User talk:Peppage/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Peppage. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I swear you find new ways to contact me on a daily basis. I don't have time to edit on Wikipedia, only browse! DragonRules (talk) 23:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. The image of Natasha merely shows the character. Although it's nice to have (I'd prefer we keep them too, but we need to comply with non-free image requirements), viewers can easily go to other sites to find more information about what Natasha looks like (or the DVD itself). The images at Zodiac I'm looking into, because I don't think they should be there either. An example of an article that could have a similar image to this one is Valkyrie. The image showing Tom Cruise compared to his character was commented on in the article and described in the caption as well. If you could find something detailing how Wahlberg was chosen for the role for being similar to Payne then perhaps you can upload a similar image. Of the four non-free image screenshots, I'd recommend only keeping the bullet time one as you discuss this in the production section. Other Featured Articles that follow as similar image examples: Jurassic Park, 300, and Transformers. Which one is the broken link? Maybe the Internet Archive can be used to fix it. Let me know if you have further questions. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I moved some of the images around (removing one of them that isn't necessary) and did some cleanup throughout the article. Here are some sources that I found on the differences between the film and video game, so at least a brief section can be made: 3D Realms "Bewildered" by Max Payne Flick, Miller Tones Down Max Payne Film Criticisms, and Max Payne. Create a section on this and expand the lead to two paragraphs and it'll likely meet B-class. Again, good work so far, and let me know when you're done. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 20:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I made a few more edits, including expanding the lead and fixing the spelling/grammar in the video game/film differences section. Remember not to use contractions (like don't or wouldn't) unless it is part of a quote. After making the various changes I have assessed the article as B-class. Before moving on to GA, I'd recommend continuing to expand on the information present, and consider asking another WP:FILM member or two to copyedit it (or open up a peer review). Once you've done these things, I think you'll be ready to advance to GA. If you have any further questions on the article in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 20:14, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, you're not being a pain. Articles have a lot that needs to get done to attain higher classes, so I don't mind helping you out with this article (I had the same issues working on my first articles). You could consider asking some members who already have had GA/FAs under their belt or maybe someone from the now defunct League of Copyeditors. By the way, I'd recommend uploading a larger size of File:Maxpaynescreen2.png. It's hard to tell what it is (I only know since I've seen the film). As long as one of the dimensions is 300px or smaller it will work. Also, for the soundtrack, I think the score track list should be removed since it's all material composed by the same artist and doesn't really focus on the individual songs. The readers can follow the link to the album reviews to see it. (Sorry if I told you to add this at one point or another, I don't remember.) Once you've had another editor or two copyedit it, feel free to nominate it at GAN. I'll try and stop by and take another look at the article once it's nominated. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I can copy edit it in the next day or so. Fdssdf (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Done.Fdssdf (talk) 00:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

There weren't any glaring errors. So kudos to you if you did the writing. Fdssdf (talk) 02:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, simply writing for the CollegeHumor website probably does not make him notable, no. What I feel separates him from a lot of the other writers is that Kevin is one of only a handful (I'd estimate a dozen or less) of the writers to also be a writer for the TV show The CollegeHumor Show. Being a main crew writer for a nationally syndicated television show on MTV might entail notability. Besides, if I recall correctly, the guidelines for notability for high schools and colleges/universities says that a person can be deemed notable to that community, even if s/he might not necessarily seem notable by general Wikipedia guidelines. As long as a verifiable reference is included by the name to coincide with his attending that school it is acceptable. -Jrcla2 ^{(talk)(contribs)} 15:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Really sorry about that, got things muddled up :/. Apologies - Kingpin13 (talk) 17:47, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Its for the typos etc. you fixed on List of Alex Rider characters. I'm in the middle of trying to give the whole article a more 'encyclopedic tone' so I notice every change. Plus, I like giving out barnstars. --Spongefrog (talk) 19:14, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for saying thankyou. --Spongefrog (talk) 20:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hiya. Good to see you're reverting vandalism so well. Just a note tho' - in this case, you'd have been better reverting the prev. versions too. All sorted now, but I thought you'd like to know. Cheers, Trafford09 (talk) 23:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's film-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Films? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's film-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. We also have a number of regional and topical task forces that you may be interested in joining as well. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! —Erik (talk • contrib) 21:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

• The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for March has been published. April's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
• Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
• Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! —Erik (talk • contrib) 03:58, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

For this film, I would recommend keeping the score within the film article. Indeed, there are numerous stubs on scores/soundtracks, many of which will never be expanded beyond their current state. Some soundtracks such as Pulp Fiction may warrant their own article, but like I did in Tropic Thunder, some scores/soundtracks should remain within the film article. Currently the film guidelines are not clear on this, and it is something that the coordinators are planning on reworking in the coming weeks/months. I'd say the safest bet is to include it within the article, and if the article gets too long due to other content, it may be reasonable to split off the score. However, this particular score doesn't look like it has major critical reception, awards, or sales, to warrant its own article. If you'd like to expand on the content consider adding the infobox detailing the producer, label, length, reception, etc. Are there any similarities to the score of the original film? Was the score the first one completed by the composer? Considering questions like these within any sources you can find would expand the section by a few sentences. Let me know if you would like further clarification. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, this article has improved significantly since I last took a look at it. With a quick glance, it looks like it would have little problem passing GA. I would recommend taking that route first, and then once it passes, heading off to A-class review. These will be a great way to improve the quality of the article as well as allow more feedback from other editors. Once the A-class review passes, get a few people to copyedit it and then you can head off to FA. Glancing over the article, I'd recommend removing the actor's names from the plot since the following section covers the role/actor in the cast section. Also, it may be beneficial to add a url link to where the movie poster can be found for the infobox image (instead of just saying Fox). Other than that, take it to GAN, and while you're waiting (it may take a month before somebody reviews the article due to the backlog) you can consider working on other articles. Again, good job, it's great that you're helping to improve some of these modern films. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Good job on the article. I went through and made some minor changes, please review them to make sure I didn't make any errors and for future reference in other articles you work on. I assessed the article as B-class since I believe it meets the criteria. If you want, consider adding this source: Love Hurts: 24 Bad Romantic Comedies: Entertainment Weekly. If you have questions about the B-class criteria, you can take a look at the other B-class articles, read the FAQ, or always leave me a message. It's good to see you cleaning up these articles that others seemed to ignore, and I hope we continue to get editors like you that leave a great impact on the project. Soon you'll be up to GAs, and down the line, who knows, maybe FAs. Keep up the good work! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot this. The image shouldn't be uploaded since copyrighted articles should not be added to articles just to illustrate a person (or group of people). I'd recommend looking for some free images of the actors at Wikimedia Commons (or using the images on the actors' pages) if you want to include an image. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I have posted a few final comments on the article's talkpage, since the peer review is now archived. Nothing much. Sorry for the delay in completing the review. Brianboulton (talk) 00:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For the initiative you have taken in improving The Day the Earth Stood Still. Good work! SoSaysChappy (talk) 14:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

It seems that the above article received a cursory and improper review at WP:GAN. I have initiated a reassessment of this and the only problem appears to be 3 dead links. Review at Talk:The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008 film)/GA2. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)