User talk:REVUpminster/Archive 1

Queen of Swords

Queen of Swords

 Done Check the infobox above and you will see what I changed. Sorry to take so long to get back to you. --Terrillja _talk 00:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Queen of Swords
200px

I've done it here, I'll try on the article shortly

Couldn't get my answer through to you at that point. Now trying here. RavenGlamDVDCollector (talk) 08:56, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

It is an honor for me to be talking to you. I made it clear to Wikipedia that I was simply re-editing your work. Had no intention to discard your style; you clearly knew your stuff. I am a big fan currently torn away forcibly from my vast DVD collection due to being wheelchair-bound after getting struck by a car on 24th June; check the sad story on my Wikipedia page; all because of my TV set having blown, and now I'm crippled.

But I do plan to get back to my repaired TV set, and then it's off to “Running Wild” and “Counterfeit Queen” but from the latter onwards there are no links to the episodes from the List of Episodes. Perhaps you could tell me how to get past that? By the way, I also have that French set, unfortunately it has no English subtitles, but I was relieved that it had an English soundtrack. I had to pay big bucks to import it. Oh yeah, one more thing, Tessie Santiago, wow, she's a fox with that mask, huh? Ivanhoe van Rooyen, Republic of South Africa RavenGlamDVDCollector (talk) 09:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Napoleon Solo

Hi there! Thanks for getting in touch. No problem at all, I'm very glad you brought the number one vs. number 11 thing up actually. Its something I really should have thought of mentioning in the original article. Never been sure why there was the discrepancy between his stated position and the number on the badge - especially considering IK has number 2 on his badge. I've heard it speculated that Robert Vaughn picked up that badge on the first day of filming, because he thought the 11 was the roman numeral for two and he was meant to be part of section 2. Also, kudos for adding the information from the cards to the MFU page. I knew the back of the card had that list, but having been born twenty years after the show aired, I never had the chance to become an UNCLE agent and get hold of one! Good to see it up there! ANB (talk) 13:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately 'To Trap a Spy' isn't on Region 2 DVD. It and the 'Spy with the Green Hat', were left out of the DVD set of the MFU films issued in the UK a couple of years ago. I think it may be available as part of the Region 1 set of all the episodes issued by Warner Bros in 2007. The Region 1 set seems to have been quite popular, so we may get a Region 2 release yet (fingers crossed). I wholeheartedly agree - Season One is really the high point of the series. ANB (talk) 17:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Danger Man

No, I am not the main editor of the Danger Man article, and I don't really know anything about what you've asked. So I can't help. Sorry. --Ted Watson (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The Adventures of Robin Hood et al...

Thank you for your reply to my talk page, I'll follow the link shortly. Seriously, do you have any idea why so many of the end credits do not match the episodes? Or why a central character in at least 3 episodes would go uncredited? The series was so meticulously produced, it doesn't make sense. Maybe you could point me in the right direction of where to look or ask? Thank you for your time, Shir-El too 12:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I know (and enjoy spotting) the same actors appeared again and again in different roles. I bought the American edition first season (complete with sponsorships) and began noticing that quite a few of the end credits do not match the episodes. It's not only that some actors were not credited: its that the lists of roles do not match the episodes at all. After reading the WIKI article about the series I've begun to wonder if they weren't somehow deliberately switched, and why. Also according to some websites the American editions available on Amazon are actually pirated; the originals are available on DVD directly from England. - On another tack: the episodes are only 25 minutes long and often leave me laughing, so from my point of view it was well worth the time and investment. Thank you again (again) and have a good one. Shir-El too 17:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Edwin Astley

Hi there - I don't remember stating that Astley wrote the song to Robin Hood, as I know that this isn't the case. Currently the article states:

"He wrote music for many British television series of the 50s and 60s, including incidental music for The Adventures of Robin Hood"

And I also didn't say that he didn't write the theme to The Saint or mentioned that he wasn't credited.

"Astley wrote two arrangements of his theme for The Saint — a slow version used in the black and white episodes and a more up-tempo arrangement for the colour episodes."

If you look at my additions to the Return of the Saint article you will see that I actually recently added correct information about Charteris' theme music being included as part of the arrangement by the series' composer John Scott. I'm a little confused as to the nature of your comments as my edits are not incorrect. Howie ☎ 23:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi there - I've just done some work to clarify my edits which should state the information clearly. Howie ☎ 00:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Department S

Department S is most certainly Spy-Fi. It fits the description on the Spy-Fi article:

"Spy-fi does not necessarily present espionage as it is practiced in reality. It is escapist fantasy that emphasizes glamour, adventure and derring-do."

Department S falls into that description. Despite being written as part of a real organisation, Interpol, the department is fictional and deals with (by the show's own admission) "the inexplicable", "baffling" and "illogical" and "unsolvable and bizarre crimes". That's from the official ITC publicity material. It's not a mystery adventure series as it involves elements of fantasy and presents the stories in a way that would not resemble real-world detectives. Plots revolved around planes that disappear into thin air for six days, ghosts, aircraft where all the passengers vanish mid-flight, etc. etc. Therefore I feel it perfectly fits the description of being spy-fi. Howie ☎ 00:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

While I agree with you that there are elements that are similar to Jonathan Creek, which is able to present logical answers to supposedly inexplicable situations, I feel that while the answers given in Dept. S are plausible within the scope of the show but they are often too fantastical for reality. Also, the members of the department are classified as agents by the ITC publicity material. Howie ☎

Ray Austin (director)

I added the link when I found all the info on that page which was probably written by Austin himself. I only got to his page to add a Zorro link. I did have reservations about it. Can you explain why it was not relevant?REVUpminster (talk) 21:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing. The content on wikipedia is split into two general areas; firstly the encyclopedia itself (along with associated pictures, templates, categories and such) and secondly the 'scaffolding' we editors use to construct it - the talk pages, wikiprojects, user pages and so forth. Most people visiting us are just here to find stuff out - for them, clicking on a link in an encyclopedia article and finding themself suddenly 'behind the scenes' isn't appropriate. For this reason I check all links to user pages from the main namespace. In a few cases, where someone is encyclopedic *because they are associated with Wikipedia* (think Larry Sanger or Jimbo Wales) an argument could be made for linking their personal spaces - however for the few hundred editors we have who are notable enough to have thier own articles, this is very rearely the case. Hope this helps. - TB (talk) 22:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Randall & Hopkirk

I think that looks fantastic - go for it! It will certainly help the page layout. Perhaps this could be implemented across all ITC shows at some point. Howie ☎ 23:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I would certainly go with Network as they thoroughly research their material. Also, IMDB is most likely wrong about there being two seasons. What probably happened was there there were two production blocks - just two periods where they would be filming upto 15 episodes at a time - but these were not seen as seasons. The few ITC shows that made it past two seasons were Robin Hood, Danger Man and The Saint (possibly a few more). The Persuaders! only had one season of 24 episodes, so I would assume the same for Department S, Randall & Hopkirk etc. Just like The Prisoner was due to be 24 episodes, and McGoohan felt that there would be too much padding! Anyway, you probably know all this already, so I'll stop now! Howie ☎ 20:36, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I just saw your work on the Dept. S talk page - looking good! I'll try and help find out some dates if I can, although life outside of Wikipedia is rather busy for me at the moment! Either way, keep up the great work! Howie ☎ 20:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep you;re doin good. There is one thing you can. Can you go through the 26 episodes and copy all of the actors who appeared in the series into List of Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased) cast members. Given time my aim was the create an article on each of the British actors so if you could create a full list this would really improve things. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 09:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter about them having minor roles, a lot of them had notable roles in other series etc so if they can all be listed I or we can work towards starting articles on them. The best way would probably to create a table which also lists what episode they appeared in etc, but whatever you are happiest with. Happy editing! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, Much appreciate you doing that. Sometime we really ought to start articles on each episode of the Avengers providing there is a source available. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 19:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: David Carradine

That's still in the article. Gary King (talk) 06:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Queen of Swords.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Queen of Swords.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 00:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm really not seeing what the image is adding- the popular culture section is just a random list of mentions- it needs serious improvement, and the way to do that is not through adding non-free images. I can see where you were coming from in adding the image, but it does seem a little dubious that adding an image of the Queen of Swords will drastically improve reader understanding of Zorro- take a read of our non-free content criteria. Remember that non-free content should be used as a last resort. J Milburn (talk) 11:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I do not think the section is wrong, I just don't think it has any great need to be illustrated. Again, non-free content should be used as an absolute last resort- I recommend you take a read of our non-free content guidelines and especially our non-free content guidelines. I am not convinced that this image meets non-free content criterion 8. J Milburn (talk) 22:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

If images in other articles do not meet our non-free content criteria, then I hope they will be removed eventually. Wikipedia isn't perfect, and as much as it is necessary for people to add what is needed, it is necessary for them to remove what isn't. J Milburn (talk) 23:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

If you would prefer, we can add it back to the page, and send it to files for deletion? J Milburn (talk) 23:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, nominated at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 August 19#File:Queen of Swords.jpg. Feel free to add it back to the article and remove the orphan notice. J Milburn (talk) 23:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Speedy Deletion

Hi REVUpminster. No, the image is not up for speedy deletion. It has only been tagged for deletion. Here on Wikipedia, we have a policy in which orphaned non-free images are deleted after 7 days of being tagged. This issue can easily be resolved by adding the image to it's appropriate article. However, if you added the image to an article originally but found it to be removed, you may want to check the history or talk page of the article to find out why. Hope that helps to clarify things. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, J Milburn may actually have a valid point here. The image's omission from the article would not actually be detrimental to a reader's understanding. Since that is the case, the image is subject to deletion under non-free content criteria #8. If you honestly believe that the file should be included in the article and that it is required for the reader's understanding, the file's listing at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 August 19#File:Queen of Swords.jpg is the place to make the appropriate arguments. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 06:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Danger Man voice-over

First of all, my apologies for taking an extra day to reply, but my on-line time was very limited yesterday.

The phrasing had come across to me as indicating that the entire voice-over had been removed, rather than only the specific reference to NATO. The whole speech sounds like Drake is claiming to be a free agent, an independent operator, contracted by each and any of those (and other?) "secret services" when they have need. Yet one episode (I don't remember the title—especially since it didn't appear on screen, of course—but it was set in the Himalaya Mountains of northern India and guest-starred Ronald Howard) included a scene wherein the villains identify Drake via computer as a "NATO agent." So the removal of that one clause does not make any sense. This made my interpreting the sentence as referring to the entire voice-over even stronger. I don't remember the NATO line missing from any when I watched on a local Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas station in the mid-1990s (I may have simply failed to notice), but after they went through the entire package at least twice, the episodes were suddenly time-compressed (not done well at all, but in fact quite obviously, with both music and voices raised to a higher pitch by the acceleration) and the opening voice-over did disappear then. --Tbrittreid (talk) 19:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Cimarron Strip

Fantastic job with the new episode list, you put a lot of deeply appreciated work into that. Thanks for adding some real content to the page. After seeing so much subtraction and butchery being performed on pages, especially this one, it's good to see a real contribution like this. By the way, it was a great series, far more like a weekly movie than a television series. Skymasterson (talk) 02:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a look at your other writing as soon as I get a chance. I'm in America and Cimarron Strip hasn't been seen here to any degree, as far as I know, since it showed originally decades ago, although I threw out my television four years ago so I might've missed something (probably did). I don't know exactly why except that shows only lasting a season are seldom rerun here and the absence of Cimarron Strip DVDs was a bit puzzling earlier (I haven't actually looked in a long time so they may now be available but I remember that they weren't several years ago, the last time I checked). Stuart Whitman was a perfect cowboy actor, almost rivaling John Wayne and Gary Cooper in that particular narrow department, and should have had a larger career than he did. Obviously Cimarron Strip came along at a heartrendingly tough juncture, when westerns in general were more or less finished on American television. A decade earlier, he'd been considered for the role of Bart Maverick in my own favorite television series, Maverick, since he and series lead James Garner looked eerily alike in 1957, but Jack Kelly wound up chosen instead. It would've changed the entire dynamic of the program had the macho Whitman been cast, and it's hard to envision how Garner and Whitman would've interacted on screen, but I think Garner and Kelly were somehow the most charismatic team ever captured on film bar none, with the combination exceeding the sum of its parts exponentially, although Kelly clearly wasn't in Whitman's league as a solo leading man or Garner's as a lone lead or when playing comedy on his own. Speaking of episode lists, have a look at the List of Maverick episodes if you get a chance and let me know what you think. Skymasterson (talk) 17:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Zorro Spanish or Mexican

Note that Alta California, or Spanish California (as you conveniently prefer to call it), was a region of Mexico at the time. Yes, his father might have been a Spaniard, but Zorro is Mexican. Surely it shouldn't be a surprise to you, since the majority of Mexicans today have Spanish ancestry. -- Lancini87 (talk) 15:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

• I am aware that Mexico did not exist in 1790, but Zorro was still born in what later became to be Mexico. Even after the country's independence, Alta California remained a region of Mexico. Therefore, people born in the former New Spainish territory that became Mexico, also became Mexicans. It did not become a US-state until the mid-1800s, after the Mexican–American war. -- Lancini87 (talk) 17:49, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Was Zorro born in 1790? If so, then his story most likely took place in independent Mexico, not New Spain, since the country declared independence in 1810 and Zorro is known to be over 20 years old. If we consider the country he lived most of his life in, then he would obviously be Mexican. -- Lancini87 (talk) 17:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Garrow's Law

Virtually all TV articles (see Torchwood, Lark Rise to Candleford, Dollhouse) refer to the quality of the picture (1080p) rather than aspect ratio in the "picture format" section. Aspect ratio is only really necessary for programmes made prior to HD (since HD is automatically 16:9 anyway). BBC HD only broadcasts with 1080 lines, they don't accept anything below that standard. As far as I'm aware, 720 is only used for Freeview HD transmissions. As for interlaced or progressive, feel free to change it to 1080i, since that's what BBC HD broadcast with. I merely assumed it was shot progressive since most dramas are. -- Pdb781 (talk) 16:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

• But 1080i is used in the UK (1080p isn't yet due to bandwidth). Just look at the BBC HD article. The channel only broadcasts in full HD. I'm not sure how you've gotten the impression that everything is upscaled, as the 1080p article certainly doesn't suggest that (it says some television systems may not be able to display 1080p, but that doesn't negate the fact that the programme was shot in full HD). As for the aspect ratio, I feel it's unnecessary as HD is 16:9 by nature anyway. -- Pdb781 (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Department S title screenshot.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Department S title screenshot.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file 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 file 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 files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file 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. ╟─TreasuryTag►Lord Speaker─╢ 07:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Title card screenshots

I have declined the speedys proposed by TreasuryTag (talk · contribs).

However, in future it would be a good idea to give more extensive explanations of what exactly you consider the image adds to the article such that it justifies its inclusion, to prevent this kind of issue arising again.

I have done this for the images TT nominated, see for example File:Garrow'_Law_title_screenshot.jpg and File:QoS2cast.jpg. Jheald (talk) 10:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Garda

Re your comment on his talkpage: if you wish to use Confidential as a reliable source, feel free. I didn't watch it, so I didn't know it said that, and you didn't mention it at all. You should have done, rather than just repeating "everybody knows she wasn't a companion" or whatever.

Also, for the record, I did not delete any image, and "the administrators" didn't put them back. I am not a law unto myself, and I resent your using such un-necessary combative language. ╟─TreasuryTag►presiding officer─╢ 16:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I also object to your baseless insinuations [1] that I am stalking your contributions. ╟─TreasuryTag►sheriff─╢ 16:38, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Clicked here to reply to you after seeing "Confidential" myself and noticed above message .Something you might find interesting .Despite different name it is same editor [2] and [3]

Danger Man/Network One ref. link

Actually, I was the one who made the link go to the Wiki-article on Network One instead of their own page, when I made a title instead of the web address show in the cite. Sorry, and I've fixed it now. BTW, when starting a new thread on a talk page, click the "New section" tab to the right of the "Edit this page" one. You'll get a separate window for your new thread's name above the one for the message. That way, you won't have to manually create a new heading under an existing thread. Your new thread's name appears on the watchlist instead of the older one, which is very helpful. --Tbrittreid (talk) 22:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Is this right? Thanks for the info. Did you notice the Carradine page is semi-blocked because of vandalism? At first I thought it was something I did (I'm paranoid) but someone wrote "not dead, not dead" all over the article. Oh, brother. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorothybrousseau (talk • contribs) 00:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC) And I keep forgetting to sign things!--DorothyBrousseau 00:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorothybrousseau (talk • contribs) Hi again, I like the box. I guess I'll keep it (since I don't know how to get rid of it, lol) The problem I was having with citations was getting it to let me use the same citation more than once. I thought I was doing it according to the directions, but it wasn't working. Suddenly, yesterday, It started working. Thanks for all your help.--DorothyBrousseau 12:21, 27 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorothybrousseau (talk • contribs)

Randall and Hopkirk

Na, I think the current one best describes the characters , the official title coloring etc. It took me a long time to find that one.... Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Can I interest you in starting all of the Avengers episodes? See this site. It has every episode and details.... Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 15:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Why I am reverting your edit

Hi there, I just wanted to let you know that I am reverting an edit you made recently-the paragraph in the Carradine article about TV appearances. The reason is that for good article status, small, one sentence paragraphs should be avoided and it is suggested that they be combined with other sentences. Take Care.--DorothyBrousseau (talk) 19:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

To the relevance of the image. I moved it there because it was that time period and because there wasn't really room for it anywhere else after I uploaded all the other imaged. The fact of the matter is that that image and the one at the top of the page are the only ones that are actually licensed, the owner having uploaded them to wikicommons. The ones I put in there are probably going to be deleted, so it will be back to just those two again. You ain't kidding about how hard it is to get a photo on this site: There is a huge argument going on over a photo of JD Salinger (who just died). He is dead and he was reclusive, there are only a couple of photos of him in existence and yet there is this huge debate over his photo being used as fair use. I can't believe it.--DorothyBrousseau (talk) 00:11, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Zorro's Black Whip

Hi again, I don't know if you know about this, but it seems to be of your interest. It is a serial called Zorro's Black Whip. Zorro is not in it, but there is a heroin much like "The Queen of Swords". Believe it or not, the only reason I know about it is because Carradine mentioned it in his autobiography and being one of his favorite things to watch when he was a kid. One of the external links at the bottom of the page will bring you right to every single episode of it. I think you will see the similarities to "Queen of Swords".--DorothyBrousseau (talk) 19:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Adventure Inc. cast.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Adventure Inc. cast.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 05:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

File:The Queen of Swords 3.JPG in The Mark of Zorro

Hi REVUpminster, the issue is that each and every use requires a rationale that addresses the required criteria. Without such a rationale showing why the image is used in an article it gets removed. I do note that the reference used in the section, seems to make no mention of Zorro at all - making this text read like original research. - Peripitus (Talk) 01:33, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Award

For your contribution to television articles via uploading images and converting episode lists into 'Wikistyle' format
Matt-tastic (talk) 13:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:Award

I have added a section to your user page titled awards and placed it there, feel free to move the section around your page Matt-tastic (talk) 13:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Rev. Misunderstanding

There was an edit conflict when editing episode 2 of Rev. (TV series), At the time I thought it was copyright infringement from a TV guide the summary you put in, however when I looked back on it, I realised it wasn't. However I believe my episode summary was more detailed, so my text is showing instead of yours. Sorry for the accusation Matt-tastic (talk) 14:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Sherlock Holmes titlecard.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Sherlock Holmes titlecard.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there REVUpminster, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:REVUpminster/Sandbox. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

London Wikimedia Fundraiser

Good evening! This is a friendly message from Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, inviting you to the London Wikimedia Fundraising party on 19th December 2010, in approximately one week. This party is being held at an artistic London venue with room for approximately 300 people, and is being funded by Ed Saperia, a non-Wikipedian who has a reputation for holding exclusive events all over London. This year, he wants to help Wikipedia, and is subsidising a charity event for us. We're keen to get as many Wikimedians coming as possible, and we already have approximately 200 guests, including members of the press, and some mystery guests! More details can be found at http://ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/London - expect an Eigenharp, a mulled wine hot tub, a free hog roast, a haybale amphitheatre and more. If you're interested in coming - and we'd love to have you - please go to the ten.wikipedia page and follow the link to the Facebook event. Signing up on Facebook will add you to the party guestlist. Entry fee is a heavily subsidised £5 and entry is restricted to over 18s. It promises to be a 10th birthday party to remember! If you have any questions, please email me at chasemewiki at gmail.com.

Hope we'll see you there, (and apologies for the talk page spam) - Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Additions to Simon MacCorkindale

I really think both of your additions require reliable third-party references. For me, citing end credits is an absolute last resort, the same with IMDb. While I guess it is acceptable, I'm wondering if you have any other sources for them? Gran² 22:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Zorro lawsuit

I took it down with the intention of adding it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, using additional citations and some of the same content from the section. It'll be back up shortly, but the version I took down was just so poor. It truly was a sore thumb to the article. Wildroot (talk) 01:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, REVUp. Generally the way we do it is to keep it as simple and neutral as possible without getting excessive detail. Here's one example, from Gary Friedrich:

On April 4, 2007, Friedrich filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court - Southern District of Illinois, against Marvel Enterprises, Sony Pictures, Columbia TriStar Motion Pictures, Relativity Media, Crystal Sky Pictures, Michael DeLuca Productions, Hasbro and Take-Two Interactive, alleging his copyrights to the Ghost Rider character have been exploited and utilized in a "joint venture and conspiracy". The lawsuit states that the film rights and merchandising reverted from Marvel to him in 2001. The case was transferred to the federal New York State Southern District Court on February 14, 2008.

Simple, declarative, big-picture sentences. We have to take special care when writing about lawsuits to avoid undue weight. The example above states the "when", "where" and "who" immediately in the first sentence, then continues to the "what". We don't go into the "why". The above is a complicated intellectual property case, yet even it can be condensed to the basics in a paragraph. I'm sure you can find other examples in Wikipedia. I hope this helps. --Tenebrae (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll bee glad to give it a shot. Including the images might be construed as trying to make a case for one side or the other, which is what we're trying to scrupulously avoid. I'll post something later today. In the meantime, I'll repost this discussion on the article's talk page so that it's all centralized and other editors can weigh in. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I can't even see where on that French page one can order the DVD, nor do I see a price attached, so barring any reviews from French movie/DVD publications existing, I guess that's a usable cite. Normally, English Wikipedia requires that sites in other languages be translated by the editor, but since the sole purpose of this site is to show that a French-language version of the series was released to DVD, my opinion is that this is readily evident even without translation. I'd say go for it. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

As the CEO of Zorro Productions, I was involved in this lawsuit. Judge Collins made two rulings in that case, one favorable and one not so favorable. In the end she vacated (i.e., threw out) both rulings, such that neither has the force of law. The proper way to handle this in Wikipedia is to treat the incident as a non-incident, in other words, the entire episode should be disallowed as though it had never happened. However, if you insist on including only one of the two rulings (and even if you cited both), then the disclaimer that the ruling was vacated must be added. Otherwise, it is as if you cited, say, a murder case without noting whether it resulted in a conviction or an acquittal. I appreciate that you enjoyed the Queen of Swords, but, in our opinion, it really was not only a rip off of The Legend of Zorro (as well as Lady Rawhide), but it was marketed by the producers as such. We believe that their marketing campaign was the smoking gun. In the end, Paramount, Sony and Zorro Productions entered into a settlement that we regarded as fair and favorable, though the details must remain confidential. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.223.190 (talk) 21:35, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Per request, we have now footnoted the appropriate court document vacating (i.e., rendering null and void) the Queen of Swords ruling. Because Judge Collins’ ruling is null and void, it is a non-fact, and really has no place on Wikipedia. May we remove it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.223.190 (talk) 21:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

This should be discussed on the Zorro talkpage but as it is part of the history of Zorro, the Zorro film, QoS, and Fireworks I cannot see anybody removing it as if it did not exist. There are far more experienced editors than me. It will always be in the history section of Wikipedia as nothing is ever completely erased.REVUpminster (talk) 11:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Queen of Swords

Hi, REV. I guess you've been editing since Dec. 2008 and I'm surprised this hasn't come up before, but I needed to change your good faith edit at Queen of Swords just now since Wikipedia is very strict about now allowing links to sites whose primary purchase is commercial sales. This means we can't link to Amazon.com or Barnes & Noble or other book sellers at book articles, nor DVD or CD sellers at articles or sections about those media. If you look at WP:ELNO and WP:NOTADVERTISING, you can see details. No biggie. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 22:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that site is odd. Sometimes the page stays up, other times it redirects to a "Webring" page. I tried saving it at WebCitation.org, and got the archive URL http://www.webcitation.org/5vq5wJhwk. When I tried that, it redirected again — but I could hit the original URL's link on the archive page, and got the delongis.com site perfectly stable.

As for the DVD citation — there's generally mention of such things (reviews, "this week's new releases" columns, etc.) at DVD-review websites and in magazines like Video Watchdog. It's hard to imagine that legal DVDs of a nationally broadcast TV show don't get mentioned anywhere at all. In any case, we're simply not allowed to drive traffic, no matter how small, to commercial sales sites.

You're right — all the legal stuff is complicated. But most of each case can be summed up in a sentence or two, and we can provide links to full articles for anyone who wants that level of detail. Here's a tip, something I do all the time: Use WebCitation.org. It's one of the best ways I've found to preserve citations when the cited source goes away. A brilliant tool to have. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:23, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'll try and stick around and help where I can. It'll be in dribs and drabs, though. Hopefully, other editors will help as well ... maybe put a call out on the TV Portal talk page? --Tenebrae (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Always glad to help. You know how it is when you're stretched thin ... you go to what gets your attention on a given day! It's good to be working with you. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, if you go to Talk:Dustbin Baby (film), you'll see quite the vociferous debate. Apparently the complete prohibition against sales sites is with External links. They're apparently allowable as cites only if there are no journalistic references whatsoever. It virtually all cases, there will be DVD review, or a "coming out this week on DVD" article or some alternative to creating links that drive traffic to one retailer or other. Overall, it's something we don't want to do if it can possibly be avoided. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Robin Hood BFI dates

Hi REV, re-the slightly incorrect bits, order of Will Scarlet / Ladies of Sherwood / The Deserted Castle, time was getting on and forgot to re-order those three, will do later, Errand of Mercy has no date at BFI, and The Goldmaker / Isabella, wasn't sure what to do , so left dates as before, could use your advice REV, what do you think is best way to get around this minor problem?, I think all the other eps are in BFI order, let me know if I missed any others. I think its worth keeping this order as it is better than the Network one, any input would be welcome. Oh and The Salt King series three Pat Driscoll, there seems to be a date mix up for 1st TX 15 Sept 1956 at the atart of series two I used the listed BFI rpt date as it makes more sense, would look strange starting series 2 with series 3 episode, your input would be welcome. "81.111.127.132 (talk) 21:56, 4 April 2011 (UTC)"

Thanks for that REV, but checking through it has 'Secret Mission' and 'Richard the Lion-Heart' miles apart and in the wrong order for series one, 'The Devil you don't Know' before 'Six Strings to his Bow' and apart from a few differences looks like the Network order. Still think, despite its faults, BFI is the one to go with. I'm in Swansea, South Wales, so missed original 1955 broadcasts completely, your right about Robin Hood on saturdays, but think these were rpts in the London region, found a few listings, don't have web address at hand, for ATV London with RH rpt of 'Marian's Prize' (S3) on Sat in 1959, and another Sat ep rpt from I think(?) 1962, ATV London Sat rpts must have run from 1959 - 1965, from what I can peace together from various websites. I'll figure a way round the problem eps, perhaps a note: apart from 'ep/name' which is placed out of BFI order, but grouped for convenience with series it belongs to, with correct tx date. and apart from 'ep/name' which is not on BFI list with US tx date ? or something, apart from 'ep/name' which have BFI dates for 1961 and are placed in series 2 which they belong to for convenience with US tx date?, or something what do you think?. No don't think a completely accurrate list will turn up but the BFI one seems right to me.81.111.127.132 (talk) 10:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks REV, next thing is a production crew list, till then.81.111.127.132 (talk) 00:38, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Emerson Park railway station

Hi, with this edit you put a mysterious "P83" at the start of the ref - what does it mean? It's not a page number, because that book has 72 pages. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

• Right the explanation. There are three volumes so far Vol 1(1996), no volume no on cover, ISBN 1 899890 10 6 Pages 1-72. Vol 2 (1997) ISBN 1 899890 19 X Pages 73-144. Vol 3 (2010) ISBN 9781899890439 Pages 145-234. This third volume was 12 years later due to a number of other books published in the intervening years. A fourth volume is still to be published. This series is the definitive story of the LT&SR. Sorry if I put the wrong ISBN. I was adding some correction to the Romford to Upminster Line when I thought I had better look at Emerson Park and could not believe the dates (the opening of the line) given. As you might guess I live locally but I am not a vicar but think wikipedia is the gospel, I am a good faith editor but I could not let an error like that go unaltered. I hope this explanation is satisfactory.REVUpminster (talk) 06:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
• PS I missed the opening date 1 October 1909 but it was there on P83, Thanks for putting it in.REVUpminster (talk) 12:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, have adjusted the refs. If you have a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources, you'll see that the page number normally goes quite late in the citation, not at the beginning; and we use "p. 83" as shorthand for "page 83".

I don't think you did put the wrong ISBN: certainly I saw no need to amend it. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Death in Paradise

I'll take a look and see what I can find out about him. I'm afraid it may not be very long though. I used Google Chrome to translate the others into English, but it never seems to do it word for word.

I didn't think we were supposed to link to foreign language articles, but I guess I could be wrong. I know with refs and external links they're ok as long as it says they're in French or whatever, so perhaps there's no problem. If that is the case then don't worry about it. Paul MacDermott (talk) 19:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Gosh, I never knew that. Actually worth knowing about it for future reference though, so thanks. I might have a go at doing this myself, especially as I'm trying to learn Spanish just now. Would be a great way to picking up some of the language perhaps. Oh, and I'd better unpost on Bruno Russell's talk page because I told him off about it. :) Paul MacDermott (talk) 23:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Michael Culkin

I've created a basic and very short bio from his imdb page, but will look for further info. Good work with the ITC stuff by the way. I actually forgot I'd joined the ITC Project, but think it must have been when I was creating Years in British television articles a couple of years ago. Let me know if you find any more missing articles and I'll start them off as stubs. Cheers Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Queen of Swords Titles 2.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Queen of Swords Titles 2.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 9 December 2011 (UTC)