/DYK1 and User:Mspraveen/DYK2). Regards, Mspraveen (talk) 04:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick update. As and when necessary, I'll update it too. Thanks again :) Mspraveen (talk) 05:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter

The August 2008 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. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nehrams I've returned my name to WP:Films as it seems the natural thing to do seems as I am involved with film on here anyway. The Bald One ^{White cat} 10:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL I had to expand $ (film) yesterday. It is the first American film in the category and it had been unedited for years. Roger Ebert must have reviewed every film ever released! I still can't get enough info together to write a better plot section though The Bald One ^{White cat} 10:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Bourne Ultimatum

Hi there,

Thanks for the review for B - class -- I'll work on that and drop you a note when I'm done for the re-assess. I think that I would like to work for the article to get up to GA standards, therefore I ask that you leave any other comments also on the talk page for getting the article to GA.

Thanks, The Helpful One ^(Review) 12:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Please re-assess the article as required. The Helpful One ^(Review) 14:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the re-assess and new comments, I'll get started on them! The Helpful One ^(Review) 18:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for advice or action:

This is the tip of the iceberg on a rapidly growing problem. See HERE and HERE. The longer PAMP and its sister articles sit here, the worse it is going to get, as the darn thing simply does not exist, and more and more off-Wiki sources are including it as if it were real and referring back to Wiki. Help!

Request for assistance sent to User:Girolamo Savonarola, User:Bzuk, User:Erik, User:Limetolime, and User:Nehrams2020

With growing concern, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:13, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about image sizes

Hi there. I notice you tagged Image:Ron Cobb Alien concept art.jpg and Image:Alien model filming.jpg with {{Non-free reduce}}. As the uploader, I can attest that these images have already been significantly reduced from their original versions. I scanned both from The Book of Alien and then reduced them by 50% or more: The original of the Ron Cobb image is a full page from the book which is 10"x14", if I recall correctly, while the model filming image is originally about 8"x8". So as you can see, these images are already significantly reduced from the originals, and I scanned them at a lower resolution. WP:NFCC does not give specific size restrictions for non-free images, merely that they are "not used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media." Given that these images were scanned at a lower resolution than the originals, then reduced by 50% or more, and no higher resolutions are available on the image pages, it's unlikely that they could be used to replace the market role of the originals. I've actually been going through the images in Alien (film) myself and have reduced several of them, but I didn't feel that these particular ones needed any further reduction. Of course if you can point me to some area with specific guidance on image sizes then I'm happy to reduce them even further, but failing that I don't feel much copyright paranoia about these ones. What, in your opinion, would be an ideal size for them? P.S. I just noticed your userpage. I'm a graduate student at SDSU myself, in the history department. I'm trying to finish my thesis & graduate this semester. --IllaZilla (talk) 16:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I'll reduce them to 300px on one side. I did my undergrad work at UCSD, got my BA in history in '02, then took a few years off from school as I got a job working on a cruise line. In 2005 I came back to San Diego to start grad school at SDSU. I've dragged it out about a year longer than I should have, but hopefully I'll be finished soon. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 35	25 August 2008	About the Signpost

WikiWorld: "George P. Burdell"	News and notes: Arbitrator resigns, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Interview with Mav
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 36	8 September 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimedia UK disbands, but may form again	WikiWorld: "Helicopter parent"
News and notes: Wikipedian dies, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured topics	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, August
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:FGKingisDead.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:FGKingisDead.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for affirming B-class for Revolt in the Stars. Cirt (talk) 09:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, still, it is always appreciated when an article you worked on gets a higher quality-status rating or its current rating affirmed, without having to do anything else. Thanks again, Cirt (talk) 21:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the prettiest award...

...but I wanted to give you something germane that you didn't already have.

		WikiMedal for Janitorial Services
		With great indebtedness for your work cleaning up B-class reviews for WP Films. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 01:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why no block for Nugentd2012 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)?

My report has been sitting at WP:AIV, and he was given a "blocked without further notice" warning well in advance of him placing the second false death rumor. Why only a warning?Kww (talk) 03:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Things to do...

...just wanted to let you know that I will try to respond to your message sometime later this week - I'm tied up with business affairs until Tuesday evening at the earliest. If you want to be bold about anything, though, you have my full confidence in your judgment. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films coordinator elections - voting now open!

Roll call and Coordinator nominations

The September 2008 WikiProject Films coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of candidates. Additionally, we are keeping nominations open during the voting period, in case any additional editors wish to nominate themselves. Please vote here by September 28!

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Livefreediehardsoundtrack.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Livefreediehardsoundtrack.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 06:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 37	15 September 2008	About the Signpost

Wikiquote checkuser found to be sockpuppeteer	WikiWorld: "Ubbi dubbi"
News and notes: Wikis Takes Manhattan, milestones	Dispatches: Interview with Ruhrfisch, master of Peer review
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

0.7

I've added something to the talk thread that you started - the problem is that our core list isn't being taken into account (although it's passing-by is understandable). As for the page that you created...I find it a bit difficult to parse, to be honest! Also, having a clear column for the current assessment (a la the core list) and maybe a column to indicate if it's own our (or anyone else's) core list might help, too. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 01:36, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image question

Re: The Dark Knight, thank you very much! I still feel like it could be better, though... I kind of stopped editing the article with the onslaught of coverage (never expected it to do so damn well). I may revisit it, since I've piled up headlines here. To address the Tom Cruise image, I am not sure, either. I think the licensing at the Zodiac image could be used, but the image you mention feels very paparazzi-esque. Do we have a source for the original copyright holder of the image? I think that it may be more visually relevant to have an image of Tom Cruise as he appears in the film. What do you think? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Saving shiloh.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Saving shiloh.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: LMS FAC

Sure thing, I'll be right over. Sorry for the delay. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 12:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Glad the rationales panned out. I'll take another look at the article at some point today; hopefully all will be well and this can get promoted. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 07:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nordic cinema

HI Nehrams. These are exciting times are they not? What I had in mind two years ago on here seems to be gradually taking shape. The project is better and more organised than ever. I;m particularly pleased with the Nordic task force and the devleopment of articles such as A Victim of the Mormons. Who;d have ever though in the olden days we would have a half decent article on a] a 1911 film and b] a silent danish movie. If we can add such content en masse which are of s similar standard this project will devleop massively. Some day we'll have every notable film from every country, and up to a half decent standard (hopefully). I;m keen to encourage editors to edit Latin American film although this seems to be a sadly neglected part of films on here. I;ve proposed a new project but I doubt I'll get anybody to follow it as most interested editors are likely to be working on spanish wikipedia aside from the one or two film buffs we have on here. Anyway just to tell you I proposed and with Her Peghsip got Category:Danish film stubs up and running. I;ve also proposed Iceland, Norwegian and Czech film stubs if you would kindly chip in at the stub sorting proposals as well as a proposed split of documentary film stubs. Hope you are well. The Bald One ^{White cat} 15:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LMS

Congrats! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:01, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. Well done Nehrams! I didn't realise you had that much time for editing these days. So hurrah! The Bald One ^{White cat} 11:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Election wrap-up

It looks very likely that I will be tied up with real-world business for at least the next 36 hours or so, and probably will not have any substantial internet connection at that time. Therefore as you are the most senior coordinator, I'd like to delegate any tasks involved with the conclusion of the election to you, along with Erik (as he likely will have the highest vote count, or at least the highest amongst those available). It's also a fair bet that you've been voted in as well, so let me be the first to offer you my congratulations on a third term and I look forward to working with you again - as always! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 06:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - If you have been following the 0.7 discussion, you will be able to see my re-adjusted list...if your computer can handle it! :)

As of this writing, the election will be over in 3.5 hours. I will report the results and mark the election page as archived. I'll try to hunt down any current mentions of the election and revise them to past tense. I will probably want to keep the status quo and have Girolamo as the lead coordinator again. I was wondering, can you update the coming newsletter based on the results? Also, I will report the results by later tonight, but if I don't take care of it within the next 12 hours, can you take care of it? I have a post-it note here, but I have to go back on campus to finish up a few things for this week. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am a new member of your team. My schedule is quite flexible, so feel free to let me know how I can be of assistance to the team and the project. Cheers! Ecoleetage (talk) 03:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bah, was hoping you wouldn't notice. :) I was trying to trust my memory with all the names, but apparently it is preoccupied with business cases and information session details. Congratulations on being a non-appointed coordinator this time, by the way! ;) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 05:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

A belated congratulations for your election as a film coordinator. I certainly look forward to working with you again. FWiW, I recently had a series of publishing deadlines to meet so my attention was diverted of late, but I will be coming back "on line" little by little. Bzuk (talk) 00:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

WikiProject Films September 2008 Newsletter

The September 2008 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. Thank you. Please also note that after the roll call for active members, we've cleared the specialized delivery lists. Feel free to sign-up in the relevant sections again!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stub sorting

HI Nehrams. I've made a proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2008/October. I think it would be a useful tool for telling us what needs doing by year and give us a format to work though each year and try to rid of our stubs to start class. I know I would find it very useful as would several others who do things by year. I haven't proposed it to WP:Films because the last few times I've announced a stub proposal or ask for some input nobody responded, The Bald One ^{White cat} 15:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Belated election congrats!

It is a great pleasure to see you returning as a coordinator, and I look forward to working with you again! I've presented another opening slate of items, and your comments are requested. (Additionally, if you haven't already, you must add the coordinator talk page to your watchlist.) Congrats and speak soon, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Jackson "highest grossing actor"

I see that you popped this line back in, looking at the talk page it's been noted that the data just seems wrong (he's about the 10th highest grossing actor).

As it's uncredited and also doesn't match the credited numbers at the start of the paragraph I can't see how it can be included. Have you noticed any source for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superfly Jon (talk • contribs) 11:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grizzly Rage

When you did the B class assessment for this article, you recommended further expansion before a GA run. Any particularly areas you felt needed expansion? The review and distribution are pretty much complete, and the production section has just about all the info available there (the one little behind the scenes video is only 1 minute long). -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Asimplewish.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Asimplewish.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deja Vu Review Commentary

Hey, Nehrams. I fixed most of the problems, with the exception of Image:DejaVuBigPoster.jpg, which some other editor got to first. However, I'm by no means a fan of arousing problems with other editors; Wildonrio gave a statement I felt was valid, and you can see the problems at this location here. It was over a large section concerning a theory that involves four plotlines in the movie. I'd like you to swing by again.

Thanks, --Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 23:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nabi (film)

I don't think I can add a cast section that would go beyond a bare bones list; I take it this is not what you have in mind? Ah well, close but no cigar I guess. :) I've failed the article on B-Class criteria #2 (coverage). Thanks anyway! PC78 (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Input

Hello again, Nehrams. I am sorry to bother you again, but concerning the movie Deja Vu, Wildonrio has proposed something that might be of aid to the article itself. It involves the creation of a seperate article detailing the four different timelines, with only a brief summary present on the actual article.

However, I brought up a possible flaw to this, concerning the general notability guideline's "significant coverage" criterion. Here be my question to you: do you think that the new proposed article will be deleted per failure of this criterion?

Please get back to me as soon as you can.

--Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 07:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spacing

Thanks for asking about the spacers. They solve a problem with the way Internet Explorer renders the page. Unlike other browsers I've checked out, such as Firefox and Safari, without the spacers, IE will butt the end of the lede right up against the Table of Contents, or the bottom of the article (usually the External Links) right up against any navboxes at the bottom. This is unsightly, making the text look very crowded, and sometimes making it very difficult to read. So the spacers are there to loosen that up and give the text a little "breathing room."

I realize that under other browsers, it also adds some space that's not absolutely necessary, but I've looked at the results and judged that the disadvanages with those browsers are outweighed by the benefits for IE (still the most used browsers, especially by people not very sophisticated about computers, just the kind of reader we should be concerned about attracting to Wikipedia. I am aware that it's possible to "fix" the problem by making a change to my monobook file, but I like to keep my settings at what ordinary people without a Wikipedia account will see when they pop over to Wikipedia to get a quick fact or two. I'm convinced that if we are to become the de facto standard for the first source of choice, those are the people we need to "capture" for our audience, which is unlikely to happen if the pages they access are cramped, visually unattractive or difficult to read.

That's about it, if you've got any questions, I'll be glad to try to answer them, if I can. Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 18:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minutes / year in film

Hi, N2020. I wanted to aks you about the edits you're making in which you change running times from "minutes" to "min." It seems to be that unless there's a space concern, for instance when multiple times are listed on the same line, there's really no reason to do that. There's plenty of space there, and "minutes" looks better than "min." Why use an abbreviation where the full word will work just fine?

Also, since I have your ear, I really don't think there's any reason to delink the "year in film" links on release dates in infoboxes. The current consensus is that it's legitimate to link release dates to "year in film" articles - see this discussion and this one.

Any thoughts on these two issues? Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 03:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sorry that we disagree about this, on both accounts. The year link in the infobox doesn't seem to me to be any odder than any other link, and "minutes" definitely looks better to my eye than "min." (And I have to say that I was brought around to preferring "minutes" by an editor that I'm usually in conflict with. I was going around changing "minutes" to "min." and he asked me why. I blew him off because of our history, but after thinking about it, decided he was right, it does look better and there's no need to do it.)

On the other hand, I'm happy to hear that you support the continued linking of release dates, that's great. Best, Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 04:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silver Reel

On behalf of a grateful project, congrats!

It is my honor, as the Lead Coordinator of WikiProject Films, to give you the inaugural conferral of the WikiProject Service Award, Second Class - the Silver Reel. Awarded for meritorious service in completing the entirety of your 0.7 worklist. Most gratefully, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Hairspray Link and Tracy in Car.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Hairspray Link and Tracy in Car.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 10:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kermit the Frog

Being as you're the B-class review vet, would you mind doing me the small favor of looking at the talk page's history, with regards to the assessment? Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Topic workshop

See this discussion concerning moving my topic workshop draft into the project. Feel free to propose any potential topics you have in mind. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 07:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Chuckandlarrymp.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Chuckandlarrymp.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem

Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:39, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Timon Ma UncleMax.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Timon Ma UncleMax.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 14:56, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quantum of Solace

Hey, Nehrams, how's it going? I'm having issues with JamesBHunt (talk · contribs), who constantly introduces his own opinion into the article, as well as doing some fair copyediting. He's been warned constantly about this since May 2008 and does not want to respond to advice. This is not so serious that I'd report this to the Admin pages, but what do you think? Alientraveller (talk) 20:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and yup, I've seen it, it's fantastic. I wasn't aware you'd assessed it B-class: thanks! Alientraveller (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Films newsletter

Thanks for delivering the WP:Films newsletter. You may also take the services of bots like TinucherianBot for newsletter delivery if you need. Thanks -- Tinu Cherian - 09:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ann Dunham with father and children.jpg

I have removed the {{Non-free reduce}} tag you added from Image:Ann Dunham with father and children.jpg. This is already a rather poor-quality scan and of less commercial value than a professional, color-adjusted scan of the original. Additionally, if the resulution were reduced signifigantly, it would impair the recognition of individual's faces, eliminating the image's relevance to the articles in which is is used. Please contact me if you have any qualms about this. Thanks —dgies^t_c 09:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An Opinion

Hey, Nehrams.

Thanks for all the help you have provided me before; I am eyeing a B-class film to nominate for GA, Beowulf. I'm trying to clean it up to give reviewers an easier time, but there are a few things that are unclear to me. I was wondering if you could advise me on them.

Well, firstly, the only evidence of the soundtrack release for the movie without pop-ups and who-knows-what was Amazon.com. However, I am only using this to verify the date of the soundtrack's release. Do you think it is valid?

Secondly, is a podcast section in the article really necessary? I think that the information is liable to shift.

Please get back to me as soon as you can. I could really use the feedback.

Thanks, --Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 23:10, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Out of My Intention

I've left you a reply here, and would certainly appreciate a bit of discussion regarding the matter. Dented pride may well play its part, but I have a growing concern that some of our assessments are fundamentally flawed. Regards. PC78 (talk) 04:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Left you another reply. That said, I shall go back to my sources to see if I can squeeze a bit more from them. Regards. PC78 (talk) 15:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As promised I have gone back to the article and made a few refinements, which will hopefully satisfy the concerns you have. Could you also take a look at Death Bell, another article where myself and Giro butted heads over assessment, to the point where I felt it necessary to revert him and reassess it myself – not something I would choose to do lightly. Ultimately that article is a lesser concern because a detailed plot summary will at least be forthcoming, but I still think I was right, and would appreciate another opinion if you feel otherwise. If I may, I'd also like to pick up on a few of the other things we discussed, but I will need to collect my thoughts first. Regards. PC78 (talk) 17:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the Treasure Planet article

Hi! Sorry about invading your talk page, but I just wanted to discuss that separate Cast section that you mentioned in your tips for improving the Treasure Planet article. After re-reading the Plot section of the article, which contains detailed descriptions of the main characters (e.g. "cat-like, sharp-witted, and often sarcastic Captain Amelia" or "B.E.N ... an abandoned robot who claims he's lost half his brain") as well as the names of their voice actors in parenthesis, I felt that a separate Cast/Character section would be redundant...plus I was basing the format on the WP: Films Style guidelines, which notes that having the names of the actors inserted into the Plot section (like the given example, the FA Tenebrae (film)) is sufficient and is actually preferred ("Alternatively, Tenebrae (film) discusses "Production" in its own section, and provides the cast via the plot summary only. ... Failing that, a cast list inserted into the body of the article may be appropriate, though some editors frown on lists inside articles."). So um...I guess what I'm saying is that I think it's best that the article doesn't have a separate Cast section, even though most of the Disney animated feature articles listed as GA have one. I guess I just felt a bit guilty about not completely following your good advice (thanks for that again; you don't know how happy I am that someone actually helped me out after somehow doing a solo flight on this article) and felt like I had to tell you about it. :| --SilentAria ^talk 07:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty then, I'll just keep the Plot/Cast thing it as is for now. Thank you so much for all your help! I'll let you know if I get stuck again. :p --SilentAria ^talk 09:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi, my name is William and I'm working on an article that I would like to take to FAC. It has been there once before and failed because of prose and sourcing issues. The sourcing issue has been taken care of, but I'm not so sure about the prose issue. I have someone who opposed it in its FAC that is going to look it over. A few weeks ago that person said it needed a copyedit before I renominate it. I finished working on it today. I've been looking for someone who has wrote at least one FA article that can work out the prose issue if it still exist. I saw you've written an FA and 20 GA articles, as well as reviewed many GAs, so I thought to ask you. The article is Lockdown (2008), it is a professional wrestling pay-per-view event that took place earlier this year. I'm not sure if you'd be interested in anything like that, but would you mind to copyedit it? Drop me a line on my talk page if you don't mind with your answer. I'll be grateful if you would, but if you don't want to or can't I understand. Cheers!--WillC 06:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you very much! This is helping it get to FA, which is a goal I've had for a while now. Take your time, it is somewhat long..--WillC 07:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you for your time and help. I looked over what you've done and I don't have any probelms but maybe one or two that are nothing to worry about. They don't hurt anything it is just me being stubborn. lol We don't have A-Class though, I wish we did, but no one has said anything about it. I'll probably get two more reviews from the people who opposed it in its last FAC. I'll let you know if I need anything. Nice to meet you and thank you for your help. Also I found you by going to the Films project and looking at the participants one by one until I found someone I thought to ask. Seeing Films has alot of FAs, I thought to look for someone in that project.--WillC 19:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I believe I fixed everything you said on my talk page. What do you think?--WillC 22:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, and thank you for the copyedit it was very helpful! Thanks for the best wishes and if you ever need anyone to copyedit anything or give some thoughts you just let me know. I'll be happy too.--WillC 06:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I want to say thanks for the copyedit again. So far nothing to serious has come up in Lockdown's FAC. I'm grateful for the help, when you didn't have to. Best wishes on anything you're working on.--WillC 05:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for History of San Diego State University

On 11 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article History of San Diego State University, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cirt (talk) 15:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment concerns

Following on from our earlier discussion...

The problem I have with {{Upgrading needed}} is that it is not consistant with {{Film grading scheme}}. The former seems to call for two "developed sections" in addition to plot and cast details, whereas the latter (the standard by which we should be assessing our articles) requires only a single "subheading that fully treats an element of the topic". Assessment cannot merely be a case of counting up the section headings; the content of an article needs to be judged on its own merits, and particuarly for Start-Class articles we cannot expect much in the way of MOS compliance. This is what I meant when I said "heavy requirements". I do a fair bit of assessment work myself outside WP:FILM, and I do not believe that other WikiProjects (indeed, the rest of Wikipedia) assess their Start-Class articles to the same high standard that we now seem to be doing. When we are lumping articles such as those we have discussed in with "true" stubs (e.g. S Diary, Maniac Cop or A) then it is little wonder that 70% or our articles fall under Stub-Class, and I don't believe that this is beneficial to our project.

Can you point me to past discussions regarding the "Stub to Start" criteria? It would useful to me to know what was said. You also mention a potential reassessment drive of all Stub/Start-Class articles; I think it would be useful to preface such a drive with a more open discussion regarding Start-Class criteria, because if the net result is a downgrading of articles on a similar scale to what we've recently had with B-Class, then I really think we'll be shooting ourselves in the feet. Incidentally, come January I'm planning on reopening the discussion on C-Class, since my own feelings on the matter have done a complete volte-face.

Regards. PC78 (talk) 13:59, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oldboy Poster

Hi, since you seem to be one of the coordinators of the film WikiProject, I was wondering if you could lend your opinion on a discussion concerning which poster should be used for the article. Thank you.--CyberGhostface (talk) 18:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Bosworth

Hey Nehrams, thanks for finding that image of Kate Bosworth, but the image is way too big. You think you can maybe crop it or something? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 19:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All is good. :) Hope everything is good with you as well. Oh, that's my bad there, I completely forgot about the size parameter. Dumb me. I'll see if I can fix it. Hey, can I maybe tell you about an image request? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The request: Maggie Gyllenhaal. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main image is alright, but not really a good picture of her. If you can maybe find an image like, where you can see her face, like say, Matt Damon's, that would be good. If you can't, all is good. :) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's true. I could tell that you were happy with that Matt Damon picture, seeing the message in the image's talkpage :) Keep up the good work in adding these images, that you've received the OK for their use, of course. Alright, if you can, yay, if you can't, I would thank you in advance for trying. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that image that you brought up, I wound up uploading the image, but it was deleted because apparently the image did not belong to the user on Flickr, apparently it was from Wireimage or something. Just wanted to let you know. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 18:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wonder Bar

Hi,

While I appreciate your evaluation of Wonder Bar recently, after looking at your evaluation of the article I still don't feel I know what more you are looking for. The review was kind of general. I checked the article against the checklist provided by the wikimovies project and it seemed to me like the requirements were met. Could you take a moment and either re-evaluate it, or use the templated checklist? Thanks! Sevey13 (talk) 01:01, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:La confidential.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:La confidential.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bridgetoterabithiaposter.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bridgetoterabithiaposter.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For moving so many great and much-needed images into Wikipedia from Wikicommons All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 03:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA reform redux

I've recently had a chat with a couple of the contributors, and we think it may be worth revisiting the GA reform proposal put together by the working party during the Summer. Since you contributed to the proposal's development, I was wondering if you'd care to comment? I've left a brief recap at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/Reform#GA reform redux; your input would be much appreciated. Thank you, EyeSerene^talk 13:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Shaun-of-the-dead.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Shaun-of-the-dead.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rocky'2006shot1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Rocky'2006shot1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tropic Thunder

You changed a lot of stuff in your recent edit so I'm not certain if the hoax you're referring to was my edit or not. Perhaps I'm extremely dense but... if my edit was the hoax you were refering to? How do you know it's a hoax?--Dr who1975 (talk) 15:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 42	8 November 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
News and notes: The Price is Right, milestones	Dispatches: Halloween Main Page contest generates new article content
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 43	10 November 2008	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens: Over $500,000 raised in first week	ArbCom elections: Nominations open
Book review: How Wikipedia Works	MediaWiki search engine improved
Four Board resolutions, including financials, approved	News and notes: Vietnamese Wiki Day
Dispatches: Historic election proves groundbreaking on the Main Page	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Volume 4, Issue 44	17 November 2008	About the Signpost

Lawsuit briefly shuts down Wikipedia.de	GFDL 1.3 released, will allow Wikimedia migration to Creative Commons license
Wikimedia Events Roundup	News and notes: Fundraiser, List Summary Service, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pentecostalism and user 76.196.75.194

Whilst your reversion of this user's edit was quite correct, the explanation you gave on the user's talk page was not. They deleted lots of content and added nothing, but your explanation referred to them adding nonsense to the page. I have updated accordingly. MarkyMarkD (talk) 00:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

You recently blocked User:71.190.26.165 for two weeks. I'm curious - considering he has a long history of vandalism and complaints from other editors, why not just block him permanently? Thanks. LiteraryMaven (talk) 20:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November newsletter

Hi Nehrams. Any idea when this is released? Count Blofeld 22:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many many -Thanks. Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 10:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! It was easy to work on it after seeing that Wildroot had gotten started on it. I think the most tedious part of the newsletter is setting up the releases for each weekend... getting the dates right and digging up the film article wiki-links. So I just tried to provide a little bit of useful content on top of that. By the way, I was thinking that we coordinators and perhaps the community should have a discussion about how to improve outreach. I feel like we've set up a decent bureaucracy that is underused, especially with the membership of task forces. Maybe we could start with something like giving the outreach template an overhaul and try to encourage using it when we see new editors? Hope you can get through the next few weeks, pal! —Erik (talk • contrib) 13:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Film reels

OK I've been a bald guy and searched for and uploaded some film reels which could probably replace our existing cartoon type icons. Take your pick from the following. I'll propose it to WP:Films so we can reach a consensus on which to use. Count Blofeld 10:05, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Filmreel3.jpg

Yes I was thinking the third one would look good in the years in film template. Count Blofeld 12:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tag and assess drive for WP:FILM

I noticed your comments on the coordinator's talk page, so thought I would aproach you directly: what do you think about putting in a bot request to automatically tag articles for WP:FILM? I seem to be forever finding articles that haven't been tagged, and indeed there appear to be plenty of them out there. It's just an idle thought I've been having so I'm not too sure about all the ins and outs of making such a request, but the end result should be worthwhile and preferable to doing it manually. PC78 (talk) 22:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into it a bit more when I get chance. Regards. PC78 (talk) 15:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, not sure how feasible this is going to be. It would be great if a bot could just sweep through everything in Category:Film and tag it for the project, but there seem to be just too many subcategories that are wholly or partially outside our scope, and weeding them all out would be a pretty big job in itself. Dunno what to say really, so I'm going to leave it for now and maybe revisit the idea if/when the tag and assess drive gets off the ground. Regards. PC78 (talk) 00:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mean have a bot go through all articles using the infobox? That's certainly a possibility. Regarding the start you've made to the tag & assess drive, I think we'll have to be crystal clear as to how awards are being handed out. I participated in an assessment drive for WP:BIOGRAPHY last year, and there was a bit of a fallout afterwards because some people weren't getting awards they felt they were entitled to. PC78 (talk) 11:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Triple Crown jewels

Your majesty, it gives me great pleasure to bestow the **Triple Crown** upon Nehrams2020 for your contributions in the areas of WP:DYK, WP:GA, and WP:FA. **Cirt** (talk) 23:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributions to the project, Great work, especially on Little Miss Sunshine - great contribution to WP:FILMS! May you wear the crowns well. Cirt (talk) 23:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Every message at User talk:71.190.26.165 indicates this person is a chronic vandal. On November 27, you blocked him or her for two weeks, and now he or she is at it again. Can you block this person for a longer period of time? If so, I wish you would. Thank you for your help! LiteraryMaven (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Films

Hi Nehrams I've sent you an email. Best The Bald One ^{White cat} 11:35, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review request for "Spokane, WA" article

Hey Nehrams, I would be delighted if you could take it upon yourself to review the Spokane, Washington article. The Spokane article is currently rated a "B" (rated a long time ago). But, its current rating doesnt reflect how much better I think it is now content-wise. Ive added almost 20,000 bytes of stuff on it in the past week or two, and I think it just might be good enough to get Good Article status. If it fails, it would be nice if you could give us some constructive criticism so we can improve it. Also, If you choose to review it, it would be nice if you notify me on my Talk page so I will know I can stop searching for qualified people to review it, lol. Thanks, Anon134 (talk) 04:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Tag & Assess WP:Military History question

The process is mostly automated; I have a set of Perl scripts which generate the worklists, but they have to be uploaded by hand.

I can provide the scripts to you, if you'd like; or, alternately, I could run them for you myself if you have a reasonably simple criterion for selecting pages. Kirill 14:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Parameters

I would definitely support that! I've felt that our current parameters were a little antiquated. We had discussion about this before: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/Archive 2#Project banner restructuring. We didn't get to follow through with this, though. What is the plan with the drive? How urgent is this matter? —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We can definitely polish our parameters, especially as we revise the article guidelines. (I'm hoping to revise the "Cast" section of the guidelines, too -- see the sandbox.) What is your opinion about a parameter to request an image? —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]