User talk:Skier Dude/archive/archive Mar 07

Deletion of [List of swear words]

thanks for the warning. sadly it was deleted before i had a chance to respond. i agree with the reasoning and agree it should have been deleted. however, i wanted to move some of the words to wiktionary, but now they are gone; is there an a==Good job== Good job on working on all of these various articles to see which ones need to be improved with infobox/images. It may be best to copy over the whole section about the categories and the progress of each over to the main page, since the talk page is mainly for discussion. It may get more face time and you could possibly be getting some assistance. Again, keep up the good work, we all appreciate your efforts! --Nehrams2020 03:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kiarostami: FAC

Hi

I would like to invite all those who reviewed "Abbas Kiarostami" during last two months to comment on the article at this "final" stage. The article is now featured article candidate. Please review the article and leave your view at the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Abbas Kiarostami page. Thanks. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Film cats

One thing though when categorizing films if you could not only add CategorY:American films but alos Category:English-language films - or whatever appropriate, Cheers ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 17:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dierks Bentley album

Why did you change Don't Leave Me In Love to a studio album? It was an independent one?

Vala M 21:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info, my mistake.

Vala M 12:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

animanga infobox

Hi, anime and manga films they have their own infobox. So I started a section in their talk page, where we can drop any further requests. - One further not-very-important detail: if you see articles with lots of awards, please avoid to tag them as Low importance: either give Mid or leave it blank. Thanks for the help. Hoverfish Talk 18:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Album tag

When you tag talk pages of album articles where do you copy the {{album}} template from? The ones you added always have one unnecessary pipe character at the end. It's no big deal but the Kingbotk plugin I've recently started to use to tag these pages doesn't parse it so I am just curious where did you get it from. Jogers (talk) 00:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Jogers (talk) 09:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tribus

hi,

this is not my page. true, i made the first edit, but this was a redirect to Tribe (biology). this was later changed, and in my opinion Tribus should not directly direct to a probably insignificant metal album from 1999. cheers --Sarefo 10:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fabua

I would like to discuss the removal of Fauba... please allow it on wikipedia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by SSM Arts (talk • contribs)

Catholic Wiki Project

Hi, I wonder if you might be interested in The Catholic Wiki Project? It's a fairly new Catholic POV wiki. Speculative catholic 02:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jrjueco

How do I mark a page with {{db-author}}? Do I just delete everything and insert the text like this? {{db-author}}

Also, it took me a long time to figure out (and I am still not quite certain) is the discussion page the same as the talk page that I am being referred to? Did I send you a message like you did to me? I think I just answered my own questions.

Dougwu 07:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help Skier! Have you ever been skiing in Alyeska? That's where I live.

Galleries in film articles

I appreciate your contributions to WPFILM. However, I'm not sure I agree with your move to place galleries of actor images on stub articles, as I've seen in adding infoboxes to several articles about silent films from 1914. Yes, the articles need images, however the images being used on them aren't necessarily from the films, and in my mind this is not encyclopedic. The images certainly belong on the actor pages and I applaud those editors who uploaded them. But a more appropriate image for the film article would be a film poster or still from the film. If neither of those are available, then no image is the better option in my mind. Anyway, I'm going to hold off on adding any more infoboxes on these types of articles until this is discussed further. — WiseKwai 01:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the feedback. I guess I'm not sure who's responsible for adding the actor photo images to the 1914 silent film articles. Didn't mean to point fingers. I guess I was just frustrated because in a couple of cases, when I was trying to add an infobox, the gallery was clashing with the infobox. I wasn't sure what do in that case, and I didn't feel right about outright dumping the photos, so I moved one into the infobox. I guess that wasn't so much as being bold as it was being an idiot. Anyway, I'm struggling to get a grip on the situation. Perhaps I could repose the issue on WPFILM talk page and see what others folks think? In a quick scan of the articles I dealt with, it's the usual suspects anyway - you, me, Blofeld - WPFILM folks anyway, so the discussion there should be useful. Thanks again. — WiseKwai 17:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We all did our beginner's mistakes, yet some more passionately than others, so no finger-pointing (although mine's twitching to do so). I did it once myself (putting one of the existing actor images in the infobox) with a caption "So&so starred in the film" or equivalent. As stated in the infobox guidelines, if no other image can be found, then "another film-related image" is acceptable. If it gets discussed, it should be over at the infobox talk. / I saw the gallery alternative, but what with the huge margin, I'd say it should be ruled out. What I do is a simple one-line table instead, preceded by a <br clear="all" /> so that it doesn't collide with the infobox in narrow browser windows (see example). Ideal? No way, but the pics are still there in case the article gets developed (which I doubt, unless someone finds a good book about early films) and they get integrated in a better way. Hoverfish Talk 07:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

talk page archiving

It is mostly just cutting and pasting the data to an archive page, adding a {{talkarchive}} tag on top, and adding a link for the archive page to the archive box. --PhantomS 00:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Film notability

Hi! I was about to add an infobox to the article stub you created for Ministry of Truth (film) but can't find any outside information regarding the film. i have therefore queried its notability. Maybe you can help me out with an external link or two? Thanks! :) High Heels on Wet Pavement 19:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

no contest here

I split this off from the main article. Never heard of it either. -- Kendrick7^talk 03:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Silent films

Hi! I've noticed you've been adding "Category:American films" and "Category:Silent films" to certain silent films pages, but the thing is these cats are already taken care of by "Category:American silent films", just so we don't have one very large useless cat. If you have any problem with this, contact me back. :) Andrzejbanas 15:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Year in film in the infobox

Please don't use links to 'year in film' instead of just 'year' for full dates. It messes up the formatting of date links according to user preferences, which is the reason any random dates are linked to in the first place. - Bobet 21:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and if you've no objection, just leave me a message so I can rollback the changes you've already made. It's faster than manually reverting. - Bobet 21:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March 4, 2007 and 2007 March 4 get formatted in the same way, March 4, 2007 and 2007 March 4 don't (look at the code). I don't think there's a consensus about how single years should be linked in the infobox (it's just been discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films if you haven't seen it), but for full dates, always just link to the plain year. I'd personally link to a plain year in the infobox, and link the first instance of the release year in the opening paragraph as a 'year in film' but that's just personal preference, and the way I've most often seen it done in other articles. - Bobet 21:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For your first example, this is how I'd do it, at least for the full date link (based on WP:MOSDATE). I changed the year in the opening paragraph based on personal preference, since I think it's good to have a link to the relevant 'year in film' article from each film article.

And yeah, it does lead to some work, since the link targets are hard to notice without editing the article. The good thing is, it's not that crucial so there's no real hurry in fixing those, just change them if you happen to see them. - Bobet 21:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second warning?

Probably just a mistake but was wondering about the warning at User talk:Proteomicon after I had tagged the article as a copyvio and already warned.--Fuhghettaboutit 01:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got ya. No real difference if the second one stays up (as opposed to a vandalism warning). As for archiving...soon. Couple of open discussions pending.--Fuhghettaboutit 02:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Actors and Filmakers

Hey see my proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Actor and Filmmakers and the main WP Film and Biography talk page. Know anybody who is interested? Actors and all film people articles need a body on wikipedia to upkeep them asthey need more focus -it would be a part of Biogrpahy and Film. If you are interested or know somebody who would be, please let them know and whether you think it is a good progession for the project or not. Please leave your views at the council or biogrpahy main talk page. THanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newbie edit

Dude, how do u create an article on wikipedia without it being deleted?? If ur a new member, most ppl won't trust u and just delete ur stuff. Is it possible to write an article not nonsense to u? —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:tingip (talk • contribs) 23:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot stubs

As we do not have the TV feed for the bot it would almost certainly label all TV related stubs (marked as generic {{stub}} or without any stab tag) as film stub. Even if I would organize the TV feed, I do not see on the article e.g. (Yin Yang Yo! episode) Night Fall any clue for the bot that this is not a film but a TV stub. I guess it is in fact {{tv-film-stub}}. Would it be better if I for the time been leave the film or TV related stubs as generic {{stub}} or continue to mark them as {{film-stub}} ? Alex Bakharev 05:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Love Conquers All (film)

Oh thank you! --Ari 14:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Unheimliche Geschichten

Hi Skier, Please see my response to your points at Talk:Unheimliche Geschichten. Cott12 Talk 01:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay

I've sorted out the Thriller Bark speedy deletion stuff... Happy? Cause I'm not, I wasn't expecting that page to be leapt on so soon. It wasn't up 5 mins. I'm not angry though you did that, I'm not great at creating the beginnings of the page, I set it up with our standard layout for the pirate crews and all in the One Piece pages and left it to others to edit much so. Its been called for for 3 weeks now.

My understanding between speedy delete and the other normal delete is vague (please don't lecture me though on the difference, I'll read the rules myself) when I've not got the info in front of me. I've never had a page I've set up been placed under Speedy Delete and it seems the rules and I've never had reaction from just deleting this particulaur tag before on a new page. Normally, this is because the pages I've removed it from got sorted and no longer legit for that tag to be placed on really fast.

I hope this clears some things on. Angel Emfrbl 21:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... I forgot about sandbox pages, its been a while since I had to create a page. Thank you, I'll remember that next time. Hoepfully, that will avoid such problems. Angel Emfrbl 21:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ZX Fuels

Since you've decided that ZX Fuels is non-notable (despite the assertion that about 50-60 gas stations in the Saint Louis area have been converted from Citgo to ZX), do you want to go ahead and delete JD Streett & Company too? They operate that chain. You might also want to look through my edit history and delete the other articles I've added. Thanks! --Stephen Deken 19:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]