User talk:Rossrs/archive5

Forgot tag sorry1 Its done ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 12:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your're welcome -I have created tags to give a standard rationale which are now being used by other users I believe. If the rationale is given then it should qualify if the image cannot be replaced. Thanks for bringing the image to my attention. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 12:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Nehrams2020 09:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes first of all I am using the year categories to put the titles into the pages removing pbvious foreign titles first. Then when this is done I was going to go through the lists and add the details and at the same time remove non American films -but it would take a great deal of time by myself!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 10:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting -1960 already looks the best list!!! If you could add like this or a small amount when you can - that would be a terrific help. All the best ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 13:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When completed I'll go through imdb by year and add all the missing films and start the articles so eventually we should have a complete coverage of films and hopefully the stubs can become better articles. It will be a great resource for summarizing US film. Regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 13:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,Rossrs
I recently did a few minor tidy-ups on the The Sullivans article.
As you started the article, you may perhaps be interested in its progress.
--Shirt58 11:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. It was nice chatting with you over on the actors group page. Since you seem to be a wise and experienced Wikipedian, I wanted to ask you if you wouldn't mind taking a look at one of the pages I've spent the most time on: Cillian Murphy. I still have several things in mind to upgrade, but I would love to get your perspective on what it needs, if you have time. Thanks! --Melty girl 15:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your very helpful comments on Cillian Murphy. You've encouraged me to be bolder about making improvements to the page. And you've given me some very specific things to work on in the next few weeks. So far, I've edited down the lead, but I only felt comfortable removing those citations for facts which are also used below; the others stated opinions about what he's known for, so I felt safer keeping the footnotes. At any rate, I expect to have the article in better shape soon. Do you know what the favored way is to have it reviewed or featured? --Melty girl 20:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!! --Melty girl 20:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:BarbaraKent.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 08:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:BelindaLee.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 09:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I've always fought for infoboxes in the articles, but the majority seems against them. For a while I kept adding them back into the articles too, but it seemed like a waste of time. I still prefer the infoboxes in the articles, but there's not much I can do about it. Sorry if I seemed rude, but I'm not that experienced in that area of Wikipedia - I've always just added to articles and that's about it. Thanks for your message,
NewYork1956 22:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:MohawkDVDCover.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 03:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I saw they sent you that "fair use" BS and I hate that. They deleted several months worth photos I had added because of that garbage so I usually do that when I see people having problems with fair use rational. That's a major problem on Wikipedia because instead of After Midnight helping you out and putting it in himself, he'd rather be lazy and have the image deleted.
NewYork1956 22:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i've noticed lately that you've been diligently removing flagicons from infoboxes. which has only been matched by Italianlover07 (talk · contribs) who continually re-adds them back....with us state flags. i was wondering if you have any suggestions for handling the dude. --emerson7 | Talk 18:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The July 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 19:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		Great Teamwork Barnstar
		I would like to award you this barnstar for being an active part of the team working towards the improvement of the {{Infobox actor}} template. It has been a great pleasure and I look forward to more such collaborative work. -- Kudret abi 20:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, that's what you get when you copy & paste. :) Thanks for the fix. Garion96 (talk) 14:08, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! I would love to get your take on my many improvements to Cillian Murphy since you last gave me (amazingly helpful) feedback. The article has been nominated for GA status. While I feel good about that and the modifications I've made recently, I did want to do a few more things for nominating it for GA (particularly in regard to the early part of his career, his most recent role in Danny Boyle's Sunshine and the lead section). Still, I'm hoping that this nomination is a good thing and not premature! I would love to get your feedback (and edits?), especially for the lead section. If you have time to take a look, please be as picky and detailed as you can in regard to GA standards. Thanks! --Melty girl 18:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for taking a look at the article! Your previous feedback was invaluable in guiding me towards bringing it up to GA standards.

Good point about negative reviews. At this point, it seems as though Murphy's arty resume and performances have made him very well-liked by major reviewers, but I can probably find something negative about Breakfast on Pluto. Men playing trans women tend to get at least some negative reviews, though I'm often suspect of transphobia in them. I found it very interesting, from a socio-political perspective, to compare reviews of Murphy in Pluto and Felicity Huffman in Transamerica, which came out at the same time. But I digress...

And thanks for helping out with the Red Eye image. As a Wiki newbie, I'm still somewhat confused by image and copyright issues. I was pleased, however, to find the candid photo of him on Flickr and get the photographer to license it, and I learned more about Wiki and copyright in the process. I would like to add one more image to the page, of Murphy in drag in Breakfast on Pluto -- I think that would make sense, rationale-wise, don't you?

Now I'm wondering how long the GA process usually takes. --Melty girl 16:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue has been resolved as to the photos noteworthiness and keeping and if you read the fair use rationale you see that there is no questions as to its fair use. These is a widely used photograph and because you are arguing its legal rights and copyright infringement the fair use rationale according to the copyright law expalins it, so drop it! Don't you read the fair use rationale on any photos, im a copyright lawyer, i know and because this info is by law "The fair use of a copyrighted work...for purposes such as criticism, comment,...scholarship...is not an infringement of copyright." and because the criticsm on this pic has already been deemed to be noteworthy to keep (read the discussion comments) this photo by law reflects the intent of section 107 of the United States Copyright Act of 1976 and stays. Also, This image was nominated for deletion on 2007 July 6. The result of the discussion was keep. Therefore because of its noteworthiness and if falls within the copyright requirements of section 107, it requires no tag. If you want to legally (fair use tag) challenge this go ahead, it will open up a lot of fun other challenges. And to just site Wiki policy will not change the facts. (Sharkentile 00:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

I'm not particularly worried about the image, but any user has the right to question the fairness of an image if it is being used with a fair use claim. User talk:BigrTex questioned it, and the tag was immediately removed. That assumes bad faith. The message that you left on my user page should have been left on User talk:BigrTex's user page, because this is the user that questions the validity of the use. Also, the tag should remain on the page until it's been resolved or if you have a reason to remove it, you should play fair and say why. There is a talk page for the image, there is also an edit summary, and you didn't use either of these options, and I guess I wasn't able to read your mind and know what you were thinking. But then again, I didn't know it was you because you weren't logged in when you made those edits. All I did was restore the tag. You really should leave a message on User talk:BigrTex's page if you disagree with him tagging it in the first place.

I didn't realize that you were a copyright lawyer. That's very interesting. Rossrs 13:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't ya think that makes WP look like it doesn't have standard? Wikipedian 12:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, if I thought that I would not have done it. I explained why I added it, but I don't really understand your question. Can you please explain what you mean? Rossrs 13:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nm. Ty for replyin', though. :) Wikipedian 14:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:33, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The August 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 13:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An automatic notification by BrownBot 01:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:JuliaStilesWicked.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Quentin X 16:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you're on vacation, but if you have a chance -- and the inclination -- check out Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emma Watson. I peer reviewed Emma Watson in order to give something back when I requested peer review for Cillian Murphy. And now I'm the only person so far who's given comments that dig deeply on the Emma Watson FAC review. You were such a great help to me when I asked for guidance on improving Cillian Murphy, and I know you would give such wise counsel and feedback to these editors. I've written some extensive criticism, but I'm betting you could say it better and then some. So, if possible... check it out.

Cillian Murphy just made GA and A-class, so thanks again for your help! I think it's ready for FAC now, but I wonder about something you might be able to answer: I've noticed that even in FA articles, awards lists/tables don't tend to be footnoted. Do you know what the rationale for this is? I've been wondering if I should offer citations or not before braving FAC. --Melty girl 01:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've missed you around these parts. Just wanted to drop in and add a post-script to this now-outdated message. Emma Watson made some progress, including adding critical and box office info to the article, and other reviewers ended up joining in. Ultimately, it wasn't fixed up in time to make it through FAC. It was an interesting and valuable process though, and I'm sure it will be renominated, because the editors are quite passionate about the subject!

Also, I did end up nominating Cillian Murphy for FAC -- after adding footnotes for the awards -- and the review is still open, though I have no idea how much longer it will be open. It's been a little bit strange, though I guess that's to be expected, since it was my first time nominating. There haven't been many reviewers, though there have been three supports and one comment/discussion. The other two have opposed. One reviewer objected, though the comments made it seem like he hadn't read past the lead and one example of a problem was a misquote... and then he never returned to discuss changes, despite a respectful message left on his talk page. The other objector, the only person to assert that "extensive copyediting" was needed, made weak and sometimes incorrect edits to the page, so I was not sure how to handle it. It seems like you're supposed to try to please whoever happens to come along and tells you to change something, but what do you do when the person is reducing the prose's quality? It was unexpected, and I don't know if I handled it correctly, but the reviewer seems to have quit the discussion after I opposed many of her edits (from a stated grammar, style and factual standpoint, of course). Perhaps I bungled... I daresay you would have handled the situation with more diplomacy. :) --Melty girl 23:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there -- so nice to hear from you! I appreciate your reading through the FAC review and giving me your take on it, as well as your observations about the process in general. I feel a bit reassured about my responses. I thought for sure the FAC was going to be closed yesterday, but instead, it was moved up to the top, so perhaps the FA director hopes that it will find more reviewers that way -- a good sign, I would think. We'll see what happens. Thanks for the encouragement. --Melty girl 16:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and thanks for the edits, too! :) --Melty girl 16:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to laugh now, having finally gotten down my watchlist to the FAC. Thanks for your support -- funny that it was the last thing I noticed this morning. --Melty girl 16:26, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Sheila.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- lucasbfr ^talk 07:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Please note that special delivery options have been reset and ignored for this issue due to the revamp of the membership list (outlined in further detail in the newsletter). If you would like to change your delivery settings for future issues, please follow the above link. I apologize for the inconvenience. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 23:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi do you think you could help fill in the cast for the American films. I've been going through and adding all the details except cast. E.g please can you help fill in the cast of American films of 1958 etc. I am doing the even years fist and really need some help from at least somebody. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 15:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Lola Lane (porn star), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. B. Wolterding 17:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Just wanted to let you know that I've renominated Cillian Murphy for FA -- it got closed with 8 supports and 3 opposes, and one of the latter has encouraged me to renominate. If you are around, I would so appreciate your support. Thanks! Melty girl 01:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Frank has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --lincalinca 03:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:PicnicMovie.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Burstmeets 05:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:JackBuetelinTheOutlaw.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Burstmeets 23:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there -- are you still active as a member of the Fair Use project? There's a user who is on a personal campaign against any fair use images in biography articles, and he's out to kill the three fair use images in Cillian Murphy, despite the FA of but two weeks ago. If you have any time to weigh in, I'd appreciate it. See my talk page for how I got dragged into this, and then see Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content#Fair_use_images_of_celebs_in_Biography_article.3F. This editor thinks that a free image of an actor is sufficient and has no grasp of the difference between that and images of fictional roles. All high quality actor articles could soon be under attack. (In this visual Internet age and with fair use rules, why do some WP users want to eliminate images?!?) Thanks! --Melty girl (talk) 16:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for lending your level-headed self to this ridiculousness. Why do some people in every community spend all their time trying to tear down good work? Humans are weird. This is such an overreach legally and such a simple-minded, ignorant-of-art response. If they insist on deleting the drag photo, I will have to conclude that they are having a religious response, not a reasoned one. Is there any recourse for this totally inappropriate delete? --Melty girl (talk) 06:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• m:Template:Wikipedian associations
• m:Conflicting Wikipedia philosophies

I'm early into reading them myself. They remind me of recent pleasant discussions. I hope you enjoy or enjoyed them. – Conrad T. Pino (talk) 10:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just an old imdb-er you probably don't remember. Stumbled across an edit and thought it *must* be you. Was fun to see that username again. Hope you have a nice trip, wherever you are. 86.44.4.103 (talk) 08:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that vacation message was a little out of date, I'd been meaning to remove it. Well, you may know me from IMDb as I was once very vocal on those boards. That was a long time ago. I remember a lot of people from there, but you'll have to give me at least a clue. What was your name? I hope you're enjoying yourself here. It's very different but can be a lot of fun. cheers Rossrs (talk) 08:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i was dermotq. i've been dropping by here for years very sporadically and doing a bit of copyediting and maybe a bit more if the right books are on my shelf or what have you. not too interested in the whole community aspect, to be honest, though your presence does speak well for it. Nice work on Kylie and Sunset Boulevard, but then i wouldn't expect any less from you! 86.42.83.73 (talk) 14:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And of course I remember you!! Well it's nice to hear from you. I used to spend a lot of time here - too much as a matter of fact - but lately my visits have been less frequent. I've not bothered with IMDb for quite a while... every time I've looked in on those old message boards I've had the distinct feeling that I'm the only one there who is older than 12. If you know what I mean. So I stopped looking. Rossrs (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, i don't think i lasted much longer there than the time of the amazon buyout, in truth. I still try to get back to PM two or three from there, but sadly nowhere near as often as i should, of course. They've heard from me at about the same rate you have now. Good to see you, and like I say, glad that username is still reprezentin'. 86.42.83.73 (talk) 15:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:SunsetBoulevardGloriaSwansonprofile.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:SunsetBoulevardMainCastMembers.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:SunsetBoulevardWilliamHolden.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:SunsetBoulevardfilmposter.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ross - nice to hear from you! I'm going to keep looking at ways of improving the article - not sure, though, how we can get sources for the sections about her life, as opposed to about the book itself - the latter are readily available, but the former are much less so. Any ideas? I don't have any of the resource books, but I will check my local library and see if they have any. It's too important an article to let it languish - and the talk page suggestions of the diary being fraudulent infuriate me, and inspire me to push on with it. Best wishes to you! Tvoz |talk 20:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those sound great - I haven't gotten to my library yet, but I will. By the way - I am still always on the lookout for sentences that read "Unfortunately, he passed away on November 27, 2007, at only age 52." Tvoz |talk 07:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Totally. That's a classic. Tvoz |talk 07:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the note. I've been editing a lot for a year or so, but still have a lot to learn about managing aspects beyond the simple submission of material. I'll follow your advice. Monkeyzpop (talk) 08:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have time, your take on this would be much appreciated: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Amendment_to_.22Subsequent_uses_of_names.22_section. Also see the above section. Hope all is well! --Melty girl (talk) 21:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:SharonTateValleyoftheDollsnightclubscene.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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:SharonTateandDavidNivenEyeoftheDevil.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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]