| Revision as of 06:27, 7 March 2015 edit174.141.182.82 (talk) →On mixing list markup: Also, that oddly displayed page title← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:16, 5 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,661 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Betty Logan/Archive 15) (bot | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} | |archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 15 | ||
| |minthreadsleft = 0 | |minthreadsleft = 0 | ||
| |minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |minthreadstoarchive = 1 | ||
| |algo = old(180d) | |algo = old(180d) | ||
| |archive = User talk:Betty Logan/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = User talk:Betty Logan/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{archives}} | |||
| {{Archive box| | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| }} | |||
| ==Discussion at ]== | |||
| == A brownie for you! == | |||
| ] You are invited to join the discussion at ]. ] (] - ]) 21:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)<!-- ] --> | |||
| == List of highest grossing animated films Peak rank == | |||
| {| cellspacing="8" cellpadding="0" style="border: 2px solid #b36747; background-color: #ffdfbf;" | |||
| |style="padding: 0.5em; vertical-align: middle;"|{{#if:Brownie_Neumüller_Ferdinand_cropped.jpg|]}} | |||
| |style="padding: 0.5em 0.5em 0.5em 0.1em; vertical-align: middle;"|<div style="font-size: 109%; margin-bottom: 1em;">Armbrust has given you a brownie! {{ucfirst:brownies}} promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a brownie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. </div> | |||
| <div style="font-size:92%;">To spread more WikiLove, install the ].</div> | |||
| |} | |||
| It is possible to source. Atleast half of them can be found at List of highest grossing films page. And the history of this page itself can be used as a source ] (]) 08:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Notice == | |||
| :I don't discuss article content on my talk page. I recommend starting a discussion on the article page if you wish to discuss an edit or propose a change to the article. ] (]) 08:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Rule of the shorter term == | |||
| == BBFC == | |||
| {{tb|Talk:Rule of the shorter term}} | |||
| Hello, why did you remove my edit on the BBFC page? ] (]) 17:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == For your eyes only... == | |||
| :Can you be specific about the edit please, because according to your edit history you have not edited the article ] (]) 03:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{ygm}} | |||
| == List of highest grossing films protection == | |||
| == FYEO! == | |||
| Hi, do you think that this page needs to have the EC protection back? I asked ] to the same admin that reduced it in September 2023--] (]) 19:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{YGM}} | |||
| == |
== User:Dark4tune == | ||
| Hi, I am asking you to intervene against this user because you have already sent him a warning about his edit wars apparently he has not drawn consequences for this and continues to do so as here </nowiki>]</nowiki>] and I can label it as such. In addition, he uses personal attacks of the ''broken record'' type | |||
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] | |||
| Tag: @] ] (]) 09:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] (]) is wishing you a ] ]! This greeting (and season) promotes ] and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow! <br /> | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{]:]}} to their talk page with a friendly message. | |||
| </div> | |||
| Hi @]. There's recent discussion about production company/distributor. The talk page also mentioned that the Presented by credit can be "given to a distributor, exhibitor and/or financier that provides a majority of the budget." I appreciate your time and review. Thank you in advance ] (]) 03:24, 18 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == For Your Eyes Only! == | |||
| == Hi there. John Higgins page == | |||
| {{you've got mail}} | |||
| Hello @] how are you doing ?. Betty an editor erroneously removed a final from Higgins' non-ranking final section from last season. It was listed on Misplaced Pages with a source from '''Snooker.org''' our number one website used for getting references. Can you re add this final please, as the page is auto-protected page. Many Thanks ] (]) 22:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == The $750,000 question == | |||
| == List of James Bond films revert == | |||
| {{ygm}} | |||
| You recently my edit with a summary of {{tq|"No reason to artificially restrict the size of the tables within the article. On large displays it just creates excessive scrolling. If the sticky headers are causing issues then it would be simpler to just remove them outright, rather than replacing them with a fix that is inferior for the vast majority of readers."}} Just so you are aware, the majority uses mobile per , which is where the sticky headers are mostly needed for very tall/wide tables. I'm glad you are fixing it. Please also fix the screen reader accessibility issues per ]. Also, if you want sticky headers without the scroll, you can use ]. ] (]) 04:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == YGM == | |||
| :The scroll table is restrictive on both large and small displays. Without the scroll table I can see five full rows on my phone, but with it I can only see three rows and have to scroll to see the final two columns, and it is also fiddly to scroll through. I am not particularly bothered about the sticky headers—they were only added a few months ago, and the article survived for years without them. They are mostly a gimmick where the data in the table is intuitive and take up valuable screen space on small devices. ] (]) 05:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{ygm}} | |||
| ::I'd appreciate you pinging me in your reply as I am not subscribed to your talk page. Don't forget that there is also ]. I mentioned an alternative to the scroll, so use either one if you want sticky headers. Sticky headers with or without the scroll have their uses on small screens, especially for very tall tables. When scrolling down to read data, instead of having to continuously scroll up and down to read forgettable headers to associate with the data, the headers stay in view. You are welcome to your opinion, so use it or don't. If you feel the table has memorable headers and isn't "very" tall, then remove the sticky headers once you test it on mobile in both orientations. It's not about survival, but improving accessibility for others. Please also fix what sounds like a long standing ] accessibility issue. ] (]) 05:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Superman Returns == | ||
| What's your problem? You haven't even seen the movie to be sabotaging what I do. And I'm not going to insist on breaking the rules. I only ask one thing of you: leave me alone. ] (]) 02:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| By all accounts there has never ever been a definition of veganism that includes honey or bees products. Every definition of veganism that has ever existed, including on Misplaced Pages, means to avoid the use and consumption of animals products. Honey is an animal product is it not? Or do you count bees as a plant? | |||
| :I am required to leave a warning on your talk page as a precursor to reporting you for edit-warring. ] (]) 03:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Regarding your disruptive edit on the Missing White Woman Syndrome article. == | |||
| == ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message == | |||
| Refer to the talk page of the Missing White Woman article. ] (]) 16:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
| <div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> | |||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div> | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-text"> | |||
| Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Think you for proposing the step that I should have proposed ages ago: now passed by consensus, and a better, less fraught talk page ahead of us all! – ] (]) 06:49, 16 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
| Your welcome! To be fair it probably wouldn't have passed if either you/Cass/Blofeld had proposed it on impartiality grounds. No-one should have to put up with that kind of haranguing for two years though—it would have driven me around the twist! | |||
| </div> | |||
| == Personal Attack in Merge War == | |||
| </div> | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1258243506 --> | |||
| ==Merry Christmas!== | |||
| On the one hand, there is, as you note, a merge war in progress, and the merge is being reverted out of process. On the other hand, your claim that one of the editors is a "pathological liar" is a very strong personal attack, and you could be blocked for it when the merge warrior is blocked for the merge war. Please do not make personal attacks. (The matter of the editor's block log is not a personal attack, although it is a bit stale, but ] is an enforced policy.) ] (]) 15:15, 17 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
| {| style="border:1px solid 3px; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}}; padding: 5px;" | |||
| :Fair enough Robert, you make a sound point. I have struck out the "pathological" bit but I reserve the right to point out dishonest claims pertinent to the discussion itself. ] (]) 16:18, 17 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="center" | ] | |||
| == I AM WILD EDIT == | |||
| Just in case there was any doubt about his actual age, the fake signature he pulled with his latest sock was actually pretty hard to spot. ] (]) 22:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Let's hope it will "lights out" for him! ] (]) 04:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == October 2014 == | |||
| ] Hello, I'm ]. I have automatically detected that <span class="plainlinks"> to ] may have broken the ] by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .</span> | |||
| :List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: | |||
| *<nowiki>Statens medieråd </nowiki>{{red|'''('''}}<nowiki>the Swedish Media Council is a government agency with the aims to reduce the risk of harmful media</nowiki> | |||
| *<nowiki>--</nowiki>{{red|'''>'''}}<nowiki></nowiki> | |||
| It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow ]. Thanks, <!-- (1, 0, 0, 0) --><!-- User:BracketBot/inform -->] (]) 03:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ==FYI== | |||
| Hello BL. Remembering your work on this ] I thought that you might find this ] of interest. Best regards. ]|] 18:13, 9 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Yeah, I suggested making it a policy/guideline once before at the village pump too and it was kicked into the grass. I don't really understand the logic: if edit-warring is a policy breach then technically breaching BRD is a policy breach too so I don't see the problem with setting it in stone. It would certainly make life easier if editors were compelled to follow BRD, but I guess the reason it never gets the support is that there are too many editors with too much to lose if everyone is forced to play fair. ] (]) 13:53, 10 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Motion picture rating system: Swedish "från 15 år" rating == | |||
| You have reverted my edit of Swedish "15" age rating, but there is in fact a "från 15 år" rating. | |||
| It is only the English-language "Statens Mediaråd" page that doesn't explicitly mention the "15" classification. | |||
| On the Swedish-language page it is mentioned as "15-årsgränsen", and that a movie can fall under this for two reasons, if submitted for classification and not approved for children, or if not submitted for classification: | |||
| http://www.statensmedierad.se/Aldersgranser/Aldersgranser-for-film/Aldersgranserna/ | |||
| It is mentioned (in English) as "The age ratings are “all ages”, 7, 11 and “not approved”, the latter resulting in a 15 rating.": | |||
| http://www.statensmedierad.se/Om-Statens-medierad/In-English/Film-Classification/ | |||
| The "från 15 år" rating is used in the "Statens Mediaråd" Film Database, and is explained on this page: | |||
| http://www.statensmedierad.se/Om-Statens-medierad/In-English/Film-Database/ | |||
| And Swedish cinemas write "från 15 år" or "15 år" on their schedules and advertising: | |||
| http://extra.sf.se/pdf/SE/SE.pdf | |||
| Bo Johansson <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :I reverted because you changed information so that it contradicted the source. You say the English version is inaccurate and the native Swedish source says there is a 15 rating? The only problem though is that I can't read Swedish and Google translate leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation. Obviously I would like to ensure the information is correct, therefore I have a couple questions: | |||
| #What is the difference between a "15" rating and the "Not approved" rating? | |||
| #What is the difference between "Not approved" and "unrated"? | |||
| :] (]) 11:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| 1. As I understand it, the age limits are set by law (SFS 2010:1882), these are "all ages", 7, 11, and 15 years. | |||
| Mediarådet's task is to check if films are harmful to children, so they can approve a film for children of all ages, from 7 years, 11 years, or not approve it for children. If they don't approve it, the 15-year limit applies. | |||
| http://www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/20101882.htm | |||
| 2. The 15-year limit applies for films that have been submitted to Mediarådet and not approved for children, and also for films that have not been submitted to Mediarådet. The last category might be called "unrated". | |||
| Bo Johansson <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:06, 13 October 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Okay, I am going to make the corrections in line with your comments. I will also add in the native Swedish source too and we will see how it works out. ] (]) 09:29, 14 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Something similar to your proposal == | |||
| ] --] (]) 15:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for letting me know, Ring. I will take a closer look this evening. ] (]) 16:41, 23 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::]. --] (]) 16:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == RM notification == | |||
| Since you have participated in at least one Requested Move or Move Review discussion, either as participant or closer, regarding the title of the article currently at ], you are being notified that there is another discussion about that going on now, at ]. We hope we can finally achieve consensus among all participating about which title best meets policy and guidelines, and is not too objectionable. --] ] 16:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Guardians of the Galaxy - Box office == | |||
| This is a neutral notice for a about the box office section of this film.] (]) 16:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Thank you == | |||
| I appreciate your comment ], but I wonder how we'd address his (likely) asking again about my not having seen this Kannada film, my reliance on the good faith edit of another user (whom I presume watched the film), and how ] and ] presumptions seems to conflict with ]. Again, thank you, ''']''' '']'' 12:08, 29 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :If he were saying the plot summary isn't accurate then you would need to be in a position to discuss the content then (which would require watching the film) but that isn't the reason for his edit. You disagree with his rationale that the summary isn't sourced, so you are entitled to revert on that basis. In regards to NOR, watching a film and summarising the content is essentially no different to reading a book or a newspaper article and summarising the content, which is basically the whole point of Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 23:34, 29 October 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Reference Errors on 3 November == | |||
| ] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. {{#ifeq:1|1|It is|They are}} as follows: | |||
| *On the ] page, caused a ] <small>(])</small>. ( | ) | |||
| Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can . | |||
| Thanks, <!-- User:ReferenceBot/inform -->] (]) 00:55, 4 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ==Same thing as months ago== | |||
| Well, I though it was good to be back after several months. But now the same editor who drove me away before with his repeated "fuck offs" and the admin who says it's OK to tell other editors to fuck off are it again. I just wanted to explain to my friends here, in case this is goodbye, that I was minding my own business, not even thinking about that foulmouthed person, and just trying to put it behind me. But within ''days'' of my return he's on my talk page, poking me a stick. And the admin is saying, literally, that if I don't like being told "fuck off" that all my past good work means nothing and that I should leave Misplaced Pages. | |||
| I don't know what my future is here. I've started an ANI , and hopefully something will come of that. I just wanted to let some of the good and responsible editors here know, and that if they're interested in following what's going on, that's the link. I am disheartened as hell. --] (]) 10:09, 5 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks, Betty. That means a lot. I value your contributions and collegiality a lot, and I appreciate very much your standing up for me. Honestly, I did not think it was controversial or wrong to ask not to be cursed at. I'm not sure the admins involved represent the best of Misplaced Pages. But you and my other good colleagues do! --] (]) 20:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Century break (snooker article) == | |||
| Hi, not sure why you undid my edit on the ] article. Ronnie O'Sullivan now has 758 century breaks, and I even updated the reference to a reliable website, ]. The link is , and it's in the 7th paragraph. ] (]) 02:18, 18 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :It is obvious isn't it? The table is structured as 50 century increments, apart from the world record set by Hendry. ] (]) 04:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :: Ah I see. Sorry, I didn't actually look at the rest of the table, and the fact that it says 'Threshold' instead of 'Total' or something – my mistake. I guess I must have assumed that as I'm so used to that convention being the norm. Having said that, I find it a puzzling way of doing things and I personally disagree with it. Just out of interest, when O'Sullivan one day, inevitably, eclipses Hendry's record, will Hendry go back down to 750 as that is the previous threshold? Very bizarre. ] (]) 05:17, 18 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :::The main reason for using thresholds is because the data keeps changing and it is difficult to keep accurate figures. Most of the data becomes outdated as soon as it is entered. Even Ronnie's 758 is out of date because he played two more matches after that report. In the case of Hendry I'm not sure what will happen once Ronnie overtakes it. My guess is that it will be retained due to the fact i) it was an important world record, and crucially ii) Hendry is retired so it won't change. ] (]) 06:56, 18 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::::OK, but I still think it is not at all difficult to update the figures, maybe the top 10 players, if not daily then at least weekly, and have an "As of " heading at the top of the table. It is done for other sports all the time, football from personal experience, usually in near real time, let alone daily. If Hendry's figure is retained then the format is made redundant. ] (]) 04:39, 20 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Trust me, it is. We used to do it that way but they were always out of date. The only reason Ronnie's count is being updated regularly is because he is closing in on the record, but try finding John Higgins' current count from a reliable source. ] (]) 05:51, 20 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Reversions on ] == | |||
| Hi, could you explain why you reverted MOS formatting edits by me and bot, as you are not new to Misplaced Pages I assume that you are familiar with ]. Oh wait! you are a senior editor. That means you are more experienced than me {{Smiley|:D}}. Anyway I use a tool called Advisor.js to format articles according ] style. I hope you have a good explanation to your reversions. Thank you--] ] 08:00, 18 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :And there is one more thing, according to ] there was a Template programming element error in the article, so I let the tool fix it.It created a mess in the ref section. I guess that's why you reverted my edit. But other edits are perfectly fine.Dreaworks is not the correct name of the animation company, their official trademark/name is ]. I don't see anything useful in . I think what you wanted is to fix that template ]. It's Ok, I fixed it manually without changing other edits. If there is only one mistake in someone's edit try to fix it manually, without reverting all the other ] edits. Cheers {{smiley|:)}}--] ] 08:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::I reverted the edits because you had obviously used an automated tool that had introduced at least two template errors into the article that I could count. It didn't look to be working right or hadn't been used correctly, so I thought it was better to revert the whole edit. I could have manually fixed the errors but there were quite a few changes and I could have easily missed something. Generally automated tools are not a great idea unless you are doing something specific on wide scale. Many of these "fixes" which seem harmless on surface can actually break stuff, such as links etc, so it is always wise to check each each fix manually. ] (]) 18:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ==Audience response proposal== | |||
| Hi. I saw your reversion of my addition of user ratings to '']'' and followed your note to MOS:FILM, which I hadn't previously read. Now duly informed, I have questioned the section of the guideline that disapproves of these particular user stats, in the form of a . Cheers. --] (]) 03:03, 23 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == December 7th revert of reference link == | |||
| What are the standards by which a link can be used for reference when it contain the text of an article being referenced? I have looked at several sites to find one that would be able to replace the dead guardian link. I fear you would revert all of them back to the dead link. ] (]) | |||
| :I will be leaving input at the vegetarians page in a few moments so it will be best to not add anything until I have left my comments and both you and {{u|Martin Hogbin}} have a chance to respond to them. ] (]) 23:05, 7 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Frozen == | |||
| If it's still playing then show proof and add it as a source. ] (]) 05:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Forget it I already found . However the last weekend (Dec 12 -14) hasn't been added which might indicate the film has stopped playing. ] (]) 06:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Also one most important thing. It isn't "still playing" in UK. It's a re-release therefore can be listed as currently playing. Look at the source yourself. ] (]) 06:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::I know what the source says, I added it. And yes, it is still playing and will be throughout the entire xmas period. ] (]) 07:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :::You're mistaken. According to the source the film stopped playing in July 2014. However started playing again in last week of November. It's not "still playing" but it's a "re-release". ] (]) 07:37, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Also it's actually a special sing-along version release and not a normal release . ] (]) 07:41, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :::::No, I am not mistaken. It is still playing. It is besides the point whether it is a reissue or not. The only reason last week's box office results haven't been added yet is because it takes Box Office Mojo a few days to update foreign box office. This week's box office may not be added until after xmas but that doesn't alter the fact it is still playing. There is just a bit of lag in the updates, that is the only reason last week is not listed on Box Office Mojo. ] (]) 08:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Titanic was re-released in 2012 so you can't call it "still playing". Sing-alongs of Frozen have been released in other countries too. A re-issue is not "still playing". The film had already stopped playing in UK in July 2014 acc. to BOM. ] (]) 08:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::If Titanic's reissue had already been added to the box office and someone had updated the source to reflect that, then it would be entirely correct to state it is "still playing" relative to the currently documented stage of its release. A quick check of the source would have confirmed to you that the film was playing as of the start of December. Now I understand you made an honest mistake, but you've got your answer, so let's not waste any more time on this unproductive discussion. ] (]) 08:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == "Notable" awards == | |||
| Hi Betty, I'm brushing up ], having split it off from the film's own article. Am I right in remembering that we only tend to include in the list those awards from organisations that have their own article? (and thus I can happily delete Aspen, Chicago and the EuroCinema Hawaii Awards, along with a few others?) Cheers - ] (]) 11:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :I think that is correct. It was certainly my position in a discussion on the subject but I can't recall if there was ever any resolution. Anyway, have a nice Christmas yourself! ] (]) 09:46, 20 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Re edits to ] and Perfume Encyclopaedia == | |||
| Out of curiosity, what makes the Encyclopaedia of Perfume unreliable? Has their unreliability been confirmed? As far as I've been able to tell they are no more or less reliable than print sources, and at least seem pretty straightforward, plus it's not an individual person, but a team of people working together... ] (]) 22:49, 20 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :It is not up to me to disprove reliability, it is up to the person who wants to use a source to prove its reliability. As it stands the dates provided by the source contradict the information given by another valid news source, so one of the sources is clearly wrong. The other source is a legitimate newspaper, so what makes the Encyclopaedia of Perfume reliable? Who publishes it and what is their background? Is there any professional oversight? If these two questions cannot be answered satisfactorily then a source cannot be proven to be reliable. ] (]) 02:57, 21 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :: The thing with perfume dates, is that they're all over the place. Newspapers repeat what they're told by the company PR, and for a while, English Blazer (the focus of the edits) had an EXTREMELY fake history behind it that was being pushed by publicity, etc - claiming that it had been around since the 1950s even though it was demonstrably BS. I've found the Encyclopaedia REALLY useful for basic date info and other info, such as types of fragrance, etc - they usually make it clear that a date is an estimate. You can find "reliable sources" giving dates that go ALL over the place for this particular subject.... ] (]) 23:39, 21 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :::That doesn't make the encyclopedia a reliable source though, it just makes it useful resource for checking stuff. If there are other reliable sources giving other dates then they should be incorporated into the article. ] (]) 02:15, 22 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Liver dumplings == | |||
| Liver dumplings are not vegetarian... <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:52, 21 December 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Please conduct article discussion at the article talk page, not on my talk page. ] (]) 03:55, 21 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ==''Merry Merry''== | |||
| {| style="border:1px solid 3px; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}}; padding: 5px; width: 750px" | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: center; height: 1.1em;" | '''A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!''' | |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: center; height: 1.1em;" | '''A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!''' | ||
| |rowspan="2" valign="centre" padding: 5px;" | ] | |rowspan="2" valign="centre" padding: 5px;" | ] | ||
| |rowspan="2" | | |rowspan="2" | | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| |style="vertical-align:top; border-top:1px solid gray"| | |style="vertical-align:top; border-top:1px solid gray"| | ||
| <br /> | <br /> | ||
| <big> |
<big>Have a great Christmas, and may 2025 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!</big> | ||
| <br /> | <br /> | ||
| <br /> | <br /> | ||
| <big> |
<big>Cheers</big> | ||
| <br /> | <br /> | ||
| <br /> | <br /> | ||
| <big> |
<big>] (]) 08:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)</big> | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| :Thanks Schro, you have a good one too. ] (]) 20:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:red; background-color:fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] | |||
| == Seasons Greetings == | |||
| ] ] is wishing you ]! This greeting (and season) promotes ] and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! <br /> | |||
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:SeaGreen; background-color:Honeydew; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] ] | |||
| ''Spread the cheer by adding {{tls|HH2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.'' | |||
| </div> | |||
| ] (]) wishes you ]! Whether you're celebrating ], ], ], the ], ], or anything else, this is the season to share love and joy with friends and family! <br/> | |||
| To you and yours ] ] (]) 16:09, 22 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| <small>Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{]:]}} to your friends' talk pages</small>. | |||
| <center> | |||
| {| style="background-color: #008000; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em; color:#FF0000" | '''Merry Christmas!''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px; color:#FF0000" | Merry Christmas {{ul|Betty Logan}}, blessings and best wishes for 2015!<br>]|] 19:32, 24 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| |}</center> | |||
| {{clear}} | {{clear}} | ||
| </div> ] (]) 08:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *I really should get myself one of these greeting templates so I don't look ignorant. Hope you all had a pleasant day and all the best for the New Year. ] (]) 08:44, 26 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Twelfth Night == | |||
| Hi - did you read the talk page? It's pretty clear that there is no definitive date for 12th night, and the article needs to reflect this. I have meant to fix this for a long time, but your edits spurred me on. Does the Shorter OD really say 5th with no caveat? That's odd if it does, as the 2nd edition of the Oxford Dictionary of English, the big single volume, gives the 5th first (see my edit summary). If you think the article is wrong, please use the talk page to discuss it rather than simply revert me, as there are multiple sources that show the different dates. Thanks. ] (]) 13:58, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Hi {{u|Dougweller}}, I didn't realize I had reverted anyone on Twelfth Night (so I apologize if I undermined any work you had done). The ] has undergone a few re-writes and there was some ] material that was better suited to that article, so I re-wrote the lede around the sources that were available. I didn't realize there was an issue at the article. The Oxford Dictionary of English definition was present in the article prior to my edits so I just stuck by what it said, so in all honesty I do not know if it really says that. The quote from it seemed fairly exact though. ] (]) 14:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{ec}}Ah, I must have misread something. You didn't undermine anything I'd done. I don't have the Shorter Oxford, but the very large single volume version says "Twelfth Night" noun 6 January, the fest of the Epiphany. That first line is what is called the "core sense". The next line, which in OED speak is a "subsense" and is written in a smaller font says "Strictly, the evening of 5 January, the eve of the Epiphany and formerly the twelfth and last day of Christmas festivities". ] (]) 14:53, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :::I have looked over your re-write and have no major issues with it. It seems to fairly represent the sources (to the extent I can judge them) and incorporates what I added in too. I wouldn't be surprised if other editors alter it in the coming days though so let me know if you need any input on the talk page. ] (]) 17:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == December 2014 == | |||
| You've annoyed me a great deal, don't corrupt my talk page again. ] (]) 18:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| Gone as far as to involve someone else to back you up on here now, you are pathetic. ] (]) 19:06, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :Man up and address my points at the article talk page rather than sulking on my talk page. ] (]) 20:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Accolades == | |||
| Hello Betty, I've been working on Frozen-related articles and would like to ask you something. The film's music was recently nominated for a number of Grammys, and I'm wondering if they should be included in the film's accolades page, or just mentioning it in the soundtrack article would be enough. With regards, —<span style="color:#D70270;">ALittle</span>] (]) 16:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :I honestly don't know, but ] includes a couple of grammy awards. Personally I would add them and then if anyone removes them it can be discussed further on the talk page. ] (]) 18:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == What'cha think == | |||
| about this... the longest article I've written to date and a fine way to wind up 2014: ].{{smiley}} ''']''' '']'' 22:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :It's good, you've been quite busy this Christmas! Keep up the good work and Happy New Year. ] (]) 21:12, 2 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==Happy New Year!== | |||
| <div style="background:orange; padding: 10px; border-top: 3px solid yellow; border-left: 3px solid yellow; border-right: 3px solid yellow; border-bottom: 3px solid yellow 8px; font-size: 110%; font-family:Tahoma; text-align: center;"> | |||
| ] | |||
| Dear {{BASEPAGENAME}},<br> <span style="color:red">'''HAPPY NEW YEAR'''</span> Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!<br> From a fellow editor,<br> --] (]) | |||
| <small>This message promotes ]. Originally created by ] (see "invisible note"). <!--To use this template, leave <nowiki>{{subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year}}</nowiki> on someone else's talk page.--></small> | |||
| </div> | |||
| ==Happy New Year!== | |||
| <div style="background:orange; padding: 10px; border-top: 3px solid yellow; border-left: 3px solid yellow; border-right: 3px solid yellow; border-bottom: 3px solid yellow 8px; font-size: 110%; font-family:Tahoma; text-align: center;"> | |||
| ] | |||
| Dear {{BASEPAGENAME}},<br> <span style="color:red">HAPPY NEW YEAR</span>!!! Thank you for your consistently excellent work through the years. Last year was a hard one, both physically, thanks to medical ailments, and on Misplaced Pages, thanks to a plethora of Wikitrolls. Colleagues like you make staying here worthwhile. Here's to a better year to all! <br>--] (]) 23:23, 2 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- | |||
| <small>This message promotes ]. Created by ] (] | ] | ]). To use this template, leave <nowiki>{{subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year}}</nowiki> on someone else's talk page.</small>--> | |||
| </div> | |||
| == FYEO! == | |||
| {{YGM}} - ] (]) 08:47, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Pirates of the Caribbean (film series) == | |||
| Hi Betty, thanks . Should we maybe consider an embedded note? I only made the change since the value has been compromised a few times. Frankly it was unclear to me why the budget was $378M if 1) there are two sources, 2) one source doesn't indicate this value, 3) the other source is confusing. ? Regards, and a healthy, productive, happy new year to you! ] (]) 05:25, 8 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :The Box Office Mojo source is out of date as far as the budget goes. The $378.5 million figure is derived from the Forbes article, by subtracting the tax rebate from the total expenditure to get the net production cost. It is pretty confusing but I have provided a complete explanation at ]. ] (]) 06:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Walkabout deletion == | |||
| Hi Betty, I am wondering why you have removed the beginning and end scenes of the Walkabout film (featuring the brick wall and the Roulette expressions)? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:12, 10 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :It is a plot summary, and the roulette framing device is incidental to the plot. See ], which states "The plot summary is an overview of the film's main events, so avoid minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, individual jokes, and technical detail." If someone wants to know the basic storyline the details you added will not increase their understanding of the film. ] (]) 21:32, 10 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::Then let me test your statement "If someone wants to know the basic storyline the details you added will not increase their understanding of the film." - What is your (Betty's) basic understanding of the film? If you are unable to come up with the correct answer without recourse to the frame or to third-party interviews with the producer, then I suggest reinstating the frame. Looking forward to your answer... (Apart from this basic point, the detail of the ending is at the moment inaccurate, but we will discuss that next.) <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :::I have given you an explanation for my edit and my talk page is not for discussing the article. If you wish to discuss the article further then I suggest you start a discussion at the talk page where other editors can contribute. ] (]) 09:35, 11 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::It is not acceptable to delete Wiki entries and then refer me to a general talk page - you have to take responsibility for your actions. Let me give you the first clue towards understanding the film: after the initial frame with the roulette phrase, you hear a mysterious, potentially erotic, panting noise. The camera then focuses on a class of harmless young girls, including the protagonist Aguttar, practising the pronunciation of the letter "H", hence the collective panting. Evidently an elocution class. Her RP pronunciation is emphasised at every opportinuty in the film (despite this being Australia). She and her classmates appear in neat school uniform. She then is shown with her family in a convential suburban setting at her home in a modest high-rise apartment. Betty, let me know if you want me to go on (I have better things to do on a Sunday, should you wish to be dismissive). Hoping for your cooperation, thanks. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:05, 11 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :::::{{tps}} IP, you've been told to take it to the article's talk page, not here. I suggest you do so, where it can get the attention it deserves, rather than the backwater of a personal talk page. FWIW, I agree that the brick wall and roulette expressions <s>are not present in the film</s> should not be present in the summary: they do not explain the plot, which is asummary of events, not an examination of themes. These should be explored further in a "Themes" section of the article, not in the Plot section. Either way, that is for the talk page of the article, not here. - ] (]) 12:11, 11 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::May I just clarify a basic point when you say "the brick wall and roulette expressions are not present in the film". Do you mean (a) there is a film version of Walkabout where the opening scene has been cut out, and therefore you have not seen the opening scenes? Or do you mean (b) that you are familiar with the opening scene with the brick wall, roulette expression, the elocution classes, the city traffic, the family apartment, and picnic preparations, but you assume they are unimportant for the film plot/understanding the film? A short answer, (a) or (b), would be appreciated. (And if I do not receive encouragement from Betty, you will not hear from me again, neither here nor on a Talk page.). Thanks. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:28, 11 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :::::::Poorly phrased: I have now clarified my meaning, but my two points remain: 1. This conversation needs to be on the article talk page; 2. A plot section is a rather mechanical summary of the steps the film goes through: it is not aplace to outline or discuss the "inner meaning" of the film: that is dealt with separately in the article, and should be in a Themes section. - ] (]) 12:34, 11 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Thanks, you had me worried for a moment. As for your concerns about an "inner meaning", you should address those, perhaps with Betty, in a Themes section. I am concerned with having the plot logically and consistently presented (trivial example: in the opening scene, Aguttar swimming formally with her brother in a swimming pool surrounded by high-rise buildings within view of the Ocean(!), while in the closing scene, Aguttar dreams of swimming naked with her brother and the aboriginal in a natural swimming pool in the outback - it is misleading to mention the latter but not the former. Although I grant the latter has more attraction for the average male viewer...) <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :::::::::I am not referring you to a "general" talk page, I am referring you specifically to the page where edits to the article are discussed which is where all editing discussions should take place. It not only opens up the discussion to other editors it also provides an archive record for future editors. By the way, while it's largely academic IMO SchroCat is partially right: while I can corroborate the "place your bets" line is spoken at the start of the film it is not spoken at the end, at least on the Criterion release. I checked my copy of the film and it is not there. You can view the end at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9w41F_f9cs and the voiceover is from The Shropshire Lad. ] (]) 14:01, 11 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::I understood what you meant - the technical term is "passing the buck". On the other hand, I see your point: if you do not have a full version of the film ("Rien ne va plus" missing at the end) then perhaps you are indeed not the right editor for the Walkabout article. And since I have not had confirmation from you that you are interested in an explanation of the plot, I end here. Have a nice remaining Sunday. | |||
| == Skyfall revert == | |||
| Hi, Betty, I just wanted to ask about of my edit to ]. It's not clear to me which "note" you referred to in your edit summary—could you please clarify? ] ] 17:34, 14 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Ah sorry, the note is in the infobox next to the gross figure (I knew there was one somewhere), rather than the section you altered. Either way, there was a ] resulting in the decision to avoid the use of "billion" in the article due to the ambiguity of the term in Brit English. ] (]) 18:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Rachel Green == | |||
| Erm, don't you think it is high time the article is protected to prevent this mass of non-constructive edits? I'd say a PC protection fits the bill. ] (]) 10:24, 21 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm not sure what "PC" protection is, but the disruption is ongoing and something probably needs to be done. ] (]) 10:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::My apologies. PC stands for "]". It protects the article against changes of the unregistered and recently registered users. They can edit the article but their edit won't go live. It is like semi-protection (SP); except SP stops them dead in their tracks. The thing is: I was hoping we could get PC permanently; admins don't usually enforce permanent SP on articles. ] (]) 16:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::Well we have three months of semi-protection now. If the problem starts up again after the protection runs down we can look into this pending changes thing. ] (]) 16:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==Film infobox deletions== | |||
| The image size for film infoboxes is 220px, and captions are useful. Please note an anon editor has been making great progress in adding to some obscure sci-fi films. ] (]) 09:04, 10 February 2015 (UTC). | |||
| :If the default image size is 220 pixels then obviously you do not need to set the image size to 220 pixels! ] clearly advises against setting the image size stating "'''do not use px without very good reason'''". For most people setting the image size to 220 pixels is exactly the same as not setting it, but in the case of users that have custom settings then setting the parameter overrides a user's custom defaults. This may cause accessibility problems on devices with small screens, or people with poor eyesight who set the text to a higher point size. Unless an image needs to be a different size to the default the parameter should not be set. ] (]) 09:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::The choice of small images for infoboxes that invariably were the only ones available for film projects led to editors trying to "stretch" the image to make it easier to see rather than exploding it in a second view. This discussion took place a looooooong time ago. See: . ] (]) 14:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::You'll see that Betty was one of the participants of that conversation, which confirm that the DEFAULT SIZE is 220px, meaning that '''the imagesize parameter does not need to be set to 220px''': it over-rides people's preferences, and causes all sorts of problems in terms of ]. - ] (]) 15:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::I don't really see what relevance that discussion has on this matter. If you ''need'' to make an image larger then that the option remains available. What doesn't make sense is setting an image that has a default size of 220 pixels to a "hard" size of 220 pixels. The only people who that will affect is people who purposefully have their ''images set smaller''. Why would you want to set the size to 220 pixels for people who effectively said they don't want 220 pixel images? Let's take a basic example: is there any discernible difference on your monitor between the two images below? As you can see, setting the image size to 220 pixels makes absolutely no difference to the typical user. ] (]) 15:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| {{ Testcases side by side| | |||
| {{Infobox film | |||
| | name = Plan 9 from Outer Space | |||
| | image = Plan_nine_from_outer_space.jpg | |||
| | image size = 220px | |||
| | caption = Image size set to 220 pixels}} | |||
| |{{Infobox film | |||
| | name = Plan 9 from Outer Space | |||
| | image = Plan_nine_from_outer_space.jpg | |||
| | caption = Image size set to default}} | |||
| |center | |||
| |t3= | |||
| |t4= | |||
| }} | |||
| {{OD}}Do I see a difference? yes. The issue was actually raised by another editor, and I followed his advice as to sizes. However, it's not worth the pixels as there are more important things to do such as adding to other articles. Thanks for the conversation. ] (]) 16:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::If you see a difference then your preferences must be overriding the default settings. Try logging out and viewing the images then. ] (]) 16:04, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| {{OD}} When I joined the Wikywackywunderland a gazillion years ago, the default must have been much lower for thumbsizes. When I changed it to 220px, then the images come out the same. As I said before, not intending this to be a deal breaker, I was merely trying to help an anon who seemed to be on a tear in regards to improving obscure horror and sci-fi flicks. ] (]) 16:18, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Well I am pleased we have managed to get to the bottom of this misunderstanding. No hard feelings. ] (]) 11:04, 11 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == I've added some more reasoning and evidence that the common name for Star Wars (film) is actually the extended title. == | |||
| Take a look at it yourself, sometime? Haha. Anyways, how can we use a historic film-conservative reference for saying it is a reliable source for common usage? That's biased because you'd expect AFI to list Star Wars Episode IV A New Hope as Star Wars. Is it not? And I seem to be the only one using many sources for common usage but I keep getting oppositions based on "No, the common usage is just Star Wars." Am I not getting evidence consideration? Cheers. ] 20:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == '']'' text at ] article == | |||
| Hey, Betty. Given your work on the ] article, and knowledge of that series, you might want to examine where I reverted {{User|Blueyedmesiah}}. ] (]) 21:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Well it certainly steps well beyond paraphrasing what is already there, so you are right to revert it. There is no doubt ''Gone with the Wind'' is revisionist, so unless the editor returns there isn't much to discuss really. ] (]) 03:05, 15 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==Barbarella music== | |||
| Hi, Betty. Apparently the IP's change at ] was good faith, compare the source. I've written a note to them. ] | ] 16:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC). | |||
| == Will you please explain to me why... == | |||
| ...my edits were reverted? Thank you! ] (]) 00:51, 22 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :] will explain why I reverted your word alterations, and ] will explain why I reverted your addition of ]. ] (]) 01:44, 22 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == What is a “series subject”? == | |||
| Hello. Please answer my questions at ] regarding the meaning of “series subject” and the difference from a name, and whether it reflects actual usage in Misplaced Pages titles. Thanks. —] (]) 22:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :I have explained it clearly already and am not going to keep repeating myself at the discussion. The RFC hasn't gone your way so you obviously don't have a consensus to implement the changes you want to make. You should move on now and work on something else. ] (]) 02:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::I don’t think you ''have''—or if you have, you did so without ever using the word “subject.” The examples you have given of “series subject (film series)” included ], where “Batman” is used as the name of the series; ], where “Harry Potter” is used as the name of the series; and ], where “Bourne” is either the name or a partial title match for the series, or both. In short, your examples of unnamed series all have names. That’s why I have repeatedly asked for clarification on the meaning of “series subject.” | |||
| ::So let me simply ask: Is '''Series subject''', to you at least, simply an alternative term for '''Series name'''? If not, what’s the difference? —] (]) 09:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| If you’re going to insist on citing ''Batman'' as an unnamed series, please respond to my claims that it’s named ''Batman''. —] (]) 10:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Honestly, I don’t get it. You’re not even denying that they have names; you’re just acting like I never even refuted the claim. —] (]) 11:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| IP, time to drop the stick and walk away. There is an open RfC to which your comments should be confined. Your actions on this talk page have crossed the line into ], which is not acceptable. - ] (]) 11:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :I wasn’t intending to harass, just trying to make sense of the situation. My apologies. —] (]) 11:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==Neutral notice== | |||
| There is an RfC at ] whose outcome could affect WikiProject Film. You may wish to comment. --] (]) 01:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi Betty! Since we don't have much free licensed pictures of maximum breaks, I see much advantage in adding one of those to the Misplaced Pages article. It's much more related to the article content than Ronnie O'Sullivan's head on top for example. Could you please restore this image? If you know a better position for it, I'm glad to follow to your instructions. Cheers, —] <small>]</small> 22:13, 4 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :I will not be restoring your photo because i) it is poor quality; ii) it does not "show" a maximum break; iii) it is awkwardly positioned in the article and pushes down the tables, ruining the aesthetic of the list; iv) we provide Youtube links to most televisied maximums anyway, so anyone who wants to "see" a maximum is not short of choices. ] (]) 22:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::Well, wherever you see poor quality (it's sharp, big enough, and shows the last pot) but it's definitely the best free-licensed image of a maximum break and hence should be used in our article of that very same topic. Of course, it doesn't show the complete break but nobody would anyway expect that from an image. Besides, the YouTube video is not freely licensed (cannot be reused by our visitors) and doesn't show the full frame either but is instead of poor quality itself. Regarding the position which is indeed unfavourable, I asked for your help but as you refrain from doing so I'll put it under O'Sullivan's image as proposed. Cheers, —] <small>]</small> 22:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Before reverting a third time post on the ] and get someone to agree that there should be a full porn film on an article about a porn film. And find a specific policy relating to posting full media not just a censorship argument. I have no problem with the film being there if it can be supported by policy. So far it isn't. --] (]) 22:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :I strongly suggest you go and read ]. There is no policy prohibiting the addition of material that may be considered ponorgraphic in nature to a Misplaced Pages article. Your actions contravene established policy. What is more, since you have reverted three times in a 24-hour period, a fourth revert in the same period will result in your contravening 3RR. ] (]) 22:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == On mixing list markup == | |||
| I don’t know whether you’re aware, or how much of what I’m going to say you may already know, but colons and asterisks in wikimarkup both define ]s; if you reply to a comment beginning with something like <code>**:</code> with a comment beginning with <code>::::</code>, that ''terminates'' the previous list (and all sub-lists) and begins a completely separate list. This can be confirmed by looking at the HTML source in your browser, having a ] read it, etc. I can give more information if desired. Cheers. —] (]) 05:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| By the way, I’ve noticed that the infoboxes under ] affected the title of this Talk page, if that matters to you. —] (]) 06:26, 7 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:16, 5 January 2025
Senior Editor
and is entitled to display this Rhodium
Editor Star.
| This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Betty_Logan. |
 Archives | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Discussion at Talk:Spider-Man (2002 film) § Plot section
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Spider-Man (2002 film) § Plot section. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
List of highest grossing animated films Peak rank
It is possible to source. Atleast half of them can be found at List of highest grossing films page. And the history of this page itself can be used as a source Marshmallow2211 (talk) 08:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't discuss article content on my talk page. I recommend starting a discussion on the article page if you wish to discuss an edit or propose a change to the article. Betty Logan (talk) 08:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
BBFC
Hello, why did you remove my edit on the BBFC page? 2A02:C7C:F05E:6F00:E14E:F0FD:E8F4:FC43 (talk) 17:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Can you be specific about the edit please, because according to your edit history you have not edited the article Betty Logan (talk) 03:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
List of highest grossing films protection
Hi, do you think that this page needs to have the EC protection back? I asked here to the same admin that reduced it in September 2023--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 19:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Dark4tune
Hi, I am asking you to intervene against this user because you have already sent him a warning about his edit wars apparently he has not drawn consequences for this and continues to do so as here and I can label it as such. In addition, he uses personal attacks of the broken record type
Tag: @Dark4tune AleszJaTuTylkoSprzątam (talk) 09:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Talk:Mission: Impossible – Fallout#Production company/Distributor
Hi @Betty. There's recent discussion about production company/distributor. The talk page also mentioned that the Presented by credit can be "given to a distributor, exhibitor and/or financier that provides a majority of the budget." I appreciate your time and review. Thank you in advance 183.171.120.75 (talk) 03:24, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi there. John Higgins page
Hello @Betty how are you doing ?. Betty an editor erroneously removed a final from Higgins' non-ranking final section from last season. It was listed on Misplaced Pages with a source from Snooker.org our number one website used for getting references. Can you re add this final please, as the page is auto-protected page. Many Thanks 178.167.169.188 (talk) 22:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
List of James Bond films revert
You recently reverted my edit with a summary of "No reason to artificially restrict the size of the tables within the article. On large displays it just creates excessive scrolling. If the sticky headers are causing issues then it would be simpler to just remove them outright, rather than replacing them with a fix that is inferior for the vast majority of readers."
Just so you are aware, the majority uses mobile per User Agent Breakdowns, which is where the sticky headers are mostly needed for very tall/wide tables. I'm glad you are fixing it. Please also fix the screen reader accessibility issues per MOS:COLHEAD. Also, if you want sticky headers without the scroll, you can use Template:Sticky header. Jroberson108 (talk) 04:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- The scroll table is restrictive on both large and small displays. Without the scroll table I can see five full rows on my phone, but with it I can only see three rows and have to scroll to see the final two columns, and it is also fiddly to scroll through. I am not particularly bothered about the sticky headers—they were only added a few months ago, and the article survived for years without them. They are mostly a gimmick where the data in the table is intuitive and take up valuable screen space on small devices. Betty Logan (talk) 05:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'd appreciate you pinging me in your reply as I am not subscribed to your talk page. Don't forget that there is also landscape orientation. I mentioned an alternative to the scroll, so use either one if you want sticky headers. Sticky headers with or without the scroll have their uses on small screens, especially for very tall tables. When scrolling down to read data, instead of having to continuously scroll up and down to read forgettable headers to associate with the data, the headers stay in view. You are welcome to your opinion, so use it or don't. If you feel the table has memorable headers and isn't "very" tall, then remove the sticky headers once you test it on mobile in both orientations. It's not about survival, but improving accessibility for others. Please also fix what sounds like a long standing MOS:COLHEAD accessibility issue. Jroberson108 (talk) 05:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Superman Returns
What's your problem? You haven't even seen the movie to be sabotaging what I do. And I'm not going to insist on breaking the rules. I only ask one thing of you: leave me alone. JeanMercier90 (talk) 02:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
- I am required to leave a warning on your talk page as a precursor to reporting you for edit-warring. Betty Logan (talk) 03:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
|
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! | 
|
|
|
|
- Thanks Schro, you have a good one too. Betty Logan (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Seasons Greetings
★Trekker (talk) wishes you Seasons Greetings! Whether you're celebrating Hanukkah, Christmas, Chrismukkah, the Solstice, Saturnalia, or anything else, this is the season to share love and joy with friends and family!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:P Aculeius/seasonal greetings/winter}} to your friends' talk pages.