User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE/ArchiveJan2007

I'm a little confused as to why left me that message on my talk page, considering that I was the one who added the information about intersection categories to the department page. Anyway, obviously that means that I concur. I should also note, however, that you should consult with the rest of us before going about a major amount of work. There's bold and then there's BOLD. The whole point of the department is to coordinate efforts so as to minimize the amount of work we have to do, so implementation before consensus is a bad idea, even if the idea is justified. Girolamo Savonarola 16:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not a race. The point is to not have to do the work twice, or worse, undo work someone put a lot of time into, however misguided. I'm not trying to be patronizing here, but the world's information has spent centuries not being contained on Wikipedia - I fail to see how another few days matter in the scheme of things. Your intentions are in the right place, but I've seen all of the harumph that happened involving the world cinema lists, and quite frankly I think that if you aren't going to at least learn something from that, it's a bad sign. Tant pis. Girolamo Savonarola 16:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

There's two ways to react to criticism. One is to take it personally and decide that the other person has something against you. The other is to listen, consider that what is being said is trying to advise you towards the right direction, and try to at least analyze the arguments without regard for either yourself or the other person, with the goal of coming to some sort of agreement or compromise. But if you'd rather attack me for trying to help you work more effectively, that's your issue. What have I done? I've done nothing but make substantial edits to the department, the project, and Wikipedia at large. You can check my contributions list any day if you need evidence. That being said, I don't think that any of that is important in and of itself - that's why I don't feel the need to place userboxes on my user page. That's what this is all about - quality vs. quantity. I'm suggesting that you spend the time to work this out together with the rest of us who've started this department in the first place, in order to get it right the first time around. The current guidelines already have clear directives for several other categorization criteria; if you want to quickly start some work, I'd suggest the Films by studio category probably needs some expansion. Girolamo Savonarola 17:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you've been overly concerned about the potential size of these categories. Look at Category:2002 albums or Category:2002 computer and video games - a category can easily sustain a couple of pages without there being much bother. I agree that for a few, such as American films or Drama films, there may be an excess of films, but we need to define a) how big a category needs to be to require subcategorization and b) how much cross-linking there needs to be. Linking the same article to Category:1979 drama films and Category: 1979 American films should be suficient - there is no need to create Category: 1979 American drama films - it's simply too many intersections. I highly doubt that 1979 drama films and 1979 American films will each exceed more than a couple hundred films at most - that's well within the range of acceptable size. Girolamo Savonarola 17:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

But you see the other problem is that then an article can potentially have two or three categories that it belongs to which begin with 1979, then. 1979 English-language films, 1979 American drama films, 1979 Paramount films. I think that to a certain extent some of this can be left alone. For example, 1979 films is a limited set - while there may be more articles yet to be included in that category, there will be no more films which can join it in the future. On the other hand, categories by genre, language, and (usually) country or studio are open-ended by nature and can continue to expand as more films are made. So the question is how can we effectively intersection those categories without creating redundancies with films by year? As I've mentioned above, it seems that most of the other media's categories by year are simply non-subcat'd fully inclusive lists for that year. That makes sense due to the exclusive nature of delimiting by a year, as well as the fact that the cats rarely exceed 1000 articles. So this is only going to be an issue for 1000+ categories with open-endedness. In other words, countries, genres, studios, and languages, not years. So what's the best way to combine them? Girolamo Savonarola 17:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC) PS - I'm heading out for a few hours. Will try to give further thoughts when I return.

PLEASE STOP RECAT'ING. If you can't wait even a few hours in the middle of a discussion...quite frankly it shows a clear lack of respect for a consensus we're still discussing both here and in the department page. Now I'm going to have to go through the work of requesting these new cats be deleted (at least for the meantime). And reverting your edits. This is exactly what I am talking about. Please do not make major structural changes like this without getting consensus. This means discussing it in full - not just posting your thoughts and acting on them regardless of their reception. I'm very disappointed in this turn of events. Girolamo Savonarola 21:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

You may have good ideas, but if you don't go at project speed and wait for things to be planned out and decided, and instead keep changing things at whim, not only you create a mess (for others to clean), but also you disregard all others concenred. Yes, you talk (a lot), but then you act as you think anyway. I have tried to help you with what I feel is useful in what you contribute. I do not like the way you take hasty initiative in categorizing. I do not see this as help, even though you may have useful ideas to propose. Please, either participate at others' pace in building up a good plan for categorizing without rushing changes, or concentrate on something else for a while, until we have time to decide properly about it. You can continue to do what you like and face reverts, deletions, etc. I will not be happy to start reverting and tagging for deletion, but I will do it if I see you keep disregarding the common effort (and yes you do). Hoverfish Talk 21:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

For the moment I am reporting all the new categories you made. Hoverfish Talk 22:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I have to pitch in here and say to Mr. Blofeld, please, no matter how good your ideas seem, think of this before you act: Before new categories are created (or new stub types or new projects, or anything), we must maintain what is already here. There are many issues of film categorization already which should be addressed, before new categories and sub-categories can be structured. There is plenty to do - let's clean up what we have before we start creating more stuff which might need cleaning up itself... (I have 2 toddlers and I preach the same thing to them...) My second point is that if you get a reputation as a guy who acts quickly with little discussion, no one will want to take you seriously in the future. So please, find some work to do while the discussion continues, and listen to the good advice others are giving you. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 00:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Your idea of categories by decade, without the additional by-year and cross-categorizing, seems sufficient for the present and should be enough to work on for now, don't you think? Her Pegship (tis herself) 15:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Race reports

You left a comment on my talk page:

Good work with covering the inidividual races but remember it is an encyclopedia. Try to make it sound less like a report and more concise Good luck editing

that I responded to as follows:

Ernsty, thanks for the suggestion, but if anything, I think the race reports I've been adding have been too short. I believe lap-by-lap accounts are in the nature of motorsport race reports -- look at any number of the F1 reports to see what I mean. Now, I realize the reports I've done for the late-'80s, early-'90s don't look very pretty. Part of the reason is that I lack the informational sources that would give me the necessary detail (basically I'm relying on race highlight videos). Hopefully somebody with old Motocourse issues will step up and fill in the sparseness of the race information I've provided.

Perhaps the model you have in mind are the race reports for the 2006 MotoGP season. However, those reports are just about useless since they simply reiterate information from MotoGP.com without describing what happened during the race. If Valentino Rossi finishes 14th in a race, it's important to know why.--Uli Kunkel 21:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Tag

A tag has been placed on Image:Kojak.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:Image:Kojak.jpg|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Pilotguy (ptt) 20:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Dryandra

They're fairly dense stubs: they list common name (if one exists), subgenus, series, authority, habit, and a high quality link. This genus is a very closely related to Banksia, which has a WikiProject that has taken two species articles to featured status in the last year. I don't think you have to worry about these stubs being abandoned. ;-) Hesperian 11:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry if I'm making new pages patrol difficult for you. Hesperian 11:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LuisInduni.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:LuisInduni.jpg. The image description 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.

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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Project work vs. individual decisions

As said before, I don't attach any "fool" or "idiot" labels on you or other users. Your haste and your solutions will have to wait. The reason haste is not welcome is that we need to have as much feedback as we can get. Such a massive change has to have behind it as thorough a discussion as possible. If not, it won't be long before someone else thinks of another "better" way and starts categorizing by his/her own logic. The delay will pay off in a steady and widely backed system. Then several coordinated members, with special semiautomatic editors, are going to work at speeds much higher than you or I can achieve. What I or you could do in a month, will be done in hours only. Your opinion and good ideas are still welcome, but only if given without pressure and excessive insistence, because under such circumstances collective work becomes very hard and frustrating. I have no resentment for your contributions, so long as you go with the project's pace and methodology in matters that concern the whole project very seriously. Hoverfish Talk 14:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Werner Abrolat.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Werner Abrolat.jpg. The image description 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.

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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, there are other screenshots that you uploaded for the new films you created that also need fair use rationales. Try to add them soon, before some administrator goes through and deletes them. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 06:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Chronological order in countries

Stressing the point that this is only my opinion, I agree with chronological ordering in countries' films. It is surely more enlightening and informative than an A-Z listing. I will also support you with my opinion if you run in oposition in some country. Hoverfish Talk 12:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Films

You have made several errors in your statistics. First, I would like to see a source for your statement that America released 10k films in 2005. Second, you assume that 30% of those are notable, which appears to be an arbitrary number you made up, but it is an order of magnitude higher than equivalent numbers in similar fields. And third, you assume that those same numbers hold for years prior to 2005, which is obviously false since the movie industry grows. I don't think it's a good idea to preemptively split categories on an assumption that they might grow too large at some point in the future. We should split them if and when they actually do become too large. >Radiant< 12:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• A far easier solution: use Category:Films by studio. Most of the studios listed there are American. So if we remove the films from Category:American films and subcategorize them by the appropriate studio, the tree becomes easily manageable. >Radiant< 13:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Did you know you could make a List of films and that our software allows that to be sortable by any column, such as director, production year, budget and media rating? >Radiant< 13:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • But neither do people generally know what year a film was made in. However, people who already know a film's title can find it by using that title. Categories are not intended as an index, they're intended to find related entries. >Radiant< 13:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Indeed. Please see m:help:sorting. >Radiant< 13:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
        • I wholeheartedly agree that it's a good idea to organize many of the more notable films released in America into a timeline by year and date of release. Note that if such a timeline were a list article, it could contain the actors, directors and release dates involved there; if the timeline were a category, it could not. That's why I object to the cat: not because the information is inappropriate, but because it's more comprehensive as a list. >Radiant< 13:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I wanna give you a prize

Hi, I'm Javitomad, a Spanish user of English wikipedia.

I've seen you've created some articles about Spanish municipalities. Some of them have been improved by me, but the important is that you created them.

Because of that, I want to give you a Barnstar, the Spanish Barnstar.

• 
  I, Javitomad, give you this Barnstar for contributin to a better Spanish-English Wikipedia.

(copy and paste this in your user page.)

Faithfully. Javitomad (...tell me...)

• • Sí, soy de España, de Madrid y de Salamanca. Tu español es muy bueno, se puede mejorar, pero es muy bueno.
    • Yes, I'm from Spain, I live in Madrid, but my mother is from Salamanca. You speak Spanish very well, you still can improve it, but it's quite good.

• • He visto el artículo sobre Jonathen Cornelius y creo que podrías traducirlo al español (más o menos). en la Wiki:Es. ¿Qué me dices?
    • I've seen the article Jonathen Cornelius and I think you could translate it into Spanish languaje (more or less). What do you think?

PS:Victoria Beckham is not liked in Spain very much... because she said something about "Spain smells like a garlic" or something like that... and, of course, people didn't liked that.

Avoid huge tables

This is a technical thing that's good to discuss before you start planning for huge tables. Huge tables may have delays to display. Don't forget the 32KB per page recommendation. You can exceed it, but don't go too far. I wouldn't worry to go up to 50KB per page, if necessary. So for anything huge (and tables add some code), try to break it down. With Nehrams we had to break down the Lists by Letters and now each one is less or around 40KB. Hoverfish Talk 15:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Filmography of country"? Something sounds wrong. Also filmography limits an article to a list mostly, whereas Cinema of country leaves it open to become a very informative article. If you must split the list of films from the cinema article, I think "List of country films" sounds right. It wouldn't hurt to get second opinions however, Hoverfish Talk 17:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It can also be named "by region and country". You created Americas, I have to look at it later. Right now I am into a lot. Hoverfish Talk 19:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm back and took a look. It's quite decent but the region positioning is a bit unusual. Why is North America so far from the South? Shouldn't the order be like in the World navigation? Hoverfish Talk 22:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Did you check Category:Stub categories? You may create "1920s comedy (or drama or horror) film stubs" but don't intersect country and decade. Go by what you find already there or on these lines. If you start new intesections there are thousands of additional combinations that could be created following this line, so you will run again into problems. For stub ideas you should refer to the stub sorting project, but I think you will get a NO from them too. As for the table sorting, it works. I have a simple example in User:Hoverfish/Notebook and you can read full instructions in m:help:sorting. Hoverfish Talk 14:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's good you proposed it. Although looking in stubs has another function than looking in all film articles, it will be interesting to know if this is welcome in stub sorting. Hoverfish Talk 15:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I never knew the ghost series, so I enjoyed reading about them. Monty Python and Faulty Towers are my favorite too. What do you mean if I don't object? I'm just the piano player. Hoverfish Talk 18:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ernst

I have a question. Where have you found these babels where you've written that your favourite language is Spanish and so on? Morris Munroe 20:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Why didn't you answer my question? Morris Munroe 14:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, but thanks for your answer. Greetings! Morris Munroe 14:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Stub proposal

Hi Blofeld! Per you suggestion on the WP:WSS/P page, if you want to know which articles in Category:American films are stubs, your best method is to use CatScan and search Category:American films for stub-sized articles, or for articles that are already film-stubs of some kind. I can generate a list for you if you like. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Me again - I created a list of all articles in Category:American films which are marked as some kind of stub; it's currently in my sandbox if you want to take a look. If you think you'll use it, I can move it to a Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Categorization subpage. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 00:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I do remember the Randall & Hopkirk series - it was called My Partner the Ghost here in the U.S. I think. Wow, a blast from the past! I am mostly recovered now, and thanks for your message. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 16:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Lists of Canadian films

I think the most important in the tables you create is to have a column for awards or anything that makes them notable. What do you say? Hoverfish Talk 21:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

To put it in a general way, what about a column for "Notability". There one could enter protagonist or director or award or boxoffice or whatever it is. Hoverfish Talk 19:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Here is an example of how it could work. Hoverfish Talk 19:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I've started adding titles to various decades. I think a notability or remarks column would be great, too. Shawn in Montreal 08:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help, starting with the I's, as you suggest. I won't be able to do anything today. However, picking up on what User:Hoverfish said about a notability column, you already have a column at left for year and a column at right for date of release. Could the template be changed to sub. "date of release" to "notability"? It's currently unpopulated. I think notability is of utmost importance for this list of films by nation project. Because if not, aren't they just duplicates of the categories which already exist? Typically I see List articles named as "List of famous/notable..." and I think that should be the case here. When I do get a chance to add more titles, I do not plan to list every film in the category if I don't think it's a notable. A subjective evaluation to be sure, but I think there needs to be some level of notability to make it from the category to list level. If not, we'll be spending inordinate amounts just on the film list, while neglecting other imp. stuff like article creation and editing. Shawn in Montreal 16:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look at what I've added to date to the Canada film list and let me know what you think. As you may have already noticed, I thought that adding another column for notability might make your take too narrow, so I've been trying to turn that right side column into notability OR release date. I've been filling in empty fields and adding some titles. Shawn in Montreal 15:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Your idea's fine with me. I don't have your table-making know-how so if you have a chance to change the layout accordingly, I'll conform to it. Shawn in Montreal 15:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

That's my feeling too. I'm glad you're okay with the idea of Notability rather than JUST awards in that right column. For example, Atanajuat has won a ton of awards, but what is truly historic is that this is the world's first Inuit feature. And I think more folks would be interested that Universe and 21-87 influenced 2001 and Star Wars, respectively, that any Genie or BAFTA Award. Seems like we're all in sync -- including Hoverfish, who had proposed the notability field -- and that's great. Speaking of film, I have to get back to my day job now, the NFB may get some Oscar nominations tomorrow and we have to be ready! Bye, Shawn in Montreal 16:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I think Notability/Release is a good idea, especially since for most of the older titles we'll never know the release date and it'll just be notability, if anything. Also, I didn't get a chance to answer you yesterday but certainly I see no value in keeping those porn videos in the list of missing films. I'm sure someone will delete them at some point. The NFB just received an Oscar nomination for the animated short The Danish Poet so I'm going to create an article.Shawn in Montreal 14:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't realize that it was Hoverfish who added the genre column where it is but I think it looks fine as is, with genre, then notability/release at right. If you feel strongly about it, then certainly change it, but I'm fine with it this way. Shawn in Montreal 16:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I just checked the 1960 film list and I think you're right: looks better with just the 4 columns, pooling Notability, release date and genre as you suggest. Will you have a chance to adapt the other decades? I don't have your table making skills. I'm also fine the idea of abbreviations, though whatever we do should be standardized across all the lists you've created for other countries, so I'll be guided by what you propose. Thanks, Shawn in Montreal 16:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree 100%! Shawn in Montreal 16:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I've asked him this very question on his talk page. Let's see what he has in mind and see if we can't quickly reach consensus. Thanks, Shawn in Montreal 16:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

If you don't mind, please expand on why you'd like to include release dates in addition to the yearv of production at left. As you'll see on Hoverfish's talk page, I wasn't quite sure what you had in mind in this regard. If you're agreeable to cutting release dates and just leaving it at years of production, fine with me. Shawn in Montreal 16:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I THINK Hoverfish's point is a little more existential, i.e., why include release dates AT ALL since we have them by year of production. Shawn in Montreal 17:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I never said we should abolish release date. There are way too many editors and users giving attention to it, so I always try to go by what I see commonly practiced. Of course the films could be put in chronological order without stating precise date, but I am neutral to this. Hoverfish Talk 17:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll give it a try, but not all films have precise dates, so it may take me some time to find some. I hope you are convinced that I am glad you are doing all this. Very glad. Hoverfish Talk 17:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Giving an external link to imdb awards page and mentioning only the most important award in the table would seem best. But one thing at a time. I'm currently trying the first column and will soon show you the result. Hoverfish Talk 17:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, did the 1970s. Formatting pending. If you are bith on this side of the thread, please, take a look. Hoverfish Talk 18:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

If you break to make it thinner, then the height doubles. But if you break titles to gain in width anyway, I guess it doesn't matter. As far as making sense, it makes sence near the year, as I did it in the 70ies or as you have it now in the 60ies. I guess if you make it its own column, some complexity with colspans is simplified. I don't think it distracts from the title, since the title is bold and the date is not. That's my view. I won't interfere any further, because it's something that will have to be consistent in all countries and I wish to leave it to you and Shawn. Just mind you this: the list of Austrian, Argentine and Canadian films will get in the upcoming newsletter and will get some traffic, so it'd better look as complete and consistent as possible. Cheers! Hoverfish Talk 19:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

My gut feeling is that if you put so many things in this last column it will look strange, not to say unpractical (for the viewer). But you don't need my seal of approval, as I respect the fact that it's up to those who put most of the work in it. I was just trying to make it more presentable. Maybe you get some feedback from others later. Hoverfish Talk 19:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, there you are out of luck. I tried to write more about your work, templates and all, but the other editors cut it short, because there are lots of other issues and the newsletter is already getting too lengthy. Maybe next month. And maybe better so, since there will be more countries ready to browse through. Hoverfish Talk 20:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I LOVE the way you've put the years in their own "capsules". That was my main concern regarding readability. I kinda prefered the dates next to the years but, really, what ever you and Hoverfish prefer is fine by me. I'll just keep plugging away on the content when I get a chance and leave the template issues to you guys to sort out, as this is clearly your area of expertise and not mine. Thanks to you both for all your hard work. Shawn in Montreal 21:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I was out: yes it's fine split in year tables. Still, I am of Shawn's opinion about the date going after the year. Like this, when you sort them by date it will make better sense. As you like. Hoverfish Talk 21:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC) - Also it looks better with spaces between the words Genre / Notability. Hoverfish Talk 21:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I did it in the first year. You have to take away the colspan and one cell from each row. Hoverfish Talk 22:04, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I let it up to you and Shawn. Mind you however: some films have more than 5 studios. Hoverfish Talk 22:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Shambala

Thanks for adding a category to Shambala (song). After writing an article like that, it always makes me smile to see someone besides a bot has paid a visit. But did you really have to act so horrified that I forgot to categorize it? If that's the worst thing you encountered on Wikipedia this weekend you aren't looking hard enough! House of Scandal 11:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hey mate sorry I didn't mean to sound harsh. Good article by the way its just I was surprised that it wasn't categorized. It may also be under Category:1973 singles you may want to check. Keep up the good work and happy editing. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 13:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No offense taken; I was just kidding with you. Can't you see the bright yellow smiley face? House of Scandal 13:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Removing messages from other users

Do not remove messages from other users or be banned!!!

Who removed a message you asshole?Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC) I have the right to remove any message from my page

The American films by year "project"

I noticed that the Category you created, "American films by year and by decade", is likely headed for deletion. I understand that categories like this take quite some time to develop and flesh out, yet this particular one appears to be unwelcome at Wikipedia, unless I'm misunderstanding the argument. I hope that you will continue your work here at Wikipedia. However, just so you know, there are also other wikis out there that might very well welcome such a Category project as yours. You might start by looking at Wikia.com, Centiare.com, or PBwiki.com. If you feel that this message is too spammy, you are welcome to delete it from your discussion page. --JossBuckle Swami 02:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Terrorism in country categories

I saw you created the Terrorism in Spain category a while back. A new user is upset by the use of the word terrorism and is removing categories from pages at random. I would appreciate it if you would take a look at, and consider reverting the user's edits to, East Turkestan Islamic Movement, Grey Wolves, and Kurdistan Workers Party. Thanks, KazakhPol 02:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Jeremy Summers

Perhaps I rushed to judgement in adding the tags. Take your time hun, it looks like it will be a good artcile. I helped you out by putting an underconstuction tag on which should prevent people from tagging the artcile until you are done.Mystify85JEC 20:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films/List of films without article/1930s

Hi. All of the films i start and edit are Laurel and Hardy related. I happen to have most of their films on my computer so it's relatively easy to watch and start a page or add something on these films. I don't have any other real knowledge about early films. At some point i will move on from Laurel and Hardy and i may join a wiki film project. So thanks for pointing me in the right direction. I've not commented on a user page before so apologies if i've missed something. Szzuk 22:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Thank you for helping out with the article on the Pabst mansion. Since I'm new to creating articles, any tips and pointers would be most helpful. IG-2000 09:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this the right way to send messages to other wikipedians? IG-2000 09:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I watch a lot of films, not too many foreign films though. I might go see Pan's Labyrinth. I've edited the articles for the NBC show Heroes, and the SCIFI show The Lost Room. There isn't a whole lot of subjects that I know a lot about. I sort of know a little about everything, but not a lot of any one thing, except maybe welding and fish aquariums.IG-2000 10:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking about creating an article for some time, when I saw a red link for the Pabst mansion, I knew I had some images of the mansion in my computer so I figured I create that one. IG-2000 10:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll check out that wikiproject, maybe there are some films I can add.IG-2000 10:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I got to get to bed, but I know of a movie that's not on wikipedia you can add. There was a movie that came out in 1986 called "Eat and Run". It was a pretty lousy movie if I remember correctly.IG-2000 10:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Dariusz Gesior

Thanks for correcting my note . However I was supposed to do it right now before you corrected it . Now in every article I made I am adding some external links and I hope it will be enough for some people not to delete my article . Thanks for helping one more time . Oh...Could you check the article about Tarant Wójcin? I mean the English there...Thank you in advance Bartekos 11:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I will make some articles about Polish old players , but you must know I am quite busy right now . I am making one article (note) per day . I'll start tommorow . I must learn only how to add references , because it wouldn't be simple information like the date of births or clubs where they played , which in my opinion don't need references... Bartekos 14:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I made a first note :Antoni Szymanowski , I can't put a reference about his ambitious and offensive style of playing...:-(

Archive

As you can see at the top of my talk page, I had to start a special archive for your messages, if that's what you mean. I have to be able to keep track of all threads at one page, so it's necessary. I am soon coming to the 1930s in the red linked films. I am also adding about 10 infoboxes of film per day to films that need them and do some wikifying on my way. So Harry Peal and wikifying: All film titles, including the first bold text mention, and including aka and foreign titles, must be in italic. Please, see how I did it in Harry Piel and keep things wikified. Doing it when you create the articles is the fastest way up for the articles. If it's not too much, what text do you need translated? Put it in the bottom of my Sandbox and I'll see what I can do. Also if you want to keep calling me "mate", refrain from reffering to others as "asholes", even if they vandalize you. Hoverfish Talk 15:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion

I'm not an admin, so I've never deleted an image. Angr deleted that one. —Chowbok ☠ 16:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe in the short term, but in the long run we should get replacements for most of these. —Chowbok ☠ 17:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow

Just wanted to say how impressed I am with your work on Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased). Very. Cheers, CiaranG 21:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Randall16Bream.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Randall16Bream.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. NMajdan•talk 14:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Randall16.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Randall16.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. NMajdan•talk 14:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for adding the rationale so quickly.--NMajdan•talk 15:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, sounds great. I know its a hassle, but creating a free encyclopedia wasn't meant to be easy. I would rather make you aware of the issue now, rather than having the image get tagged a year from now when you maybe aren't contributing anymore and the image ends up deleted.--NMajdan•talk 15:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

SFD notification

This message is to notify you that a stub category that you created (Category:Argentine film stubs) is up for deletion at WP:SFD. Please join the discussion. Thanks. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 15:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Answer(s)

I think some stubs now and some work better sound a good way to get it going. We had many discussions in the film project about naming of foreign films. Currently the decision is to give the English name, if it has been screened in the English speaking world. However since the decision was not always so, you will find lots of French or Italian names given. Even "Palme d'Or" should normally be "Golden Palm", but it's in French. In no case translate a title literary, if an English name is not given. Yea, the Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased) is swell! Congrats! I'm glad to hear you decline nomination. I would too. Hoverfish Talk 23:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I can't talk about others, but I remain to all I have dislosed you till now. You have my esteem for your contributions and you have some ways that are going too fast and sometimes opposite to how a larger number of editors go about things. I don't see why you expect 100% acceptance from me or others. I'm not dissatisfied with you, I find you friendly and helpful. But when you go against the grain, or in dissonance with others, I react as I do. Hoverfish Talk 23:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Look, no one doubts equality around here. And no one marginalizes anyone, most surely not me. It's just that we are careful to go with each other's "grain" and more generally with wikipedians' "grains", so we seem "close". If you interpreted Cbrown's answer correctly he gave you the credit that no matter what, you would be ok even as an admin. And I take it from him, as I don't have any admin traits in me. To me, knowing your haste and insistence on some things, it was a momentary shock. But after Cbrown's answer, I realized that if you accepted to become an admin, you would have to learn even better than me all these rules and conventions, so that's that. Argentina is going well. For the time being and the forseable near future, actors, directors, etc are Biography Project. At one point we could make a proposal like you say, but give me time to think of the possible pros and cons and I will let you know soon. Now I have to make an important anouncement in the project on some latest developments, so I will be concentrating on formulating it. Enjoy your Argentine edits. Hoverfish Talk 20:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't get what the problem is with restoring "that automatic wiki film tag in the talk pages of my films". What tag do you mean? And what does Cbrown have to do with it? Hoverfish Talk 16:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's a tag you are supposed to put in every new film article you create. I also checked some of the films and see that you don't check where the links you give link to. Sometimes they link to disambiguations or to other people. This work you should do along with the rest, especially if you plan to create so many articles. "I add hundreds of articles fast and you guys come cleaning after me" is not nice. The template should not be just {{Film}}, by the way, it should be {{Film|class=stub}} or {{Film|class=start}}, according to the class of the article. Hoverfish Talk 17:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, one I found is John Russel in Allá donde muere el viento. It leads to a huge dab page. I don't have time to check which one it is. I guess the J.R. (actor) should be the right one. Can you check? Hoverfish Talk 17:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

To get them even to GA you may have to find some good book of Argentine Cinema (good publisher, prof.critics, etc). Also it will be important to see these movies, else I don't see how one could develop them so high. Do you think you can find so much info in the internet? And by the way, I fixed a bit your user pagetop so the userboxes don't get into other elements of the page. As it is, in a narrower browser's window, the volcano hides some of the user boxes. I can also easily make it so that if the window is narrower, simply the right part of the screen is not seen. Let me know. Hoverfish Talk 20:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I cleaned up the Argentine missing pages, moved them to their correct names, fixed all links to point to them, etc, etc. The navigation template by letter you tried to put in M-Z wasn't going to work no matter what, so I got it out and linked to the A-L page. I mean the contents table has all the letters anyway and that's just a project page, so let's not get into highly complicated templates for its navigation. Ok? Hoverfish Talk 21:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The other thing I want to strong ask you, is to put film infoboxes in your film articles. We have 727 (they were 840 or so a few days ago and 7 members, including me, are doing our best to add all these infoboxes. If all your films come in without infoboxes, it will be like we are getting nowhere soon. So please, take some o the menial work too. I think it's fair. Hoverfish Talk 22:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, sorry for the remark. It looks like I just bumped into someones without infobox. So I will not mark any of them for needed infobox for the time being. I know you work a lot and I know you care. I do take a look at your contributions now and then. Hoverfish Talk 22:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Indian cricketers

Hello again, James and nice to hear from you. Thanks for the good wishes.

I'm afraid Indian cricket is a massive project in its own right but I think if I can get all the season and tour articles up and running, if only as stubs, it will at least lay a foundation. The same applies to nearly all the other Test countries, some more so than others. Even England is a long way from presenting a full picture because there is still a lot missing from the 19th century.

I like your new image and userpage. I'm a SPECTRE fan myself having always been keen on Ian Fleming's books as well as the early films. I reckon the best Bond villains invariably belong to SPECTRE. Apart from Ernst Stavro himself, I would say three of them were in From Russia With Love alone as portrayed by Lotte Lenya, Robert Shaw and Walter Gotell.

By the way, speaking of Bond and his girls, beware of this little lot:

File:Bond 001.jpg

All the best. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 13:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Argentine film stubs

Hi Ernst (nice archive box, btw)

It looks like we're approaching WP:SNOW. I don't know if the nomination will stay open for the last two days, but it will obviously end with a keep. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 18:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased)

That sounds like quite an undertaking, good luck with it. Speaking about the Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased) series, I was somewhat surprised seeing that your plot outlines of episodes 1 and 10 look very much like the texts found on http://www.randallandhopkirk.com/ In both cases, entire blocks of text are identical to the other webpage. Do you have permission to use this material? If not, I would advice you to check the plot outlines again and rewrite where it is necessary. Cheers. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 20:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Film list

When I last edited the List of Austrian film something went wrong so that now the lines of the table are invisible. can you fix this? I dont know what I did wrong :-/ -- Otto Normalverbraucher 00:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Argentine films

Hi Stavros! Just wanted to congratulate you for your work, and tell you that there's a {{Cinenacional name}} template for Argentine actors (the one for films is to be created). The Cinenacional is the official Argentine cinema organism. Good wiking, Mariano(t/c) 12:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I really don't know what to say. On the one hand you keep starting endless projects and on the other you tell me how huge the project is and how many years it will take. If you can get together a project for each national cinema, it would help you. About categorizing Biographies, I keep telling you: it's Project Biographies. I can't answer for them. I think you would gain a lot to become member of Biographies and see what's up there. There ARE births and deaths in the years in film, but you have to follow suit there. I don't edit these sections because I have no idea on biographies. Hoverfish Talk 18:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Oooooops, I may have stepped on your toes. I added a film to the List of Argentine films:1980s ...and it starts with V as in Veronico Cruz. Sorry if you are in the process of building a great list and got in your way. Best-- Luigibob 08:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your commentary on my article about Martín (hache), I'll try to expand it (it's my all-time favourite film) and also try to make some new articles of films involving the people in it (Adolfo Aristarain, Cecilia Roth, Federico Luppi...). Keep your good work, it's nice to see people so devoted to the Wikipedia as you! Joanberenguer 23:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Cathedral Saint-Peter Saint-Paul

Thanks a lot! I still need to fix several things on the page but will finish by midnight GMT. GGenov 10:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course I don't mind, that's why we are here. I've been working on the intro and also on the History part. But I like your intro, so will not touch it. still I'll change the history and add the references right now. The idea with the pictures is great. If you can come back in a little while and have another look will be great. maybe in 2 hours? GGenov 13:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I just saw that the painting you added to the gallery is of the Cathedral in Mantes, not in Nantes. Did you have any special reason or it was just by mistake? Shall we leave it or remove it?
GGenov 15:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Great! The only thing left is to add a description of the possitions on the Ground plan. This I'll do in the "Interior" section. The rest seems more or less fine to me. after adding the possitions it'll be, say, ready.
GGenov 15:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

) well, I'm not French but can make my way through it :). You are probably right about the last sentance in the intro... it simply didn't quite fit into the main body. but I'll move it there. btw, isn't the article a bit poor in information for being nominated?
GGenov 15:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahaaaa, I got the point :). Well, I see you've done a bit of rearangement and I'll not touch it anymore but maybe add some positions later on.
GGenov 15:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, in that period nothing really interesting has happened from a construction point of view. However, the interior has undergone quite a bit of refurbishing in terms of beau-art and stained glass. I have some info on that and will also dig the French sources to see what may come out of this. Detailed info on French topics is quite difficult to be found in English.
GGenov 15:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe, I can help you with this. Bulgarian is indeed my native tongue. Have quite good memories of the bulgarian cinematography before 1989. Moreover, have also friends who remember :). You did a really good job with the cathedral. One can learn a lot from you. thanks.
GGenov 16:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually from Varna, not from Sofia. You must be having lots of good fun here and there. And broad range of interests is always welcome, especially when it comes to making encyclopedia. How do you manage with all this wiki-stuff, anyway? I can hardly fit it in my schedule. The main reason to start it is that I've got an awfull lot of friends and colleagues who say "well, wikipedia is a nice idea but the info is inaccurate and incomplete as a source...". I agree but instead of blaming prefer to do something to make it better. Particularly like Gothic architecture and the fields of specialisation you can see form my profile. Currently I attend a M.Sc. program in Molecular biology to expand a bit the info in my brain :)
GGenov 16:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a great DYK candidate. I've made some minor copyedits dealing with the referencing. I think a DYK image is appropriate for this subject, if you haven't added one already. For me, it seems like the article itself has too many images because it's not that much of a smooth layout. Can you make the images smaller or move one to the gallery? Nishkid64 16:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess you didn't know this, but I'm not in WikiProject Films. I was a bit confused as to why you were telling me this hehe. Also, the cathedral article will probably be up on DYK in 2-3 days. Nishkid64 15:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Bulgarian movies

Hi James, I just placed a description of a BG movie that you can find here. Also activated the link to it on Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Bulgarian Films. However, haven't moved it to "Ready". Have a look please if it can be called "Ready" at all.
And thanks for the cathedral actions.
GGenov 18:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure! It's a good chance for me to watch these movies once again. I have another four films here at hand and will write about them as soon as I manage to "flip" through them. Cheers!
GGenov 19:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Zameerposter.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Zameerposter.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. Yamla 23:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Cathedral of St.Peter and St.Paul, Nantes, was selected for DYK!

On January 20, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cathedral of St.Peter and St.Paul, Nantes, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 18:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeeee we're in. Just saw it!! btw, another movie is ready. click here to see it and move it if you like.GGenov 19:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

NO, please don't make lists of films

The Indian film industry is said to make 2000 films per year. It's been operating for some 80 years I think (if not at the same level) -- let's estimate 80,000 films then. That's conservative.

It's better to do the work rather than spend a lot of time making lists. If you actually want to DO something, go to Boxoffice India online and consult their lists of top-grossing films for each year, or decade. Then make sure that all those films are in List of popular Bollywood films. Some of them will be red-links. OK, make a list of those. Those red-links will be worth aggressively pursuing. Zora 18:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion on the Portuguese cinema move; will try to do it (still new at this!) Thanks again Jbmas99 20:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Good work on films

I'd like to thank you for your work on film-related pages, specifically in reference to Shilpa Shetty's movies. This will help the problem with red links and contribute to Wikipedia as a whole. Ekantik ^talk 04:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for your messages on my talk page and thanks too for writing a nice article on Ab Dilli Dur Nahin. Keep up the good work and let me know if I can help any — Lost^(talk) 18:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi James, another BG movie is ready. It's Manevri na petiya etazh. I saw you went through Opasen char. Thanks! I finished with it as well. Shall I bother you for the future with checking or you'd prefer if I just move them to a subsection 1/2-ready or something and then you look whenever you have time?
GGenov 16:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
OK perfect, I'll do whatever I can, also with the time list.
GGenov 16:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for keeping me updated on your progress with Indian films. Please don't worry about the abuse you received, I am assuming you are speaking about Zora? If so, let me know and I will think about filing some kind of incident report as this editor is making problems in other areas of Wikipedia too. Regards, Ekantik ^talk 16:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Columns

All these column you say (date, genre) are a good idea in principle. As you see however it gets to be a problem with table width. And also we use relatively high resolution (I'm sure you're also on 1280x1024). Imagine what happens at lower resolution (say 1024x768). I have though of abbreviating, but it turned out silly. Again, let's see what gathers under each header and how full columns get and we can come back to it at a latter time. Hoverfish Talk 16:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The first column IS release. It doesn't make sense to have another column also called release. Hoverfish Talk 16:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at Events in 2004 in film. Wouldn't that be more appropriate? Hoverfish Talk 16:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I read it: you won't talk to me, because you think I don't recognize your contributions. Whatever, I'm tired of repeating myself. Hoverfish Talk 16:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks appreciated, but t'was nothing

re: Hey well done for improving the Milreap link for Lhakpa Tsamchoe. I started her article and Himilaya a while back when I was imporving Seven Years in Tibet. I amstill only half way through! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

xpost

• Thanks, I'd forgotten that, but it's nice to be appreciated. Films are normally way outside my patrol; just another obvious fix needed--there were several others which were harder in following that line of links, etc. I do a lot of 'relational' editing by accident, so to speak. One thing leads to another when cross-checking links sometimes. IIRC, just was trying to figure out who the hotty' was in another movie. That lead to more typical geo-political edits for me— related Tibetan/Himalayan geography and researches was an interesting lesson in how some of the rest of us live! That kind of thing makes wikiediting worth the time. // FrankB 18:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC) (w/Xpost mytalk)

Seppo Kolehmainen

The page history says you created Seppo Kolehmainen and contributed all of its content. Can you add references if you have any? Thanks. Rintrah 17:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Shilpa Shetty

All the career section is saying is that she starred in this film with that actor playing this role. That's just useless info. Which is why I reduced it not delete it. Info about the storyline of the film only belongs in the film pages. What's the point of giving a whole list of films in which you describe who she starred with etc etc. Amitabh Bachchan, Shahrukh Khan and Preity Zinta all have a good body of work but if you look at their career section it states good info. BTW, my edits were not vandalism. Im going to find some useful info to put into her career section and there is a possibility I might delete the stuff you re-added but i'll try and retain the stuff. Also in the future if you ever leave a message then sign your name-- Pa7 18:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Look, I agree with you on some points but I'll say again saying she acted with this person blah blah blah is not good info. Yes I do agree her page should look good considering all the stuff happening with Celeb Big Brother, but what's the point in giving a year by year sentence about who she acted with etc etc. If you look at Preity Zinta's or Rani Mukherjee's page you'll see there is a good well written career section not about who they starred with and what their characters names were. Like I said Im having look at anything that would provide good info about her career and i'll try and add to the info you re-added. -- Pa7 18:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Alphabetical vs chronological

Hi. I start a new section as I want to clear this out separately from the Canadian issue. It's a problem of consistency on how lists are sorted in all countries. I tried the Canadian 1970s by release date, and found many problems on my way. Also now that I see it done and compare it with all other county lists, I think that it will bring out a huge mess. The reasons are several. For one, we will not be able to find releadse dates for many-many films. For another I see it often mentioned that imdb's release dates are very often wrong. So I wanted to talk with you about your since-long stated plan to arrange (eventually) films chronologically. Although in principle a very good idea, it has big implementation problems. Also other users trying to add films will meet these problems. So my question is: should we forget the prospect of arranging the country lists chronologically? It's best to decide now, so that when next month your two templates hit the news, we will have nice and consistent lists, with a good possibility of surviving in time without major overhauls. Please, think about it and let me know. I will contribute to make things according to what we decide. Hoverfish Talk 07:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Also about templates: It is good you include the general country lists template at the bottom, but not good you took away the "film-reel" template at the top. I know it is a repetition, but when I suggested in the project to substitute it with your template, it was strongly advised that I leave the reel template in place for consistency through all the series. Some other templates using the reel are currently being developed for other series also. So let's keep it as our trademark, so to say. Hoverfish Talk 08:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I gave it another try in the 1970s with "Date" at the end (and restored alph.order within each year). Is it ok so? Hoverfish Talk 08:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Good morning there is Wales! (Where exactly by the way? Swansea by any chance?). Yes, sure, but within each year, should it be alpha or chronological? Hoverfish Talk 08:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks good in Google Earth! Cool! I drove through once, on my way to Swansee for a visit. I'll be off now. Till later. Hoverfish Talk 09:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The template sure looks fine now. What I don't get is which one you suggest should stay where and which ommited. Can you make this clear? Which is the "regional" that you say should not be included? Hoverfish Talk 13:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

There are way too many templates now. Let me remove which ones I think are not needed in our example, and you tell me then if you agree. I will remove both from the list and from the cinema of Argentina. Just as a test. Hoverfish Talk 14:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, we tried both the same edit in Cinema of Argentina. So, I agree as it is right now, both in the 20ies list and the cinema articles. Which means I will support these templates in all countries. However I forsee problems in some areas, but I will stay optimistic till then. Hoverfish Talk 14:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

And please, can you reduce to at leat 2/3 the flag size in the cinema articles? Hoverfish Talk 14:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Adding film posters in any other article than the film they represent is violating fair use. Hoverfish Talk 15:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

What I know is that in several series, boxes containing film posters to represent awarded films or notable films of the year, were all removed. It's not a limitation Wikipedia imposes, but rather a limitation imposed on wikipedia by copyright law. If you want to make 100% sure (because I may still have it wrong), you can ask in the project about it. Hoverfish Talk 15:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I still think you should ask about it. I'm not so familiar with all this stuff. I wouldn't do it however. Hoverfish Talk 15:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

That's right. Quite an asset for WP Films. If you look at some other members' pages we also have professional plot writters and so on. Nice to know, eh? Hoverfish Talk 15:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

More missorting

I see your tracks in the articles at Category:Subdivisions of Mongolia, too. Could you go fix the missorting there and in related categories, please. Gene Nygaard 16:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, creatures of his kind should be blocked definitely for life. End. - Darwinek 17:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Answer is: no, I can't block him just when I will want to do that but he is fighting everybody and sooner or later will stand in front of the Arbitration Committee and will be punished. On that day I will open my finest wine together with fellow Wikipedianz. P.S. Yes, it is hard to combine it with the university :). - Darwinek 17:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

OFF-TOPIC: How's life in Slovakia? Well, fine, though it started to snow (yes, started), we had no snow until now. To Hungary, no, I didn't forgot, but I can't force myself to do some more, as I'm primarily doing on Slovakia (expanding/creating). To User:Gene Nygaard, though he isn't so nasty to me this time, he is in trouble with Darwinek and User:Tulkolahten (you saw that move and edit war in Marek Špilár article?). And something from personal: I'm still waiting for my results from this 7 weeks now. Why it takes so long to send results back from Cambridge? MarkBA ^t/c/@ 18:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Gene Nygaard

Story about Gene Nygaard is terrible and long. I tried to discuss with him but he refused all conversation. He continues vandalising several pages, so I put a warning on his talk page. You should do the same. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 18:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:007Scarpine.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:007Scarpine.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. ~ BigrTex 06:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:007 Freelance Doctor No.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:007 Freelance Doctor No.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. ~ BigrTex 06:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Shilpa Shetty

Hello got your message. Im having a look at any new info about her and I'll try and put as much as I can. Best regards. -- Pa7 18:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I've discussed the notable roles on the discussion page for her article. Im asking members of WP:INCINE to contribute to this, but for now i'll concentrate on her career section. Best regards. -- Pa7 18:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

If you do happen to find anything concerning her career which is not mentioned already then please do tell. Thanks. -- Pa7 18:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Let it be

The cinema is doing great and I had noticed you got editors to help in with various countries. The category issue is as it is. If it changes in the future it will come out of a broad consensus. I don't think if we start discussing between is it will change. So let's concentrate on our tasks now. I am on my second infobox and I want to do eight more today. If you wish to bring back the issue of subdividing big categories by creating hundreds of cross categories, we have now the Categorization talk page for such discussions. I know you want to subdivide, you don't need to remind me, but we have to respect the fact that all the others want to keep it as it is, for the time being. After all, if we give everywhere American films, they can at least all be found under this category, so that any future decision can take them from there. Hoverfish Talk 18:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, I went back and added the categories. It's just that I am in a bit of a hurry with the infoboxes and had forgotten them. Cheers! Hoverfish Talk 19:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It would be of huge help if you add film infoboxes and encourage the other contributors to do so too. I know it takes some extra time, but you don't have to fill in all the fields. So long as the infobox is there, with Name, Director, Producer, 1-2 main actors, Country, Language, Year, Imdb#, the rest can be filled up in good time. Currently it looks like we are trying to empty an ocean, but as more users show up it will get done eventually. Anyway, it's good you gather all in your secret base, since we can retrieve them all a bit later. Hoverfish Talk 16:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Comments on Turkolahten's page

I've replied to your comments at User talk:Tulkolahten there. Gene Nygaard 17:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Finland's flag at the 1912 Summer Olympics

Hey how come the Finnish participants of the Shooting at the 1912 Summer Olympics - Men's 100 metre running deer, single shots have the Russian flag by their name!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The flags are controlled by {{Country flag IOC alias FIN}}, through {{flagIOCathlete}}. User:Andrwsc created that series of templates; I'm guessing there was a reason he created an exception for 1912 in the template that causes Finland's athletes to have Russian flags. You should ask him, though I imagine it has something to do with the political status of Finland at the time. -- Jonel | Speak 22:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

yes your probably right about the Winter War and everything wa sabout that time I think. Good work it would be great if you could start articles on the particpants -who have probably done a lot of work in this field I have't really seen your work. I started a few historical Olympians several months back such as Harry Mallin and Leon Moreaux including some shooters and Category:French fencers. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I created Category:French fencers ;). Henri Callot, Henri Delaborde (fencer), Georges de la Falaise, Eugène-Henri Gravelotte, Henri Masson, and Jean Maurice Perronet are a few of the French fencers I started articles on. I have also made sure every competitor from the first modern Olympic Games has an article - see Category:Competitors at the 1896 Summer Olympics, quite a lot of those articles were started by me. The problem with creating articles on participants is that there are a *lot* of them, and getting anything more than stubs on each takes a good deal of time. I'm focusing on making sure Wikipedia has results for all Olympic events first - quite a large undertaking in itself. Glad to have support in writing articles about the individuals though, great work. -- Jonel | Speak 22:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:J.Headleycover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:J.Headleycover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 09:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Aztecwarrior.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Aztecwarrior.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 08:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:PeterAndruska.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:PeterAndruska.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 08:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:007livetwicecover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:007livetwicecover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 11:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome

I'm happy to help with articles, I'm currently on backlogs checking out articles that need editor attention!!! Thanks for your comments! Tellyaddict 13:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Municipalites article

After finishing the articles on the municipalities, I'm gonna work to make articles about provinces longer, I always thought I should do that --escondites 13:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Decades prior to 1980 on List of Canadian films (and relation ship to List of Quebec films

Hi, will you have time to format the tables in the decades prior to 1980, as you did from 1980 through 2000?

Also, do you know what the policy is for Quebec and Canada categories and lists? For example, there are many Quebec films that are not also categorized as Canadian films, so they didn't crop up with you did your initial list, I think. I've been adding some titles from List of Quebec films into the Canada list. However, I have not, for the most part, been categorizing them as Canadian films, since the Quebec film category IS a subset and I'm not sure how much duplication we want in the Categories. Shawn in Montreal 22:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lisa Hannigan.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Lisa Hannigan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 09:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:GraemeHick.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:GraemeHick.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 09:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Aamutv.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Aamutv.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 09:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Leprechaun2cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Leprechaun2cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. Fritz S. (Talk) 16:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Egyptian films

Hi Ernst, how's it going? Um, I've been working on articles for classical Egyptian films for some time now. Problem is sources are really hard to find, and almost all are Arabic (which makes this even harder). I've started about 30 so far, all translated from Arabic sources. I'm having a hard time connecting ideas and organizing them. I've been completing Faten Hamama's major film articles, since I'm planning on nominating it for FA after finishing my work. Anyways, good luck with your work. I'll try to do my best. :) ← ANAS ^Talk? 17:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. I just joined the Films WikiProject. :) I think setting up a WikiProject is a good idea, but for the Egyptian project, we'll need some members, because there are many (many, ~4000) Egyptian films and for many of them, there are no (not even a few) reliable sources. IMDb is not so helpful (or accurate, um, no wait, make it correct) even when it comes to cast, release date and sometimes, genre! Another issue is the naming for the films, since there is no primary transliteration for most film names, a standard transliteration is what I'm using, with starting redirects to common spellings of course. Names in IMDb are sometimes completely wrong. You seem to be enthusiastic about this. :) You could count me in in a WikiProject:Egyptian cinema, although I believe it would not help much if there were not so many dedicate members. For now, I think it would be more effective to set up the list of films for every country. ..Some hard work, good luck with that! Thank you for the kind comments, too. :) ← ANAS ^Talk? 17:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

By way of your introduction to Salloum: I'm no Greek-Austrian although I live in Austria. Just Greek will do. Hoverfish Talk 23:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Scott and charlene.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Scott and charlene.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 18:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Jamie! Could you please activate your e-mail? I wanna send you some pics. - Darwinek 22:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

You'll see, nice pics from my country. :) Just don't forget to check the e-mail in the future. Wow! Greeat job Jamie, Argentine films are going just right. :) - Darwinek 22:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Cinema of Austria

Hy! I've just found something that might be interesting for you: an article in the New York Times about the recent austrian cinema ( "Nnew wave" cinema of austria. There has been a film-series in the NY Lincoln Center where many of the most important austrian films of the recent years have been presented - see article [1]. If you like to work on articles concerning the cinema of austria, this newspaper-article will be a good overview to the current austrian cinema and a good inspiration for missing articles! Probably you may also add some informations to the Cinema of Austria-article? :) -- Otto Normalverbraucher 00:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:FranzSanchez.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:FranzSanchez.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hi! I'm Emiliano the guy who made the archive Clockwork (1978 film). I wanna say thank you for help me in that archive.

your mate: User:Emiliano s

PD: only I write movies at es.wikipedia.org. I don't know speak too much english so the argentine films will be wrote at es.wikipedia.org

....for your question: si soy de Argentina tambien te puedo enseñar español cuando tengas que hacer algun tipo de archivo

WP:Films Newsletter

The January 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. --Nehrams2020 18:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

There's the link, sorry about that. The reason you didn't get a newsletter was because your name wasn't on the member's list here which is where I harvested the names from to send it by AWB. Just include your name and you'll get next month's on time for sure. I'm glad you're willing to help with the infoboxes, the more volunteers the better. I'm not sure about the award infoboxes, do you mean an infobox devoted entirely to awards or a section within the film infobox about the film's awards? --Nehrams2020 18:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about any award infoboxes but you should probably check and see if the project has any templates already created. Ask on the talk page, I'm sure somebody will know. Keep up the good work on the films, I really appreciate you always adding infoboxes now which will make it easier for everybody else. --Nehrams2020 18:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, all films have to be tagged with the film template, also TV films, so they can be evaluated for class at least. But in the Indian films, do be tactful and place the films template under their local one. One editor was almost upset today and then was thankful that I placed the WP India cinema at the top again. Hoverfish Talk 19:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I just saw the above discussion. I once suggested that we make an award infobox but it was not very welcome at all. I guess we have too many infoboxes. Everyone said that section Awards is very obvious, should always be there in awarded films and it's quite enough. Hoverfish Talk 21:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

An Award section does exist (look at the film style quidelines). Why tabulate it? If you want to do it in individual films with many awards, why don't you just do it? If you want something for all films, I would say forget tables and just use the Awards section. I don't like tables within articles. Sometimes they put cast in tables, I think I've seen awards also in a table somewhere. But they look bad IMO. Hoverfish Talk 21:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

As I said, use it in individual films. If you want to generalize its use, you have to present it to the WP Films Talk page. I will stay neutral. Hoverfish Talk 21:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

It fits all right for a film with so many awards and nominations. Till tomorrow. Hoverfish Talk 22:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Sira`..

Thanks for the encouraging words! Have a good day. :) ← ANAS ^Talk? 20:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)