WikiLight14 (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 440: | Line 440: | ||
==[[Talk:WALL-E]]== |
==[[Talk:WALL-E]]== |
||
Hi, Alientraveller. Could you please share your thoughts at [[Talk:WALL-E#I choose Controversy|#I choose Controversy]]? Cheers, —[[User:Mizu onna sango15|<font color="red">Mizu onna sango15</font>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Mizu onna sango15|<font color="black">Hello!</font>]]''</sup> 01:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC). |
Hi, Alientraveller. Could you please share your thoughts at [[Talk:WALL-E#I choose Controversy|#I choose Controversy]]? Cheers, —[[User:Mizu onna sango15|<font color="red">Mizu onna sango15</font>]]<sup>''[[User talk:Mizu onna sango15|<font color="black">Hello!</font>]]''</sup> 01:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC). |
||
==Dragon Ball fan fiction== |
|||
Go F yourself, I wasn't the one that used a fake script, so there, you go to fan fiction! |
Revision as of 18:47, 9 August 2008
Archives: 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11
Worked
I'm really please that worked! ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 10:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Re:Gi Joe
Go see a reliable sources has been added before making a revert. --SkyWalker (talk) 12:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, According to your latest entry you have added this link. That link shows LatinoReview site. Which is the same site which confirmed Brendan Fraser has Gung Ho and The Rock has Shipwreck. It is confirmed that BF is Gung Ho. Why do you keep reverting?. --SkyWalker (talk) 12:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Jack Sparrow
Shouldn't we give him the title of protagonist in addition to Anti-Hero? BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 23:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- I see, but that makes this unequal: the Elizabeth Swann article names her protagonist. Just thought I should get your input :) BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 16:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Good question...perhaps a removal might be in order... BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 16:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Great. I'll just check to make sure that it's been removed on the Elizabeth Swann and Will Turner pages. Thanks! BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 18:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Good question...perhaps a removal might be in order... BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean 16:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
oy! wall-e had his page moved
So Gears of War decided to move the Wall-E page to WALL • E, without checking the archive where the hyphen use (or non-use) had already been discussed with the decision to keep it as - was made. Your assistance in putting it back, assuming you agree that moving it back is the right choice, is appreciated. SpikeJones (talk) 03:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Transformers 2
They aren't rumors. The are confirmed. If you had bothered to read the Talk Page on that article you would see my sources. Kalas Grengar (talk) 17:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Warning of impending violations of Wikipedia's 3RR policy
Please do not engage in Wikipedia:Edit warring; in editing The Dark Knight (film), you are verging on violating Wikipedia:3RR. Your edit summaries are not accurate; it is not a copyright violation to link to a reliable third-party published source such as Allocine.fr, which reproduces the text that you cited (initially in a misleading way). Only by examining the text does it become clear that the previous presentation was misleading. A quotation in the citation will solve that problem as well. I'll try to provide it a bit later if I can find the time. See the article's talk page and please use it rather than edit warring for discussions. Edit warring is a violation of Wikipedia editing policies and guidelines. --NYScholar (talk) 21:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Jack sparrow
Concerning your revert to Jack Sparrow, I understand what you are doing, but the summary was not specific enough, and a newcomer would likely be very confused by it. In the future, try to be a bit more specific in your edit summaries to avoid confusion.
Best, --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 21:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC).
Thank you
Thank you for your hard work on The Dark Knight too. --NYScholar (talk) 23:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
My work on Hulk (film)
You can head over to User:Wildroot/Hulk and do a little editing. That would pretty nice. Cheers. Maybe I might be able to get that article in shape for GA before the new film comes out.—Wildroot (talk) 01:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Jurassic Park 4
Good call on removing that stuff, I didn't have the guts to do it myself. Ben Boldt (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
The Legend of Spyro
Yup such film is under production [1],[2],--SkyWalker 15:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I thought you might like to know this
Monday, on the main page: Jurassic Park (film). - Face 19:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hm, Persion Poet Gal protected it for some reason. - Face 19:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Ta
...for the Barnstar. I do that, copyedit upcoming FAs o' de day. Nice work, not too rah-rah for such a lunatic praiseworthy fanatical cinephile as you seem to be. Congrats. --Milkbreath (talk) 17:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Wikiquette alert notice
Hi there. You should be aware of this thread which involves you. At present, I do not see any major civility violations. I would probably advise not to put comments such as "thanks for the edit conflict" in the edit summary, as it can come across as if you are blaming people for something they have no control over. Also, if you are getting edit conflicts, there is a lot of conversation going on and it is possible other people are getting edit conflicts and could be frustrated as well, so it's just an altogether bad time to be cheeky :) --Jaysweet (talk) 13:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Heads-up
Just wanted to let you and the others know that I'm obviously not on Wikipedia much these days. I started my internship, and I'm pretty busy with it. Not going to be editing at work, and my current residence does not have a stable Internet setup. We have one modem to which there can only be one laptop connected at a time. I have two roommates, so that's three laptops that have to keep being moved and plugged in. So I can't get comfortable and edit a good deal. One of my roommates will be retrieving a wireless router from home, so hopefully that will permit me to station myself somewhere comfortable. Hope you're all doing well, though! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The Two "Hulk" films
Do you know how possibly weird that would be if both films were nomianted for GA status on the same day? I have yet to finish this article. I'm getting closer.—Wildroot (talk) 01:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
User: Tenebrae is reverting the 'Avengers' film and other referenced Sequel content from the "Sequel" section, and is reducing it to a very small length with barely any content or references.--Snowman Guy (talk) 13:28, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- Really!? That's quite a thing to say. I agree with you, my expectations are low considering that I'm not too crazy about the director and the so-called writing issue weirded me out. I checked www.fomdi.com to see if it's captioned this Friday, but it's not listed yet. I usually know by Wednesday, but possibly as early as this Tuesday night. I won't get a chance to see Indiana Jones until DVD, sadly... I missed it in the theaters. I definitely want to see The Incredible Hulk, The Dark Knight, and Hellboy II (which keeps seducing me with its amazing previews of del Toro's mad brilliance). Definitely will see WALL-E, too, considering it's packaged for people like me. :) Do you have any idea how minimal the dialog is? I saw on the article that there is a speaking role by a human captain. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 11:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
- I see what you mean now re: the indent. And I have to compliment you on your excellent, EXCELLENT work on this article. These are some of the most best edits I've seen. I've been privileged to work with some great colleagues and editors on the Comics Project, and I hope you'll accept this as a token of appreciation for all you're doing. With thanks, --Tenebrae (talk) 13:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar
I award you this for your highly precise, NPOV, detailed and yet pertinent and relevant edits. Congratulations! — Tenebrae (talk) 13:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC) |
Lord of the Rings
I added a subsection to the Lord of the Rings film trilogy article that referenced three academic works - you instantly deleted it and explained this edit with the word "irrelevant", regardless of the fact that the academic sources I cited were all studies of the film trilogy and its reception, and therefore relevant. Please do not do that again. We can discuss this on the Lord of the Rings film trilogy talk page. Ninj (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Friendly note
It looks like you already have 4 non-vandal reverts to The_Incredible_Hulk_(film). While I agree with your edits, make sure not to get in trouble with 3RR. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 16:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- The last revert you just made, I'm not sure on. While it's an important plot note that the Hulk relents, it still appears that Abomination dies. However, I'm not too concerned on that note at the moment... you have to bring these issues to talk, you are in the 7 revert vicinity for today already, and it isn't vandalism reversion. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 18:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Replaced your "Blue flower" picture.
I replaced the "blue flower" picture from the Batman Begins article. Hope you don't mind. I used the source from Blu-ray so the picture is more detailed now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arman88 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Marvel Studios
Thanks for your copy-editing! I had copied "Motion pictures" from the Paramount Pictures infobox, but "Film" suffices, too. Of course, the proper dashes don't show up on Microsoft Word. And I knew there had to be an article for something like Marvel Films—there was something in the back of my head going, "There's something you're missing!" Now I know what it was. :) I stopped short of a 2005 NYT article talking about how Marvel Studios will independently finance the film, so I have a ways to go with this. (I'm using Access World News and implementing major newspaper headlines, but I'm going to try to use business databases and cull headlines from sources like Wall Street Journal.) Anywhere else you might suggest me looking at? There's definitely a lot more information related to Marvel Entertainment, but I'm trying to focus on the studio right now. (And this weekend's film is Get Smart -- BAH! There is a Hulk screening an hour away, so maybe I'll go to that...) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 10:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, I thought I'd explain why I removed the 'uncredited' tag from Norton's screenwriter entry in the infobox. I just thought it too trivial a thing to mention there, as the WGA's decision is mentioned in the article proper, and to tag his contribution that way seemed like an observance of WGA standards that we would usually ignore here. But I bow to your superior experience on this one. All the best, Steve T • C 08:43, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Crystal Skull
There's no such thing as a crystal skull??? Shazam! I had thought that film was a documentary! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yeesh! :) How sure are you about the copying? I wonder if some kind of memo can be spent their way... —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
AFI thing
Sorry about BttF! Didn't notice you'd already added the AFI note. I'll make sure I check the history next time so I don't step on anyone's toes (though it looks like it's just you and me adding this stuff at the moment). Steve T • C 13:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Smallville
Well, unless Tess becomes some hugely popular character that gets written about by numerous critics (which I highly doubt), then I don't think she'll ever warrant a page to herself. As for other shows, at the moment, not really. Maybe if the CW wises up and creates a Green Arrow spin-off, considering how popular the character was in season 6 and the fact that I believe they are testing the waters by making him a series regular to see if audiences can handle a whole season of "Green", then I'll have another show to write about. Other than that..probably not. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:49, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, there was rumblings in the fan community that "Tess" was really "Teschmacher". I would actually prefer that that really was the case over the idea that Davis Blume is Doomsday. Right now, I have no anticipation for the eighth season because I completely disagree with the introduction of Doomsday. I'm sorry, but that is clearly a "Superman" type of character. You cannot introduce the only character that has ever succeeded in "killing" Superman, and you don't even have Superman on the show. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 15:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- He's already died and been resurrected on the show, we don't need it again. We certainly don't need "Superman's death" played out on the show when we don't have a Superman to kill. You cannot do that series of comics without two things: Superman and Doomsday. They both go hand-in-hand, and it's a huge mistake introducing this character when you haven't even had the blue tights and red cape flying around. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- I doubt he'd wearing the suit mid-way through, because Welling has been adament about not doing such a thing on the show. I could see, and I hope for it, that they do it in the series finale (at least in the last couple minutes), but nothing further than that. It's going to be hard to see how this is going to end with Lex seemingly out of the picture entirely. That rather annoyed me. The entire eighth season can suck so long as the series finale itself is fantastic. It should be 2 hours long and packed full of action and references to previous episodes. I would love for a scene where Clark remembers all those times when he promised to do great things, or people reminded him that he would do great things for the world. Some kind of montage where he remembers key moments in his life that have helped guide him. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Can always count on Enter Movie to find a way around it and have it prepped and waiting in the wings. LOl BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I've heard. I've also heard that the tv commercial actually listed October 2 as the start date. I'll hold on to that source though, and see about including it somewhere. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Iron Man Movie
Regarding the removal of the {{citequote}} tag with the claim "'tis in the cite". I looked at the provided reference article (I assume its [3]), eyeballed and text-searched it, and did not find the phrase "Director Jon Favreau and star Robert Downey make this smart, high impact superhero movie one that even non-comics fans can enjoy." or any sizeable component thereof.
A litte further digging revealed my problem. I was looking at the reference article provided that covered all the other claims. I should have been looking at the uncited Rotten Tomatoes page for the movie. I will make the appropriate changes to the article. -- saberwyn 12:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Thoughts
I just came to know that Near future in film is nominated for deletion. I was wondering if merging 2009 in film would be a right choice. 2009 is 7 months away until January 2009 arrives this article should be merged till then. What do you think?. --SkyWalker (talk) 18:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Images
Not bad thanks, I think I've done alright. As for a release image... I'd probably go with this one, or if you wanted one with some of the actors in, a crop of this one. Gran2 11:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Evangelion (Live Action) Film
Hello, I noticed your recent change to the page for the proposed Evangelion live action film and wanted to know why you did change it. I understand changes to the pages content, but there is now no way to access the page that was there now! Again, could you explain the reason for this? Thank you Ode2joy (talk) 03:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Hi there. I remember that when the first TF movie was in production we had a header at the top of the talk page saying something along the lines of This is for discussing changes to the article only, not for commenting on how much you don't like the robot designs etc. I had a quick search for a similar header template (I realise that the "robot designs" comment must have been a parameter) but couldn't find one. Do you think the Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen article would benefit from such a header, given the number of forum-like comments that have been posted there and, if so, do you remember the name of the template? Cheers, -- JediLofty UserTalk 11:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- That's the one! Let's hope people actually read it, rather than just thinking Wikipedia is www.shootfortheedit.com or www.donmurphy.net! :-D -- JediLofty UserTalk 12:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Re: State of Play
Hi. That's an excellent rewrite of the lead. I was hard-pressed to see what exactly you'd removed at first, as it essentially says the same thing but in about half the words. I'll incorporate it shortly. Thanks again, Steve T • C 08:02, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Hulk/Who
The CGI was okay, it was just so obviously CGI that I couldn't really lose myself in it. It was just a cartoon character interacting with humans, I didn't really feel like he was there. I don't think there was much they could do about it though, so I'm not going to blame the film. Favourite bit... hmm. The Ultimates-inspired fall from the helicopter, perhaps? That was all heroic and cool. I also liked the scene in the cave with the Hulk being all cute and bashful, and the battle on the university lawn. I much preferred the action in Iron Man, not quite sure why. Iron Man was just better, full stop. Yeah, there's some pretty good superhero flicks out this year, especically if Dark Knight delivers. I take it you're not planning on seeing Teeth? :P
As for Doctor Who, the finale looks like the biggest, bestest Who fangasm they could have come up with. :D It's very Avengers-y what with the Earth's (or Britain's, same thing) greatest heroes assembling. I love how they're all heroes that the Doctor is responsible for creating, it's like his reach has spread out and made everyone a better person. My only quibble is Maria and Pete - I want them to appear but they don't seem to be. I'm kind of preparing myself to say goodbye to Doctor Who; even though it's going to continue and I'm going to keep watching, I really think this is the end of the show as I know it if the frequent rumours about Tennant and Davies leaving are true. Paul 730 20:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- I love the T-1000. Wasn't he one of the original CGI characters? I probably like Robert Patrick's performance more than the CGI though. I think Jurassic Park and Lord of the Rings have amazing CGI even though I'm not a big fan of those films personally. The JP dinosaurs still hold up brilliantly today. The swinging scenes in the last two Spidey movies are great as well.
- Well, I just see "Journey's End" as the finale to a really good run. If the quality stays high after that episode, great, if it doesn't... well, those four seasons kind of stand alone anyway. Like you said, all the stories of the last four years coming together for a finite ending. Do you think anyone will die? I really thought Sylvia was going to die in last weeks episode, I thought that was her hand in the body bag. Last week's episode was cool, I love alternate timelines and that kind of thing. Paul 730 21:02, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know about that uncanny valley thing, I've always had a weird crush on Tommy Vercetti and he's hardly realistic. :P That article was interesting though, I think you're right.
- Isn't Martha set to lead TW next season? I was convinced Donna was going to die, but since she already "died" last week perhaps not? The TW and SJA characters probably won't die in a show outside their own. Maybe Rose then? Although didn't Davies say he would never kill a companion as that would undermine the shows optimism? It better not be Jackie, that' all I'm saying!! Paul 730 21:24, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Hmm. Don't Time Lords have some control over what they look like? Didn't some Time Lady from the old series go through a number of choices before settling on her new look? I'm willing to accept any plot twist that keeps Tennant for a few more years. Davros was okay... I'm pretty unfamilar with the character so he doesn't interest me as of yet. You're right about the Daleks having good characterization but I tend to take that for granted to be honest, I'm far more interested in the "human" characters and their personal journey. Donna's fate has me worried, what was that Kaan said about eternal death or something? I'm glad the crossover characters were handled well, I was worried they would be glorified cameos but so far they're being very pretty active in the story. Paul 730 23:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- So tell me what you thought of "Journey's End". I was completely blown away, but I've seen quite a negative reaction from fans on the internet (typical) which annoys me slightly. What more do they want? I won't spoil anything in case you haven't seen it yet. Paul 730 00:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Surprisingly enough, Mickey was the episode's highlight for me.~ZytheTalk to me! 16:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Where's all this Mickey love come from? :P I like him and all, but his arc pretty much ended with "The Age of Steel", and he's not been very interesting since IMO. I'm sure Torchwood will breate new life into him. I too loved Rose's closure but I've read online opinions complaining that it's too fan fiction-y, with one person describing FakeDoctor as a "genocidal blow-up doll". Hmm, I guess you can't please everyone. I'm so conflicted about Donna... it's such a tragic end to one of my favourite characters. I'd love an update on her in a few years, see her enjoying life as an ordinary human (as opposed to Rose, Martha, SJ, and Jack, who are all warriors now). Paul 730 22:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- I have no problem with the Doctor clone - it puts me in mind of the end to Dan Slott's She-Hulk run. We saw an alt-universe Shulkie end up with gormless love interest Pug, while in Earth-616 the two could never be together (he took a magic potion or something to erase his feelings for her, it sounds wierd but it was brilliant, honest). It was a really bittersweet ending, because we found we closure we wanted, but the main She-Hulk could move on in other stories like the Tenth Doctor. Wilf as a companion... no thanks, he was likable enough, but nah. I'm really interested as to who will be the companion in next year's specials though. Maybe a different one-off companion in each episode? Paul 730 22:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Friday the 13th
Per WP:NFF the production has to be notable. It isn't, because we know nothing about it. You've created a page that mirrors exactly what's on the franchise page, with the exception of it have an infobox (which does nothing but repeat what the prose already states). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Alien, it says it right there on the film notability guideline: "Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles, unless the production itself is notable per notability guidelines." Nothing has been reported about their production except for the shooting and start date, and that was only by the producer's blog. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Respecting you, and having the discussion. Not treating the article as if it were mine and having edit wars over this. My big problem is that nothing has changed-with the exception of a few new cast names-with the information that is there since the last time the article actually had a deletion. Brad Fuller's blog gives us just about nill when it comes to information on the film. I have a set visit that I haven't had time to read, but from what I've managed to scan, even that basically just repeats what they've already told people and what we already have. There might be some additional things about the cast, or how they got the rights, but I didn't see anything about the production itself. The film sits on a fine line, because I know they are keeping track of all that they do, but they aren't telling anyone right now. I would probably feel better if we had an official plot description for the film. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I knew. I watched a 30 second video of Jared Padalecki running through a cabin and then them pulling out this steel case and opening it up to reveal what the mask actually looked like (a cross between Part 3 and Freddy vs. Jason, which is a good thing). No one did any talking in the video, so you're left going "what's happening...tell us about the mask". BIGNOLE (Contact me) 12:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Do you help
Do you help with edits all the time on darknight page or just when needed. I think you coulde do more. Sorry to say but again Im worried about the page not being good. thanks! If you verfied the quotes like no one else is that would help. I think rules might be broken? I dont know. isnt that rule of wiki about movies and info where from? Thanks alien. Boggydark (talk) 01:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Harvey Dent
Please stop removing my edits. I just added the source of the confrimation from a warnerbros employee who saw the film monday. there is proof! here is his posts: http://uk.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=632783&page=6&pp=30 and if you dont believe that here is another review that backs him up:http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37214
- It the original post has been confirmed by other sites. It is TRUE that magizines and reviewer have already been shown the film. It is not a fake. Rolling Stones has a review, so does rotten tomatoes, and AICN. Thats 3 DIFFERENT sources all backing the other one up.
From my long experiance at the wikis I have learned that it is against the rules to delete sections off talk pages. thank youQuinlanfan2 (talk) 15:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- If they are fake why are there three different sources backing it up. The warner bros employee, said that the image was concept art but it was almost identical to the one in the movie.
Im fine with it just being on Two-Faces article. When ther is a more recent version Ill upload it to the other articles. Deal? thanks Quinlanfan2 (talk) 15:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Im not saying that it is relible, but the very fact that three sources backing each other up is the proof. Ive deleted stuff on my talk page and admins got pissed. Im just trying to warn you so what happened to me doesnt happen to you. you said it could go to the two face article. "I don't mind its inclusion in Two-Face's page, but I corrected it for you: it's concept art." Alientraveller Quinlanfan2 (talk) 15:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- alright. i understand now. sorry for the confusionQuinlanfan2 (talk) 01:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Voyage of the Dawn Treader
I have just created this page for the new film, do not change it back to the redirect. If you have any changes you want to make, make it using the new film page. --Bray6265 (talk) 1:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The Incredible Hulk (film) redux
I'm confused as to why you reverted my edit. Have I missed something in all the published sources? Where is the serum being THE original supersoldier serum confirmed? I'm not gonna edit the wording again but, am placing a citation needed tag. Thanks. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Hancock
What is the policy with Wikipedia and requesting for Flickr images to be used? I was looking for some images and found [4], [5], [6], and [7]. What should I do? What do you recommend choosing? I was thinking that a Smith/Theron shot would be good for the Release section, and we should be able to use a screen shot from the film to reflect the damaged Hollywood Boulevard rather than the promotional mock-up. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining... though why can't the last image belong on Commons? It doesn't strike me as a commercial website. Feel free to educate me, as I haven't really looked at this before. I just noticed that premiere photos were becoming more of a trend. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the link. It seems like more effort than it's worth. I'm not looking forward to the film that much, but I guess I want to see it expanded since I started off with just the development history. If it's captioned starting this Friday, I'll see it. (I'll see WALL-E without the captions, too.) I really want to see Hellboy II and The Dark Knight in the next few weeks, though. Did you read the IGN review for TDK? I'm barely suppressing my expectations for the film. I even had a weird dream last night having the film play out (with mere guessing on my part as filler). I'm sad that I didn't get to see Crystal Skull or Hulk on the big screen, though... my location is not ideal for films, and they aren't really captioned after a few months. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- It's definitely been quite a summer of films! I wish I was in a better place to take advantage of seeing them. I will drive an hour to see The Dark Knight if I have to... I'm sure it's quite a viewing in IMAX format. Nolan's definitely handled Batman well, though I wonder if the ultra-realism makes expansion inflexible. The scale of The Dark Knight seems so huge that I can't imagine how a third film would follow it. I don't think I've read Batman: Dark Victory... I'm not sure about them putting up smokescreens, though. I think that if we see Robin in future films, it would not be a classic Robin look. The Nightwing identity would have its own origin, just not the independence of the character. In the MTV article, I agree with Loeb about the father-son dynamics being powerful, but I guess I feel like I've seen the relationship before. The misbehaving young lad and the stern father figure who withholds visible affection, you know? I don't know how many more are planned to be made, but a Robin-esque figure could be introduced in the third film, adopted, and only discover Batman's identity at the end of it. No rushing or anything. Then by the fourth film, he could be the sidekick. In the meantime, I'm not sure what could transpire in the third film. I really wish Nolan didn't think Penguin was workable... it could really just a kingpin (I see Philip Seymour Hoffman in that role) who finally gets the Gotham underworld under control, and Batman would also have to deal with The Riddler, who does a lot of manipulative, but no large-scale, crimes. What do you think? Any thoughts rattling in your head about the future of the film(s)? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the link. It seems like more effort than it's worth. I'm not looking forward to the film that much, but I guess I want to see it expanded since I started off with just the development history. If it's captioned starting this Friday, I'll see it. (I'll see WALL-E without the captions, too.) I really want to see Hellboy II and The Dark Knight in the next few weeks, though. Did you read the IGN review for TDK? I'm barely suppressing my expectations for the film. I even had a weird dream last night having the film play out (with mere guessing on my part as filler). I'm sad that I didn't get to see Crystal Skull or Hulk on the big screen, though... my location is not ideal for films, and they aren't really captioned after a few months. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I just finished that article and now I put it up for GA nomination. Would mind taking a quick review? Cheers.
FYI, starting next week my work schedule will become virly rapid. I will be directing a short documentary with the Sundance Institute come next week. I'll see if I can get another two film articles to GA status then.—Wildroot (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Move
Yes, I did it wrong, i'm trying to fix it now. I reundid all my revisions. Give me 5 minutes. smooth0707 (talk) 15:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Reception sections
Erik raised the possibility of updating the MOS reception section. We're going to be putting together a proposed wording for the section at User:Steve/Reception before taking it to WT:MOSFILM. If you've got any thoughts/ideas you want to share, you're more than welcome to plonk them with the rest, here. Steve T • C 20:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Re: David Mitchell
It's nice to see he reads his own article! I'll see what I can with it, thanks. Gran2 12:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- Lol, looks like my Sunday's planned. You'd think they could have had a bot fix it couldn't you? Ah well. Gran2 21:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Interested?
Any comments for [8]?--SkyWalker (talk) 05:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC) Thanks. :). BOL --SkyWalker (talk) 11:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- You haven't just been watching this on TV too, have you? I always forget how much I loved that film, and end up loving it again. Steve T • C 22:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I completely missed your comment on my talk page! Yes, yes, give me the red pill, and let's see how far down the FAC hole we can go. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Hellboy II
It's just groups of ten -- makes it easier to work on a batch and cross them out. That way, less scrolling involved. Nothing too complicated. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Re: Batman Begins
Hey mate, I have begun a discussion at Talk:Batman_Begins#FA_drive_.28July_2008.29. Cheers. Gary King (talk) 18:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, I hope we can work together on this future FAC. Anyways, I was just stepping through my edits and re-adding edits that did not remove info. Is the removal of content the biggest issue you have with the edits? What about the dates? I didn't actually remove a lot of info; for a lot of the unreliable references, especially those for revenue numbers which can be found at many places, I replaced them with more reliable references. If the content removal is the biggest problem, then perhaps I could revert back to mine then re-add the content that I removed? Thoughts? Cheers. Gary King (talk) 18:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- So I guess overall we're on the same page. I think the Themes section should be removed, though, per this edit. Primarily because half of it is quotes, and if we really are going to have an entire section on Themes, then it should definitely be longer. But I don't think it's a really needed. Gary King (talk) 19:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Also, I don't know of the message you posted on my talk page was sarcastic or not, but I didn't mean to step on your toes when editing this article. I've just been through one-too-many FACs where the reliability of some of my references were questioned that I figure I'd just get all reliable, unquestionable references before ever submitting an article to FAC again. Gary King (talk) 19:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Good, glad to hear that. I definitely appreciate your work on film articles! I believe I mentioned this before ;) Anyways, I'd like to remove Themes per my point above. Thoughts? Gary King (talk) 19:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
wall-e / eve
Your last edit was "she should not have an article". Well, she does: EVE (WALL-E). SpikeJones (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
MOSDATE
What is the new standard? I just de-linked the date=
attributes at Hancock (film), and it shows differently in References between {{Cite news}} and {{Cite journal}}. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
- I asked SandyGeorgia about the status of MOSDATE, and she updated me. Just wanted to pass it along. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Hulk 2 Redirect
Please see my thoughts on this in the redirect section here: Talk: Hulk 2.--Snowman Guy (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Problem with the way you edit/explain yourself
Here it is then for your talk page
I do not appreciate the posts you sometimes places up on the talk pages when addressing someone questions or editing.
Example of what I meen.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
I resently added a peice about the Wilhelm Scream to the page. It was removed. I would like to know the reason why please.Tacoman10 (talk) 20:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Because it's not important. Alientraveller (talk) 21:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC))
I think explaining why it is not important is much better then just stating that it isn't.
People make mistakes and it can become frustrating when being attacked by vandals or having an edit war, but I think to sit down and take the time into explaining why you don’t find something right/true/correct rather then implying that your way is the right way makes it allot more easier and enjoyable experience for people to edit.
I do apologise for not placing this on your talk page as I am currently at work and did not realise I was not replying to your talk page. It is not my intention to have a go or have a war with you. Just thought it would be niced to people trying to learn the steps to this big busy place.
MattyC3350 (talk) 11:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- But he's right. A "Wilhelm scream"? It's a sound effect. It's trivial. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The Dark Knight
Disagree with my edits if you must, but I would appreciate it you not resort to namecalling to make your point. Also, if you're so opposed to not mentioning the NYC premiere (which has received tons of media coverage, and is therfore noteworthy), why not remove it in the info sidebar as well, thus obliterating it completely from Wikipedia?Richiekim (talk) 16:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Inflation information in Box Office receipts
As you may recall, we were involved in a discussion about inflation adjusted box office receipts. I thought the adjusted numbers were as important or more important than non-inflation adjusted numbers, and you may have disagreed. Anyway it seemed that we came to a compromise to include both as equally important. Anyway, someone deleted the inflation adjusted numbers from Titanic and I accidentally thought it was you, but it was not, so that is why my change comment reads as it does. Since I don't monitor the titanic page as much as you do, I would appreciate it if you could keep an eye on that sentence to prevent other from deleting the inflation unadjusted information. Thanks. Cshay (talk) 15:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your support on this issue. I am going to the insist that the other editor discuss this issue in the discussion page. If he does not do this and keeps revert warring, I will bring this up with the admins. Cshay (talk) 19:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hello. Thanks again for your support. I have to go offline for the weekend so I won't be able to respond if the poster continues to revert war. I just wanted to say that my silence this weekend does not mean I agree with his wish to delete this information from the intro paragraph. Thanks. Cshay (talk) 20:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
T4
Lol, was that a hint, per chance? The video's not working btw... damn you for getting me excited! :P Paul 730 20:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
- I saw it, thanks for the other link... meh, it looks okay, nothing truly exciting. I'm truly Bale will impress as John (when does he not?) but the trailer doesn't give enough away for me to really think anything of it. I only started writing about John because Zythe wanted to... the Terminator rewrites were his idea, we just started it in my userspace for some reason. Personally, I'm not a big John fan. Paul 730 20:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Be civil, pal. No need for that kind of edit summary. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Watchmen
Aw, man, I wanted more after seeing it! It was a little surreal to see all these elements of Watchmen jump off the panels like that. I kind of wish they would have briefly mentioned the time periods and all, since I can't imagine how people who didn't read Watchmen would have received Dr. Manhattan annihilating a Vietnamese troop. Bring on the film! :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 11:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Editing film articles that you have not yet seen
I'm curious, does editing film articles that you have not seen yet spoil the fun for you? Or do you just ignore the Plot section? :) I haven't seen The Dark Knight yet (will do so tomorrow) but can't stay away from the TDK article, so I'm just trying to avoid Plot for now. Gary King (talk) 19:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, that'll be fun. I'm going to pounce on that article right after I watch the movie, probably tomorrow (about 20 hours from now). A friend of mine has already seen the film four times! Gary King (talk) 20:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- I just returned from seeing The Dark Knight. Epic, and well-deserving of its #1 spot on the all-time movies list on IMDB. The primary reason that I'm letting you know is because The Dark Knight (film) is going to get a lot of lovin'. Gary King (talk) 22:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Film talk
I actually got to see WALL-E with captions two weekends ago! I liked it very much, although I think I liked Ratatouille better. I agree with some critics that it was tough for the last two acts to follow the first, which was fascinating and private, you know? I did find the condition of the planet to be a bit morbid. I think the captions were useful in following the songs (not critical, but still nice) and following the live-action actor in these videos. I also saw Hancock captioned last weekend (got the article to Good Article status, the first in a long, long time), and I just found out this past hour that The Dark Knight was captioned here after all! I was checking the websites, and they didn't seem to have it. So I had given up hope till next weekend, but my friend in Chicago said there were captioned screenings of TDK there. I figured this meant the studio did have captions to distribute, so I called the theater and found out the theater had them after all! I'm trying to get my roomies up and ready to see this now! :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
- I think WALL-E is great in a lot of ways, but I guess the scenes in space just felt so apart from the scenes on Earth. Definitely some interesting social commentary in the humans' portrayal, though. Let me know if you want me to go digging for any print sources to help with WALL-E. Also, have you seen the IMDb page for The Dark Knight? It's the #1 movie of all time, who would've thought!? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I thought that Ledger was very memorable, but admittedly, all the talk about his performance made me "notice" his acting more than I wanted to. I think that it did help overshadow my expectations for Eckhart's performance, which was really well-done and authentic. There are a ridiculous amount of great moments all around, too... when you see it, look on Bignole's talk page (I responded to him with my spoiler-ish thoughts on the film) to see what I liked in particular. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:50, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- When do you get to see The Dark Knight, if you haven't already? I wanna know what you think! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- Haha, yes! :) I enjoyed the scope of the second film, but both are definitely great. I think the Joker was Batman's first "real" challenge. It was definitely a film to turn over and over again in one's head. I didn't mind the Hong Kong subplot so much; it showed that there was a world outside Gotham City, and definitely demonstrate the effectiveness of Batman's vigilante reach. Did you wind up liking Two-Face or the Joker better? I loved how the filmmakers teased the audience with Two-Face's appearance, cutting away as he turns his head. Then seeing the full ugliness, whew. I kind of hope that he doesn't come back, though... the way they wrote him in, I can't picture him as a serial villain from hereon. I have to agree with the consensus, that the Riddler should be next. He can find out Batman's identity from Mr. Reese and set up an intricate mind-game to mess around with Wayne/Batman, compelling him to cover his own butt. Catwoman should be in, too, for new female presence. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- Are you referring to the last film where Two-Face kills Robin's parents? I think that was a unique element in the film series, not found in the comics. I don't know if it needs to be repeated. I would not mind Robin being introduced because of the father-son dynamic, but I think he should have the Nightwing-esque appearance. It would definitely be hard for Nolan to top The Dark Knight thematically... that's why I'm not so sure about the Riddler, who isn't as chaotic as the Joker. I mean, I'm fine with the Riddler, but he won't garner as much interest. Two-Face was definitely a great character in the film; I grinned broadly when he first mentioned his coin. You read my thoughts about the film at Bignole's talk page, right? I launched into raving praise over there... and you do have a point about the Joker being easy to write. I think it was probably more controversial to cast the Joker than it was to write him. As for the next film, I'd be cool with the Riddler because I can't see who else could be a major enough villain. I don't know about Talia coming in; it seems a little too "full circle" for me, where it would make sense for Catwoman to pop in as part of the Batman-attracts-crazies theme, not to mention Catwoman's ambivalent morality. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- Haha, yes! :) I enjoyed the scope of the second film, but both are definitely great. I think the Joker was Batman's first "real" challenge. It was definitely a film to turn over and over again in one's head. I didn't mind the Hong Kong subplot so much; it showed that there was a world outside Gotham City, and definitely demonstrate the effectiveness of Batman's vigilante reach. Did you wind up liking Two-Face or the Joker better? I loved how the filmmakers teased the audience with Two-Face's appearance, cutting away as he turns his head. Then seeing the full ugliness, whew. I kind of hope that he doesn't come back, though... the way they wrote him in, I can't picture him as a serial villain from hereon. I have to agree with the consensus, that the Riddler should be next. He can find out Batman's identity from Mr. Reese and set up an intricate mind-game to mess around with Wayne/Batman, compelling him to cover his own butt. Catwoman should be in, too, for new female presence. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I have this tremendous urge to create The Joker (The Dark Knight) with all the press the specific character has had. Even the LA Times breaks down his performance! What do you think? Is that too drastic? :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Double, Double, Boy in Trouble?
How do you know that the season primiere is "Double, Double, Boy in Trouble"? There are no sources that link the bounty-hunter story to the title. Sυρєrıor (Reply!,Contribs) 20:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- Are you saying just because DDBiT has a KABF14 code, it must go before Lost Verizon (KABF15)? It doesn't work that way. Either that, or I don't understand you. Sυρєrıor (Reply!,Contribs) 21:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- That's what I'm trying to say. The production code numbers do not refer to the order the episodes go; check the List of The Simpsons episodes. Go down to season nineteen and you'll notice the episodes have not aired because of the number of their production codes. Sυρєrıor (Reply!,Contribs) 21:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Non-free images: MOSFILM draft
I am seeking to revise WP:MOSFILM#Image to be more focused on the infobox image and shifting general instructions to a new subsection, "Non-free images", under the current MOSFILM section "Other article components". The new subsection will discuss how to best implement them and will provide instructions to do so. I began with discussion at WT:MOSFILM#Non-free images, and I've written up a draft at User:Erik/Images. If you could provide early input before I introduce the draft to the core discussion, it would be greatly appreciated. Please leave your feedback on my user talk page. Thanks, Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Question.
Is this reliable source?.--SkyWalker (talk) 18:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, But why blogspot?. He can start a own website :). It is a awesome news that Steve is coming back. His music is just incredible. --SkyWalker (talk) 18:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
LOTR
Actually if you've watched the last film, he is referred to as the Witch King by Gandalf when he's talking to Pippin in Minas Tirith...A Prodigy (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
X-Men (film)
That lame article reminds me when I first started out on Wikipedia. We need to do something to get this reverted. —Wildroot (talk) 21:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The Black Pearl
Your contributions to the Black Pearl pages are great. I did some searches as to the history of the Black Pearl Wikipedia page and noticed you were the first one to add that Lord Cutler Beckett ordered the ship to be burned and sunk. Since this info isn't covered in the films, I'd like to know where to find the source of that referential information. Thanks, Nathan 1981 (talk) 17:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Re: X-Men: First Class
I think that in the long run, such a setup would be appropriate. I don't know if it's a fair assessment to make, though before the film even comes out. I petitioned for Road to Perdition to be about the film article since coverage for the source material was demonstrably sparse. Maybe you could find out what coverage this X-Men comic book has from sources like Wizard and Comic Book Resources. If there is a compelling amount of material, it may be best to have a disambiguation page with X-Men: First Class (film) and X-Men: First Class (comic book). By the way, maybe we should put a hatnote at the comic book article to point at the relevant section in the film series article. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:57, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hah, I am actually typing out discussion to initiate at WT:FILM this very moment. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- I sort of misunderstood the situation, though... I thought that the only justification was the "his life's mission" bit. No wonder it's so easy to question, being so distant from the intended context! It seems more appropriate now that I see that context, and its location is better. Though I imagine with some dedication, a high-quality article would have room for non-free images that don't come from a prologue. This situation does remind me of the image at Jurassic Park (film)#Legacy, though I'm not so sure about these Plot section images... :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- I look forward to Wolverine, but I'm a little overwhelmed by how many characters they're trying to cram into this film. Schreiber looks well-cast as Sabretooth, though. I think that a Magneto film would be great; Magneto's concentration camp scene really stood out for me. We're so used to powers being demonstrated in a contemporary setting, so it would be fascinating to see Magneto get his way through the earlier decades and environments. I kind of wish, though, that filmmakers could have figured out a way to set up for a mutant universe at large with the first three films. It feels like what they're doing now is only kinda-sorta fitting, though I imagine comics have tried to do that, anyway. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- I would definitely love to see Captain America if they had equal halves of World War II and the contemporary period! I think it would be better than a mere prologue because it could establish the Captain's involvement with 1940s America and its people, then tear him away from it and force readjustment in the new, future world. Think Red Skull should appear, though? I've never truly read much about him, and I very vaguely remember his appearance from that lousy Captain America film a while ago. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- Is it really already established? That would be even better, but I never expected a studio to do that. I guess I need to catch up a little with the potential superhero films! You and Wildroot have been doing too good of a job. I haven't read Todd Alcott's blog, but I will take a look at what he has to say. Also, Peter Sanderson's review sounds worth reading based on his background. Let me know when it appears! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
If you want to say anything, feel free to do so here. If you notice any malicious edits on my watchlist, you can let me know, too. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Edit warring (Blocked)
Hey, I noticed you've passed Three reverts to Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade today. (Diffs: [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]). This appears to me to be disruptive edit warring, and, as you have been blocked in the past for this behavior I expect that you understand it is not acceptable here. As such, to prevent further disruption, I have blocked you for twenty-four hours. When you return, please try to work things out with your fellow contributors instead of just repeatedly reverting. SQLQuery me! 20:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- Damn! Well I won't argue even though I didn't edit war and the discussion went absolutely fine, but oh well. All hail the almighty admins, lol! Alientraveller (talk) 20:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and will someone undo this silly billy, he/she completely ignored the talk page! Alientraveller (talk) 21:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- No, you were not 'switching back and forth between revisions', you were constantly and consistently switching back to your preferred version (removing an image and some referenced text). That, is edit warring. SQLQuery me! 21:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- Right, three reverts, then I moved the image, then I fixed the reference. I broke no rules. Alientraveller (talk) 21:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- No, you were not 'switching back and forth between revisions', you were constantly and consistently switching back to your preferred version (removing an image and some referenced text). That, is edit warring. SQLQuery me! 21:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and will someone undo this silly billy, he/she completely ignored the talk page! Alientraveller (talk) 21:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Alientraveller (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Administrator has not bothered to read the talk page discussion at all. These five reverts did not also consist of switching back and forth between revisions: they involved civil discussion too. Now some random editor has completely ignored talk page consensus. Alientraveller (talk) 21:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I believe the evidence of a 3RR violation is somewhat borderline, to be honest. However, the full sequence of five edits indicates to me that edit warring was indeed happening, and a short block is an appropriate response to that. — ChrisO (talk) 22:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- EXCLUSIVE: ‘Transformers 2’ Prequel Comic Gives Inside Scoop On 2009 Movie
- LaBeouf injury slows 'Transformers'
- Sony may bite on Spidey spinoff
Alientraveller (talk) 18:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Ringstrilogyposter.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Ringstrilogyposter.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 17:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Re: Doomsday
It was enjoyable, but not amazing. Worth the rental, though! The DVD had a captioned commentary and captioned featurettes, which made me a happy lad. As you can tell, I've pulled a couple of screenshots from the film and implemented them (no more hottie tatooed survivor). I have random details in the sandbox, but I'm not sure if they really have any kind of place in the article. I was wondering, if you don't plan to see the film, can you read the Plot section and fix any American spellings? I think I'm gonna nominate it for Good Article status. It will be nice to use this as an example of how to implement screenshots. Do you think they fit well? I have two free images in the mix, too, so it seems like a decent balance. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:09, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! I figured it's easier for you and Steve to spot such discrepancies, while it's easier for me and Bignole to spot when it's the other way around. Funny how that works. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Since you have contributed to some superhero film related articles in the past, would you mind helping me build/clean up this article? It will need work with:
- Removing speculation.
- Adding more titles.
- Removing all non superhero-ish films.
- And any other improvement edits.
Would you mind helping me out? Thanks.--Snowman Guy (talk) 18:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Re: Bane
Well, I did do some "work" on the article, and was gonna add a peer review for the article, but, never got to it. Yeah, I'd be interested in helping you out to get the article to GA. ;) What are you proposing? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
A.I.
I'm nearly finished with the A.I. Artificial Intelligence article and it would be nice if you did a "article polish". Thanks. I'm adding in the DVD special features for tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Tonight my short documentary is having a premiere at the Tower Theatre (Salt Lake City, Utah). —Wildroot (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Edge of Darkness
FYI, since you've been putting together the "Film adaptation" section, filming is reported to start on Edge of Darkness on 18 August. Just search Google News on that date for the typical "filming started today" report and create the article. I suggest using "(2009 film)" in the meantime since it's unfortunately the best rule of thumb (IMDb, sigh) we have in lieu of actual verifiability of when it could come out. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I need your opinion
Talk:X-Men (film)/GA2 Wildroot (talk) 17:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh and the X-Men article needs a quick edit.—Wildroot (talk) 17:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Alientraveller. Could you please share your thoughts at #I choose Controversy? Cheers, —Mizu onna sango15Hello! 01:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC).
Dragon Ball fan fiction
Go F yourself, I wasn't the one that used a fake script, so there, you go to fan fiction!