Yukichigai (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 334: | Line 334: | ||
:::Hmm, I understand your point (that's why I asked your opinion, cos I was unsure) but City of Angel do usually give very fair reviews. I'm not loving how fans are treated like total lepers on this site - sure, we have to be NPOV, but does that mean the fans opinions are totally irrelevant? A glance through that site shows that the show creators do acknowledge it - there's quotes and stuff from the writers complimenting the site. Also, the reviews are written by the site's "staff writers", not just random fans busting their chops. If it's against policy then fine, but it does seem like a reliable site (not to sound totally Robin, lol) I saw you getting all pissy with that guy at the Angel episode talk page. Lol, don't insult Smallville or you'll unleash the beast! [[User:Paul730|<small>'''<span style="background:Blue;color:Cyan"> Paul </span>'''</small>]] [[User talk:Paul730|<small>730</small>]] 18:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC) |
:::Hmm, I understand your point (that's why I asked your opinion, cos I was unsure) but City of Angel do usually give very fair reviews. I'm not loving how fans are treated like total lepers on this site - sure, we have to be NPOV, but does that mean the fans opinions are totally irrelevant? A glance through that site shows that the show creators do acknowledge it - there's quotes and stuff from the writers complimenting the site. Also, the reviews are written by the site's "staff writers", not just random fans busting their chops. If it's against policy then fine, but it does seem like a reliable site (not to sound totally Robin, lol) I saw you getting all pissy with that guy at the Angel episode talk page. Lol, don't insult Smallville or you'll unleash the beast! [[User:Paul730|<small>'''<span style="background:Blue;color:Cyan"> Paul </span>'''</small>]] [[User talk:Paul730|<small>730</small>]] 18:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC) |
||
== Notification of Request for Arbitration "TTN, part Deux" == |
|||
I've requested Arbitration regarding [[User:TTN|TTN]]'s numerous edits to TV and other fiction articles, and included you as an "involved party" in the request. The request can be found at [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#TTN.2C_part_Deux]], and you should add a statement to the section somewhere under mine. Thanks. -- [[User:Yukichigai|Y|yukichigai]] ('''<sub><font color="blue">[[User talk:Yukichigai|ramble]]</font></sub> <small><font color="red">[[User:Yukichigai/VA|argue]]</font></small> <sup><font color="green">[[User:Yukichigai/C|check]]</font></sup>''') 21:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:13, 14 November 2007
Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.
Want to learn how to properly archive? |
I reserve the right to archive talk discussions at my leisure, but will make sure the discussions are closed before I do. Thank you. |
Transformers commentary
On User talk:Alientraveller/Transformers (film). Alientraveller 14:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Bay must be a motormouth. Still, thanks, just post it whenever you can. Alientraveller 19:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks ever so much. I guess I can wait for more information from the rest of the DVD, but you deserve a well-earned break. So wow, the Griffith Observatory scene was added in post? That was one of the best scenes in the film: hopefully we'll have some more pure robot moments in the sequels. Alientraveller 08:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- So that little exchange between Optimus and Ratchet? I see. Well, here's hoping for FAC in the new year. Did you hear Jack Sparrow has been promoted? Alientraveller 13:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- It's ok, getting Bay's commentary down is something I'm thankful for. What did Bay mean when he said he wanted to focus more on the character's faces in the sequel? Does that mean the robots are getting the lion's share of screentime or more animated expressions (fear, laughter, puzzlement etc). Alientraveller 13:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I want more Optimus, Starscream and Ratchet. I definitely want to see Grimlock munch metal and be defiant to Optimus. Anyone you want to see? Alientraveller 13:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- So that little exchange between Optimus and Ratchet? I see. Well, here's hoping for FAC in the new year. Did you hear Jack Sparrow has been promoted? Alientraveller 13:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks ever so much. I guess I can wait for more information from the rest of the DVD, but you deserve a well-earned break. So wow, the Griffith Observatory scene was added in post? That was one of the best scenes in the film: hopefully we'll have some more pure robot moments in the sequels. Alientraveller 08:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Reply: Thanks
You're welcome. Lord Crayak 19:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
F13 franchise
I take it you're going to include Alice Cooper in the music section? Are you going to mention how everyone mistakes the theme tune for cha cha cha? I'm sure Manfredini was moaning about that on the DVD.
Getting back to the Civil War debate, I think you're giving secret identities a bit too much credit. The Fantastic Four's children are alive and well, so that kind of proves that they can protect them. Iron Man once said, "the whole SID thing is so archaic once you come clean with everyone." And Spider-Man was like "That's easy to say when you're a billionaire with body guards." Similarly, in Civil War, Invisible Woman says "The SID thing isn't such a big deal. The FF have been public since the start and it's never been a concern." Again Spidey replies "Well, it will be when I come home and my wife and aunt are dead." The SID is only important to a few heroes, not all of them. Apart from Spidey and DD, I can't think of many other Marvel heroes who bother about it. I can understand your point, I don't think it's reason enough to oppose the SRA, because the Iniative aren't releasing the SIDs willy-nilly. There's a scene where She-Hulk is getting Hellcat to sign up and she says "No, this info is classified, only available to the highest ranking members of SHIELD." "So I won't have to 'pull a Parker'?" "A public unmasking? Ohmigosh, no!" Besides, if a villain really wants to know their enemies SID, they could probably find out whether they were registered or not. Registered heroes also get paid, BTW. Oh, and the Bugle hate pretty much all superheroes, not just Spidey. It's just because J Jonah Jameson is a Spider-Man character that it's more apparent in his book. There's a hilarious story where She-Hulk is marrying Jonah's son (that astronaut guy from Spidey 2) and Jonah tries to kill her with a Spider-Slayer robot, lol. He was like "my ****ing daughter-in-law is a big ****ing green superhero?" :D Paul730 22:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'll be honest, you've actually defended the pro-reg side better than the characters in the book did, and I think Civil War as a story would have been better if there had been a bit more discussion like the one we're having. Your argument that "Turning it into a "paid" service changes the whole idea behind being a superhero. The whole point of a superhero is not solely on the premise of ones ability to fight supervillains, but on the idea that it is their destiny to do that. It's in their heart. You might as well remove the whole idea behind superheroes, give them a badge and make them walk the beat--because by paying them you've basically turned them into cops." That's what Cap and Falcon said, only they used less words because the writer prefers action over dialogue. That argument is all very well, but in the aftermath of all the national disasters that the Marvel Universe has suffered, it comes off a bit childish and naive. In the real world, would you really give a crap about some suphero's destiny, or would you be more concerned about whether or not the government is doing something to keep you safe? The more I debate with you about this, the more I actually like the Civil War story, because it's more thought-provoking than good guys vs bad guys. Can you see the pro-regers side of the argument? I do agree with many of the points you're making, I'm just wondering if you agree with any of mine. I'm not saying the SRA is perfect, in fact, the way Tony Stark has carried it out is deplorable; locking up heroes in the Negative Zone, hiring villains, and making an evil Thor clone to fight on his side. Oh, and Hulk, Cap, and Wonder Man's identities are all publicly known. Antman (Scott Lang) is dead, perhaps you mean Hank Pym (his identity is publicly known). I'm sure there are a few SIDs out there (Squirrel Girl), but like I said, it's a bit old-fashioned nowadays...
- You never replied to my F13 questions. Paul730 22:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oh sorry, I never saw your reply to the F13 thing. Must have just skimmed over it. :/ Okay okay, you <3 secret identities, I get it. :P Lol. You've given me a new perspective to think about, since neither side is represented all that well in the main story. It kind of comes off as Cap and Iron Man fighting each other for 7 issues (which is still fun). The argument itself is better handled in the other books; Dan Slott's She-Hulk defends the pro-reg side very well (although I agree that the citizens arrest form thing is a weak defense for the SID debate) and Peter David's X-Factor defends the anti-reg side very well. Also, just to confuse things even more, it's recently been revealed that some of the worlds heroes are actually Skrulls in disguise. Reed Richards and Luke Cage, some of the most influential characters in Civil War, are prime suspects. So are they actually trying to make the world a better place, or weaken it so it will be easier to invade? Interesting.... BTW, want to me to get that source for the F13 theme tune, about how it's often mistaken? Paul730 23:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- I added the music comment in. Lol, I was only asking in case you had another source sitting in front of you saying the same thing only better. Why do you not read comics again? Didn't you say you didn't have time or access or something? Or are you just not a fan of the medium? I do love Marvel comics, but they're not very accessible. It took me a long time to get up to date with the continuity and understand enough of it to enjoy the stories. Paul730 23:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's what I mean. I had to read The Ultimate Guide to X-Men and The X-Men Encyclopedia in order to get caught up on their histories. The Ultimate Marvel line is supposed to draw in new readers, but they've become almost as complicated as their predecessors now. I think they'll get cancelled soon, TBH, the sales have gone to shit. Paul730 00:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I prefer the comics. Superhero films are more accessible, but once you get the hang of the comics, they're better because there's a sense of history and experience. These character are the real deal. Also, in films, certain characters don't get their due because of limited screen time (like Cyclops getting shoved out of the way for Wolverine). Something like Smallville is a good compromise, because it's not as rushed and simplistic as films, but it's less complicated than the comics. One of the downsides of comics is the vast differences in quality between writers; a book can be great one year and shit the next. That's one of the reasons why I love Buffy; there's a sense of history after 7+ years, but there's also consistant quality and focus in the writing because it's all overseen by one person. Paul730 00:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Wow, that sounds... cheesy. ;) So much for their "no tights, no flights" rule. Fonzie had better get his water skis on, looks like there's a shark that's ready to be jumped. Lol, I kid. How does he look in it? Has he started wearing his underpants on the outside yet? The dirty exhibitionist. :P Paul730 00:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Tom Welling is undeniably handsome, but I don't really find him all that attractive. I think it's the hair, it's a bit too long for my taste. (My friend says Peter Petrelli gets really hot in season 2, after he gets rid of that awful barnet) It's good that Welling's getting bigger though, that's something that rarely translates over from the comics, their physical precence. Ironically, Wolverine, one of the biggest, toughest supeheroes in the films, is a midget in the comics. Lol, why were you bigging Welling up to your g/f? Trying to convince her to watch it with you or something? I actually watched the opening of the Bizarro episode on youtube a few weeks ago, can't remember if I told you or not. Bizarro seemed really cool. Paul730 01:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I just saw the bit where he bitch-slapped Clark across the forest, and then Clark had to stop the river with his eyebeams. It was pretty cool, I didn't know Smallville could feel that epic. It was certainly more exciting than anything that happened in Superman Returns. I mean, the plane crash was okay, but nothing X2 hadn't done better. Hugh Jackman is a giant, comic book Wolverine is only 5'3. He's taller than Cyclops, which would be blasphemy if it weren't for Jackman's great performance. There's a slight height difference between them. Paul730 01:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, it was the seventies, you have to make allowances for bad dialogue. At least it's not as disturbing as this classic line from Golden Age Batman. Kinky shit. Paul730 01:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- LOL, I've seen those before. And people have a cheek to complain about the gay content in modern comics! Wasn't Golden Age Robin a little boy? That's bit creepy. It seems like Batman wasn't the only one partial to a bit of spanking either. Clark's not looking so wholesome now, is he? :P Paul730 01:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- He seems to be enjoying it, must be a coping mechanism from all those years of abuse at the hands of his dad. ;) The Batman ones are scarier though. There's a lot of weird stuff in old comics. How about this story, in which Clark gets turned into a baby, and Lois and Lana compete to see who can brainwash him into falling in love. How about that ending? Paul730 02:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh yes, the explanation was crazy, as opposed to the literary masterpiece that was the rest of the story. ;) Bet it makes you look at Smallville in a whole new light. Hard to imagine that a good TV show spawned from that rubbish. Paul730 02:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oh there's plenty of shit in Marvel. Did you know Professor X was originally hinted to be in love with Jean? Thank God they brushed that under the carpet. They're exploring it again in Ultimate X-Men, unfortunately. BTW, what's your opinion on overlinking? Should something be linked once on a page, or only when it's in the vicinity of another link? For example, the F13 TV series is linked in the lead, and also in TV section. F13 1 and 3 are linked in the lead, but not the film section. Just want to make it more consistant. Paul730 02:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Cool. I read somewhere that linking more than once is fine, so long as you can't see the same link twice on your screen. Paul730 02:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I tried but it didn't work. :( I also tried listening to the Doctor Who theme tune on that page, and that didn't work either which makes me think it's not the file you uploaded that's broken? ...Strange, I opened up a new window and it randomly started working??? Probably just my wacky laptop; I spilt a glass of water on a few months back and it's never been the same since. Good work on getting that music though! It really improves the article. :) Paul730 04:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I don't really understand computer stuff, but it is working... kind of. It went on longer the first time, but not it cuts out earlier??? Oh well, I got the ki ki ki ma ma ma bit. Did you have the same problem getting it to work? I saw you asking Raul for help. Paul730 04:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Duh, just got your message. :) Paul730 04:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- It's a very cool addition to the article. BTW, your Jason article got a little mention on youtube the other week. It was some Jason fan video and people were arguing over who was better out of the horror trinity. Anyway, somebody quoted that California State University study to prove that Jason was the best, they were like "I read that on Wikipedia". Just thought you'd want to know that your work is appreciated by the public. :) Paul730 04:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- That guy who keeps changing the season number on the Smallville page is a total sock puppet. Why is it only for completed seasons anyway? A quick glance at Desperate Housewives and Ugly Betty shows they don't follow the same rule. Aren't seasons completely made before they start airing? Firefly was cancelled before season one finsihed airing, but the full season still exists on DVD. Paul730 21:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, I agree with you about the episodes, since we can't know if they've been made or not. Not sure about the seasons. Even if it's not a "complete" season, saying that there are only six doesn't seem very accurate. I'll still revert that guy if he changes it again though, he's being disruptive and I haven't seen him argue his case. Paul730 21:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- To me, a "season" just means a number of episodes. The Aquaman show can't be a season, because there was only one episode, it wasn't a season, it was a pilot. There have been a few episodes of Smallville season 7 (and the fact that it's referred to as "season 7", I'm guessing the Aquaman show wasn't described as "season 1"). Paul730 21:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I would simply put "7", the fact is that the season exists, if not in it's entirety. Episodes have either been shown or they haven't, they're not spaced out like seasons. If you're still not sure, you could ask at the television project for some more opinions. Paul730 21:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, never let it be said that Bignole isn't sure of his own opinion. ;) Paul730 22:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Wow, that article is looking amazing. It really makes X-Men film series and Spider-Man film series feel puny. Alientraveller 13:25, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, cool. Man, I wish I could write like you do. I'm obsessed with writing in chronological order, as you can see at Transformers (fiction). Alientraveller 13:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Halloween
Happy Halloween. :) (It's like 10 past 12 here in Scotland) What's your opinion of today's featured article? I'm not loving those images in the plot section. Paul730 00:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I agree that section looks extremely cluttered and the pictures are pointless. I'm going to remove them, the only thing which was putting me off was because it's featured and you'd think the pictures would have been removed already if they didn't belong. Paul730 00:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Like what? Do you think that reception and criticism should be merged? The title "Criticism" seems pretty POV to me. Paul730 00:48, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Wasn't there an article for the producers cut (I think there was for 6, don't know about 2). If that was the case, somebody might have merged the unsourced stuff after the page became featured. Either way, it shouldn't be there if it's unsourced. How should we fix the reception section? Maybe have subsections with "Box office reception" "Critical reception" and maybe "Controversy" or something? Paul730 00:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Done. I only hope that the regular editors of that page don't revert me for being "too bold". That happened to me over at the Harry Potter (character) article, your pal Arcayne reverted my edits because they were too "dramatic". He wasn't rude about it or anything, but it was frustrating. Lol, I don't even like Harry Potter. Paul730 01:31, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. :) Oh, and thanks for catching my little "vandalism". Lol, I obviously wasn't paying attention. Paul730 01:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
My name is Earl episodes
Hi. I participated in the talk about merging the episode articles of My name is Earl. If you make an article for season 1, I can make for season 2. Friendly, Magioladitis 14:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. What about the synopsis of each article? Should is leave out much of them or just put them all together? -- Magioladitis 14:49, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: Batman
I see what he did. From what I can tell, it's an attempt to stuff each unsuccessful project with as much indiscriminate information as possible, such as the most minor roles in the script for Batman: Year One. Considering none of these projects entered production, there's not truly much coverage that can be provided about them besides projects and writing details (that are never fleshed out or publicized). As for my absence, I've been swamped with school and trying to take some time off from Wikipedia to focus better. (I tend to check my watchlist a little too often when I could be hunched over these wonderful textbooks, ya know.) I imagine I'll surface this weekend if I can find the time. Hope all is well. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- What's your take on the jack-o'-lantern image? I wish the source was better (ComicBookMovie.com, meh), but I guess I felt that the article's Marketing section needed a visual aid. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 02:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Spider-Man 3
Just watched it for the first time, it really wasn't as bad as I expected. There were some moments I didn't like, "Emo-Spidey" was extremely cringeworthy during his dance routines, and MJ was a bit of a moany bitch. Sandman was cool, I wasn't expecting much more than a cool special effect, but the character impressed me. Venom was alright, I wasn't a huge fan of the character beforehand, he's a bit... nineties. I liked Eddies "ooh, my spider sense is tingling" joke, that was a bit raunchy, lol. JJJ was great as usual, I like him. It was nice to see Ursula again, she's a sweet character even though she's not from the comics (that I know of). Gwen Stacy was a bit pointless. I liked Harry's redemption, it was cool to see Spidey fighting alongside someone. Overall, it was a fun movie, but it was a bit long and it suffered from "oh, I'd forgotten about him" syndrome. It felt more organised than X3, though. I'd give it three stars, it was good. Paul730 23:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- I know what you mean about Gwen Stacy, they should have used Debra Whitman instead. That way, she's not completely made up for the film (don't really like it when they do that) and Gwen would have been done no disservice. Gwen is unnecessary in the films; they admitted during the making of the first one that they basically merged her personality into MJ's to form one character. I can't help but wonder if they only introduced her as a plan B in case Dunst didn't return for later sequels. JJJ... I remember wondering if Man-Wolf was going to reappear as a villain, but I doubt it, he's too C-list. Perhaps if they introduce Scorpion in a sequel, JJJ can play a bigger part, but I'm not really pushing for more sequels. I thought Venom was okay visually, I'm surprised they were as loyal to the comics as they were. I see what you mean about him looking like Carnage, but ah well. Emo-Spidey wasn't funny, he was just embarassing. The whole jazz bar sequence seemed very indulgent on Raimi's part, I do think he goes too far sometimes. The only time Peter really came across as "bad" was when he was taunting Harry, but even then, who wouldn't be sick of his constant "Spider-Man killed my father!" crap. I'm not too familar with the animated series, I've seen a few episodes, mostly about Morbius. A moment I liked in 3 despite being incredibly cheesy was when Spidey was playing the audience while getting the key to the city. It was a total groan moment, but very in-character for Spidey, lol. Paul730 00:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, I love how you're comparing Tobey Maguire's performance as "Bad Spider-Man" to someone falling on their arse. :) Paul730 00:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- I do wish the "darkness" could have been elevated, it would have made the film more believable. Who cares about making it child-friendly, I think kids would be more traumatised by Maquire's dancing than if he did something evil. I hate how he thought he was so sexy as well, him and his big greasy fringe. Lol, Spider-Man and Mr Fantastic, I wonder if we'll see Wolverine and Iron Man shaking their asses on the dance floor next. Paul730 01:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, I didn't mind Mr Fantastic's dance nearly as much as Peter's. As least there was a reason for Reed to be dancing, he wasn't doing it in the street and he didn't randomly hijack a piano. In the commentary for FF, they said that the negative response to Peter's dancing almost made them cut that scene, but they decided to risk it. Lol, dancing Wolverine would be funny because it would be so out of character, kind of like this. :D We could very well see Stark dancing, he is an alcoholic playboy. They should do a Marvel musical. ;) (I was kidding, but I probably would enjoy it. They're doing a Desperate Housewives musical BTW, inspired by Buffy) Paul730 02:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, Angel's dance was much funnier than Reed's. So, did you do anything for Halloween? Isn't Halloween a really big holiday in the States? Paul730 02:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Not really. I can't really be bothered with Halloween, it's too much effort finding a costume. My friends celebrate it though, last year my (male) friend dressed up as a geisha, lol. Paul730 02:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was going to go to a party last year but I didn't have a costume because it was kind of last minute. I figured I could just stick on a hockey mask and pass as Jason. Anyway, when I looked at myself in the mirror with my ordinary clothes and a cheap little plastic mask on (which looked nothing like Jason's) I just thought "This is pathetic, there's no way I'm going out like this" and ended up staying in. I think I would really enjoy Halloween if I put the effort in. I saw pictures of someone who had went as a Buffyverse vampire with the lumpy forehead, that would be really cool. Paul730 02:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I saw a guy on youtube (I spend way too much time on youtube) showing off his collection of Jason masks. He even had a latex replica of Jason's face in Part 7. I was totally jealous. All those collectibles are so appealing, but you feel like such a geek for wanting them. I've got a few Marvel figurines, they're such dust collecters. Paul730 03:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- That sounds cool. :) I always wanted a Michael Myers doll, my friend used to have one that played the music. They're so expensive though. I don't deny my geekiness either, I just don't have the money to buy stuff that's just gonna sit on my shelf. Like I said, my Marvel figures (which are the cheapest series) just collect dust and I hardly ever look at them. I'm always fascinated by the merchandise in my local comic book shop. They used to have a life sized Freddy statue that always made me jump when I turned the corner, lol. I've got a Vamp Willow toy, and a couple of Spike toys. I wanted to get a Puppet Spike, but it looked shit in real life and was a bit too expensive. Paul730 03:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, a museum of geekiness. My friend is a total goth, and her bedroom is full of Chucky dolls. It's kind of scary. My mum always slags me off for buying figures and stuff, she says she can't believe I still buy "toys" at my age. And when my grandpa found out that I read comic books, he said "Shouldn't you be reading proper books by now?" Lol, I get so much abuse for my geekiness. My friend won't stop making fun of me for editing Wikipedia, he's like "that's too geeky even for me!" Paul730 04:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Aren't you a total jock as well? I figured coz of your username that you were a school athlete or something. Paul730 04:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
You? Gave up in an argument? What have you done with Bignole?! ;) Did you watch all the Spidey films together? Wouldn't that take like six hours or something? The memory loss thing... I remember thinking "huh?" during the film but I didn't really question it too much. I guess he lost some memories and not others... Did you see the spoof I linked to on Alien's page? It points out a lot of silly moments. I saw you nominated the franchise for GA. Are you going to do the cultural impact section later, or did you just decide it wasn't necessary? Paul 730 17:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- I know you didn't "give up" exactly, I was kidding. One of favourite part in that "HISHE" spoof was when Sandman was like "I have a daughter. That makes it OK for me to break the law." Aw, I love Sandman. For everyone else, it was all about bloody Venom but for me, Sandman was the best thing about that movie. Lack-of-subtitles are so annoying. That Halloween doc didn't have any, so there was a lot of rewinding going on. How does the GA process go, I'm not familar with it... can I vote or something? Paul 730 18:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Why isn't IMDb reliable again? There's guy over at Talk:Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV series) asking. I think I know, but could you please clarify? Paul 730 02:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. BTW, have you seen this? It's a five minute long making of for the series Ultimate Spider-Man. Utltimate Spidey is definintely by favourite interpretation of the character - like Smallville, it's free from the continuity of the old series, but has enough time to flesh out the characters/stories. Some of the redesigns of the villains are rather extreme, but I like them. Paul 730 03:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- The game was okay, I always feel like those Spider-Man games have wasted potential. I wish the city felt more alive in them. The Buffy page... I wouldn't object to the removal of the title comparison image. It used to be three separate images until someone pasted them together. What about the other images? TBH, that whole page isn't a great FA article. It seems to have degenerated quite a bit since becoming featured - that cultural references section is crap. Paul 730 03:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- The sad thing is, that's the only FA us Buffyfans have to our name. :( The article doesn't seem to be very well-maintained, or possibly more likely, it's being maintained by people who aren't strict about policy. When the S8 comics came out, it turned into a plot summary of them, I removed it a while back. There's OR throughout - Adam is based on Frankenstein, Buffy vs Caleb is an example of feminism. Blindingly obvious stuff, but still unsourced from what I can tell. Be bold and remove those images, we'll see how people react. Speaking of which, one of those images has been returned to Halloween II. Does the murder of a random nurse really deserve an image, do you think? Paul 730 04:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Preity Zinta FA
Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Fixed it your're correct ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 12:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
OK thanks for your contribution. Regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 12:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes a bit of a nightmare this Croc. He is altering the FA Casino Royale article also. Is he delibrately targeting my FA contributions or something? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 13:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
X-Men cast list
Thoughts? User:Alientraveller/X-Men cast. Alientraveller 15:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- OK, Yahoo is a reliable source. Alientraveller 16:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
TF movie
Please don't take offense. Mathewignash 21:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi, the page is an FAC, and I was wondering if you would mind taking a look at it. Thanks, Scorpion0422 21:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look. -- Scorpion0422 —Preceding comment was added at 21:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Smallville
That's too bad you can't accept Spoilerfix. I've never gone wrong with them. Btw, what's wrong with Kryptonsite? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinepowell (talk • contribs) 05:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Check this out, there's an episode listed for his guest appearnce that matches what I put. YOu'll see I'm right once you find "other sources" for episode titles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_McClure —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinepowell (talk • contribs) 05:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't think the Writers' strike will affect the next episode after "Blue" since it airs in a month's time. "Gemini" is dated for December 10, any writers' strike obviously came after this episode was filmed, since most episodes are filmed a couple of months in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinepowell (talk • contribs) 06:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Here's are the links to my sources for titles and airdates, one by one only one does NOT give airdates but at least it lists titles.
http://www.episodelist.com/site/index.php?go=seasons.view&season_id=981
http://www.scifistream.com/smallville/s7/index.shtml
http://www.spoilerfix.com/smallville.php
The episode titled "Siren" does have an airdate of Jan. 10 as stated by TVGuide in this article
http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-News-Blog/Tv-Guide-News/Exclusive-Black-Canary/800026218 19:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- TV Guide mentions 15 episodes will be produced for Season 7, as the scripts have been written. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I wasn't responding to Robin above. I just came across the headline based on the Smallville update at 2007 Writers Guild of America strike and was passing on the headline to you just in case. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Erik just proved another point for me. Thanks. Don't tell me I haven't given you any sources. Spoilerfix is reliable I don't know how else to get you to realize that. I hate to tell you but a lot of people also same the same thing about Wikipedia, so what does that tell you?
I'll give you an example of how good Spoilerfix is. Las Vegas episode tiles, have been there since mid October and haven't changed and I've even added them here. You still haven't said why Spoilefix is not any good. Btw, "Siren" is scheduled for Jan. 10 not some other episode, so please don't say you don't know which episode will air that day. Robinepowell 20:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
You keep on saying (like a broken record) Spoilerfix is crap, WHY? I have NOT had any problems with them - ever. So I'm going to keep on relying on them for future episodes until the day they stop being reliable. Same goes for Kryptonsite. Robinepowell 18:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Interesting how I hear from everyone but you, and yet I still don't have an answer. WHY? Why do you refuse to use Spoilerfix? Why are they not reliable? Why can't you let me add these episodes and if anything changes (which it hasn't so far) I'll change it on Wikipedia. Robinepowell 03:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay I'm still lost, even more so. What does Kryptonsite have to do with Spoilerfix and your obvious distrust of them? What the heck are WP:RS and WP:V? YOu wonder why I ask you to say it in plain english. Robinepowell 21:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I can't read them, you'll have go to them yourself and put on my messages. My userpage is not setup like most don't know how, especially since this site is not easy to use. Robinepowell 21:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Instead of giving very long answers to my questions about this keep me some that are short and sweet to my questions.
Have either Spoilerfix or Kryptonsite had wrong information? If so when and in what way? I have to more episodes to add to the list and that will take it to a total of 15 for Season 7, if the writers strike continues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinepowell (talk • contribs) 19:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- In regards to the writers strike and "episodes written." That doesn't mean they are filmed and may never be. Writers are necessary during filming in case rewrites need to be done during filming. Robin, now many people have told you spoilerfix is not reliable, can you believe it now? Bignole I have had the same issues with Robin not accepting four reliable sources over spoilerfix. It is frustrating. Any help we can give each other is welcome and offered. Good day. Irish Lass 13:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Batman
Yeah, you said your DVD wouldn't allow it. My belief was that two screenshots that would work as critical commentary were the blue flower or the water evaporating machine, to illustrate their use in the plot. Alientraveller 15:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- The shot of Bruce opening his closet before going to Arkham might be a worthier illustration of the Batsuit. In fact, you could try a comparison of it with the ninja costume. Alientraveller 19:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe, but what about something that captures the monorail, the water supply, Wayne Tower and so on. It's up to you really. Alientraveller 19:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I understand what you mean; I think if we had a large abundance of information about the Batsuit (like more than what's already in the article), we could use more than one image. I agree with what you said to Alientraveller that it should be replaced -- it was really just a quicky production still. I need to get my hands on that Cinefantastique' already... I'm doing a programming project, so maybe after I submit it, I'll go to the library and cough up 30 or 45 cents for Xerox copies of the issue. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Do we still have our eye on the by-2008 deadline to set up as FA of the Day for TDK's release? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
There are a few "related articles" at Box Office Mojo that we could implement. Maybe The-Numbers.com will have articles, too. Also, I think we should look for information about what the studio's expectations were, considering how buried the cinematic franchise has been all this time. I'm looking forward to looking for new information -- research skills have been nicely honed since we got it to Good Article status. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hahaha... that was terrific. Glad we still have a sense of humor around this place. By the way, I did a super-quick search (was actually looking up the general notability of SHH! outside of movie websites) and found this. To be honest, The Dark Knight is a lot better maintained -- I hope we can get Batman Begins up to such a fleshed-out status. We have over 70 references for The Dark Knight, and the film is still over a half year away! I think we're going to top Spider-Man 3 in "Most ridiculously well-referenced upcoming film article on Wikipedia". I wonder how many non-free images we can plant, provided that we have a treasure trove of real-world context to tie them to. I'd like to push the admins a certain way about the justification of the images. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- If we don't find anything Batman Begins-related that's free, I think we should use a free image of a clean-shaven Christian Bale. After all, he's the new face of Batman. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, you said the main page, so I was assuming you meant Batman Begins as Featured Article of the Day. I don't know if the Tumbler is better than a free image of Christian Bale -- it doesn't really capture the film as much as Bale would, in or out of a Batsuit. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah... I haven't really wanted to look. At least we have the page history for later, hmm? I do wonder what goes on in most screenwriters' heads. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- "Grrr, Warner Bros. didn't like my Plastic Man script, huh? Well, I'll show them.... I'll start my own article and write about myself as a brilliant screenwriter, and I'll start an article about my brilliant script, and when all of Wikipedia reads it, the studio will want to hire me back!" I'll pray with you. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah... I haven't really wanted to look. At least we have the page history for later, hmm? I do wonder what goes on in most screenwriters' heads. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, you said the main page, so I was assuming you meant Batman Begins as Featured Article of the Day. I don't know if the Tumbler is better than a free image of Christian Bale -- it doesn't really capture the film as much as Bale would, in or out of a Batsuit. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- If we don't find anything Batman Begins-related that's free, I think we should use a free image of a clean-shaven Christian Bale. After all, he's the new face of Batman. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Hah! Great victory! I guess it does help to argue right back at 'em. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Joy of Sect
- Thank you, thank you, thank you. Someone needed to say what you said. Thank you for also saying: "Yes, I'm leaving this message with both you, as this is a joint problem." That is appreciated. I will do my best to stop engaging in that thread of discussion, but if other people bring up concerns at the FAC, I will do my best to address them. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 17:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC).
An application of BIO
I got involved in Mitch Clem at AfD. Can you look at the references and let me know whether you think I'm right on his notability. He is not an important topic, but this illustrates an important application of the BIO and Notability rules. I think that the Minnesota Public Radio spot is just about enough, then the mention in PC World, while not in-depth clearly is saying this person is noticed. The other comixtalk source is marginal, but I think that it adds to credibilty. It appeares that Comixtalk has a blog section, but where he is covered is more akin to an online magazine in a scheduled and dated issue. Cheers! --Kevin Murray 15:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Asking for some advice
You might remember me from my contributions to the Friday the 13th related articles, which I've kind of abandonded in exchange for the Halloween 'verse. Sorry if I left you high and dry on that one. But what brings me here is that I seek your counsel. I fully trust your expertise on both the subject and the protocol of writing these articles. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I have been putting some words down on the latter articles, among them, the Michael Myers article. My proudest is the rewrite I did to the Halloween II section, an example of which can be viewed here. I fancied what I thought was a good job, what with the crunching/simplifying of the plot that stuck to Michael (and not the overall film), wrapped around real world details. Then some anonymous fella came along and wiped it for a flat-faced plot sum-up. The reason they wrote was a simple GFDL. I originally thought it stood for Good Faith Deletion because it first got my attention before with the removal a section that seemed to be composed entirely of original research. Then, after this, I looked it up and came to this. I'm not even sure what that is, much less what it has bugger all to do with editing the article the way it went (and, oh, yes, GFDL also seems to justify this wholly incorrect diddy). I reverted one of these and got back what I can only describe as a robotic reprise revision. I intended to revert again, but then thought it best to rework the rest of the other film entries with the same balance of short summaries and real world backstories. But I don't want to put all that effort into it and then get squashed for four cryptic letters. Again, I trust you in what you're doing, so am I in the right on this, or should I just give up and remove it from my watchlist? --Bacteria 17:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Reviews
S'fine. :) I didn't actually read through them all, so they might be crap. I noticed you saying you needed more reviews for that page, and I had half an hour before Heroes, so I thought I'd try to be helpful. Lol, I've never even heard of those films before. Paul 730 22:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I noticed your dispute with that editor. Judging from her talk page, you don't seem to have much patience for her, lol. The random insult of this edit summary made me laugh. I'm not familiar with those websites or why they're not reliable (is it because they're like gossip sites and not directly from the horses mouth?) From your talk page, it seems like she's trying to convince you that these sites are good, when you're just following policy and don't doubt the info personally. TBH, the whole debate is kind of pointless, because isn't all this stuff going to be confirmed faily soon anyway? I wouldn't waste my time if I were her. Paul 730 23:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was laughing because you mentioned her age. It was just so irrelevant to the matter at hand, lol. :) I believe you about the sources. It's obviously a case of Wiki policy over your personal opinion because you were telling me about Siren last week and I know you trust Kryponsite. I'll stick the page on my watchlist, revert any more badly sourced additions. Maybe she'll get the hint when it's more than one editor disagreeing with her. I saw you asked an admin for help as well. Paul 730 23:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, they look well cheesy. The SFX in the first clip were cool - I like those visceral eighties-style SFX for horror movies. The vampires look good in it, proper monsters. I'm not a big fan of the pretty boy Anne Rice vampires, I was like "When are you going to vamp out for goodness sake?" :P Paul 730 10:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- I came back from town just there and I was wavering about buying Freddy vs Jason vs Ash, but the new She-Hulk was out, so... I might buy the TPB rather than the issues. Uh, if there is one, that is. It does look fun, Lori gets killed in it. Bout time she died, I hated her. Might be a dream though, you know what they're like. Lol, I love how Ash is still working at S-Mart, only at Crystal Lake. Paul 730 17:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I only buy TPBs, Buffy being the exception because that's too good to wait for (I'll probably get the Buffy TPBs one day though, such a completist, lol). Most stories nowadays tend to be written with the TPB format in mind anyway. A common complaint in reviews is that the pacing is screwy because a story has been dragged out for six months. One of my favourite books, New X-Men, is constantly criticised for that. A recent story was about Stryker invading the school and basically slaughtering all the students with machine guns. Kind of like X2 only way more extreme. I thought it was brilliant, but the snobby reviewers were like "there's only so many months of killing off minor characters that we can be bothered with." Not a problem when you're reading it in the space of half an hour. :) Paul 730 21:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- What, the story jumps from book to book? The X-Men used to do that a lot during the nineties... apparently the stories were great but it was too hard to follow. My X-Men: Dreamsend book collects issues from about 4/5 different titles, some of them obscure solo series like Bishop and Cable. Kind of confusing. The current Messiah Complex storyline is jumping from book to book, but that's kind of justified because it's a massive crossover (or "X-Over", lol) which affects all the X-teams. I'll be waiting for the nice tidy graphic novel collection. Paul 730 22:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- The death of Superman is a pretty massive event to hit the DC Universe, you would expect it to impact those titles. Still, a title should still make sense on it's own. Civil War is a big crossover, but if you read the main series by itself, you can enjoy the story on it's own. But then, if you want the full story, you can also get CW: Amazing Spider-Man, CW: Captain America, CW: Fantastic Four, etc etc. The Dreamsend story was terrible in that respect; somebody would get shot in one book and then die in another... the whole thing was just such an obvious ploy to get people to buy more titles, since the story could have been told in one book. Paul 730 22:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thank you for getting rid of that Michael Myers character history. That's been driving me crazy for ages, lol. Paul 730 12:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. Going anywhere exciting? I saw that Robin still didn't take the hint about those sources... couldn't help but rant at her a little, lol. Paul 730 22:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, at least you're articulate with your arguments, you're not just "THIS IS BULLSHIT UR ALL FAGS!!!" like some of the crap you see on the web (especially YouTube, there's so many assholes troll there). Why exactly were you kicked out? :) You seem to have quite a rep online... I was on some website and somebody was saying "I tried adding some stuff to Wikipedia but this guy Bignole wouldn't let me." I can't remember what it was about, but it was funny. Lol, your "little proof reader?" I asked my mum to proof read something, and she asked "Why are some words blue and some aren't?" *Sigh* Paul 730 23:28, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- I Googled your name and found it. They don't slag you off, they're just whining because you wouldn't let them put that Topher Grace was playing Eddie. Oh well, guess they got the last laugh. :P I remember that stuff with Don... it was kind of scary, that some nutcase across the globe can get it in for you and start stalking you. It was also pretty pathetic, that a grown man has nothing better to do with his life than that. Paul 730 11:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know, that's what I told your pal Robin - that it was policy, not a personal thing. I remember reading the Don website and laughing becasue he was being a dick to his fans as well. He said "Find Erik and ThuranX for me NOW!" and they all started working, then when somebody said something off-topic he was like "Stop chatting, and do what I say!" He's probably used to being a big fish in a small pond, can't stand it when he doesn't get his own way. Lol, he'll probably read this and me on his list as well. Paul 730 14:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- BTW, I'm attempting to clean up List of characters in the Halloween series and I wish I hadn't started. Like when you're trying to clean a room, and it looks messier than when it begun. *groan* Paul 730 14:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
We can move the title if you want. I kind of want it to be consistant with List of characters in Friday the 13th... even though they're different series, lol. What would be the best titles, and I'll change them? Alientraveller suggested the same as you, but some characters also appear in comics so perhaps "film series" doesn't work? "Franchise"? How do you think I should lay out the page? Alphabetically means there won't a giant contents box, but as I said, I want it to match "F13 characters"... Should I include Halloween III characters? Sorry to bombard you with questions, lol. I also moved my "minor Buffy characters" sandbox over. It's still pretty in-universe and unsourced, but it's in better condition than before. As I told Alientraveller, I'm just waiting for the uproar of "you redirected the character pages! Random Sunnydale High Student deserves his own page!" Paul 730 15:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- I mean the main characters - Tommy, Lindsey, and Sherriff Brackett all appear in the comics. So technically they're not just "film" characters. Paul 730 18:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
WP:WAF
No meaningful consensus in support of it ever existed.Geni 00:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- You are aware that Argumentum ad Antiquitam is a logical fallacy yes?Geni 00:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Pauline Fowler
Hiya, just curious, do you feel that your concerns have been adequately addressed at the Pauline Fowler FA nom? Or do you feel that there are still outstanding issues? Would you be willing to post a "Support" at the nom? I'm concerned that things seem to have kind of stalled there, and I'm trying to figure out what I can do, in order to get things moving. Thanks, --Elonka 01:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- On the question of tense, are you saying that the first sentence should be "is", but you're okay on the rest of the paragraph saying "was"? I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I'm just honestly baffled by the rules here. --Elonka 13:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I've heard the explanation, but I'm afraid I still don't entirely "get" it. Everytime I think I do, someone else comes along and says, "No, you did it wrong." ;) So I guess my question for you is, "Is the article right?" If it's not, please adjust it to what you think it should be, and then we'll go from there. :) --Elonka 13:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Angel eps
I just "pulled a Bignole" and left an epic comment at Talk:List of Angel episodes. I know I gave up earlier, but the ludicrous arguments being presented there made me feel like I had to step in. Also, I reread that Brian guy's comment and you're right, it's a load of crap. It's full of personal attacks too, I don't know why I didn't notice it the first time. Anyway, even though I know they're not going to be merged, I thought I'd make a last ditch effort regardless. God loves a trier. Paul 730 02:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I spent ages writing it, I wanted to reply to all the points as best I could. It ended up a bit longer than I intended... lol. As I said in my comment, I'm not opposed to the idea of individual Angel episode articles, I just have doubts that they all deserve them. Angel episodes are typically part of the overall storyarc and rarely memorable by themselves. I can see something like "Billy (Angel episode)" or "Smile Time" having the potential to become G/FA, but there's so many filler episodes that are just building towards the season finale. I can see Buffy having more notable episodes, because that show had more "special" episodes like the musical, or "The Body (Buffy episode)". Too many of the "Opposers" seem like they just want every ep to have an article out of principal, because they like the show. I must say I found this response rather amusing. It's like "what are you gonna do?" Paul 730 02:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- I also wondered if she had a learning disability. If she does, then fair enough, I apologise for criticising her for something that's not her fault, but if she doesn't, then the fact that we're sitting here wondering about it says a lot. Lol, you've really got a thing about her being a 30 year old girl, don't you. So ageist. ;) (I kid, please don't write an essay about why you're not ageist! :P) Paul 730 03:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, that could be a category... "Potentially crazy Wikipedians". It probably already is. Yeah, I noticed that F13 has been sitting there ignored for ages. Nobody cares probably, because it's an article about a series of crappy slasher films from the 80s (lets face it). It's pretty demoralizing, because that article is the shit. :( Paul 730 03:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- No shit it got passed quickly, that article was brilliant. The only person who was wavering about supporting it was you. At first I thought you were just being fussy about your own work, but I see you're being just as anal about Pauline Fowler (my goodness, I watch that show and she's every bit as bad as the article says). Paul 730 04:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I can sympathise with the idea of writing in past tense, even though I disagree with it. EastEnders is on 4 times a week, and I don't believe the BBC airs reruns of old episodes (ie, from years ago). As you said, it airs in real time, so it's hard to think of something that happened 10 years ago in the present tense, because it's not like you can just buy the DVD can relive it. The plot summary doesn't like that big a problem to me - it's written from an OOU perspective with comments from the actress. Also, it's those kind of convoluted soap opera storylines that needs a lot of explanation. It's kind of a plot summary and a "Characterization" section in one. I dunno, lay out-wise the article seems fine to me. Paul 730 04:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- I know, which is why I disagree with writing in past tense. Due to the mundane day-to-day nature of soaps, Pauline's family and home are quite important to the character. Obviously if I wrote "Buffy lives at 1630 Revello Drive" (and it's sad that I know her address, but what can I say...) that would be in-universe and excessive detail, but in a soap... the whole point of the show is neigbours in that square, and her address is kind of important. :/ Have you mentioned these "IU" problems at the review? It would be nice for it to make FA... I'm no fan of Pauline's, but another fictional character FA is a good thing. Paul 730 04:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I just fixed an edit you made at the Pauline article - don't know if it was a mistake or deliberate. There was a random comma and a sentence which didn't make sense. Anyway, I'm going to bed now, speak to you later. Paul 730 04:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Can
this review(link doesn't take you to review) be used in the "You're Welcome (Angel episode)" article? City of Angel is a fan site, so I wasn't sure. Their reviews are fair, I usually agree with them (not that that matters, but you know..) That article is pretty decent BTW. I was impressed, Kweeket's done some really good work. Paul 730 16:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, I understand your point (that's why I asked your opinion, cos I was unsure) but City of Angel do usually give very fair reviews. I'm not loving how fans are treated like total lepers on this site - sure, we have to be NPOV, but does that mean the fans opinions are totally irrelevant? A glance through that site shows that the show creators do acknowledge it - there's quotes and stuff from the writers complimenting the site. Also, the reviews are written by the site's "staff writers", not just random fans busting their chops. If it's against policy then fine, but it does seem like a reliable site (not to sound totally Robin, lol) I saw you getting all pissy with that guy at the Angel episode talk page. Lol, don't insult Smallville or you'll unleash the beast! Paul 730 18:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Notification of Request for Arbitration "TTN, part Deux"
I've requested Arbitration regarding TTN's numerous edits to TV and other fiction articles, and included you as an "involved party" in the request. The request can be found at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#TTN.2C_part_Deux, and you should add a statement to the section somewhere under mine. Thanks. -- Y|yukichigai (ramble argue check) 21:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)