User talk:MikeAllen/April 2010-July 2010

April 2010

re: Removed your silly message tag

Hehe, appreicate the hilarity! I made the same point about reading the status bar in a recent discussion about the WP:EGG policy. I still stand by my "WP:EGG insults user intelligence." comment. Hope you had a happy fooling day! Lugnuts (talk) 17:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Let the experiment run, please

Regarding: [1], please do not do that again. There are thousands of pages and running an experiment on one seems goodness. Instead of reverting, discuss the experiment outcome on WP:ACTOR and what you liked or did not like. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 02:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

PS, we use different talk page standards... so if you reply on my talk, further discussion will occur there, but if you reply here it will stay here. ++Lar: t/c 02:34, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Lar. Hmm, what experiment are you talking about? I wasn't aware of any kind of experiment with adding shadows to fonts was taking place? Can you let me know where the discussion is at? Thanks. :) As you may or may not know, I have discussed until the cows came home with Jack. My good faith is done with him. But that's another topic... —Mike Allen 02:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The experiment of replacing a lot of hardcoded markup that has to be replicated page by page with something easier to maintain. Pull the shadows if you like (can't say as I'm a fan either) but don't wholesale revert the whole thing. ++Lar: t/c 03:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

If Jack would have explained that he is now demoing a template on the actor talk page (I don't see where he has, or any support for such a thing), I wouldn't have reverted. It's difficult to discuss with him since he already has set in his mind what he wants and really doesn't care what others say. I just thought it was another one of his pointy edits. Shouldn't such "experiments" be performed on test pages and not on the mainspace. I don't understand this and this doesn't say diddly squat about what is going on. Well only that a template with 120% font sizes, shadows, and red text is included. No justification for anything, other than Jack not liking how editors are making/have made filmography tables. —Mike Allen 03:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll have a word. Jack may not always approach matters the best way but he IS trying to help. I agree he needs to be a bit more explicit about what he is doing and why. Best. ++Lar: t/c 14:58, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

GAR question

Yo Mike. I've been following Pee-wee's Big Adventure's GAR since Feburary and nobody has made any work on your problems. I'm just letting know that you should probably close and the demote the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

RE:Saw 7

I wasent being disruptive. I just followed commen knowalage by SAW fans that the movie comes ou the Friday b4 Halloween or on Halloween. I was not trying be disruptive. But u didnt site any resource for your changes maybe i shuldve left a warning on ur page.:(STATicVerseatide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:STATicVerseatide) 06:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Bot fiasco

It's a problem when you have multiple uses of the apostrophe to create italics or bolding. I run into that problem myself from time to time. What you have to do is use brackets (these --> {{ }}) around the "'s", this way the HTML code knows not to read it as a random italics or bold code.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Halloween II (2009 film) / references

Hi Mike, I saw that you reverted my use of <i> tags in the references of Halloween II (2009 film). I actually used them to un-italicise names that shouldn't have italics (according to their article pages anyway), like Box Office Mojo etc.--BelovedFreak 00:12, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, something I only recently learned! There's no hurry to revert, let Bignole do some editing for the time being I guess! --BelovedFreak 00:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

About that email from a while back

The original one never did get to me. I just saw your message from then on my talk page and thought of it. I figured I'd let you know in case you have a borked setting. I can't seem to find any that I've set wrong on my end. Millahnna (mouse)talk 11:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Saw II game

Yeah I wasn't surprised all the evidence led to the reveal sometime this month. Was the Konami event in LA? Odd choice for storyline but I really think this could be a great game. The detail of that trailer showed a definite improvement over a simple budget title. I hope they include multiplayer and a better story structure. I think that VII and II could really make another great SAW year even with Paranormal Activity 2 taking some numbers :( GroundZ3R0 002 02:46, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh by the way, we really should do a DYK for the article, ideas? GroundZ3R0 002 02:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Freddy Image

Well, we have two problems. One is that the image is photoshopped, and ShockTillYouDrop even states that it is. As such, the heavily photoshopped image (as it's beyond simply lighting up a dark image) is unusable on Wikipedia. Secondly, there isn't any critical commentary in the article about Freddy's physical appearance. I mean, the should be as it's a significant change from previous films, but at this time there isn't. So, we cannot even use an official photo of Freddy.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Cast vs. Character Info Formatting - AiW

Commenting here to address one thing not directly related (though somewhat applicable) to the debated article. I disagree that adding bullets or some other form of break/delineation indicates a difficulty in reading a paragraph. It was something I often saw used in printed encyclopedias a couple decades back, depending on the flow of information and details.

However, to maintain the paragraph format and avoid lists, I feel the material will need to be overhauled. As it currently reads (which may well be the problem), some delineation felt necessary. Thus, I think the entry in question could do with a revision so that the production notes/character notes are completely separate from the actor/character list. Just my two cents. Emtigereyes (talk) 14:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

soryy

My friend sent that to me and said it was the official plot. And asked him for the link to where he got it i was going to add once i got it. u do not need to jump to conclusions. I am not a vandal at all ALL my edits are to help and improve Wikipedia i have helped out SAW articles and hip hop articles and w/out my edits the encyclopedia would be alot worse Your Welcome STATicVerseatide feedback what i've done 01:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say what you did was vandalism. I just gave you a warning about adding unverifiable information into the article. I suggest you start reading Wikipedia policy and guidelines before adding anything else into articles. WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:V. Also it's discouraged to remove warnings from your talk page, though they are still preserved in your history. Might also be a good idea to read WP:CIVIL since you told one editor to fuck off the other day. Not very nice. —Mike Allen 02:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I only remove them bc I only need my talk page info to refer back to conversations i have had b4. And i have appoligised to that editor for being un civil and im done with doing that. STATicVerseatide feedback what i've done 02:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Category removal

Hi, just wondering why you removed Cat:2010 films from The A-Team (film) article (diff). I'm a "veteran editor" but I'm not brushed up on policy. Is it because the movie isn't out yet? (p.s. HotCat rocks! perfect for WP:UNCAT) ~EdGl ★ 16:35, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I explained it to another editor (since I seen I had already removed the cat in March and he asked in an edit summary my reason. I just seen it after going through the Cats 2010 films again). Read it here. :) —Mike Allen 18:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything on this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Categorization, so I left a message on its talk page in case you were interested. I just want to see what other people think about this. ~EdGl ★ 00:34, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. See you there. :) —Mike Allen 00:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Alrighty :) Thanks for your willingness to participate in discussion (that is the best way to go about things here, I'm sure you'll agree). ~EdGl ★ 01:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to thank you for getting Saw VII protected for two weeks. Every time I ask for protection it's two or three days! Ugh. I guess it depends on the admin (Fastily is awesome though). Just wanted to come by and tell you that. :) —Mike Allen 06:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Sometimes depends in the admin, but it depends on the logs of the page logs Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 20:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

FURs

Usually for images such as posters or DVD covers, they can use the template as they are used as the main image. However, if an additional poster or DVD cover was desired for another area of the article (for example home media or production section), a specific fair use rationale indicating why it was necessary to include it in the article would be needed. All screenshots should have a specific rationale indicating why the image is being used as they should not be included in articles for decorative purposes. For the image you linked to, the reason I flagged it was because the header of the fair use rationale should indicate what article it is being used in. I have just corrected it to show you what I mean. The fair use rationale is already strong enough to warrant inclusion in the article as it states that the image is used to illustrate the "techniques used to create the film's flashback sequences" (and the image is being used in the filming section with a caption that supports this). Usually adding a few lines indicating why the image is being included (while also mentioning that it is a small version, a single frame of the film, is published elsewhere on the Internet/books, etc.) can usually ensure that the image can remain in the article and prevent it from being deleted. Unfortunately many of the images on that long list I started do not meet one or more of the non-free image criteria. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wildhartlivie reverting endlessly. Thank you.

nb: these reek of hypocrisy: [2] vs [3]

Jack Merridew 06:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

How so Mr. Jack? —Mike Allen 06:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh that. I like the shadows around the borders now, just not the red font.  :) —Mike Allen 06:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Also while your pimping my page, you should add some pretty shadows like you have on yours. It would be much appreciated. Thanks for the happy birthday. :-D —Mike Allen 06:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Degrassi

Hi. You've commented at the FAR for Degrassi: The Next Generation. I think that I have taken care of all the points you have raised. Please revisit the review and let me know if it's up to scratch and meets the criteria. Thank you, Matthewedwards :  Chat  04:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for joining in on the Sherlock Holmes discussion

For obvious reasons, I was very frustrated. I appreciate the extra eyeballs. Millahnna (mouse)talk 14:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Sherlock Holmes

Can you please read the line directly under yours in the Sherlock Holmes talk page. You were not ignored and you also did not ask me to read any policy. Thank you though. Jlavigne5771 (talk) 00:07, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I wrote it but never posted it. Don't mind me... —Mike Allen 01:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Non-free images cleanup

Since you've been helping out with the image cleanup, I figured you might be interested in commenting at the image cleanup listing's FA images. I went through all of those images and left comments on whether I thought they should be removed or not. I would appreciate it if you could leave some of your thoughts on the images so we can move along the process of cleaning up the articles. If you have any questions, please let me know. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:19, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Ratings

Both come from the Nielsen Company, though I don't personally know who this Travis Yanan is, or why TVBTN goes through him for the final figures. The TV Ratings that TVBTN posts initially are just overnight estimates, based on samples taken as they don't have the time to count all and get the numbers together by the next morning. The "Broadcast Finals" are the numbers that have been officially counted and are recognized as the "official" figure used. Typically, these numbers are smaller than the estimates, generally because when people estimate they like to be generous with figures. Also, neither figure takes into consideration the "Live+7" figure (which is the number that represents the people who watched their DVR within like 7 hours of the show's broadcast).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Where are you running into a problem with this at?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

To my knowledge, it's coming from Nielsen (whether directly, or via some other source like Travis). In this case, I would say that Travis is probably getting it from somewhere else and just posting it, and thus places like TVBTN know they can get the info from Travis on a reliable basis and just source it to him. Nielsen is the only company that does that numbers, so they have to come from them. The only other alternative would be that Travis is making them up, but that takes a bit of planning since he breaks down percentages and shares and all that crap. Pretty elaborate joke. I personally don't like sourcing to forums at all, and TVBTN used to do a good "DVR" roundup about a week later, which would show you the true "final" number, by including the DVR figures as well. Unfortunately, now they just show the percent increase, and don't actually list real viewership numbers. Thus, if you don't know what figure they started with (estimate or "final") then you cannot even take the percentage and figure out the overall viewership.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Probably the same reason why they don't archive their ratings, because they don't care. LOL. I'm not sure. I can never find anything on their website and I always wonder how news organizations do. Maybe they contact them directly? I never see any official "Nielsen" announcement, so they could be sending them directly to the studios themselves.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:09, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Are these what you guys are looking for? Millahnna (mouse)talk 19:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Well that's a start, but it doesn't list all network shows. :( Mike Allen 20:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Since you've got me curious, I'll try to poke around and see if I can find something. I know I've seen someone at TWOP post about this sort of thing before. Millahnna (mouse)talk 22:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

film grosses

Thanks for the info! Really appreciate it.Hutch y2k (talk) 18:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:SCRUTINY

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

[4] I fail to understand why when WHL fully claimed responsibility for that comment in the sockpuppetry investigation :

• "There is nothing presented here that indicates there was an attempt to edit surreptiously"
• "There is nothing presented here to indicate that I tried to avoid scrutiny, mislead or deceive anyone, or try making disruptive edits with the IP account "
• "There was no effort to try and hide my identity "
• "and the comments I made on the Andrew Koenig talk page here."
• "There was no attempt to represent myself as someone other than who I am. " all located within [5]

and the case was closed based on WP:SCRUTINY (the fact that WHL was not intending to hide the fact that s/he had made the comments), that s/he has any valid right to remove a link from the statement to that very claim of responsibility for that comment. MM 207.69.137.39 (talk) 00:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

She didn't create another account to confuse or deceive editors. She wasn't logged in, after the servers automatically logged her out (every 30 days) when she posted the comments. There's no conspiracy here and it is a non issue. She later admitted it was her, after you drug her through the noticeboards--and wasn't it settled then? It's really not a big deal so please quit trying to make a problem where there isn't one. If you want to see problems, look at WP:AN/I. While this is only an essay, this describes your behavior fairly accurate. WP:Wikilawyering Mike Allen 01:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The issue is that if she is so adamant that she was not trying to hide the fact that she made that comment, then why oh why would she object to and remove what is essentially the signature to that comment? MM 4.158.222.209 (talk) 01:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Is this all you do here is bitch about who didn't do what and why they didn't do? Seriously. Guess what? There isn't an issue! Mike Allen 02:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

SAW

Please don't revert this again, but instead explain to me why it was done and maybe it can be discussed; because honestly I see no reason at all why it was. I was following clean up per the guildlines of WP:ELNO and typical userbox configs of which do not condone of the breaks but commas to be separated in listings. Among everything else that was done, they are just general fixes. Why was this reverted? -- GunMetal Angel 18:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

May 2010

Nightmare

Nope, I'm going tomorrow. :D Well, it'll technically be Friday, as I'm going to the midnight showing.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

My g/f doesn't want to get dragged to the midnight showing because she has stuff to do in the morning...but I don't care. Yeah, I wrote most of it. I actually have a few more sources that I will probably try and go through tomorrow to flesh out the article more. Hopefully there will be enough good info there.

Nice new image. If we can get some good critical commentary on the make-up effects in the film, we could probably use that image.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

For whatever it's worth, I'm trying to get this one in this weekend too. I'll do my usual plot fun if it needs it after. But as a rabid Freddy Kreuger fangirl (with no one around in meatspace who likes horror flicks) I just wanted to pop in for a friendly "woohoo it's finally here." No midnight showings where I'm at though. I'm jealous of Bignole. Millahnna (mouse)talk 09:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

That's good. I HATE writing plot summaries but I will give them a good cleaning. :P About to buy my midnight ticket. The reviews don't look good who what remake does get good reviews? Mike Allen 22:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Because it should be cited in the body of the article, and also something about the coding of the citation and the infobox. I don't know. It's something that was brought to my attention earlier. Well, I'm off to get a seat (bought my tickets earlier today). I'll probably come back and write up the plot before I go to bed and clean up any crap stuff some IP adds (or deletes) after. Be prepared for the shit-storm of IP edits that will occur in the coming days.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

You have to be careful. You removed the source outright, but it was being used in multiple places for other information. I've fixed it (..er...I did, till you undid it trying to fix it yourself..lol). As for the film. I liked it. I think I liked F13 more, because it's just more entertaining, but I did like Nightmare. I thought Haley did awesome, and I loved the way they handled his backstory--making is almost seem like he was innocent, and then later showing that he wasn't. I liked the idea that with Nancy being his favorite he waited for her to put herself in a position that would leave her stuck in the dreamworld forever. Sucks that it only gets a week before Iron Man 2 comes out.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

BTW, I figured I'd mention this ahead of time, but I intentionally left out Nightmare's placement within the "Slasher remake" and the "Wes Craven Remake Riot" because they are not true genre's to pick from. Since Wes Craven had nothing to do with this remake, and the fact that The Hills Have Eyes 2 is not a remake of the original sequel, but just a sequel to the remake (which throws the whole list out of whack). I think once it moves into the to 10 of the "Slasher" and "Remake" charts, that would be good to note. I also was thinking that it may be interesting to note it's comparison (after all is said and done) to the other Michael Bay remakes (since he's done like 6 (if you include this one) of them.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, there were definitely some cuts (I hope the DVD is unrated). For instance, Katie Cassidy had repeatedly talked about some scene where she was supposed to be crawling through a tunnel that was barely big enough to fit her body, but I don't recall that ever being in the film when I saw it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

All that franchise stuff (inflation adjustments) should be up-to-date...I think I redid all of them at the start of 2010...I believe. Either way, the "start date" is always the year of release for the film. So, in the first box put the original amount it earned, then put the year it was released, then put this year, and then hit calculate. You should get an adjusted dollar amount in the final box. That reminds me...I wanted to compare the initial release with the remake's opening weekend.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

To me, 3D is a gimmick I can live without. It often becomes too distracting for me - though, I did relish the chance to finally see F13 Part III in 3D when it was re-released on DVD last year. I like most of the Saw films. I haven't seen the most recent one that came to DVD yet, but I have the others. I liked how III wrapped up everything from the first two films and showed how it was all one giant game. That was awesome. I do like how they go back and answer old questions that were seemingly forgotten...but I've noticed that the latest entries just seem too staged. I could deal with Saw IV, but you reach your limit with this idea of "apprentices" - it becomes contrived. Having Amanda as one is one thing, but it seems that they keep adding accomplices just to keep the series alive.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I doubt Saw VII will make any real money. If you look at the series, there seems to be a trend downward right now with that series at the box office. I doubt people will come back "because it's the last". They'd probably wait for the DVD, like me. The only one I saw in theaters was Saw III, the rest I waited for the DVD. F13 did really well continuing the storyline from one film to the next, it just wasn't as intricate as Saw. For that matter, Halloween and Nightmare did as well....again, Saw was just written to have so many questions that it was "deeper" than the traditional slasher films.

I edited a couple of the Saw articles, but they were really minor edits. Those pages had so many problems (both with the article and with editors dealing with ownership problems) that you couldn't do any real clean up without fighting people on everything. At least, that was how it was when Saw was still "popular" and those pages attracted more "fanatic" editors.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

What are you doing to "web cite" them and preserve them? I heard you mention this before, and although I understand what is going on I don't know the process to do it. It would probably save me a lot of trouble in the future if I learned.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. It makes more sense now why I've been seeing some citations with the hidden archive url.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:34, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI, I learned recently that if you don't archive Fangoria links immediately, they are typically deleted within a month or so. They don't last very long. I just recently found one on the Friday the 13th page that is going to kill almost the entire music section because it was an interview discussing the music.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

If you want, you can just remove it. It isn't hugely necessary, and the idea of comprehensiveness doesn't hinge on he's opinion of Freddy. We have other people talking about how "scary" and "sinister" Freddy is in this film. Sad to lose, but not detrimental...unlike F13.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Iron Man 2

Hi Mike,

I put the Iron Man 2 synopisis up and saw that it's been taken down (and subesquently gone back up again). My apologies if I'm "spoiling" the US: it has legitimately screened here in NZ where I'm writing from so I didn't know if I was violating any terms of use.

For what it's worth I've put a spoiler warning at the start and edited it a bit for length already. If it's going to cause an issue I can save the text and put it up later...

Cheers,

Comikaze (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)comikazeComikaze (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Scream 4 filming?

This is the most I can find in regards to the Scre4m teaser post.[6] As for the start of filming, the most recent source I’ve found is here[7], though it just simply says May 2010. Let me know what you think of these sources. Geeky Randy (talk) 17:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. In fact, I was thinking the same things. My only concern is... do we know if Scre4m is the official title? Should this hinder us from going ahead and creating the article? Geeky Randy (talk) 05:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Scream 4. Lemme know what you think. :) Geeky Randy (talk) 21:18, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. Thank you. Geeky Randy (talk) 04:25, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Maybe it's due to Cathy Konrad's lawsuit. It's interesting she has the nerve to sue when she was the one who gave away the ending to Scream 3 a week before it came out. She pretty much said that Dewey, Sidney and Gale all survive. I might be able to dig up a source on that. She's stupid, and I'm glad she's not a part of it. Geeky Randy (talk) 19:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Why??

Why did you revert my edits to Saw VI?? I was only trying to be helpful!

First, Hi. Second, please sign your name with "~~~~". Third, so this was done in good faith? Mike Allen 08:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I made that edit, but then I decided to revert it, when I realized that it wasn't a good idea. I'm sorry about that. But why are all my edits being reverted when I'm only trying to be helpful?? I even corrected "their" to "there" and that got reverted! The serpent behind the mirror (talk) 23:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't revert it again. Mike Allen 00:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Saw VII

Thanks for the heads up. Ugh just what i need lol. Once it gets vandalized like five times in a day or something we can get it long term semi protected. STAT- Verse 01:09, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Im ussaly good at getting PP (Page Protection). I've dealed with alot of vandalism heavy articles when editing hip hop articles. For example I got The R.E.D. Album protected until like October. I know what you mean about most IP's being vandals. Like 70-80% of IP's are vandals. Both good luck to the article not having much vandalism this time :-). STAT- Verse 03:01, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with the cover because I had a feeling that the cover was fan made. The saw7 website doesn't even exist yet. Most likly will get a couple bit of Fan Made posters in the next month or so. STAT -Verse 06:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi!

Hey! You're not interested in editing the Twilight articles anymore? :P Mo HH92 ^Talk 14:55, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh ok :) Nothing really, I was just curious :)Mo HH92 ^Talk 02:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Email

Back at you. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS April Newsletter

The April 2010 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:58, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Query

I noticed this, and the edit summary. What was your intention there, please? --John (talk) 05:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Alice suggestion

Hi there Mike, I see you've been pretty active working on Alice in Wonderland (2010 film), and I've just posted a suggestion to the Talk page. For what it's worth, I'm holding off directly implementing it just yet to avoid any possible COI issues. Please have a look if you get the chance. Cheers, NMS Bill (talk) 17:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I just followed up on your comments at Talk with a few examples of why I think the addition would bring the article in line with articles about similar films. And thanks for the response, I appreciate your involvement. NMS Bill (talk) 14:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Image for Noah Ringer

You stated in your edit summary, when you removed the image, that "non-free images aren't supposed to be used when free alternatives can be available." My question to you is, do you have a free alternative available that can be added to the article? If there is not one, then that image should be kept. Silverseren^C 08:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Alice in Wonderland Box Office Edits

It looks like the edits to the Box Office performance do match with one of the references already listed (http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/). Hopefully as the film moves out of theaters, this kind of frequent editing will cease (probably soon, with the DVD coming out in a month). Emtigereyes (talk) 17:17, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

SVU

Since you reverted me, care to weigh in, even though the talk page looks dead. CTJF83 chat 21:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Saw Cast Members

Idk if you are good with charts cause i was wondering if you could fix the chart on the List of Saw cast members page because it says Danial Mathews was only in Saw II but he was seen lying on the floor when Jigsaw and Mark Hoffman are setting up the nerve gas house in Saw V too. STAT- Verse 00:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure about that? That fotage was never previously used. Even if it was there should be a (f) flashback note in the article. STAT- Verse 01:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

But why would Gus be the only one phisiaclly there and i mean the guy that played Danial might not have been there but the page is about the charcter not the actor so it deserves not that the character Danial Mathews was in Saw V. STAT- Verse 01:34, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

okay i get what your saying and of course i know theres a character page just look at the chararcter page history. STAT- Verse 02:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Scream 4 added to cast and characters table

Thank you for taking the time to add a Scream 4 column in the cast and characters section of Scream (film series). I made a few minor adjustments, as I found a some the of revisions weren’t visually presentable. However, I'm still a bit unsatisfied, as some character's column are a different size than others. Is there a way we can change the size of the text? Also, do you find it necessary to source Arquette, Campbell and Cox's reprisal in the table? I just find it slightly redundant, being there are plenty of sources already in this article and the Scream 4 article that verify their return. But I thought I'd ask your opinion first. Thank you. Geeky Randy (talk) 19:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose their reprisal could be challenged, so we might as well leave the source in there. And I think changing the width looked nicer as well as chopping down some of the character's names, since their full name could be read in the bio. Thanks again for your imput. Geeky Randy (talk) 18:34, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources?

As far as bloodydisgusting is concerned, I'm finding mixed opinions. See here and here. No one seems to have inquired about dreadcentral. I would need to see discussion on dreadcentral. I'm not convinced of the reliability of either of them. There are sources out there that don't bring controversy. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Nightmare Legacy

You may wish to return to Talk:Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy and re-evaluate your position on the article. MichaelQSchmidt has sourced some information for the documentary and would like everyone to review the page again. My opinion remains the same, as everyone on that page is already on A Nightmare on Elm Street (franchise)#Documentary, with the exception of the IMDb cast list for everyone interviewed. You may feel otherwise, and it would be only right for anyone who has cast an opinion of the previous version of the page to review it and either alter their opinion or reaffirm their choice.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Appreciations...

Thanks much for THIS. Very cool. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

And for THIS as well.  :) Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Still workin...

I was able to begin digging through the pre-production and pre-release interviews and have begun adding production background.[8] The article did indeed need information not available on the official website, so as to better understand the project itself. Also, I did slice the "list of interviewees" by a great margin. I do think it's encyclopedic to have readers know at least some of who was involved, but yes... the huge list was massive overkill. Still woking, and thank you for your input. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Saw VII

Well I got Saw VII protected till October in case you didn't notice. Told you I could get It protected long-term. STAT -Verse 23:40, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Ice Age IV: Continental Drift

Why did you revert my edits, as seen here? We know Ice Age: Continental Drift is an ice age movie and an upcoming movie? --20:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.97.187.69 (talk)

Re: Benson's Junior Status

Comment left. Benson was definitely the junior of the show, having just transferred in to the SVU during the first season. The reason it's so murky is the producers have stopped paying attention to details the longer the show is on (when's the last time you heard Munch referred to as a "sergeant?"). Hope this helps! Redfarmer (talk) 04:03, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Recent Alice in Wonderland Plot Summary Changes

Yeah... that was rather impressive, and not in a good way. Thanks for reverting it. On the plus side, all of the bloating you adjusted occurred less than 24 hrs ago. I've been making small adjustments for the past week, often after reverting other bloats (though nothing like the one you reverted). Some folks just have particular details they really want to share... too bad it's hard to express that a plot summary is not the place to do it. Emtigereyes (talk) 03:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

SRQ

I have filed an SPI report here. Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 20:56, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

TY!

DocOfSoc has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Saw VII

Really? Wow bummer I really thought it was real. Oh well good photoedit Saw fans lol IVe been good haven't really been on wiki that much lately due to my damn Writing 121 and Alg 212 exams but Ive been checking up on Saw articles nonetheless. Good work you really made some great articles. I noticed you've been under attack lately by some people on the talk pages though, some people won't let up will they? GroundZ3R0 002 23:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Scream

No, pre-production isn't being in production. It is the time when things are being set, but filming hasn't begun. I didn't see a source on it, so I removed it. If there's a source, then by all means, return it, but we don't list films not yet in production (active filming). Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Um...[9]...they was?? Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I meant sourced within the article proper, that's good enough. Sometimes people will add the source to the table, but as long as it is in the article, that's good enough. The inclusion in the table is secondary to having it sourced in the main article and that's usually held until it enters filming. Hope that wasn't too confusing. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of Craven, I got an autographed photo from his son, Matt, in the mail yesterday. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Glad it makes sense. I get my photos from many places. Back when I started, I wrote Jimmy Stewart in care of The Tonight Show and he answered, then put me on his Christmas card list. A Christmas card from George Bailey was a really great thing. In those days, I often sent requests to companies for which they worked. I bought an address list and got a lot that way. That's still a handy source. I got the address for Katharine Hepburn, wrote her and she sent a letter from her, signed with her full name, not just the K. Hepburn she usually did. I still have one. Occasionally I buy them from reputable dealers, I but from JD's Autographs because I know they go get their photos signed in person. Off and on, I've sold some of the autographs I collect on Ebay. I got the hobby honestly, my mother wrote the movie studios back during the studio system and she got a lot of them. It's a fun hobby. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, response varies as to who it is, there are notable lists floating around who name the most congenial actors toward fans and ones that respond to autograph collectors. Tom Cruise was usually on it (like I care about THAT), as was Johnny Depp. I think Alyssa Milano was on it too. I've never submitted questions to "ask the celebrity", though. Seems sort of trivial. Yeah, I know they would bring it back, but still, it's not in active production. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The Times

Thanks Didn't think WebCite worked on links that had NOARCHIVE set. No great desire to help Rupert Murdoch, if he wants to make a few of his publications invisible to the internet I'm happy enough to speed him on his way. I've been making deliberate efforts for a while now to not just note the "work" (Times/IMDB/Metacritic) in a citation but to also reference to the "publisher" (Newscorp/Amazon/CBS) and stick to better sources if at all possible, such as the BBC or the Guardian that do allow archiving and don't tend to break links very often. The paranoid were correct on this issue. -- Horkana (talk) 23:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, MikeAllen. You have new messages at Horkana's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Umm....

I have always thought that Cheech and Chong joke was funny. I thought you would respond. Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:33, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

Saw VII

The Saw VII talk page... seemed like the other editors felt like attacking lol thanks I hope E3 2010 will shed some light on the game. Yeah I think will Elwes confirmed, true 3d (and true 3D pricing), being the last, no super competition (I hope Paranormal 2 tanks), and following a decidedly better VI, this film could gross over 200 mil with any luck. What do you think? GroundZ3R0 002 04:57, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Maybe i'm being optimistic but the high ticket prices could make it go up up up. But really i just want it to please the fans and close the series well money really doesnt mean much for the last film. yeah i figured those guys were being ridiculous and threatening for no reason. Dr Heffner is the best actor that doesnt matter at all in the film lol GroundZ3R0 002 05:20, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Ha Thats what i though for VI then bang, a scene with him talking about a knife lol but you could be right who knows? id still bet its not much more than that though. GroundZ3R0 002 05:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS May 2010 Newsletter

The May 2010 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Gary Coleman

The LA Times is reporting it: [10] :) Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree, especially People. TV Guide can be considered a gossip sight, but People is known for their fact checking. When in doubt, you can always go to WP:RSN. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Greek poster

Hi! I saw that you switched the poster for Dogtooth from the original Greek to the American. Template:Infobox film states that "Ideally, an image of the film's original theatrical release poster should be uploaded and added to the infobox". In this case the original poster is the Greek, not the American. If you look at some higher class articles for non-English language films you will see that the established practice is to use the original posters. I'm not blaming you for anything as the English Wikipedia can be quite confusing in these regards (as it to some extent also serves as the international "main" Wikipedia, which doesn't come without paradoxes), but I suggest that you revert the change. Glad that you're paying attention to this film anyway, watched it recently myself and thought it was great! Smetanahue (talk) 01:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Perfect! Smetanahue (talk) 08:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

FYI

I think you should know that you and I were both mentioned here by the Little Professor as being basically the usual suspects to support WHL. I made my comment because I couldn't let what he said pass without one. I feel you should know you were mentioned in case you have something you'ld like to say. Have a good night, --CrohnieGal^Talk 23:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

At this time I do not. I don't even know him. I've never seen him. LOL! Thanks for letting me know. Mike Allen 01:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Me either, he just popped up out of the blue with comments like that which is why I had to say something. I don't know where he gets his info from but it's not accurate in my opinion. It looks like the ani will probably die away as usual. Thanks, --CrohnieGal^Talk 11:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

File talk:Knight and day 09.jpg

Please engage in discussion, at File talk:Knight and day 09.jpg. Please do not upload over an existing image page, especially without a source. -- Cirt (talk) 02:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

You did this again, at File:MiddleMenPoster.jpg. Please, do not do this again. -- Cirt (talk) 02:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

To clarify, different images should be uploaded with a whole new image page, not over the same page. -- Cirt (talk) 02:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

The source is still IMP Awards. Maybe not the same page number, but that's the source. The Middle Men poster, I uploaded the theatrical poster, as the other was not the poster. I add theatrical posters all the time and include a FUR and sources. I'm sorry that I messed up on the Knight and Day, but I thought that was just the promotional/teaser poster (and I meant to say poster, not "problem"). If it's going to be an issue, I'll just stop. You could at least came by and told me the right way to do it, instead of the "Don't do this again". Thank you. Mike Allen 02:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay you are right, I should have commented here first, not the other way round. But please, in the future, do not upload over existing images and pages, and instead just upload a whole new image/page with a new source cited. -- Cirt (talk) 02:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Well.. I was just going by what other editors do: they upload a new poster over the existing one. I usually do that and then include a {{Non-free reduced}} so an admin can remove the other non free images. I guess I didn't this time. So we are supposed to upload to another page and then let the other one die naturally (bot removes it for not being in an article)? Mike Allen 02:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that would be best practice. :) -- Cirt (talk) 22:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Single director TV shows

Hi. I was editing Covert Affairs, which indicates that it has only one director, referencing this source. Hope it helps. Nightscream (talk) 19:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

It appears that Michael Lembeck was the director of the Pilot. On that page you provided, they list a different director for the Pilot than for the series. So.. I guess we will see tomorrow who directed the second episode. Thanks. Mike Allen 22:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Director for Hot in Cleveland Pilot

I downloaded the pilot from iTunes and it says Michael Lembeck directed the pilot. I can show you a screencap if you want. QuasyBoy (talk) 20:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Oops, I can't provided a screencap like I thought, But Lembeck definitely directed the pilot, I woundn't add his name if it was otherwise. QuasyBoy (talk) 20:46, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

That's what I figured. I tried to watch it again online at TV Land but it wasn't available. I wonder if he just directed the pilot and the other directors listed on that site will be the series main directors. I guess we will see tomorrow. Thanks Mike Allen 21:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what it seems. :) QuasyBoy (talk) 22:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

Alice in Wonderland: Reimaging

I was surprised to find that the link to the wiki article on Re-imagining is set to redirect to Remake (done a while ago). That's possibly what's contributing to the current edits. Each time the AiW article mentions Re-imagining, it's linked to an article... so I don't think we'll need to change the term. However, this may pop up now and again. Just a heads up. Emtigereyes (talk) 16:27, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Mike Allen 06:44, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:FILMS June 2010 Newsletter

The June 2010 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:35, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Mike Allen 06:44, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Saw VII.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any .

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 03:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.

Looks like you haven't been informed of List-defined references—the innovative way of referencing. Mike Allen 03:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

RE:Scream 4 script drama

Actually, I hadn't read this until you sent me the link. Thanks for the update. Sounds like quite a train wreck. They seem to be waiting on a statement, so perhaps it'll be easier to add something to the article once some things have been clarified. I dunno, while the source is notable, I don't know if they're reliability reputation is worth the time with just the info they've given so far. I'd love to help you, Mike, but I'm going to keep my hands off this for a short bit until they make some confirmations. Thanks again for the great work on the article. Geeky Randy (talk) 04:31, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah it seems like every source has a different story or viewpoint. I don't go for all of that. No rush, the article will still be there when their are some official confirmations. Right now it just reads like gossip. "A source "close" to production told me... " If they are having all of these problems and is the reason why some actors are unhappy (and dropping out)... that doesn't look good for the finished product. :( Filming just started a few days ago. Oh I keep saying to myself that I'm not going to work on anymore upcoming film articles. There's one I'm working on coming out this month, one in September and then another in October. If you've seen what a film article looks right after it's release... it's overwhelming to keep the article coherent and stable. lol Thanks for your kind words, despite the words we had back in November. :P Mike Allen 08:15, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Your user page

Hey Mike, I made this edit to your user page. If I've changed something you didn't want changed, I apologize. The userboxes were out of alignment, and I'm a bit OCD about things like that. I also moved the </div> to the place I assume you meant it to be. If not, feel free to revert it.  Chickenmonkey  07:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Too much code for me to be fooling with after midnight. Well, I get lost in all that code anyway. LOL :-D Mike Allen 07:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

You removed the hash because you forgot? Just do a new one. Jack Merridew 08:00, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see the point. No one is going to crack into my account. Mike Allen 08:15, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Saw VS Paranormal

Damn I guess the war on. I was hoping PA2 would get lost in production and at least get delayed. That could mean a big dip in revenue for Saw VII. I would laugh hysterically if PA2 bombed, I dont care for ghost movies like that. Yeah this looks to be a pretty epic year for Saw I cant wait for the trailer. Maybe they'll do the smart thing and instead of release a teaser of a guy in a trap they'll actually show some Gordon lines or something to entice fans. hmm? What's the deal with Scream 4 anyways? GroundZ3R0 002

See Kevin's latest blog post. He posted some pictures (nothing very revealing). He said there should be some official ones pretty soon. There's been some rumored drama on set of Scream 4. Word is that the script is being rewritten by the Scream 3 writer, actors are getting pissed, some are dropping out and writer Kevin Williamson is off the project. They are supposed to release an "official" statement soon. Until then that shit isn't getting into the Wikipedia article. I'll fight to my very last breath to keep it out (it being protected for a month came at a good time, so that's helped). It's just rumored plunk, for now, with each website having a different story. Mike Allen 00:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Good pictures, not as spoilerific as I'd like but good to see updates. Wow that sounds like a bunch of shit I love Scream I really hope something good comes from all this stuff. Yeah thats a good move keeping all the rumor mills out until theres clarification even though the drones will try to change that. GroundZ3R0 002 01:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh and did you read this. The title of the article is "'Paranormal Activity 2' trailer pulled from 'Twilight: Eclipse' after audiences deem it too scary" -- so I'll give you a hint of what it's about. :P Makes me want to puke. Oh and someone has JUST created the Paranormal Activity 2 article 3 days ago. Like someone began working on it hours ago. Well.. there's not much information coming out about it, so that may be why. I don't plan on working on it, do you? :P Anyway, did you see the new Saw II: Flesh & Blood trailer? Carla is in an elevator trap (may be the same Carla as Saw, since she's Asian and is now a doctor a free clinic). Also CHARLIE IS DOING THE MUSIC! and we actually see Jigsaw's (Tobin) face. :D Mike Allen 01:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Ugh yeah stupid twilight fans are pussies and now have given PA2 some steam.. gee thanks lol Yeah I noticed there was only a paragraph on the first films page for a long time, made me glad nobody cared enough to create a page. (If you cant tell i REALLY dont like paranormal hahaha) WHOA WHOA WHAT TRAILER?! do you have a link? that is exciting news for me i missed that completely! yeah i figured when the news release said Jigsaw would return and "provide his likeness" that he would be shown, good news. Are you sure clouser is doing the score? I know people added it to the page but no source and they still add him to the first game so idk. Source? Thanks a bunch ive got my Saw void filled for a while lol GroundZ3R0 002 01:30, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

"Hello Zepp" was played in the trailer. I'm sure I read that he is back dong the score. I'll have to find it. Here's the trailer -- CLICK. Mike Allen 01:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow great trailer thanks for the link. looks like a definite improvement upon the first. i like how they rendered jigsaw it looks way better than what i expected. did you see the quick flashes of the girl in the glass box and the hitler-esque man in blue that looks similar to the Saw III freezer trap but with fire? Yeah I think that could be Carla from I. GroundZ3R0 002 03:49, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I think you missed my first message a while back to you where I sent you links to the new pictures of the game where they use traps from Saw II and V. See here. Also, I don't think it's confirmed that Clouser will do that score (I can't find it). I guess people just thought that because of the "Hello Zepp" being used in the trailer. Mike Allen 04:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh nice yeah i didnt see those i like the traps they're bringing back thanks. Eh as long as Hello Zepp is actually in it then thats already an improvement, even if they're using the Zombie house composer Alex Guilbert. I FINALLY got high speed internet good bye dial up wow my surfing is so quick now! GroundZ3R0 002 17:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

That's gonna piss some fanboys off GroundZ3R0 002 21:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Hah. You've must have missed the drama the other day where it was reported (and CONFIRMED) by Lionsgate that it would be called Saw 3D: The Traps Come Alive. Oh people were so pissed.. including me. Stupidest shit I have ever heard. The next day, Burg and company did an interview with ShocktilYoudrop and said the title was just Saw 3D and the "The Traps Come Alive" was just the tagline. They also said there will be 11 traps in the film, the interview is in the article. I don't care for SAW 3D.. but oh well. Mike Allen 21:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I missed that. the day i checked it was already Saw 3D and i was pissed because i dont like when they do that dumb title stuff. Then i read that it was "The traps come alive" and i immediately became appreciative of just Saw 3D LOL i guess it could be worse hah. I like the new poster.. its not Saw but that could be a good thing. You like it? I can't wait for the comic con scenes to be posted even though they're prob short flashbacks. GroundZ3R0 002 09:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

BIG NEWS this week. We've got some images.. of Hoffman (with his face back) and someone in the trap that the whole public [in the film] will be able to watch. And get this, it has been CONFIRMED that Saw 3D will indeed be the final film. Read here. Mike Allen 18:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

AAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!! RAGING SAWGASM! This is shaping up to be fucking amazing! Thanks for the link! SAW FTW GroundZ3R0 002 05:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Pifeedback

Could you give your opinion on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Pifeedback.com?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 13:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Since you already made a post, would you mind checking it out again? ChaosMaster_Chat 19:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Tanisha Thomas comment that you made

I am responding to a comment that I believe shouldn't had been said.

"Apparenlty this low class article gets to stay, so the AfD has been removed, and off my watchlist."

That comment shouldn't have been said at all! Please leave your own "opinions" to yourself! You could've just said "This article gets to say blah blah blah" AJona1992 (talk) 21:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

And.. why can't I make that comment? The comment was directed at the article, not Tanisha Thomas. The article is a low class, it's a stub. It will probably always stay that way, along with IPs adding blogs and IMDb as sources. Blah. Also, please add your comments at the bottom of the talk page. Thanks. Mike Allen 20:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

New wikipedia page

Hi mike, i wanted to create a new wikipedia page about this website, http://www.thisman.org/.

Its a worlwide phenomon (fuck my spelling) where every night, hundreds of people dream about the man pictured at the website above. In cities like paris, rome, L.A, and cairo, there are flyers with the mans face asking people if they have dreamed the man and to go to the website.

Is this worthy of a wikipedia page, or is it not popular enough?

Just thought id ask before i went ahead and did anything

(Moviedude346 (talk) 06:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC))

I would really think not. It hasn't appeared in any reliable secondary sources to make it notable. I think that website provides all the information there is about the "man", no need for an encyclopedic article. Also, I've never seen that man in my dreams. Thank god. But I probably will now.. thanks. LOL. Mike Allen 07:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Im afraid of dreaming him too :( lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moviedude346 (talk • contribs) 02:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I've got lots of time to waste, so I looked at some comments on the site, one says

T h i s s i t e i s a c l e v e r m a r k e t i n g s c h e m e f o r t h e u p c o m i n g f i l m ' I n c e p t i o n ' , w h i c h i s a b o u t a m a n w h o c a n e n t e r o t h e r p e o p l e s d r e a m s .

--CliffC (talk) 18:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Very Freddy Krugerish. :P Mike Allen 18:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Gross for Love Ranch

Wow. I thought $91,716 had to be a typo. But then when I first saw that Helen Mirren and Joe Pesci were going to be in the same movie, I thought that was a typo too. Cheers, CliffC (talk) 16:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

It just had a limited release in the U.S from what I read. Mike Allen 17:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Mike, I need your help

Hey dude, this person keeps reverting my edits! on The Bad Girls Club (season 3). The person puts that Amber was nicknamed the "Firecracker" when really she was nicknamed the "Control Freak" can you help me out on like preventing that IP address from reverting the edit. I also asked him/her to stop on both, their talk page and the talk page of the article. So I hope you can help, thank you AJona1992 (talk) 01:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Good job on creating the pages (why didn't you create a season one page?). Though I would look for some secondary sources to add (right now it's mostly just primary sources). Like interviews and news release. Personally, I don't see why the nicknames should be listed. They don't go by those nicknames, as opposed to that show I Love Money, where they exclusively go by a nickname. I'm going to remove them all, that'll put an end to it. Maybe. :) Mike Allen 02:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

But the nicknames are a good idea to put there! lolz I mean even though it's a great informative thing. And thanks ;). I didn't want to do season 1 because there wasn't really any sources I can find. The only thing I can find about season 1 is their names and ages lolz AJona1992 (talk) 02:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey is my grammar ok in the Season 4 page (house section)? AJona1992 (talk) 02:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

"Great informative thing" does not make it encyclopedic. The nicknames were only used in promos and I think maybe the first episode. The house section needs some copy editing done. Was the house really that much difference than season 3 to deserve a whole section? Looks like it's undue weight to me. Mike Allen 03:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

True, and yea the bad girls club house is always different, in style, etc., than other seasons. Thanks for letting my know AJona1992 (talk) 15:33, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Saw 3D cast list

Hey Mike, what up :-). Well anyway, the cast list on the Saw 3D kinda makes it easier to see whos in the movie by just glancing at it. I know I do that when I wanna find out who is in a movie. I also know its redundent to name it twice but the Cast List section was good. Red Flag on the Right Side 00:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Quite frankly I don't care what you think. It's MYYYYY article, get your own. LOL Seriously, I don't see how it is relevant. I think the cast reads quite well in the casting section. Most current GAs and FAs do not have a cast list. Simple as that. Now older ones do, but not the newest ones and I like to stay current. I think readers go to IMDb for "quick" information and to Wikipedia for in-dept information? Some editors believe whatever works "best" for the article, should be used (example: if no background information is available for casting, then a cast list would suffice. But if casting information is in the article, it works best in prose). It all comes down to mainly preferences since some editors rather add the casting information in bullet form. One editor thinks "this way" should be used, and another believes "this other way" should be used. So what do you do? I hate to bring it to WT:FILM since it's been discussed so many times. But if you want, that's one way to find out. Thanks for your discussion and not a war. It's much appreciated. Mike Allen 01:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Dude im not going to war over this but I started getting a little teary eyed after reading the first sentence LOL. It does look more profession this way like you said. Also thanks for this barnstar that you gave me a while ago. Red Flag on the Right Side 01:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I usually tell people to "follow the blue links" of the actor's name. It helps. Also while we're here I did something a tad different: Other new cast members are: Gina Holden (as Joyce), Laurence Anthony (Rogers), Dean Armstrong (Cale) and Naomi Snieckus (Nina). Other returning cast members are: Greg Bryk (Mallick) and Joris Jarsky (Seth Baxter) both from Saw V. Tanedra Howard (Simone), Shauna MacDonald (Tara Abbott), James Van Patten (Dr. Heffner) and Larissa Gomes (Emily) return from Saw VI. When you say "Other returning cast members", what film are they returning from? I thought it was a good idea to list it this way, especially for readers that's new to the franchise. What do you think? Mike Allen 01:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah thats good. Red Flag on the Right Side 01:50, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TuneUp Utilities logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TuneUp Utilities logo.png. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fleet Command (talk) 20:39, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

And the purpose of that was....  ? Mike Allen 20:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh, this is just boilerplate notification. (I couldn't change it when it came.) Anyway, it is replaced with the more recent version. So, old version is being deleted. Nothing to worry about. Fleet Command (talk) 20:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I know what the notice is for (actually I don't care for them, as I have all of the images I upload on my watchlist), I was just wondering the motive behind updating the image to one you extracted from the program icon. It's so small and not really good quality. Is it a new logo or something? I haven't used the program since November 2009. Mike Allen 00:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I see now. They did update their logo. It looks kind of bad. lol Anyway, I see now. :) Mike Allen 00:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoom (2011 film)

Nice catch. You might want to check out the creator's other recent creations, as well. A page was put up for Guillermo del Toro's future Haunted Mansion project (The Haunted Mansion (2012 film)), which I've redirected to The Haunted Mansion (film)#Remake. Cliff smith ^talk 16:24, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

It looks like The Haunted Mansion remake (not reboot) is happening.. just now how that user portrayed it to be in the article. So I do think a redirect was appropriate. I've just found another hoax article he's made. It's been sent to AfD. Mike Allen 23:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I just closed it, actually—it's gone. Cliff smith ^talk 16:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)