This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi, CyberGhostface/Full Archive, Welcome to Wikipedia!
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
Happy Wiki-ing. -- John Fader 18:43, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Just out of curiousity, last year I saw an article about a character in the series. I now forgotten the article but I do remember a few things what the article contained.
1) The character was male.
2) The picture was of a young man
3) He had a sister
4) He was not evil
5) He was not a member of the VFD
6) The picture showed a haircut much like Sanji
According to Wikipedia, vandalism is 'any addition, deletion, or change to content made in a deliberate attempt to reduce the quality of the encyclopedia'.
Upon noticing that all but one of his other appearences (the RF in Hearts) were speculations, I changed the sentence from "as well as cameo or hinted roles in other stories" to "as well as speculated cameos or hinted roles in other stories"
You, a user who hasn't contributed to this article for at least 500 edits, reverted and says it was vandalism.
Please explain.--CyberGhostface 03:32, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Software glitch. When I visited Randall Flagg, the article appeared as a completely blank page with the standard notice present for articles that don't exist, like fooooble (though it was still bluelinked, as was the "article" tab) and the history said that your edit had removed all the text from the article, so, in lieu of any reasoning I could see for its being deleted, I reverted it. I apologize for the hasty revert and especially for the presumptive message, as if I'd taken another minute to examine the circumstances surrounding the blanking, I'd have immediately been reminded that you're a major contributor to the article and would have no reason for "vandalism"—and in the time it would have taken to check up on the circumstances more carefully, the glitch might have fixed itself. Very sorry. -Silence 03:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Please list any IPs that conduct similar activity on WP:AIAV with reference to the previous RFI report which is currently in the April archive. Thanks. --ZsinjTalk 18:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I have created pages for those 2 articles and I wondering to you wouldn't mind helping me wikify and reword them please - SGCommand
Snicket
I didn't write Mauricea in the 12th book! That wasn't me! Someone's been pretending to be me!--Count Olaf
Wonder Showzen: Season Finale
Could you please give details of where you got the information? Slickidiot 20:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
No, how do you know it is the season finale? Slickidiot 01:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC) Oops sorry :PSlickidiot 03:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed that someone put mathmatics under the episode name. I hate anonymous editing... Slickidiot 03:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Stephen King & Rob Zombie
Those are my favorites too! I also like R.L.Stine. What are your favorite Stephen King books? Mine are It and Carrie.----Punk18
Hi! I noticed your name on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Horror membership list and am writing to all members who have not voted for the Collaboration of the month. Today is the designated selection day to choose the collaboration, but we currently have a tie between the two articles receiving the most votes, John Carpenter and Dario Argento. I am hoping to remedy this by drumming up a few more votes. Note that by voting for any nominated article (not limited to these two) you are indicating your "commitment to support and aid in collaborating on that specific article if it is chosen," so please feel absolutely free to ignore this message if for any reason you don't wish or would not be able to participate.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Surprise!
The Working Man's Barnstar
For your good work on all of Lemony Snicket's books and hard work relating to A Series of Unfortunate Events, I hereby award you the Working Man's Barnstar! Kilo-Lima
Yes, you can put it on your user page, or just leave it here on the talk page. You're welcome! Kilo-Lima|(talk) 12:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
The Devils Rejects Bios
Yes, sorry about that. I didnt realize it was entirely the same. I was trying to reword it from a biography that had come with these official figurines from 'The Devil's Rejects'. I guess, I didnt change them enough and this was the only bio I could find of them because I cant get onto the official website due to age restrictions. So, I changed the baby bio and I think its ok, but just to be sure:
Baby, was born September 12, 1948 in the rural community of Rugsville County. She was born as Vera-Ellen Firefly to parents Mother Firefly and Captain Spaulding.
As a child Vera-Ellen showed signs of manic behavior psychosis when at the age of seven she stabbed another school mate in the eye with a home-made knife. Around this time, Otis B. Driftwood, a violent criminal roamed into Ruggsville County. Otis had formed a deep bond with his new adopted family, the Fireflys', and especially taking a liking with Vera-Ellen. Otis then nicknamed his new sister "Angel Baby".
Beginning sometime in the 1970's Angel Baby and Otis becan a spree of murders across the country. All of which was documented in a series of diaries and scrapbooks that they kept. Later, in the winter of 1976, Baby returned to Rugsville alone and resumed her life on the Firefly farm.Lindsey8417
I've converted this image you uploaded to PNG format (here is the PNG version), and have been scolded by OrphanBot for not specifying source information. Since you uploaded the original image, could you please provide this info?
Thanks in advance, --Fibonacci 22:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
I added a source to the picture.--CyberGhostface 22:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
I suggested on the Books Portal that we create articles for all the characters for the book just like The Da Vinci Code. Any way to spread the word? --SGCommand (talk • contribs) 10:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
ASUE infobox
All the info in the box is coded into every page. Please leave as it stands.Alan 23:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
I've submitted this issue for mediation, as I really think that the content adds value to the pages.Alan 23:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Leatherface
What the actors say is one thing, but what they say in the actual film is another. He's obviously mentally disturbed and probably has some form of mental handicap, but, not only is it unclear as to what handicap he has but saying "mentally retarded" is not an acceptable medical term. Bignole
Yes that is probably a more accurate term, at the moment (seeing as "The Beginning" will be out soon and they will hopefully put some rest as to what is wrong with him). I don't mean to be an ass about it, but it can't be said if his condition is a result of an actual mental development problem or if it was something that was more physical and emotional abuse, because of his physical deformity, that caused him to regress to a child-like state. Chances are that it is Autism, since there is an obviously lack of language development, but his awareness of rules and obedience to his family would suggest otherwise. Bignole
Those are fan sites. Fans dubbing the masks a name is one thing, but they cannot try and interpret what each means when he is wearing it. If you can find an article where any of the directors, writers or actors (that portrayed him) discuss his signature masks then that's fine, because they are the only ones that can give an insight into why he wears the different masks. Otherwise it's POV. Bignole 19:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
That's fine. But, you paraphrased one site and then used the Hansen interview as the cite, which isn't correct. Hansen didn't mention the killing mask, and his descriptions were slightly different. I inserted him as a direct quote, and added the other site back to cite the source for the title "killing mask". Bignole
Try finding sources first, then delete things if nothing comes up. Again, I advise checking books about King's work. -- LGagnon 20:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
No personal attacks
You shouldnt call anyone an "illitarate moron" (Neo pet on Saw 3 history page) even if they are one. This is a warning. Please be more pleasent to your fellow Wikipedian. Thank you for your contributions to wikipedia.--TheNation 01:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
p.s- On a side note, you spelt his user name wrong (there is a space), making a spelling mistake yourself. If your going to insult someone on something they did wrong, its better if you dont make the same mistake. Just giving you a heads up for the future. Again, thank you for your time, and remember, please be pleasent to other wikipedians, Thank you.--TheNation 01:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I thought you already had reprimanded her, but if you start insulting people, it only makes you as good as the vandals, you need to be better than them, and if Saw 3 is always getting vandalized, then request protection on the page.--TheNation 15:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm the one who should be sorry, I would have done the same thing in your case. Keep up the good work.--TheNation 16:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Unblocked
My sincere apologies for blocking you. I had thought you were not including the mandatory detailed fair-use rationale but in fact, I was blind. Thank you for pointing out my mistake and I am sorry for the problems this caused you. --Yamla 17:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Flagg image
Unfortunately, policy trumps consensus every time. If you wish, you could re-upload it and post an inquiry at Wikipedia:Fair use review to have some more input. howcheng {chat} 23:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I was going to tell you to not reupload media deleted through our deletion process. If necessary, link to it offsite to discuss it. Jkelly 22:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Next time get freely reusable licensing before uploading the image. Jkelly 23:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
BMB page
BMB and Brian Michael Bendis point to the same page.
We need to make the BMB page a disambiguation page.
Do you agree?
And if you are more experienced maybe you can tell me why trying to modify the BMB page send me to the Brian_Michael_Bendis page??
BogieD 16:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
If im not on please delete anyone who is adding Dr.Gordon to the cast list of Saw 3. It is not true. Nimrod1234 21:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Userboxes
Please do not re-create this redirect. See the log. Thank you, Kusma(討論) 13:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
New userboxes ...
Please don't go creating any new userboxes in template space, but especially not divisive or inflammatory ones. We take free content very seriously at a Foundation level and your preference of fair use over GFDL content is not really appreciate here. --Cyde Weys 13:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
New userboxes
I have deleted a userbox template you recently created, as userboxes should no longer be created in templatespace per the terms of the German userbox solution. Here is the userbox code so that you can recreate the userbox in your userspace ("userfying") if you wish.
<div style="float:left; border:1px solid #111; margin:1px;">
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px; background:#4ff;"
| style="width:45px; height:45px; background:#2af; text-align:center; font-size:14pt; color:#007;" | '''FU'''
| style="font-size:8pt; padding:4pt; line-height:1.25em; color:#022;" | This user supports the use of [[Wikipedia:fair use|fair use]] images on [[Wikipedia]].
|}</div>
It's obvious that you and I have totally different opinions of this film. But regardless of how we feel, many of the things in your edits were very biased against the film, and I tried to counter-balance that with a positive review from critic Joe Bob Briggs, whom I consider somewhat of an authority on horror films.
You say the majority of horror fans consider it the worst in the franchise, but I've personally experienced that the 2003 remake of the first film was the most hated amongst the franchise's fans. It's fine to say that alot of people hate TCM: Next Gen, but on the same token it also should be pointed out that many people also love this movie.
And I moved the "This film has a poor reputation..." paragraph to the Interesting Facts section because it really doesn't fit in too well at the beginning of the article. --CJ 05:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Ultimate character boxes
I removed the character box for Ultimate Gwen Stacy. The reason being that if the Ultimate versions get them, why not every other version? (What If versions, Exiles, Age of Apocalypse, Powerless, House of M, Earth X, etc...) And then it just gets cluttered. There isn't that huge a difference, except that Bendis and Bagley had a hand in recreating her, and the issue when she first appeared. There was a short discussion on the subject here... which you're welcome to join if you feel differently on the subject -HKMarks 14:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting the page. I really appreciate it.--CyberGhostface 21:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
No problem :) —Mets501 (talk) 22:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Saw 3
Good job. -JNighthawk 04:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I was referring to Saw 3. Those kids were very wrong, and you dealt with it the right way (by telling them so, and not beating around the bush). -JNighthawk 02:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Saw III was released. just thought you might wanna know
Leatherface
That is not fancruft. That is his name from The original Texas Chain Saw Massacre. This is an encyclopedia which means it is important to list all of his other identities. Also, that image is up for deletion, so it should no be used in this article. Thanks. --Mikedk9109 20:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not talking about the earlier versions of the article. I'm talking about the original movie. Have you even seen that? He is referred to as Robert Sawyer. Yes, I've seen the prequel and the remake. They changed his name along with various other thing from the original. This is an encyclopedia which means those things that were changed have to be included.
I didn't mean to remove it, I didn't catch it as I was paying more attention to what you were doing with the names instead. I apologize for removing your valid prequel information. I'll fall to yor side on the Robert Sawyer issue. But don't you think that his real name ,Thomas Hewitt should be in the opening paragraph? --Mikedk9109 20:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Suggestion
I think you should consult WP:OWN. You seem to have a problem with letting other people edit Leatherface. The name makes more sense to go at the top since its an alternate identity, and that section has just as much information about the prequel as the remake does. So, it should be mentioned in the header. You continuously revert other peoples valid edits, just because you don't like them. Thats considered vandalism. Thanks. --Mikedk9109 19:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism, according to this site is, "any addition, deletion, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." So I advise you to look it up in a dictionary as you have no idea what the word means.
Taking a quick look at the history page, the only times I revert edits is A.) Its vandalism, B.) Its innacurate or C.) Its irrevelant. Not just because I don't like it.
Here's what you don't get. The article applies to Leatherface's character as it has been in all six films. He's only been referred to as Hewitt in two. Its like if someone makes a Dracula film and says his real name is Marten Vladimir. That name might be relevant enough for its own section, but it would be irrevelant and infactual if in the main header of the article it was written "Dracula, also known as Marten Vladimir is a character..." and so forth.
Do you understand what I am trying to tell you or is this falling on deaf ears?--CyberGhostface 19:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
This is his alternate identity! You taking that out of the intro is like taking Leatherface out of the intro. THAT IS HIS NAME. What he is also known by. It should be in the opening, where it belongs. That statement you made was uncalled for. Especially since its over the internet, and I cant hear what you are saying? Yeah, maybe you should think about what your saying before you type it. --Mikedk9109 19:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Your edits on Leatherface
Hi, I just wanted to point that you were both violating the WP:3RR policy on this article. The policy is in a nutshell that you shouldn't make edits wars on an article. So please both stay cool and discuss your disagreement on the article talk page :) Peace and Love, -- lucasbfrtalk 19:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
3RR
You have just broken the 3RR. I have no other choice but to report you. --Mikedk9109 20:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
I've only reverted 3 times. Which isn't breaking it. You have reverted 4 times. --Mikedk9109 20:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Only three of which were reverts. --Mikedk9109 20:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Re:
Hey, I've done nothing wrong. I've already gotten my point by. But you just won't accept it. I've suggested you look at WP:OWN, but you just keep on reverting, thinking you know anything and everything. Sory, but I've already reported you. I think mediation would be useless, seeing that we cannot get along. Thanks. --Mikedk9109 20:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Threaten? What? Excuse me, I've done nothing wrong. Except try to contribute to this site, without people harassing me. Its not one more edit, its one more revert. Shouldn't you know the difference? --Mikedk9109 20:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
You have no right to drag another user into this conflict to team up on me. That user has no business in it. Also, I am not a new user to Wikipedia as I've been here for 6 months. Thanks. --Mikedk9109 21:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
I just wanted to let you know that I apologize for everything that went down yesterday. It was very childish of me, and it won't happen again. Just hope that we can get along, and work together on this article. Thanks. --Mikedk9109 20:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
I accidently wrote it in the 3RR block section. So I moved it. --Mikedk9109 20:11, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Alright. --Mikedk9109 20:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Saw 3 edit
Hey, thanks for reverting the "jacking off" thing for Troy's trap. As you'll see from the S3 talkpage, I removed it because it just sounds sexual. Lol ViperBladeTalk!! 08:57, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Question for CyberGhostface
I would like to know why you deleted the parody from Avengers Disassembled page? Last I checked parodies of a topic are acceptable. While, I'm no expert on the rules here, I'm pretty sure you only delete something if it's:
A. Vandalisim.
B. Uncited Rumor.
Not if you have a personal problem against it. You keep personal problems aside when doing edits. 66.233.190.223 11:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
A one issue reference in an obscure comicbook parody is not relevant enough to deserve a whole section in a wikipedia article.--CyberGhostface 13:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Could you at least tell me of somewhere else I can put it? 66.233.190.223 01:38, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Randall Flagg
There are still some quotes that lack citations. These and any "questionable" statements (that is, anything that could potentially be disputed) need to be cited. Also, it always helps to include more outside material; I suggest adding more info from sources other than King's books, as this will help show that more research has gone into the article than simply reading the books that he's in (for academic level literary analysis, this would be a requirement). -- LGagnon 15:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Another
The Original Barnstar
Even though we've had our differences in the past, I want you to have this for your great work on Leatherface. Thanks. --Mikedk9109 17:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Credit where credit's due
The Original Barnstar
For Your excellent work on Leatherface, Here you go. You deserve as much as credit as I do for trying to get this article into better shape. --Bignole 17:02, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Leatherface
No discussion had taken place since Oct. 8. There really were not enough participants in the discussion to reach a consensus. I agreed with Abu Badali so I deleted the image. Abu pointed out to me that you have uploaded it again as Image:Leatherfaceentertainmentweekly.jpg. You say it was scanned from Entertainment Weekly but you must be more specific. What issue of EW and what page? It also needs to be linked to an article. -Nv8200ptalk 22:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Era of photos
Okay, leave aside copyright status for the sake of this discussion. Doesn't it make more sense to have a photo from when the person was most notable? Say, for example, Charlie Chaplin. What image is more representative: this one or this one? Would you want to go with the "more recent" one in this case (assuming, again, that copyright wasn't an issue)? —Chowbok 01:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
ATTN: CyberGhostface
Is there really any reason you keep deleting the parodies from Avengers Disassembled? You keep stating it's unimportant, that's just your opinion. There are many who do look for parody/parodies of their favorite comic books, cartoons, video games, books, tv shows, etc.
If the parodies were deemed unfit in the first place, then it would have been deleted sooner as it was typed in May earlier this year. Again, the rules on deletion are:
1. If the information is unorganized/misleading.
2. Vandalisim
3. Unconfirmed rumors.
Not because you have a PERSONAL DISTAIN for it. The important thing about being a Wikipedian is to bring information to an article, not to delete every minor detail that offends you. If that's not the case, then why is it so important to keep deleting it?65.54.98.101 04:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
But, while it's not distain, it is still a personal opinion. Which again is not grounds for deletion. If the section was a violation, then wouldn't it have been removed months ago? Just don't think that being a long term Wikipedian makes everything you do right. 71.115.231.16 07:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
A Series of Unfortunate Events
Sorry about the delay to my response (had to work), but I realized your edit was clearly in good faith a long time ago. I noticed your edits to the other related "A Series of Unfortunate Events" articles, which I marked as "not vandalism" using VandalProof. I have no idea why you're on VandalProof's blacklist. Regards, Tuxide 03:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Blacklist? For WP:VP2, it gives your edits a higher precedence than those not on it for reviewing because some other VP user thought adding you to it was a good idea. I have no idea why. VandalProof2 is basically just a tool to aid in edit reviewing, and being on the blacklist, or whitelist even does not necessarily mean you are a vandal or a trusted user, respectively. It is just a convenience for precedence, and delightfully I thought clicking on "not vandalism" in response to your edits umpteen times this afternoon was annoying! As far as I can tell, I don't see anything wrong with your recent contributions. Regards, Tuxide 04:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Aplogy to CG
I do apologize if I have been harsh, and I do hope we can come to an agreement for the Avengers Disassembled page. My other reason for typing in, User: 65.54.98.101 hasn't really been involved in the edits. For some reason when I get on our other computer at the house, I end up with his name. To settle it, I'll stick to this computer for future edits. 71.115.231.16 09:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Isn't this proof enough there is a confirmed Saw IV, and a mentioned Saw V, and Saw VI. -SawFan2006 01:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Saw II
Sorry. I didn't notice that the quotes around the director's words didn't end, I thought it was just a review from a new user at first. Sorry again =P.
Saw II and Amanda Cluse
I've noticed you reverted an edit by me that replaced the cast names of the actors in Saw II with Amanda Cluse. I don't know what happened, but that was not me. I've actually made several contributions to the articles, including creating the articles for both Jigsaw and Amanda.--CyberGhostface 21:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know I only reverted the cast names. If I reverted anything else I apologize, you can revert the rest of it back. If your worried that I turned you in for vandalism or anything, don't worry about it. I usually only go after people that I see vandalizing a page several times. I hope that clears things up. If not just message me back. --Dleav 12:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
172.147.144.167
I see that 172.147.144.167 is launching several personal attacks at you (Look at his user contributions for details) and by looking at his contributions, has changed the message in one of your Barnstar boxes to the one he wrote here. As I'm still not quite sure about what he wants, I'll leave you to decide what to do with him and I've reverted the attacking comment he made on your Barnstar. You might want to check his contributions and add his name to WP:PAIN. Thank you. --Bruin_rrss23(talk) 11:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Bendis
Thanks for adding my stuff back in, I appreciate it. Very magnanimous. Thanos6 14:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
For your information...
I traced the now blocked IP's (that used to launch personal attacks at you) using ARIN and found out that they're registered to America Online. Written just for your information. --Bruin_rrss23(talk) 08:06, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Fictional character biography
See the exemplars page. [2] The section is to be titled "Fictional character biography". If you don't like it because you consider that redundant (there are nonfictional characters in comics, you know), then take up that issue at the exemplar talk page. Going through and changing every section title to suit your preference in contradiction of the exemplar not only might be a huge waste of your time but might create a lot of work for other people. Much past discussion went into establishing what that section should be based on Wikipedia policy for clarifying fiction. Doczilla 21:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
No problem. You're not the only one who feels that way, which is why I've just posted a comment about that on the project talk page (without mentioning you). If others feel it's inherently redundant to say "Fictional character biography", then the issue needs to get taken up at a higher level. Doczilla 21:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
So would you please fix all the work you just undid? Doczilla 07:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks dude. I've been real busy with school so I've only been able to do minor things on most pages, most of which include reverting of vandalism. Right now we're trying to decide of The Invisible Man and The Phantom deserve a spot on the HORROR ICONS template, but I haven't been able to do anything but vote because I've go so much stuff with school. I plan to, at the start of next week, provide my discussion for that and get back to Leatherface. I think I'm going to focus on that one because, as far as fictional character pages go (from the Horror genre) it's got the best base right now. The rest are going to need a complete makeover, while this one is just in need of updates and touch ups. Bignole 00:11, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Tireless Contributor Barnstar
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I hereby award this barnstar to CyberGhostface in recognition of his tireless work on Saw III. Keep up the good work! --Releeshan 19:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for the barnstar. I appreciate it. -- LGagnon 22:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Image:Alavigneheather.PNG
Thanks for uploading Image:Alavigneheather.PNG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. -- Chowbok 17:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Re:Leather Pic
I'll contact him and find out what it is that he finds isn't acceptable about the picture's source. Bignole 15:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Wait, who? Who is the user and when did he try and get the image removed, because it was an Orphanbot that labeled it? Bignole 15:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha..Thanks. OK, well I see what he's requesting, or at least I assume I know. What he wants is the actual source that Miked got the picture from..the actual hyperlink. When I get home, in a couple hours, I'll do a quick search and try and find that same picture, and then grab the hyperlink and the website's name and add that to the info for the picture. I'd ask Miked but I haven't heard a peep out of him since his last blockage, so I don't even know if he's still editing or if he's just taking a break for awhile. Bignole 16:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I couldn't find the original source so I had to upload a newer version of the picture, and I included the website the picture was taken from. Bignole 19:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
No problem. I informed Miked that I uploaded a newer version, and that since he provided the original, if he finds his source website that he can make the decision to put the original photo back up there or not. Also, I have the pictures on my watchlist now, so if Abu marks it again I'll know this time. Bignole 19:19, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Horror Icons Template
Hey, CyberGhostface, there's a new survey on Template: Horror Icons here: [3] Please feel free to cast your vote of approval or disapproval regarding a horror character's becoming an icon or not. You can also nominate other horror characters you feel deserve their recognition as icons.
Lastly, you can also contribute to the deletion of a "copy" template of the original Horror Icons template. If you choose to express your opinion, click this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:TFD#Template:Horrormovie_Icons and you'll be on the "Wikipedia:Templates for deletion" page.
(FF7SquallStrife7 01:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC))
Yeah I saw, I reverted the ones that are actually on our template. I'm pretty sure it was Piecrust under a different IP address. Bignole 02:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Amanda should not really have her own section in Jigsaws article, she has her own. Due to Saw 3s new history, shes been present since the bathroom trap so I integrated her into Johns actions but she is relatively minor in his article, I hadn't finished my edits yet though I would've also described their relationship more. it can be under another heading since it should be broken up properly but...yeah...amanda shouldn't get a personal section and that final test bit is basically a summary of the end of the third film and largely about Amanda.Darkwarriorblake 19:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Well I'm giving it a shot. I'm trying to stick to only parts that include Jigsaw or affected by him. Most of Saw 3 basically.Darkwarriorblake 20:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Not sure yet, I'm taking parts from whats there and working from there. You'll know in a few minutes.Darkwarriorblake 20:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Mediation
I would like to inform you that I will be the mediator in a Mediation Cabal case you are a party of. See the page here.
Re:Opinion
The close-up would be fine. You aren't losing anything by having a closer angle, and it also allows for making the image a smaller thumb. We need to do something about these images though, because there are like 4 or so images and the article isn't long enough to support them. I mean, we have to fight to have 4 images on a film's page. Bignole 21:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Ok. Do we need both the before and after images of John? He seems to be covered three times, including the image with Amanda. Bignole 03:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe we should shrink them some. It may just be because they seem rather large for the page. Bignole 04:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Re: Leatherface comics
Per fictional character page, you would chronical this as "appearances in other media". Go to Jabba the Hutt and see what they did for where he appeared in books. I think, the appropriate way is really for us to put together all his appearances in one section and divide them by mediums (film, literature, etc)...then divide those by each entry. They should really be brief entries about each work of art. But, in basics, to answer your question -- yes, you could include it in his article. Just discuss where it picks up, what it's about, so forth and so on..nothing too detailed since it will probably be an ongoing series. Bignole 04:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Possibly unfree Image:Edgein.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Edgein.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Angr 00:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm not exactly sure how to help. The fact is that the picture you have, which is one that most people have, is actually a police photo. If you could determine the copyrightability of police photographs then you'd be able to correct label it. The website you got it from, as far as I would think, wouldn't be the "copyright owner" because the man died long ago, and most photos are police photos. I'd go to that image help page and ask how to correctly determine the copyright of a police photo, then I'd make sure the summary of the photo includes the fact that it is a police photo from when he was arrested. You can't just leave a website as the source. Bignole 03:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I've been discussing this image over at the "possibly unfree image" page where it is located. You may be in luck, because it is a police photograph, it may be public domain, but the problem lies in the state. Not every state gives PD to it's government images. I've asked them where to find out if Wisconsin allows it's government pictures to be PD, but if you know where then I'd find it. Bignole 19:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
No problem. I've sent an email to the county in Wisconsin where Ed Gein was arrested (I think it's the right county..either way) requesting information on the state's stand on licensing pictures. Their legislature states that the only exempt documents are statutes, and a couple other things, but they don't explicitly talk about images. Hopefully they will contact me back so that we know what's what. Bignole 01:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Ed's been taken down from the "possibly unfree image" page. It should be all good now. Bignole 23:07, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Re:Jigsaw
I can't actually remember what the last image was, but you are right in that all of the images are just scenes from the previous films and not "memories" of Jigsaw. Mainly because a lot of the images he never saw. Not sure how to proceed with that Anon that insists on including it. I mean, it's one opinion versus another's based on the interpretation of the scene. He isn't vandalizing, technically. He really believes what he's adding. It's kinda up in the air, from what I can see as far as getting him to stop. Bignole 12:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Saw characters
Instead of putting the articles up for AfD I've suggested a merge for Jeff with a discussion. We'll see how that goes and then deal with Lynn and Dr. Gordon. Sound fair? Mcr29 19:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Saw III
Well......ummmm......(tries to think up something)....well, I told you that this guy in IMDb says he works for Saw III (yeah, I really believe people who say they work for someone, now I don't) but he was lying....I didn't believe him at first, because I was lied many times before then I believed him. There you go. Cigammagicwizard 00:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Dark Tower stuff
Hey there, I noticed that you are interested in Stephen King and the Dark Tower books. I'd like to start a push to improve (and establish) referenced articles on Dark Tower subjects. I'm starting with Cuthbert Allgood - seems as good a place as any. For now I'm just copyediting and adding citations. Your input would be welcome. I found your name when I went to the {{DarkTower}} template to find out why Eddie and company weren't listed as characters. :) Mus Musculus 22:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Dread Central and Spam
Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided lists a long list of spam links to be avoided. Movie reviews are not included in that list. Dreadcentral (or any other horror review site for that matter) aren't 'mainstream' and thus probably wouldn't be in Rotten Tomatoes...but its certainly not spam or someone advertising the site.--CyberGhostface 00:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Normally, you might be correct. But, in the case of Dread Central, almost all the Dread Central links and the Dread Central article itself have been added by one user. That user adds no content to Wikipedia (besides the Dread Central article). He only adds links -- hundrds of them. He's been warned repeatedly to stop, and he's recreated the Dread Central article a couple of times after it was deleted. The external links list to avoid isn't exhaustive, and other policies on Wikipedia can also have a prohibitive impact on linking. I think #3 under links to be avoided along with the section "Advertising and conflicts of interest" clearly cover the Dread Central stuff anyway. Chicken Wing 04:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
"An anon vandal is adding false information to this page. I've reverted and warned him twice but I fear he will persist. I will try to keep an eye on this page, but if you could help with this I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks."
Alrighty, will do. JackOfHearts 01:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I probably won't be on for the rest of the night, but if I see him, or you do, or Jack does, I'd go ahead and report him. He's being disruptive. I'll leave a note on his page to bring it to the talk page if he really thinks it should be included, if not then it will be considered disruptive vandalism the next time he tries. Bignole 02:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
A Series of Unfortunate Events has been nominated for WP:AID, a weekly cleanup drive. Please vote for it as it will both help improve the quality of the page, but also it will get more Wikipedians editing ASUE pages.
Welcome to the first issue of the Novels WikiProject's newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do.
We would encourage all members to get more envolved and if you are wondering what with, please ask. Clamster5 18:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I didn't initially know what you were talking about in regards to "The Rejects" and assumed you had me mistaken for someone else, so I didn't know I was reverting you. Sorry about that. It's your category, so call them whatever you want.
Treybien 18:24 2 January 2007 (UTC)
ASUE
Hello, CyberGhostface/Full Archive On, WP:ASUE, your username, as well as all other participants' names, have been moved under Inactive Participants. If you are still are an active member, please move your username to Active Participants.
Yeah, if you can get them to change the licenses, that'd be fine. I have no special love for either of the pictures I put on the articles, I just want free ones. —Chowbok☠ 03:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh cool, I see you already got the Zombie pic. You might want to also forward those e-mails to <permissions@wikimedia.org>. —Chowbok☠ 03:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Lindsay Lohan
Your replacement of a free image on Lindsay Lohan with a copyrighted image not licensed or useable on the Wikipedia has been reverted. Please remember that it is your responsibility to ensure that the images you use are appropriate and indeed, you removed a warning to this effect. --Yamla 04:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
Please accept my sincere apologies for being a complete moron. In order to prevent further misunderstandings, please mark the license for the image on the image page itself. Please also consider adding a comment at the top of this page which indicates that I am to think twice before blocking you again given the sheer idiocy I've shown to you in the past.
Request handled by:Yamla 04:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Re: Saw III
I would refer him to Wikipedia:No original research, and inform him that if he disagrees with the neutrality of the statement that he should bring it to the talk page. If he persists in ignoring you, and making the change anyway, I would bring this matter up with an Administrator and see what he/she suggests. Bignole 21:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Also, don't revert him any more, because I count 4 reverts on your part for that mess inside of 24 hours. Technically you have violated the 3RR. As a matter of fact, don't revert anything on that page until at least tomorrow. I'll put it back on my watchlist and revert any vandalism also. You don't want someone getting pissed and reporting you. Yes, even if it's vandalism (unless blatant, like "poo", "shit", etc), it will still count against you if you manage to come across an angry Admin who doesn't care if it was in the best interest of the article. Certain vandalism can be made ambiguous enough to get you in trouble. I'll monitor the page and if he adds it again I will revert it. I left a message on his page. Bignole 21:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Try the Conflic of interest page. It isn't vandalism, so you can't report him for that. Hopefully you can get an outside party to concur with you, and if he continues then he could be blocked for disruption. Bignole 23:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
NOES template
He's been working on a standard template for all NOES characters. If you go to the template page you can voice what you think needs to be added to the template so that we can add it to this page. Bignole 03:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I admit I might have been acting in haste.....
But I do not belive that MAnhunter should be included in the Hanible universe. Also I must say you did a good job on the hanible page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaac Witte (talk • contribs)
You make a good point but I still dont consider it to be a hanible movie but thats just me. Good job on adding the articles about hanible's sister and step aunt I love those movies and cant wait for t in theaters, Im readng the book now.
On a side note I am a fan of horror movies and would like to join the wiki horror project. How do I join? Isaac Witte 03:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
You put a much better image up on the article, unfortunately it is not GFDL, and not even Creative Commons licensed.
In http://www.flickr.com/photos/garvinj/136275373/ it is listed as http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/ - "non-commercial, no derivative works", which is not good enough for our purposes. We need both commercial (as we are used by commercial sites) and derivative works (arguably just displaying it at a different size, such as a thumbnail, would be a derivative work). If you can get that image to full CC, including commercial and derivative, I would be happy to restore it. -- AnonEMouse(squeak) 17:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi--I'm not sure what the problem is. It is a GFDL image and was uploaded on Wikimedia commons. The original uploader and photographer (from Tribeca) gave me permission to use it. Check out the discussion page on the main image's page.--CyberGhostface 17:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I am also forwarding your message to the original uploader.--CyberGhostface 17:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Last message, sorry. The Commons page states that "Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder." I got permission from the owner of the image to use it on Wikipedia with her complete permission.--CyberGhostface 17:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
You're quite right, will restore image. My apologies. AnonEMouse(squeak) 21:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey
I've noticed that you have reverted that IP (now user) moving Leatherface's name around in the Chainsaw articles. I have dropped that user a line on his talk page, and I hoped you could do the same. I just can't get it through his head that Leather is the main part of the Chainsaw movies. —mikedk9109SIGN 22:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Now this guy (Matt Tyler) is making up some stuff about how wiki has Movie credit rules in which wherever the character is in the credits in the movie, thats how it is on wiki. I have never heard of such rules, and think they are made up. Go to his talk page to read his whole statement. Thanks. —mikedk9109SIGN 17:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I have brought this up at Conflict of Interset here, if you would like to make a comment. —mikedk9109SIGN 17:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Re:Texas
I assume you are referring to Leatherface. Leatherface shouldn't be restricted to just the film, and if he is mentioned in the comics than I would say including it (making sure to cite the comics..I think there is a comic book citation template). If it is only about the family, then it probably doesn't satisfy notability. Most of the character pages for those films don't satisfy notability, at least not on an individual scale, but what can you do. In the least, if it expands on Leatherface himself then I say include it as a "literature appearace". See how I've been working on Jason and how I've included a literature section. BIGNOLE (Question?)(What I do) 20:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Mmm, I don't personally think so. They are limited to the comic book realm (at least at the moment) and their notability would be in high question. At least, I can't see them deserving an article of their own (then again, neither does Chop Top). I see them in a "list of Texas characters" type of page. BIGNOLE (Question?)(What I do) 22:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I think only Leatherface is notable enough for his own article. He's the only continuing factor, he's recognizable in pop culture, a horror icon, produced in various mass medias. I think just about everyone else should be religated to the List of page, but I have no intention of fighting that battle. If they exist, then they do. It's like fighting the battle of the individual television episode articles. Almost 90% do no deserve to be here, but they still exist. If you agree, and you have the right not too I won't think differently about you as an editor, with me on the notability of those other characters, and you wish to pursue a merger for all of them then I would back you up and help. If you don't, that's cool too. Heck, if you agree but are like me and don't want to fight the battle, that's also cool. I just got that Crystal Lake Memories:The Complete History of Friday the 13th, and Friday the 13th:Making Camp Blood in the mail, so I'mm going to have a joyous time fixing the Jason article. That CLM book is bigger than my college textbooks. BIGNOLE (Question?)(What I do) 22:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you agree with it then I say go for it. You can shrink the images down so you won't lose them ( and so they won't be too big for the page) and we won't need every detail for the characters. Some characters will have larger descriptions than others. I'm sure Drayton will have a larger discriptions that Luda May. Eventually, you can work in out of universe information, like how certain actors took on the role and what the Directors was going for when he created the characters (or writer). Then, once the page becomes too large you can separate some of the larger characters into their own page. BIGNOLE (Question?)(What I do) 23:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Looks good. I think if you can find some out-of-universe information, like what went into creating these characters (that might be one one of the DVDs, if you have them), or the casting of those actors in those roles, then it would help with adding more encyclopedic information and giving the pics more room to breathe. But it's definitely coming along quite nicely. I know there is a films of Tobe Hooper book that would probably help out a lot with the first film, and the Leatherface article in general. But that's just one source. I'm sure there are plenty of others out there. BIGNOLE (Question?)(What I do) 06:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
New Project
Hello! Recently I've started a project WP:CRIMINAL that aims to improve articles relating to criminals, including serial killers and others, particularly their biographies. If you are interested please join this project and help! Thank you! Wooyi 03:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Silence of the Lambs Userbox
Hey man, thanks for using it. That's what I made it for. As for your userpage, the userbox looks fine to me from my PC, but I'll take a look at it just to make sure there are no bugs. - Mtmelendez 21:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Hannibal Rising contradications
No I think you'll find it is you who is doing the original research. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in Hannibal the vision of Mischa's teeth is a nightmare. Since when does a nightmare have to reflect reality in any way. AlistairMcMillan 14:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Cool. Point to something that proves Hannibal's nightmare was him recalling an actual event and I'll drop it. Or point to a "reliable source" where someone believes this is a contradiction. Otherwise I'm just going to pull that point of trivia again. AlistairMcMillan 20:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
From our own article on Hannibal: "In one scene, Lecter retired to his palace in search of comfort only to become haunted by horrific memories his subconscious had stored there in numerous oubliettes." For about ten years Hannibal had this image of Mischa's teeth in the stool pit in his memory. Then he finds out the vision is erroneous. Is it not possible that decades later the nightmare vision is still there, that he is just recalling this vision that troubled him during hsi childhood.
Anyway this is all irrelevant. Unless you can point to "reliable sources" who consider this a contradiction, it doesn't belong in the article. AlistairMcMillan 22:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Saw characters
It's not just the category now. Most of the articles themselves have just been nominated. I'm guessing you'll want to save at least Amanda's article. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 10:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I voted. They shouldn't be deleted, but they shouldn't all have their own article either, especially when they are really just expanded plots from the films. I left an explaination for what I think they need. BIGNOLE (Question?)(What I do)
I don't think it will be necessary to merge all the info from the deleted articles (Lynn Denlon, as the majority is repetition. However, some of the articles DID contain interesting info such as the actor's thoughts and opinions on the character. If they could be recovered and added to the suggested section of List of Saw characters, then I think it would be fine, but this is not needed unless someone wants it (to expand on the given paragraph). Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 22:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
To me, gunslingers!
Howdy - since you've been active editing Dark Tower articles, I wanted to invite you to check out Wikipedia:WikiProject The Dark Tower if you have time. This is not ready to "go live" yet but I have been working on it for a while and would appreciate your feedback.
There are several things still to do, such as fleshing out article structure guidelines, researching and listing article categories, creating a tower-specific stub template and category, creating a project userbox and category, and setting up article assessment.
Let me know if you are interested in helping out, or feel free to just hack away at it. Long days and pleasant nights. --Mus Musculus 20:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
By the way, is there anything I can do to help get Randall Flagg up to FA? --Mus Musculus 21:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I saw those. Maybe a fresh pair of eyes on it will do the trick. When I have some time this week, I will just copyedit it for sentence structure and so on, and see if I can dig up any more citations. I just got a very good book about the Dark Tower that can serve as a secondary source for some facts in the article if needed. --Mus Musculus 21:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Hannibal again
With the movie now out, should Inspector Popil & Vladis Grutas deserve their own articles?--SGCommand (talk • contribs) 14:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Not my loss
If you don't want information about the real stories the inspired the movie that's fine. You know where to find them in the history of pages you deleted. I'm not going to write it twice, and you should work on learning to have less pride in pages you deem "yours". I put information on that page so people who want to know more about how the ideas and actions of real life disturbed people with more than just simple murder on their minds that led to the creation of the Jigsaw Killer.
Heres something to refresh your memory... "Jigsaw in comparison to the Pennsylvania bomb case
In September of 2003 a deliveryman, Brian Douglas Wells, had gone to the remote area to deliver a pizza, according to his boss. Douglas showed up at a local bank (intending to rob it)an hour later with a bomb attached to his neck using a coller.The collar around Wells' neck included a series of locks near his throat and was "obviously designed by the individual who intended to affix it," said Police spokesman. After the robbery, Pennsylvania State Police stopped Wells, handcuffed him and sat him down on the ground, safely away from others. Police then called a bomb squad, but the device exploded before bomb technicians arrived, killing Wells. Before the bomb had went off Wells kept repeating to police that "A man had drugged him at the front door of the remote house he was supposed to deliever a pizza to..." The man who drugged him, left a note for Wells that instructed him to rob the bank or the device attached to his neck would explode if he wasn't back in a certain amount of time, and once Wells returned the device would be taken off. Officers thought the man was making one last effort to get out of custody. Moments later the incident became infamous as one of the most bizzare cases police have ever delt with. To this day similar cases have been reported around the state, none with fatalities."
You don't know that the incident inspired Jigsaw. Its a similar incident, true, but unless Leigh Whannell says in an interview that it actually inspired his creation it counts as original research. As it stands all I see is a psychopath using another man to rob a bank for his own personal gain. Not nearly enough to stand on its own for an entire section. The only time you should bring in real life inspirations is if you can cite it. For example, Ed Gein inapired Leatherface. This is fact, and something Tobe Hooper has mentioned on several occasions.
And please, oh please, don't pull out the "owning the article" card. Yes, I created the article and thus I regularly check up on it. That doesn't mean I remove any edit that isn't mine. Hundreds of people have edited the article since I started it.
You should check out Amanda Young's article, another one I created. Another user wrote a whole section entitled Evolution of a Killer. I had nearly nothing to do with its completion. All I did was add a 'cite' tag, which the user fixed. If I was the power-crazy person that you imply me to be, I would have removed it. On the same level, if you had given a citation that states where the idea for Jigsaw came I wouldn't have touched it.--CyberGhostface 23:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Manhunter
I am just wondering what you meant by Manhunter being in a different continuity than Harris's canon. I was a little confused. Dr.HannibalLecter 21:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I see what you mean. Lecter is a composite in that film and he is renamed. However, in Red Dragon, The Silence of the Lambs, and Hannibal, there are also both composites and renamed characters. In Red Dragon, for instance, Ralph Mandy is a composite of the novel's Ralph Mandy, Dandridge, and Lange. Also, Manhunter is listed on Harris's website as an official adaptation. Dr.HannibalLecter 22:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the link to the interview! Dr.HannibalLecter 18:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Lost images
Hey, thanks for reverting Ned's changes to the Lost character pages by reinstating the images. I have been doing this as well and ask that you participate in the new discussion at Talk:Lost (TV series)#Character images. Thanks, --thedemonhog 18:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
RE: Alexander Mahone
Sorry, CyberGhostface, I think I tagged it for deletion after it was removed. I think the promotional shot is fine at the moment. The other images were changed to screenshots because another editor was unhappy about the use of promotional images when screenshots were available. Regards, Ladida 23:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it would be kind of nice if you could help me with the characters' articles. The "Appearance" section is getting hard to manage. No matter how many times I say "brief", nobody listens. At the moment, I think all the characters' articles are kind of violating Wikipedia's "out-of-universe" style for fictional subjects. I started rewriting both Mahone and Michael Scofield's article by adding more behind-the-scene and actors' quotes etc. Would you like to try and rewrite T-Bag's article? Thanks, Ladida 23:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I don't think I'll have time to edit for the next few months cos Uni is about to start. Regards, Ladida 23:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
It's getting better. :) However, if you read the article, apart from the very first paragraph, it still doesn't seem encyclopaedic since it doesn't have factual information from news etc. -- Ladida 01:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Flagg
Howdy, just letting you know that I have started copyediting this article and trying to add sources as I go. If I do something that seems odd, just let me know. My goal is to get it to FA, so if I see something that seems like original research or uncited, I am removing it for now because that will sink a featured nomination. That doesn't mean it isn't good material, but I'd rather add it back later when we have sources. Cool? --Mus Musculus 06:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Lost images
I just wanted to apologies about getting so worked up about the images without giving you a proper explanation. With just up and removing the pictures like that, I can understand that you probably thought I was insane. Now having had time to think about the situation and being away from the computer I realized I should have explained myself first, to help avoid these kinds of heated situations. If you haven't already, please see my message on Talk:Lost (TV series)#Fair use and Lost, which will hopefully clear up some of the confusion. -- Ned Scott 06:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Aaron Thomas
Ok, I will see what info I can get on Aaron Thomas. Dr.HannibalLecter 21:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I moved your {{CyberGhostface Archive}} template to the above location. Single-user templates do not belong in the template namespace but instead should be in your user space. They can still be transcluded just like regular templates by the same syntax: {{User:CyberGhostface/Talk Archive}}. Regards, howcheng {chat} 17:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Mustafa
The page is no longer my concern, I created it a long time ago, and am now indifferent to its inclusion. Thank you for the notification, though. Drake Clawfang 00:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Unneeded article?
List of saw II victims; am I the only one who thinks this article is slightly pointless, especially when there isn't one for the first or third films? Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 05:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Report me for what? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rcarey1979 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC).
She has been doing this since October, CGF. I also posted on the BLP noticeboard. I included a link to where she started her rants about Sid and zombies on IMDB, but since I posted that, she has gone and deleted her posts. At any rate, it began on Halloween of last year, and she's STILL at it...pretty ridiculous hobby if you ask me. Thanks for the help.
Spirot 04:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
I have been advised to discuss this issue with you in a civil, and respectful manner as to resolve this dispute. Please contact me at your earliest convenience, so that we may work towards a timely resolution. Thank you -Rachael—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcarey1979 (talk • contribs)
I've warned Rcarey1979 about breaching 3RR and although I agree this could well be a BLP case and therefore be exempt to 3RR violations, thought I'd just say a quick word that if she continues please come to me rather than edit warring... and I'll sort it out. Thanks mate Glen 06:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
An unregistered user is continuing to change the article pic to the fan-made one that is up for deletion. I've reverted, but it keeps coming back, and I'm off for the night. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 03:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Cyber,
I have just reverted the Saw IV article back to before the poster and tagline was removed. It isn't the official poster, however is a teaser, and therefore isn't fan made. I have stated this in the edit.
By reverting back to this point, I have copied all edits; cast link to Jigsaw Killer, removed "followed by Saw V" as this is not yet official, and that's about it. Movie Junkie 20:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I too thought I was a fan made poster the first time I saw it, but through a but of research I found out it was a teaser. Not sure when the official will be produced, but as soon as it does, we'll get it changed. Movie Junkie 20:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Capt. Spaulding page
Well done! Since I have NO clue how to do the code properly, could you add links to your CS page to wherever it says "Captain Spaulding" on Sid's page? I think that'd be keen. =)
Btw - if you want to come back to the forum, let me know. (18 came and went, right?)
Christina Aguilera Image
Cyber,
Reserving my right to respectfully disagree with you, but do you
really think the original copied photo is better placed than the original taken less than a month ago ?
I sincerely appreciate you being considerate enough to state your
reasoning as opposed to simply switching the image back without comment, and thus have no intent of reverting without it being mutually agreed. Maybe the original could be placed elsewhere on the page so both appear ? Your thoughts.......
Dannyg3332 21:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm afraid I'll have to agree with Danny on this one. Although the pic reprents Christina as a singer, it doesn't clearly identify her. But we do have a pic in 2006 which could be replaced with it further down the article. --wL<speak·check> 22:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Links and site
Oh, ok. I was thinking of the movei creds list, but if it's linked in the article itself, I guess it doesn't really matter.
Subscriptions are not open yet, but we are letting people in with "referrals" from other members for now until we reopen. So if you want to join back up, just give me an email (if there's a way to do that here in private) to use and I'll have our webbie make an account for you. You could of course then change your password once you logged in. Just let me know. =)
Spirot 04:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Arbitration re: Abu badali
Hi. I am writing you because you were one of the respondants on the RfC about Abu badali that was started back in November. There has been no substantive comment there for over a month and User:Abu badali has never bothered to respond to the RfC. The last comment on the talk page of the RfC was a suggestion to take it to arbitration, which is what I propose we do. Accordingly, I have created a shell/draft listing to add to the list of Arbitration Committee matters here. I've listed your new there, preliminarily, as a complaintant. If you are not interested in participating, please remove your name. If you are, please add your comments as we must prepare a 500 word summary of the case. Thanks for your attention - Jord 15:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I haven't had much problems lately with him and he's been nice enough to revert vandalism on my pages. I'll keep an eye on the arb page though and see where it goes from there.--CyberGhostface 20:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Characters
If anything major about the characters are released, then it might be best. Otherwise, the new info might just be added to their separate paragraphs on the main article page. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 23:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Now that you mention it, he does kind of look like Mickey Mouse... -Mike Payne 20:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Reply to your post
Thanks!!! Offer's still open to come back on board, too.Spirot 03:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi again! Just wondering - do you know how to archive discussions? Glen suggested archiving that spat on Sid's discussion page, but I have no idea how to do that. Please let me know. Thanks again!
Spirot 03:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
AIV
Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! John Reaves(talk) 21:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Archiving
Well, I just spent about 45 minutes trying to properly archive that spat, and I can't seem to do it right. I hesitate to do any more, because I don't want some bot blocking me thinking I'm vandalising the page. Any help you can give would be great. It's just that one thing I want to archive. Glen suggested it, and I've asked how twice, but no luck. Thanks!
Spirot 04:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
You, sir, are wonderful. Thanks so much for all your help!
Spirot 05:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I can't really speedy this article because it does have references and external links so it does assert importance...just not enough notability in my opinion to warrant an article. If you feel like trying to AfD, I would support a delete. IrishGuytalk 20:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Category:Sadistic Horror films
Thanks for the heads up, i made myself some reasoning for the cat on the page, feel free to give it again to re-consider your vote. But I can understand people's judgement on this. Thanks again! Andrzejbanas 00:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I posted a discussion on the Hannibal Lecter page a week ago and no one's replied. I think a re-vamp of the ENTIRE article is in order if we want it to be considered for featuring. I want to know what your opinion is on this! Thanks! --Majinvegeta 01:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Dude, you know what happened to Rob Zombie?
His page is practically blank now! What happened?
I took a lot of the info on RZ's previous page, and put it, in my own words, on my Mircrosoft Word page. As long as it's reworded, I can repost a lot of that useful info, right?
Re:Chop to the Top
He's right, it isn't a screencapture, it's some pic that is either promotional or something personal. He's nominating it on that basis. I'd just look for a real screencapture to use in its place. Something that isn't quite as large resolution wise, and remember to add a fair use rationale for its use also. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Random question: do you go to the Studiolo anymore?
My banning got lifted, but I noticed that a bunch of people left the forum. Molly was particularly pissed at Clariz about something. If you know what happened, could you tell me? Just curious. --Majinvegeta 02:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, just wondered if you had any idea why the picture of Chris Meloni that was taken by a user had been deleted? Quentin X 19:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I found the deletion log and have asked the administrator who deleted the image to give me a detailed explaination as well as the name of the original editor. (Quentin X 17:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC))
Splat Pack
Thanks for removing the Nick Palumbo links on Splat Pack. I've been keeping a keen eye on the Splat Pack article, and I see you've been doing the same over at Nick Palumbo (among others, not to mention that we've run into each other on the Splat Pack talk page). Is Palumbo notable? I realize that he probably fulfills WP:N, but I'm really not liking the way that page has shaped up. What's your take on it? Rockstar (T/C) 19:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Just realized I responded on my talk page, not yours. Anyway, I figured he wasn't notable, and I've definitely removed his name from the Splat Pack article more than once. It's funny, because I can always tell that someone is not notable or is grasping for notability if his or her name gets spam-linked somewhere else in Wikipedia. Sigh. Well, I think that what we should do is cut the hell out of Palumbo's article, removing literally everything that is unsourced or possibly original research. He does, after all, fall under WP:BLP. I'll go ahead and take a shot at it. Rockstar (T/C) 19:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
So I just mauled the hell out of the article. You know, I was thinking: I really don't think Palumbo is notable enough for his own page. The only sources that were used were unreliable web interviews and forums (which I'm sure don't fulfill WP:RS or WP:N). I do think that Murder-Set-Pieces is probably notable enough for Wikipedia (considering who reviewed it), but I think that Palumbo's page should be deleted and a M-S-P article created. I do realize that I think I deleted some of your work, but I also wanted to completely gut the article and leave only a barely-there stub. Maybe then after a week or so we can nominate it again for deletion. Rockstar (T/C) 20:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Definitely, will do! Rockstar (T/C) 00:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
rationales
Okay, I'l let you knw if there's one of yours that needs a rationale. As far as I know, the uploader's last edits were in February which would explain why rationales were never added after the tag was put up.--Wizardman 01:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Check it out
I seriously revamped the Hannibal Lecter Article, and I must say that your input and suggestions is STRONGLY suggested. I like the length of it now (it's practically chopped in half), but I don't know if I like the organization or wording. Your input is greatyl appreciated! --Majinvegeta 05:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Torture Horror
Although I still like my title, i think this would do. I just hope it doesn't end up getting deleted again! Andrzejbanas 21:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Leatherface GA?
shall we now nominate the Leatherface article for Good Article status? Mr Richardson 19:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Lecter article
I think it's ready to be nominated for good article. Perhaps a few references are needed, but I think it's ready to go. Just wanted to get your opinion. :) --Majinvegeta 16:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Sid's page
I left one of the admins a message about those two and their games. Hopefully they're going to be dealt with appropriately. We just went through this same BS with Quatloo, did we not? Some folks got a strange idea of entertainment... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spirot (talk • contribs) 01:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC).
Hi CyberGhostface. The rules around WP:3RR can be somewhat confusing, but in the standard interpretation any reversion of text counts - even if it was different text than the previous reversions. By the letter of the policy, if four different people made updates to a page and you corrected spelling mistakes made by each of them in between those other updates you'd be 'guilty' of 3RR... which is silly and not the intent but actually has been enforced that way on occasion. In this case you were definitely edit warring with the others and passed three reverts in under five hours... and that IS exactly what the policy is meant to prevent. Of course, they were edit warring too. I've protected the page and am going to suggest discussing the actual issues. --CBD 11:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Re:DOB
Well, don't revert because they are not concrete, revert because they are fictional and so they can technically never die. Meaning, Leatherface can be killed, but someone can remake the film and he'd be alive again. I didn't realize he was doing it on more than a couple of the names, I thought it was only the main characters. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
is taking a hell of a long time Mr Richardson 12:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Quick Jigsaw Q
Nothing particularly important, I was just reading up on the Saw 4 article and it mentions the tape covered in wax. I don't really recall that scene. Do you know which film it was in?Darkwarriorblake 21:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Weird, never noticed that bit, must've been distracted by something else in the scene or just never took it in. Thanks anyway Ghostface.Darkwarriorblake 22:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Man I finally found the scene, the camera actually focuses on the act and I still never noticed it. Thanks for your help.Darkwarriorblake 22:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Advice on uploading images
Hello!
Thanks for uploading some pictures to Wikipedia. I wanted to make sure you were aware of some of the requirements and good practices for uploaded images.
Pick an image name.
When uploading an image, pick a file name that is descriptive, and unique. Remember that many images may be uploaded about the same topic, and remember that names are case sensitive.
Source the image.
On the image description page, explain where the image came from. If you created the image yourself, then say so. If it's from the web, give a URL. If it's a screenshot of a movie or game, or a scan from a book, give the title.
Provide copyright and license information.
This part is a little bit trickier, but it's very important. The copyright of the image generally belongs to whomever created it.
If it's a photograph you took, or an image you created (modifying an image that already exists doesn't count) in software like Photoshop or GIMP, then you own the copyright. To upload it to Wikipedia, you must agree to license it under the GFDL (which allows anyone to use it, but requires that they give credit to the original author and requires that any further edit to the image be licensed under the GFDL as well) or release it into the public domain (which allows anyone to use it for any purpose without restriction.) Do this by placing an appropriate tag on the image description page, like {{GFDL}} or {{PD-self}}. Be sure to mention that you created the image. If you're using {{PD-self}}, you may also want to use {{NoRightsReserved}}, since there is some dispute as to whether one may grant items into the public domain.
If you didn't create the image, or the copyright somehow belongs to another party (like a screenshot, which you might "create", but the copyright belongs to the author of the movie or video game), then you need to find another tag that describes the copyright status of the image. Images used on Wikipedia need to be free for our use and the use of sites which reproduce our content. This means that images cannot have a restriction such as "only for use by Wikipedia", or "for non-commercial use only", or "for educational use". Images without a free license may be usable in certain articles under fair use, but such a use should be justified on the image description page.
Describe the image.
To another reader, the image may not be immediately understood. A caption in an article doesn't explain the image to a visitor who sees it on its image page. Put a brief explanation of what is in the image on the image description page, similar to what you might include in a caption on an article.
Thanks again for your contributions. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me at my talk page. Riana⁂ 07:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for the barnstar! Clamster 01:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: Peelingflesh@g-mail.com
I'm not aware of any, because of verifiability purposes, it's extremely hard to prove. Maybe if you could get them to publish the question/answer on a website or something. I don't know. I know that saying "i got an email" would encourage others to say the same thing, even when they never had such a thing. I'm not saying you don't, just that using that type of citation would open a door to people putting lots of OR in an article and then claiming to have spoken to some higher power via email. Bignole 15:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't know. You might want to ask the people at the verifiability page. I would think they would be more knowledgable on this type of thing. Bignole 15:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Let me know how it goes. Bignole 15:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I think it would be considered that since you actually asked someone for the answer, as opposed to finding the answer from another source. It's a weird line. Because your email isn't a published source, that is what makes it OR. The truth is irrelevant to the fact that they haven't answered that question in a venue that published it somehow. Sorry you didn't get the answer you were hoping for. Bignole 22:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, you need to add a source to the Halloween poster. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hannibal Lector. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. HalfShadow 21:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I sent him a message. Try not to revent him again. I got the page on my watchlist now. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
You have been blocked for a period of twenty-four hours for violating the three-revert rule on Hannibal Lecter. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. -- tariqabjotu 22:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Y
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
Unblocked by blocking admin.
Request handled by:Chaser - T 06:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Tariqabjotu has re-evaluated the situation and unblocked you. You might want to stick to this rule of thumb. If you revert someone one time, and they revert you back, just take it to the talk page (theirs and the articles). If they refuse, then immediately seek outside opinions. This way you want come close to the 3RR, and more people can weigh in on the information trying to be included (or removed, if that is the case). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Amanda Young pics
I think a pic of Amanda in the pigmask (something like this or something) should go up, but there's too many pics as it is... thoughts? Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 08:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the additions to the Can-Toi page. I'm trying to get a couple of the categories fleshed out properly, since the dark tower pages seem somewhat sleepy. You're one of the few active people involved on the DT stuff, and I really appreciate it.
I'm trying not to go too far though, and was wondering if creating a Pimli Prentiss and Finli page was necessary. To me they were very important characters that change the landscape of the narrative and they carry a great portion of the second act of the book. Adding Eddie's death into the mix and Finli's prior off camera appearance, I thought they were noteworthy enough. But I'd like to get others opinions as well. If they truly are superfluous entries, I'd gladly delete them, but if not, I'd like to expand them properly. My real mission here is to get a bit more coherence in the setup of the entire DT group of articles. To me, for... say... Eldred Jonas to have a page and Ted Brautigan not to seems odd. Just what is the set of criteria for a character to merit a separate entry?Artemisstrong 06:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: Archives
I created Talk:Hannibal Lecter/Archives so that the Hannibal archives may remain hidden until you click the show button. I might ask another sysop to help me since I still can not fix this problem myself: I can't get those two archives to show up there on that special archive page I've created. Lord Sesshomaru
I just noticed this, but should the "p" be capitalized? Shouldn't the article be moved to "Billy the Jigsaw puppet" or "Billy the Saw puppet" or something? I don't know how to move pages myself, but if you could, I will get to work editing the pages that link to it asap. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 02:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Jason
I finally finished the new Jason article. Take a look. All the images are hidden, so you have to click the links to them if you want to see them. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Was aware of them. If you have links to them, that would be great. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
You mean this stuff:
In December 2006, Wildstorm Universe began publishing new comic books about Jason Voorhees under the Friday the 13th monicker. The first sest was a five-issue miniseries. The miniseries involves Jason's return to Crystal Lake, a lone survivor's tale of the murder of her friends by a monster, a new revelation about the evil surrounding Crystal Lake and the truth of what Jason really embodies.[37] On July 11, 2007, Wildstorm published the first of a two part special entitled Friday the 13th: Pamela's Tale. The two issue comic book covers Pamela Voorhees' pregnancy with Jason, and her journey to Camp Crystal Lake.?? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
LOL, no it wasn't there. I just added it. I was making sure that was what you were talking about. 7 issues? I only saw mention of a 5 part miniseries, and then the two about Pamela. What others are there? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Could you find me a link to the seventh issue? I can only find number 6. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I am planning to cleanup the Carnivàle article (I've already started, but it will take a while). As you might have heard, there have been long discussions about images on episodes lists (see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Removal of images from lists of episodes), and as a result, most if not all such episode lists had their images deleted. Carnivàle may have escaped that fate as it didn't have a separate ep list at that time (still doesn't). Now, it seems that you uploaded all 24 ep screenshots, and all of them have been tagged for missing fair use rationales (which you corrected); one has already been deleted. Do you have any attachment to those images? Because I would like to remove them from the list per the noticeboard discussion, but I have no other pro/con feelings about them otherwise. If I remove them, they might as well be deleted from the datebase afterwards because they aren't used anywhere else. If you want to keep them there however, could you re-upload the now-missing image so that it looks nice again? – sgeurekat•c 21:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
You can remove them if you want. Do you think we should make seperate articles for the episodes though?--CyberGhostface 21:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I first thought you meant a separate page for the ep list (and I agree with what you said at the Talk:Carnivàle#List of Episodes). But as for the episodes themselves: No. Carnivàle didn't work on an episode basis, and I think the ep list is already extremely well written without giving too much away. Instead, I'm envisioning giving a quick and not to detailed overview over the most important characters and character arcs, like what you can already see in the article now. I'm also thinking about adding a section for "Dolan, Iris and Brother Justin" as well as possibly "Lodz and the avatars of the last generation". I still need to make my notes for Season 2 and then phrase and integrate the info into the article, including everything encyclopedic I could already get from interviews. That will take some time. – sgeurekat•c 22:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I've finished Carnivàle and I think it's ready for featured article status. Would you re-read the article and give it a peer review? I think it is well-sourced, NPOV, follows style guides and is comprehensive similar to the already featured TV articles Lost (TV series) and Arrested Development (TV series). But you should check for weird or uncommon language constructs (I'm only a near-native speaker), consistant American spelling and punctuation (I might have mixed in a few British rules there), and general things that you notice otherwise. It would be much appreciated. (You can use the article's talk page or my own. If you don't have the time or will, please say so also.) Thanks. – sgeurekat•c 11:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
I changed it to the "Jaw Splitter" after I saw that was what James Wan had officially called it, most notably on his art for the device. I figured it should be listed under it's official name, seeing as how it was only referred to as being similar to a bear trap, spawning the name (like calling Danica's test "Freezer room", it's official name, instead of the fanmade "Ice shower") Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 03:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I think this article is coming too early, and is messy... any suggestions? Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 22:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I did think it was strange having an article for a character that isn't yet very important (we shall have to wait and see Saw IV before thinking this over). — Movie Junkie 10:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi CyberGhostface. This is just to remind you that user templates should be subst'ed, that is, instead of {{uw-npa3}}, use {{subst:uw-npa3}}. Thanks and happy editing. JRSP 19:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with why you got rid of my Rigg page, but I still believe that it is useful.
Basically every site and plot summary states that Rigg will be the focus of Saw 4. I just wanna know if you could maybe rethink the deletion. Thanks!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Famguy3 (talk • contribs)
24.168.46.238
I reported 24.168.46.238 for legal thrats to you after their 48 hour block began. Admins decided to block the user for 6 months, including thier talk page. Good job keeping your cool against 24.168.46.238's attacks. Edward321 04:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Maybe It is best to wait.
I guess maybe ill wait until october to make the page. Not A lot of people are obsessing over saw 4, but they will be come october.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Famguy3 (talk • contribs)
The trailer is coming soon I think
I think the official trailer will be before halloween and/or death sentence. That might spark people's interest even more and even if it doesn't show rigg, the page might be worth putting up. People will want as much info as they can get.- User:Famguy3
Image:Halloweentrio.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Halloweentrio.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ejfetters 11:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC) Ejfetters 11:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
It's replaceable with something more appropriate for the section, like an actual behind-the-scenes image...instead of a promotional image that just shows the three individuals together. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
The Trailer
I believe that the trailer will premiere tomorrow with either halloween or death sentence or both. Either then or on September 17, which is what i heard at yahoo movies on the saw 4 message board. I'd like to wait just a little longer so that nobody deletes the aricle and all of my work was a waste.- User:Famguy3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famguy3 (talk • contribs) 20:14, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
I knew It! The Trailer is here!
Dude, you can catch the trailer over at yahoo movies. No real info on Rigg, But you see some new characters faces, as well as Forensic Hoffman. I think that maybe the guy at the end of the trailer is Rigg, But you only see the side of his face, so i can't be sure. Let me know what you think of me getting the page up and running again. Thanks! - User:Famguy3
sounds good
alright. i got a few things to do, but ill get on it as soon as i can. Keep me posted in case you find any other info.- User:Famguy3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famguy3 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I have an idea.
I had an idea around a month ago to start a saw wikiproject. I don't know how i would start it. I think that sincew your more experienced, you might be able to help. Interested?_ User:Famguy3. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famguy3 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
A Saw Wikiproject would be awesome, and I'd be all for it! Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 15:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
It could be a nice opportunity to get all the articles finally cleaned up. At the very least perhaps a task force could be set up off the Horror WikiProject. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 16:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey. You do a great job. I hope you don't mind, but i made myself an administrator on the project. I figured since I will help vastly and i gave the suggestion, it would make sense. You should do the same. By the way, out of curiousity, what college do you attend? Get back to me when you get the chance.- user:Famguy3
You motivated me to give you all a start by rewriting Amanda Young's plot summary to a shorter out-of-universe briefing. Unfortunately I couldn't fit in her dealings with Matthews in the third film. I can write up a to do list for that article as well. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 03:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Honestly
To be honest, i planned to change it anyway. I just felt like "Whoa" for a second cause it was actually up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famguy3 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I think it'd be best just to retitle Jeff's page as "Reinhart family (Saw)" or something, have a little tidbit concerning how they were mostly focused on in Saw III' (this can be adjusted depending on Jeff's status for the fourth movie when it comes out), and then have Jeff's fic. char. bio with the bio-box, then Lynn's, trimming the stuff previously mentioned from Jeff's, then add bits about Corbett and Dylan. We wouldn't need all the pics used in the articles, so some could be trimmed as such.
Sidenote: As was mentioned on Jeff's page, "Reinhart" was a fan-given name that made it's way onto the DvD cover, so if they touch up on his real last name (which would probably be "Denlon") or if they choose to accept "Reinhart" in the fourth, it can be edited or left alone as needed. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 00:32, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Newsletters
Unfortunately I don't know of any "templates" for newsletters. However you could do what I did was to look at a few and take the techniques and ideas from what others are using and "borrow" these ideas as a basis for you own. Best of luck. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Sure, I'll Join the Saw WikiProject
So what do I do? — Enter Movie 22:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Jason vs. Leatherface
Granted, saying it takes place before TCM could qualify as OR; I put that it was meant to take place between Jason Takes Manhatten and Final Friday there though because of a comment made by a writer in the "Halloween, Chainsaw, Hockey" feature near the end of the first issue; although as what was said was somewhat vague, I'll refraim from putting it back. -- Lord Crayak
F*cking funny as! I actually lolled. I'm sure it's probably against "Do not feed the trolls" but f*ck it, still funny ;) Ryan4314 23:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Yea she prolly did take it too far, but that's her style, and ironically the more people retaliate the further she'll take it lol Ryan4314 10:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply: Hills Have Eyes articles
I agree, I had plans to do this before, but they never pulled through; might be somewhat difficult though, considering the large differences between continuities (Mars/Lizard and Mercury/Goggle having nearly identical information, Doug being dead in the new continuity, but still alive in the old one, etc.) Lord Crayak 19:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
As you did to your WikiProject Saw can you add a template and news paper for it?--*VANILLA2 19:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Can yo make a template like the tamplate Saw WikiProject one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanilla2 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok first make the template then set up the whole article--*VANILLA2 21:3, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Sid Haig
You know the checkered history behind that article (written by Haig's publicist), and your telling me not to delete uncited information is both condescending and snide. Quatloo 23:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
My original complaint, was that the article was terrible. It was unsourced and written in a tone incompatible with an encyclopedia. The awfulness of the article I stumbled upon is what attracted my attention, not any interest in Sid Haig. Eventually it came out that Haig's publicist had written the article and long protected it. After a long debate, I was able to remove the bulk of the article. Then, instead of letting the article organically grow with sources, the original article was recently restored for some reason, including about 50% unsourced material. This made it a partially-sourced article that is now once again, badly written. I originally removed the material because it was unsourced, and this is the same reason now. If Sid Haig as important a figure as the article implies, surely there are sources for this "common knowledge." If there are not, the material is not important enough to be covered. Quatloo 23:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply: Beast?
Yeah, sure, go ahead. Lord Crayak 21:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: ...the mad and macabre
They weren't to my knowledge. Unless that is a name they got from the comics, I would say "show me a source." BIGNOLE (Contact me) 03:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
This image needs a better source, which specific film was the screenshot taken from? Is it a publicity still? Thanks in advance, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 20:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Reply: Sawney Bean
Do you mean add a section in the Mutant article on Karen? If so, I don't know, she just seemed to suffer from radiation poisoning instead of mutations. Lord Crayak 20:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I suppose you're right, I'll get to work on it. Lord Crayak 01:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
There, done. Lord Crayak 02:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Impersonation...
So why do you suppose this guy was impersonating you, or at least mocking you? Turns out he was also User:Citizen Dick, User:UPGRAYEDD, and a somewhat busy IP editor. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
friday!
hey. im really sorry that i havent been on in a while. ive just been crazy busy
anyway, i wont be able to make many contributions becausde im starting to think that there arent that many to make
saw IV is out friday, Im seeing it that night
i can maybe add info to the page when i get home
famguy3
Oh I don't care about the template, I was referencing most of those user's stupidity. Anyway, in my monobook.css I have userboxes turned off, and I just viewed your page from a public computer. Geez. Also, Lost ftw. --Henry W. Schmitt 23:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Amanda Young
The phrase as-is is confusing. Is it the police that question it? If so, why not just fix the awkwardness and start the sentence with "police think" or something like that? I come to Wikipedia to learn about the character, not to read ambigious wording that is confusing. hbdragon88 03:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about the last edit. I'll send all content-related questions to the talk page from now on. I really must understand that my role around the articles is very very severely limited... hbdragon88 22:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I haven't seen any of them actually. My role is limited to pointing out unexplained things in the articles (such as Hoffman's letter and who questions Amanda's ability to pick up the corpse) and stylistic changes, as well as my understanding of the traps (dependant on the factual accuracy of List of traps in the Saw film series). hbdragon88 23:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Source
if something lacks a source you should place a CN tag rather than deleting it Sherzo 23:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
it is of probably more note to someone in the UK, you edit could be construed as POV trying to protect it from criticism, leave the statement and fact tag in place, if after a reasonable time no one provides a source remove it, also leave a message for the person who added it asking if they could provide a source.Sherzo 11:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Haig pest
I also consider that old matter settled, so I also am baffled as to that person's behavior. My only complaint was procedural -- reverts generally should include a reason, but reverts removing signed messages from discussions should always include a valid justification, which you gave on the rebound. There is no need to respond to this message. Quatloo 19:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Saw Barnstar
The first ever Saw barnstar given to CyberGhostface for all his hardwork and showmanship to all the Saw related articles. Keep up the great work. ZenlaxTCS 21:17, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Daeg Faerch
Don't thank me, thank the helpful people at the Miscellaneous Reference Desk. They've been patiently parsing through a batch of unidentified photographs which happened to contain the Daeg Faerch shot :) GeeJo(t)⁄(c) • 04:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
To be honest, I think Kerry deserves a page of her own, seeing as how there's new info on her in every film. She's the one character aside from John and Amanda to be in every film. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 20:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I made it. It obviously needs some work, but it's in the same arrangement as that of Jigsaw and Amanda's articles, not too in-universe as Adam's or Lawrence's... Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 21:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Rebirth
I reenetered Saw: Rebirth into Jigsaw's article, explaining that Saw IV gave an alternate backstory. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 03:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Looks like he's messaged quite a few folks. Guess we're not special. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
How would you feel...
About an article on the pig mask from the Saw series? I've created the structure of the article in my sandbox if you want to have a look at it. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 23:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, seeing as how Cecil was his first victim he kidnapped, I would have assumed it would be the origin of using a pig mask. I'll create the page and see where it goes from there. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 00:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Re: The Walkin Dude
Before even reading the page I can tell you that you shouldn't have that huge quote from King in the lead. The Lead should summarize the entire article, and I don't think any quote that long is a summary of anything. Looking at the table of contents, you should never have 1 subsection. The rule of thumb is, if you have an "A", then you must have a "B". So, I'd remove "The Stand" from "In Film"---and decapitalize the headers. Only the first word is capitalized, unless it's a title. For instance, Michael Myers is called "The Shape" in the first film, so a heading with that name would be "The Shape". So, all the book titles are fine, but things like "In Comics", "In Films" should be "In comics" and "In films"---and remove "Death" from "The Dark Tower". If you think "Death" needs separating from "The Dark Tower", and looking at the size that might be necessary, then place a semi-colon--";"--in front of "Death". It will section off like normal, but won't show up in the table of contents. Try not to use the word "Fans", it makes it appear as those the section is not NPOV. I wouldn't put the origin of his name first. I'd get all the appearance information out of the way. Introduce the reader to the character before you start explaining how they were created. You're going to have an issue with over use of non-free images as well. You could probably merge some of that "fan" --try using "readers"--criticism in with the "Literary criticism" section. It's a more appropriate place for it all. I would also try paraphrasing more. Since Wiki isn't a mirror, we really shouldn't be copying large chunks of text from sources. Almost every section seems to be built on mass quoting. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Alrighty, well, I'll get to work merging the info we have for a "Gordon family" article, it would have more info in a different field than the Adam article. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 22:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Dexter Morgan
I replied on my talk page. All the best, – Quadell(talk) (random) 13:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
As an aside to the review, while I was constructing the AH template from the article- and talk-page histories (it took a while, hence the edit conflict!), I was impressed with how far you've brought the article. You've not picked the easiest subject from a sourcing perspective, but it was an interesting read, and if you can get most of those paragraphs sourced somewhere it should hopefully pass GA next time through. Thank you for your work so far. EyeSereneTALK 20:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I'll just tack myself in here. You have put a lot of work into that - do you want to maybe let it simmer for a while, and I'll go through and do some of the cleanup stuff and a bit of re-writing and then you can take a look at it with fresh eyes? I find that usually helps when I am writing something. Leafschik1967 20:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Sheckley
Hello,
would you mind explaining your recent removal of material from Robert Sheckley? It wasn't me who put it there, but I thought perhaps a "citation needed" tag is required, not complete removal. Jashiin (talk) 18:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I actually did a quick google search and nothing about the quote turned up except for Wikipedia and various mirror/copies. If you go to Wikipedia:BLP#Remove_unsourced_or_poorly_sourced_contentious_material,there's a quote from Jimbo that goes "There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons". That, and the editor in question who added was an anon who only did about four edits, and all but one involved the Running Man.--CyberGhostface (talk) 19:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I see; I agree with the removal now. I was worried because you didn't give any explanations in the edit summary. Thanks for replying! Jashiin (talk) 19:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi again
I was wondering as the resident Saw expert if there had been any word or scene I missed that explained what was in that letter to Amanda in Saw 3. It's been bugging me for a year+ now and theres no explanation I can remember or theory that I can come up with as to what would need to be written to her.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Aw man, it can't be that easy to draw your own conclusions if I haven't got a clue. The only thing I can imagine (Because, though I might be wrong, I remember Jigsaw telling her about the letter) is that it says he knows she hasn't been offering people the chance to live but if he tells her that it kinda messes up the end of the 3 unless she was too far gone at that point.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello again, and thanks for the message. The article is definitely improving, but in response to your question there are still a few things to do (some that I left out of my GA review as I thought I had probably given you enough work already!).
Before renominating at WP:GAN I'd recommend, if possible, adding further references. The GA criteria are pretty strict about this, probably more than anything else, and it tends to be the first thing picked up (although it depends to some extent on the reviewer you get!). As I said in the review, the minimum is usually regarded as one inline citation at the end of every paragraph that covers the contents of that paragraph, plus extra cites for quotations, controversial statements etc to prove they are not original research or editor commentary. You have all the quotations properly cited, but in much of the article there are very few citations for the actual text. To give but one example, the last paragraph of The Stand section makes the claims that:
In the original version King implies that Flagg may have had an out-of-body experience in the instant of the explosion that allowed him to spiritually (possibly magically, as later books suggest) escape unharmed. While the original version of the novel does not tell of Flagg's fate afterwards, the 1990 expanded re-release of the novel, The Stand: The Complete & Uncut Edition, explains that Flagg reappeared somewhere on a beach with complete amnesia, where it is suggested that he continued to wreak havoc upon the human race in his new form.
I don't doubt that this is true, but it needs to be referenced - in this case, citing the relevant pages of both versions of the book would allow a reader to follow up these claims for themselves. The same would go for much of the rest of the article.
In addition a copyedit is always beneficial; the prose is generally good so nothing major would be necessary, but it never hurts to get someone unfamiliar with the article to proofread. I noticed one or two small things while I was re-reading just now (I'm sure I saw 'it's' instead of 'it is' somewhere, but I've lost it!), and there are some phrases that come over as editor commentary that should be removed or reworded (eg 'oddly enough', 'Surprisingly, Walter looks hurt.' etc). The League of copyeditors may be useful here.
Finally, the article layout could perhaps be improved. The lead (per WP:LEAD) should be a summary of, not an introduction to, the article. It needs to briefly mention every major claim made in the article, and should cover every section. Although I think this is mostly sorted, there is no mention of reader/critic reaction to the character (ie the Literary analysis and criticism section). It may also help the article flow to have the next section below the lead as a "Concept and creation" section that deals with how and why King developed this character (this would perhaps be a better place for the quotation currently in the lead). I first expected to find this in the Origins section, but confusingly this deals with Flagg's in-universe origin, not the character origin from King's perspective.
Apologies for the long answer - hope this helps! EyeSereneTALK 11:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays
BIGNOLE (Contact me) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Don't overdo it on the fudge!
I haven't listened to the commentary, but I definitely think it's worth noting that the actor himself believes Dr. Gordon to be dead. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 21:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm probably not entitled to comment it just so happens that JackofHearts' talk page is on my watchlist still. Certainly if it comes from the actor himself its certainly worth mentioning, however I think it's worth bearing in mind that it's not cannon and so not an official fate. Agent452 (talk) 21:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I made sure to copy the text from the article into my sandbox before it was deleted, but I don't have the time to do much editing on here today or tomorrow. Jack Of Hearts | Miss A Turn 00:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
So which articles next...Saw itself?
I guess from your comment on the current articles for deletion for the Pig Mask you're feeling like I'm feeling...pretty pissed off that despite the keep votes out-numbering the delete votes Hoffman was deleted anyway. And now the Pig Mask is up and so it will continue I guess. Think some soul should enter a petition to change the moto of wikipedia to "the Encyclopedia anyone can edit...provided they have a detailed knowledge of every single guideline, policy and discussion that has ever taken place." Anyway this rant was to pretty much say that I've voted keep but, like you said I hardly expect it to count...Agent452 (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Lemony Snicket Roll Call
Hello, CyberGhostface/Full Archive! Your username, as well as the usernames of other inactive members of Wikipedia: WikiProject Lemony Snicket, has been removed from the inactive members list, as part of a process for making the wikiproject active once again. If you would like to continue to be an member (inactive or active), please follow the instructions on the top of the participants page to add your username.
I think it's time to block this user: MrHaney, their comments on the talk page are inappropriate as well. Vrac (talk) 22:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
What have you against free speech? Mr Roth has a very strange obsession with other men's penises and uses his films as soapboxes from which to deliver bizarre lectures on child genital mutilation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrHaney (talk • contribs) 22:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with it. Vrac (talk) 22:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Mischa Lecter
An editor has nominated Mischa Lecter, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mischa Lecter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
RF
I would put it up on the league of copy-editors requests page and maybe a peer review, letting people know what your goal is. It isn't too far from FA. Wrad (talk) 03:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Randall Flagg GA
Congratulations - you've put in a lot of work and it's well deserved ;) EyeSereneTALK 08:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
USM Video Game Cannon
sorry it took me so long to reply to your question, but Bendis announced he woul be writing an arc that covered and expanded upon the video game story after amazing friends. he made htis announcement in the Ultimate Previews mag that came out in the fall.
Captaincanuck65 (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Rob Zombie films
Why are you bringing those back? The single characters do not have enough relevant information to warrant articles. Improve the film articles instead. TTN (talk) 00:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
That kind of information would be covered within "Legacy" or "In popular culture" sections in the main articles instead of separate articles. Unless you think you can provide a few paragraphs of solid creation and reception information, you should just work on the main articles. TTN (talk) 00:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
And by solid information, I'm talking about a scenario where both film articles are bloated with information, but there is still plenty left to write about. I really doubt you're going to find that much that is fully separate from them. TTN (talk) 00:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Can you please just follow the proper flow of creating articles on fictional topics? Unless it is something truly iconic like Superman, we start off with the main article and work towards creating sections there. Afterwards, you split off if it is necessary. If you were to actually flesh out the two main articles fully, I'm sure you would see that there is no need for the separate articles. TTN (talk) 00:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
We're talking about this specific case, not every other article. I'm sure sources talking about the characters exist. That's evident from the DVD commentary. That does not mean that the characters need separate articles when they're not independent from the films. If you could find references on the characters that are completely separate from the films that show that these characters are truly iconic, that would be a different story. TTN (talk) 00:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
There is a difference between interviews about the characters to hype up or expand upon the films and those that truly get away from them. I've seen a few so far where the characters are talked about, but they do not actually separate themselves from the film. If you could just go and fetch one real quick, I'll shut up, but I have been in this situation before. This just never turns out well. TTN (talk) 00:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
See, that's the first type I was talking about. They focus on the characters in relation to the films (all three even seem to go into details on the films anyways). That kind of information is better placed within the articles. Information on casting, changes to the characters, ect would all go into development sections. Anything on the popularity of the characters should be placed within reception sections. Anything like merchandise should go into popular culture sections.
Now, if at that point you find that there is a just so much information on a specific character piling up, that may be worth bringing it back. That would have to be some fairly specific information, though. Otherwise, you can just trim and condense it. TTN (talk) 01:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
For the interviews to separate them from the films, they would have to provide evidence that they are iconic in their own right. Those show nothing more than them being extensions of a few cult films. Two films is not a really big deal; the interviews relate directly to the films (i.e. if you can find some from this year or something still talking about the characters, you'll have a case); and merchandise has more to do with the overall series and Rob Zombie than the specific characters. Just because the main articles discuss the characters will not mean that they aren't notable in their own way, if that's what you're worried about. They'll just be getting their specific weight in accordance with the overall topic. TTN (talk) 01:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
The first one could possibly be used for something, but it is sort of borderline trivial. The second one provides absolutely nothing relevant. What I'm talking about would be ones that show that someone could just randomly name Captain Spaulding, and he'll be shown as something more iconic than the films themselves. I really think that if you want to do this, the split out approach is the best way. Also, making the two films featured would really show if they need to be split or not. TTN (talk) 01:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
We're not looking for every trivial mention of the character. You need significant details for the article to stand. TTN (talk) 02:02, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Interviews would need to be based upon the fact that the characters are iconic. If you were to find a interview from last month talking to Rob Zombie about how iconic the characters are at this point (with little mention of the movie), that would be good. Reviews reviewing just the characters would probably be valid also. I want unrelated article to talk about the characters, not just give a passing mention because of the actor or a reference to scary movies. TTN (talk) 12:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
You're the one that claimed that they were iconic in the horror movie area, so I'm just sticking with that. It's possible to include those details; we've established that. The thing is that the details to not overreach the boundaries of the two films, which could use that information anyways. Would it really be that hard for you to work on production and reception sections for the two films? After those are fully developed, we can look over them and see if the included details have a lot of weight leaning towards one or two characters. If those details, would be better contained within an article, they can be split. TTN (talk) 15:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Iconic is iconic, even though there are certainly different levels. If they're the ones that are iconic instead of just the films, they should be able to show it. Obviously these characters wouldn't be able to have as much information as Jason Voorhees, but one interview praising the character's portrayal isn't going to hold up an article. You should take those kind of sources and put it behind sentences like "The characters of the film were well received, setting a standard for later horror films." in a reception section for the first film. The second film should somehow expand upon that. TTN (talk) 16:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
You found one that mentions the character in a side comment. I'm talking about one recent interview where one single person, the whole cast, Rob Zombie, writers of the films, or anyone else important is interviewed about the character(s) and their impact on the horror genre, their ever lasting popularity, or anything like that. Those would be indicators of notability. TTN (talk) 16:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
The main indicator of notability is significant coverage. So far, you have one or two things outside of the scope of getting a feel for the films. Those one or two things do not really shout "I'm notable." The films are notable, and the characters a big chunk of it, not independent from it. How about this for now: take the one list of minor characters in the films that is floating about and merge the characters to it. Work on both the film articles and the list. If they're independently notable, they'll be able to be split from the list. Otherwise, once the film articles are developed, the list can be redirected. TTN (talk) 17:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
What exactly have you provided that shows that they're notable? The only source that you have provided that actually gets away from the films, and isn't just a passing mention is the interview with Gunnar Hansen. Even then, it's just a couple of quick questions about his favorite character. That doesn't hold any real weight at all, and I really doubt it would be included in any article. What exactly is so hard about leaving them as redirects until it is shown that they actually stand? TTN (talk) 17:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Reception has to be from critical sources. One guy that played a character in an unrelated movie is not relevant. Now, views directly from people that worked on the two films would be fine. If you want to save images, all you have to do is make sure you know the names, and ask an admin to undelete them afterwards. All of that stuff also fits into the film articles, which is what we've been going over for the past while. TTN (talk) 18:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
If there a tons of independent, non-trivial, and reliable sources discussing the characters, that is enough to support independent notability. What you have shown me is nothing like that, and it fits with the film articles. TTN (talk) 18:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
We've already gotten past the point of citing guidelines specifically. At this point, we're arguing about interpretation. TTN (talk) 18:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Flagg
Thank you very much for the barnstar. I appreciate it, and I wish you the best of luck with the FA. I'll be keeping my eye out and cheering for you. Finetooth (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
re: Flagg
Not at all. It's difficult to give constructive criticism but I know it's even more difficult to receive it. I've been reading the R.F. article for a long time and I think it's ready for FA status. True that some sections are not terribly long, but if that's all the information available, it can still be considered comprehensive. Again, great work. --Laser brain (talk) 23:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
The Flagg FAC
So, I'm thinking this candidacy is going to fail over the secondary sources concerns brought by Awadewit. I have mixed feeling about it because on one hand, I see his point, but on the other hand I really doubt there is much out there in the way of serious academic papers about Randall Flagg. But, I am offering to help do the research. I have access to the MLA database and I can start pulling sources if you are interested in a collaboration. I can pull sources and provide the full text to you with bibliographies. As time allows I can also help add sources to the article but I can't commit to much right now. What do you think? --Laser brain (talk) 19:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I found one article so far that looks promising, but the MLA database doesn't carry the full text. I will look elsewhere for it or request it from the library. I am starting a list here, and will post full text as I find it. If you see anything useful, you can cite it from my bibliography. --Laser brain (talk) 21:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I just wanna say hang in there on this FAC to you and others helping you with it. FA's can be brutal, and I should know... I've been through a couple really difficult ones. Just stay cool, remember that people are trying to help, and remember that even if it fails you can always renominate. Us horror fans have to support one another, right? --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm distracted, but will have another look during the week. You are actually very fortunate to be engaged with Awadewit, who is probably the most insightful reviewer we have onsite. Ceoil (talk) 13:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for the barnstar! Galena11 (talk) 22:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Lady Murasaki (Hannibal)
I have nominated Lady Murasaki (Hannibal), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Murasaki (Hannibal). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. ≈ The Haunted Angel 23:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Flagg PDF
Hey Cyber, I got that journal article about Flagg today. They sent it to me as a PDF. Do you want me to email it to you? If you use the e-mail link and drop me a message, I'll reply with the PDF. I don't know how else I could get it to you. --Laser brain (talk) 03:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
RE:Prison Break photos
I didn't save them. Sorry, I can't be of help. Regards, Ladida (talk) 03:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi!
That's nice that someone finally added Suzie to Sid's page! Very cool of you. But her last name is (was) Oberg, not Olberg. I think she uses Sid's last name now though (the real one).
Just wanted to let you know, but you know, because of *someone* getting the page locked, I can't do it myself... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.58.52 (talk) 06:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
No, I mean his real name. Mosesian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.58.52 (talk) 05:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
She signs her emails with that name, and has it changed in her IMDb page. You can also ask her on his MySpace page if you don't believe me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.58.52 (talk) 06:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
I would AfD....in a while
There is an injunction on all fiction articles concerning character articles and episode articles. I would consult Deckiller on this, to see if they think this page falls into that character category. To me, this page is redundant to the Category:Fictional serial killers, and similar categories. The page goes partial coverage of like six characters, and then just plainly lists about 20 or 30 more. Most of those characters either have their own page, or don't have a page at all. I don't see why the category that we already have in place can't suffice as a "List of", especially since we probably couldn't cover all of those characters fairly without creating an overly long list. But, like I said, consult Deckiller about whether it falls into the injunction. If it does, then you'll have to wait till the ArbCom is over before you do anything. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Randall FLagg FA
I'll give it a look. I've just caught up with all the LOST hoopla (I'd never seen an episode before this year, but on the urging of a friend, I rented the first 3 season... now I can't miss a new episdoe), and I think it'd be worth mentioning a flagg/john locke connection. There's a LOST producer out there who said something like "We are definetly attempting to make Locke a Flagg-esque character, etc." and it might be a worthwhile add. Artemisstrong (talk) 02:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Horror
It looks like the type of list that would be better done as a simple category entitled "Category:Horror film killers". — Deckiller 18:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Lemonysnicketgrave.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lemonysnicketgrave.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. BJBot (talk) 12:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
"The source"
That's actually sort of a disappointing amount of material.. I was hoping that article would be a "treasure trove" of scholarly analysis about Flagg. Alas, alack. I will look at it this week and make some notes about where it might go. Are you thinking a separate heading for scholarly analysis, or working it into the plot summaries? --Laser brain (talk) 04:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Man Behind the Curtain
Sorry for stealing this off Helen (I have her talk on watchlist) - I've got a sandbox version here, so we don't have to work on parallel versions. Will(talk) 15:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Please help
You are the interested party, how do I re-write the Hammes Company article so it gets approved. Do you think it's not a significant company? I have a hard time believing it is less signifant than many of the companies that already have pages. I look to your guidance to help define how to get an article approved. The latest version of the article that was posted yesterday included sources, was written from a neutral point of view, had relevant external links, and told the story of how Hamme Company has designed two huge parts of American culture. Wikipedia is a very important resource, and having a neutral wikipedia page for Hammes Company would seem appropriate. Please give me any input or ideas. Thank you!Sharnden (talk) 17:11, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Hammes Company. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sharnden (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Re: Inside
I don't think it's an inconvenience to merge the page histories. You're right that there isn't much content, but I think there is a preference to preserve page histories whenever possible. Since the article with the foreign title was created before the article with the English title, the merge should be very easy for the admin who does it. After the merge, the article will have just the redirect in its page history. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Helsinki Times
Excuse me, but you seem to be in the process of nominating a just-created article for deletion. Since Finnish is a fairly obscure language, can you explain what steps you've taken to make sure that the subject is not article-worthy and it's not just the article's present state that needs a tune-up? If you haven't, why is getting the article deleted preferable to finding a Finn on this international project of ours and asking him to check up on the matter? --Kizor 19:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I nominated it for deletion because it was one of many labeled as being "conflict of interest" by User:AlexNewArtBot. Maybe I was a bit overzealous in nominating, but most of the articles listed with it were speedily deleted as well, and it came off to me as being self-promotion. I hate it when I see self-promotional articles that come off as advertisements.--CyberGhostface (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Alright, its withdrawn.--CyberGhostface (talk) 19:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. :) We need people who are willing to change direction when appropriate a lot more than people who never have to. I am not certain about the eventual fate of the article, just that it has a factual and non-trivial basis. I cleaned the article up after Dhartung did and added what I could on short notice. --Kizor 21:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Just a note to say that while this is a good idea, the message at WP:COPYREQ is probably better. Your message gets Creative Commons and GFDL mixed up, doesn't explain what CC-BY stands for, and says that copyright holders should "give permission", when an email with just "permission" will result in the image being deleted under CSD:I3. Let me know if you'd like help redrafting it. Stifle (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Could you show me the best "casual" message to use for asking for permission? Thanks.--CyberGhostface (talk) 18:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the barnstar. What a nice surprise! You made my day. Cheers, Meltygirl 04:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Your userpage has been copied.
Hi, Just letting you know that User:AnalWinkee has copy/pasted most of your main userpage to his. He/she is claiming that he/she has over 23,000 edits (instead of 15) and has taken all of the barnstars you received.
Hello, CyberGhostface. You have new messages at Atyndall's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I knew all of that, because I deleted it twice, and protected it. The author has demanded in email to "let the public decide." So, go for it. - CobaltBlueTony™talk 14:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I reviewed the CSD and didn't find a valid cat for books and mags, so I AFD'd it myself. "Let the community decide"! - CobaltBlueTony™talk 14:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
As soon as I have some time to sit down I'll take a look. I'll try and go back through the FACs and peer reviews and see what people have said about it. I would first go over to the League of Copyeditors and find one of their active editors (see the "List of members") to get someone to copyedit the article. I'd suggest Sean ODuibher, who copyedited Friday the 13th (franchise) fo rme just the other day. He's pretty good, and generally quick about it. That's one thing I noticed from a quick glance at the last FAC, that the writing was criticized. I can already seen some areas where I can reorganize some sections, but like I said, it'll have to wait till I have enough free time. Right now I'm on my lunch break from work, and I won't be back home for hours. It may have to wait till this weekend, but hopefully I will be able to get to it earlier. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I think it could be expanded more, especially in the "Impact" section, but also that "Concept and creation" section. We need more info on how his concept has changed (or hasn't changed) with each novel. We cannot say that the article is "comprehensive" if we don't cover that type of info over all his novel appearances. As far as images go, first we need to pick one for the film section. That's a small section to have two pictures and I don't think we need either. I think the Fangoria image would better be served in the "Impact" section, with some discussion on Flagg appearing on the cover of the magazine. As far as Walter O'Dim goes, you would need commentary on Flagg's appearance as O'Dim (i.e. an actual description of his appearance). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
It seems like the assertions of notability were obvious, even if they weren't properly supported, or even if they're not true. A7 indicates that mere assertions of notability circumvent speedy deletion (I usually read that to be reasonable assertions, not just "Billy is graet!!1!one!"). Try AFD; it should go through quickly if it's a hoax or has no verifiability. - CobaltBlueTony™talk 12:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Stand DVD
I'll check out the DVD for stuff about the makeup, I don't know that there is ton, but I believe there is a bit about how long it took. Leafschik1967 (talk) 20:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
notifying
You're doing good work placing speedies, most of them anyway. But please notify the editors who submitted the articles. It is not strictly required exactly, but it is considered polite, & almost everyone does it. Use the linked message that appears on the speedy template after you've saved the article. This has the additional advantage that in cases of spam and copyvio, it also leaves a warning. DGG (talk) 21:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Image source problem with Image:Furio giunta.jpg
Image Copyright problem
Thanks for uploading Image:Furio giunta.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 07:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the source so quickly. I didn't want to see the image deleted but I couldn't find the source myself. Rossrs (talk) 14:24, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikicookie
I am awarding you this WikiCookie for your constructive edits on Wikipedia--LAAFan 16:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
speedy/merge
Yes, Gandalf (dog) is almost certainly not worth an article unless conceivably he plays a really central role in the fiction, but only real people & things can be deleted via speedy as non notable. Either use prod, or just do a merge to the book. DGG (talk) 15:53, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Wolf Hunter
I don't see how any one has a right to delete some ones work from here. Wikipedia is a Encyclopedia for people to gain knowledge about things in life, pop culture and things from around the world. The Wolf Hunter film it's self is a film that has lots of fans and supporters as does the character. I think just because its not as well known as Freddy or Jason does not mean it should not be on here. I have already seen that some one else has edited the article as well. I think that if this does go off its a shame and what kind of Encyclopedia for the people rob people from learning about films and characters from a independent film.
--bloodline video 06:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Article of Focus Department created
I was debating wether or not I should give you the message I'm giving everyone else, but decided not to because of your former involvement in the discussion. Anyways, point is the department's been made and we're awaiting votes. It's up to you. --MwNNrules (talk) 18:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Second nomination is up. --MwNNrules (talk) 07:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
FYI, "apparently non-notable based on Google hits" is not a criterion for speedy deletion. (I deleted it anyway, though, because even when machine-translated it's clearly patent nonsense.) ~~ N (t/c) 04:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
WP: Stephen King
You expressed intrest in a Stephen King WikiProject a few days ago, just wanted to let you know that one has been officially proposed here. If you're still interested in joining, feel free to add your name to the list. Thanks! Blackngold29 11:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Celebrimbor
Hey, thanks for doing that. As you probebly can see i know little to nothing about Lord of the Rings. I feel really embarresed now and am going to destroy my profile! :) Maybe we'll talk later, but i'll be be under a differnt name. Thanks for all the work you have done on the site, i use it quite alot for research for my Home Work.
Aüf Weidersein!
Ivey1 (talk) 05:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The Firefly Family
Hi I'm italian, sorry for my english, but I prefer don't use automatic translator. I'd adjusted the page Captain Spaulding, to the syle of a italian wiki page: this, I also removed the from the italian pages of the characters of the "Firefly family" the en.wiki link because it linked to the pages of the movies, and this'nt the same thing of a link to the fictional character. Many compliments for your job, if you look on Imdb page of the various characters you can see also a little biography of them (you sure know that Rob Zombie created a fictional story of their live before the movie). --Kasper2006 (talk) 16:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
James Benamor
I added some references to James Benamor, and I think that notability is now shown. --Eastmain (talk) 07:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Traci L. Slatton
Just a friendly heads up on Traci L. Slatton. I removed your G7 speedy tag because there are weak claims of notability in article (author of book published by a major publisher, which has been optioned for a film). However, I'm not 100% convinced of notability, and if you feel like taking it to AfD, I'm all for it. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 13:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Apology
No sweat. I certainly contributed to the melee. Sorta funny in retrospect - having both of us put in the corner. Cheers. Stuthomas4 (talk) 16:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok, you seem to be strongly opposed to an "unofficial mythology" section of the X-Files page. Would you at least be ok with a list of non-mythology episodes that introduce character who recur in mythology episodes? I'm new to the show, trying to watch mythology episodes, and it would be useful to me. User:Mustex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.210.133 (talk) 02:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I have, I'm just too lazy to log in right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.210.133 (talk) 05:02, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Respect Thread Conversions
I'm looking for folks to help convert Respect Threads to wiki formatting on Project Fanboy: WikiFans. Respect Threads, showcase scans of feats performed by comic book characters and have gained an audience on several comic book message boards. A few other wiki editors and myself are trying to convert them from the unprofessional look of a bunch of posts on a message board to the formatting common with WikiMedia wiki's. To view an example of what we're doing, here is a link to Respect Silver Surfer.
I was wondering if you might have time to contribute your comic book knowledge and/or scans of comic book characters performing feats, and help us out with our Respect Articles project?Millennium Cowboy (talk) 03:03, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Great to hear CyberGhostface! Thanks for the help! Millennium Cowboy (talk) 05:04, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Media franchises The Texas Chainsaw Massacre task force proposal
Dear CyberGhostface...To help the proposal get more attention, you are invited to place {{WikiProject Media franchises merge|The Texas Chainsaw Massacre}} and {{WikiProject Media franchises}} on the talk pages of all articles and pages related to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. For the banner you can assess the quality based on other projects, since the quality of the articles doesn't change from project to project and all non-article pages are automatically assessed. You are also invited to ad yourself to the WikiProject here. Hope to see you around the project. - LA (T) 09:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
You didn't have to do it, but now the task force has a better chance at getting noticed. Have a nice day! - LA (T) 17:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi! This article has been restored as a contested PROD. --Stormie (talk) 05:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
FAC: The Texas Chain Saw Massacre
Hi, it's EclipseSSD. Just wanted to ask if you were willing to help out with replacing the references mentioned on the FAC page, becase it'd be really great if the article finally passed for a FA. Could you let me know as soon as you have time? Cheers, --EclipseSSD (talk) 14:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Re: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Hi, here are some of the facts to (re)cite.
Throughout the article Ref 13 (leading to TexasChainsawMassacre.net)
Beginning & throughout the article: Ref 2 (Refused-Classification.com)
Ref 11 & 12 in the creation section.
Ref 14 & 15 in the Casting Section.
Ref 17 in the release section.
Ref 31 & 32 in the home video section. (DVD reviews)
Refs 53, 54, 56, 58 and 60 in the Adaptations section.
I know it's a lot, but it would be greatly appreciated, and I will try and help out, and also it'd be useful if you could contact anybody else in making this a FA article. Thanks, a LOT, --EclipseSSD (talk) 15:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, it's a great Start!. If we keep this up, hopefully, we won't have to worry about anything else. Well done!. --EclipseSSD (talk) 16:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Halloween sequel
It seems to all be based on hearsay. Their "breaking news" of the Weinsteins looking for another sequel was from a scooper, and any writer could say they are working on a film and not actually be working on a film. BIGNOLE (Contact me)
It's ok. I saw the headline when it first was published, but it looked a little shoddy (not saying it isn't true). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Update
So when do you think I'll be able to add an article for them? Being a Packer fan (and having run across this situation) I've been trying to get it posted because the more research I do I realize it really should be a part of Wikipedia (they've built a lot of important things). How do I know if something's protected? Trust me, next time it goes up, it's going to be Wiki-perfect. Sharnden (talk) 19:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Chris Underhill
An article that you have been involved in editing, Chris Underhill, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Underhill. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? WWGB (talk) 12:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Please return to WikProject Media franchises
Dear CyberGhostface...You are invited to come back to discuss WikiProject Media franchises. Since you participated in one or more discussions of the project, possibly when it was known as WikiProject Fictional series, I hope to see you return to it. The project needs your participation. Currently there is no activity on the project's talk page about the reorganization which is discouraging. I had great expectations for this project as it touches so many topics but am becoming discouraged. I hope to see you return. LA(If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.) @ 19:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Randall Flagg
I think there is still an image problem (i.e. Images for the sake of images), I don't think a lot of them really meet the criteria. That will most likely come up in an FAC. The lead needs to be expanded more to cover the whole article. Has the article had a peer review before? If not, that could be beneficial before a FAC nomination. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
No, what he "tidied up" needed such. He just condense like information. What is missing is a summary of the character's creation, a summary of common characteristics associated with him, and a summary of his impact. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Re:Nice name
Thanks. The Dark Knight inspired me to make a Two-Face account, I had another account, but I got a new computer and I forgot the pass, so most of my old contributions have been vanquished, so now i'm known as the talk page editor who never remains civil lol --Harvey "Two-Face" Dent (Muhaha!!) 13:12, 13 September 2008 (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.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hannibal Lector. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. HalfShadow 21:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lemonysnicketgrave.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).
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_talk:Sarahsilvermangfdl.PNG){kind=link}
