Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:55, 20 March 2008

Hey, welcome to the Films WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

• The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for September has been published. October's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
• Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Film Tasks template to see how you can help.
• Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Misplaced Pages. Check it out!
• Want to collaborate on articles? The Cinema Collaboration of the Week picks an article every week to work on together.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around!

Archives

Through 2007 Through 1/08

Helpful templates

Just cut an paste them when you need them from this page, I keep them on my user page. The dates are always formatted correctly, just remember to increment the date, as often as possible, as I sometimes forget to do.

• <ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |accessdate=2007-10-31 |quote= |publisher= }}</ref>
• <ref>{{cite book |last= |first= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title= |year= |publisher= |quote= | url= |isbn= }}</ref>
• <ref>{{cite news |first= |last= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title= |url= |quote= |publisher=] |date= |accessdate=2007-10-31 }}</ref>

thank you

Thank you Wildhartlivie and Pinkadelica so much for all the effort you've put into this article today. I'm sorry it's turned out to be such a hornet's nest, but I appreciate that you've both taken action. I am completely sure that this is the same serial-vandal that has been doing this nonsense for over a year. this edit repeats my edit summary verbatim but without context - an old trick, and several edits including this one contain the same mangled English as previous edits, plus there is a complete inability to distinguish between POV and cited opinion (also nothing new). I'm so sure it's the same editor. Thanks again. You two are the best, and I look forward to speaking to you in a few weeks. (Wildhartlivie, I can't believe he threatened to have you blocked....) Cheers Rossrs (talk) 07:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, we are going to "click here for instant jealousy", and we'll be staying here, but in an actual building of course, then "click here to really make your head spin", then to "the most beautiful stetch of coastline in Australia" and then one week in the low apartment block on the left side of the picture just above the tree line. Not bad huh? The last place is not far from where I live and we're going here, which is also nearby but unfortunately we won't be seeing Harriet. We met her a few years ago, and she was very beautiful, but she has departed these shores since then, along with her owner.

Yes, it looks like it was an eventful day, and I think you handled it brilliantly and with restraint. Sometimes civility is overrated, but I really don't see anything uncivil (incivil?) in any of your comments. The "new" editor is nothing new, but the first time it happened, it was just me against a gaggle of sockpuppets, so at least now there are two of you. Tag teaming is naughty. But working together for the good of the project is a very worthy thing. I've often wondered about Claudette Colbert. What is it about her that makes a new user think "hmmm I'm going to sign up with Misplaced Pages and the first thing I do is completely rewrite the Claudette Colbert article". The weird thing is that about 10 new users have had exactly the same idea. What are the odds? Take care, and thanks again. Rossrs (talk) 08:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Amy

No fear, I wasn't talking about you.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 11:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Regards.•:*¨¨*:•. ¸¸.•´¯`•.Mark Fairfax-Harwood, Engineer Springvale Studios 22:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC) I am not ranting at anybody!, but being as you are one of the editors deleting my published life's existence link by link and with the embarrassment all cataloged on google for my competitors to chortle about (If I write on this page). All it would take on your behalf, would be taking the time to read the published BIO from the artists site that the entire article is based on and verified by. Possibly seeing if there where any way of avoiding cutting the last nine years of the poor woman's history. Also if you noticed the red ink on the article there was a link to an article about me and another link to an article about my sister both articles have been deleted by people that are as far as I can ascertain are no longer wiki editors and when you have worked as hard in a field of art as me or my sister, to have genuinely reached a position of national prominence in a particular field it is more than disappointing to see the record of your life's achievements cursorily deleted by people who are not even interested enough to even google you first or consult with others more knowledgeable on the subject. Also I was very surprised not to find an article about Stan Shaffer having clicked on the red Link, I do intend to rectify that omission. I wont write it myself as I am dyslectic and useless at writing and if I don't reply fully in less than eight days its because I am working hard on something that will be reported in an article in wiki but only after they have erased my credits. IE. Cradle of Filth's next album. You can watch it happen in a few months time.

Regards.•:*¨¨*:•. ¸¸.•´¯`•.Mark Fairfax-Harwood, Engineer Springvale Studios 09:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I will reply by line. "The issue around material that has been removed from Misplaced Pages has to do with several points. One is that material must be referenced from reliable 3rd party sources (see WP:CITE), which does not mean using a self-published source written by the subject of the article. Another is that it must be notable (see WP:Notability). Another is that it must meet specific guidelines regarding style and presentation (see WP:MoS). Another is that it must be written from a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV) and not constitute a conflict of interest (WP:CoI). Anything that I've removed from articles to which you may or may not have contributed has been because of issues with one or more of these points. A Google search, omitting self-published materials, forums and the like yields less than 20 hits for your name. My name has more hits than that and I am certainly not notable per Misplaced Pages definition."

Then search Springvale Studios and MarK Harwood and if you still think you are still more notable, I will write an article about what I know of you so far!.

"Meanwhile, who IS your sister?"

My sister is Oriel Harwood

"I wasn't on Misplaced Pages in 2006 when your article was apparently deleted. Nothing to do with it,"

How old are you then?, It was up there then before my article was deleted as I said by people who are not any longer Wiki editors. It was deleted and then another was put up there not by anyone I know. And that was deleted as well by someone no longer editing Wiki.

"so please desist in blaming me for wiping out your life's work."

Ok you only deleted a relatively small part of my life's achievements then

"A person's notability does not rest on whether there is an article about him or her on Misplaced Pages. In fact, a person's life work determines whether there will be an article."

No you personally and other wiki editors are doing that bit!

"Establish notability independent of self-promotion that is objectively published in news or similar sources."

http://www.iankitching.me.uk/music/bonzos/bonzo-albums.html

Well to find out who they where before you where born try Misplaced Pages.

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=45792

Still I don't spose you follow death metal much.

http://www.bourbonstreetrevival.com/davebiog.html

"If you or your sister have reached a level of national prominence, then finding objective 3rd party sources should not be difficult."

It isn't is it.

"But in order to support retention of any article, those sources must be included in the article so that they can be verified. That is, for example, why the "citation needed" tag on the Louise Robey article was placed regarding her place of residence and current career status. Verification. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)"

Doubting what a person says to this extent in my social class without having adequate evidence to the contrary is actually considered quite the rudest thing you can do and the custom of the past (had you been a man) would have been an early morning start with your seconds. I only know of two societies where the the words "is that right" can be loosely injected into a conversation without causing absolute consternation thats "trailer park america" Or wikipedia

You haven't said a word about why wiki would remove empirical information about record credits etc. Do you in fact agree that like Hollywood A list parties "you just want the talent, no below the line smuks".

Well my sister designed Cruella Deville, Glen Close did not.

There is more to this than meets the eye eh?.

In this industry getting your credits is vital, your customer base have very good reasons for keeping you a secret, I have been told by a management company that once credited me as "The Calophalic Alchemist" that if they credit me properly they wont find booking me to be so easy next time snerk snerk!.

Thanks for all your help Mark Lucian Fairfax-Harwood.

Blocked user

Hi. Blocked users are allowed to edit their own talk page in order to request an unblock. The blocked IP abused it and tried to revert my block by removing the notice (which of course does not work). I blocked them at 19:09 UTC on March 13 and, other than their own talk page, they did not edit again until 19:22 UTC on March 14, a mere 13 minutes after the block expired, but otherwise not editing during my block. As to why they're still allowed to edit during an active sockpuppet inquiry... I'm assuming that they accusers/admins involved are not entirely convinced enough to block the IP(s) yet, but I'm not involved with that personally. Cheers, CP 02:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Clara Beranger

Thanks for the assessment. I agree about Mrs. Demille being confusing, but I was trying to communicate her rise in status, I will rethink the section. The Demille's were the elite, so marrying the boss was a big deal. I still may find more material on her. I am never really am finished with anyone I work on. I'm working on Yakima Canutt right now, he's about 80% done. I will let you know. Thanks!. One of these days I am gonna figure out how to get from a B grade article to a GOOD. I seem to be racking up Bs, but then i've only been here 6 weeks. EraserGirl (talk) 06:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 09:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

What's My Line

At the end of February, you reverted this edit with the comment that the show in question wasn't a primetime network game show. However, the section states:

is the longest-running game show in the history of prime time network television, and the sixth longest-running game show overall (behind

As such, none of the shows in that list should be network primetime game shows, since WML was is the longest running of those, and these are the game shows of other types that have run longer. I don't know anything about the show that was added and whether it is in fact a longer running game show, but its status as non-network primetime should not be relevant.

I just wanted to check with you on whether you misinterpreted the list, or whether there was something else to your revert... If anything, it would seem that without citation, there is no way to prove the list conclusive or complete, and perhaps it shouldn't exist at all, or at least should have a tag. Thanks TheHYPO (talk) 21:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's misleading in any way - it says that WML is the longest running prime-time network game show, and , the sixth longest running game show overall. To me that clearly means there are five game shows that have longer runs, but none are primetime network game shows. I don't see anything misleading about it; I do, however, agree that it needs a source and there is no basis for the list (it says six, but there are currently six OTHER programs listed in that list, which would make WML at least seventh, if not eighth with the one you have reverted. I think the list is due to be removed pending a source. Thank you for clarifying. TheHYPO (talk) 03:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Gene Wilder

I could really expand the article, make it a GA and everything, but i'm afraid that my grammar/spelling sucks. Would you mind keeping a eye on my edits so the article doesn't look like it's been written by a Spanish monkey?--Yamanbaiia 23:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Melchior Lengyel

Dear Wildhartlivie, it is not completely clear for me how the article about Melchior Lengyel should be made perfect, your system deviates from the one I have got accustomed in the Hungarian version of Misplaced Pages. I would be grateful to you if you helped me in this work. May I recon on you?--Elkagye (talk) 07:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I tried to tidy up the references. Do you think that each work mentioned in the text should be listed in the references with all of their bibligographical data?--Elkagye (talk) 13:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Jonestown

Wildhartlivie- thank you for expressing to User:Lonewolf BC, in a fluent and civil manner, exactly what his problem is. I've had to deal with exactly that type of behaviour from that editor before, especially after he started following me around Misplaced Pages with his twitchy revert finger and smug demeanour. I certainly hope he'll get the message this time. --G2bambino (talk) 15:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I've answered your comments on my talkpage. You are welcome to respond there, but no more flaming me, please. -- Lonewolf BC (talk) 04:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Bette Davis comment on <Rousse>'s talk page's_talk_page-2008-03-17T01:44:00.000Z">

Hi - I just read your comment on my recent changes (mainly to American-style punctuation w/quotes) to the Bette Davis article. I guess it was a little quixotic of me to do that - I usually do accept the punctuation I find on a page (as you'll surely conclude if you look at my pattern of editing) - but I noticed that a) the punctuation was inconsistent (OK, the preponderance of quotes *were* inside closing punctuation, but there were a handful of American-style quotes throughout) and b) the article had American-style spelling, which to me (I'm a freelance proofer of academic books) is a cue to expect American-style punctuation. Heck, it's a featured article, so that's all the more reason to have *consistent* styling, if (as you admit) it's not incorrect, wouldn't you say? And Bette Davis to me is a quintessentially American actress, so that seems another (maybe kind of subtle) argument for American style. What do you think? Thanks - Rousse (talk) 01:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)'s_talk_page"> 's_talk_page">

Marion Cotillard

When you get a chance, could you look at the Marion Cotillard page, namely the awards section? I've already removed quite a bit POV, repetitive praising, and listed fansites so I'm gathering that a major Cotillard fan feels the need repeat her numerous accomplishments. Is it me or is that section repeated save the nominations? I was going to remove it but I didn't want to be too hasty. By the way, I know you were working on columnizing the Oscar winners filmographies, would you like me to do that to Cotillard's page? Pinkadelica (talk) 03:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for looking. I'll columnize that in the next few hours or tomorrow. Big thanks for tables, I always have a hard time finding those. I didn't email you or anything because I figured you were busy. Sorry to hear you're not feeling great, I've been sleeping wacky hours too. In my case, I think it's the weather. One day it's hot, the next it's cool and rainy. I did see the Colbert article and your edits. That's their MO if you think about it. They pop up every few weeks, wreck havoc on the article and then disappear. Very curious (and annoying) behavior. Pinkadelica (talk) 04:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. What's odd to me is that it seems that those that are listed under wins are already listed under the "Show" section. I don't know if that was an oversight or done intentionally. Judging from the POV and unneeded nonsense that the article did have, I think it was done on purpose. Pinkadelica (talk) 04:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain it was an anonymous IP address that did it. I only went through the history briefly, but I think it was an IP that did several edits in a row sticking that stuff in. Ah well..let me go clean up this mess! Pinkadelica (talk) 04:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Patkirkwoood (talk · contribs)

Have blocked these IPs for three months as sockpuppets of WJH1992 (talk · contribs); it would have been earlier if I'd been watching the sockpuppet case, but its clear that since they have both reverted the same edit of mine they are the same editor. Thanks for reminding me. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 17:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Manson - revolver

At the Manson talk page, you might want to weigh in on "Revolver," a section I've put there. I've just brought the section to the attention of BassPlyr23, too.71.242.159.196 (talk) 18:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Postscript: You might also want to weigh in on "Clothing discovery," which I've just added to the Manson talk page.71.242.159.196 (talk) 18:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Date format

It has been established that date formats are in the format that the articles' subject originates from. Since Charles Manson is an American, dates in his article should be in the American format. The British format doesn't matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.211.18.216 (talk) 00:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Nancy Price

Dear Wildhartlivie - wondered if you have time to a look at the Nancy Price entry - I'd appreciate some help with taking it forward - cheers Excellentone Excellentone (talk) 23:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)