User talk:Erik/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

June 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The June 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Nehrams2020 07:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The Searchers

Once again you appear to show a dislike to images. What the problem with the searchers article? In other film articles wikipedia would be crying out for public domain film images but with the Searchers there are many available but none used!!! Do you beleive images degrade an article?? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 16:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

HI. The commons has about 40 images of the film. The film is registered as a national possession or something so is considered pubic domain -its odd isn't it -I put in only one image of John Wayne and it was removed. I also don't like a high number of images but i'm sure one or two with appropriate citations in relation to article discussion is more than appropriate. Regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 16:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks I've addressed it to them. It does seem odd not to use at least one picture from

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:The_Searchers_%28film_1956%29

I am very impressed with the article development though. Shame that Casino Royale wasn't promoted after I and others including youself worked hard on it ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 16:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Well the first nomination was a clear support with over 20 people supporting. However the FA admin wasn't happy about one ongoing complaint about unreliable references from "unofficial bond sites". So it was started again but his time not even half of the people felt like renominating again -and quite rightly so -they shouldn't have had to do it twice. Desptie several references altered it still wasn't regarded as sound referencing - everybody involved beleived it was a well written article up to FA quality but because of several of the sources used it was refused after about a two month long process. I don't know what happening with Goldeneye at present -in my view I don't think its quite FA qulaity yet ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 17:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

well i',m not going to fuss around with references when there are thousands of articles and films barely beyond a stub!!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 17:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Pan's Labyrinth links

Hey, don't want to be naggy, but I was wondering when you thought you could do that? I'm bored and I'd like to write a production section, but I'm shite at finding sources. Atropos 20:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Google magic

Awesome. Google always seems to amaze me.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. Alientraveller 18:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Linkspam

I see that you're currently removing a number of links in Korean film articles as "linkspam", but as far as I can see the links are all perectly good. I've reverted one or two of your changes, but would rather discuss it with you first. PC78 18:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Specifically it's the links to HanCinema and Koreanfilm.org that I'm referring to. I certainly don't see a problem with linking to a film or actor's HanCinema profile - as a dedicated Korean film database it's a highly useful resource, and it's usually more relevant and informative than linking to IMDB or AMG profiles. Likewise with Koreanfilm.org, one of the most dedicated and comprehensive Korean film sites there is, and whose creator, Darcy Paquet, is a regular contributer to Variety[1]. Perhaps linking to individual reviews is a bit much though; I'll try to avoid that in future.

Please note that I'm not affiliated with these sites in any way, I just consider them to be highly useful and relevent. Looking at some of the other links on your "black list", I don't think you can reasonably compare them to (for example) http://lunapark6.com, which appears to be nothing more than someone's blog. PC78 19:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to second that. For one thing, the sites are not spam. For another, reviews are specifically mentioned as what SHOULD be linked at wp:el. Rizzleboffin 18:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

(Copied from User talk:PC78) It seems that your reason for deleting these links is simply because they are "blanketed" across Wikipedia. There is a very good reason for this. It is the most reliable and thorough English-language source for information and reviews of Korean films available. (If you know of a better one, please provide it, as that imaginary source would be very useful for improving these articles.) The articles and reviews linked at these sites-- at least the ones I've seen removed-- are not at all "indiscriminate." They all pertain directly to the film or actor which is the subject of the article. When we've got so many completely unsourced articles, to remove these links is to remove valuable sourcing from these articles, and to lessen their quality. Rizzleboffin 19:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

You also removed a link from the Shaun of the Dead (comic) that I added in when I created the entry [2] because some of the comics feature on the DVD as extras and this is required as proof. I can guarantee I have no connetion with the site other than being an occasional reader. Just a note to let you know why I'm reverting the edit. (Emperor 19:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC))

No problem. Just for a moment thought it made sense (after all what is a link about DVD extras doing on a comics page?) until I realised: a) I'd added it b) I'd added it for a reason ;) It is a soli source backing up and verifying information in the entry so it makes sense to stay. No biggie, link cleanups will snag the occasional legit links, I just wanted to let you know why I put it back. (Emperor 19:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC))

Indiana Jones 4

yeah what is a GIPU, and how come i can't edit the title, the guy over at aicn said that pharoah's crown is the real title, i'm just trying to post that info, who made you the boss of the internet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.116.178.5 (talk • contribs) 15:47, July 3, 2007

Robots in disguise

Thanks for that goldmine, I'm forgot about Wizard's coverage. Alientraveller 19:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

What should be the name of a section focusing on the fanbase's reaction to the film? I found some links [3][4] of reactions from those involved in the franchise's history. Alientraveller 10:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Chum? Alientraveller 11:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Dude, one of those was Simon Furman's blog! Alientraveller 11:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Benson Yee's an uber-fan, who acted as script consultant for Beast Wars, and has also been working with Furman for the upcoming "profile" comic book of Beast Wars characters. There's also Chris McFeeley, who's recorded audio commentaries for DVDs of the Japanese cartoons and the Animated Movie. Alientraveller 11:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Praise is praise, and found some of the reviews so well-written I couldn't refuse. I'll add some extreme negatives to balance it out. Oh, and I've included it. I'm so on top of this article and yet I won't be seeing it soon: when are you off? Alientraveller 13:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think I've read anything on the product placement funnily enough: Bay loves to shoot his cars beautifully and nobody's noted that, considering they are the main guys. But I did include some bloke from CNN about Hollywood stooping to a new low with toy movies. Alientraveller 14:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Would this fall under a reliable source for audience reactions? It doesn't appear bloggish.[5] Alientraveller 18:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

No thanks, the article is very detailed. It's at this point I can just sit back and wait for the DVD to rewrite, restructure, and consolidate. Fact is, if I get this article to GA soon, then seeing the film will feel like my God-given right: and that would be a most satisfying feeling. Alientraveller 20:40, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Well it's nice to understand a filmmaker's style beforehand, and not be mislead (part of why I enjoyed Hulk was because it was released a month later, and I knew it was a psycho-drama and not the Hulk movie I had in my head since I was little, which is what I hope from next year) In all honesty, as much as I prefer not to be spoiled, I am going to rewatch it anyway. But some films, namely The Prestige, I'm definitely glad I went on hiatus from that article. Alientraveller 20:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Eh, there's no harm really, but remember it all may already be in the article. Alientraveller 08:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

American films

Please please!!! help fill in List of American films. Even if it is just a few details it all helps -any contribution you can make will be more than appreciated!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 17:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Question

What is your opinion of the List of most expensive films article? I keep giving continuous thoughts to AfDing the page, on the grounds that it will generally always be unverifiable. I watched another page, List of most valuable comic books, get deleted on the same grounds.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but trimming the list isn't going to make all those reliable sources pop up. Disney has yet to come forward about Pirates, hell most studios won't come forward unless specifically asked and even then. I would have thought the "List of most valuable comic books" would have been quite notable itself. Maybe I'll just prod it to see what kind of reaction I get. Anyway, to more lighter conversations. Yeah, I saw the "trailer". I didn't know what to make of it, but my buddy and I shared the same thought of "Godzilla". The noise the creature makes (which you never see) is eerily like that of Roland Emmerich's 1998 Godzilla. I don't mean that iconic Godzilla scream, because that would have been a dead giveaway, but some of the general growls and roars. Who knows. It looks cool, but I think handicams kind of make people queezy (i.e. Blair Witch Project).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. It seems we are going to have something new on our hands with these viral marketing ads for films.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:50, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Eh, I don't know. If he had said "WikiPitBoss"...that would be better. lol. Maybe he means you are trained to be tough? I don't know, I saw it, and the praise..but wasn't sure how someone could turn insult into praise. I'd just ignore it, and assume good faith that he truly meant it in a complimentary manner.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

LOL, if it was coherent it would probably been even funnier. What's this about JPIV? (*goes to check recent history*)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, the can of shaving cream. My theory would be that the mud would have preserved the coolant inside (the ground does take quite a bit of time to heat up and cool down). One could say that the rival company had a tracking beacon on the can, but until recently there was too much attention on the island for them to go in and retrieve it. Eh...lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Wiki has been doing that a lot recently. The other day it was lagging up to an hour's worth of edits. If you click contributions (which is what I did to make sure it was you that sent me a message) that list gets updated, the same as with the history of an article...but personal watchlists have begun to have "downtime" because of the lag.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I saw a proposal, but I didn't see what he suggested. I'll go check it out.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, Jim speaks to my heart in regards to the shortness of plot summaries. Though, the rest is actually kind of hard to do, and we'll probably need some examples to better understand (e.g. including OOU in the plot), though you can view something that was recommended for another pilot I'm working on, which incorporates OOU information. Christmas Carol...yeah, a bit too early. I read about it yesterday. Look at Ripley's Believe It or Not, that film has had so many shifts it's must be a rubic's cube it so hard to finish. Carrey's got a lot of "open" projects right now, and I don't know if anyone knows which is going to get off the ground first (or at all).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

You were right, people look past the reliability of the information and only see the topic.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Apparently IMDb is a reliable source for information also.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

I just have a problem citing a source who does not provide the source of their information. To me, its the same principle as "I heard from an insider that Anthony Michael Hall will be Edward Nigma". BOM and IMDb don't even claim to do that, they don't even state what information comes from where.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:18, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

True, but, if you look at the budget before Singer went over, it was 184.5 million, that's almost 90 million off, according to BOM's number. It makes me wonder how far off they are for other films, since they don't say where they get their information.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. It sounds better, because one could cover the aspect of how Hollywood "protects its assests" (as you stated). It's a very wishy washy subject, in my opinion, and maybe better to develop an article that discusses the unreliablness of the information as well as what is currently estimated.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I think BOM does just make estimations, like you said. They're off on the Jason X budget and the Freddy vs. Jason budget by 3 and 5 million respectively. Not as much as Superman Returns, but obviously they are working off some kind of estimation system. Oh well, the page will most likely stay...I'll just have to take it off my watchlist, because I can't really stand to see IMDb and BOM used so frivolously like that.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

Watchmen

On a side note, Comics2Film reports those behind TheOneRing.net and KongisKing.net is behind the Rorschach journels. Alientraveller 13:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, why?

Ok, so I noticed it was you that messed with the Warcraft film links, andn possibly redirected the film link itself to the Warcraft Universe page, which I think is very unnecessary. If Transformers, Harry Potter, Speed Racer all have their own page even though being made based on a title, then the Warcraft film should also. I'm requesting the redirect to be removed. Just letting you know if it was you who did this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NastalgicCam (talk • contribs).

See my response here for an attempt at explaining. It's probably best we keep all talk in one spot, so we should probably use the aforementioned section. --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 11:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The Jetsons (film)

Hello, Erik i'm user:Yoda317 if you don't know already. I looked on the internet and believe a Jetsons film is being made. i would like to ask you to put one of those banners that says this article is an upcoming film and it's release date can be changed or something like that. I'm pretty new to editing Wikipedia, but I love using Wikipedia. I edit film facts i know are wrong, and i would like to be part of the Film Project.

P.S. Please respond as soon as possible Thanx!! Yoda317 23:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

why can't have the free speech to say there are rumors of who is going to play in the movie! I understand movies can linger in developement hell, Indiana Jones was in developement hell for 18 years, that is a whole different story though cuz it is a little harder to come up with idea after you have started a series and need new ideas. For the Jetsons u can be creative and a create a movie script within ten days so i dont' know why the studios can start filming a movie rather quickly and u didn't answer my questions from the last message u sent me. Yoda317 23:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

How do i turn into a film adaption page or whatever u were talking about. Yoda317 23:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey i was wondring if me and u could be wikipedia friends especially after the jetsons fiasco. maybe we culd help each other out or something. well i hope we can spawn an internet frienship. Yoda317 23:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah thanks for the info. I think i would know better than to place a rumor i thought was false. I saw on the Diane Lane article that she is in the running for the role of Jane Jetson. If The Jetsons movie isn't made for 18 years then there is no point in making it so the producers or studio should hurry before the world we know turns into the world of the jetsons. The movie wouldn't stand out if it were made in the future where the movie takes place. and answer that friends question i asked u. i think me and uu could be good friends on wikipedia cuz i beleive u and i like movies Yoda317 00:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't have any films I edit. i have created a few film articles for Munster, Go Home and The Munsters' Revenge that i currently watch. I have edited certain child star articles. And stuff like that. So, what is the your favorite article that you have edited? I don't have one. I just love editing. What upcoming movie do u want to see the most? I want to see The Munsters (film) and possibly The Jetsons (film). Yoda317 00:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I can't wait to see Transformers, Harry Potter 5, Indiana Jones 4, Bourne Ultimatum, and Live Free or Die Hard. I love action movies. Well, what is your favorite movie of all-time? Mine is Citizen Kane. Yoda317 01:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, who can forget those amazingly vivid (for the time) action scenes in Citizen Kane? My favorite part was whereKane is racing down the slopes of the Rockies on the sled Rosebud, all the while being chased by tommy-gun wielding socialists. The climactic battle over the unfinished puzzle was in fact one of the best fist-fights since They Live, a close contemporary.

grn. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

You don't have to be a fan of a particular genre to appreciate Citizen Kane... Alientraveller 14:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess it was the disconnected nature of the sentences -- talking about action films, then mentioning Citizen Kane. Fairly unrelated in terms of cinematic glory. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:43, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that was why. I think Citizen Kane is nicely-done. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Help

{{helpme}}.

How can I help?

What is the template to report that Wikipedia has been cited in the news? I can't seem to find it. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Give me a second or two.

If it is for a specific article: {{onlinesource}}. Is that what you want? GDonato (talk) 15:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I was looking for. Thank you. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

What is the verdict on the use of movie taglines in film articles? I think its as dopey as trivia, but I cannot seem to find the MOS ref regarding such. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.

Hulk

Alright, I guess I can live with that. Too much cite needed zeal in other articles, I guess. and Lately, the need for close citation on the future comics films has ramped up, so... alright then. ThuranX 15:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: American Gangster

No problem, and nice work on the article. Just so you know, Strickland said in the interview I added that the character she played in the film is "Russell Crowe's lawyer and a bit of a female interest to say the least", but I wasn't sure if she meant she was Russell Crowe's character's love interest, was a love interest for someone else in the film, or was just a female character who would get women interested in paying to see the film. So I left it out, but if you know what she means, you could add it. Extraordinary Machine 18:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Linkspam 2

I was just following you, after you reverted the RS link on Moan. I figure that Rotten Tomatoes is sufficient enough as it encompasses a larger review source, and I wouldn't want to see the external links bombarded with several reviews from various other sources. I'm sure that RS is used as a source for other sites, but I don't think that the reviews are necessary. --Nehrams2020 18:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

We'll see. Let me know of the result. --Nehrams2020 18:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, now I know. Keep up the good work. --Nehrams2020 18:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation in Pathfinder (2007 film)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Pathfinder (2007 film), by RyanLupin (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Pathfinder (2007 film) is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Pathfinder (2007 film), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 05:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyright on Pathfinder

Um nothing wrong with it? Copyright violations will apply to all articles regardless of whether it's a mainstream article. The article in question was copied and pasted from another website. Ryan|^(talk) 11:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

But back to the original point, I had every right to request its deletion and I'd appreciate it if you didn't come to my talk page and make out that I'm the bad guy here. The consequences of copyright violations are far greater than the loss of an article. Member's shouldn't start articles by copying and pasting text from another website. It could cost Wikipedia dearly. Ryan|^(talk) 11:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The Dark Knight

You have no right to use intimidation tactics to keep me from contributing to the article. I have disagreements too and they are just as valid as the other editors. If you have a problem with my edits you should explain them on the talk page before you revert my edits. What you are doing is trying to enforce your version of the article. You don't own this article and have no right to to try and force me out of the debate. annoynmous 11:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Once again how do you know who is important and who is not when so little is known about the story of the film at this point. Contrary to yout claim I have listened to your points and I found your reasoning flawed. Had you guys bothered to look at the talk Page instead of just automatically reverting me you would no that.

Well it doesn't matter now because alientraveller has included Fichtner's name as a compromise. However, the issue of Banner is still and issue. Why should someone who might have got the role be in the main cast list at the top of the article when we already know who actually got the part. If you want to include Banners name in another part of the article fine, but it shouldn't be at the top of the article. annoynmous 11:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Power of Templates

I have just finished reformatting the refs for The Power of Nightmares with the appropriate templates, as you suggested in Peer Review. Just in case you wanted to be informed. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 05:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

X-Men film series

Would you be as so kind as to provide some citations for me? I'm thinking I could start X-Men film series, and develop that into quality articles for each film. Alientraveller 10:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Variety will do for now. Alientraveller 10:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Killing two birds with one stone. Hope you enjoy your holiday. Alientraveller 14:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Quick question: in America, does the second film's opening read X-Men United? Alientraveller 14:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Darn that Ethan Haas

Hey Erik. Clearly this whole wikifying process would go smoother if various editors on all sides of the Haas problem would get together. Surely, you have to feel that mention of EHWR has to go somewhere. If we put it in the right place, with a cited source, it should keep alot of people from adding it, and making more work for us. I mean, I agree that it's not notable enough to have it's own article. Maybe if we make some dismissive mention on the Ethan Haas disambiguation page, it'll keep (as many) people from messing with the Cloverfield page, the EHWR page up for deletion, and The Class page alone?

If not, what's your overall strategy? Yookaloco 21:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Just figured out that I'm supposed to reply on the talk pages of others. I'm blushing. Anyways, I'm not really sure what I think about the deletion movement, I've flip-flopped a few times. Right now, I'm at the point where I would like anything small to keep people fron continously adding EHWR content.Yookaloco 21:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

IDK

Sorry, i meant that Citizen Kane is the best American film ever made, my favorite movie is The Mummy Returns, Spider-Man, and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. By the way I am only 14 years old and i have watched Citizen Kane along with Schindler's List, two American films with wonderful cinematography and talented actors. How old are by they way? Yoda317 00:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 13 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Hancock (film), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 20:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Batman films

Well I give you thanks for the ideas. And thanks be to Bignole for suggesting to clean-up The Dark Knight. Alientraveller 20:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'll ask him/her to provide a cite. I'm not too bothered about a dude who's there to get killed by the Joker. Alientraveller 20:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

10,000 B.C. (film)

No, because the film's actual title is 10,000 B.C., they have just spelled it differently on there. Trust me, my uncle is best friends with a guy who worked on it, and he's always spelled it with the periods. -- SilvaStorm

Links to Movie Reviews

Erik...I recently received a Spam warning for posting an external link to a movie review on Hollywood Snitch. Also, my links are continually removed. I have been reviewing movies for over a year now and write for several publications. I am applying for the Chicago Film Critics Association this month and am registered with all the major studios and attend most previews. Hollywood Snitch is a professional web site and I do not SPAM all over Wikipedia. Hollywood Snitch has been around for more than a year and I have reviewed over 70 films. I notice that Rotten Tomatoes has a link and they are commercial. I feel that the reviews adding to the external links adds to the article by giving another view point. I read the External links rules section and they state that movie reviews should be considered. Please let me know your thoughts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rilbiz (talk • contribs) 14:26, July 17, 2007

Halo Film

Since you did some of the editing on the halo film I figured you may want to add this cause nobody has yet and i dont feel like doing it. [6] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.3.248 (talk • contribs) 16:11, July 17, 2007

AHM

Something I came up with talking to a friend. He's got the physical for it, lean, tall, blonde, and he's got the acting chops to handle it; it'd be like his Dead Zone character's perceptiveness without the psychic, and playing the suspicious of the crazy is osmething he's probably eager to try after playing 'the crazy' for a while. Glad you like the idea. I've imagined him testifying in the Dent case, consulting with the GCPD Chief about Batman, interviewing Gordon, coming face to face with Batman in Arkham, possibly as a subplot about recapturing the inmates let loose in Ra's release. he'd be great for commenting on the diametric oppposition of Joker and Bats, or on Harvey dent's shattered psyche. ThuranX 23:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Choke (film), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 15:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Yea but..

It really annoys me. Sorry i apologize. Wow you sure have made alot of contributions! good work! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian-turner77 (talk • contribs) 13:26, July 18, 2007

Hey thanks for understanding dude. hopefully that son of tony will be deleted as soon as possible! and hopefully so will the person who did it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian-turner77 (talk • contribs) 13:31, July 18, 2007

yea he seems to have a thing of making up fake articles. he did that son of tony thing 2 times before. and he created a xmen 4 article. hes just pointless.ian turner 17:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:IMDb

LOL, I was just sitting there trying to figure it out too. Yeah. Wow, I haven't seen you in awhile, though I saw that you've been working hard on other articles.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

So you did. I wasn't watching LFoDH, I just happened to see Alien's edits to it and then I looked at the plot. It looks much better now. I'm actually trying to find a userbox that says something like "this user hates overly long plots...blah blah blah". Yeah, I finally got the first season of Smallville out the door and on the mainspace; Jason is done, and just waiting to hear back from an admin. I learned when I deleted my Smallville sandbox that I lost 400+ edits, so now I'm going to see if I can get an admin to simply merge the page histories and the content. I haven't found any new movie pages to work on. I'm trying to finish up all the sandbox projects I have first.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I see the bot visited you as well..lol. I think Alien jinxed me, lol. Oh well, hopefully I'll have the info merged in the next couple days by an admin. If not, then I'll copy and paste it all before that 7 days runs out.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think we have enough evidence to show the lack of reliability with certain information. The current proposal for what to use isn't really that bad. I just think it needs clarification as to what is what, and when it can be used.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Transformers

Really? See, I never expected much in the way of storyline, at least not like Spider-Man 3. I knew it was going to be all about the bots, so I expected just lots of action. What made it enjoyable to me was Shia LeBeouff. He's just hilarious. I mean, there were so many moments when Bay could have been totally cliched. The moment at the end, when Mikaela comes up to Sam, when he has to get to the building. I totally expected one of those cliched "big kiss, I'm never going to see you again" moments, but it wasn't like that. It came across more like a "I have no problem sacraficing my life with yours" instead. Bumblebee? That is like the greatest character in the world. He beats out Optimus Prime any time. The interaction between him and Sam. I was amazed that a CGI robot could bring more emotion to the screen then some actors I've seen recently. To me, the movie wasn't designed for that "emotional element", like you got from Spider-Man 2. It was truly a popcorn movie, no strings attached. Sure, they could have gone the other way, but you have to look at your source material. It's a bunch of battling robots. Every time they see each other they do battle. They're more sophisticated than human technology, they are virtually indesctructable, and they know once they get the Allspark the entire planet will be filled with even more transforming robots. Why be discrete. If you come across your mortal enemy, it's throw-down time. I don't know. I would never expect to see The Dark Knight have nothing but tons of violence for no reason at all. That's because Batman's inner turmoil is what is entertaining. For Transformers, the most entertaining thing about them was going to be huge mechanical beasts bashing into buildings. As for the characters. I like to compare them to all the other counterparts in alien invasion films. They're different. Obviously not realistic, but they were (in my opinion) meant to be humorous, which is the point of the movie. It isn't supposed to touch you deeply, but get your adrenaline pumping. I really think it's how you look at the film's intentions. Is it trying to make cinematic master piece, or just make you forget you just spent 2 hours and 20 minutes in one seat, paid 10 bucks for a movie ticket and another 10 bucks on popcorn and soda? Spider-Man 2 is a great film, one of my all time favorites as far as being able to combine multiple elements of film, but I couldn't help but check my watch in that film. I never once thought about time in Transformers, because it's a different kind of movie.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Though, the one thing you could have definitely cut, the storyline of the soldier getting back to his wife and baby. It was barely touched on, and I didn't care about it the entire time.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I think that's why they did the prequel comic books before hand, because at 2 hours and 20 minutes, this movie would have been awfully long if they were have elaborated more on the backstory. And I don't think a movie based solely in Cybertron would have been as entertaining,....eh, well it wouldn't have been as funny that's for sure, and if it gets too serious then it gets boring.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I think some movies end up trying to use flash to cover bad stories, or bad actors, while others use it to just make everything that much better. If you watch some episodes of Smallville, the special effects are usually really good, but if Clark wasn't an alien and had no superpowers, and wasn't this grand hero...if you stripped the show of all that, it's still a very powerful drama. But other films end up drowning themselves in special effects and flash, when the films are equivalent to a shallow person. I think if you stripped Transformers down, it's pretty shallow, but for some reason the flash works in its benefit. Occasionally you just need that sugar rush.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't read it all. I got to "I'm a fan" and said "goodbye". Maybe I'll go back and read what he said.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The peer review is stagnant. Could you review it for me? Alientraveller 18:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

S7 built the Hoover Dam over the All Spark, and moved Megatron there. I can't remember the exact dialogue, but I got the gist of it. Alientraveller 18:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Bulldoze the whole article if you need to. Just don't mess with the placement of citations, otherwise I become unfamiliar with the text. Alientraveller 19:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Jason

That's fine. I thought it kind of already satisfied GA anyway, since GA doesn't say that it has to be "brilliant prose" or anything. Thanks for the nomination.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. That's such an iffy thing. I've found that character articles tend to be like Television episode articles. There are a lot of people who will fight tooth and nail to have a separate article for every character in a film or television show...or book for that matter. Personally, I think only the main characters usually end up warranting their own articles. I don't think Tommy Jarvis warrants an article on his own. Though, he appeared in 3 Friday the 13th films, there just isn't that much going on for him. He's hardly noted in popular culture. He isn't some iconic horror hero. I think one should apply the same notability criteria to characters as to others. I mean, Freddy Krueger is obviously going to need his own article, even if the page was a stub or simply a fictional biography. Even if no one asserted the notability of the character, no one could deny that it's there either. I saw your list of characters from Underworld. For the most part, I think all should start at that "List of characters" level. Selene, I can see her having her own article because really the movies revolve around her.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

She's fairly new, so there might not be enough. Worst comes to worst, I'd simply propose she get merged into a "List of" if someone comes by an removes the prod. I saw the article, it wasn't much more than a fictional character background.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Valkyrie

I've always wanted to say this: IMDb sucks. Well, I don't mind the Daily Poll, Top 250 and news articles, but from an encyclopedic perspective... Alientraveller 13:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

What's it say?! What's it say!? (anticipation). I can't read it, I'm at work.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Scrolling list

I had no idea there were such usability discussions. If they're a problem, I don't mind their reversion at all. ♥♥ ΜÏΠЄSΓRΘΠ€ ♥♥ ^{slurp me!} 14:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Underworld

A fan by any chance? Alientraveller 14:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah right, I've never seen them, as horror, or more specifically the modern gory kind, isn't my thing. I have seen the films of Stephen Sommers, which are a bit more cheeky, and Van Helsing has Kate Beckinsale in it, which left me confused initially. I didn't care for it: I liked the idea of combining all three monsters, but the plot was there to make poor action scenes. I may revisit it as an article, as it has a bit of an Ishtar reputation. Alientraveller 15:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it wasn't so much the tone, because it's ok to make a romp, but it was just dissapointing. Van Helsing was really a Wolverine clone. I'm just waiting for Len Wiseman to sign on to make Wolverine because I want more of the X-Men film universe. Ditto with David Goyer and Magneto. I really do wonder if we're going overboard with franchise articles for the sake of unmade sequels, but according to WP:SS, in the early days Wikipedia should have developed franchise articles and then articles for each film. Alientraveller 15:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, if for example, Zack Snyder got run over, Watchmen wouldn't be so much a film article, but rather a superb article about the proposal to adapt Watchmen on film, and perhaps explore fans' view on adapting such a popular novel. Ditto with Indiana Jones 4. But some articles, like The Simpsons Movie, if that never got made, it'd be ok to just be in The Simpsons as developing an animated film is a bunch of discussions. Alientraveller 15:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is getting quite confusing, but speaking of Hugh Jackman, I think the Wolverine director is a really cool sounding choice. Alientraveller 11:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I think you explained it very well. Alientraveller 11:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Alientraveller 15:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

V for Vendetta

Hey, I noticed you trimmed the plot section way back. Though I think you were correct in shortening the section I think you were maybe a bit too hasty in removing so much of it. Perhaps you could replace some of the more relevant info. Luke C 19:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Choke (film)

Thanks for keeping me informed. It's too bad they couldn't get Fincher to come back; sorta strange he didn't take the project, don't you think? I mean, this could be a great film in the hands of the right person. I don't know enough about Gregg to comment on his directorial skills, but with Rockwell and Huston on board, this could be incredible. —Viriditas | Talk 20:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh, now you've got me excited about this film. Stop that. :-) —Viriditas | Talk 02:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick update - the information, as well as the production schedule I posted on this site are correct - filming was done on my property, have the first two weeks of production notes (as well as individual scripts). If you are having reading the prodution notes chick on it, click on full version then click on expand to full size. Richard Deagon 19:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Valkyrie

Brevity may be important, but the article does't make clear why Germans are having problems with the idea of Cruise playing one of their national heroes: Cruise is a member of an organization considered by many Germans to be fascist in structure (which is why the Verfassungsschutz is keeping an eye on Scientology), but is now playing an officer fighting a fascist regime. I think it's worth making this clear! Thanks. - 84.152.218.89 20:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:X2

Yeah, most of those cites are Comics2Film, when it was still a column in Comic Book Resources. Alientraveller 08:28, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Man of Steel

Hey erik! how are you bud. i have some information on the superman returns sequel. how about me make a page about it. dont worry its not fake news! Lol.""""

Hmm good point Buddy. There was information on this site called Superfandom or something like that and i got some information there and also from imbd. Ah well at least we can look forward to Iron Man and The dark Knight. You looking foward to those films aswell?ian turner 20:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I Hope this is how you do it :L Yea i dont think iron man will be as good because..come on this is a guy who directed Elf! a comedy christmas film Lol. the dark knight will beat iron man hands on ian turner 21:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Rightly said there Bud! I Assume that incredible hulk isnt just a sequel but a remake aswell seing has it has a comepletly different cast. i think that the incredible hulk will be very impressive. Did you ever see the Fantastic four sequel? ian turner 21:26, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Yea that film wasnt the best marvel film ive seen. Il have a look at it :D im a really big film adict. ian turner 21:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I should chip in that Rise of the Silver Surfer is a good film, but the first film is something I don't think you'd enjoy: there's not much plot. I'm really looking forward to all these '08 films, including the comic book adaptations Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, The Dark Knight and Watchmen, and I hope they are all good. Hulk is important to me too because I really want to see a film that will live up to my love of the character. Everything discusses so far thematically has ticked all my boxes. Alientraveller 21:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Citations

I think you guys should look at this if you already haven't. Wikipedia talk:Lead section#Citations in the lead - drafts.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Filmrationale

Template:Filmrationale has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Abu badali ^(talk) 19:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I know I agree with you completely - for film posters yes but screenshots may need greater more specific rationales which a tag cannot provide. ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 20:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

That seems like an excellent idea - but when I tried it before it would alter the main template. If it can be done in a way that you add specific details and it not affect the template this wouod be perfect ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 20:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes thats very good -like the Info box Film you copy the content template and add the neccessary details -yes this should go on the main film project page ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 20:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes like Info box Film. I'd suggest putting it in the main film project page ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 20:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

New template

That looks excellent, but I also have no idea on how to create it though. If we did switch to this would we have to delete the old one and start replacing the image format with this one? If you or somebody can create it soon, I'll make sure I make mention of it in the monthly newsletter so that all members will be aware of its existence and hopefully begin using it. I won't be able to message you back if you respond for a couple hours as I'm heading out the door to go see a movie. Great idea for the template though! --Nehrams2020 20:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Isn't there already a basica fair use rationale tempalte?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I think I'd have to see a test run so that I could see how it works. Right now I just see what you fill in.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Notability (films)

Just added the revised guidelines on future films and it looks like Mr. Murray wants to revert, even though I heard no other objections from the other users. Would you mind having a look at my edits to the guideline and weigh in? Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola 01:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Cloverfield

I received a message from you to not make the talk page a discussion, I know that. Look I am here so I want people to stay informed on the Cloverfeild movie. But I was told that "I myself can not change the actual article" If I do it is going to be changed back. So what I find that is news I post in Talk Section then you guys determine it is fact or fiction. Its your guys fault for turing it into a discussion, I am just merely posting info which I think should go into the article. If You want me to F**k up the article tell me to and I will do it man(knowing idk wiki coding myself). Like I said I post info I find off the web and post what should go up on the Cloverfeild article so people would be informed about it.

Like the Los Angeles thing No one has posted anything about it in the actual Cloverfeild article. I have proven fact that the movie was also filmed there before the trailer even came out. But look, Los Angeles is not even mention in the Article which stills pisses me off. Also about the poster, Comic Con is coming in 3 days and the name of the movie is going to be announced then, I bet after the name is reviled you have to add to the article that the movie's name/poster was accidentally slipped onto the web before the event itself officially announcing the name(though you keep deleting the pics/links I posted just in case for reference). I seen articles on wiki that mentions these things that like Hostile 2....."Movie was leaked before it was released"

So Erik dude, I am not starting discussions in the talk sections but posting Facts (with links) that is not in the article itself that I want someone to maybe mention at least once. If it becomes a discussion, its the poster after me who posted fault NOT ME and If you want me to F**K up the article for my non-knowledge of making a wiki article, tell me and I will sure do so.

Thank You For Listening

--74.244.160.39 01:57 EST, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Mithos

Ok.....WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS. I AM ABOUT TO POST BELOW IS A SPECULATION....ITS FUCKIN COMIC CON 2007. COMIC CON HAS A FUCKIN TRADEMARK AND COPYRIGHT

All material, unless otherwise noted, is ©Comic-Con International and may not be used without permission. All other artwork is ™ & © respective owners and noted where known.

HOW THE FUCK IS THAT A SPECULATION SITE TELL ME THAT. Look I posted This.

"1:30-3:30 Paramount Pictures— Paramount Pictures, DreamWorks Pictures, and Nickelodeon Movies present a bold new vision for the future of adventure. Be here for a one-of-a-kind presentation put together just for the fans at Comic-Con as you get a look at such highly anticipated films as Beowulf, The Spiderwick Chronicles, Stardust, Hot Rod, Iron Man, and the next installments of Indiana Jones and Star Trek, plus a few surprises. Appearing in person: JJ Abrams, Neil Gaiman, Roger Avary, and SNL's Andy Samberg. Hall H"

Comic Con Schedules

It is on the actual FACT Fuckin NOT SPECULATIVE SITE. Tell ME how is that Speculative? Huh Erik? If This Source does Go to someone else for credit for finding it than ME You Know I will be pissed and I can consider as abuse of power deleting posts over and over in talk ESPECIALLY MINE ONLY SINCE I BEEN ON THIS ARTICLE(MOVIE) SINCE DAY 1.

--74.244.160.39 02:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Mithos

>,< I Will not Look at the guidelines if I get my rights back. Especially Me being falsely accused of starting discussions When I post Creditable Posts.

--74.244.160.39 03:05, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Mithos

Even If the Posts Does Not Mention The Movie....its in one day IF I does mention the Movie Keep my post about it on talk and mention it in the Actual Article.....IF Not Delete the Post to prevent further confusion then just delete every single thing I do post. >,> --74.244.160.39 03:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Mithos

Ok I don't Post stuff in the Talk section cause I want to discuss. I already took my Discussions to the Ethan Haas.org Forums I am on this Talk article to Inform people on the movie seeing everyone comes to this article every dam day. And I can not help inform people about the movie If people Keep deleting posts I make. --74.244.160.39 03:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Mithos

"That's the issue, though... in informing people about the film through the talk page"

Remember what I posted before, If you want me to post my info that has been proven Fact on the Actual Article I will BUT I Do Not Know The Coding Wiki Uses......ALSO It will get deleted anyways unless mentioned on Talk about 90% of the time. And because I am not an actual member of Wiki and not planing to be in the near future I Will not touch the Actual Article. Now The only Way I can post Info "If It is Fact" Like The IGN: It's Alive 1-18-08 Article (which was given credit to another person >,< Though I posted it on Talk myself First) Is to post it in the Talk Section(Which Most Info is debated before Going on the Article Itself Like Slusho(Which I First Myself Brought Up but was given no credit from posting the IGN articles. --74.244.160.39 03:55, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Mithos

Ok Ill Make the account but I am only for this film XD --74.244.160.39 17:18, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Mithos

Re:Film

Thanks for letting me know! What about music?--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Wait...I don't see a media category.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to inform you Erik, but you're categorizing them incorrectly. For example, you changed Talk:The Fountain (film) to Media. But if you look in the category section at the bottom of the talk page, you'll find that the article is still uncatagorized, because that is not a valid category. For the correct category names, please see: WP:UCGA. In the meantime, I'm going to revert the edits.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Eric - there is no media at all. You can only choose from the fields listed in that chart. Upon further examination, I did see that films belong under "Socsci", so I'll change the feilds to that name. The template works perfectly. But the only valid field names are the ones in that chart. You might be confused because the GA article tag at the top of the page said "good Media article", but the template just adds whatever you type in the box - but unless you use one of the proper category tags, it will remained uncatagorized.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I have no opinion on the current templates, but I definitely think they need tweaking; especially since some of the topic names sound stupid in the GA promotion box (a good Socsci article?) I would (as you already have) take it up at the project page. But in the meantime, the whole point of the project is the subcategorize the good articles, so, until some of those other issues get tweaked, it only makes sense to use topic names that actually exist.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:47, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Question

Could look at the big discussion over at Freddy's Nightmares. Someone is claiming that the series (in it's entirety, which has never been done before) is released on DVD. It looks more like it's a bootleg. Amazon doesn't list the series, only these secondary "TV shows on DVD" kind of places. I can't find a releasing house for the DVD either. I'm not sure how or if the information should be included if it's nothing more than bootleg DVDs.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't sure how to address it, because it's obvious they are selling something, it just doesn't look official.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Dracula Year Zero

Hey, may I know why you deleted my Dracula page? Many unreleased movies have their page, I don't think you should have deleted it, and without asking anyone, or telling me why. Klow 17:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

re:Watchmen

Oi, I thought that may be the case as soon as I hit the "Save page" button. Either way it deserved a revert, but next time I'll pay better attention so my edit summary will reflect what's going on. Thanks for letting me know, María (críticame) 19:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Question

So if I cite the official magazine or internet article about this...it doens't become Original research does it?

Cause I didn't put any "theory" or anything on there...I was merely talking about the connections between slusho and cloverfield and how someone working with the project confirmed it...

After saying that I also put some basic facts about Slusho, like it is a drink in JJ Abrams Alias...and is a japanese drink --Huper Phuff ^talk 00:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Kirk Montgomery, a reporter at an NBC news affiliate in Colorado, has reported an inside source's claim that the Slusho website "has lots of clues", though this has not been officially confirmed as a marketing campaign website.[4]

That line is already in the article...isn't that speculation. Plus there is a part in the movie where Slusho is included, which makes it relevant...and I didn't come up with any of this on my own. I saw it somewhere else and figured it should be documented since it is a part of the story that is obviously tied to the project. I didn't say what it was or is...

I just said Slusho is seen in the trailer and JJ Abrams has previous ties with it...IE Alias

And another thing...much of the information could very well be false...just because a reporter reported it doesn't make it fact. All Paramount has said is they are making a movie, and JJ Abrams is producing it.

"Cloverfield" is speculation...that project name hasn't even been confirmed... --Huper Phuff ^talk 00:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

No no no, that's my point. None of it came from me. Some of it came from imdb.com.

And the rest from an article.

All I'm saying is if you're calling "slusho" unconfirmed evidence, then so should this whole article. Cause "Cloverfield" hasn't been confirmed either...the only real name you can call this thing and be 100% correct, is 1-18-08

If you want me to cite it all, just say that...don't go off on this whole thing about speculation, cause I've been trying to tell you I didn't make any of this up and it's all published in an article by a news website, trailerspy.com --Huper Phuff ^talk 00:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

You must know, like I do, that imdb.com publishes only information that it can verify too. They don't publish actors that are possibilities, they wait until the actor has been publicly announced. So you can't deny that imdb.com is a prominent reliable source. I can understand trailerspy.com, so I can remove the info I gained from that article if you would like. But there is an obvious connection between the project and the word "slusho" which is outlined by imdb.com at this page: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/trivia. So can I atleast post the stuff by imdb.com? --Huper Phuff ^talk 00:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Alright, fine. I just think you're being a bit anal when it's something that is clearly visible and justifiable by just looking at the trailer. There was no speculation is was just the connection that was previously outlined in the article and its appearance in the trailer. --Huper Phuff ^talk 00:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm coming off as another noob, or w/e. I added 2 sentence to the previous section that I feel isn't speculation, just stating the facts:

A person can be seen wearing a Slusho t-shirt in the movie trailer. It's visible when he leans toward the camera to ask if anything can be seen from the roof after watching the news broadcast (see right).

I couldn't find a way to link to the image with text, like "seen here" as a link to the image. If you can help me out with that then go ahead and remove the thumbnail I put there for a visual aid.

Beowulf/Indy 4 edit

Erik

I appreciate that you edited out the Indy IV link fairly (my bad) but the Beowulf site does represent the single most comprehensive collection of news, articles, images (largest Beowulf gallery on the net) and information on the movie out there at the moment. X-Realms (www.beowulfnews.com) is also a self-funded 100% non-profit making site (note lack of ads, affiliate shop is for charity) and only uses a blog-platform to deliver its content (I understand blog links are a no-no). In this respect it is no different from sites like TFN which is a heavily commercial site linked under Star Wars or theraider.net under Indiana Jones. FYI X-Realms (previously Episode-X.com) celebrates its 10th anniversary in December next year and has played a major part in online fandom over the years, especially Star Wars.

Regards Elgar102 14:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Mad Men

Thanks for the link! As far as an LOE (list of episodes) goes, someone made one with some info they probably got off of IMDB, but I intend to watch over it and get it to FL standards. (I've been with WP:LOE almost as long as I've been on Wikipedia.) As far as individual episode articles go, I think I might wait on that since the consensus lately has been to start with a full LOE, then spin off a Season list, and then possibly do individual episodes. But nonetheless Bignole could help me, yes. And thanks again for the links: I appreciate your help with it! More comments and suggestions are welcome, since it's a new favorite show of mine and I now intend to get it to GA once the season wraps up. Thanks! Cliff smith 19:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Cloverfield

http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/07/26/comic-con-live-paramount-panel-star-trek-indiana-jones-iv-and-more/ This article mentions that the title is no monstrous and he will not be revealing the title today at comic-con. VerasGunn 22:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I removed the comic-con section from the article an integrated the information into the rest of the article. If anything new comes up then it can be added then. VerasGunn 22:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Transformers

I wasn;t aware of that policy. I've removed the warning now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilcypher (talk • contribs) 18:58, July 26, 2007

I had a look at the Q&A for Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman on the official message boards, and they said the Allspark creates raw, primal lifeforms: essentially the bastardized use Megatron planned. So if you're wondering how B.B. got his voice back, it wasn't the cube, it was the laser Ratchet fires at him when they meet on Earth. Alientraveller 21:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:TDK

I didn't give it a second's thought. That was pretty ingenius of you to try. Don't know where that is though, or how it pertains to the film.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that they said it was SD. We'll find out eventually. Why can't studios just be up front about such things. Stupid cloak and dagger.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

So do you to believe me now anyway I was keeping on topic by asking opinions and wanting to discus "Batman beings" series related issues especially if Harley Quinn a considerably now important part of the batman series and if she was going to play a roll in this up coming movie that brings me to Poison Ivy who the "Animated Series" version of the characters were rumored to have a sexual relationship and sleep in each other beds(you probably know this) and that brought me to Miss thuman's acting in Batman and robin and brought me to W(here)TF is robin and if he'll appear near or at th end of this movie —Preceding unsigned comment added by GasSnake or Poison Oak (talk • contribs) 22:34, July 26, 2007

it will not be a "cloverfield" the only reason that happened to "cloverfield" is because it's publicly known as a viral web only event while batman is unknown at this moment but this seemed to be a very very private thing at first with the bills only circulating at Comic con 07--GasSnake or Poison Oak 02:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't get the request. Have you tried to plug anything into the submit box? I've tried my name, my email. Not sure what should go there.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

BOF revealing all this stuff?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess "your friends" are the friends lucky enough to be at the Comic Con. I assume there are hidden clues around there that give you these passwords.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah. All blocked here at work. It's pretty cool though.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

State computer firewalls are weird. I can access the viral site, but not BOF or that chatroom you are on. At one time I could get an arcade forum, with tons of games.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

There a secret to that last one, because it didn't work.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

Last one I got was "vallandigham"?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Nope. I had a feeling there would be when I read "when your friends are all painted up" (or something to that effect).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I saw what appeared to be a bootleg version on SSH the other day. It won't load on my work computer, I'll have to try when I get home.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks like we have another one on our hands.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this Tabascoman is starting to really annoy me. First he claims he's been here so long that he deserve some leeway and that we should let him add information and source it later. He makes claims of understanding things, which he obviously doesn't. They're just getting on my nerves with this ridiculousness. They want to include anything and everything just because it happened, no matter if they can source it or not. They think if you witness it happen then that's good enough.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:11, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Be my guest; I'll stay out of it. It seems people assume if you fill out the image page then that means it's ok. Also, the image has no source, so that doesn't help its case either.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed. Though, as I promoised, I'm staying out of the discussion. Who knows, maybe we both just have a completely wrong understanding of policy and guidelines. It's possible, right?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear lord. ErikBigNolepedia? LOL.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:53, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Seemed like a good name for it at the time. :) Actually, guys, no hard feelings. I don't agree with your image ideas or your editing ideas. I'm not gonna be phony and lie to you because that isn't who I am. But, I'm also not going to engage in flame-wars on the Internet. TabascoMan77 18:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I saw that, Erik. Interesting view points on all sides. I think Anonymous probably hit it a lot closer to home, that it's more enforcing the rules (whether we like them or not), then it is not wanting the information in there.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Friendliness just shone through. But I think it's fine at the Rachel Dawes article, given the character will suffer Women in Refrigerators syndrome. Alientraveller 20:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I redirected the same title, just with "(film)" attached, because there is a Batman comic line that runs that title. Technically there are no other articles on SotB, but you never know what someone might try.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, probably so. I didn't think it had a page, so I didn't give it a second though. I would not have thought to put "Batman: Shadow of the Bat" as the search.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Stardust

Sure! I'd be glad to use them. I loved the print version and I took a look at the film page and saw it needed revising now that it's coming out. I was cleaning up the external links and trivia sections and added a differences from the print version - I'd be glad to work on it some more. Pejorative.majeure 04:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm Sorry

I just wanted to apologize for the nasty tone of my last post on the William Fichtner affair.. Although I stil believe in the argument I made, theres no exscuse for the insulting tone of some of my posts. Sometimes I get so caught up in an argument that I lose reason. I did not mean to insult you personally. I'm sure you were doing what you thought was right. annoynmous 08:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to sign in on that last post. So I'm writing this just prove that it is me. annoynmous 08:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Valued opinion

First, I'd like say that I saw you redirected all the Underworld character articles to the series page. Does that series not have a "List of characters" page? Anyway, to the point. Something on the Smallville article has bothered me for a bit and I was wondering if you could take a look and give me your opinion (same goes for Alien if he's reading). Do you think Smallville (TV series)#Casting should be merged with Smallville (TV series)#Cast and characters? To me, they really seem like the same topic and might help cut some redundancies. If you think they should be merged, what direction do you propose (i.e. Casting --> Cast and Characters, or vice versa)?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The suggestion about the primary cast seems like a really good option. The recurring guests seem to be what will be the most trouble. Are you saying make a section called "Recurring guests" with subsections of "season 1, 2, 3". What do you think about making "Recurring guests" a subsection of "Cast", and then just keeping each season in its own paragraph. The paragraphs could be separated by the "see also" or "main article" type of links for each of the "List of characters..." pages that correspond to each season.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll fiddle around with it, and merge those other sections and see how it looks. I'll let you know when I'm finished.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on it here, do you think I could keep general casting information in the "casting" section, and put the specific actors' information next to their names in the list, or keep all casting info together?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I think I've decided that I'm going to drop the recurring guests altogether. They are mentioned on the season pages, and on all the LOC pages for each season. The list would be ginormous if I included them all, even in prose on the main page. I think the regulars will be fine, since some people go from "recurring" to "regular" on their follow up season.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Virgin Comics

Yeh, I just used it as a template, but saved accidentally, the new article contains info. Vastu 14:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Image Deletion

I've noticed that a lot of images are getting slated for removal, asking for rationale for their inclusion. The once for the DCCountodwn image is slated for removal, and I am noit sure why. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Vacation

Enjoy your vacation, Erik. —Viriditas | Talk 21:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Watchmen Official Cast

I know you're on vacation and all so I won't expect a speedy reply, but I was just curious as to what your feelings were about the official cast for watchmen. Elated? Satisfied? Disappointed? I guess it was sort of anticlimactic since the rumours had been spreading around for some time about most of the cast, but I was still overall pretty happy. I think Haley and Crudup are brilliant for the roles, and although I'm not too familiar with their work I think Wilsona nd Morgan will live up to expectations. I'm more or less passive about Akerman, and the only one I'm really baffled by is Goode as Ozymondias. They guy is a phenominal actor (if you don't know who he is check out The Lookout) but is about 20 years too young to play Veidt. Which striked me as odd since he's the one character that really isn't in any major flashback scenes. I just don't get how they're going to convincingly portray him as being from the same generation as Haley when he's so much younger. Anyway, sorry if you don't usually take personal comment like this on your talk page but I can hardly contain my enthusiasm after reading the announcement and am trying to get a feel for what other readers think. Enjoy the vacation.

Aurum ore 23:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Underworld Film Characters

Why did you have all the underworld film Characters deleted? They were fictional characters with no basis in real world events. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evolutionselene (talk • contribs) 15:08, July 28, 2007

Would you delete James T Kirk for not having any basis in reality? Or prehaps Luke Skywalker? Or the Witched Witch of the West? They have no basis in reality. Thats why its called fiction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evolutionselene (talk • contribs) 12:21, July 30, 2007

Just thinking here, but you might want to add Lycan, Vampire (Underworld) and Death Dealer (Underworld) to the AFD proposal. I personally think that they should be merged, rewritten and sourced rather than deleted, but I don't think they should stay as they are. Slavlin 16:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Bloodrayne

Hey Erik. I Added a poster to Bloodrayne 2 but i think it will go cause once i put a picture on something and it went after a week. im not a fan of the films but it looked so empty lol ian turner 09:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Joker Image

I agree with you that the new Joker image does not belong on The Dark Knight article. It however does belong on the article dealing with Jokers appearances in other media. To say it is not critical commentary is fundemantally false. That article is supposed be about how the Joker has been depicted in various media and an image of what he looks like is relevant to that. It is an official studio image released to the public so it is fair use.

I will support you keeping the image out of The Dark Knight article if you support me in keeping the image on the page dealing with the Joker. annoynmous 12:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like a good compromise. I happen to agree with CmdrClow's fair use argument. However, I also agree with you that at this time the image is not relevant specifically to the dark knight article. Indeed it feels clumsy and out of place in the article.

I'm also fine with the image being deleted from the Rachel Dawes page. Although it's one of the few official images of Gyllenhaal as Dawes I guess we can wait until a better one comes along where you can see her more clearily.

I will make a statement on The Dark Knight talk page in support of this compromise.

annoynmous 13:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

review please?

User:ThuranX/Sandbox can you take a look at the two templates, and leave me comments either under each, or on the sandbox talk? thanks. ThuranX 14:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

The Fountain

It wasn't that per se. I replyed to that, and then looked at your profile and your contributions and was thankful for the stuff you've added considering I'm a wannabe film-maker, so I use wikipedia as my first point of call. Black Mesa 19:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

maybe you'd like to see my little short film I made. It's hardly a masterpiece but hopefully it's a start! =p

Here's the link (if you want to see it! =p) http://youtube.com/watch?v=IEC1UOJj3R8

No that's fine. Just that I was reading the forum debate on IMDB about people being annonyed with the 30 million budget, and someone said that as it's being shot on digital, it would be a lot cheaper to film. I had a look around the web, but I didn't really know if I should use a web link to reference it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Black Mesa (talk • contribs)

300

What seems to be the issue? And yes, the whole "controversy" was banal, but Iranians are certainly more vocal than Africa, who could have whinged over LOTR. Alientraveller 19:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Olive Branch?

Hi, Erik. I've gone to every single other talk page, reading your comments about me and BigNole's comments about me and Alien's comments about me...I'm not gonna sit here and pray for forgiveness from everyone. Wikipedia's editing process is hardly important to me and I'm not gonna make a mountain out of a molehill and act like I've been doing something wrong and that I need to say sorry...that's not me. But I need to clear up a few things just so that there's now confusion:
• I fought long and hard to get that image posted on TDK WikiPage. I jumped through a lot of hoops and defended my position until I ran out of strength to defend it. It goes fine with the "Cast/Crew" section. You don't think so...and, somehow, the senior editors win over juniors. Oh, well. That's the way of things at Wikipedia. When it got removed, I got upset because it DOES meet all the guidelines set forth in the Non-Free Image rules and I felt (and still feel) that removal and subsequent "compromise" was just a cheap way to win a discussion about the original article.
• I never said to BigNole that I was entitled to "leeway" for editing Wikipedia for a long time. I said this:

"I wasn't born yesterday. I'm a pretty reliable guy and am not looking to pull a fast one. The entire re-write about the BMWFilms "The Hire" page on Wikipedia is due to me. I would think I have a tiny bit of clout."

Now, I don't know how, in that sentence, it could be interpreted that I said "I deserve leeway", but BigNole was treating me like some new person who has never edited before and he throws the rulebook at me and this and that...I finally pushed back with what I know. Now, whether you want to take this as arrogance or a proclamation of truth is up to you...but I'm not going to sit there and have somebody say, "read this" to me 100 times over. I understand the rules. I can't prove that I've been coming to Wikipedia since 2002. I started editing with the Mission:Impossible character of "Ethan Hunt" with no username. I finally registered around 2005 and started the work on the "Path to 9/11" WikiPage. I DID re-write the BMW Films "The Hire" WikiPage. I DO know how to source...but when I run into users such as BigNole, who throw their weight around and constantly throw the rulebook at me like I'm kindergartner, that's when I draw the line and begin singing my own praises. I have been with Wikipedia awhile as and observer and small-time editor...but I don't take it as seriously, nor do I have the "medals" to say to everyone, "Hi, I'm an editor. I'm good."
• I hold no grudges against any of you but I think you're being a bit hypocritical in showing me (as well as the Batman-on-Film Community) up by showcasing us as morons in your "satisfied customers" column. Especially in light of the fact that you tell us that personal attacks aren't allowed. Your column (as well as BigNole's and whoever else might be doing it) is a direct contradiction to the rules you hold as gospel. I'm flattered (and find it a bit humorous) that you would think my "ErikBigNolePedia" comment was enough to make me look unhinged in your eyes and therefore, deserving of a spot on your short little list...but I think you need to re-examine who belongs there and who does not. I certainly don't think I'm deserving to be in the same list of trolls who call you "idiot" or "stupid" or who make homophobic rants or alter your page in such a way as to make you look like you're an ass...but I think I have a well-deserved gripe as do the people from BOF. I will remove my comments that I made if you remove the comments I made from your list...but, PLEASE, you have got to work, "ErikBigNolePedia" as an in-joke into your userpage because I'm still kinda giggling over the comedic reaction I got and it makes me smile. :)

That's all I have for you. If you want to start over where we say, "I'm Tabascoman and you're Eric", I'm fine with that. You are the nicest out of the three people (you, Alien, Big) who have come to my Talk Page. Let me know. Thanks.
TabascoMan77 20:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Erik.

I went ahead and removed the hostile speak, towards you, from the Dark Knight board and from my Talk board.

I don't have much left to say about the Joker image so there would be no point in going on about it. I'll get over the image not being included. That's the way it is.

I'm glad that you decided to start over. I knew we would be able to because you seem to be fairly amiable. It's generally how you walk through the fire.

I'm also glad you kept the "ErikBigNolePedia" remark as part of your user page. You should keep it as a permanent addition. :)

I should add that, as stubborn as you guys are or tend to be (and I'm not reiterating an insult or mean it as one because hard-headedness is a good thing and shows strength), I am just as stubborn. I think, at times, you guys do go a bit overboard but, as I said, I have to live with that. I'm not here to become the best of the Wiki-clan but

The "senior-editor" remark was made in the absence of anything better that could have been said in the heat of the moment. Don't mistake that for ill will. It was said out of respect. You guys have edited a lot. I would have been one of you had I finished the Mission:Impossible character articles I wrote. Unfortunately, I lost them.

My "The Hire" page is the page I've adapted to try and get back into the game.

I have to get going. Got a deadline to meet but I just wanted to let you know that I am glad we've got a fresh start. Have a good one...let's not hope for a non-bumpy relationship on Wikipedia...those are no fun. Let's just butt heads every once in a great while. :)

TabascoMan77 22:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

American Gangster Commission

You are right about the movement part. I am still editing and updating as I go along thank you a bunch!!! Erik I could surly use your help and I can get you involved with the project if that's ethical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shallydo (talk • contribs) 10:25, July 31, 2007

RE: Afd

Thanks for fixing that. I didn't know quite what to do :-)

Seraphim ^Whipp 14:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Watchmen

I'm not so sure, as I'd hate the development section to just be a block of information on failed projects, so I'd like it to stay as it is now. It does show how all set to go they were. In future, we could use some of those awful Dr Manhattan concepts. Alientraveller 14:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The July 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 18:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Silent Hill 2 (film)

May I recommend taking WP:NF's statements to the discussion? Surely a simple "it's the rules" argument should win the day. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 19:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

If they're still keeping an eye on the page. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 19:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: HP AfD

Yeah, I saw that. The first thing that needs to be done is that those huge paragraphs of text, blatantly detailing the pages of the book need to be, in the least, reduced to just the part that is different. It's way too detailed, for such a small thing.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. Those pages will never get deleted unless for some reason they manage to find a bunch of unbiased editors. Right now, they are swamped with the a television editors (who think all things deserve their own page, "b/c Wiki isn't paper), and the HP fans, who will magic someone to death for trying to delete their article. Fictional topics are the hardest thing to AfD.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I never saved it for that very reason. They are too time consuming to monitor and they usually end in "no consensus". Tons of "it's useful", "Wiki isn't paper" type of arguments.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:15, 1 August 2I

Joker Image

Look closer, a rationale was provided. --CmdrClow 21:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I added it for Rachel Dawes. Alientraveller 21:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Need help with film article

I am a history student at UGA and I have created and edited Abby Singer (film) as a film history project. I need to improve this article. Also it has been said that it is not notable. Please help CamdawgUGA 01:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Underworld Film Characters

I kind of like Slavlin's approach to it. What say you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evolutionselene (talk • contribs) 05:27, August 1, 2007

scrollref

Hi Erik! Re this edit to World of Warcraft, can you point me to the discussions on this subject. I liked the scrolling references region. :-( --Stormie 01:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I still think the scrolling region is pretty cool, but fair enough, there seems to be a number of solid objections. --Stormie 03:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Re...some fava beans and a nice chianti

I haven't viewed it in awhile, but I'll take a look at it when I get to work in about half an hour. I'll see if I can find more issues (i'm sure there are plenty). Have you already written up the issues on the talk page?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

This is what I got:

• Lead does not follow WP:LEAD. Much of the information is not mentioned anywhere else in the article.
• Per WP:WAF, there should not be a "fictional character biography". He isn't real, he doesn't get a biography. You should make note of his appearances in "film", "literature", etc.
• Diagnosis - this is all original research. It's also written as if someone was trying to play psychiatrist. The section should really be called "Characteristics" and it should contain reliably sourced information.
• Infobox - "Current Status", "Relatives", "Ancestry", "Race", "Birth", "Gender", "Birth name", "Titles", "Nickname" - these need to be removed. His gender (by the way, there is a difference between gender and sex) is obvious from his picture, as well as his race. "Birth", "Birth name" "Titles", "Relatives", "Current Status"...all these are in-universe information, treating the character as if he is real. Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)#Infoboxes and succession boxes. Only information essential to understanding the character. You also need reliable sources for "M.O." (which, being an organized serial murder isn't an M.O., nor is revenge). Need a source for the nickname, and the aliases.
• Please see Jabba the Hutt, Palpatine, Jack Sparrow, and Jason Voorhees for articles that provide good examples of how to write about fictional characters.

 BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

No problem. I saw your post (I put it back on my watchlist). I've seen a similar request for GA from Leatherface and I would have failed it myself if I hadn't worked on the article.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

LOTR - German?

Can you look at the talk page for The Lord of the Rings film trilogy? Some user is using IMDb to somehow show TTT and ROTK were German films. Alientraveller 17:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: WP:NF

Yeah, but getting people to adhere is another story. Most usually say "it's a guideline, not a policy".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

sure thing

I'll be glad to ride shotgun, or backseat driver it, or be a one man statler and waldorf in the balcony seating, LOL. I'll look in daily, weigh in with comments or tweaks as needed, and answer questions as needed. ThuranX 21:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, i'm going to need some time to sort through that. I'm impressed by your efforts, and thus feel I need time to fully support you, but i've got a thing with some girls in a city tonight, so I have to go with my priorities. i will set aside a couple hours this weekend for reviewing your work though.Thanks for the (assumed) patience, lol. I'll give you whatever ups and downs of critique I can then. best to ya, enjoy your friday night. ThuranX 00:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Minor Help

Hi, this is Yoda317 and i need help. I want to know how you can get those userboxes that say stuff like family guy is freakin' awesome. I want to be able to put a bunch if these on my user page. I would really appreciate your assistance! Yoda317 22:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: X-Men

It has been slightly difficult though: reviewers like to throw their weight around rather than analyze, and I don't really want this to become a "Ratner sucks"-a-thon, although the overall shape of the franchise so far is the contrast between Singer and Ratner. Nonetheless, I'll work at it, throwing in IGN's comics-to-film analysis for good measure, and be expanded once the spin-offs are out. Alientraveller 14:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Done, and I also added a bit on the series' impact of jump starting the comic book movie golden age we're all in. Alientraveller 14:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Nah, Variety's article is so kiss-ass, AICN actually has Vaughn being honest about only having five months to shoot the film. Alientraveller 14:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Kingdom Come

I haven't read it, but I did notice you were working on it. I wish you good luck: I may not have read it, but I'm not stupid to not know that Alex Ross is a wonderful artist. Alientraveller 14:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

So what are you planning with Watchmen? Alientraveller 17:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

So these are references in the current article, some are good and some that you found bad right? Alientraveller 19:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

A FAR is up to you. Alientraveller 20:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know of a colouring template. I'm very sure once you reshape the article in a sandbox, you can just add in your version of the article slowly, like what WesleyDodds did with Batman. Good luck. Alientraveller 20:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

"Spider-Man 3" on DVD October 30, 2007

You want information on Spider-Man 3 on DVD from Sony Pictures Home Entertainment? Read the following article: "Spider-Man 3" Hits DVD October 30! AdamDeanHall 17:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL, yeah. I standardized test would be a good start. Though, I think most of us would have failed it the first go round (at least I know I would have). These are the times when I wish we could have banners on the front of the article alerting new editors to things that should not take place, like not reading the article before you add something, or making sure you know what verifiability is before you add something.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Question

I could swear this article, List of programs broadcast by American Broadcasting Company, is a violation of one of those "Wikipedia is not" things, but I can't find one for it. I thought there was one that said something along the lines of "Wiki isn't a TV guide" type of thing. What do you think?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

If it's survived one already then I'm not going to waste my time. The second you linked was supposed to have been deleted, per the outcome of that AfD, but it apparently never actually occurred.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Your're right Erik. But this would also make all of the director templates on wikipedia redundant also as you can click on the director and see his filmography too. Particularly for an actor of Pacino's status I don't think there's much difference. If we do delete such a template then I'd delete all the other templates for directors on wikipedia. They are intended to serve as a quick navigation but when filmographies exist it does make it seem unnecessary. But please note if you delete this template you also delete his main filmography which is also this template and it shouldn't be!!!!! SOme user like on Pierce Brosnan's article thinks its good to rmeove the full filmography which includes details of characters played with a template and this should be forbidden. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 16:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Pacino's main article should have a filmogrpahy like this not a template:

Year	Film	Role	Other notes
1998	Dil Se	Preeti Nair	Winner, Filmfare Best Debut Award. Screened at the ERA New Horizons Film Festival & the Helsinki International Film Festival
	Soldier	Preeti Singh
	Premante Idera	Jaanu	Telugu film (Dulhan Dilwale Ki is the Hindi version)
1999	Raja Kumarudu	Rani	Telugu film (Prince No. 1 is the Hindi version)
	Sangharsh	CBI Officer Reet Oberoi
	Dillagi	Rani	Guest Appearance
2000	Kya Kehna	Priya Baxi	Nomination, Filmfare Best Actress Award
	Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega	Jahnvi
	Mission Kashmir	Sufiya Parvez	Screened at the Stockholm International Film Festival

♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 16:39, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

James Bond Will Return in 2010

I'm pretty sure the AFD will be a keep, so I suggest merging to Bond 22 rather. Alientraveller 21:29, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I've weighed in, as per your request. (Thanks for the heads up.) I hate to say it, but I think that a couple of us (you, me, Bignole?) are gonna have to probably do a mass AfD on all articles that currently fail the WP:NF guideline. And there will be MUCH gnashing of teeth... Girolamo Savonarola 22:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

In those cases, generally the majority of the information will be people-based. Therefore, the article would have to be merged piecemeal into the relevant biographies for the time being. (Some overlap of merge material is probably both desirable and necessary, too.) So the question is what is the better approach? To corral all these articles up and prepare ourselves for a HUGE AfD that might possibly create as many problems as it solves? Submit a few separate ones every week to gradually whittle it down, but recapitulate the argument every time? Simply be bold and merge, and deal with the edit warring when it occurs? Maybe some combination? Girolamo Savonarola 22:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I would hazard to guess that Category:Upcoming films, Category:2007 films (and upwards; I say 2007 because some of these are poorly maintained articles), and Category:Future-Class film articles would be the usual suspects to continue trawling. Maybe if your list includes an "Alert" section for where there is some disagreement/edit warring, then I could just watch it regularly and be the cavalry as need be? :) Girolamo Savonarola 22:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, don't even get me started on the whole image nonsense. (How hard is it to strip images from WP commercial releases if they are so concerned about future use?) Hey, here's an idea - why not just ban all images of any sort right now instead of slowly tightening the noose every six months? ;) Girolamo Savonarola 23:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm just referring to the call that always seems to come up about why [x] types of non-free images needs to be deleted. Seems that the excuse largely is because of possible third-party uses or future Wikipedia publishing ventures. I find this excuse rather weak. Girolamo Savonarola 23:36, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to say that I agree with you on your points, as far as I can tell. For me, I actually spend most of my time with the WP Filmmaking project, so my concern is more things like promotional images. I'm tired of constantly getting notices telling me that these images are about to be deleted, especially when the manufacturer not only puts high res versions online, but includes posters in a downloads section. How much clearer can it be that they want to disseminate the image? Arri sells cameras for six figures each and accessories for anything between four and six figures - is it reasonable to suggest that they're going to pursue us for showing their promotional, openly offered images of their products? This entire enterprise certainly needs to think about legal issues in everything we do, but certain cases are obvious and need to be distinguished as such. First I was asked to add some sort of attribution. Then months or years later, I'm essentially threatened for not having given them a comprehensive, multi-parameter'd tag which only has just come into existence. While I understand why these are happening, I think that the burden of proof should remain on the IfD'er for a longer period of time - say six months or a year - as the image has been on the server and thought to be "cleared" already for some time. It's not the same as someone right now today uploading an image which clearly doesn't fit our guidelines as of now. Basically, no ex post facto for a more than reasonable period of time, I say, regardless of the legal issues, unless there is a particular C&D order or lawsuit pending. I mean, imagine if we ran all of our text contributions through a gauntlet like this against the copyvio rules? If all text edits were assumed to be copyvios until proven otherwise? Our dictum should be to assume that content is free or fair use until good indication shows otherwise. And for legal issues, it's pretty much granted in legal systems that good faith efforts are enough - generally lawsuits occur after disregard for a C&D. I don't think we're not going to disrespect a C&D, do you? Obviously in an ideal world everything would be free and clear, but even in lucrative industries where there are whole legal clearance teams paid to vet their product, things happen. It's unreasonable to think that we're ever going to be perfect, and potentially more damaging to the project as a whole if this becomes an obsession beyond all other policies. I think that things like NOR, V, N, NPOV, and BLP are massively more important. Diligence is all that's needed, not absolutism.

And there I went... Girolamo Savonarola 00:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Schindler's List

It's ok, it's really just preliminary work. I hope to create paragraphs on production and reaction and maybe afterward I can go more in-depth. I'm working from Joe McBride's biography, and will be sourcing afterward with his bibliography.

Really, I'm distracting myself. I'm not so sure what I want to do now, Titanic should be GA, I want to improve the first two X-Men films' articles, plus I never resumed FOTR and TTT. I'm also reading A Cultural History of the James Bond Films. There's just so much to work on. Alientraveller 12:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm really punching myself: I realize I should have started writing the article using the Entertainment Weekly article. Because all other news outlets suck compared to EW in terms of summarising production histories. Alientraveller 15:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, there doesn't seem to be much cast information. Do you think I should approach it like Fight Club, with the cast in brackets in the plot? Alientraveller 17:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

You know what? Dump as many resources onto the article's talk page as you can. Sprinkle me some choice quotes. Schindler is my current focus now. Alientraveller 19:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

By saved, you mean you have them on your computer? Alientraveller 14:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

American Gangster

This is Salute's agent, my client is in the "American Gangster" Movie, so why are you taking off the posting? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.59.52 (talk • contribs) 12:48, August 8, 2007

I will have someone contact you, who I believe we have a mutual relationship with, this week. Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.59.52 (talk • contribs) 13:04, August 8, 2007

Some clearly never read WP:EL. Alientraveller 17:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

May I ask another favor?

Having some trouble with an editor and the WP:NCF. I've just brought it up on WP:FILMS talk page, so I won't rehash in detail, but would appreciate if you'd be willing to add some words with him. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola 22:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Venom

It was still verifiable. The only reason I left it was because it was a first-hand interview (it was reported on other sites). It probably doesn't hold any water, as Avi can't make the movie himself...well, he and Marvel could try but I highly doubt it's at the top of their list of comics to get out to the silver screen. It appeared that it was something they might have discussed previously, because I had not heard of a solo Venom film, with exception to that one that was toyed with years ago.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:19, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I only got to the bit about saving Gwen Stacey and that it took 30 minutes to get him into the Spider suit. That's some funny stuff, and totally true about the suit.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:57, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Save it for last. You'll never find support to merge, that crew is far to strong in numbers.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:26, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

RiffTrax movies

That category has gone through a CFD recently, for which I was the only advocate for deletion. I didn't feel like fighting yet another lonely battle when I have about four going on already. Feel free to nominate it; I will certainly support the nomination. Otto4711 21:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• The only argument was "this is the same as Category:MST3K movies because the same people are involved." My response to that is that MST3K movies is a legitimate category because if it weren't for their being featured on the show many of the films would not be notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Whereas the films riffed by RiffTrax are in no way notable for the riffing. It came down to me versus fanboys and there were more fanboys. Otto4711 22:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Memento

Yes, please do. I looked for studies like that, but I didn't find anything in my searches. But if you can provide some, that would be fantastic.--Dark Kubrick 13:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the journals. Can't you just post them here, or does it require an e-mail address? And could you tell me how you found them for future referencing? Thanks again.--Dark Kubrick 01:22, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah sorry, I just saw them on Memento's talk page. For some reason my watchlist didn't catch that. Anyway, how did you find those?--Dark Kubrick 11:08, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Uh-huh. Instead of a university, would my library's subscription be adequate enough to access them (I'm not sure if my library does have one, but would it still be the same)? And the ones that you weren't able to save, I'm assuming those had to be paid for for you to view, right?--Dark Kubrick 15:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that Amazon thing is a good idea. Anyway, what would be the best way for you to send these sources to me? E-mail?--Dark Kubrick 22:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, sorry taking so long. If it's still not too much trouble, you can send those files to fluteguy@fastmail.us, thanks again!--Dark Kubrick 18:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:NF

I'm not so sure as the Spielberg article is a bit lame, which is why I've been doing merges like Bond 23 to Bond 22, and the X-Men spin-offs to a new article, rather than the WP:WAF violations of their characters' articles. Problem is, Lincoln is very inaccurate: the film's name is Team of Rivals. I need to sort that one out. Perhaps we can simply move citations into Steven Spielberg.

I also think The Hobbit should be merged: so we can clean-up all that controversy over Jackson and Shaye's bust-up. Alientraveller 15:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe Interstellar can be merged, but I'm not sure about Team of Rivals: I could flesh it out now with the SpielbergFilms.com archive. Alientraveller 15:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Merging The Munsters

Hey Erik, i'm wondering if you help me learn how to merge The Munsters (film) into a main article like The Munsters. I believe that movie is stuck in development hell since no information on who the director or the cast is, we only know who is writing it. So I believe this project hasn't gotten off the ground and can't support its own article. Well I'll appreciate your help! Yoda317 01:19, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Erik, I have been fine, watched a few classic movies so i can add to their articles here on wikipedia. Thanks for the advice. Well, how have you been yourself, since i haven't heard from you since like a while ago Yoda317 02:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I have a few questions to ask you to get to know you better. first of all, where are you going to live after moving out of your apartment. Where do you live? I am 14 years old, and live in Michigan, i'm an aspiring film director and actor. I wish to perform stand-up in a few years as well. I plan on getting my sister into show business, the problem is we live in Lansing, Michigan. Yoda317 02:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Erik, I am having difficulties merging the article, it is confusing me terribly. I'll appreciate your assistance! Yoda317 03:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid

The article does pass notability guidelines. WP:N reads:

A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

The references for the article clearly show this. Either way, please stop merging it into Metal Gear Solid. The movie is not based on the Metal Gear Solid video game. It would be as appropriate as placing it in Metal Gear Solid 2 and Metal Gear Solid 3. As I noted above, the article clearly passes notability guidelines (with references like IGN, owned by Fox; GameSpot, owned by CNET), so there should be no troubles in having its own article. Reverted. --Teggles 02:25, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it would be better placed at Metal Gear (series). I don't particularly mind its merging, so if you're determined, go ahead. However, please don't strip comprehensive information (e.g. replacing an announcement day with a month) just because it's "unencyclopedic". --Teggles 02:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Slusho debate

Don't worry, I'm simply trying to make a vigorous argument - I'm not fustrated, nor do I take any of this personally. Its a debate, not a fight, and I'm just trying to represent my position as best as I can. Thanks --Qwerty7412369 17:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The Dark Tower: The Gunslinger Born

Hi. Just out of curiosity, which aspect of WP:FU would prohibit the use of the cover images? (I'm not the one who added them, or anything, I'm just genuinely curious, because I'd like to get a better handle on the concept of FU.) Thanks. Nightscream 01:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.Nightscream 05:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thoughts

I'm thinking of proposing a merger of Chloe Sullivan, Lionel Luthor, Whitney Fordman, and Jason Teague into Smallville (TV series)#Cast. What are your thoughts. I think they clearly violate WP:FICT and WP:WAF. It seems people created an article for anyone that became a regular cast member of the show. I think the main article contains sufficient OOU info, and they don't need their own article. Whitney and Jason, surely don't, as they were on the show for 1 season.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I've proposed them and I'm writing up the discussion now. I'm sure to receive resistance for all of them on the grounds that they are "main characters". The problem is, even being on the show for years and years, there is still no significant outside coverage of any of those characters. All the pages are being used as character biographies to catalog the show.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I think they all have Wikia pages that look the same, just much longer. I don't see why we couldn't just link their names to those pages.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate it. It may turn out to be like the season pages. I'm one of the few active editors of all the Smallville pages, so it usually turns out I'm talking to myself. Whatever happened with those Underworld pages? Did any of them get redirected or deleted?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. I pass over so many articles that bother me because of their structure of being so fannish, or huge fictional biographies...I just grit my teeth and say "you don't want the hassle that will come with the mergers, AfDs, etc...not until you clean your plate of what you've loaded already". I'm trying to clean up the Michael Myers article in the sandbox, and I'm giving serious thought to FARing Andrew Van De Kamp. I can't believe that is FA. I just don't have the time right now to sit through all the angst that doing an FAR is going to bring for that article, but it bothers me more and more the longer I let it wait because I know people are going to that as an example and it's such a poor example to use.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

The way I see it, since FAR is just a review and doesn't determine if it loses status (which apparently, according to the FAR, should not be your motive for doing an FAR), there is nothing on how they came about creating the character. Then, the appearances section is one giant character biography, which is direct contradiction to WAF. That in the least, needs to be trimmed. It's causing other television show articles to do the same thing. Paul's work on Buffy Summers, in his sandbox, is a pretty good job, and he's always tweaking it. But that's a character with 7 seasons of television under her belt, and that's seven seasons of a main character, and not a supporting character who isn't in every episode. That's one example I'm going to show on how they can write a much better "history" of his actions. They detail way too much. The characterization section is riddles with original research. I don't think we can draw conclusions ourselves based on actions in a show: "'Andrew is very protective of his mother'...because he did this and that in these episodes." The use of non-free images is probably a concern to be brought up as well. I have no problem that he has his own article, he obviously has gotten coverage outside of the show...but I don't believe this is what an FA article should be, and I truly believe it got pushed through by the DH editors.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

We'll see what kind of attention it gets. I mean, I could write up a Chloe and Lionel article that has OOU information in it, but I have yet to find significant coverage establishing notability. I mean, the Smallville companions are great for production type information, but not for establishing notability. I can provide plenty of what Allison Mack thought of her character, how she tackled her in certain episodes, but it says nothing about notability. I can talk all that stuff on the season pages.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you're watching Andrew Van De Kamp, but the plot tag was removed.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Bernard Quatermass and Troy McClure stand out for television characters. Alientraveller 21:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest Pauline Fowler, but I've already displayed my displeasure for the fact that they have redundant information (a character development section that catalogs major events in the series, and a storylines section that details events in the series). I've found Bernard Quatermass to be a good example, and it's FA. That, coupled with Paul's work on Buffy (though not GA, it shows you can write a more concise "plot" section) show how the article should/could be.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, well, Dev920 seems to want to flaunt the fact that the character is so notable that he deserves a longer plot section, so I'm just going to have to put everything aside on focus on this article now.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Andrew Van De Kamp has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Aguirre

Thanks so much for the very helpful Google Scholar links related to Aguirre, the Wrath of God. I would indeed like to know how to access the full content for the scholarly articles, if you wouldn't mind providing me with that info. Is this something you can simply tell me on my talk page?-Hal Raglan 18:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer. I have no level of access at all, as I am not a university student and have no ongoing subscription with any of these sites. Its impossible to tell from the brief tidbits provided if these articles would truly be helpful or not. The purchase price for the individual articles is pretty outrageous. I'm particularly interested in any article(s)/book excerpts, scholarly or not, that reliably discusses the historical accuracy of Aguirre, in terms of how much in the film is simply fantasy and what, if anything, has been taken from the lives and experiences of the "real" Lope de Aguirre and Gaspar de Carvajal. All the articles I located in the past required purchase or subscription. A regular Google search for non-purchase/subscription references finds nothing that seems reliable. I'll do another search and, if I find anything that relates to what I'm interested in, I'll let you know.-Hal Raglan 18:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Cool! I very much appreciate this. Please send 'em to deacrco@yahoo.com...that's a shared junky email used mostly for stuff such as this. It gets filled every day with garbage so please use "For Hal Raglan" in the subject line, if you don't mind.-Hal Raglan 19:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll print these out later. I'm sure quite a bit of info in them will prove useful. Thanks yet again.-Hal Raglan 19:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Dark City

What's the status? This is one of my favorite films. I knew someone who worked on the production team, and when it was released I received a Dark City mouse pad. Coolest thing I ever owned. —Viriditas | Talk 09:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

No worries. I assumed and hoped for the best, knowing your talk page is quit a busy place. Good luck with school, and let me know if I can help with this film at all; I can transcribe the DVD commentary and send it to you. —Viriditas | Talk 20:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Gamble (David Banner)

My comment had a point and was completely justified. In addition, there is an insult by ThuranX pertaining to a Fox having a "mouth-breathing audience" that was not removed even among my objections. Mcflytrap 13:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Absolute: The Long Halloween

A head's up for the new edition of Batman: The Long Halloween: it features an introduction by Chris Nolan and David Goyer about the book's influence on their Batman movies. Just a head's up for next time you visit the comics shop: or at least you can memorize the page numbers. I already noted this on Batman Begins' talk page. Alientraveller 15:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Infinite monkey theorem in popular culture

Hello. Since the article has been edited considerably since you posted your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infinite monkey theorem in popular culture (second nomination), is it possible you would want to add to it or adjust it before the discussion is closed? Michael Hardy 18:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Problems with Red Camera article and linkspam

Hey, I was wondering if you wanted to step into the fray here on the Red camera article, due to issues regarding the external links (discussed in the talk page). I believe that you've already encountered one of the user names (I suspect sockpuppetry). I've also got a 3RR violation process in the works for the moment, but I can't edit for at least a few more hours myself, lest I fall the risk myself. Anyway, if you're up for having a look and maybe keeping a watch with the rest of us for a few days if you are interested... :) Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 22:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, could I bug you (meaning you, Bignole and Alientraveller) for a bit?

I am having some difficulty putting together the fair-use rationale for the Highlander image. I added it up after someone purged in favor of a didgy b7W that I've never seen before (and am unsure as to its provenance as an original poster). Could I ask you, Big and Alient to take a gander and make sure I've written it up correctly? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 04:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Watchmen

Hi. I'd need time to give it Watchmen a full once-over (I've mainly just tossed out obvious rubbish when it turns up, 'cause I tend to concentrate on Doctor Who articles), but one or two parts do rather justify the edit summary "This article is horrible. Where are the sources for all this crap?"[7] I can only assume it's either drifted off course, the way things can when there's little central guidance, or criteria differed back when it was first nominated.

I'll look over stuff and get back to you. --Mark H Wilkinson ^{(t, c)} 15:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL

Just saw the Batman on Film notation. You are famous now, buddy - you've angered at least dozens of hefty-bags with anger-management issues. Don't expect a Chistmas Bat-card fromthem this year. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 09:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Buuuuudddy

Thanks for protecting my page from vandalism while I slept. Since there were only two edits, both directed at me, I don't know who the IP was or what I did to make them so angry. Thanks for reverting their vandalism. Crazy people out there. I am slightly curious how I touched this person in such a special way that they felt a powerful need to blank my user page. lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

The Hobbit

You'll be pleased to know I've rewritten the article, and have added a merge tag. Alientraveller 12:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Spawn 2

I stand corrected. Thanks for the heads up. I'll see what I can do about incorporating the information into another article once I get a chance. Drewcifer3000 16:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Question

Why do you delete links that contain information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laudnergomez (talk • contribs)

Pilot (Smallville)

I've got a new FAC going on. I'd appreciate lots of criticism and tons of "fix its" from you guys. :) Here is a link to the FAC. Sorry for the generic message.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:31, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. I know. Matthew's generally given me a hard time when it comes to these things, just like I give him a hard time when it comes to his opinion that episodes are automatically notable just for being what they are. But, I've addressed his concerns, either in action or in disagree with reasons provided...so, unless I have a slew of people agreeing with him, then it seems to be more of a difference of opinion. I more or less respect you guys' opinion over most people's anyway.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I was meaning to ask you...what's up with the Jimbo request? Did you meet him in person, or come in contact with him at another page?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Editing in favor of studios? What, like you would only allow positive criticism, or something like that? LOL, wow. You get to The Man and it's under these circumstances. Well, at least Mr. Wales clearly knew the truth by simply looking at how you conduct yourself on here. I guess someone held a grudge against you. Makes me fearful, now. lol. Glad to know nothing serious came of it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice. Maybe he'll petition a more concrete page for us to point to.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. Most articles used to start as "Pilot is the ...", which makes it appear as though it is an official "title". Another editor came up with the current version, which basically just says the episode is known simply as "the pilot". But your version seems good, so long as people don't start arguing about it. Matthew complained the plot was too short, when the peer review (which he had no part in) requested the plot be shortened. Bole doesn't think the second paragraph of the lead is relevant, but a more in-depth summary of the entire article was requested in the peer review. I hate it when two processes start to conflict with each other. Have fun unloading your stuff.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad it isn't more important than getting ready for school. LMAO, I wouldn't assume you had so much time debating the use of executive producers and the like, but not to copyedit an article. Truly, the thought didn't cross my mind. The only thought I had in regards to this FAC are usually the "I hope more people come to review it" thought. People tend to shy away from fictional topic articles, and I hate that because then you get articles that have been voted FA status by people of the fiction land projects, and to me that's a waste...even if it happens to an article that I've worked on. That's why, even though I didn't agree with some of the things Awadewit said in his peer review, and about all the films having mandatory themes sections, it was good to get the views of a Literature project editor, b/c they weren't tied to the film projects or the television projects. Otherwise you get stuff like Andrew Van de Kamp. Like I've said, take your time and get to it when you get to it. The only way I'd be concerned about this article is if it get midway through September and no one else had reviewed it. I'm hoping that it will make FA status, and if it does, I'm hoping it will make it before Sept. 27. I want to request it for FAotD for that day, because the seventh season premieres on that date, and I think it would be good to have the very first episode on the front page on the day the new season starts. Anyway, less wiki talk. How is the move going? Is it a long drive back to school? This your last year?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Most other Wiki-editors don't take the entertainment project editors seriously...or at least, they don't take the articles seriously. If Wikipedia is a joke to the world, I'd be willing to bet that our family of articles are the butt. That's cool. I understand procrastination. I start school on Monday, and I haven't done a thing about it, yet. I don't even know when my classes are. I'll check those Sunday most likely. They're all in the same building, I just have to look at the times for each. That's good this will be your last year, as undergrad. I'm hoping that these last three semesters (fall, spring, and summer) will be my last at undergrad. Since I changed majors last semester, I had to start over, so I was "technically" a senior last year, and this is my fifth year. 700 miles from home and a coule bad experiences with professors put me in a funk for an entire year, and I really screwed myself over. I've been trying to fix it ever since, including trying to basically figure out what I really want to do with my life. The school changed a couple of my class times, so I couldn't take the classes when I scheduled this past summer, and this coming fall. So...I'm hoping that I can fit them in somewhere, because I'm going to be really pissed if the school put me in a position that I cannot finish at the end of this summer like I was supposed to. Anyway, if I do finish then, I'll probably try and stay here for grad school. They have an accelerated Masters program, where I could be done in a year.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I've come across a couples mentions of how film articles really are not encyclopedic, no matter what. I've never come across wide spread hatred or anything, just happened to be on someone's talk page and noticed talk of that. I'd suspect you'd notice it more on that side of the world, so to speak. I don't generally cross over there, that's why I'm only basing it off of random instances of gossip. But, it didn't strike me as that odd either. I wish this could be a job as well. I'll show my parents something I did--being rather proud of it--and their response is usually, "yeah, did you get paid for that? Can you put that on a resume?" Things like that. I agree about the films. I find it funny that I'll be talking to people about films and they'll mention something like "Oh, film X is coming out". Then I'm like, "eh, not really. You see, right now there is this problem with this, and so-n-so is working on this..." LOL.

I know the "cubicle zombie" feeling, as working for the state right now, that's where I am. They don't block Wiki either, but they've recently enforced a new surfcontrol that will monitor everything we do and how long we do it. So, I'm basically not on here during the day any more. I'll get on for about 5 or so minutes to check things out, but I cannot stay on for long. Well, I could, but I'd get fired. Before then, how do you think I wrote the first season of Smallville, the Jason article, the pilot currently at FAC, or any of those articles. It was when I was at work. I used to jest that I really was being paid to edit Wikipedia, but I cannot do that anymore..lol.

Yeah, my interests have led more to the private therapy field. So, I'm in the social work department, trying to finish that. The great thing is, if I can get into FSU's Social Work grad school, then the tuition is reduced. That would really help me. My first year here was out-of-state, so that was an expensive year.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

"What's Wikipedia"...LMAO, that's the greatest line ever. Oh god, my mother does the same thing with my user page. Apparently, I was left signed on when I was visiting, and she actually got on Wikipedia, not knowing that I was logged in there. So, she goes checking on some food dish, I don't know what it was. Anyway, she didn't find what she wanted, so she makes it herself. I'm listening to this on the phone, and I'm going "please tell me you're joking". So I put in the article title, and sure enough, there's my name on this page with an edit that goes "Oh, and it blah blah blah (I don't remember the details). If anyone disagrees you can remove this." I about died right there. I quickly took it off and moved it to the talk page requesting a source. I wish I could find the page in my contribs, but there's a good chance the page was deleted anyway. I found it Then, after realizing that she was on my account, she proceeds to do that mother thing of snooping. It isn't really snooping, because it's in the public view, but knowing her, she was doing it to snoop. She spies that BOF comment, and clicks the link. There she finds the comments they made, and she proceeds to tell me how she wrote a comment back yelling at them for being mean to me, and telling them how good I really am. About this time my hands cannot work fast enough to get to my user page so I can click that link and find out what damage she has done. The she confesses that she really didn't; I check anyway.

My schedule is kind of chaotic myself. I'm probably going to need to do some studying, at least for that GRE and take that thing so that I can say "yeah, I messed up one year, but look at my GRE scores."  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a good idea about the collaboration. I don't know if the Superman sequel will start by then, especially if the rumors about that JLA movie are true. I hear they want Routh to be Superman in that movie, and if that's as far in development as rumors have it, and Routh does it, then I don't think he'll be available for a Superman sequel for awhile. I'm not to optimistic about a JLA movie though. Oh, in case you missed it, I found the edit my mother made, and it's linked above (her edit would be the first instance of my name on that page). It's the oddest thing, but so funny when you read it. I think I'm going to add that to my user page. Yeah, I need to go to bed myself. I've been listening to the new KORN album, so it's kind of kept me in the mood to stay up....which I should do since i have work at 8am. Night.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, get this, someone put List of Smallville episodes up for featured list removal. Their reasoning, because there are not links to the episodes, like every other show, even though there are currently only pages for season 2 and those are going to be redirected here soon anyway. And, because there are not plot summaries. LOL. *Sigh*  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, well..I really liked the film. I don't care if it's a new person or not, so long as the comedy stays good and the action is at least as good as it was. I'm always hestitant to see new directors because you run the risk of getting less than previous. But you also run the risk of the "same thing" with a returning director. I guess few films can be Spider-Man 2.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Would love to chat privately

Could you email me? It would be great if you specified an email in your preferences, too. --Jimbo Wales 11:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Smile

 BIGNOLE  (Contact me) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Film Articles Relooked

How Can I mark these articles:

• Soul Calibur: The Movie
• Pac-Man (film)
• Splinter Cell (film)

for Deletion for Lack of citation and Original Research? If I can't can you take a look at the article, It is very unorganized also not cited because there are no sources. --Mithos90 23:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Imdb question

Take a look at this edit. I had missed this before, but am unsue about the legitimacy of linking actor names to the Imdb site (wp isn't a collection of links). I thought it should be reserved for those folk with articles within WP. Input is welcome, and I'll act on it. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it helps. Thanks a bunch, Erik. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Spirit

Hey, buddy. You are the one violating the 3 revert rule. I"ve added factual information to the article that is accurate. And you have reverted it out. If you have a beef with the facts, speak up. But it's not up to you to decide what is relevant or who has made contributions of significance to a particular film. If virtually every article you read in the public media includes mention of the Executive Producers, who are you to decide arbitrarily that they should not be mentioned in an article about that very film? Get over yourself. - Dawgknot —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dawgknot (talk • contribs) 21:49, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

I have left a discussion comment about the EP issue on the article. I believe that there is substantial evidence of EP's being included ...even in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines where 2 of the producers listed were EP's. I can't find the discussion about the issue about which consensus has been reached. Perhaps, you can point it out. - User:Dawgknot —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 12:52, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

I believe that you have to concede that your claim of consensus on this point was not accurate. In that instance, why would you not, in good faith, place my offered text back into the article and list the two producers I added? In the event that a consensus is established that would affect all films, then, reference to these people can be removed. I have asked Mark Wilkenson to reverse his revert. But you can do it too. Please do so. Dawgknot 16:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand your point about 'real world' context but it is entirely beyond the capacity of an editor here to determine, beyond available facts, that one person had more of a hands-on role than another. In the context of The Spirit article, the original text accurately reflected that Oddlot (Del Prete and Pritzger) entered into a collaboration agreement with Batfilm which included Melniker and Maier as well. That's a 'real world' context. Typically, in film and tv production, different elements bring different strengths. It seems to me that if article after article reflect the participation of certain folks, the evidence grows that the industry agrees who is important to the film ...and who isn't.Dawgknot 17:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Ok, I'll be monitoring how it turns out. --Mark H Wilkinson ^{(t, c)} 15:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Have you prodded Bignole yet? I'm certain he'd be interested. Also, why not RfC this? Girolamo Savonarola 01:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

You linked it - I don't know what else should be done at the project talkspace. Maybe mention it in the announcements section? Also, an RfC and an open call template at the top (I forget the exact name, but the shortlist items listed at Community portal all have it). Between Dawgknot and Dohanlon, it's been a pig of a week dealing with people who refuse to concede any points on any grounds. And I don't understand, why not Bignole? Girolamo Savonarola 01:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Another thought - could this actually be a less-obvious vanity editor? If this guy is one of these "lesser" producers himself, it might explain why he's fighting so hard. There certainly is nothing directly pointing to that, but I just wonder if the vigor might have to do with a COI. Girolamo Savonarola 01:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Good points. What I think this really highlights is the need to really tighten up the infobox template usage notes. Girolamo Savonarola 01:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Prod me? *Sniff sniff* Are you two planning on deleting me? lol. I responded. I was aware of what was going on, I just kind of kept out of it because of the extensive writing back and forth. I hope I understood your point in that correctly, at least that was how I perceived how they should be mentioned. I also picked up on the vibe Girolamo mentioned. He/she speaks as if they are either taking film classes and are reading these things from a book (and I won't get into my opinion of film classes), or they really do this stuff for films and they are applying their personal experience to the situation.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

So that does seem to be true is some instances. So what is up with the pilot? lol. I don't mean that like "how come you haven't c/e'd it already", but more along the lines of "you keep saying that you are going to, but since you have I'm thinking that it must need some serious c/e'ing that would require a substantial amount of time that you currently don't have". I mean, you can take your time, I know how busy you are with your new digs and stuff, but your wording makes me worry that the article is in worse shape that I realized.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

If this is where the laundry gets aired, then I'm happy to do it here. I hadn't thought that was your choice. I'm sure you mean well, but you are making, it seems to me...and I could be very wrong....some assumptions about the motivations of editors of the Hollywood trade press that aren't supported by evidence. I have supplied a great amount of support for the view that these producers must somehow be viewed as very important. I have used rock solid reliable sources for my view. Isn't surmising and speculating about why trade editors make certain choices inappropriate for an editor here...without sourcing?

I can give you many speculative reasons why those names keep appearing (when at least one other producer's name doesn't) that would counter your speculation. But is that how we honestly should work? I don't think it is an appropriate editor's musing without evidence that certain folks are 'go-to' sources and therefore their names get printed. But even if it were true, doesn't that demonstrate real authority and influence?

The only way most of us get our names in the paper is to commit a crime, die, witness an event or do something very important that is newsworthy. And that judgement is made by the editors of those papers. Isn't that why this encyclopedia places such emphasis on reliable sources? Dawgknot 14:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

...........

I got my name in the paper when I was younger, for making the honor roll. Probably not Wikipedia worthy though.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

He's got my opinion, if he doesn't like it, which he obviously doesn't since he told me on my talk page that it isn't good enough, then so be it. I agree, we can't have 15 different people listed in a box like that, the damn thing would end up stretching down half the page. That wasn't what it was designed for. As for the honor roll and newspaper thing, if you saw my town, you'd know the newspaper is a "small publication". He, the way I see it, I get published in Wikipedia every single day. :)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

If we list all the producers then we have to contend with every job that gets mentioned in a magazine. Costume designers get mentioned, and they can win awards, but we don't have a spot for them in the box. It will just open a door us becoming IMDb, and I don't want that. I would be fine if we removed the producers credit from the box altogether. It's like trying to pick your "best" child. I mean, who really makes the film? Could it be the director, the writer, maybe the actors? A cinematographer perhaps? Do we even need a box? "Too many questions".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

Hi Erik. It is my view that arbitrarily limiting inclusion to "classic producers" involves unsupported assumptions that cannot be WP:V. Do I favor listing all of the 300 producers? No. Actually, I don't. But I would rather that as an alternative to leaving out the usual complement of producers which are hardly ever that many. We cannot fairly make policy based upon outlier examples. You have made many assumptions, perhaps based upon your extensive experience reading trade press, but those assumptions, in my view are very simply wrong. Shouldn't there be some WP:V in support of those assumptions if they are going to govern who is mentioned in a film article and who isn't? I'm not trying to be provocative is asking the question. I have supplied you with links to non trade press (and I can supply many more) that make include the information. Why is that not good enough for you? I believe strongly that my view is supported by the preponderance of the WP:V evidence. If someone is repeatedly mentioned in a trade article or a consumer article, then many disparate smart, informed editors and reporters have decided that the content was worthy of publication. What WP:V support have you for a contrary assumption? I know you dislike my reference to ownership issues, but really isn't it the case that you have a strong view of what these film articles should say that isn't supported by the film guidelines? I know you have done prodigious amounts of excellent work. I have seen a lot of it. But you have a too limited view of who is important to a film and who isn't. And I mean that in all sincerity and respect. Dawgknot 17:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:Queen and Country

OK, fair enough regarding Bond the Englishman. It's so boring reverting all these edits for such a long film series anyway. Alientraveller 22:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks for the head's up. WP:FU keeping us on our heels... Alientraveller 22:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Bound

Hi, just curious about the citation you removed from the Bound (film) article. Is it not a very reliable source? I don't get why it's linkspam... --Belovedfreak 23:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I'd added that reference originally but I also hate linkspam and the fact that someone has been adding links to that site, doesn't make me inclined to readd it. Also, I agree it's not the most reliable of sources and since I'm trying to get the article to GA, it's probably best left out. Thanks, --Belovedfreak 11:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.

Saw you step in on the Arcayne edits. I'm avoiding him as much as I can these days, as previously discussed. Also, what's up with the personal invite from Jimbo himself? congrats on that, I suppose. (unless it's bad in which case, my sympathies, LOL). ThuranX 01:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

That's wild. Hope you gave him some good ideas. By the way, I went back and looked at that catwoman mess. the 'jerk off to his success' comment wasn't to Arcayne, but to the idiot troll. Arcayne pulled the section from the articel while I was busy sourcing it. If you look in the history, I make a comment about having started sourceing, only to see the troll delete sourced stuff, proving he's a troll. As for involvement with WIkipedia in a bigger way, I actually got an email soliciting me to consider applying for admin, based on my contributions to WP:AN/I. I'm declining for now, but I may have to think about it, it's a fairly well respected admin who suggested it. ThuranX 05:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Road to Perdition FAC?

Have you thought about nominating Road to Perdition at WP:FAC?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with continuing to develop this fine article and with your other high caliber film work. I am not a scholar of film so as someone who has experience with WP:FC all I can really add is that most successfully reviewed articles now have at least one citation per paragraph. Thus, I would beef up the Road_to_Perdition#Plot section.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not saying it is lacking detail or it needs to be longer or it needs more depth. I am saying that it is uncited. It is the only section apart from the lead that does not have sources. It needs to pass WP:RS, WP:ATT and WP:V. It is not suppose to be your opinion of what the plot was. We are a tertiary resource. You need to make it clear you are reporting an authority's version of the plot summary.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

O.K. It looks like you know what you are doing. Best of luck.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Lynchpin

Heh, I am confused by Warner's eschewing the obvious sequel route to Superman Returns. I'd rather see Man of Steel and The Darker Knight first before Justice League, although I don't mind the idea of launching spin-offs for lesser characters from that ensemble piece. I'm not so concerned by continuity: I assume it's set years after BB/TDK, when those storylines are wrapped, and style-wise just look at how Batman fits into the wider DC universe. It will be odd seeing Bale not return, but like I said, I assume it'll be years later.

As for a lynchpin article, you lot will be there for The Hobbit and Toy Story 3. I found it interesting you discussed an older film, so I'm curious as to whether you'd ever planned to work on LOTR. I'm hitting a structural snag with FOTR, because on the one hand I have all this development information I've put here, yet FOTR would look anameic without it. Alas, "The Road Goes Ever On..." Alientraveller 09:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'll keep working at FOTR. What I'm doing is slowly injecting information from Peter Jackson's biography, which offers a lot more chronological understanding (eg. Howard Shore's previous film music for used for the animatics), and then all the stuff I retrieved from EW, and then the motherload of the DVD. And whatever happens, we can keep tabbing the next DC film, whatever it is: while they are rushing it, I've always to see a shared universe on film. I just want a good film, but this isn't a perfect world where Warners would have two entirely different films on the same character within six months. JLA and Man of Steel aren't a serial, like Matrix 2&3. Alientraveller 18:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

They could have been better, but I don't think a comparison could be made between the two in that respect. Maybe more like Spidey and Pirates could have been way better. Oh, you forgot about Green Lantern. Hal Jordan totally deserves his own movie first. Hell, you could kick out a series of films chronicling his birth as GL, then his rise to the top, and then his fall (which subsequently was killing every other GL, and pretty much demolishing the JLA).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

That's what makes it so great. You do about 3 movies with Hal, pretty much the Emerald Dawn I and II series, and another for kicks. As your are doing those you can make more Superman movies. Then, you implement your cross-over. They did that animated Superman's death, but it would be been better in live-action. So, first you do a JLA movie, to introduce characters that don't need their own movie. Then you do Supe's death, which leads to the beginning of the fourth Green Lantern movie (or the third, if a good story cannot be attained beforehand). Now, you've connected multiple franchises. Or, you could just find a more realistic reason for Coast City's destruction, like a terrorist attack. It isn't necessary to have Supe's death (though, I always thought that would be better in live-action, I truly adult Superman movie).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a big GL fan: I blame the cartoon using John Stewart, so I'm not too sure about Hal Jordan. I'd love a Wonder Woman movie (why did Whedon leave man?) as we need a strong female figure for once, and I really want to see ancient gods in the modern world. I'm annoyed the Thor movie is allegedly just Asgard: Thor defends Midgard too! As long as there's never a bloody G.I. Joe/Transformers movie, I'll be happy. I always disliked those comics, even if Megatron got his tank form in a crossover.

For Transformers 2, I would really like Orci and Kurtzman to return. But they're busy with Trek, so I wouldn't mind if they roped in Furman. He wrote the prequel, and is currently expanding it at Titan UK, so it'd be a shame if his fanfic, as it stands, was wasted. Alientraveller 19:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The Emeral Dawn series were really good. Jordan had a lot of personal demons before he ever became GL, like indirectly killing his brother in a drunk driving accident. Not only did he not want to be a hero, he didn't think he even deserved to be a hero. A lot more going on than John Stewart personified in the animated JLA, or really any of those animated appearances. Kyle Rayner could be "fun", since his character is an artist, you know he has to have some insane ideas in his head...but you cannot have him without doing Jordan first. Rayner's story begins with Jordan's downfall.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Parallax "demon" was retconned to appease fans who didn't like them making Jordan a psycho for no reason. So, you could incorporate that from the beginning, and show signs of the possession, and maybe glimpses of the demon, which could be explained in more depth when Jordan finally turns and begins calling himself Parallax. You could make it work by showing that, even though he was possessed by the Parallax demon, it was still aspects of his character that the demon prayed on. You could show it kind of acting like that red devil on your shoulder to Jordan, where his true emotions get the best of him, and the Parallax demon sort of pushes him even further to that breaking point that only he can reach, which would be the moment when Coast City is destroy (by whatever reason is decided upon later). That was the moment in the comics that he turned, because it really was an unexpected turn, and having at least a reason behind it is helpful. You can assert that if Hal was stronger then it would not have happened, and maybe his intuitions about himself from the beginning were right. I mean, he was still the greatest GL (in fandom and fictionland), and his downfall, while not entirely his fault, was a product of his own emotional unrest.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, comics are comics, cinema is cinema. Comics = space, film = time. Enough of my ramblings though, they'll do something cool. I remember being concerned over how two-dimensional the Transformers could have looked in a three-dimensional environment, but they went beyond my imagination in rendering them, so I hope the lantern effect can look solid enough, as well as being a beam of light. And I look forward to Watchmen being filmed: just believe it when you see it. Alientraveller 20:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The GL effects could work. It would take a combination of physical creations, which are smoothed with CGI. Like, if you were going to create something like a baseball bat (why, I don't know, but bear with me), it would have to be like Star Wars. You literally give them a physical entity to hold, and then the CGI maps around that. Those lightsabers in the prequels were awesome. Also, remember Gotham City was a miniature model with CGI smoothing it out, and it looked great. I think we've come far enough that anything created could look good, you just cannot skimp on it, and go all Sci-Fi channel budget with it. As for DC and Marvel, I tend to agree. Marvel typically has better stories, and more intersting characters overall.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Future films

Sure I would Not Mind Having Help with films that are in Development Hell Articles. I am at the moment getting used to the coding and film template by correcting Film Articles I come across like BloodRayne II: Deliverance which was kinda in a blood mess. --Mithos90 17:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: BB

Wouldn't be promotional catering...well, not too much. We do it all the time. Halloween on Halloween. It's generally how it happens when a specific date is request with such topics. I think it's a fine idea. I was just thinking about the cast section today. Generally, I'm of the mind that a "Casting" section is far more useful. I'd be much more interested to know what Bale had to do to get the job and such. It also takes care of that petty IU bug that goes around when dealing with those lists. I'll also see what can be done for that reception section. I haven't read it in forever so I'll have to see what can be salvaged and what needs to be completely redone.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be delighted too. I also found some free images of the Tumbler too. Alientraveller 20:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Awesome. I was just looking at the images on your user page. I love the captions.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It's just until we can include the fiction with a real-world perspective. I found an interview with Bale discussing Wayne's different personalities: brooder, playboy and Dark Knight, to discuss his personality in the cast. Alientraveller 21:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL, we can all stop our work on Batman Begins. We've apparently gone above and beyond in terms of providing OOU information for the article. We should have stopped when we recognized it as a film, that would have been "plenty".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've given myself a silly things section of my user page. I think I had another one earlier last week..I have a feeling that section might just fill up faster than the "Satisfied customer" one.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it just me, or is anyone else getting the urge to watch BB as they work on the article? The more reviews I read the more I want to go sit in front of the television and pop it in (which I'm giving serious thought to doing in a few minutes).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

		The Tip of the Day Barnstar
		I know this isn't what it's for, but they didn't have a sarcastic one available. Your "Tip of the Day" is to run out (or drive, because running is so overrated) and buy the nearest copy of Batman Begins.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, does anyone else think that the InvisibleBarnstar is a little, how you say...oxymoronish?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL, ok I couldn't tell if you were pulling my leg or if you really couldn't find it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think I may just do that. I'll probably look at one more review and pop it in. That or The Omen III: The Final Conflict. You sure Garfield would pity you? I think he'd just be happy it wasn't him. You have lab already? When did you start back? I thought you started back today, like me.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I have two tomorrow, then I have to go to work afterward. I swear, the day Wiki becomes a career choice, I'm sending in my resume.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so a thought came to mind while watching the movie. If the microwave emitter vaporizes all the water around, how come no people were killed when they were standing next to it. The human body is 70% water, should they not have shriveled up an died?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess I was so engrossed in it before that I didn't think about it, but it suddenly hit me when Ducard/Ra's was standing next to the thing and I immediately go, "Heeeeey, why isn't he dead?" I'm wondering if we'll see more of Zsasz in the next film, or if he'll be dropped completely.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

A Gordon subplot could be interesting. I had a comic with him in where he had a (i want to say sororiety, but it could have been something completely different) hostages and he was killing them and then cutting himself for the cops. Batman shows up and takes him down. It was part of that series of comics where Batman was eventually institutionalized at Arkham, I can't remember the series, but I had two of the issues. *goes searching* Ah, found it. It was Batman: The Last Arkham, I had two of the 4 issues.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

And apparently, he wasn't really insane. Might have helped if I had the other two issues. lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm trying to keep that cruft to a minimum, if nothing at all. I'd rather not have the "he loved this movie" type of responses. I hope that I'm finding criticism that, when read, is clear on the critics stand for/against the film. Yeah, I have a feeling I may have something due tomorrow, but I'm afraid to open my bag and find out that it's true. Maybe if I don't open the bag, I won't see what's there, thus I won't have anything due. Think that'll work out?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Is there anything on that page that isn't already in the article, besides the track listing? If there isn't, and I don't think there is (I haven't read the film score section) then I don't see why a merge would be bad. I haven't come across anything in reviews so far discussing the music. Not to say there isn't some out there, just not in the ones I've read so far.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about including the "BATMAN" thing, but the info about how when the album was released the tracks were all named after bats is easily verifiable. We don't have to note anything special about it; the film being called "Batman" is enough. Since they obviously intentionally names the tracks after bats (you kind of cannot do that by accident), I think it's fine. I don't want to presume the intentions about the "B-A-T-M-A-N" thing though.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Spider-Man 3 Poster

I saw this poster kicking around. I think it was a "limited release" poster or something. I found it in Seattle about a week before the movie came out in theatres, but I've been searching for it like hell. When I finally found it, I placed it in the article. You removed it, though. What gives?

Luckily, I took a snapshot of the poster while I was in Seattle. I hadn't seen it anywhere else before. Hazmat-Man 00:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[8]

It's a cool image, but I have to agree, it looks photoshopped. In the least, I know they clean up that "snapshot". Here is the version he pointed to, on my photobucket, and I put it in PhotoImpression 5. I cropped it and enhanced it, and this is the cleaned up version. Looks like what was uploaded here. Makes me assume that the version started like the one that was uploaded here, and was later photoshopped onto a billboard, because I had to increase the size to get it close to the version on Wiki...where as it's smaller on the billboard. Good work, but doesn't appear authentic, especially when I've never seen it used anywhere else before.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

You thinking about the Emo Peter cover for *scratches head* Entertainment Weekly?? I think that was who did it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Premiere?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: current

I always appreciate and respect your opinion, but in this case I disagree. While the template: current fiction isn't included with the template: current set, I think that the argument could be made in that the release of the book is a current event. I am not sure about the argument that it is an attempt to circumvent WP:SPOILER; certainly, the language is caca. However, how it is being applied to Deathly Hallows is to recognize the unusual nature of this highly-anticipated book, and the fact that it has not been released in most markets as of yet (Europe, the Americas and Japan are not the world), and that including plot spoilers infringes on the copyright of the publisher and author as surely as if we released secret info before the US/UK release date. The only difference here is that while it has been released in many English-speaking countries, revealing such information might interfere with the sales and marketing of the book in currently unreleased markets. Another difference is that the details we are detailing in the article is a helluva lot more accurate than the pre-release "spoilers".

I don't advocate the use of the template current fiction to be used as a substitute for spoiler warnings. It's primary purpose os to recognize that it is in fact a current event. That I think it should remain until it is released in the majority of countries is an unswerving opinion. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 09:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The Day the Earth Stood Still

Wow, I'm impressed. People aren't jumping the gun and are just adding information to the original film's article. I wonder how the One will do as Klaatu. Alientraveller 20:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Eva Green

"I assume you're finding your way into biographical articles before tackling a major one like, say, Steven Spielberg?"

You are correct, and you have won $1 million and proven yourself smarter than a ten-year old! Well, it doesn't take a genius to recognize your wisdom. So yes, I never really worked on a biography, and articles like Spielberg, Jackson, Burton and so on would be a real task. I have done some touches for Ian McKellen and Sean Bean which passed GA under me, but those were the works of others I recognized. Eva Green is young, easy on the eye and had some easy-to-access articles (especially with her fan site which translates foreign language articles). It was either her or Michelle Ryan. Maybe I can keep practising with her next. Alientraveller 18:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

It won't cost money will it? Seems like a nice site, I've visited the BFI myself. Alientraveller 19:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure, ok, I'm alientraveller91@yahoo.co.uk. And while you're at it, send me everything you've got on Schindler's List. *wink* Alientraveller 20:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I found those sources provided redundant. Anyway, I'll just have to sort out that lead, and work on Schindler's List once you send me those papers. Thanks very much dude, and I look forward to Interpretations of Fight Club. Sorry if it'll sound even more of a load, but you may have to write from a book perspective too, as well as the film. Alientraveller 13:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

So with Schindler's List, are you not at a location with those papers to send me? Alientraveller 21:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Jason FAC

Yeah, if you find some, great. As I said on the FAC, my only concern is that right now that section primarily focuses on the interviews in the book, but when I look back at it now, it actually does not as much as I thought. Now that I'm looking over the article, it needs to be cleaned up. A lot of the references can be trimmed, instead of the references after each statement. I just don't want to have to focus on that right now, while I got so many other things front-and-center at the moment.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. They put it up for deletion because there wasn't a clear indication that it was promotional. I just reverted to the original upload. I don't have time to deal with such trivial things. There are people arguing that Superman should look more like Superman (Kal-L) over on the WP:FICT talk page. More of "Notability, especially notability (fiction), and WAF do not show what is common practice and they should be changed."  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm off to my first two of the morning, then I have a 3 hour class from 5pm to 8pm tonight, that will be loads of fun.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember that.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

He may have meant episode articles, not LOE pages...though I didn't catch what was said. He believes I was laying insults when I posed that he did not understand the idea behind significant statistical data, since he was suggesting that I simply count the editors on the page to determine such a thing.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

What would you call this?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm tired of this argument. I say, let 'em argue. Nothing is going to change, one way or another. The guideline will remain and people will choose to either ignore it, or follow it. The only sure thing is that those that follow will have a better chance of being FA than those that do not. Speaking of which, Andrew Van De Kamp is going on like day 16/17 in that FAR and no one from the article has commented. I think that's going to end up going to Featured Article Candidate Removal in a about a week.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Have fun with that. I have work tomorrow then I'm going down to central Florida to visit my g/f for the weekend, so I'll probably be a little inactive this weekend.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Roll call

Hey, I had a question about what you said on the WP:Film talk page: "...redefine their goals in relation to this WikiProject. It would be beneficial to know what everyone's preferences are, for easier collaboration." Are you referring to each member specifying the parts of the project they are usually working on/plan to work on or something else? I just want to make sure I read your comment correctly. By the way, I had a good laugh when I saw on your userpage "The film has poor ratings on RT and Metacritic, though... but hey, even bad films can have good articles, too." I had high hopes for the film, and was disappointed it wasn't that great. I was able to add the majority of sources in a day, and was surprised it passed GA so quickly. Anyway, good luck on your next GAs and I hope you'll be able to bring Batman Begins up to FA. --Nehrams2020 20:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I just started school again, and have all of my upper division classes this semester so I've been taking it kind of easy. I'm probably going to do another actor again really soon, maybe Steve Carell, Matt Damon, or a director. I don't have any current film projects, except maybe Mr. Bean's Holiday, which currently has a good start on sourcing. But I'll have to wait for that to come out on DVD before I start working on it though since I'm going to wait to see it. I'm trying to write GAs on a couple of films/actors and then toss in some other signifcant articles (such as Oklahoma City bombing and Deep Impact) so I don't be labeled as just a film/actor guy. --Nehrams2020 21:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'd appreciate it. My favorite task for getting articles up to GA is scouring the internet and any magazines/books I have for sources. You've always done a good job on working with films, and there have been numerous times that I go to talk pages to assess the article and see that you have included potential sources and information that the editors of the article can use. Google alerts are great and I use it to keep up to date on articles I have already brought up to GA status. I'm interested in eventually making an attempt at FAC, hopefully with the OC bombing article, but I probably need to get some more editors to point out what it needs and give it a good copyedit. --Nehrams2020 21:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:FICTION

Hehe, this is getting so many people riled up. Why can't people just go back and rewrite articles. I mean it's not hard to write about Gandalf in the order of book publishing or something. Merging isn't difficult either. Alientraveller 15:17, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

whoops.

color me red. I'm embarrassed. that WAS an horrific oversight. thansk for catching it... (though you couldn't do that during the review period? LOL) ThuranX 18:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I Am Legend

What happened to the third citation? Alientraveller 19:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, cool. I'm really looking forward to that film: I better read the book. Alientraveller 19:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)