User talk:Skier Dude/archive/archive Aug 07

Have a beer

You deserve this for adding fair use rationales to tons of images you didn't even upload. Nice work! Videmus Omnia ^Talk 06:34, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:A Strangely Isolated Place.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:A Strangely Isolated Place.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 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 '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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Star Trek Logo Image

Could you please list what DVD it is the cover from, it is still unclear of the source of the image in question. Ejfetters 08:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Image:24Day2.jpg

I have tagged Image:24Day2.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Bigr Tex 16:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of the work you've put into rationales, and for your response to this. I agree with your assessment that it may not be a poster. Keep up the good work. ~ Bigr Tex 17:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check histories before tagging for deletion

See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Emory_Smith&action=history. -- John Reaves 21:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Silence (1963 film)

I'm curious, why did you give The Silence (1963 film) a low importance assessment? —Viriditas | Talk 12:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citizen Kane (1941), considered to be the greatest film of all time, failed at the box office, received no awards, and was shelved for over a decade. The Silence was released without censorship in Sweden in October, 1963, but the original directors cut, including sex scenes, homosexuality, nudity, masturbation, urination, and strong language caused a huge "storm of controversy" with censor boards at the time. (Morawski, 1974) (Bagh and Qvist, 2000) According to Jerry Vermilye, The Silence "...achieved a measure of sensationalistic attention by dint of its scenes of sensuality, mild though they were. It raised a great deal of controversy in Sweden, and its notoriety continued to raise hackles elsewhere in Europe. All of which attracted the attention of filmgoers; in Britain and the United States it became a considerable hit, perhaps for reasons of prurience rather than art." (Vermilye, 2002) Nevertheless, the Swedish Film Institute awarded The Silence three Swedish Film Awards for Best Actress, Best Director, and Best Film.[1] The film received mostly praise from the press and "serious" film critics, but there were protests in the Swedish parliament, and Bergman was forced to cut out a number of scenes, and different versions of the film were released in foreign markets, with Germany the only country where the full, uncensored version was shown outside of Sweden. The cuts were not enough for the UK, where it received a very limited release.(Robertson, 1993) Due to its reputation for "pornographic sequences" the film became a financial success. (Gado, 1986) The film is also noteworthy for being part of Bergman's so-called "trilogy" of films, with Through a Glass Darkly representing Bergman's certainty in God, the subsequent removal of that certainty in Winter Light, and the absence of God in The Silence. (Gervais, 1999) The film has been classified as a "landmark of modernist cinema" (Michaels, 2000), and popular film critic Vernon Young reversed his position on Bergman and admitted in 1971 that the film was an "extraordinary achievement in its way...The Silence rewards effort..." (Gado, 1986) N.M.H in Monthly Film Bulletin praises "masterly performances from the whole cast and some impressive sequences", but bemoans the fact that the audience is never involved. Some critics were confused by the art house nihilism, and failed to find any meaning at all in the film. (Vermilye, 2002) Francis A. Schaeffer compares The Silence to the then nascent New Journalism of Truman Capote's In Cold Blood. (Schaeffer, 1985) Denys Arcand rates the film number 9 on The Directors Top Ten Poll [2]. The film also appears on the New York Times list of top 1000 films[3] and many other lists. At the end of the day, The Silence is most notable for breaking through the censorship barriers of film in the early 1960s, as the sexual revolution was still in its infancy in 1963. I'm adding back the high importance assessment. —Viriditas | Talk 23:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to add it to the article as time permits. I'm a little busy right now. I should be on later tonight. —Viriditas | Talk 00:49, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The July 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. This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 19:49, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Todd Wright (musician)

I removed the speedy from Todd Wright (musician), because his bio asserts that he was a former member of a band that has an article and is therefore assumed to be notable. If you want this article deleted, I suggest nomination at WP:AFD Carlossuarez46 01:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Traffic (2000 film)

I'm sorry to keep bothering you like this (!) but I would like to know why you gave Traffic (2000 film) a low importance assessment on the film project. The film was nominated for five Academy Awards, took home four, and the accolades don't stop there. —Viriditas | Talk 01:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

prod

as a prod patroller, i appreciate the work on the non-notable people you've been prodding, but it would be considerably easier for me and other admins who review for deletion if you could indicate just a bit of the field of the subject , eg. unsourced biography of footballer, not simply unsourced biography. Most of us think ourselves competent in somewhat less than all possible topics--I'll review writers for example, but not sports figures, and it makes it easier to know what to ignore--otherwise i need to open them all. DGG (talk) 00:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For adding countless fair use rationales and therefore saving many useful images from inevitable deletion, I hereby award you this Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Jogers (talk) 10:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your effort. Keep up the good work! Jogers (talk) 10:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The Jogersbot tech barnstar

Thank you very much :-) Jogers (talk) 21:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:JasperSimpsons.png)

Replaced - OK.

Orphaned non-free image (Image:On Stage February, 1970.jpg)

Fixed.

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Patches&Violet.png)

Replaced - OK

Orphaned non-free image (Image:CaptainMcCallister.png)

Replaced - OK

Smile!

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

Just some random wikilove. :) -WarthogDemon 20:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another rationale

I am continually impressed by the quantity of quality rationales that you add to images that I've tagged. You recently added one to Image:Faron.jpeg, which had been licensed as an album cover. When I reviewed it, I noticed that it is actually a promotional photo. I think that a valid fair use rationale can be written, but the album one doesn't apply. I tried to do it myself, but wasn't satisfied with any of my attempts, so I left it alone. Could you take a minute and give it a try? Thanks! ~ Bigr Tex 16:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sentiment seconded. I clicked on the film poster images category for the first time. You're a machine. Good going. Doctor Sunshine talk 13:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ambonoclast

Vocabulary-related? Is this an error? I realize there is a term defined, but I have a feeling this was just on oversight. --Evil1987 01:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Notification of discussion: Guideline/policy governing lists

Given your extensive Wikipedia experience, I'd appreciate your input on the following:

User:Sidatio/Conversations/On list guidelines

Thank you in advance for any thoughts you may have on the topic. Sidatio 00:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

AfD nomination of Toy Meets Girl

An article that you have been involved in editing, Toy Meets Girl, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toy Meets Girl. Thank you. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 17:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

A. Edward Sutherland et al., PROD

Hi,

Before PRODing a film-industry person for lack of sources, please check to see if s/he has a profile at IMDb.com. I know IMDb doesn't prove notability, but it does prove WP:V in many cases. Mr. Sutherland was an especially obvious case -- as an early actor, associate of Chaplin and Fairbanks, he has no business being PRODed (or deleted) once the truth of his existence is confirmed (ie., he is not a hoax.) I've noticed a few other PRODs like this of yours, but I didn't want to bother you until I saw this very obvious case. Best wishes, Xoloz 06:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL :) Okay, you're right... it isn't your responsibility, and I understand the frustration. I thought I should make the suggestion, but now that I know your principled reasons for not doing so (and economy of time issues, also), think no more of it. I'll continue to save the ones I think have a decent shot, and I thank you for doing the noble work of tagging so many of the darn things. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of improperly capitalized album articles

Thank you very much for your work at the list of improperly capitalized album articles. The bot currently doesn't specifically search for titles with words that are likely to produce a lot of false positives like "The" or "On". We briefly discussed the issue here when the possibility of creating a list of exceptions emerged and the decision was to leave them out because the list was huge anyway. Now when the list is cleared, would you be interested in working on the expanded version? Jogers (talk) 10:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on my talk page. Regards, Jogers (talk) 17:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PROD of Jan Tománek

You PRODded Jan Tománek. The article is still weak but there are now references and his notability is estblished, if barely. Do you have any objections to removing the PROD? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: List 5 second opinions

Nice idea. Jogers (talk) 08:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Capitalization lists for books and films

I'd like to make these lists we talked about here. Could you recommend me what from what categories should I take relevant articles? Last time I made the list of incorrectly capitalized film articles I used the following categories:

I'm not sure if that was the most effective technique, though. My idea for books is to take articles from Category:WikiProject Books articles and Category:WikiProject Novels articles. Any suggestions? Jogers (talk) 19:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the list. Jogers (talk) 18:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:MartinPrince.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:MartinPrince.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Michael Corrente

Why would you propose a well-known director like Michael Corrente be deleted? We have plenty of pages of the films he has directed. It is a stub.--David Shankbone 22:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]