Mikomaid

Welcome!

Hello, Mikomaid, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! VanTucky 02:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Lolita: Film noir? Yes 0r no, I say NO

Re: the film: But she's not a femme fatale in the classical sense who uses sex to get money, power, jewelery, drinks hard, is involved in crime, and such. The girl in Lolita likes sex and boys. She leaves Humbert because she wants more experiences and not be oppressed by an overbearing (co-dependent) new lover, and dare I say quite an older man. She's no femme falate. Femme fatales are in a sense sociopathic, that is, they really don't have hold to any any values other than advancing their own self-interests. Lolita truly seems in love at the end of the film and is happy to be pregnant. She wants to settle down and raise a family. Lo is no femme fatale. So the film from this aspect in not a neo-noir. Do you have any critical reception references that mention the film is a neo-noir. As such, I will revert, in due course. Luigibob (talk) 14:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe you tried to add these films, again. My, my, my....Luigibob (talk) 05:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Public Domain - Spellbound

Hi, I've removed the claim that Hitchcock's Spellbound is PD, as the US rights are currently held by Disney/Buena Vista (via their acquisition of ABCs back catalogue, which included all of the Selznick/Hitchcock titles). As evidence, you can see the relevant copyright information on the packaging shots for the Criterion release on this page. Unfortunately, the information on the DVD Breakdown site is incorrect. Davepattern (talk) 10:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ooops!! What's vary of DVD packages here[1]!

public domain films - urgent

Can you furnish a responsible source for your edit saying the film The Man with the Golden Arm is in public domain? Did its author discuss the doctrine whereby the unrenewed film of Pygmalion protected it against distribution by others than the holders of the intact copyright on the play? Please respond ASAP, as i am concerned such unref'd assertions can harm WP, in light of the possibility of giving the appearance that WP's copyvio problems are part of a pattern of trying to undercut valid copyrights.
--Jerzy•t 03:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry, i meant to lk the edit in question.
  --Jerzy•t 03:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
  

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)