User talk:Girolamo Savonarola

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

I will be replying on this page to all topics started here, for the sake of ease of reading.

[edit] Review Fires on the Plain

Could you review Fires on the Plain (film)? This is not a review for B class, I'd just like an opinion about it. Me and Dekkapai have worked on it quite a bit. It would be appreciated if you could get to this quickly. Oh, and if you could give me an opinion on my new section in WP:film talk page "Saving Private Ryan - Sniper issue" that would be appreciated as well. I will ask other editors about this as well. Happy editing! Yojimbo501 (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to take a crack at it if you're willing to submit it for a peer review. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 02:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks but other editors are reviewing it now and I don't know how to submit it anyways. Yojimbo501 (talk) 19:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

See the instructions at WP:PR - it's really rather easy, and comes with the benefit of several automated tools as well. Good luck! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Also thanks for your comment on SPR - sniper issue. I believe nobody would really notice if we replaced "sniper" with "marksmen". Regardless, I believe Swatjester's source supports that he is a sniper very little besides the use of the word. I also think that if we reach an end to this issue, we should at least take out that source. Maybe, we could do a poll? I don't know. Well, besides that, Fires on the Plain is going quite well. Yojimbo501 (talk) 21:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Wind That Shakes the Barley

Please see the talk page. If you recall my concerns previously, I think there is something going on here that needs attention, but maybe from an admin. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Zinta video question

Hello Girolamo! I would like to ask you something. I tried to find another source regarding Preity Zinta's early career and find out which film was the first she starred in after Kya Kehna, Soldier or Dil Se. We know that technically Kya Kehna was her very first film, and that Dil Se was her first release. As I said, in an interview I saw back in time she said that Soldier had happened before Dil Se. In this interview with BAFTA (which is a video by google, unfortunately), her very first answer describes that (in the second by the way she describes her first audition with Shekhar Kapur). We of course cannot use this video as a source (I guess so). Do you have any idea what we can do? Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Video interviews are perfectly acceptable as sources, especially if they can be easily watched and verified online. If that's your source, then we have Template:Cite video - just make certain to identify the time in the video track where the information for that reference begins. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 19:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow thank you! At first I thought you were joking... Well, fine I'll add it later. BTW, youtube.com does not qualify as RS, does it? Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The trick is finding a stable location - YouTube is a problem because content is regularly removed. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 20:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The given video has been there for almost two years now. Thanks for the help. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey again. Several of your points have been addressed. Could you please have a look at the FAC? The article clearly has no chances to be promoted, but nevertheless. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you not had time? I see you were quite busy with other matters. Please have a look though before the nomination is closed. It's very important right now. Shahid • ^Talk2me 03:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Igor...what do I do?

No problem. :) Just download and unzip the Igor-0.2.0.zip file, and execute the .jar file. It gives a bit more detail in the README file. There have been some problems with running on Macs, so please let me know hoe it goes, good or bad? – Clockwork Soul 05:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, you grabbed the source files, then. There should be two files on that page, one source, and one not. The executable one is in a green button and looks misleadingly like a header of some kind. – Clockwork Soul 05:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Any luck? – Clockwork Soul 05:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Did you leave the jar in the same directory as the /resources and and /lib directories? I don't know how to check the console for error messages on a Mac, unfortunately. That would help us find the probelem. – Clockwork Soul 05:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, what version of Java do you have? – Clockwork Soul 05:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah! That's probably the problem: you'll need Java 6. You'll need to download the Java SE6 update for Mac. – Clockwork Soul 05:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

What version of MacOS do you have? – Clockwork Soul 06:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

That's unfortunate :/ I would compile with an earlier Java if I could, but I rely on a number of the newer features to do a number of things. – Clockwork Soul 06:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Keep an eye on Igor bug number 1968422... this may fix your problem when I resolve it. – Clockwork Soul 16:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject films peer review of Pather Panchali

Pather Panchali, an Indian film directed by Satyajit Ray, is one of the Core articles in wikiproject film. The article is at the WikiProject Films' peer review section here. Please provide inputs. Thanks a lot. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Would be happy to get around to it in the next few days. Thanks for the heads-up! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 00:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mistake in Your Editing of "Georges Bataille's Story of the Eye"

Hello! You made an error in your editing of the article on Georges Bataille's Story of the Eye. I've seen the film and the title is not Story of the Eye -- Georges Bataille's name is part of the title. Please check the film's web site at www.armcinema25.com to confirm this. Thanks! 205.247.175.180 (talk) 15:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but I am the guy who created the original article. Mr. 205 is correct -- I saw the film when it played in New York back in 2004 and it is called "Georges Bataille's Story of the Eye." I fixed the article's title. I can understand the confusion, since I did not ID the director in the original text. And, yes, the web site for the film will confirm this. (Gee, I thought I was the only person who knew about this film!). Ecoleetage (talk) 00:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Argentine films

Hello Mr. Savonarola. I was wondering if you agreed with me that moving the spanish names in Category:Argentine films to the english were posssible would be the best course of action. If you agree could you help me move some of the them to the english names but as each one is done the names in the images will have to be changed accordingly so I don't get bot drills again. Let me know what you would propose because at present as they are in spanish it almost feels like they are alienated from the rest. Regards ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've begun moving the spanish article titles to english. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I would say that per UE and NCF policy, film titles should not be translated into English unless evidence exists that the titles were translated for foreign release. Otherwise it's essentially OR to be translating the titles. Girolamo Savonarola (talk)

Thats what I always thought but I always thought you insisted that all foreign titles should be moved. Ah Ok I agree anyway, I have only moved the ones which have been released under the english title internationally. Some of them wouldn't translate that easily anyway. Thanks, if the Fritzbot gets the greenlight for the geo articles I'll be reutrning once again to do more film work over the coming months. Particularly France, Italy, Spain/Mexico and Hong Kong. Regards ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 14:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Foreign titles should be moved where the English title exists. Otherwise, we can't be making our own assumptions on how to translate - plenty of films have opted for English-release titles which are significantly different from the vernacular title, sometimes with the explicit intent of the filmmakers. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mania for unreferenced tag

I'm noticing that editors are using this much too frequently in film articles, e.g. Reign of Terror. I mean, what is there that needs to be referenced that the IMDb and TCM links don't cover? Is there something we can do to discourage this or someplace to bring this up for discussion?

Also, on an unrelated note, what is the guideline on IMDb and AMG links? I seem to recall reading that they shouldn't be listed in the External links section if they are already in the infobox, but User:23skidoo claims he or she has read the opposite. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe that the current convention is to maintain links to IMDb in both the infobox and the EL. As far as references go, only two points stick out: 1) references need to be cited for specific points within the article itself, and 2) it is generally agreed that the IMDb fails WP:RS. (AMG would be acceptable, however, since it credits its authors and doesn't accept anonymously submitted and poorly checked data.) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:10, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. I thought only IMDb trivia and biographical info were unreliable. Are you saying that the credits are also? I notified them one time about a mistake (Jack La Rue was listed as uncredited in a film, when I could see that he was with my own beady eyes), so I assumed they checked those. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

There is some evidence that the WGA credits are verified with the guild, but aside from that, the cast lists are created the same way as the trivia section, so there's no way to ascertain the reliability. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Award

I came to Casablanca for the waters, but the award is a nice bonus. Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Medal

Thanks! :) The Wookieepedian (talk) 04:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure! (Keep up the good work...nudge, nudge...) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unexpected awards are always fun

Thanks! Just out of curiosity, why isn't Triumph of the Will on the Core list? (I originally started editing Wikipedia because I was amazed that there were no in-depth articles on it!) Palm_Dogg (talk) 07:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It hasn't qualified for inclusion yet because it isn't high enough on the metalist; that being said, it is ranked well enough that I anticipate that it will join the Core list when the German task force is set up sometime in the near future. I'd definitely encourage any further work on it now, though, if I can be of any assistance. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Thank you for the barnstar! I will address your comments of course. Thank you for the help. Best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 11:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the comments left by you will be addressed (of course it may take some time, as, you can guess, the working speed will be somewhat less now!). And bye the way, when you have time, please have a look at Pather Panchali, which is in the peer review of WikiProject Films now (as I have messaged you earlier).--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

As for Armaan. Armaan was quite an arty and non-commercial film with no box office expectations. I have no problem adding it, but it is mostly known for its content and the critical success, and writing it would just make it a redundant note. It was more of a film which was expected to do well critically rather than commerically. That's common sense here, for that you'll have to know the subject.

Salaam Namaste review by NYT. We are always going according to the majority view. As you know, there will always be someone to criticise a film. In this case, most of the reviews (probably all of them, except NYT) were positive and even very positive. In the article we are presenting the final result, so that it can represent the general/overall reception for a film, and the information is fair and representative. The reception was as I said mostly (almost unanimously) positive, so that's what we say in the article (for that you will have to see my analysis). Also good to note that a note like "The NYT said..." belongs to the film article, not here. Here we only describe the general reception in one line, meaning, the majority view. Apart from that, I saw the NYT review and it was fairly positive, except for some very minor points.

Girolamo, how do you think is best to rewrite the graduation bit? As of now I changed it to "She initially majored in English honours, and later pursued an advanced programme in psychology. She earned a postgraduate degree in criminal psychology..."

Is there somewhere else to go? Maybe something like:

"She initially/first (or maybe it's best to remove that?) 'majored in'/'graduated with'/'earned an undergrad' in English honours, and later pursued an advanced programme in psychology. She earned a postgraduate/masters degree in crim psy..." ? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The advanced program = grad school. So "she graduated college with an English honors degree, and then started a graduate program in criminal psychology" would be a good way to go, IMHO. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 20:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Hobbit

I think it would be best to treat the project in development as a piece of history rather than an actual film article, hence my suggestion to exclude the film infobox. While we have WP:NFF, we also have WP:SS. The topic has grown in its own right, and whether or not a film actually comes forward, this is a distinct movement that cannot be scooted under a section of another article. A possible compromise is some kind of Tolkien films article that would be a broader location, mentioning briefly and linking to The Lord of the Rings film trilogy. WP:NFF is ultimately a guideline, the template indicating, "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should follow, though it should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." For example, if Watchmen (film) for some reason did not enter active production, it would have relevance as a stand-alone historical topic. Any tweaks you have in mind? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pather Panchali review

Thanks a lot for the review. We shall work on it, and update you. --Dwaipayan (talk) 14:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Have responded to your comments in the review. Have commented on 4 of your suggestions, please have a look. Thanks. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Could you help with Greek (TV show)?

An editor, Thelegendofvix keeps adding a "Name of show" section in, though many editors, myself included, belive it is unnecesary. Since there are (not that I can tell, anyways) coordinators for Wikiproject TV, and though you are a Wikiproject film editor, could you help in determining weather or not it is due weight? I'm going to ask other editors to. I'm sorry I ask so many questions, hopefully, one day I will no longer be dependant on editors like you. Yojimbo501 (talk) 00:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

If there are numerous editors disagreeing, then it's really an issue of consensus. I'm not familiar with WP TV's style guidelines and practices, however, so I'd feel somewhat out of my element as far as the issue itself. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 00:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Start to B-Class

I developed a first draft of the Start to B-class template, found here. Let me know how it needs to be changed/expanded so that I can develop the template and you can integrate it into the banner. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Films May 2008 Newsletter

The May 2008 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pather Panchali contd

Hi! Have responded to your second series of suggestions in the peer review. Although I know nothing about auteur theory (indeed, learned the word first while going through sources for the artilce Satyajit Ray!!), the word was used from sources cited. We in wikipedia, are not to debate on the theory, just to report that he has been called a auteur by appropriate authority (in this case, books on cinema), this was the basis for using the word. Please again have a look at the article. It is definitely improving a lot thanks to your assessment with clinical precision. Hope the article will be ready soon. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 09:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Modified the article per your suggestions. Thanks. Waiting for the next dose of review :) --Dwaipayan (talk) 17:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] It is absolutely shameful

Thank you very much for the barnstar! Its nice to know my work on Wikipedia is appreciated by some people. My editing has slowed down tremendously recently but I hope to jump back in soon. When I do, my first objective will be to try to bring Aguirre, the Wrath of God to Featured Status.-Hal Raglan (talk) 19:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Wiktlas"

Well, I liked your wiki-atlas idea anyway. :-) --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 15:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Well actually I proposed a proper Atlas and a Wiki Translation project 8 months ago but like the bot was met with some opposition ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 16:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC).

[edit] could you please do me a favor?

Hello,

I am a master student at the Institute of Technology Management, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan. Currently I am wrapping up my master thesis titled “Can Wikipedia be used for knowledge service?” In order to validate the knowledge evolution maps of identified users in Wikipedia, I need your help. I have generated a knowledge evolution map to denote your knowledge activities in Wikipedia according to your inputs including the creation and modification of contents in Wikipedia, and I need you to validate whether the generated knowledge evolution map matches the knowledge that you perceive you own it. Could you please do me a favor?

I will send you a URL link to a webpage on which your knowledge evolution map displays. Please assign the topic (concept) in the map to a certain cluster on the map according to the relationship between the topic and clusters in your cognition, or you can assign it to ‘none of above’ if there is no suitable cluster.
I will also send a questionnaire to you. The questions are related to my research topic, and I need your viewpoints about these questions.

The deadline of my thesis defense is set by the end of June, 2008. There is no much time left for me to wrap up the thesis. If you can help me, please reply this message. I will send you the URL link of the first part once I receive your response. The completion of my thesis heavily relies much on your generous help.

Sincerely

JnW ^talk 07:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Production history of The Devil Wears Prada

OK, I'll hold off on finishing the job, but I still believe it ought to be done. I respectfully disagree with the assessment that most of this is "cruft" ... I found while researching the original article that just about everyone involved in the film has an awful lot to say that explains why many creative decisions were made in the making of the movie (as opposed to "I liked working with X because ..."). I'm open to moving some of the quotes into footnotes as I have been, but I really feel a lot of what's in there is adequately encyclopedic. Daniel Case (talk) 18:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did bring it up on WT:FILM a long time ago (~~can't find the link right yet ... I'll get it to you eventually~~ here it is), and the consensus was to go ahead and do it, and that it would be a good idea to have because we would eventually need more. There are plenty of films that, IMHO, could use separate articles on their convoluted production histories (Blade Runner, Apocalypse Now for starters). I have always used quotes perhaps because of my journalistic background, but also because it insulates the article better from charges (and someone in a review always makes them) that the editor is improperly synthesizing the source material or otherwise imposing a subjective bias on it (also, it makes it easier to find an archived or other version of the source when the original link goes dead). I can see your point about the lists ... they could easily be prosified.

If you would like to discuss this on WT:FILM, let's do it. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I started the thread already. Daniel Case (talk) 20:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Evil Dead

Could you check out some of those Evil Dead film articles and tell me what work needs to be done on them to make them better respected? If you can't I understand, Thank You. --Tj999 (talk) 22:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest starting with WP:MOSFILM and also looking at some of our featured articles to get a better idea of what a quality film article looks like, and how it is written. But the most important thing is mainly finding good reference material for the articles - both online, but more importantly,offline if possible. There should be several good books that have been written about the films by now, either from a more documentary aspect, a tangential one (like biographies of the main cast and crew members), or a critical perspective. Google Books, Google Scholar, and even Amazon search probably are a good way to find some of these; the JSTOR database is also worth a good trawl if you can obtain access (many libraries have accounts there). If you have a specific article that you're putting up for a review process such as peer review, A-class review, or FAC, though, do let me know. Best luck! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your knowledge. I will look into these offline sources. --Tj999 (talk) 23:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for comment re: COI, and request for further input if you're able

Hi there, a couple weeks back you left a comment in reply to me on the discussion page for the upcoming Kevin Costner film Swing Vote. I had requested assistance in making factual additions to the page, and you replied to say there shouldn't be any COI problems "so long as you are performing neutral, uncontroversial edits" and " involve facts which are unlikely to be contested and are reliably sourced."

I appreciated the suggestion greatly, although I hadn't acted on it until just now. Long story short, when I created this account I sought advice from the Village Pump, and got the thumbs-up simply to make suggestions. I did not even ask for permission to make edits, because "exercise great caution" is not clearly defined, and I've seen what happens to people who end up on the wrong side of COI disputes.

Anyway, using your suggestion I've finally gotten around to starting a discussion about thison the Village Pump and would appreciate it if you might add your thoughts there. Thanks. NMS Bill (talk) 16:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)