User talk:MarnetteD/archive44

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


A barnstar for you!

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your efforts to protect existing content every day. Much appreciated! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:25, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much Dr. B! MarnetteD|Talk 14:40, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Always...

It's always nice to see a friendly face dabbling in the painful world of Indian cinema. Face-smile.svg Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by Cyphoidbomb. I know what you mean. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 04:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
For checking every single archived cite the bot makes - I know it's a pain but your effort and help with it is extremely appreciated :),

Thanks for your contributions here and Keep up the great work :),
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 14:13, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Many many thanks Davey2010! It is kinda the perfect task for a wikignome with a chronic case of editcountitis :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 14:18, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
You're very very welcome :), Hahaha I think I have that condition too :D, I have a feeling I'm going to die from it too haha :), Anyways happy editing :) –Davey2010Talk 15:29, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Someone to keep an eye on

See this
Good morning M! Trust all is well with you. Thought I'd post something positive here, what with your having to deal with so much ghastly trolling recently.
Cheers! — Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh | Buzzard |  08:09, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi G. Thanks for the link. Exciting news. I look forward to seeing him play in the future! Yes there does seem to be an uptick in trolling this spring. Fortunately mine isn't as bad as some other editors are having to deal with. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 13:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm Shocked

Totally not a sock! :) GABHello! 19:02, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Great stuff GAB. Thanks for bringing a grin to my snowy afternoon :-) MarnetteD|Talk 19:05, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm slipping -- I already used that before on Soft skin. Will try harder. GABHello! 19:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
No worries at all. Always worth seeing it again. In fact "Play it again GAB!!" MarnetteD|Talk 19:09, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
(To a checkuser): "Round up the usual suspects!" GABHello! 20:47, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Undone edit

I undid this edit of yours as it appears to be a slip. DuncanHill (talk) 17:12, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

A pure misclick on my part. It must have happened when I was reverting this but I have no idea why it happened. Thank you for fixing this DuncanHill. MarnetteD|Talk 17:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I've had similar things happen before - the watchlist sometimes "jumps" as you click. Glad to have been of help. DuncanHill (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Undone edit #2

I apologize I undid your edition on article [1]. It was not my intention to spam it. I did not understand why it is not possible to post my edition since it was related to the film. Sorry and thanks for your comprehension. Roxschneider (talk) 00:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)roxschneider

Thank you R. I have added some links to your talk page to try and get you started in learning how things work around here. MarnetteD|Talk 01:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week : nominations needed!

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Howard Da Silva

I reverted your removal of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World from his filmography. With the AFI catalog source, you don't see the entire cast unless you click on "Display movie detail" in the upper right hand part of the page. He's in that movie, albeit in a bit part. But he's there. — Maile (talk)

Thanks for fixing this Maile66. I do have to say that I have seen the film many times and I don't remember seeing him. I hope that he is listed somewhere other then AFI (as reliable as the are mistakes are possible) as that would be better than my dust covered memory banks. The Criterion Collection restoration of the lost footage is wonderful if you haven't seen it. I do have great memories of my folks taking me to see the film at the Cooper Theatre in its original release. Cheers and enjoy your week. MarnetteD|Talk 23:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
I was just coming here to tell you that he is on the AFI list, which while not infallible, is pretty close to it on cast lists. What is your feeling about Movies.com as an RS? His bio there also lists it. Perhaps most importantly, TMC's The Essentials has him listed as well. Onel5969 TT me 00:08, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi again Maile66. I know that it would be in the part of the film where Benjy and Dingy are landing the plane. Do you remember the specific scene. I want to make sure that isn't being mistaken for the character played by Jesse White. I probably should watch it again and that will be as delightful as all the previous times :-) MarnetteD|Talk 00:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Good job on all your research O. With that many WP:RSs you have put my mind at ease. Thanks to you both. I love when Wikipedia works like this. I hope you both have a marvelous week. MarnetteD|Talk 00:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi, there, MarnetteD. I've seen him in the film, but it was about a year ago when I did the filmography on his article. I specifically looked for him, but my memory is that it wouldn't click it was him unless you knew to look for him in the airport. It might even be in the same scene with Jesse White, but I don't remember that well to say for sure. Howard Da Silva was pretty good on characterizations. And I always expect him to dominate any movie he's in, but here it's just a brief scene. That is a long, long, long movie. — Maile (talk) 00:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Good deal Maile66. I will be on the lookout for him. best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 00:25, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Oliver Reed?

I see you have kept an eye on Oliver Reed a couple of times this year, so might I ask your advice? I try to be extra careful as an editor, as there are potential COI issues with my edits, and don't know what best to do in this instance.

Earlier this week I added an internal link relating to a well-known appearence (well-known in the UK anyway) of Reed on British tv, the current description being somewhat inadequate imho, and I thought the link was encyclopaedic and uncontroversial:-

(this appearance and its repercussions are discussed here).

However this text was removed within a day by an anonymous editor (earlier in the year a similar parenthesis had been removed by someone using AWB which I assumed was just a mistake). I don't want to get into some fight but think this should be reverted. Any advice? AnOpenMedium (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello AnOpenMedium. Thanks for your question. The problem with your edit is that it is in the form of a parenthetical which IMO is inappropriate. The current situation where the item is linked thus "after arriving drunk and attempting to kiss feminist writer" may not be ideal but it is better for an encyclopedia article. Another way to handle it would be in the form of a footnote but, in this situation, I think it would be unwieldy. I'll ping Michael Bednarek to see if they have any suggestions and any of my talk page watchers are free to chime in as well. MarnetteD|Talk 16:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Absolutely agree. I overlooked the fact that the link was still there (it was loss of the information I was concerned about) as I stupidly missed it when checking on my phone. My fault. No need for anyone to get involved, apologies for contacting you needlessly. AnOpenMedium (talk) 10:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
No need to apologize at all AnOpenMedium. Something like this is easy to miss and, even if it wasn't, asking questions is always a good thing. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD|Talk 12:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Victorian Farm etc.

I'm not sure what's going on with 109.157.254.81 (talk · contribs), but you saw fit to bulk revert them. You might be interested in taking a look at 217.42.151.43 (talk · contribs) too. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:53, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the message Andy Dingley. Whoever this is has been IP hopping for several days now. This was also happening at some point last year. There was an admin who was aware of their edits but I have forgotten who it was. If you think there is anything worth saving please feel free to restore it. Cheers and have a great week. MarnetteD|Talk 22:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

The Eiger Sanction article

Hello, MarnetteD. I hope all is well. I recently expanded the Eiger Sanction article and noticed that you are one of the major contributors to the article. If you have the time, please review the article against the criteria for B-Class status. I would also welcome any suggestions for improving the article. Thank you. Bede735 (talk) 02:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Mentioning users

Thank you. What is the difference between @User name: and User name?PhysicsScientist (talk) 15:11, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello PhysicsScientist. They are only a difference in formatting. There are several different ways to initiate a ping and they are shown in the section labeled "Mentions" here Wikipedia:Notifications#Triggering events. Although the system usually works there are times that it doesn't so if a person hasn't responded to a ping after a few days you might go to the editors talk page and ask your question again. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 16:33, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you.PhysicsScientist (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Rollback and good-faith edits

Hey. I noticed you used rollback to undo a series of changes to Embeth Davidtz without an explanation. The changes you reverted were clearly made in good faith, and you ought to have left an edit summary for your revert. You may wish to reread ROLLBACK ("[E]ditors who misuse standard rollback (for example, by using it to reverse good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary would normally be expected) may have their rollback rights removed.") and BITE ("Always explain reverts in the edit summary . . . ."). Thank you. Rebbing 01:37, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Rebbing those edits were made by an IP hopper who has been editing against the MOS (in particular WP:OVERLINK) for over a year now so, no, their edits are "not in good faith". Last year, at the start of their editing, several of us tried to explain things but we were ignored and the IP hopping and poor edits have continued to this date. Thus, I am not "biting" anyone. You should know that I am not the only editor to have wholesale reverted their edits. Your message is in the realm of WP:DTTR. While I understand your concerns, and will note them in my future dealings with this IP, you need to be aware that I have also been putting up with stuff like this and this from a a prolific sock puppet master who is trolling my page (using your post for their nonsense) as I type this. Thus, I will ask you to forgive me if anything that I have posted is upsetting for you. MarnetteD|Talk 02:54, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
I see. An appropriate edit summary would have saved us both the trouble of having this conversation. I noticed the IP- and network-hopping replies to my comment, and I now understand what you're dealing with. Thank you for your dedication. Best. Rebbing 03:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply Rebbing. I hope that you enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 03:15, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Also, I apologize for the tone of my original comment: I had aimed for thoroughness but clearly overshot into condescension. And, again, thank you for fighting this sort of nonsense. Rebbing 03:28, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
@Rebbing: I've been reverting the same guy. One of my typical edits is here. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:10, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
I keep waiting for this person to add Northern Hemisphere, Third Rock from the Sun, Solar system in Mutter's Spiral - the last one is a Dr. Who reference a show which Redrose64 and I have watched for many many years :-) MarnetteD|Talk 09:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Ha ha, yes! I've seen similar overlinkng and excessive details elsewhere (possibly by the same editor), and it makes me grit my teeth. Clutter makes it harder to find useful information, especially for those who most need it. Rebbing 18:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
You got that right Rebbing :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 18:17, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to an online editathon

Female singer silhouette.png
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women in Entertainment worldwide online edit-a-thon

--Ipigott (talk) 10:27, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)

Don't know if you're aware of this

Went onto Amazon.co.uk to purchase a copy of the second season of The Hollow Crown today (enjoyed it, although not a patch on the first; no Jeremy Irons, no Patrick Stewart, no Simon Russell Beale, and the jury is still out on Cumberbatch's Richard III for me. In fact truth be told, the jury is still out on Cumberbatch's Shakespearean chops in general. His Hamlet was...meh. Hiddleston on the other hand most definitely has the gift). Anyhow, imagine my surprise when I saw David Warner's face staring at me in the "Users who have purchased The Hollow Crown have also purchased..." section. Barton and Hall's The Wars of the Roses is finally getting a DVD release. Sadly no Blu-ray, but still. I have an ancient copied-from-VHS DVD that is literally brown (as in the actual image is brown, not the DVD itself). As I thought this might interest you, here's the link. Bertaut (talk) 01:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

So many thanks Bertaut. I knew second series of THC was in the offing but hadn't checked on when it was available for purchase in a couple months. The news about TWotR is even better!! It only aired here once back in the early 80s on Bravo (jeepers it is nice to remember when that cable channel was worth watching!) and I didn't have a video tape recorder then. So lets see - that means we have these as An Age of Kings - TWotR - The BBC Shakespeare - and now THC - cornucopia may be too generous a word but it is a delight :-) to have so many versions to chose from. Thanks again for the heads up. MarnetteD|Talk 02:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
one question - do you know how much BC has done Shakespeare on stage? His popularity is such that TV and film fill so much of his time that, perhaps, the proper training for his "WS chops" hasn't taken place. Pure WP:SPECULATION on my part. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, the second season of Hollow Crown aired in the UK to next to no fanfare, starting on May 9. It was so low-key I almost missed it. Compared to the huge promotion of the first season, it came and went without virtually anyone noticing. As for your list of Shakespeare DVDs, don't forget Shakespeare: The Animated Tales. Not at all bad for what it is (and it offers the only recorded record of Antony Sher as Richard III. I know a few people who saw his 1984 RSC "spider performance" and say it's the best Richard III of all time. One friend of mine says it's the second greatest Shakespearean performance he's ever seen - after Brian Cox as Titus in Deborah Warner's 1987 production; which, for what it's worth, is also Jonathan Bate's all time favourite production of any Shakespeare play). As regarding Cumberbatch, to be honest, I'm not 100% sure. I know he did some relatively small Shakespeare productions before his breakthrough in Amazing Grace (which was an excellent movie, and he was terrific in it), but I don't think he has the level of formal training of, say, a Tom Hiddleston or a Ben Whishaw, or even a Tom Sturridge. I do know that his 2015 Hamlet was the best selling production in the history of the Barbican, but both the production and his performance met with extremely tepid reviews. Which is often the case. Remember Denzel Washington played Marc Antony in Julius Caesar on Broadway about ten years ago? Broke box office records, but got panned by critics. Jude Law's Hamlet wasn't very well received either. On the other hand, I saw Cillian Murphy in a production of Troilus and Cressida last year in Dublin, and he was exceptional. Bertaut (talk) 02:46, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
By the way, I picked up my brown-DVD copy of The Wars of the Roses on iOffer. It's a great site for picking up bootleg copies of stuff that aren't available elsewhere. I'm a Michael Mann fanatic, and I was able to find a decent copy of his short lived TV show Robbery Homicide Division on there, as well as obscure episodes of shows like Police Story, Police Woman and Bronk on which he worked. Well worth checking out if you're scouring for something lost to the mists of time. Bertaut (talk) 02:51, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
So wonderful to read about all of these performance Bertaut. The "stunt casting" phenomema of Denzel that you mention is at the heart of Birdman. Thanks also for the heads up about the website. My grail is tracking down Life Story. My VHS tape is fading away. It is one of the best TV films about a scientific breakthrough and the people involved that I have ever seen. Not entirely surprising as the director Mick Jackson worked on Bronowski's The Ascent of Man and Burke's Connections. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 23:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

An IP editor has very unwisely files an ANI complaint against you...

...you'll find it here. Best, BMK (talk) 05:23, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

66.102.146.179 (talk · contribs), just on a cursory look. Doc talk 07:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Some might expect a 72-year-old tenured professor to act in a more mature fashion. I wouldn't, considering the state of college campuses today, but some might. ;) --Ebyabe talk - Union of Opposites ‖ 08:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC) Like this. --Ebyabe talk - Border Town ‖ 08:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
This ANI complaint is, in all honesty, completely stupid and made by an IP with a poor "editing" record. You have my complete support. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 08:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks everyone your posts here and at the ANI thread are most appreciated. As ever I have been asleep when all the fun is happening. I hope that everyone has a delightful weekend!! MarnetteD|Talk 12:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Checking Cyberbot II edits

Hi MarnetteD. When checking edits by Cyberbot II, if you find an archive URL which doesn't work, as you did here, please don't leave the non-functional archive URL in the article - either replace it with a functional one, or revert the bot's change and tag the link with {{cbignore}}, to prevent Cyberbot II making the same change again. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 10:55, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello DH85868993. I am not entirely sure what you are on about. First, I can find no requirement that I have to fix the links that don't work. As the documentation states "please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know" - this way the others can fix the link. In this case you performed the fix which is great. Next, at the User:Cyberpower678/FaQs to the question "How do I stop the bot if from persistently messing with a source?" it states "... if it's persistently trying to tag the source as dead, or is persistently adding a bad archive, then you should tag the source." As the bot had only tried fixing the source once the use of the {{cbignore}} would (as I understand it) have been inappropriate. My "task of Sisyphus" is checking items here Category:Articles with unchecked bot-modified external links (of which I have done over 5000 so far) and setting the template to "T or F" to remove them from the category. Since this task (as all editing here at WikiP) is voluntary I have chosen to check the links and leave fixing them to others who are far more skilled at it than I am. Cheers and enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 14:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
You're quite right. Please accept my apologies. Enjoy your weekend too! Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 00:30, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply DH85868993. I am guessing that, like me, you saw these popping up for the last few months and didn't know what they were about - apologies if I am wrong about this. If these show up on any pages you have watchlisted feel free to check to see if the changes worked. Of course you don't have to do this but, since you know how to fix them, you will save a step in the process :-) If you do check them and have any question not answered at the FAQ feel free to drop me a line. I may not know the answer but I have learned a few things in working with them in the last few weeks. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 00:38, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Will do. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 02:36, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Any help on those is much appreciated DH85868993! I saw your user page and wanted to let you know that I am a fan of Proust as well. In my youth the only GP race that got regular coverage of was Monaco but it was never live. Then a year or two before AP won his first title we started getting coverage of all the races on ESPN2 (it has moved to several channels since then) so I am fortunate to have seen him at his best. The widescreen HD that we get now makes all the venues look wonderful. Enjoy the race tomorrow - er in your case I mean today :-) MarnetteD|Talk 02:49, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

IP 81.156.162.127

Hello, MarnetteD – we could use your help over at Katie Leung regarding this IP editor. I've left them a personalized {{uw-ewsoft}} message at the IP's Talk page, but they've ignored any attempts at discussion and are reverting away. One more revert from them and it can be taken to WP:ANEW. Thanks! --IJBall (contribstalk) 18:54, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Note that a preexisting discussion at Talk:Katie Leung already exists on the subject of this IP's edits, so they're clearly going against the established consensus. --IJBall (contribstalk) 18:56, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the message IJBall. I have added my thoughts to the talk page. Whoever this is has a real bee in their bonnet (the hat not the car body part - although come to think of it the bee might be there as well :-)) about this. They have been showing up at various IPs for at least a year now and, as far as I know, have not responded to any talk page messages. I suspect you know this already but I thought I'd mention it just in case. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 19:32, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
That one and 81.156.136.164 have been blocked. I guess we just wait now for the next IP they'll use. *sigh* --Ebyabe talk - Health and Welfare ‖ 19:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
You got that right Ebyabe. Enjoy the rest of your Memorial Day! MarnetteD|Talk 19:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
You too also as well. ;) --Ebyabe talk - Border Town ‖ 19:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Here they go again

Please see my report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Yes, after failing on my TARDIS Wikia page, they've gone to Wikimedia. They're afraid I'll "tattle" on them? What are they, 12? I know I'm supposed to assume good faith, but there comes a point where that goes out the window. Anyhoo, cheers. --Ebyabe talk - State of the Union ‖ 20:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Doctor Who (series 9)#Episode Groupings

I would like to invite you to contribute to a discussion on whether or not "The Girl Who Died" and "The Woman Who Lived" and "Heaven Sent" and "Hell Bent" are two-parters. Over the course of 3 weeks and 2 discussions, only 3 editors including myself have contributed, so it would be a great help if you could take the time to contribute. Fan4Life (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

ANI

Hi MarnetteD. I'm hoping that my response here helped clarify things. I didn't mean at all for my suggestion to wait for an admin to take possible action on the IP to confuse you into believing that the trolling and attacking was okay; just the opposite. If you have questions or concerns, please let me know. My talk page is always open to you, MarnetteD. Again, I think we miss-interpreted something in my response; I'm messaging you to give you clarity and assure you that the trolling was not okay, and to make sure that you know that I agree with you :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:59, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!

Much appreciated. BMK (talk) 04:43, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Film categories

Following the discussion at WT:FILM, please find the discussion here about umpmerging the year/genre film categories. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:59, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Dame Penelope Wilton

Penelope has been awarded a well-deserved damehood. Letting you know (on the off chance you don't already) because we once spoke about her. (Might want to also keep a weather eye on that article for a while because the rabble had added the word "Dame" to her bolded name, which I just removed.) Softlavender (talk) 09:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Part 2: On the other hand, there seems to be a very inconsistent usage of honorifics in Wikipedia articles of late. The post-nominal letters are of course noted after a name, but why are some British honorifics ("Dame", etc.) used in some lede-sentence names, whereas some British honorifics are usually or often not used and/or are actively discouraged? Facepalm Facepalm. Get me out of here. Softlavender (talk) 09:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know Softlavender. I hadn't seen the list yet - though I did notice Brian Blessed's article get a batch of edits regarding his award before I went to sleep last night. Cheers and have a pleasant weekend! MarnetteD|Talk 14:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks I hadn't heard about Brian, and haven't looked at the full list, either. (I had just seen a couple of tyweets about Penelope.) 07:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

nominate Jude Quinn for deletion

Hi MarnetteD, fyi I've nominated Jude Quinn for deletion [[2]] Thanks, Mick gold (talk) 09:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the info Mick gold. MarnetteD|Talk 19:47, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

67.218.18.234 (talk · contribs) again

And ... blocked. MartinSFSA (talk) 16:02, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the update MartinSFSA. I appreciate you letting me know. Have a pleasant weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 19:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Title formatting (italics vs quotations)

The thread at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Title formatting (italics vs quotations) for recurring features may interest you. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:45, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for making me aware of this Redrose64. MarnetteD|Talk 15:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation in The Shining (film)

I'm not sure about this. If someone types only "The Shining" looking for the movie, for the novel, or for an album, he'll come to the disambiguation page, where he can find what he was precisely looking for. There is just one movie called "The Shining" (or with similar name), so The Shining (film) cannot be misunderstood and so there is no need of the hatnote. It's what it's been chosen for, taking for example, From Russia, with Love (novel) (featured article) and From Russia with Love (film) (good article), in which there are no hatnotes. An hatnote may be inserted in The Shining (J Dilla album) because it may be that someone who's looking for The Shining (RBX album) (who knows the cover album but not the rapper's name) came to the wrong page. But in The Shining (film) there is no need of a hatnote. --Almicione (talk) 09:55, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your note Almicione. I think the thing that gets left out is that not all readers will know the ins and outs of the search function and DAB pages. If a reader has gotten to the article for the film and wants to go to the DAB page they have to go to the search box and type the title in again. Far easier to have the hatnote and save some time and keystrokes. For me this is a WP:IAR situation but I know that I am probably alone in feeling this so please feel free to remove it again. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 15:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I cannot understand why the reader who wanted to go to the movie article, after he came to that, he should want to go the DAB. Every link (with the same name) to the article is in the article itself: there is a link to King's book in the incipit and another one in the infobox, and if we take Oldboy (2003 film) there is a link to Lee's version in the incipit and a link to the manga on which is based in the infobox. Why a reader should want to go the DAB? To know that Reginald Wilmot was known as "Old Boy" and that there is a football club called "Old Boys' AFC"? No way.
Do not be against the rules. Try to change them if you think they are inadequate :) --Almicione (talk) 19:32, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
It is a shame that you cannot put yourself in the shoes of a reader who is not conversant with Wiki-markup but so be it. MarnetteD|Talk 22:49, 1 July 2016 (UTC)