User talk:DCGeist

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive
Archives
  1. September 2005—February 2007
  2. February 2007—May 2010

article about Joe McCarthy[edit]

OK so clearly you and some other people have an agenda to misrepresent American history. As I said on the other page, McCarthy had nothing to do with the Cold War. But if it were relevant, communist subversion dating to the 1920s caused the Cold War, not the other way around —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennisbyron (talkcontribs) 20:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • You did say that on "the other page" (my talk page), and you were incorrect there also. Drmies (talk) 04:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution[edit]

Hi. :) Just wanted to remind you that when you copy content, even if heavily modified, from one Wikipedia page into another, you need to attribute with a link to the source. This is necessary to meet the terms of CC-By-SA and GFDL. I've taken care of attribution at Wikipedia:Words to watch for the sources I saw, but if you know of any others that have been merged, please add them to the list. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:08, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Impartial tone[edit]

Hi Dan, thanks for your concise comment on reverting my "scare quotes" edit to WP:Words to watch. You're right, it doesn't belong there - but where? What I would really like is to increase guidance in the section "Impartial tone" in WP:NPOV. I think it's easy for editors to be tone-deaf, so to speak, and specific info of the type provided by WP:Words to watch would be helpful. Thanks for advice, Postpostmod (talk) 20:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for feedback. I made a trial shortcut box for the impartial tone section of WP:NPOV, but thought I shouldn't put anything into a policy statement without getting consensus. How about WP:IMPTONE? (see box)
And then, what's the procedure for getting consensus for adding a shortcut to a policy?
I'm not sure yet how to put in the scare quotes issue. It seems too specific compared to what's currently written in the impartial tone section. However, I think a rather longer explanation of tone needs to be prominently available somewhere. I'm concerned it might be offensive for me as a new editor to undertake it, though. It's an important but subtle issue, and maybe it goes against the grain of popular internet culture, to some degree. Maybe this is when people write an essay. Maybe someone already wrote a good essay - I'll go look.
Okay, I just read WP:VALUE and it looks like an essay is the way to go. I'll start writing it on my user page.
Thanks for your kind offer to help; I'll check in before editing any more policies. ;-) Postpostmod (talk) 21:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations[edit]

Well done with Paramount Television Network. Sorry I was preoccupied with other matters and couldn't pitch in. The article looks terrific and well-deserving of its new FA status. Best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 18:19, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Dan. Your note was the first news I had that the article had been promoted. What a relief! Firsfron of Ronchester 14:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings[edit]

Yes, you are correct, the text didn't reference Lou Reed, but now I think about it, perhaps Lou Reed should have a photo in there. I've uploaded hundreds of photos of musicians, by the way.. that are all free images. For the last couple of years or more, I've been keeping a list on my Userpage. Should you be interested in looking for photos for biographies of musicians, music portals (some of them are populated almost entirely by work I uploaded,) or for genres of music or architecture themed photos-- (actually, I keep the architecture on Wikimedia Commons,) a fairly large list does exist there if you are looking (some of the pics, are obscure, like Lene Lovitch. I also attempt to find images for others for biography articles.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 21:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I use the same Username on all Wikipedias (I sometimes edit to the Portuguese, Spanish and a couple others), but you can find close to 400 photos in Commons, although, I tried going back to list most of them on Wikipedia on my Userpage including duplicates just so they're handy. Feel free!--Leahtwosaints (talk) 21:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I found you as interesting in art. I tried to expand a stub by translating from German WP because I found a bot-message there. For I am not a native speaker in English, I'm sure I made a lot of mistakes. Would you be so kind and have a glance at that article? Please also tell me if I did something wrong. Thank you!--Fishbone16 (talk) 09:29, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Expert opinion[edit]

Can you have a look at Wikipedia_talk:Subject_specific_guide#A_choice:_.22subject_specific_guide.22_or_.22subject_style_guide.22.3F and offer up your most expert of opinions in these matters Gnevin (talk) 15:43, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Gnevin (talk) 01:09, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"pertinent and representative quote"[edit]

Hi DCGeist. Regarding this edit, I rather think the Kepner quote is neither pertinent nor representative. The word "egregious" implies that Joyce's call was obviously wrong at the time and thus unforgivable. However, it is not at all clear that another umpire in Joyce's position could not have easily done the same thing, and rather it is the availability of replay and the momentous nature of the situation that is making people take notice. Furthermore, the fact that no one who has actually been an umpire is saying things of this sort makes me doubt the quote's pertinence. As for being representative, the general sense of the quotes I'm reading from baseball folks of all kinds, including present members of the Tigers, is more that Joyce is a good umpire who did his best job given his limitations (i.e., no replay).

Although it appeared in a RS (the NYTimes), my view is that this quote is the somewhat inflammatory opinion of a single (quote-hungry?) pundit and should not be included either in Perfect game or in Jim Joyce. Thanks, --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 17:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little concerned about laying out unnecessary bait at this time. Since you were the one who reverted my edit, it seems it would be a fine solution if you and I could just come to a quick agreement. If we can't, then of course I'm happy to consider another venue. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 17:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DCGeist. FYI, I have now joined a discussion on the topic here. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 18:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This edit summary is inappropriate. Please read WP:BRD if you are unfamiliar with the methodology I used. And I don't appreciate the tone. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 18:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

perfect game lead image caption[edit]

Hi there, I just noticed that you reverted my recent edit to the caption, and I also noted that you explained that it was justified by the citation. I checked it out, and while the term "everlasting image" is used in the reference, it seems to me that it's just an emotional phrase chosen by a NYC-based reporter. Since it doesn't really add anything to the context of the image, I still think it should be removed. Let me know if you have any further thoughts on this. Thanks! Cmprince (talk) 18:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[My favorite flame EVER][edit]

Hispanophobic liberal media devil. It's nothing but subservient brown wetbacks to you Washington/Hollywood/Wall Street kleptosocialist elitists. Who the fuck are you to bastardize my heritage and decide what "race" I am? You patronizing leftard WASP bigots know absolutely nothing about the Hispanosphere beyond your dark wetback servants. If i ever see you in New York I won't hesitate to smash in that fat ugly nazi nose. All of you patronizing segregationist leftards are going to suffer for your vile arrogance and hypocrisy and then we're throwing out your beloved criminal Aztlan mojado voting block regardless of how much you fraudulent troglodytes wail and complain and bait "racism." We're doing away with your kind and taking back the respect we deserve. You're finished. Vete al infierno marrano.

June 2010[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on United States. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MoS document history[edit]

In past discussions on the MoS talk page, concern has been expressed at various times about the lack of clear visibility of the status history of MoS-related pages, such as how, why and when they became part of the MoS. A recent conversation began an initiative to do something about it, but is in danger of fizzling out. This may be simply because folks are busy on other things. As a major contributor to recent MoS rationalization efforts, any contribution you could make to the discussion would be welcome, to help us come to a clear conclusion about whether to go with this or drop it. PL290 (talk) 08:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media review for Achtung Baby FAC[edit]

Looking back at the first FAC I initiated for Achtung Baby, I noticed you did a media review for my nomination. I've since nominated the article for a 2nd FAC. SandyGeorgia has asked me to find someone to review the article's images, and since you did a media review for the 1st FAC, I was wondering if you would be able to do the same for this nomination. If would also be helpful if you could review the sound samples. Let me know if you would be able to assist me. Thanks. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 00:59, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've attempted to address your concerns - please let me know if there are still issues to be fixed. Thanks. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 03:57, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Beleyesbogey.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Beleyesbogey.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppenheimer[edit]

You know, I'm beginning to have second thoughts about including a reference to the Oppenheimer security clearance revocation in that section. It wasn't really part of the loyalty reviews initiated in 1947, as he was a consultant and this was a kind of special situation. As you can see from the article on the Oppenheimer security hearing that we just created, it had its own dynamic, but definitely belongs in McCarthyism. A separate section, perhaps? Figureofnine (talk) 18:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I'll think about where else it might be suitable. Figureofnine (talk) 18:59, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if there's some way we can denote "controversial" or otherwise indicate the significance of the hearing. Figureofnine (talk) 21:15, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

House, MD[edit]

Hi David,

I am a wiki-novice (as far as editing), but noticed inaccurate information in the House, MD [page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House,_md]. I did not ignore your "talk" discussion, but didn't even see it (nor can I find it now -- unless this is it?). I had even sent you an email because I didn't know the appropriate was to discuss with you.

Anyway, I was not trying to get into an edit war, but rather was simply trying to correct the info. on the House page. The problem stems with the attribution of the creator credit. David Shore created House. He is the sole creator. While it may be based upon, or inspired by an idea of Paul Attanasio, that is not the same as "created by," as defined in the entertainment industry. This is indicated by the credits on the show, where Shore is afforded "Created By" credit (i.e. NOT co-created by). Furthermore, information in the bar to the right of the House page supports this information, as only DAvid Shore is listed as the creator.

In the entertainment industry, often producers do generate ideas (as Attanasio did). For their efforts, they are afforded some sort of "producer" credit (as Attanasio was). However, the creation of the characters, scenes, story, and the writer of the script is what determines the actual "created by" credit. That is what David Shore did.

I believe because of this interview with David Shore (http://www.macleans.ca/culture/entertainment/article.jsp?content=20060320_123370_123370), people interpret that to mean that Paul Attanasio co-created the show. That is not the case. Just because he came up with the general idea, does mean he "co-created" the show. In fact, further in that interview, Shore says that all Attanasio did was come up with the general idea, but that Shore himself developed the characters and wrote the script. Nonetheless, that interview really is irrelevant regardless of what it says, in so far as "created by" credit goes. There is an industry standard and according to that standard, David Shore is the sole creator (as evidenced by the credits at the end of the show).

So it is factually incorrect to say Attanasio co-created the show, which is why I tried to tweak the language to reflect that he had the general idea, which was inspired by the NY Times column. The "created by" credit is a matter of public record, and even the unrevised entry says that Fox accords David Shore "created by" credit. So, to me, what is actually unsubstantiated is that Paul Attanasio co-created the show. There is no attribution for that anywhere. And just because something has been long-accepted on this page, doesn't make it so.

If you can help me, by letting me know what I can do to make this entry factually correct and have people accept that, please let me know. I'm not too familiar with wikipedia's functions and I definitely didn't intend to get into an editing war, but i still can't even find that "talk" page that DCGeist refers to (I'm sure it's just my ignorance, but I can't find it).

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soundart99 (talkcontribs) 02:27, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]



Why do you clean Jennifer Morrison name from starring of House, M.D. ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.140.223.100 (talk) 11:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't actually ask for it but I can't be bothered to change my template[edit]

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

If you don't want it, let me know and I can remove it, but I thought you might find it useful for quickly getting rid of House vandalism. :) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect game[edit]

I'm confused by this edit to Perfect game. I thought the original was a good edit; in any event, it is clearly not vandalism and if you want to undo it, it deserves an explanation. Matchups 03:42, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but still, putting an edit summary of "remove redundant phrase" would have avoided characterizing the edit as vandalism and confusing someone who looked only at the diff. Matchups 10:54, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

weasel quotes[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your edits. What I was trying to get at, was that putting quotes around words is like using weasel words. That is, the quotation marks themselves have the same effect as weasel words by giving the impression that someone said what was in the quotes, just like weasel words give the impression that the text associated with them was said by someone. --Bob K31416 (talk) 02:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I'll look here for any response you care to give so that we can keep the discussion in one place. --Bob K31416 (talk) 02:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I responded on my talk page to your response there so that our discussion can be unfragmented there. --Bob K31416 (talk) 03:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

View from the Basement[edit]

Apologies if we were at cross purposes on lead, as I explain here [[1]] Mick gold (talk) 18:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

United States[edit]

Hi. I saw you deleted James Bevel from the U.S. page. I thought that had been worked out long ago with reams of discussion. What happened? Randy Kryn (talk) 21:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, appreciated. And for info purposes, and to show you (once again, I'm sure) how important your page is to the world's readership class (just ahead of birdwatchers and far below fans of reality shows), when Bevel's name was removed it took away 40-50 hits a day. Lots of people being educated through your good work (and a lot less stress than teaching in public school). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Since when does wikipedia not cover urban legend? Black lyzard (talk) 19:39, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Punctuation[edit]

Hi DCGeist. Thanks a lot for your help and suggestions so far on The Basement Tapes. I have a question about a recent punctuation-related change you made. You put the commas outside the song titles and quoted WP:MOS, which says "On Wikipedia, place all punctuation marks inside the quotation marks if they are part of the quoted material and outside if they are not." So far, I have been making the distinction between actual quotations and song titles, the latter which are not really quotations per se. There are no examples in that section of MOS that address song titles. I have been trying to follow that MOS rule for actual quoted material (quoting what someone says, etc.) but I did not believe that song titles fell into that category, and have been actively putting commas and periods within the song titles. Is it your understanding that they fall within the MOS rule? If so, I have a lot of song titles to change back to having the periods and commas outside the quotes. Or, since MOS does specifically address song titles, would you accept my interpretation of the rule, and not object to commas and periods within song titles? I believe this to be a "cleaner" style, rather than song titles with commas outside. Please let me know what you think. Sincerely, Moisejp (talk) 01:12, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it does say that. Thanks for pointing that out. All right, I will change all the song titles over to this style. Thanks again! Moisejp (talk) 01:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DCGeist, I just wanted to say thanks again for all your help. You've really helped the article tremendously. The other reason I'm writing this message is to let you know that I have to be away for a couple of weeks. I let I.M.S. and Mick know this a while back and reminded them just now. But I just thought I'd let you know as well since you have been collaborating with us a lot. It's possible I may get a tiny bit of online time in there but if so it will be very little. Anyway, if the FAR process is still going on when I get back, I look forward to collaborating with you more then. Thank you. Moisejp (talk) 18:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Murali[edit]

How is Murali usually batting at number 11 not relevant to the fact that he has the most ducks? That record is more likely to be held by a bunny at the bottom of the order than a specialist batsman near the top. Directly relevant. But I'm having a jaded day and certainly don't care enough to revert your change. 180.214.168.191 (talk) 01:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)Dave[reply]

Thanks for you comments so far and your copy-edits. I've changed a couple of them: I've changed "William's company" to the full name of the company which Hammond's father fought in, as company on its own didn't make much sense, I realise! Also, you changed "conditions" to "circumstances" when describing his off-spin bowling. I changed the other "conditions" in the sentence, as it really needs to say this when talking about his spin: he only bowled if the pitch would let the ball turn a lot, not just in some circumstances. Not sure what I've just written here makes sense, but I hope it reads OK in the article. If it doesn't work, just revert or let me know. Thanks.--Sarastro1 (talk) 10:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work on Wally! I doubt it would have passed without you. --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted the Lord Harris image as I think he looked like he was being punished on the right! It did look a bit odd, so I moved him back left. I realise it breaks up the section headers, but I think it is easier on the eye the way it was. Feel free to disagree and put it back!!! Not sure about the 1929-30 tours as there is no obvious place to put it. My personal preference is to leave it out because, as you say, many players missed tours. He also missed the 33-34 India tour. However, I'm happy to try to stick it in if you think it is necessary. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

View from the Basement, part 2[edit]

Hi Dan, I wanted to thank you for your great contribution to improving this article. I was surprised to see that we have not been promoted to FA. [2] [3] best Mick gold (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support, I shall wear it at all times. A query? Mick gold (talk) 08:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've posted another query. Thanks Mick gold (talk) 16:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010[edit]

Please remember to maintain civility in your edits, especially your edit summaries, as Wikipedia's Civility policy entreats editors to "Be careful with edit summaries". Edit summaries like "edit better" are not in the spirit of civility, and edit summaries like "we're not having 'Western "Points West"'" could be construed as reflecting feelings of ownership of an article, which is against Wikipedia policy. Thanks. Mmyers1976 (talk) 19:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work[edit]

on Statue of Liberty. Please post at the FAC when you have finished your work, and if you get a chance let Sandy know, since I believe this is the only thing needed for promotion. From what I have seen, your edits are quite good indeed, though I may play with a couple of wording choices later.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More cricket![edit]

As you did such a brilliant job copy-editting Wally Hammond, I wondered if you would like a look at another cricket article. The Yorkshire captaincy affair of 1927 is at FAC here at the moment and is a little lonely. I warn you, it's a little different and much more provincial. Feel free to leave it alone! --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Opinion[edit]

Request retracted.

I found you in the FAC review for Parks and Recreation (season 1). I am trying to get an opinion on whether Glee (season 1) might in fact also meet the criteria for FA. It is currently listed for FLC. Would you mind giving it a quick view and giving me an opinion one way or the other? Frickative and I are currently considering whether to change the nomination.

Your feedback is appreciated! CycloneGU (talk) 20:36, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback[edit]

Please only use rollback when reverting vandalism. This was not reverting vandalism. Garion96 (talk) 14:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are in breach of the three revert rule[edit]

Warning
Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at WP:AVOID. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. --188.221.105.68 (talk) 15:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion on the talk page in regards to this problem. I have reverted your edit - again. If you continue to revert, you may be blocked from editing. This is your final warning. CycloneGU (talk) 16:14, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

Kudos[edit]

Thanks, Mr. Geist, for your judicious edits and reverts in the article "United States." I've followed them over many months, and I commend you for your common sense and intolerance for nonsense. This article is among the most besieged and vandalized across Wikipedia (in all languages), and I find your constant vigilance quite admirable. Please stay with us! Mason.Jones (talk) 20:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Statue of Liberty[edit]

DCGeist, there is some question over whether you would support a proposed compromise at Talk:Statue of Liberty#Name. We'd appreciate your comments there. Powers T 13:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your note[edit]

DCGeist, first, please do not template regular editors. Second, it is you who is edit warring on this issue, and have been blocked for this behavior just a couple of days ago. I believe there are plenty of other editors who understand this point, and I am sure they will remove this entry unless there is consensus to include it. Crum375 (talk) 19:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again[edit]

Once again, thanks for your help at FAC. Hope you're not too sick of cricket yet! --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Photo Drama of Creation[edit]

I have a question about this issue. Please go to the discussion page of the Sound Film article to see what it is. I would appreciate it if you would. 96.232.149.142 (talk) 02:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, that Nixon image cost me $22.75 in fees to the Nixon Library for reproducing from a contact sheet ... the negatives are still being sent to them.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second opinion pls[edit]

Was wondering if you could look at other additions by Rjensen..Specifically what is going on here -->Talk:History of the United States....Moxy (talk) 15:43, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Explain your reasons for auto-archive configs at Talk:Elvis_Presley#Auto_archiving --Kslotte (talk) 12:02, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping the delegates awake[edit]

Thanks for the chuckle: [4] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Akira Kurosawa[edit]

Thank you for your input and kind words about my article on Kurosawa. The following are my responses to your comments:

1) Made dating consistent in article and infobox (Month-Day-Year). 2) Changed "released a film a year" to "directed a film a year". 3) Removed "American" from "American AsianWeek"; 4) I will change the dashes as you suggested; 5) For the file page of the photo used in the infobox, I changed the summary (under "Portion used") to make clear that Mifune was in the uncropped version of the photo. (No, I don't know the exact date on which the picture was taken, but I can tell from internal evidence -- the age and costumes of the participants in the uncropped photo and other photos obviously taken during the same shoot, the appearance of the set, etc -- that the picture had to have been taken in the early 1960's, with Sanjuro rather than Yojimbo the more likely film, and I gave the release date of the former film, 1962, as the last plausible year in which it could have been taken.)

Would you be prepared to support this as a featured article? Do you have any other issues about the article you would like me to address? Please let me know.

You wrote:

Comment: Very nice to see an in-depth article on such an important director. I'm finding style issues here. Just the top for the moment:
* What's your date style? You use day-month-year in the first graf and infobox, but month-day-year in the second graf. Choose and apply consistently throughout the entire article.
* "Throughout the 1950s and early 1960s, Kurosawa released approximately a film a year." Clumsy verb. Studios release films. Distributors release films. Directors direct films or make them.
* "American AsianWeek magazine". Magazine names are italicized, but what is the name of this magazine? American AsianWeek magazine? AsianWeek magazine? If the latter, do you perhaps want to refer to it as "the American magazine AsianWeek"?
* The use of spaced em-dashes is not considered proper here per our Manual of Style. Preferred style is unspaced em-dashes; spaced en-dashes are an acceptable alternative. Choose either and apply consistently throughout.
* The caption of the infobox image is truly bizarre: "Kurosawa demonstrating swordsmanship to Toshirō Mifune (not pictured), probably on set of Sanjuro (1962)." So we know the identity of a party not pictured in the image, but we don't know when it was taken? Really? Unless this is a crop of a larger image showing Mifune (which the file page does not indicate), that is hardly credible

Dylanexpert (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I feel as confused and frustrated as if I were invited on public property and then arrested for trespassing. The whole purpose of a Commons section is to include in it images that anybody can take and put in their articles without challenge. If I use the Commons section and am challenged for it, what’s the point? At the same time, I can see your reasoning that these particular images, which might at first have seemed to be “free,” may not be. So my argument would be that, because of their ambiguity, perhaps I might keep the images unless they are challenged by someone claiming to hold the copyright for them. If you don’t accept that, then I will “rehost” the images as you indicated… but you will have to let me know how to do that.
For the images of Akira Kurosawa himself (there are actually two disputable images, not one) I grant that these are probably not free images, but again, they shouldn’t have been in the Commons in the first place. (Who’s minding the store anyway?) I’ve contacted the New York Public Library website from which the images originated and asked if I could use them in my article without a fee. They said that they did not require a fee, but that I have to find out about copyrights by third parties. So I guess I will have to rehost these also as Fair Use images.
The Yojimbo and Red Beard images already have fair use rationales for the articles in which they originally appeared. Do I have to write a whole other rationale for *my* article?
I will rewrite the rationale for the Tora! Tora! Tora! image to make it a bit more detailed.
I would argue that the “Reputation among other filmmakers” subsection represents a nice change of pace from the “flowing” style of the rest of the article. And I believe you exaggerate somewhat when you describe the whole thing as “currently grab bags of stubby, bullet-point-like grafs.” For example, the Robert Altman paragraph “flows” fairly well. However, in a couple of instances (Spielberg and Scorsese), the grafs are not written as complete sentences, so I will change those.
Since you used the word “arguably” in your description of the “Homages and allusions” subsection, I am taking that as a subjective judgment and will keep that part as is.  : - )
You wrote:
Images: Many image issues. Just looking at the first half of the article:
* The following images are currently hosted on Commons but in fact appear to be non-free: File:Kenichi Enomoto 1945.jpg, File:Drunken-Angel-0.07.54.jpg, File:Rashomon 1.jpg, File:Akira Kurosawa directing.jpeg (more specifically, the first three are almost certainly non-free, and there is no well-supported reason given for the claim that the fourth is free). If you wish to include any of these images, they must be rehosted on Wikipedia and adequate fair use rationales created for each.
* The following fair use images lack rationales for their use in this article: File:Yojimbo.jpg, File:Kurobarberousse.jpg.
* The rationale for File:Tora.png should be improved to discuss its function in the context of the article's critical commentary on the film.—DCGeist (talk) 19:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Comment: The Reputation among filmmakers (and arguably the Homages and allusions) subsection, as well as the Legacy section are currently grab bags of stubby, bullet-point-like grafs. They need to be reworked for more flowing prose. Dylanexpert (talk) 22:22, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is for your attention only, so I'm addressing it to your talk page rather than the Featured Candidates page. I just noticed that you changed the Legacy section. (I was concentrating on correcting the images and was going to get to that last.) It reads very well. You didn't have to do that because I was going to change it myself, but I appreciate it: it shows that you're genuinely interested in making Akira Kurosawa a featured article.
I was very upset with User:hamiltonstone's opposition, since these should have been put under "Comments" and some of them seem to me nitpicking or just wrong. I will respond to his objections shortly. Dylanexpert (talk) 11:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basement[edit]

After the excitement of our first nom, we are on the road again. Mick gold (talk) 08:15, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dan, sorry to intrude. I'm puzzled where Sandy's 'Oppose' leaves us. Your opinion would be most welcome in the FAC. Mick gold (talk) 22:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for communiqué, I think I understand. Negotiating your way through FAC, there are plenty of academic, technical & political challenges. I think it's right the nominators had to find their way past the issues Sandy raised. I preferred the old version, but there's no doubt several editors (WesleyDodds, Kitchen Roll) as well as Sandy found it too long & listy. I was wondering if you'll declare Support for FAC, but any road (as they say in Manchester) your contribution has been great. Mick gold (talk) 08:09, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point & have done something, it seems odd to mention controversy about song that was not included ("Memphis"), but to omit the three that were. I noticed this point was in caption for sound clip "Don't Ya Tell Henry" & thought it should be in main text. Mick gold (talk) 13:20, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The question of Dylan’s authorship? This is what Pete Seeger called "the folk process", borrowing freely from others to create something new. You’re opening a huge kettle of fish/can of worms, so I’m not keen on doing this for TBT article. Dylan has always borrowed/stolen. He said "Open your ears and you’re influenced." "Masters of War" borrows Jean Ritchie’s arrangement of "Nottamun Town", "Girl From The North Country" borrows Martin Carthy’s arrangement of "Scarborough Fair". "With God On Our Side" borrowed melody from Dominic Behan’s "The Patriot Game". I believe Behan wanted to sue Dylan, but it was pointed out that Behan’s tune was borrowed from other traditional Irish songs. This tapestry of allusions and borrowings has become more complex and all-embracing in Dylan’s recent alums, particularly Modern Times and "Love & Theft". Just dig that title. He steals what he loves, and he loves what he steals. The title is in inverted commas, as you probably know, it’s taken from an academic book on white minstrel culture as a love & theft of black culture. Sean Wilentz’s new book talks about this stuff in an interesting way. When Joni Mitchell recently called Dylan a plagiarist, Wilentz responded thus: [5]

Today I heard Wilentz talking in an interview about Dylan and Blind Willie McTell. Wilentz said of McTell: "He’s not some black men sitting in the south singing about his pain. He’s an entertainer, he sings all kinds of songs, religious songs, pop songs, as well as blues. He takes songs from other singers, he says: he jumps songs from other singers and re-arranges them his own way. Well that’s not unlike what Dylan does. So the more I listened to Blind Willie McTell, the more I saw an affinity."

To be honest, I’m not crazy about your recent copyedit. I think we should say: All songs by Bob Dylan, except where noted. Otherwise you’ll find yourself putting your wording on all the articles on Dylan albums, and I don’t think it’s right. On p. 163 of Shelton, an aggrieved Dylan talks to Shelton about this issue. He says, "Woody didn't write ten original melodies, but nobody ever called him a thief." Best, Mick gold (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the first time in my life, I seem to be encountering writer's block. I've looked at the point you made:
Dylan's compositional approach involved incorporating significant elements of songs by other hands in three evident cases: "Open the Door, Homer" (refrain); "Apple Suckling Tree" (tune); and "Crash on the Levee" (central lyrical allusions).
I've looked at the New compositions section. I'm afraid I think this section reads well. I've stared at this stuff for an hour and I haven't been able to come up with 1 or 2 sentences to express your point. I don't think I'm being difficult, I think we may have an honest disagreement about whether this addition improves the article. Mick gold (talk) 10:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Death Is a Caress"[edit]

I see that you have removed my information about the Notwegian film noir "Death Is a Caress" from 1949. According to Cinemateket this film is sought-after in retrospective series outside the Norwegian borders. It is regarded as a classic. It was the female director Edith Carlmar's debut film. I don't know if have seen any Norwegian films, including this one. It is quite good with excellent playing by the two principal actors, Bjørg Riiser-Larsen and Claus Wiese. I don't know if the information was omitted, because the film was Norwegian. Mbaskkel2 September 15, 2010 21:37 (CEST)

The article section in question must summarize the very broad field of noir-styled films made outside the United States. Unfortunately, we can not mention every noir-ish film (either American or otherwise) in the article. In the English-language literature that the English-language encyclopedia relies on for a general topic such as film noir, Death Is a Caress is virtually invisible, unlike the other films named in the section. Of course, it would be perfectly appropriate to include it in the Norse article on film noir. Best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 19:49, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Akira Kurosawa[edit]

Hi there. Editor Dylanexpert has removed a {{non-free}} tag at Akira Kurosawa that had been placed there by Hammersoft, and re-inserted by me. His/her edit summary suggests you had deliberately removed the tag, although as far as I could see there had not been a discussion at the article talk page, and Hammersoft thought the removal had been inadvertent when you were reverting some other edits. Can you indicate whether it was your intention to remove the tag and, if so, why? I'd also welcome your input to a thread opened at the article talk page about the extended use of non-free content in the article. Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 23:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion on neo-noir and film noir[edit]

Hello. I saw you as one of the leading contributors of the outstanding article Film noir. Your knowledge of this particular area of cinematography could be valuable in the current proposal to merge the article neo-noir with film noir or maintaining it as a stand alone. Here's a wikilink to the discussion. Cheers and thank you for reading. -- Marco Guzman, Jr  Chat  06:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Milhist election has started![edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies talk 21:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect game II[edit]

Here are a couple of references on Ledee's catch. [6] is the most Reliable, but boring. [7] has some interesting material, but probably can't be used. Matchups 03:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be a pain![edit]

If you don't mind, could you have a look at the Roy Kilner FAC here? It has two supports but is a little lonely and I can't get anyone to review it for love nor money! And as always, your copy-editing is outstanding and would be appreciated. However, if you are cricketed out, I perfectly understand! Thanks. --Sarastro1 (talk) 10:56, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Any tips on how you created {{USA midsize imagemap with state names}}? I want to make one for New York State. Not sure how you determined the the correct coordinates. Thanks in advance for your help. upstateNYer 02:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pound[edit]

I intend to re-work the lead completely as per SlimVirgin's comments, so I wouldn't worry about fixing it at this point. I've requested to have the article delisted. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:55, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peace in our time? Dan we could use your help here. It got off to a bad start but, eh nothing that cant be resolved. Ceoil (talk) 09:53, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DCGeist - we've never interracted I don't think, but I want to apologize for my behavior on Thursday. The truth is, when I was building the article my vision was severely limited and during the composing process the comma use was inconsistent. Technically the abverbials should be followed by a comma, but my preference for dense on-line documents is to limit the comma usage for flow and ease of reading. When you posted your comments I was well aware you were absolutely right; I was also in the midst of severe migraine attack and completely incapable of fixing. Happily the migraine is gone, and the prose has been gone over since. I will have a look as well as soon as I'm finished addressing SlimVirgin's concerns. This may be more information than you need, but I hope we can put this behind us. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to let you know that the FAC has been archived and to thank you for taking a look. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pound lead[edit]

Sure, I can take a break now if you like, while you fiddle with it. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 19:08, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 19:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re Talk:United States[edit]

I didn't think that at all, I knew what you meant, no worries. :) --Golbez (talk) 22:07, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2[edit]

As a reviewer at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Magic Johnson, I thought you might consider commenting at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to help resurrect the House Wikiproject?--Talktome(Intelati) 03:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Galaxy responses complete[edit]

Hi -- just to let you know that I've now replied to all your points at the Galaxy FAC. I really appreciate the detailed review you've provided; it's a pleasure to respond when the reviewer has clearly read the article with care. I hope I've addressed everything; if not, just let me know what's outstanding. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 02:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit?[edit]

Thanks for the detailed copyedit you are providing for Galaxy Science Fiction. Would you be willing to lend you copyediting skills to another article one Galaxy is done? I am planning to nominate Venture Science Fiction at FAC after Galaxy, and though I've copyedited it myself there are always things that a fresh pair of eyes can spot. If you have time, and are interested, it would be very much appreciated. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 10:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I can still be surprising :) Seriously though, I hope I didn't offend you. I really feel that the table is better in every way (i.e. it's identical but larger, and more readable). I didn't mean to get off on a bad foot with you. If consensus was formed there that the image was better, I wouldn't stand in the way of FA status. Anyway – happy editing! I hope to see you around more. Regards, Jujutacular talk 16:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMF Data on US article[edit]

Since you are the one doing the reverting, can you explain your reasons here? --OuroborosCobra (talk) 04:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proselytizing[edit]

Are we at least in agreement that the word is used incorrectly in some articles as a contentious label? patsw (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In these examples there is no context for determining is the effort of religious conversion described as proselytizing is coercive:

Or are you looking for examples of usage where proselytizing is implicitly coercive rather than neutrally expressing the effort to convert? patsw (talk) 00:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an explanation of the usage where proselytize connotes forced conversion or conversion by inducement - Faith, freedom, and the future: religion in American political culture I believe that in current usage, this connotation is used in Wikipedia to assert without evidence that efforts religious conversion labelled with a form of proselytize are using force or inducement. patsw (talk) 10:51, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TCM FAC[edit]

When you stated that there were issues with the sourcing, were you referring to just the information being cited not being backed up by the source? Where were the issues at? I'm trying to help Taerkast fixing the sourcing issue, but I don't have the time to go through each source one by one because my real life job takes up quite a bit of my time. If you don't mind, where did you stop working through and where were you finding the issues primarily (e.g., was it every section, or just the sections about the film's themes and impact which would result in likely inaccurate assessments of statements?).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DC, that gives me an idea of what's going on. I trusted the editor working on the page enough that I didn't assume that those types of things would have existed. I'll see if I can salvage what's happened, but I don't suspect that this page will pass FAC right at this moment.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:50, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you'd like to comment on the FAC page on those issues which you raised before the oppose, I think I've addressed them, at least. But the article won't pass FAC, and perhaps GAR may also be needed.--The Taerkasten (talk) 19:48, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

United States[edit]

What is holding this back from FAC. I'll help out.--Iankap99 (talk) 20:57, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is currently underway at this section of the nonfree content review page. As you previously participated in a talk page discussion on this matter, you may be interested in participating. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:58, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so at this point, you're clearly in the minority on the nonfree images. I know you're very convinced of your position, but it does not seem to have anything approaching a consensus (and even in a "no consensus" result, nonfree media defaults to removal, since it is presumptively unacceptable). While I hate for things to go here, I'm not seeing any choices but to report this for edit warring, if this should continue. Is there another way we can resolve this? Seraphimblade Talk to me 12:28, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unofficial perfect games[edit]

Seeing the latest reversion of an unsourced comment, it occurred to me that, although I don't know for sure, it's possible there was no such thing as an "official" perfect game prior to 1991. As I recall, the Sporting News annual record book listed all these events and called them "perfect games", even though some were spoiled in extra innings and some were called due to rain or darkness or something. I think they had a separate section they called "less than 9 innings", but I'm not sure that conferred any "official" status to those games. I'll see if I can find anything on this. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:04, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 1992 baseball guide points out that the scoring committee in 1991 declared that change, along with abandoning the 154 vs. 162 games differentiation. It doesn't use the term "official" anywhere, but it said that about 50 games previously considered "no-hitters" were taken off the list. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote the above before I saw your note. It would take some digging to find my record books. But you're right, TSN's record book was considered "official" at one time. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Avengers-We Are The One.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Avengers-We Are The One.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:31, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The issues were fixed. Please check back. Thanks--CallMeNathanTalk2Me 03:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i again, I've gotten two copy-editors to fix up the prose, so I think its much better now. While it may not earn your support, if its good enough I hope you can consider at least removing your oppose. Thanks anyway--CallMeNathanTalk2Me 00:53, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About the demographics thing in the US article[edit]

Well, it's kinda confusing if there's like no note explaining that. There should be some kind of note saying that, like "People who identify as "some other race" are included in the White category." Not to mention then why does every article about cities include the "some other race" category as well? Just wondering. Cyanidethistles (talk) 19:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy DCGeist's Day![edit]

DCGeist has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
so I've officially declared today as DCGeist's Day!
For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian,
enjoy being the star of the day, DCGeist!

Signed, Neutralhomer

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day...NeutralhomerTalk • 05:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above is given on behalf of User:Maclean25. - NeutralhomerTalk • 05:01, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elvis Presley[edit]

Can you tell me why you reverted my edit on the Presley page? The recent discussion seemed to lean towards supporting my removal, and no one replied to my post with the new link about the issue? All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 03:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elvis Presley again[edit]

Please don't remove my edits without discussing with others first. I'm not some country simpleton that you can insult at will. Your actions are uncalled for, especially when the material is properly sourced. You're treading a fine line between arrogance and the crude disrespect of another editor. Santamoly (talk) 03:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DCGeist. You have new messages at Collect's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Consider this a final warning for misuse of rollback, this is also related to the above two sections. Please read WP:ROLLBACK and WP:VAND, and be sure to only use rollback in appropriate situations in future, where it will not inflame an issue. Cheers, - Kingpin13 (talk) 11:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Elvis Presley rollbacks[edit]

It's not proper WP etiquette to remove another editor's properly sourced & cited edits without discussion. You're out of order in this matter. I see from the above dialogue that you feel that you have a right to do this. Let me suggest to you that this not correct WP behaviour and will only make things difficult for everyone if you continue to behave in this disrespectful manner to others. If you have an urge to change another's edits, discuss it first before taking the axe to a valid and decent contribution. Santamoly (talk) 07:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Armored--Sekula.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Armored--Sekula.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

United States[edit]

I would like to get this article up to FA status, I have listed it for peer review, but do you know of any problems off hand that can be fixed, please respond on the article talk page so that all editors can see. Thanks --Iankap99 (talk) 01:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free material on punk rock[edit]

You probably have seen the discussion on a similar issue at Rock music#Non-free music files, but if you have not it might be of some use to you. The only solution here was a case-by-case discussion, which is still ongoing. I think a RfC to get this debated and to check against policy is a good move and I look forward with interest. I didn't contribute on the review for punk because I missed the link among all the postings on the talkpage.--SabreBD (talk) 20:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed you added in several hot links and relinked several things I delinked. I have several issues with this:

  1. There is no need to have a hatlink to something that is linked in the body of that paragraph. In fact the MOS says not too and it has been my experience with several GA, A class and FA or FL articles that they will need to be removed in order for the article to get promoted.
  2. There is no need to link common terms and have the article look like a sea of blue. It detrects from the article. There is no reason to link to things like baseball where nearly anyone in the world would know what your talking about.
  3. There are so many templates on this article that it exceeds the maximum template threshhold. This means that there are templates that cannot display.
  4. The article is over 165 K which means that it will open slowly (if at all) on some computers. Removing some of the extra unneeded links and templates will (and did) reduce that size a bit.

although things like Baseball, BBQ and apple pie are good cultural references they are common terms and do not need to be linked. I'm not going to get into an edit war over it but I would like to see this article make it through FA and it can't as it is.--Kumioko (talk) 16:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you again readded several links and images I removed from the United States article. I appreciate that you are watching this article but we need to remove some things off of it. The article is too big with too many templates and the bottom line is we need to chop some less important ones out. If you don't like the ones I am removing then you pick some to remove but we need to trim this article down if we ever want it to get promoted. --Kumioko (talk) 16:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, since you seem to have a prominent editing position in this article, why don't you help out by looking for an appropriate Statue of Liberty image rather than simply eliminating ones you don't like? I mean seriously, it's probably the leading icon of the USA, along with the flag. The article is definitely remiss sans. By the way, speaking of clutter, there's a picture of an apple pie, a religious institution, a ranch-style home, a writer, two current political figures, and an athlete - but no room for the Statue of Liberty? Castncoot (talk) 01:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ZepInParis.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ZepInParis.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Issues grid feedback[edit]

Since you mentioned in a recent FAC that you thought the issue grids I've been drawing work well, could I ask a favour? Would you mind taking a look at File:Planet Stories issues grid.png and telling me if the italics work? I need a way to distinguish issues dated "Fall 1946" from "November 1950"; the grid can't really do that very well by itself. I could also use bold text or underlining, but that would probably be too strong. I'd be glad of any comments. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talklibrary) 18:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's very helpful; and thanks for the catch on the Winter vertical. I'll try underlines and see how that looks. Mike Christie (talklibrary) 21:57, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done; and I fixed a couple of other problems, which I hadn't noticed with the italics. I think that's clear evidence that the underlines are better. Thanks again. Mike Christie (talklibrary) 22:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

non-free images RFC[edit]

Can you please start the proper RFC? I don't know how to. JDDJS (talk) 23:13, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you reverting all of my edits to Punk rock?[edit]

Why are you reverting every single edit I make to the Punk rock article? My edits are valid, you should not abbreviate the name of a band or anything on articles (for example: on the punk rock article, The Sex Pistols' name was abbreviated simply to "The Pistols", or if it's talking about an independent record label, "independent" is a better word than "indie"). And for my first edit I made that you reverted, the term "stars" is not an official word, it's not like The Living End became the Best of Orion or something after releasing an album, which is why it should be replaced with a better word. And I do not appreciate your attitude towards me for simple mistakes, bringing up every single thing I did wrong on the talk page simply because I started a section, talking about something that had absolutely nothing to do with what I am talking about. So I suggest that you be nice, and stop reverting all of my edits. --Blaguymonkey (talk) 02:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add a third opinion. Your revert here. Could you please comment properly? I can see reason why you might do this, but wouldn't want to guess. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:08, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@Escape Orbit Are you talking to me or DCGeist? I assume you are talking to DCGeist since he did not comment in the edit summary when he reverted my edit. --Blaguymonkey (talk) 10:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:BlackmailStill.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BlackmailStill.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—innotata 01:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The Beatles" versus "the Beatles"[edit]

There is currently a vote taking place and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 01:08, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell?[edit]

and start removing it from "everywhere else" as OR

instead of telling me what to do, you could actually offer to help, don't you think?--camr nag 14:16, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you'd think, right? anyway, i thought we could take this chart (sorted by country name) and do half each.--camr nag 14:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mongolian language[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Mongolian language has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments good article reassessment page . If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. RcsprinterGimme a message 17:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Statue[edit]

Thanks for continuing to keep an eye on the article. I try to, but it is often difficult to keep up, I have a long watchlist. I'm thinking about nominating it for October 28 for TFA, the 125th anniversary of dedication. I think that would be better than a July 4 run, because who watches Wikipedia on July 4?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:20, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep two eyes on this article, DCGeist.
You live in New York, I live in Paris. Your interests is movies, my interest is Paris.
The name of the island with the statue of Liberty is Île aux Cygnes.
Île des Cygnes is (or has been) the name of most other islands, great or little : Mauritius, near Annecy, Enghien, ...
And the most references from Google Books refer to another island in Paris, Île des Cygnes (former island) : look the notes.
Excuse my scholar english.
Bonne journée à New York--Rigoureux (talk) 19:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your English is far better then my French, and even better than my "scholar Spanish". I'm inclined to agree with you, given my looks at the French Wikipedia and Google earth, although Google earth is confusing, I'm gathering that part of the street that runs along the Île aux Cygnes is called the Île aux Cygnes ... well, I'll be in Paris myself in a week or so and can check it myself. I visited the statue on my student tour of Europe, in 1986. About time I saw the old flame again ... My apologies to your fair city.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pixies FAR[edit]

Hi DCGeist, how are you? We haven't been in contact lately, but I hope everything is going well for you. Lately, in addition to continuing WikiProject Dylan stuff, I have done some work on the Pixies FAR to try to save it from losing its FA status. It is now in the FARC stage but has been languishing there for quite a while because there have been no reviewers. If you have time, would you be interested in having a look? Either way, take care and I hope we have a chance to work together again sometime in the future. Bye for now, Moisejp (talk) 12:08, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit[edit]

A reason would be great, that's why we have edit summaries. The random order of this looks like shit. CTJF83 11:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Main page appearance[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on May 8, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 8, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 20:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


RFC discussion of User:Philip Baird Shearer[edit]

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Philip Baird Shearer (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Philip Baird Shearer. -- Parrot of Doom 11:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pulp Fiction is going through a GA review and has been placed on hold for seven days to allow issues to be addressed. Talk:Pulp Fiction/GA1. SilkTork *Tea time 18:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overdue[edit]

The Featured Article Medal
Awarded to DCGeist for repeated authorship of featured articles. Keep it up! MrMedal (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

USA ARTICLE[edit]

A GINI coefficient of 45 is a high one, why are you cancelling my adjustment — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ionutmortu (talkcontribs) 17:48, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alger Hiss Page[edit]

Mr. Geist, re your revision on Alger Hiss page, where you state that "Hissites" never appears in John V. Fleming's book on Cold War history, I refer you to page 292 of that work, last paragraph, opening sentence.http://www.amazon.com/Anti-Communist-Manifestos-Four-Books-Shaped/dp/0393069257/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309544229&sr=1-1#reader_0393069257 Please change your revision accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.77.99.104 (talk) 18:57, 1 July 2011 (UTC) 173.77.99.104 (talk) 18:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chain Saw[edit]

Hey, thanks for the additional copyediting. I'm not gonna let it slip by FAC, gonna try again soon. It's too close not to eventually become FAC. Thanks, --Tærkast (Discuss) 11:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Statue of Liberty[edit]

Are you the one who deleted that Emma Lazarus was a Jewish poet? If so, why?Looslion (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Looslion[reply]

Words to watch, Synonyms for said[edit]

Hi Dan, has the addition of "reported" to this section been discussed before, and if so, where? I'd be in favor of the addition. (I noticed the recent edit that included this, and your justified reversion of it, for reasons unrelated to the "reported" addition.) Thanks, Postpostmod (talk) 17:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick and friendly response. If you don't favor the addition, I'll leave it alone - if the more active editors of this page wanted it to be added, it would be already. I don't have a constituency.  ;-) Best regards, Postpostmod (talk) 22:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pulp Fiction[edit]

Hey DCGeist, could you let me know why you reverted what i added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonnym (talkcontribs) 20:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Manhattan Project[edit]

The Nuclear Barnstar
For your contributions to the featured article candidacy of the Manhattan Project Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre[edit]

You commented on a previous FAC for The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. Would you mind checking in at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Texas Chain Saw Massacre/archive6 to see whether your previous concerns have been addressed? Ucucha (talk) 01:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to say, whatever the outcome, you've done great work on the article. Thanks, --Tærkast (Discuss) 19:48, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

United States Dispute resolution noticeboard thread[edit]

Hi DCGeist, this is Mr. Stradivarius from the dispute resolution noticeboard. This is just to let you know that you're mentioned in the thread United States - foreign relations and military there. All the best. — Mr. Stradivarius 10:26, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:44, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Statue redux[edit]

I think the ZIP code is worth keeping and have commented on talk. Also cleared up some of the open questions on talk.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Research into the user pages of Wikipedians: Invitation to participate[edit]

Greetings,

My name is John-Paul and I am a student with the University of Alberta specializing in Communications and Technology.

I would like to include your Wikipedia user page in a study I am doing about how people present themselves online. I am interested in whether people see themselves in different ways, online and offline. One of the things I am looking at is how contributors to Wikipedia present themselves to each other through their user pages. Would you consider letting me include your user page in my study?

With your consent, I will read and analyze your user page, and ask you five short questions about it that will take about ten to fifteen minutes to answer. I am looking at about twenty user pages belonging to twenty different people. I will be looking at all user pages together, looking for common threads in the way people introduce themselves to other Wikipedians.

I hope that my research will help answer questions about how people collaborate, work together, and share knowledge. If you are open to participating in this study, please reply to this message, on your User Talk page or on mine. I will provide you with a complete description of my research, which you can use to decide if you want to participate.

Thank-you,

John-Paul Mcvea
University of Alberta
[email protected]

Johnpaulmcvea (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:ColorMeBloodRed.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:ColorMeBloodRed.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Alpha Quadrant talk 21:55, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Main page appearance: Film noir[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of Film noir know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 2, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 2, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Two silhouetted figures in The Big Combo. The film's cinematographer was John Alton, the creator of many of film noir's iconic images.

Film noir is a cinematic term used primarily to describe stylish Hollywood crime dramas, particularly those that emphasize cynical attitudes and sexual motivations. Hollywood's classic film noir period is generally regarded as stretching from the early 1940s to the late 1950s. Film noir of this era is associated with a low-key black-and-white visual style that has roots in German Expressionist cinematography. Many of the prototypical stories and much of the attitude of classic noir derive from the hardboiled school of crime fiction that emerged in the United States during the Depression. Film noir encompasses a range of plots. Though the noir mode was originally identified with American productions, films now customarily described as noir have been made around the world. Many pictures released from the 1960s onward share attributes with film noirs of the classic period, often treating noir conventions in a self-referential manner. Such latter-day works in a noir mode are often referred to as neo-noirs. The tropes of film noir have inspired parody since the mid-1940s. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ornstein-Sonata 7 M1.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ornstein-Sonata 7 M1.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:16, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:CKLWCoverage1.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CKLWCoverage1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:23, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect game cleanup[edit]

Thanks for fixing the ones I missed. I undid the one, but failed to check the history. I'm sure the editor meant well, but he's wrong. That's the way the ball bounces. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:23, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you're right about the editor's good intentions, but yes, this is one of those lovable idiosyncrasies that's part of baseball's charm (like, how 'bout the foul line that's actually fair?). Among idioms I cherish generally, I put it right up there with the Texas Leaguer and the Baltimore chop.—DCGeist (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • And this was good too. I always see you making good edits; I am sorry we have had some disagreements in the past and I want to say how much I appreciate the work you do here. --John (talk) 04:42, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I appreciate your nice message, John. Thanks for all the time and effort you put in to make this a better encyclopedia.—DCGeist (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, if I reacted too unpolite in the discussion. I made the edits in good faith. Watti Renew (talk) 17:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

as WP: Assume good faith, WP:Be polite, WP:Avoid personal attacks and welcome new editors. I point out that international readers may have different interests in the articles and start reading from the main country article, like United States. E.g. in Finland, people voted in May/2011 the climate change, population growth and water crisis among the three most serious problems of the world. Based on this, readers have wide interest to check: How does the US tackle the world population overpopulation, as its growth is from 1 billion in 1800 to 7 billion estimated in 31 October 2011 [8] Watti Renew (talk) 17:51, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Beatles/Years Active[edit]

There is a discussion occuring here involving debate about whether or not the Beatles were "active" during 1994-1996. Your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 22:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Content[edit]

Given your input here, I wondered if you could help me and SchroCat by reviewing this FL nomination. Thanks. igordebraga 15:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Free as a Bird" is a song performed by The Beatles.[edit]

There is a discussion here which may interest you. Radiopathy •talk• 18:20, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim that "I've watched this carefully: solid consensus developed, no counterarguments even offered" is patently false since there are several on the talk page. Absconded Northerner (talk) 08:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Main page appearance: Statue of Liberty[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of Statue of Liberty know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 28, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 28, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Statue of Liberty

The Statue of Liberty is a colossal neoclassical sculpture on Liberty Island in New York Harbor, designed by Frédéric Bartholdi and dedicated on October 28, 1886. The statue, a gift to the United States from the people of France, is of a robed female figure representing Libertas, the Roman goddess of freedom, who bears a torch and a tabula ansata (a tablet evoking the law) upon which is inscribed the date of American independence. It has become an iconic symbol of freedom and of the United States. Fundraising for the statue proved difficult, especially for the Americans, and by 1885 work on the statue's pedestal was threatened due to lack of funds. Publisher Joseph Pulitzer of the World initiated a drive for donations to complete the project, and the campaign inspired over 120,000 contributors, most of whom gave less than a dollar. The statue was constructed in France, shipped overseas in crates, and reassembled on the completed pedestal on what was then called Bedloe's Island. Its completion was marked by New York's first ticker-tape parade and a dedication ceremony presided over by President Grover Cleveland. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 00:03, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Threats[edit]

Please do not make threats as you did in your edit summary here. It is not acceptable behaviour on Wikipedia. Absconded Northerner (talk) 08:18, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011[edit]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Absconded Northerner (talk) 08:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:Free as a Bird, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Absconded Northerner (talk) 11:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not reinstate your personal attacks against me again. I have made no personal attack against you, despite several attempts by you to provoke me. If you make further attacks, I'll report you on the appropriate Administrator noticeboard. Absconded Northerner (talk) 12:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DCGeist. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Absconded Northerner (talk) 12:24, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:01, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TFA[edit]

in two minutes. Ah.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly is an interesting TFA. I'm now back for the duration. It looks odd to me too, but apparently it is "Sun" judging from the fact that a very good reviewer changed that in my new GA (waiting its turn for FA Walking Liberty half dollar.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Free as a Bird" proposed lede change[edit]

FYI, there is a vote taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 03:09, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi :D I am a fairly new editor to Wikipedia and I love everything about it. Well... I have been editing Wikipedia for about 4-5 years now but it's usually menial things or creating stub articles rather than working on already-made ones. I love to add to Wikipedia and want to help to grow and flourish, and have recently tried to challenge myself by bring a stab-class article up to GA/A/FA. A couple of days ago, I was hopping around the Wikipedia metapages and stumbled across the featured article talk page where they were discussing the neglect of vital articles - many are less than a C grade. So i decided to try my luck at tackling one. I chose mass media because it was a stub class and essentially a blank canvas to work with. I have done a lot of work, and have been able to salvage various bits and bobs from its previous edits (the article was rife with vandalism and disagreement and lots of stuff was deleted as a result) but now it is dormant. After a discussion on the FA talk page on how to proceed, I was redirected to you as a person who could perhaps give me some help in my endeavour. I have built on many sections - history, the intro, influence etc. but the article is still in a relatively bad shape. Perhaps you could offer me some assistance? Any would be greatly appreciated. :D--Coin945 (talk) 07:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this article before FAC?[edit]

Hi DCGeist, I'm hoping you can take a look at this article and provide any advice or suggestions for it before I nominate it at FAC. It's been through two peer reviews and recently passed GAN. I've been doing relatively minor improvements to it, such as updating some refs with links (tough for old magazine & newspaper articles). Looking at past FAC discussions, I've noted that non-free images are often a sticking point. I've tried to limit the number of non-free in the article, but perhaps you can give an assessment of whether it would past muster in that regard. Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 18:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Film stills[edit]

Hello there. You've come to my attention because I've noticed you've uploaded a number of film stills and given very convincing explanations of how they are PD. I'm currently working on the Katharine Hepburn article and slowly getting it ready for FAC. Many of the images on it are production stills, and it was suggested to me by the GA reviewer that I make the explanations more specific to each photo. I was wondering if you could take a look and offer me some advice on how to make the claim to PD watertight. For instance, where exactly do I need to search for copyright records (such as you've done here)? I'd be very grateful for any help. Seeing as you obviously have an interest in classic hollywood (I am seriously impressed by your film related articles by the way, the film noir one is just amazing) then maybe you could take a look at the article in general, and see if you have any suggestions? I'm always looking for help. Don't worry in the slightest if you are too busy or just un-interested though. I just thought I'd be cheeky and ask. :) --Lobo512 (talk) 21:59, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliments, coming from such an experienced editor that really means a lot. I can't even believe the article has come this far, I don't know how it happened haha. I'm in no rush at all to get it to FAC (as long as it's there by about...March, that should be fine, since I'd like it as TFA on May 12th, her birthday) so will happily wait for you to help whenever you can. The main thing I would hate is if I was made to remove the images, that would probably be enough for me to just say "oh well, forget it", so I want to get them perfect. About Morning Glory by the way, she did win an Oscar for it but it isn't really considered a classic, by any stretch. I selected that list based on her most enduring, continuously praised films (not my personal favourites, an objective estimation based on my film knowledge). There are a couple of others I'd put there before Morning Glory, personally, but if it is a really glaring omission, I'll add it. --Lobo512 (talk) 11:56, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello in the holidays![edit]

Hi. Hope all is well with you and yours. An editor has reverted James Bevel on the United States page, and another discussion has taken place on the talk page. Was wondering if you could have a read of that and join in. Thanks, and onwards to '12. Randy 21:44 23-12-'11

Orphaned non-free image File:Slade Classic Lineup.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Slade Classic Lineup.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hepburn images[edit]

Hey DCGeist. I hope you enjoyed the holidays. I was just wondering if perhaps you're available to give me a hand with the images on the Katharine Hepburn page? If you're still busy it doesn't need to be too much - just an explanation, perhaps a demonstration, of how is the best way to do it. I'd like to get it started quite soon since it will probably take a while (I'm going to reupload them all to the Commons as well) and I'm feeling motivated right now (it comes and goes in waves!) I can wait though if needed, there isn't any real pressure to get it started. Let me know. :) --Lobo512 (talk) 18:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've managed to sort this myself, so no worries. --Lobo512 (talk) 19:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Military Historian of the Year[edit]

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.[reply]

Hi,

This article Hollywood blacklist seems quite good to me. Also, it is an important topic of history, (although little thought about today, even though Dalton Trumbo just recently received justice for Roman Holiday). Why is it rated only a "C"?

Best wishes,

MathewTownsend (talk) 01:15, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Long time no chat[edit]

Funny enough I was browsing through the history of a Talking Heads single page and saw your name. It's been a while. How have you been? WesleyDodds (talk) 10:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:51, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re Hepburn audio[edit]

Hiya. Yeah, with a lot of research - I worked it all out. I'm practically an expert on US copyright law now, haha. Ridiculous, I'm not even American, and I've never been the most law abiding person. Anyway, I'm glad you think they are well done. Is there anything at all you can see that might be problematic? As for inserting an audio clip, that's certainly an interesting idea. I'm not sure there is the physical space for it though. Unless it went under characterisations? Or I suppose it doesn't have to go under the legacy section...I'd be open to the idea if you can think of a way to make it work (and if it's definitely okay to do).

By the way, the article is a featured article candidate right now. Would there be any chance of you dropping in to offer some comments? It would be fantastic to have input from someone who has written a related FA (RKO). Speaking of which, I seriously love your articles. I read over pretty much all of the RKO and Sound Film ones recently, they are so enjoyable! Seriously, I'm not trying to butter you up or anything, I genuinely have been meaning to say thank you for creating such interesting and informative stuff. I wish someone could get together an equally good article for MGM, they have such an interesting history... What's your next wikiproject (if you have one)? --Lobo (talk) 21:43, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'll have a think. I rewatched the Adam's Rib trailer and it doesn't really have any interesting lines (if it included that one "I refuse to expose myself to typical, masculine brutality!" that would be amazing, but allas).
I really hope you can comment at the FAC, that would be amazing. All the best, --Lobo (talk) 17:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, can I just ask your opinion, does this sound okay: "Hepburn's reputation holds her as one of America's finest actresses," ..? Or is that an awkward way of putting it? --Lobo (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it obviously was crap lol. For some reason I didn't want to do a simple statement, but now that you've done one I don't know why not! --Lobo (talk) 19:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh or the Bringing Up Baby trailer is PD! That one has some great lines. Or the Stage Door one has some typical, aggressive Hepburn. That would be nice b/c the article doesn't have any media from that yet. But I guess that brings us back to the issue of space...Is it possible to make sound files smaller, or are they always one size?
The FAC still hasn't managed to get any feedback. :( It's turning out to be rather anticlimatic! I know that I just need to be patient though... --Lobo (talk) 19:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"if you really want to have fun and be progressive, you could even incorporate Template:Audios into the caption text accompanying appropriate images." > Now that is an interesting idea! I actually really like that idea. It certainly would be unusual, but it would enhance the reader experience of the page so I don't see how anyone could seriously object. I may ask on the Commons, to double check, that it's okay to use trailer audio. I feel like it must be, since as soon as the trailer was published without copyright, all the images and audio therein must've irrevocably entered the public domain (since the trailer was published before the film) - right? But yeah I think I'll double check. Also, I'm afraid I don't know how to rip audio. Can it be done with a regular media player, eg VLC? --Lobo (talk) 19:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yay I added one, from Stage Door! I love it! I've decided to keep it simple and just include one, after the comment about her voice. But I think this is great. I hope it doesn't encounter problems, it really brings her to life. This was such a good idea, thanks DC! --Lobo (talk) 18:15, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had the option of having it cut off in the middle of that word ("people"), or start off on a whole new sentence and cut off in the middle of another word. I couldn't make it stop exactly in the right place (I used a different program than the one you suggested, because that wasn't available for Windows).
As for that sentence in the lead, I wrote it like this "..and the medium was where she found her greatest success in her later years." I recently asked someone to look over the lead for me, and she then gave that sentence a tweak to what you see now. My way was a bit long, her way is a bit unclear. I dunno, can you think of a good way to phrase it? I do think it's accurate to say TV was Hep's biggest success then. On Golden Pond was very much a one-off, all her other features (from The Lion in Winter onwards) flopped. Whereas her TV work was popular and she got loads of award nominations. This isn't just my thinking either, I've read it said about her a few times. I understand if you're saying it comes off a bit contradictory though...Let me know if you have any ideas on how to make it work. --Lobo (talk) 07:28, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I've just given it a small change for now, I'll think about it more later. Gotta get to work! --Lobo (talk) 07:38, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

United States Article[edit]

I would like to get this article up to FA status, I see that you are very active on the article, would you like to join me on this task? --Iankap99 (talk) 02:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Project Punk Newsletter: February 2012 (Volume III, Issue I)[edit]

Announcements and news for WikiProject Punk music

February 2012:

Updates:

Articles

Features

  • If you see a picture, article, list list that lives up to the corresponding featured criteria, please nominate it.

Delivered by In actu (Guerillero) on behalf of WikiProject Punk. You are receiving this because your user name is listed in Category:WikiProject Punk music members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile, remove the category from your profile, and/or move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list. Thanks.

 I thought you might be somewhat interested in this 16:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

RFC/U[edit]

Dan, have you looked at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/DocKino? It seems no-one had the courtesy to notify you that Onefortyone (talk · contribs) calls you out as a sock of DocKino here. Whether or not you take the accusation seriously, I thought you should at least know about it. --Laser brain (talk) 16:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks very much for going through the Hepburn article and doing some copy editing. I may have to tweak a couple of things to make sure they're still matching the sources, but on the whole I'm happy with everything you did. :)

About the Holiday comment by the way, I just want to make clear that I was never trying to claim it was sourced to Edwards. I know that she suggests it was the storyline that caused its failure (which is just her interpretation...one that doesn't make much sense to me, because audiences loved escapism from the depression). I was using the source to ref "failed to be a hit". I can see that my sentence was thus a bit too interpretive on my own part, though (although it is certainly alluded to in Berg and Higham), so it probably is best not to give any explanation for its failure. But so long as you don't think I was intentionally misusing a source, because that would be really bad. --Lobo (talk) 07:50, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay good, I just wanted to make sure you hadn't thought I was being sneaky! What you said makes sense, and I fully trust your judgment. The sentence isn't really needed. And now it frees up a lil bit of space for me to add a bit more about the film. It's up there with her most popular, but there's barely anything said about it in the article right now. It's such a typical Hepburn role as well (rich girl rebelling against convention), it would be nice to mention that. But I was worried about the space before. I'll see if I can make a sentence about it flow with the rest of the text.
Are you a Chaplin fan then? I absolutely love him. Luckilly (you may have noticed on my talk page) someone else has come forward who's interested in improving the article. That's going to be a help, and will motivate me. I really want him to have the article he deserves. What sort of films/filmmakers do you like by the way? I'm guessing film noir and B movies are up there?! I love the former, but not so much the latter. Are there any articles you're actively working on right now, or planning to? --Lobo (talk) 21:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We sound similar with films, my tastes are also very broad but with a fairly typical "film snob" leaning. I've only been a proper film fanatic for a couple of years though, so I still have tons of stuff to see. Fassbinder for instance - I've unfortunately only seen a couple of his films. I really like his style though, I need to see more. For a while now I've been very focussed on classic Hollywood. I just love watching all those great old stars. :) Buster Keaton is wonderful too (I saw The Navigator on the big screen last summer, so good!), but I think I prefer Chaplin because I love his social commentary. But to be honest, Sherlock Jr is possibly better than anything Chaplin made. It is a marvel.
Film director articles are, on the whole, pretty pathetic on wikipedia. Especially non-Americans (even someone like Ingmar Bergman, about whom there's so much to say, only has a very basic biography). It's a big shame. I know it's hard to do much on WP when you work, though. But definitely help out with Chaplin where you can. I've just told Trueheatsusie I won't be able to work on it for a few more weeks, but I'm encouraging her to get it moving as soon as possible. --Lobo (talk) 18:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article restructuring at the Beatles[edit]

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 01:34, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Film noir page revert[edit]

Dear Mr. Geist. What you label "cleanup" is simply an outright revert of a good faith copyedit made to the above article. It appears from your revert pattern on that page you have begun to take ownership of Film noir. This is always cause for pause and reflection.

I have revised the passage at issue to retain the words of the original language yet achieve the desired intent, toning down the effectively 1st person tone of the original (which read as though the article's author finds distinguishing the two periods hard rather than the authorities they cite experiencing the difficulty). I do not expect to see another summary revert. Yours. Wikiuser100 (talk) 10:45, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pulp Fiction GA[edit]

I am reviewing the article for GA status and have left some suggestions on the review. RAP (talk) 22:24 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Current/Past Members of the Beatles[edit]

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback[edit]

Rollback what? Are you threatening to erase my unrelated edits? I was merely being bold, as the version you reverted had not yet been tried. Why don't you weigh-in on the subject, your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I hear you, but really, two or three editors are not budging at all, with no compromise in sight. I do not consider their efforts to be good faith attempts to improve the article, and find a solution to this obvious problem. — GabeMc (talk) 00:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just meant there is an effort to protect the status quo at all costs, and without offering any solutions. Come on, you know how it is at the Beatles and elsewhere I'm sure. "That's the way it is" is not an arguement against article improvement IMO. — GabeMc (talk) 00:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Case in point here. At first Steelbeard argued that teh most prominent line-up should receive distinction, now he has reversed and is arguing why do we put Ringo above Stu and Pete, which he is actually defending. This is way more tedious then it needs to be, and teh quality of Wikipedia suffers for this kind of blind status quo defense. — GabeMc (talk) 01:11, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this diff if you want to know what I am dealing with. — GabeMc (talk) 01:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you at least explain to me why you remain neutral on the issue? — GabeMc (talk) 02:27, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • You asked for diffs, so please look at these two, just 1.5 hours apart: here and here this is one reason why Wikipedia loses good editors IMO, smart people don't go on forever banging their heads to improve articles against editors who have put in a fraction of the time and hardly own a source on the subject, basing most of their votes on their gut feeling versus having a good encyclopedia in mind, hence my questioning good-faith. Even mothers with Munchausen by proxy love their children. — GabeMc (talk) 03:40, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you shouldn't use roll-back for perceived edit-warring, its meant for vandalism only. Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. — GabeMc (talk) 07:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2nd Straw Poll[edit]

There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 01:03, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect games[edit]

Recentism, too much detail, etc. One of the stranger endings to a perfect game. Yet how many times have you seen a guy start for first after what he decides is ball four, and the umpire calls a strike maybe just for showing him up. In this case, the bozo stood there and argued instead of running to first. Like anybody ever gets an umpire to reverse a strike call. How much do they pay these guys? I bet you and I could do just as well, for considerably less money. I found a youtube entry for the 1941 World Series, in which the Dodgers had a lead in the top of the ninth, and Tommy Henrich made a half-swing on strike three and the ball got away. But he didn't gripe, he dashed to first, safely. Then the Yankees wrecking crew proceeded to demolish the Dodgers. What a difference it can make when you "do your job" instead of grousing. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't watched the play as many times as you have, and you can tell me if you think he really went or not. I think the strike was questionable, but the call is what it is, and the batter needs to do what he needs to do. The case of Galarraga is tragic in its own way. Selig could have acted "in the best interests of baseball" and overridden the umpire's call and made most everyone happy. But he was probably scared to death of creating a precedent. I'm reminded also of batters who stand there and let strike 3 go by because "it wasn't my pitch". As Joe Morgan once said, in reference to someone taking a called third strike in a crucial situation, "You've gotta be up there hackin'." A third strike swinging means that you at least made the effort. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Editor's Barnstar
For your contributions over the years to Statue of Liberty. Wehwalt (talk) 16:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious, but perhaps ignorant[edit]

   What's "gf"? (Reply on yr tk pg is fine.)
--Jerzyt 18:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jerzy. So, "gf" is Wikipedia editors' shorthand for "good faith." You'll sometimes see it in edit summaries in a case like this one, where an anonymous contributor has been reverted, to signal to those patrolling for vandalism that there's no red flag here (the majority of vandalism does come from anons). Or it might appear in a reversion of an experienced editor as a quick way of indicating, "I may strongly disagree, but I know you meant well and am happy to discuss it on the article's Talk page."
There's certainly no need to feel ignorant. There's a lot of Wikipedia shorthand, probably too much, and even after editing for six and a half years, I can't follow nearly all of it. Best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 19:10, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AGF has gotten drilled in deep enuf that i missed the "obvious" resemblance of "gf". Tnx!
--Jerzyt 06:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paul McCartney FAC[edit]

I am sure you are a busy editor, with much else to do, however, we could really use your insight on the punctuation issues at Paul McCartney. Maybe you could find a little time to give the article a quick once-over, I'm not asking for much commitment, perhaps just fix a couple of the issues I am not seeing. If not, I completely understand, but maybe you could recommend someone who may have the time and willingness to help out a bit. Thanks again. ~ GabeMc (talk) 22:59, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Casing changes in quotes[edit]

   I don't care to contest your recent edit to House (TV series), but do you know whether there's a guideline one way or the other? I ask bcz what you removed recognizes a distinction required, if i understand correctly, in e.g. filings with a court.
   IMO it's a desirable measure for us, in order to more clearly reject the tendency of editors to put paraphrases inside q-marks, even if the phrase or word in quotes is a quotation at most in the sense of

My go-with-your-gut self is comfortable describing it w/ this/these words, so if you don't like the way i've put it, cowboy-up, my-responsible-WP-editor self is just quoting my go-by-your-gut self, who takes the responsibility for any imprecision.

--Jerzyt 22:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

   You responded on my talk, at 22:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC):
I have not been able to locate any current Wikipedia MOS guideline on the matter, but every current style guide with which I am familiar encourages the silent change of case in quotations where grammatically called for, except for (a) as you note, in legal contexts and (b) when the source is a historical document in which many words other than proper nouns are capitalized. Obviously, neither exception applies to reviews of House.
   Thanks! And your views are IMO sound. My expectation is that i'll adopt a "contribs by me in a WP discussion" exception, but stop making work for you in articles. [smile]
--Jerzyt 22:38, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

I've ordered the MLA and Chicago MoS as well as the Oxford guide to British English, so that next time around, I will be more prepared to deal with the specific grammar issues I cannot currently identify. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Civility warning[edit]

As far as your comment: "the only real horror here is GabeMc's abusive treatment of those who displease him". This is a personal attack which could cause defamation of my character, also known as libel. I respectfully request that you strike the comment. I will consider filing an ANI report should you decide not to. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I redacted the accusation that your oppose had anything to do with "The/the", as well as the "sour grapes" bit", but as far as the rest. We were currently in content disputes at another article, and an admin has confirmed that your actions at FAC were less than proper. You can't oppose someone when you are actively disputing something else, that is common sense IMO. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 22:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The nominator is not well versed in English grammar" is a personal attack on me, and as such, it too should be redacted IMO. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:05, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh? Well, not in my opinion. I view it as a statement of fact that is (a) well evidenced by your compositional efforts on The Beatles and Paul McCartney and (b) highly relevant to your desire to compose and contribute to Featured Articles and the sort of help you currently need to do so. I will be more than happy to redact the observation when (a) your grammar shows significant improvement and (b) you apologize for your unprovoked personalization of the McCartney FAC discussion, which included many disparaging and dismissive comments about me (all of which, of course, preceded the description of your grammar skills that you now wish to be redacted). It's nice that you have struck out the very worst of your comments, but you have never apologized for taking us down the road of personal conflict in the first place.—DCGeist (talk) 06:28, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Which comments do you want me to strike? I thought I redacted them all, if I missed any it was by accident. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 08:28, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sgt. Pepper straw poll[edit]

There is currently a straw poll taking place here. Your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Major film studio's Mini-major argument an3-notice[edit]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Mini-major studios[edit]

I don't mean to bother you, but may I ask you something? Is the list for mini-majors under Major film studio correct? (i.e. Summit, CBS Films, Open Road, etc) I just want to make sure for verification because of the changes going on. King Shadeed 15:42, July 9, 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)[edit]

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at [email protected]. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Main page appearance: RKO Pictures[edit]

This is a note to let the main editors of RKO Pictures know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 15, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 15, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

RKO Pictures is an American film production and distribution company. It was one of the Big Five studios of Hollywood's Golden Age. The business was formed after the Keith-Albee-Orpheum (KAO) theater chains and Joseph P. Kennedy's Film Booking Offices of America (FBO) studio were brought together under the control of the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) in October 1928. RKO has long been celebrated for its cycle of musicals starring Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers in the mid- to late 1930s. Actors Katharine Hepburn and, later, Robert Mitchum had their first major successes at the studio. Cary Grant was a mainstay for years. The work of producer Val Lewton's low-budget horror unit and RKO's many ventures into the field now known as film noir have been acclaimed by film critics and historians. The studio produced two of the most famous films in motion picture history: King Kong and Citizen Kane. Maverick industrialist Howard Hughes took over RKO in 1948. After years of decline under his control, the studio was acquired by the General Tire and Rubber Company in 1955. The original RKO Pictures ceased production in 1957 and was effectively dissolved two years later. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Precious[edit]

most famous films
Thank you for giving us the broader picture in the background of some of the most famous films, and for low-key black-and-white at the other end, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (26 December 2010)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 183rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject invitation[edit]

Howdy, DCGeist!
Your editing history indicates that you may be interested in joining the new Westerns WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve and maintain Wikipedia's coverage of fictional Wild West articles. If you are interested in participating, you are welcome to sign up at the project page. We hope you will join us!
Ma®©usBritish{chat} 03:30, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Military history coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the projectwhat coordinators do) 08:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:LittleCaesarCover.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:LittleCaesarCover.jpg. 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dan, it looks like you've been gone a few months. That's too bad; you're a great editor. I know you've been one of the primary contributors to the punk rock article, and there's a dispute going on there between myself an a new editor who's trying to posit the '60s garage rock acts as the "original" punk rock movement, insisting on adding disclaimers to the article's lead sentence like "Punk rock, as we know it today..." or "Punk rock, in its modern form...". In my opinion this is wholly unnecessary and gives undue weight to the '60s acts, who (though unquestionably influential) are not widely recognized as being of the "punk rock" genre in the relevant sources. There is a discussion about this on the article's talk page, and I wonder if you might offer your thoughts on the matter. Thanks. --IllaZilla (talk) 08:56, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dan, hope you're well. Moisejp & I are trying to take this article further down Highway 61 to FA. Your comments would be appreciated. Best wishes, Mick gold (talk) 08:25, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mail[edit]

Hello, DCGeist. Please check your e-mail – you've got mail!
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Firsfron of Ronchester 20:01, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:17, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Ornstein40.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Ornstein40.jpg. 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:02, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Leo Ornstein around 90.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Leo Ornstein around 90.jpg. 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:07, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:RosenblattJazzSinger.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:RosenblattJazzSinger.jpg. 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 04:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Largest cities and metro areas of the United States has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Largest cities of the United States has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:JolsonJazz Singer.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JolsonJazz Singer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cowell-Dynamic Motion.ogg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Cowell-Dynamic Motion.ogg. 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 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cowell-Piano Concerto M3.ogg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Cowell-Piano Concerto M3.ogg. 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 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cowell-Quartet Euphometric.ogg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Cowell-Quartet Euphometric.ogg. 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 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alger Hiss RFC[edit]

Hi DC. There is a Request for Comment on the Alger Hiss Talk page. I see you haven't edited in a while, but if you see this, could you please help us out by commenting on the RFC as to whether you support or oppose the changes the editor wants to make? Thanks! Joegoodfriend (talk) 05:11, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this edit wich (at last) got us rid of the "Ätzttussis" typing error. I still wonder why this couldn't be done years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jochim Schiller (talkcontribs) 15:40, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 17:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter[edit]

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration


Read the full newsletter



Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library Survey[edit]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:31, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

most famous films
Thank you for giving us the broader picture in the background of some of the most famous films, and for low-key black-and-white at the other end, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (26 December 2010)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two years ago, you were the 183rd recipient of my PumpkinSkyPrize, repeated in br'erly style, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seven years years ago, you were recipient no. 183 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:CharlesWilliams(US).jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CharlesWilliams(US).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:06, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CII, September 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014, Redux[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

NOTE: This replaces the earlier October 2014 Bugle message, which had incorrect links -- please ignore/delete the previous message. Thank uou!

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:DonnieDarkoStill.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DonnieDarkoStill.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ElviraMidnightMadness.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ElviraMidnightMadness.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:17, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:InvocationImage2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:InvocationImage2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:45, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ScarecrowGarden.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ScarecrowGarden.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:14, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open![edit]

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CV, December 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BrickScreenshot.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BrickScreenshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you should pop in...[edit]

Please look for your name at User:Dweller/Featured Articles that haven't been on Main Page! --Dweller (talk) 10:29, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PulpUSPoster2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PulpUSPoster2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:03, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:58, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXV, September 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXVI, October 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXVII, November 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXVIII, December 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXIX, January 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXX, February 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 04:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXI, March 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXII, April 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIII, May 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIV, June 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXV, July 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVI, August 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVII, September 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVIII, October 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIX, November 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXL, December 2017[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:16, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User group for Military Historians[edit]

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLI, January 2018[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back[edit]

It's nice to see you in action again. --Laser brain (talk) 12:54, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You personal do not determine (nor any one else) which studios/production company are major studios or mini-major studios. Amblin Partners is the successor to DreamWorks Studios which has been sourced as a mini-major studio even when it has not distributed films. CBS Films gave up distributing films in a deal with Lionsgate and is still consider a mini-major. MGM was for a while not distributing its own films, until Orion Pictures and now its distribution joint venture with Anamupura Pictures was set up. Spshu (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed at length at the talk page. It in fact started with you. You need to comply with sourcing requirements. Response to your ultimatium at my talk page was made there.
You need to cease edit warring in ignoring a core policy: Wikipedia:Sourcing. Spshu (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited RKO Pictures, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dixiana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An/I[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Harout72 (talk) 12:17, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

Orphaned non-free image File:Banksy Pulp Fiction Mural.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Banksy Pulp Fiction Mural.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PulpFictionGuns.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PulpFictionGuns.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:46, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PulpFictionTwist.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PulpFictionTwist.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:47, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sunset Bouevlard Title Cue.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sunset Bouevlard Title Cue.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:CowellSchirmer.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:CowellSchirmer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:13, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MarleneSmokes2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MarleneSmokes2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Clash-Train in Vain.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Clash-Train in Vain.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MarleneSmokes2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MarleneSmokes2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:32, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The file File:Leo Ornstein (cropped).jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MadsenHotSpot2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MadsenHotSpot2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago[edit]

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The file File:Wire-Reuters.ogg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lyrics and music of the sample insufficiently covered by critical commentary. May fail WP:NFCC#8.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Crime-Hot Wire My Heart.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Crime-Hot Wire My Heart.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:All The Small Things.ogg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:All The Small Things.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Television-Blank Gen (Live).ogg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Television-Blank Gen (Live).ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 08:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Metal Urbain-Panik.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Metal Urbain-Panik.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clash-The Guns of Brixton.ogg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Clash-The Guns of Brixton.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:R Thompson-1952 Vincent.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:R Thompson-1952 Vincent.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ramones-Blitzkrieg Bop.ogg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ramones-Blitzkrieg Bop.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Germs Forming.ogg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Germs Forming.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Amadeo Roldán.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Amadeo Roldán.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:12, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:StrengthThruOi.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:StrengthThruOi.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

The file File:Clash-Complete Control.ogg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Insufficiently supported by critical commentary of Complete Control. May fail WP:NFCC#8.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Criterion8tag[edit]

Template:Criterion8tag has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 05:50, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BloodSimplePoster.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BloodSimplePoster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Primer Carruth.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Primer Carruth.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ornstein-Suicide Airplane.ogg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ornstein-Suicide Airplane.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:49, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]