Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:48, 28 July 2009

Welcome to my talk page!

• Please use the Reply button to reply to a message, or add topic (+) to start a new section.
• If I have left a message on your talk page, please DO NOT post a reply here, instead, reply there.
  • Mention me using the "Mention a user" button in the Reply box or type out {{ping|Erik}}.
  • I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
• If you prefer to manually edit the page to post:
  • Use an accurate and appropriate heading.
  • Indent your comment by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
  • Sign your post with four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

Erik's Archives

Fight Club

My all-time favorite book, and one of my favorite films. Glad to see it at FAC and I look forward to reviewing it. --Laser brain (talk) 18:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Awesome to hear that! :) Hope you can help do the article justice. —Erik (talk • contrib) 18:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm unfortunately opposing because the prose isn't ready. But, I'd like to work with you to get it up to par within the timeframe of the nomination. --Laser brain (talk) 22:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem, and I appreciate your examples. Someone copy-edited it some time ago, but I had a feeling that it was not the most skilled performance. I will review the writing... a good tip is to read it out loud to yourself, isn't it? Easier to detect some of these weird phrases. :) I'm about to turn in, so I will take a look at your suggestions then the article tomorrow. Thanks for weighing in! —Erik (talk • contrib) 05:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Since I am new to the FAC process, what is your suggestion about copy-editing Fight Club? I feel like I can continue to make changes every time I go through the article. I checked with the Guild of Copy Editors, but they seem so backlogged. I'm willing to review every so often (it's funny how there's always something new to discover each time). I admit I rushed the article a tad to FAC because I hoped to request it as a front page article for October 15, 2009, the film's 10th anniversary. Didn't realize my writing wasn't so solid! :P Any suggestions would be great. —Erik (talk • contrib) 00:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, any more these days all you can really do is ask around. I can help out with the copy editing if you'd like. I don't claim to catch everything but I'm not bad. --Laser brain (talk) 01:04, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Your help would be greatly appreciated! GrahamColm provided a new list of fixes that I carried out, so obviously there's more work to be done. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) 16:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

It's already looking vastly improved—I will follow up at the nomination page either today or tomorrow. Thanks! --Laser brain (talk) 19:23, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Erik, I expected to start a new section, but I see a conversation has already begun. Thanks for addressing my comments so quickly. With your blessing, I will continue to tweak the prose, but I have added my support. Let's hope that no major issues are unearthed by my fellow FAC regulars. Graham. Graham Colm 18:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Any help you can provide in improving the article's prose is very much welcomed! The focus on copy-editing certainly tells me in the future to try to get more work done in that field for other articles before I bring them up for review. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) 18:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Did some minor tweaking and a bit of repositioning - while post-production and lab work may seem to be a visual effect in the literal sense, anything involving the overall "look" of the film is traditionally considered cinematography; the job doesn't stop at production. I've also clarified a few things - feel free to copy edit, of course, but I changed phrasing that I considered blatantly inaccurate. Unfortunately directors often talk a lot of tripe that they may genuinely believe. I recall hearing Mike Leigh claim that Vera Drake was shot on a special Kodak experimental film stock, only to find out months later, when speaking to his cinematographer, that it was actually shot on what was (by the time of release) the most popular film stock in use. Leigh's confusion arose from the fact that his film was amongst the first to use it when they were in production. These things happen. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the changes! Admittedly, I have no technical expertise, and I tried to interpret the material the best I could. I appreciate your fixing the errors involved. Let me know if you need access to something like Cinefex. —Erik (talk • contrib) 15:09, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

re: Notes and References

Yes, I've always been a bit confused by the two different headings. I think references is more apt, and looks more encyclopedic too. Lugnuts (talk) 18:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:CITE seems to support "Notes" for footnotes. "References" are for a source that has "a significant amount of the material" used in the article (books and periodicals whose coverage is multi-paged). "Bibliography" is mentioned at the page as apart from referencing for the article body; it's more of a "Further reading" section. I will probably revise my write-up to be in line with this, though it's not something we should crack down on. If you have any thoughts about my write-up so far, feel free to share. :) And thanks for catching the AVP slip-up... —Erik (talk • contrib) 18:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

Greetings - I wonder if you have ever considered becoming an administrator? Or, more to the point, if you would have any use for the tools? I'd consider nominating you. I'm going to approach Steve as well. Let me know and we'll chat. --Andy Walsh (talk) 19:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Appreciate the offer to nominate me! :) I have considered becoming an administrator but do not want to do so yet for a couple of reasons: One, I do not have use for the tools at present; I'm becoming more and more involved with WikiProject Films, though, so tools may eventually come in handy. Two, outside of the mainspace, I prefer to be a non-admin while I am involved as a lead coordinator for WikiProject Films. Not that I would wave the map, but I want to be able to accomplish goals without any possible stigma attached. Hope you understand my reasons, and again, appreciate the consideration! —Erik (talk • contrib) 19:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

If you've got time

If you're bored or have some extra time, I'd love your comments on Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Star Trek: First Contact/archive1. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 21:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I should have some extra time later today or tomorrow! I am a guest at a friend's house and without my own computer, so my access is touch-and-go. I'll try to find a time slot soon so I can read through the very comprehensive article and respond to it. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) 14:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Camp Kawanhee for Boys & Bryan Singer

Yes.. thousands of kids go to summer camp each year. But how many world famous entertainers, singers, actors, etc go to summer camp each year. Please undo your removal of the Camp Kawanhee For Boys reference in the Bryan Singer page. It is a noteworthy fact that he attended this summer camp. It would be a non-noteworthy fact if there were a reference to you and your summer camp experience because you are not a famous and influential person. Furthermore, expanding on the bio of famous individuals only adds to the pool of information from which we draw, if we quash that information then where do we end. For example, millions of kids go to college every year so should we delete those references too??? --You Talkin' to Me??? (talk) 15:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

re: Tag and assess drive

Thanks for the heads up - I'll take a look and reply with comments. Lugnuts (talk) 14:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Signpost: 27 July 2009

• From the editor: Welcome to the build-your-own edition of the Signpost
• Board elections: Board of Trustees elections draw 18 candidates for 3 seats
• Wiki-Conference: Wikimedians and others gather for Wiki-Conference New York
• Misplaced Pages Academy: Volunteers lead Misplaced Pages Academy at National Institutes of Health
• News and notes: Things that happened in the Wikimedia world
• Misplaced Pages in the news: Assorted news coverage of Misplaced Pages
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Oregon
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 09:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Fight Club, redux

Congrats on the article passing FAC. It is well-deserved. Now can you do The Game and Seven? Thanks. --Andy Walsh (talk) 22:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! :) I've considered doing Seven, but I'm less sure about The Game—the ending always bothered me. The protagonist stepping off the ledge and plunging to what seems to be his death, and he lands in his own party where guests laugh gaily? It never sat right for me. Seven, on the other hand... wicked good. I'm actually getting a book called Dark Eye about the films of David Fincher, so there will be details all around and perhaps a bit more for Fight Club, too. It wasn't available at any library, so I just decided to buy it used. —Erik (talk • contrib) 22:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice work! A long road traveled on this one, but worth the patience you showed in waiting to nominate it. Steve  22:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Outline Update - Basking in the light of knowledge - 07/28/2009