User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE/ArchiveDec2006

STOP removing RFU tags

This is the last time I'll warn you about this. Irpen's interpretation of this is simply wrong, as he's been told by two admins already. Don't get yourself blocked over this. —Chowbok ☠ 16:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The Colt and the Mare

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article The Colt and the Mare, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:The Colt and the Mare. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. TheRingess 17:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:3blindmice.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:3blindmice.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Iamunknown 08:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Pegship

Please note that you hve been posting to Pegship on her archive. I have reverted these posts. Please consider posting them to her current talk page. Thanks, Cbrown1023 00:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

WkikProject Hawaii

Hi, Ernst! I see you've created a number of Hawaiian geo stubs. May I ask for what purpose? I'm guessing they are surfing locations, is that correct? If not, could you tell me what you would like to do with them? At this point, it looks like the articles should redirect to a list. What do you think? —Viriditas | Talk 10:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, Hawaii is great. I hope you had a good time. So, do you think the list should be a list of beaches or surf spots? What do you want to call it? Do you think we may be dealing with more than one list, or are these all beaches? No hurry on this. Take your time. —Viriditas | Talk 10:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Your suggestion is a good start, but I think we should narrow it down. Take a look at Category:Hawaii-related lists for some ideas. Like I said, no hurry on this, so take some time to think about it. Mahalo. —Viriditas | Talk 10:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Aidankaatajat eli heidän jälkeensä vedenpaisumus

Hey. Thanks for creating the article. This is a very tricky one. My poor translation would be The Ones Who Knocked Down the Fence, or After Them Came the Flood. I don't know if that's good enough to be mentioned in the article. Thanks, Prolog 17:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Finnish directors

Greetings! My advice would be to wait until you have a lot of articles under Category:Finnish film directors before we propose a stub type. Currently there's a new Category:French film biography stubs which will reduce the size of Category:Film director stubs, so I don't know how soon we'll need a new stub type. Carry on! Her Pegship 18:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Congrats and edits

Congrats on making it over 25K! About the articles, it'll be the new year before I can get around to helping out. Sorry about the delays, been a few upheavals in my personal life. -Yupik 19:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

About the new lists of films

Hi, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. I see you are starting a new series of articles about films in year. There are two reasons I think it would be wise to discuss this in the Film Project talk: 1) In these lists there are plenty of red links and there is an ongoing talk on this issue in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/List of films without article. Maybe you can also contribute there with your opinion. 2) I have been updating all the Years in film articles to have one all-inclusive list of films that have articles on each year's page (but not giving all films we don't have articles on, except the ones already given previously, many of which may be removed when a guideline becomes clear). So later on in what you have started, we will have duplicate lists. My original thought was that the lists of films without article could complement the lists of years in film. So I am very interested to know your intentions. There is also user Nehrams2020 who is working hard for a complete alphabetical list and I am sure he would like also to know and discuss on what you are planning. We can be all more effective this way. We are dealing with many thousands of titles after all. Hoverfish 21:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ernst, I am not so interested in the country lists as this is not my focus. My focus is on the lists of years in film, and what you are starting with the films in year is going to be tagged for deletion if you don't take it easy and understand where your work is standing in relation to other project activities and what the problem with giving red links is. I would really wish that not one bit of enthusiasm and time in editing, including your edits, is wasted. I can see your good intentions and appreciate them, but you should align them with the project's concerns. I reassure you that you are not the first who noticed that a full list of ALL films is not given, but this is not what Wikipedia is looking for, and I say this after having researched a lot of relevant articles and guidelines. Actually your new lists happen to coincide with a time wherethis problem is getting so serious (film titles as red links) that new and clear project guidelines are soon to be established. So, please, follow the link to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article, try to understand what is attempted there, what problems exists with lists full of red links (in the main namespace) and maybe you will decide to add your efforts to the project's efforts to define the needed guidelines, before you invest so much energy in things that may be later deleted. Such lists as you are about to create (films in year), IF they contain red links on mostly unimportant films, are not what we are looking for. There are other internet databases for this. I emphasize this as I know it would be a big dissapointment for you and for us and I am trying to avoid it. I know you care, but so do I and the others in the project. When I started I was even more ambitious than you and wanted to create a full film database for Wikipedia. Then I found out that this is not acceptable and had to slow down. I wish you do the same, without feeling put down in any way by what I say. At best start such discussions in the Film Project talk page and not in individual members, because you may get some more feedback and opinions. When I started developing on the lists of years in film, I had posted in detail all my intentions, waited for some time and then started. That's the way to go in a project. Hoverfish 12:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Well not to wikify by linking to unexisting articles is a good move. I have no problem with your presence and am most glad to know you are interested in developing Wikipedia on films. But there are already areas where this is going on and I am trying to bring this to your attention. Hoverfish 13:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I am also quite with you in wanting to decentralize attention from the american film industry. This is why I started including international awards in the years in film. Before there was mostly only Academy Awards. The red links I give in awarded films are a push in this direction, but should be done with care, or it will have the opposite result. Please, look also in Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable films. It is very incomplete but it has to be taken fully in consideration, because it stands very close to Wikipedia's needs. Hoverfish 13:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC) OK then, happy edits and please discuss in the Project talk. This way whatever we say becomes noticed from more concerned members and can bring us very useful feeback. Hoverfish 13:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

ReYears in film

Okay, but wouldn't it be better to just leave it to the category, because in your example, List of Albanian films, there were very few (3) films with articles (notable ones) and the rest were red links... I think this wouldn't be good in the long run. Cbrown1023 22:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Are there any criteria in the films you include for each country? What sources are you using (you don't have to name them -just to get an idea)? Are they from filmographies of directors /actors or did they get some local award? I admire your effort and intentions and the presentation is quite appropriate but some point of criteria or sources would be good to know. Maybe also a useful hint for anyone who wishes to contribute to your effort. Hoverfish 20:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: List of Finnish films

I've nominated the article List of Finnish films for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that List of Finnish films satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Finnish films. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of List of Finnish films during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Calton (talk • contribs)

Films lists

Hello! Thank you for being bold and trying to meet a need where you see it, but I think your current, numerous, films lists are actually running into some troubles. You see, "List" articles are still articles, and still require that all information contained in them be verifiable and notable. Also, there is a vehicle for catagorizing articles by their traits, such as countries of origin and years of creation, and they are called Categories. See WP:CLS for more information about the difference between Categories and Lists. Since categories such as [[Category:Finnish films]] already exist, it is pointless to create a LIST that covers the same information. Lists such as List of Top 25 Grossing Finnish Films that attempt to discriminate qualities and thus establish themselves as notable ARE appropriate, but a list of ever X made in history, where X is a significantly large and unmaintainable grouping, violates the policy wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Thank you again for all of your efforts to improve wikipedia, and please try to refocus your efforts on creating categories instead of lists where appropriate, and when you create lists, they should not be indiscriminate lists. Happy editing! --Jayron32 06:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

To respond to your comments on my talk page...

• • You said: WHAT ARE YOU DOING? I put a hell of a lot of work into setting those up ... I feel that I am being targetted once again..Certain people are making my life a terrible misery on wikipedia
    • Response: Relax and take a breath. Assume good faith as I have done. I understand the amount of work you put into this. Also, I was NOT the one who put these up for deletion. The fact that I endorsed the nomination has nothing to do with my opinion of you or of your project. Lists are articles. They are subject to the same guidlines and policy as any article. You cannot get around such policies as WP:NOT especially Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and Wikipedia is not a directory simply by calling the article a list. Indiscriminate means that no criteria are used to decide what to keep and what to leave out. An article titled List of Finnish Films is by its very name indiscriminate. Again, a better title might be something like List of Top 100 Grossing Finnish Films by Year IS discriminating, and I would vote keep for this list every day and twice on Sunday. Lists should NOT merely be identical to categories, and a broad list like this WOULD be.
  • You said: When those lists are completed there will be far more films listed than in the categories. Information is there at your fingertips and if you require knowledge of films any where on the planet the navigation box immediately connects you to them.
    • Response: I understand your purpose. A short change of focus by creating lists of discriminating qualities would help greatly. Again, as I said above, I believe lists of films DO BELONG AT WIKIPEDIA. But a list with no restrictions is by definistion indescriminate and thus deletable. You could recreate each of these lists by including discriminating qualities in the title, as I described above. Thus, we have assurance that every film in the list is verifiable and notable. Again, this is a GOOD PROJECT you are working on. I support the idea, just not the current implementation. Consider a small change of focus, and you will find that you are better able to defend this project, and I would be the first to line up in your corner.
  • You said: Why iare these lists any different to List of Acts of Parliament of the United Kingdom Parliament, 1707-1719 or any of the other thousands of long lists on wikipedia?...There are thousands of lists on wikipedia why are these any different particularly when they are for information purposes.
    • Response Your analogy is bad. Every Act of Parliament is published in reliable sources. It is open to critique, and thus is part of the public discourse. Not every film meets these requirements. For a better analogy, consider the difference between List of number-one modern rock hits (United States) and List of American Songs. There is a reason the second one is redlinked, and will never exist. It is indiscriminate because it does not contain any criteria on inclusion of songs. The first one exists because it is destined to be a controlable list. There are a finite number of songs that meet the criteria spelled out in the list. So it is a good article.

Final Comments: If your goal is to create a list of articles that need creation, then it would be better handled through the creation of a Wikipedia:WikiProject:Finnish Films and the like. It would allow you to create redlinked lists so others or yourself will know the shortcomings of wikipedia. If your goal is merely to have centralized lists that contain all articles of a certain classification, then we already have a vehicle for that at wikipedia, and those are called Categories. Again, YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO, but you need to go about it differently so as to ensure that your lists are discriminating in some way. Again, if you need help doing this right I would be glad to lend a hand where needed. My goal is not to see you go away, or to see this project go away. I support you as an editor and I support this project. I just don't support the way it is being implemented right now. --Jayron32 16:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

If you permit me a humorous analogy, it's like someone wanting to drive from town A to town B and so he sees an empty looking motorway and starts going. Then some people start trying to tell him that he is driving on the opposite direction and he is bound to get in trouble. The driver keeps driving thinking the others are trying to give him a lousy time. Then he meets opposite coming traffic and everyone starts shouting at him and he thinks the whole world is suddenly against him. But believe me I don't think it's your fault in this case. The reaseon (given in terms of the analogy): there were no markings where the driver joined the motorway, or maybe there were the wrong markings. For this I have started posting messages above project level. We are missing some clear guidelines. So clear that when such an enthusiastic person like you has a good idea and wants to contribute, he knows clearly the way to go and no energy is wasted. I really hope you don't think I was trying to give you a bad time with what I said yesterday. Just the time I spend writing to you, should show you how much I appreciate your intentions. Hoverfish 18:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Look Jayron32, I'm quite with your latest approach. Ernst Stavro Blofeld has a good idea. It can be a good tool if done right. If it becomes a good tool (in Film Project namespace), I am sure it can update a lot. It can reach a point, after the appropriate filtering to create one or more Main namespace series. From the link that Beardo gave in his comment, I checked Greek films and (being Greek) I saw that there were just the notable films that have had some international notability that were mentioned. This list has been there for a while and cannot be tagged for deletion, because it's properly filtered. Now, there are a lot more notable Greek films. This doesn't mean no one should create an article for them. And surely there can be a backing list, red linked, including translated titles red linked, so we can monitor which films get started (and even so we can't be sure if an article gets started spelled in a different way, which needs making searches -so who has time for it? -is there some bot that could do a fuul round of checks once in a while?). But mind you: others may have their hand busy. From what I noticed, if one starts something like this, he is mostly alone keeping it running. So don't start too much and start asking for help, because film gnomes are busy these days. I started with Keep in my vote, but I changed it to align with Jayron32, because I think his alternative means that not one moment of your efforts has to be wasted. It just has to get in the proper place and wait as a tool before it makes any headlines. Please, let me know if my comments are helpful and well taken. Hoverfish 20:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Look, keep privately a backup of the edit codes of all your lists and navigations in case they get deleted. Under Film Project namespace you can start then something similar to what I started with the lists of films without article. But don't overshoot: just start only as much as you can manage to develop alone. Later, if it proves useful to some, they may give you a hand. Then, when you have better understood what Jayron32 means by "discriminating", you can find the right title for a series of useful articles in the Main namespace and include only the films that are relevant to the new title. I would suggest "List of notable ... films", but notability for films, especially foreign ones, is not easy for me to define. I keep reading articles but can't find how they apply to films. Click on the second part of Jayron's signature and read some of his musings on notablility. Even for me it's hard to understand it all, but at least you will get an idea of some important issues have to be considered in Wikipedia. Hoverfish 13:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Kjell Westö

Thanks! I couldn't find the proper stub cat and ended up giving up on trying to find it :) -Yupik 11:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Yehp, will do! The Finnish wikipedia doesn't have an article that I can find on that movie and I have never heard of the movie, so I'll read up on it and fill in the English article sometime this week. -Yupik 11:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

What categories are

I can't take the time to teach you this. You will catch on it soon. Categories are not lists or articles. They produce lists. Categories are some markings that one enters to an article. If you go to all the Nigerian films and add [[Category:Nigerian films]], then when you go to Category:Nigerian films, you find them all listed there. Please, find out by yourself about all these things and spend time studying what concerns you. I need my editing time to keep on with my projects, all right? All best. Hoverfish 14:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Patronize you? I just persumed you didn't know from what you said. Sorry! No, it's not nice to have one's work deleted. Hoverfish 14:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Categories vs lists

Hi there! I like the idea of using the navbox to direct people to categories. Instead of a redirect, you can "hard code" the Category link into the box; redirects can be messy and add an unnecessary step to navigation. The box should also be renamed "Films by country or region of origin". Would you like me to edit the code for you?

Also, if you want to keep the lists, your best option is to move them to your own userspace, like your Sandbox. Just use the "move" function to change the list to (for example)User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld/List of American films. Once they're there, people should understand that they're a work in progress and not ready for the main encyclopedia yet, and generally folks leave sandbox items alone. Hope this helps - Her Pegship 18:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:Films

Thanks for helping to contribute to WP:Films, I know you have been facing a lot of opposition. I listed all of the discussion from your lists and templates on your talk page, Hoverfish's, and Cbrown1023's on the talk page of WP:Films if you want to take a lot or discuss it yourself. I am hoping by listing it there, the project's members can get a better answer on what should be done. Good job on the templates, I do recommend that if the lists of years in film are all deleted then the template could replace the current table of years in film on Lists of films, (once the redirects are fixed of course). I am a big film lists WikiGnome myself, so I commend you for your efforts. However, attempting to make drastic changes without discussion will get you a whole lot of opposition/discussion. I just wanted to let you know about the WP debate so you can be part of the discussion and help to improve the WP:Films as a whole. Wikipedia can be frustrating at times, but don't let it get to you. The members here only want to help improve the project and Wikipedia in general. Thanks and please join the discussion. --Nehrams2020 19:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Incivil comments on my talk page

Look, I am trying to help. I support your work. I think what you are doing is a good idea. I have done nothing but argue in your favor, and you leave this incivil screed at my talk page? I spend a large portion of my day defending your project and trying to save it from total anihilation with a compromise solution, and you say you are sick of me? For the record, I don't particularly like Calton or the way he deals with other editors. But that doesn't mean you should lump every editor who commented on the AfD in with him. I have given you suggestions on how to avoid having your work deleted. I have argued on the AfD a method to keep it around, and am fighting to do so. Hoverfish is doing the same. And yet to come to our talk pages and tell us that you are SICK of us? You are sick of what, people trying to help you? --Jayron32 20:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I think we are beginning to understand each other better. Please understand that this is not personal. I can see the impulse to have a personal connection to your work. I work very hard on the articles I have written, and sometimes it hurts to see them criticized. Please understand that everyone here is trying to improve the encyclopedia. I don't want to speak for others, but I am nearly 100% sure that even the people who vote delete (and I had voted delete on the national lists, but changed. I am still voting delete on the year lists) both recognize the work that went into what you did and the purpose of it. The disagreement is over the implementation; and a difference of opinion as to what a "list article" is and what a "category" is and how to use each. Please take my comments at the AFD page and on the project page to heart, and understand that they come from a desire to improve the encyclopedia. --Jayron32 16:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

8th Dalai Lama

Hi, what's the deal with this edit to Jamphel Gyatso, 8th Dalai Lama? It appears to be copied verbatim from http://www.dalailama.com/page.51.htm which says "Copyright © The Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama". What's the rationale for considering this free material?—Nat Krause^(Talk!) 03:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Film lists

If your primary justification for having these lists is merely to identify missing articles, then the proper place for these would be in the Requested Articles section of WikiProject Films. Articles do not need to be created for the purpose of finding red links. Girolamo Savonarola 18:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Barry Cumann

You inadvertently placed some comments in the entry for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Barry Cumann which apparently belonged at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Finnish films (and then I mistakenly moved those comments lower down in the Kevin Barry Cumann entry thus moving them farther away from the List of Finnish films entry). I have since removed them from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Barry Cumann but you can find them in the edit history in case you need to restore them to the AfD entry where they were supposed to be. --Metropolitan90 21:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Redirects

Please stop creating unnecessary redirects, they put too much strain on the server unless they are useful. Cbrown1023 14:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

This is about your redirecting of a ton of articles to categories instead of just changing your navigation box. Cbrown1023 14:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

That was just an example, my point was your talk in WP:FILMS about creating more redirects... that is a little too much. Those can stay now. Cbrown1023 14:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry! It sucks, but...... Cbrown1023 14:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Cbrown1023 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Cbrown1023 14:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Since you ask me, I will answer this, but for pete's sake don't think I'm trying to hover above you or anything. Mate, I'm only three months deep in all those policies and guidelines and recomendations and I'm still in search of the most basic basics, if you know what I mean. You and me are two different ways of going about things. I go slow, ask first, if no reply than try a bit and see if anyone gets bothered by what I did and then proceed to make lots of work and big changes. I can't expect you to do the same, because each one has his own way into things. So: all you hear from me is just my opinion. But if I see you going along a line that is going to get stuck with the way Wikipedias usually go about categories, lists, navigation boxes, etc, it's of my character to try to warn you. So now I have to warn you again, but not as "Wikipedia", simply as "mate". You wrote to me: "do you see how I can't win?". If I may make a friendly guess, you are the type of person that takes things in a win-lose way, sort of like a game. Maybe this game sustains your enthusiasm. I'm not trying to put it down, but I will tell you, this is an encyclopedia and not a place to "win" in something. Maybe one can "win" in managing to find out enough on how things work here, or how he/she can contribute effectively, etc. Now, from the beginning I've tried to say "slow down and look around". You didn't "propose" lists, you worked by yourself and compiled them. Yet, by the title you created them, their relation to the other existing lists wasn't sucessful in several aspects. But doesn't mean you lost your time, or anyone wants to put you down. If you want to be an effective wikipedian, you've got to get used to it. Yet to you, even if we manage to save all of your work and find a way to corelate them with other lists, it gives you a feeling "you lost". That's the way editors react when they find something out of place. They don't want you to lose anything, not even in feeling bad. I think it's just your way of "wanting to win" which creates this illusion. I reassure you, during the three months I'm in Wikipedia, it's the first time I see so much participation of members in responce to your contribution. None of these members expects a new-comer (to the film project) to know everything, or even the basics, so if you quit wanting to win, you will see that you are surrounded by pretty cool mates, who themselves are still in a process of learning about all these matters. I also tried to share my understanding on what categories are, but started too elementary for you. In Film Project talk, in my last long comment, I am trying to make plain my understanding of what exactly categories are meant to be and what their difference from lists is. Maybe someone more knowlegeable will explain to me that I missed some point, which I will appreciate to learn. Ok, mate? I will help when I see that you understand well and participate in the common effort of solving all this. Don't worry about deletions. We have a way to make your contribution useful and enough members are there to help it happen. Of course our help will be no help to you, if you take it all as a defeat of your original plans. Hoverfish 16:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

If your wish "to provide information in one massive volume to anybody on the planet" comes in conflict with Wikipedia, there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. And about how Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable films will accept to grow into containing your data, this is between you and WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles to sort. I am no member of this Project. And, no, I don't think that I misunderstand you too much. Hoverfish 17:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Good move!

Ok, saw your recent work. From this lists you are adding we can figure out how to proceed. As soon as we find the right name and place for a full series of lists of films in countries. We can put all the blue links and as many of the red ones (but unlinked) as the title allows. I'll be glad if it turns out that ALL qualify. On the way we may even find more "reds" that may have an article under a slightly different name. New articles may start too (I'm not good in this - only in a few films I know well I contribute). Don't worry if I mark all blue links somehow. It will be just so that others will not start asking how comes and we include existing articles in a list for missing articles. Hoverfish 17:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

And by the way this was my first message in the Film Project: The Layman's Blues. Please notice the second message (the note after it I wrote just before all this deletion talk started). Hoverfish 17:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Good, so if you make this updating from the sources you mention, please also take the time to mark each film for some notability. If any awards involved name them (no link needed), for important director give linked name, for any important actor starring (not just in cast) (give linked name), or other notable factor). But if they have an award it's enough to add only one extra factor, not too many and we get to lots of code size. If you want, you can mark them as I do in the other red lists. This will help with manageability surely. If you put a huge number of red links from the countries without marking them, I will have to do it and I have already lots in my hands, so, please let's do it step by step. Filter how you think best for notability, and mark red links when adding them in the red lists. Let's not start creating individual "red" years, until we get an overload (I would say of over 65KB in several decades, but this can be decided in time). Hoverfish 18:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

This about finding other wikipedians to help you is another problem I mentioned carefully. All I know are over-busy, including myself. But if you explain your latest move in the Film Project, members will notice and somone may be willing to give you a hand. I will give you the help I already mentioned. Hoverfish 19:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I just saw you are creating the articles outside the films without article in film project namespace. I will move properly your lists, so please notice how the name should be and when you create the other countries name them likewise, i.e. Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/missing Albanian films . OK? This way they are protected under /Lists of films without article. Hoverfish 20:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I definitely would mind. As I said above, please let the decades as they are. Hoverfish 20:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It is not only a matter of organization, it's that I am patroling them daily. Before they were one list, and I had to check one page. Then it got too long and were split, so I have to patrol more than 10. If they are further split a daily patrolling will not be possible any more. Hoverfish 20:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, the lists have been moved to the proper namespace and I have renamed all the links in the red lists appropriately. For the thing about merging them all in one year, let's first see how many titles you come up with in the countries and we can then decide the next best step. Hoverfish 20:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Look, I don't quite understand, so I can't say "agreed". Do your work as you say in Argentinian films and I'll see what you mean there. Have to concentrate on other things now. Hoverfish 20:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Naming of films

I would also ask the others in the Project if it's better to create all these films under their original language title or its English version. I remember there had been some discussions about this issue. I don't think there are strickt rules, but some things are more conventional than others. Hoverfish 20:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but the argument is that this being the English Wikipedia, folk will not understand anything in all these languages (as seen in a listing), so giving the English-International title is much more useful. But again, I'm not so much the one to talk to about it. Hoverfish 20:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Films w/out Article

Well, good job then! Cbrown1023 22:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

You mean you want to have the same lists sorted differently in different articles? If so, this thought has often come in mind. Yet since I started going through X-number of lists, I think the work done to keep them all updated will be much harder. Imagine we find that film "The Return Of The Hoverfish", actually exists under the title "The Reurn of the Hoverfish" and we have to make the correction not in one list, but in 5 different versions of it. That's why I had mumbled originally about a database (and I mean this as in Excel for example, where you can compile all data and then sort it as you like), but then I found that Wikipedia isn't creating such databases, so I quit the idea. But we have to be sparing in creating diffently sorted lists of the same material, because this makes us more busy with such routines and less able to work on improving articles. Hoverfish 22:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yugoslavian Film

Hello, I noticed you made an article regarding Yugoslav films and was wondering if you had plans to actually begin adding films yourself or if you made it as an incentive to get others to contribute. I'm not really sure about layouts and how that could be done, so I'm not going to do it myself, I'd massacre it... Anyway, I think it's a great idea. I hope it doesn't get deleted, because it's a candidate... so maybe someone should edit it and start adding movies as soon as possible. Stop The Lies 07:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Stop_The_Lies

I'd love to help, but I'd probably be really slow and not much of a help... In addition, I have finals to worry about until Dec 19th, so I don't have much free time. Another thing, I noticed that some Yugoslav Cinema Wiki articles already exist, they're not too developed though (very little on them, more like stubs), so not sure whether or not to add to those??? And then there's the Serbian cinema article... should there be a link on the Yugoslav cinema article to it etc etc... can get very complicated since people have already started separated articles... :S It would be great if it could be merged into one coherent article named 'Yugoslav Films', with subdirectories, but wow would that take a lot of work... Stop The Lies 11:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Stop_The_Lies

I'm definitely going to help you out, but I can't until exams are done (I'm sure you understand). Yugoslav films are very important to me, and I can even think of other people who might be willing to help. Anyway, I'll let you know when I'm available to help out :) Stop The Lies 11:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Stop_The_Lies

correct entering of Cast

In Wikipedia cast has to be displayed like this: * [[Actor]] as Role

• Rod Steiger as Tarzan
• Romy Schneider as Jane

The way you copy cast from imdb is obvious copy of text. Be careful we don't start getting complains about it. Hoverfish 18:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't check if this is also the case, but it goes without saying, that you shouldn't copy text "as is" from imdb summaries. It has to be at least rephrased. Hoverfish 18:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Kinkinda

Hi, I deleted the article "Kinkinda" as I verified that such place doesn't exist; it's likely a byproduct of a mistaken web site related with Maja Latinović. See Talk:Maja Latinović for an explanation. Duja► 10:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

Hi, I've noticed you add a substantial amount of images to articles, and congratulations for it, but I'd just thought you might like to read WP:XIMG. The code makes the article look a lot tidier and means you can change the size to decrease distortion that may show up when smaller pictures are enlarged. Just a quick thought, keep contributing! SteveLamacq43 17:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Just a moment, I'm back

Let's discuss a bit more before you go ahead. Hoverfish 13:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The films that are completed will eventually populate the new series of (say) Notable Films by country, right? Hoverfish 13:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Look the backlog is something you can keep parsonally, like in User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld/Completed missing films. Better also let the entries for a while in the list, to make sure all categories and assessments are done right. Then whoever assesses them, can remove them, ok? Please, start a new section at the bottom of my talk page, as it's hard to find your answers. Hoverfish 13:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I also have a Film Project list in User:Hoverfish/Notebook and I gave a link in the project. The gnome-work I mentioned above (asses. categ. etc) can happen easily on the red list. The Film Project (and you are part of it too) will decide the name and purpose of the new series of films by countries and soon we can simply move them in Main namespace. Don't lose your precious time for unnecessary moves. We are going well now. Keep up the good work. Hoverfish 13:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, just make sure no text is obviously copied from other sites. Hoverfish 14:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I read somewhere (but that's only from memory) that it counts when films exist also in other Wikipedias. We could check at some point. Hoverfish 15:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Good you know Spanish! Translating from other Wikipedias is great. Hoverfish 15:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

In case you don't already know, there is Wikipedia:Translation you may find interesting. Hoverfish 15:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

About categorization, I haven't yet much experience. Her Pegship does this very well. From what I know, the top Category is Films and then as we branch down, we have to make sure we give subcategories that branch the right way up. That's elementary, but it's all I got. Hoverfish 17:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Stub templates

Greetings Mr. Blofeld! Please, please refrain from creating stub templates or categories without the sage advice and help of the Stub Sorting Project. It's better to use the Film WikiProject "Stub-class" rating on the talk pages for now, until those articles are actually created.

Stub templates are a tool for identifying large categories of small articles that need improvement, not to tag a small number of articles. The purpose is to inspire people to expand the stub articles, not to create more stubs. The guideline for WPSS is that once a category has 60 or more stub-sized articles it can qualify to have a stub template and category.

Your motives are good, I know, but please be more patient; don't create a stub template if there are not already 60+ articles, however many there may be in future. As long as the articles get an appropriate "permanent category" (i.e. Category:Argentine films), they will show up on the stub project's radar and get duly attended to.

I'm going to have to list {{Argentina-film-stub}} on the Discoveries page for now, and we'll see what happens.

In good faith - Her Pegship (tis herself) 19:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand your enthusiasm; the more you are seen to work within the system, though, the better your reputation as an editor. Thanks. Her Pegship (tis herself) 19:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:OlaviAhonen.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:OlaviAhonen.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 16:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Progress of work

Nice going. That's the way it usually goes, some general (structural) work and then some articles and so on. If others see the pattern and its aim and it fits in with their work, they join in. As the puzzle keeps building up, and sizes of articles reach some known size, it will become easier to see what structure (and names) we will give to the main namespace lists. And the more users find a stable and undisputed structure, the more participation we'll get. Hoverfish 23:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

By "articles reach some known size", I mean "lists reach some known (or even forseeable) size". Hoverfish 23:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you must have done some mistake in Argentinian films. The table includes old silent films and other articles that have nothing to do. Hoverfish 14:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, but don't edit in the main namespace lists you are still working on. This you can do in your own namespace. If anybody patroling recent changes sees it, it will be tagged automatically for something and we'll have to do discussions again. - You wrote: "All of this would be part of the years in films series and Cinema of series". It will have to be an independent series of lists that can run parallel to several other series, but in particular to the years in film. There is a more general series "years in events", and the years in film series correspond to the general series. The navigation of years you see there is also part of a more general project. It should not be replaced or changed unless all the series decide to change to a new template. If a new series is created and belongs to the general navigation, it can be decided between projects that the new series qualifies and is included. Hoverfish 14:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Now it looks very good. Further data can be added any time. What is now necessary is to give a text lead section, explaining that this is not a list of ANY Argentinian film, but a list (say) "most notable" or "of international notability", to stand a chance in the main namespace. Make a sample of the lead section as you think best, edit it in this article and I will do any corrections if needed. Hoverfish 15:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to limit you in your plans of inclusion. But you will have to define somehow your criteria of inclusion. If another user adds a film, it should be within the scope you define. Hoverfish 15:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

El Apóstol

Hi, you placed a message on my talk page mentioning the IMDb link, it's actually already in the infobox. Thanks for adding the cats and other things. ShellBeach2 18:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Oops! Never mind it seems you already noticed it (I checked the article history) LOL ShellBeach2 18:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Note on changes

Hi, I did the following: 1) Copied the films you had compiled of 1894 and 1895 to the corresponding years in the list of films without articles. 2) Made all the links of the films in year navigation redirect to categories (some early ones were not) 3) Fixed the formatting of the template to all block text, and with line-breaks every 10 years. 4) Switched to the generic navigation so I could add style 60% width to the table. Just wanted to let you know. I see you are editing cinema personalities. Good work. Hoverfish 22:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Warm congrats for your dedicated work, mate. I would say don't worry too much about making articles for ALL actors. I suggest we look at it from the average (film-interested) reader of Wikipedia. What does one need to find to really expand one's knowledge. Does one need to know every single Argentinian actor, or ones strongly important in Argentina? I couldn't tell who's who, as I know little about it. If this clue is helpful, I'm glad to be of help. Hoverfish 13:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

"Other users will begin to see...". Don't make it sound like "we" (other users) underestimate you. Good, there was a mishap with the way the lists initially appeared in mainspace, but I haven't heard anyone doubting the value of your work. Hoverfish 14:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

These navigation boxes you have to suggest in project talk. There are several members involved. Hoverfish 18:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC) As said, I am talking about it in the project (the cinema navigation) (see there). This is not just between the two of us to decide. I think that the cinema nav can become fine, but you souldn't yet start with genre, as from what I know, this is another slippery topic for the project and some of the members who do genre should be present (right now some are not present). So, further talk in project talk, Ok? Hoverfish 20:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:SangreFria1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SangreFria1.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Further, the link provided was not a valid URL. I have removed it from the page. MECU≈talk 15:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This image as well:

• Image:Ahierromuere1.jpg --MECU≈talk 16:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

List of film soundtracks

Hi there; I know that you have been here much longer than I have, but you appear to have failed to put any content into this article, which I have, after waiting 20 minutes, marked for speedy deletion. If you do not agree I know that you know what to do.--Anthony.bradbury 21:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

My friend, you claim 25,000 edits. Can you not do a redirect? OK, I will do it.--Anthony.bradbury 21:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, hit an edit conflict. My humble apologies - I did not receive the bit about your PC being on the blink, but I do know that you have been here much longer than I have. I had no intention of criticising. Would you like me to do the redirect, or will your PC allow you to do it? Looking back at my last edit, it looks slightly patronising. That was not my intention. Apologies again.--Anthony.bradbury 21:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Vastly higher edit number than mine, as I said. Can I help, or are you OK?--Anthony.bradbury 22:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, let me say again I was not criticising, and did not intend to criticise. Peace, brother.--Anthony.bradbury 22:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely nothing. That's what I said!--Anthony.bradbury 22:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

New navigation

I see you started adding it to articles. has the project OKed it? Hoverfish 21:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Look at what I mean in my sandbox and let me know in its talk page, please. If we decide something, I will link it to the project too. Hoverfish 21:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, good going. It's late now and tomorrow I have some early ways to go. So, till tomorrow. Hoverfish 22:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know I have experimented some more with flags here: User talk:Hoverfish/Sandbox. But no matter how I try, there are problems with line breaks between country name and flag. IMO, the project will not favor flags. Hoverfish 00:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean "adjusting so the titles are panelled off"? Also can you please post a note in film project if you agree with the latest version of World cinema navigation (without flags), so we can substitute it in the template? Hoverfish 13:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

So, what do you say. Shall we swap the template? And by the way, in which articles will you put this template? Hoverfish 22:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I can also try to make Asia topics in the flagless version as you have it in the flag version. I'll see if this makes it lighter. Hoverfish 22:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we should bold the main topics or give them bold-90%size. Let it simple, and please no more maps or sat-photos. Hoverfish 22:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

No sections for subdividing countries. Anybody reading the main article will know which countries it includes. Hoverfish 22:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, let it to me. I will not do all tonight, but will continue in the morning. By the way Quebec belongs to Canada, I have to make it show this. Hoverfish 22:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Another thing I have to do is fix all the links since the Cinema articles were renamed. I'll start tomorrow. Nighty. Hoverfish 23:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

James Bond

I challenge your claim that the criminal mind is always greater! It is always important, however, in the most recent James bond movie, I remeber no mention of SPECTRE. I believe that your claim is true, criminal mind is great, however, not greater than the mind of Bond, James Bond. All is well! I am busy de-orphaning articles. Hope all is well in your underground lair as well. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Every few months or so, I start watching all ym bond movies again. I am in the middle of that. My most recent movie i started is the spy who loved me! 40,000 that is alot of articles. I devote most of my time to cleaning up sub par articles and adding sources to them from whatever sources I may have. I am trying to think of a witty Bond saying, however, they are all so shrot and to the point and mostly meaning less out of context (i.e. I dont want to set up an entire scene just to say, "I think he got the point") after killing a villan with a knife. Now that I think of it, that is what I just did. lol. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I like the template, I fail to see its importance in world dominate. Unless, there is a secret java script running in the back ground that is stealing account information from succeptable computers whoch which to steal money for your worl conquering schemes! I see right through you Blofeld, I know your tricks. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have turned the tables. As i overdrew ALL of my accounts massivley so instead I transfered my negative balance to you to be replaced by the positive balance. You are now out millions of dollars. bwaaa haaa haaa. (wait, this world domination evil thing is starting to feel pretty good. Do you need any evil apprentices?)-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I am actualyl really busy with orphan de-tagging and WP:AIRCRAFT, those are my 2 main points now. and wait, doesnt #2 get wasted? I want to be number 1.5 I a, not that interested in filem and such. I will just be an evil #1.5 -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Section headings

On discussion pages, please be sure to add a section heading to your posts. It aids in navigation, reading, understanding, and keeping all the posts together. You can do this by hitting the + at the top of every discussion page or by editing the page and adding =={{{POSTHEADING}}}== where {{{POSTHEADING}}} is the title of your choice. In both, just type what you want to say after the heading or follow the other instructions. Thanks, Cbrown1023 22:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Bond

I am watching you, right now in a movie in which you say, "Right idea mr. bond, wrong pussy" and "Making mud pies 007?" Do you know what movie I am watching? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 02:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Good Luck

I really don't know much about Sister Projects and what their span is or could be. It really depends on higher up strata. Anyway, wishing you good luck for your proposal. If it works out, I could use some, although I'm not good in picking up any more languages. Four is enough and I'm even having problems with Greman, although I have all possible learning matterial at hand. Hoverfish 13:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds interesting. There is somewhere an issue on the coal about other wikipedias and connecting them. Maybe you know more than me on the issue. The one thing you mention with Dictionaries should be discussed in the wiki-dictionary. By the way, shall we say goodbye to the Cinema of Country templates? I think consensus is pretty clear about it. Hoverfish 13:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiLinguistics Project proposal

Hi Ernst, I have just read your proposal for WikiLinguistics project, but I'm not sure about few things. You want there to have explanations about grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc., etc.? And for looking up words I think we have already Wiktionary, don't we? Otherwise, I'm in favour of establishing this project, because we would collect those data in one place. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 13:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It sounds like a great idea to me. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Having WikiLinguages (not WikiLinguistics, Linguistics is the study of Language with a capital L and is more an academic encounter and not necessarily about learning them) sounds like a really good idea. I like the notion of having audio files to assist the reader. I do have some ideas/concerns myself

• Having a separate wiki for every language is quite cumbersome and heavily biased towards commonly spoken languages. I think that each language can have its own sub articles. So there would be the Lingala page, then Lingala phonology, Lingala verbs, Lingala politeness, Lingala declension, Lingala dialects, etc. organized with them (this may be what you described and I just misunderstood). We could and should, however have separate language wikis in the same way that Wikipedia does. This way the Lingala page(s) on the English WikiLanguages would have the assumption that the reader speaks English while the same page in the Arabic WikiLanguages would assume that the reader speaks Arabi, etc.
• Wikipedia is a site that at least pretends to fall back on outside sourcing. While information regarding language aspects is technically free for all, I imagine certain ideas on training (such as drills, exercises, assignments) may have some difficulty getting consensus. This is by no means a reason not to do WikiLanguages, just something to keep in mind in formatting the layout.
• WikiLanguages needn't contain a list of every word in each language. That is what Wiktionary is for. A certain basic vocabulary can be present, but I don't think that WikiLanguages should necessarily be around for pure translation.

I really encourage this idea and wish you the best of luck in getting it established. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Country templates

I do not think that a whole template, with flag and bold text is going to be accepted by the project. But I will see if the maker of the existing country template could grow to incorporate your links. They are useful in an infobox. Normally the index box, in well written articles would include (unlinking) all these topics. I also don't like the idea of flags in Film and Cinema articles. It's the Film-reel image that should be the main point. Flags raise issues of history, geography, nationalism and although this fits well in an article like History of Uruguay, it hits strange to a big percentage of film audience and members. Also I know that you enjoy seing the large picture and trying to connect things, but it is so that consensus is the only way in such general areas. In writing about a film or a director, this is not so intense, except if you happen to find someone who has a different view about the specific issue. Also the block letters in a table or list (apart from headers), is something that will later be undone, routinely, by someone cleaning up the series. IMO if you notice how some things are styled in (good) similar articles and lists, complying saves time and makes wiki-leaders take you more seriously. Hoverfish 14:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with all of the intentions you have listed. It's a lifetime's work you mention there. Hoverfish 15:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the template looks much better now. Simple and covering all aspects. I added a spave between image and title. Hoverfish 15:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

This last is for the criteria boxes (whatever they are called) which display previous and next for some criterion. Name it and use the standard box. I would say don't incorporate it in the template Cinema of country, since others may add this box for some other criteria (films of Director). Hoverfish 15:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

What I mean is like at the bottom of The Last Temptation of Christ (film). The one connects films of the same Director and the other films of criterion collection. I would say, it sould look like Films of Director, same formatting basically, except titled "Notable films of Country". Alternately (and most important if there are many films), you could use a box like the criterion collection, same formatting basically, to move to the next/previous film in time (it would correspond to your list by release date). Hoverfish 15:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it would work. I will contact someone who can do it for us. There should be ONE generic template, which takes input of Country and places it in the right spots. If some fields are empty for a country, they can be made not to appear in the template, until filled up (with a "yes"). Shall I ask for it? Hoverfish 15:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

About the missing countries, I also mention it in the project talk. Yet my gnoming is of the kind that once in a while I jump in articles and usually to save some IMO notable films from ugly cleanup tags. I started few ones, but the one I put all my best in was The Favour, the Watch and the Very Big Fish. Her Pegship foööowed with a copyedit tag and my babelbox "English /native" got somewhat shaky (to which I must admit, I am lousy in both Greek and English correct-grammar-wise). So your asp on articles would have better responce in the project talk. - By the way, what I mean is in my Sandbox and an application of it is in its Talk page. Hoverfish 17:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Newsletter

The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

class needed / class stub

I noticed you set these cinema articles as class needed. This class is for when the page doesn't exist at all. When there is even a line created, it's class stub. Good going. I am sure they will be picked up and developed soon. Hoverfish|Talk 22:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I told Cbrown to take it easy with class needed. No time though for machine gunning all these bullets. I am into studying and applying categories and trying to get some specialists to collaborate in starting a project page about it. I have a mountain of categories to add to films, lists and some general articles. I also discover some forgotten lists on the way. Hoverfish|Talk 23:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, don't think twice, Ernst. Do as you feel best inclined to do. Some project members may pick up your idea and start filling up the gaps. I'm sure in good time you'll find how to dissipate your edits and interests best. Hoverfish|Talk 14:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I checked but I don't see why the column splits in categories. I'm also new to all this. But I did get your cinema of country template to be generic. In my sandbox is the template and in the sandbox discussion it displays. In the edit of the discussion you can see the code that calls the template. As it is now, all the fields have to be filled. I will ask for help on how to not display a field if it isn't filled. Hoverfish Talk 14:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we can change this. I guess categories have by default 3 columns and they divide the entries but don't count in the letters. Well, categories are just a tool, no main namespace lists, which can be tailored for display. Hoverfish Talk 14:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

No, there you have misunderstood something. I am not going to "tell him". If you first edit articles in mainspace with a couple of sentences and you want to work later on them, you will generally get such problems. You have to defend your articles for notability. If you know so many sources, you must prove it to the user who happens to doubt it. Hoverfish Talk 16:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Just want to let you know that I find a lot of misconceptions in your last message. However I want to give you one point on your "Surely I can't be expected to write a 5000 word article immediately to start with". No one expects you to do any edits, but as I mentioned before, it's best to work on an article in your own sandbox, so when you create a main namespace article, it has all it needs (sources, references, whatever) and it won't be tagged. The editor you mentioned performs a useful function in Wikipedia. Now if you decide to start articles on all the villages of the last province of a country, I don't wish to learn daily about it, or the arguments you will get into with other editors. It is a drain on my editing time and I wish you only communicate with me about edits relative my field of focus, ie lists of films. Thanks. Hoverfish Talk 20:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, but you are dealing with Biography Project criteria and I don't know much about them. I suggest you become also a Biography member and find out about their priorities, guidelines, etc. Hoverfish Talk 20:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

If you remember, we first met on the issue of your lists of films of the early years. Since you started the list by countries, I also got involved in keeping them under project space, provided there keeps happening some filtering work and we end up with something useful for the mainspace. On my userpage I state my general interests, not my focus on edits. This can be deduced from "my contributions", as well as from my discussions in the project. Hoverfish Talk 21:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Vote

Vote here: Wikipedia:Elimination of Fair Use Rationale in Promotional Photos/Vote Badagnani 20:15, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Vote however you want. I believe it's worded according to your ideas. The only thing is that IMO often the "free" replacement is much lower in quality and thus doesn't transmit the same information as the original, posed photo. Badagnani 20:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Aldeatejada

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Aldeatejada, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Aldeatejada. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Oo7565 22:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

i removed the the delation tag and the clean up tag is that ok?Oo7565 22:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

ok sorry my fault for using the wrong tag then sorry againOo7565 22:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

the artical looks great now keep it upOo7565 18:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Asmane Gnegne

Hello. I don't understand what was wrong in the article about Burkina Faso player Asmane Gnegne . Yes , it is true he played in reserve team of Unia Janikowo , but also he plays in the first squad . And that thing he played in reserve team , which play in lower Polish league makes him unique . Why ? Because he is one of the first black playing in such a lower division in Poland . I hope you will agree with me and not delete it anymore . Look at the English teams squads . It's a lot of unknown players for me . Do I want them to being deleted ? I don't . However thanks for your oppinion and please don't think I attack you :-) . Just I told you my point of view...Merry Christmas and Happy New Year ! Bartekos 00:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry I put those words above to you . I thought you had delete it . I was frustrated a little bit . I wrote an article and suddenly it is deleted without any discussions...I'd agree with deleting , but after some signals , after discussion...You gave me a signal that article 'is in danger' :-) . I appreciate it , but the person ,who deleted it , didn't give me a chance to improve it . I started everything again and Asmane Gnegne is again on Unia Janikowo squad . I hope it will stay a little bit longer than last time :-) . MERRY CHRISTMAS again ! :-) Bartekos 12:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

and I appreciate about it...Thanks for warning...I am making a squad of Unia Janikowo step by step . I used to making one or two players profiles per day . I finished Korona Kielce squad and I started making Unia Janikowo one . Asmane is on 'lower' position in squad :-) , because he is a striker :-) and the squad is formated in that way : goalkeepers , defenders , midfielders and strikers . However Asmane isn't rather a star of Unia Janikowo .

If they wany to delete the article , they should rather delete one about FC Warsawa. Why ? The answer is simple that club doesn't exist . I'd do it , but I can't :-) . Tell me please , how to delete it ? Bartekos 12:17, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Korona Kielce and Silesian Library

Firstly about Silesian Library...Telling the true I have never heard about it . Maybe because I live in the other part of my country - Cuiavia . I made article about Wójcin - the village I live and correct a little bit the article about Strzelno . I am going also to change article about Janikowo , because it's all wrong . That's all what i am going to contribute in geography topics . I corrected also Korona Kielce article how you suggested . The article isn't mine at all . I have just made notes about all footballers . The only club I am trying to make is Tarant Wójcin . I know , I know it's only a club who plays in Polish A-Klasa (6th level) , but I think it's not worse than some English clubs they have notes as well.... Aha...hi = cześć and good bye - do widzenia Bartekos 12:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

http://www.jeziorawielkie.pl/wojcin.htm - there is a photo of the palace in my village , but I don't know if it has copyrights . The website is public one . It's from the website of our commune - Jeziora Wielkie and also I can't put photos here so far...:-( Bartekos 13:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes , I study it :-) . However maybe it will be strange for you , but my English is too weak to do it . In the law , we need to be very precise in choosing words . I don't have such a big knowledge in English law terminology to do it . I don't want to discredit myself :-) . Bartekos 21:35, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I’m happy that you like FC Korona Kielce page. I wrote most of texts on it, and MKS1973fan translate it into English. After that Bartekos wrote notes about Korona’s players, and here it is. :) I talked with Bartkos, and we agreed that the Korona’s page should be notify for some Wiki ranking or contest. It would be good for others pages about polish I league clubs. After, that Korona get a good notes I would write a note on other clubs forums and informed them that, Korona get some price. I belief some of them, would be motivate by that, to do something that not to be worse then Korona. But it’s not for now. We will talk about that in second part of January, when most of transfers in the team well be done, and our work will be than (for sometime). (The other problem is that, we don’t know how to inform that the Korona page should be taken for a contest. But we will talk about that later.) I’d like to ask you, can you check spelling, grammar and other things (like Wiki laws and “standards”) on the Korona side? I belief that MKS1973fan, made everything properly but, it would be good if some English native could check it.

Sorry for my English mistakes that I made, and Happy New Year. I wish you that, the New Year party, would be not only memorable but also remembered. ;)

You are right, but not always. For Example I write that Louvre museum is one of the most popular “things” in Paris, and it seems to me as a fact. But I can also find people that say, they know only Eiffel Tower and the Pink Alley, so Louvre is popular at all. One man say that San is yellow, but other one say it’s not, because when it’s going up and down it’s red. Third guy say, it’s all because Earth atmosphere and non-polarized light (I hope I wrote it properly), so talking about colors is improper. I know you are right, but I fight with “fact and opinions” on Polish Wiki (without bigger successes). For example, 20 “experts” look at one painting and 14 of them say it is beautiful and 6 others say it’s horrible. And what shell we do now? If it would be math, everything would be clear. 14 is more then 6. But maybe we have bad “experts”? So we should talk about opinions not facts. Fact is that Legia Warszawa was a champion of Polish I league. We can also say, that they were the most effective team (they have the biggest number of points). But we can’t say that they were the best team. Because what those it mean “the best”? The most effective or maybe that they play the most emotional and the most spectacular marches? Course we can say that some time was the best Polish team because, the highest number of supporters went to the stadium, to see them. But more people observe TV, so maybe this is the thing that makes the team the best one. I know, you are all right. I wrote, notes that you put at Bartkos side. And I know, that the word “opinion”, could make a big problem at Korona’s side. I just want to tell you, that many things, that we hear or even say, those are only opinions, not facts. If we would like tock only about the facts, we couldn’t say almost about anything. The easiest proof is history! All people belief it pure truth (we have dates and facts). But every nation has different (view on) history. It means that even the “history” is an opinion that was made by historians. I hope you don’t think I’m buffoon. I’m just specific. ;) And I’d like to thank you for warnings about Korona, I’m appreciate that. Misiekuba 19:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Main page=

What happened how was this possible? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

No one protected a template on the Main Page, and then someone else exploited that vulnerability. -- tariqabjotu 15:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Red links

Are all the red links you are giving in the by year list films worth a separate article each? By the way I contributed 4355 asterisks in the Brazilian list. You should not link reds before you filter out the unimportant films. I still don't understand why you don't work directly from the imdb lists and you copy it all here first. Then you have to delete all non notable films... Hoverfish Talk 22:19, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

That's surely faster than I could. I also saw you joined the project to categories. Looks well organized. I don't need to consider you being thick. It's just that such work could be done on a simple text editor before it comes in. We are not supposed to copy text from other sites directly. But so long as no one else objects, I'll go along. Hoverfish Talk 22:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think the Austrian filtered sections look good. By the way I didn't answer this, I have little knowledge of Austrian cinema, apart from some comedies I have enjoyed. one I will surely make an article for in good time. Hoverfish Talk 22:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

All this bulleting can be avoided if you follow the following procedure: copy the list from where you copy it. Paste it in a text editor with find and replace option and set it to replace "\n " (with a space) with "\n*". Then copy the bulleted list here. I'll do the ones you brought raw, but please, do it by yourself in the next films. Hoverfish Talk 23:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

An editor with find and replace? MsWord does it for one. What I do is I copy your unbulleted list in Word, run the above Find and Replace and then copy back the resulting bulleted list. - No bold in film titles in lists of the main namespace. Please, don't give bold text for film titles. You can mark importance with an abbr. note after the title. Lists that have entries with bold are eventually going to be cleaned (wikified) by someone. Hoverfish Talk 14:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Joe Calzaghe.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Joe Calzaghe.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 23:09, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy Holidays Count Blofeld

I am watching you in a movie, where you are attempting to claim your title as count. You have cut off your earlobes, and also have devised a scheme to take over the world with beautiful, hypnotized women. Do you know what movie I am watching? None the less, hope you have had the happiest of holidays! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 00:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

"Do you expect me to talk Goldfinger? No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die." Yes, Goldfinger is a great movie! I may watch that tonight, or at least start it! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

217.Douglas Head Lighthouse, Isle of Man i have added the expand tag to that articale you created i think but i look at the at the page history and you said that tere was not enough info kinda so i added but if you want i could add the delation tag if you want you proberly dont right but i will you want me to okOo7565 04:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Bond Girls

Let me mull over the most stylish bond movie for a few. In regards to the bond girls, no doubt ursula andress is the best (at least in my opinion). I think the uncanny resemebalnce to that seen where honey ryder comes out of the water for the first time in the first bond move, in tommorow never dies with Halle Berry is also an excellent scene. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I wont argue against Fatima, any opinions on the worst bond girl ever? I am going to go for Ruby Windsor, for no particular reason other than I she is just completey unnatractive to me. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I will agree with the Fatima comment. Now, about the most stylish boind moves (from the 1980's). # of them were Roger Moore, 2 of them Timothy Dalton. I have nebver been partial to Timothy Dalton (although License to kill is a decent movie). I know as sure as hell that it is not "A view to a kill" and given the choice between For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy, i gotta go with Octopussy, but that is my personal guess there. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:30, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The fabrege egg and the sothebys auction were one of the main reasons i chose that over For Your Eyes Only. Also, the scenes, on the boats rowed by the beautiful women and even the scenes where the circus (octopussys) women take the fort. I just watched it a few days ago so it is fairly fresh in my mind. b tw, have you ever played the James Bond version of Scene It? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Worst bond Movie

I gotta go with A View to a Kill for the worst bond movie. Let me think about the most extravagant bond villans house and get back to ya. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

My guess on the most extravagant bond villian abode. I gotta go with Francisco Scaramanga, and his island abode. That place was pretty pimping with his own mini butler or what not. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Moonraker is an excellent bond movie. It would be 2nd on my list of best place to live. I can see why it is probably mroe grandiose than Francisco Scaramanga. Moonraker is a pretty classy movie as well. The lab in the library (the one that dissapears as they walk in with gas masks to see Hugo Draz attending to business at his desk). I think it could qualify in the top 3 classiest bond movies. I have to put The Spy Who Loved Me on the list too. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, i am gone for the next couple of hours. I will get back to you on any firther bond questions either later today or tommorow! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

James Bond Userbox

what do you think about my james bond userbox

007	This user prefers that his martinis be shaken, not stirred

 ? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for missing films without article

Adding missing John Wayne films in the missing films lists is exactly the right place. The John Wane or Western fans may find here their choice. If in non-English cultures, exist such fabs, we still have to find their notability in the Engl-talking world. About starting with subcats in American films, wait please for what is about to start (see also Films project talk): We are starting now the Film Categorization department, where such big projects like recategorizing several thousands of films can be put in the to-do list, where all ideas can be discussed and "officially" decided, so that members can sign in (and display the sections they will be doing). Hoverfish Talk 13:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I am here all right. But it seems you are not aware of my last discussion in the Film project about the Arg. template. Look and you will see that I have started by posting there. We do not have any consensus yet, but if they follow the link and see how it fits in the articles you have made, they may like it. But Film project talk is the way ta go. Hoverfish Talk 13:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

film categories

I like the idea. I know that is how wikiproject aircraft categorises aircraft. by coutnry and era (usually years). It depends on the project though and what they think. Some projects have pretty closed minds, others are more progressive. By the way, have you ever thought about archiving your talk page? Every time i load it, my computer slows to a screeching halt. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

archive template

You should get an archives template. similar to the one on my talk page. Just a reccomendation though. I started watching moonraker last night. After watching it, i think it rivals octopussy as the classiest bond movie. Your mention of the extravagent mansion, but with the quail hunting and bonds "classy" kill of the attempted assasin make it a pretty classy movie all around. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, it is 200KB! The recommended is 32KB but going up to 64KB is ok usually. If you need help, this is what is most practical: [1]. Hoverfish Talk 14:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC) - Well! Done already! Hoverfish Talk 14:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You know, when you edit conflict (i.e. when adding the nifty archive template), you can scroll to the bottom of the page, and it will show the diff. just copy your addition on the left side of the diff and paste it back in. saves you from having to readd it again. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

btw, you are welcome to to copy and paste my archives template. there is some formal template out there but i just coped the code from somebody else for it. (I am a programmer, what can i say?). -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Looking good!

Looks good! Its nice now that my computer does not double as a smoke machine when loading your talk page. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you ever play the goldeneye game for nintento 64? The space ship launching compelx was a secret level on that game. Quite an excellent game it was. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice touch with the S.P.E.C.T.R.E archive. I approve! I have seen your volcano lair (kinda like my toolbox area). looking pretty good. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Walter Matthau

I have gone through Walter Matthau's filmography and added in the missing films. But not in all films does he play an important role. So some films I didn't add as ("starring" or "with") Walter Matthau. Maybe they are more notable for something else though. Hoverfish Talk 15:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you on both points. When the cat dept starts, it will be suggested. Some members are corrently in break, but tafter New Year we will surely pick up momentum. One thing I would say, is that I think you can be most effective if you post somewhat more concise and less hasty messages. I do the same too sometimes, but it's better to avoid it or you lose the interest of the others. And for such big lists "others" (including some who run AWB, could do a massive sweep of a wide rearrangment much faster) should (but not be coerced to) find it important and in tune with other priorities for massive rearrangements. So it is much better to do the work of deciding ALL the changes first, so that ONE round through all the thousands of films will give the full result. For the second point, keep thinking "notable" (to the English-talking world) and may the Force be with you. Hoverfish Talk 18:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I added in your sandbox the list all linked. Test it and delete it (check for possible misspellings in links). Hey, when you copy articles in your sandbox, you should't include their categories, or your sandbox will appear in the category. Also if templates are in a category they may pass it to the sandbox. Hoverfish Talk 19:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Bondpedia

Hi I'm a representative of Bondpedia - the James Bond encyclopedia. A wiki-based James Bond encyclopedia and I chanced upon one of your edits and saw your username. I checked out your userpage and saw you loved James Bond. Bondpedia desperatly needs people with more knowledge (we only have 12 members!). Would you be interested?

To reply talk to me on my talkpage: User talk:Highfields

Or you can go to the site by the link above and search for:

'User talk:Tom'

'User talk:James Bond'

Ask me or my mate any questions, look around and hopefuly create an account

Merry Christmas, looking forward to talking to you

--Highfields 14:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

ps. If you know anyone else who ight be interested remember to tell em about us

SFD notification

This message is to notify you that a stub category that you created (Category:Tanzania politics stubs) is up for deletion at WP:SFD. Please join the discussion. Thanks. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 18:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

That's fine if you didn't mean to. I'm not saying that what you did was bad or anything. It's just that it's too small, so we probably don't need it. I was just trying to be nice and notify the creator. Thanks for your input. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 18:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The football club for deletion

FC Warsawa - such a club has never existed...Please delete it , if you can , because I don't know how to do it . Bartekos 19:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood film

The article part looks quite decnt. Didn't check it all way through. One thing is that with so many pictures and the pictorial cast, you may find problems. I would keep cast as in FA's. Hoverfish Talk 19:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Italian

I'm afraid I don't know that much about the language, sorry - I took a year's worth in college, but none of it seemed to stick. Truth be told, I learned more from going to the opera. French was my thing - ten years' worth does tend to come in handy now and again.

Good luck! --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 07:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, si, si, ho capisco un po'. Which is about as far as I go, really... --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 09:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Request

Hi ! I am sorry to bother you again . I am making an article about Tarant Wójcin . Could you check it if there is no mistakes ? I mean in the English . You're native speaker , so you could find some mistakes there and correct it . I'd appreciate it . Thanks in advance HAPPY NEW YEAR !!! Bartekos 12:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Flag issue

Using the EU flag for European countries in general is no good idea. As I read in the BBC, even members of the EU aren't all that happy about it. Personally I am for one flag, which doesn't exist officially yet, ie. the Planet Earth one. Oh well, a good hope for the New Year, I guess. Hoverfish Talk 12:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

"Penny blue"

Hi, your picture Image:PennyBlue.jpg is not an actual penny blue (which are ultra-rare), but a Two pence blue (take a closer look at the denomination). Stan 15:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Creating categories

What is now this Category:American films of the 1910s that already got tagged? Look, we are making an effort to bring all this in the project and decide slowly and carefully and with as much consensus as possible, so that a big round of recategorization can happen. If you want to go ahead by yourself and create whatever system you think fit, it may all be scrapped and nobody will be happy about it. Can you go with the project or not? Hoverfish Talk 21:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Could you please state your moves in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Categorization so that others can follow what you are up to? I am cynical with you? The whole idea of making the categorization thing is to agree on a plan, coordinate and carry it out. Must other follow your edit history to find out what happened? Did you discuss my proposal to break it down to general genre? I'm not sure if my idea is the best or even good. I just don't see you discussing but instead do "inevitable" moves. So who is the cynic between us? Anyway, I hope everyone agrees with your move and I am glad it was you who put the speedy deletion. The last thing I want to have is AfD discussions. Hoverfish Talk 21:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

...and that's exactly why I suggested each decade is broken down to general genre (1980s American comedy films, or whatever). But you did now this. And if you put a lot of work into it and we end up with huge subcats, then delete categories, recategorize, etc. I am trying to avoid this waste of time and energy. It needs a bit of patience, but enough members have joined already and I am positive before long we will have something to do work (massively) on. Hoverfish Talk 21:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

...and did you mention this in the project? Look I am not a cynic, but I do think we have a project which should decide first on how to categorize. If you want to bypass it all, fare well. Hoverfish Talk 21:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we all agree that a category 15 pages long isn't practical. And how many pages will be, say, 1970s American films? If it is 5 pages long, it will still need breaking down. Hoverfish Talk 21:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I think if we split down decades by genre (or some factor) it should happen to all decades, not just some. Can we now move this discussion in the categorization talk page? Hoverfish Talk 22:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)