This user may have left Wikipedia. TheMovieBuff has not edited Wikipedia since April 2017. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome!

Hello, TheMovieBuff, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place ((helpme)) before the question. Again, welcome! Cirt (talk) 00:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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 September has been published. October'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) - 22:33, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just worked on a bunch of the templates you've done. They look great. The only thing that I really had to touch was the categorization. There were 8 or 9 of them that you had put under American film director templates when the person isn't American. :) If you go to Category:Film director templates, you can see some of the subcats of directors. European and Asian have further subcats. The second thing involves sorting, which is one of those things that you just have to kind of learn. When you categorize templates, you need to put the cat and also how you want it listed on the category page. For example, [[Category:American film director templates|Smith, John]]. That way, everyone is under the correct letter. If you leave it as just Category:American film director templates, then it goes under T on the category page, which is what we don't want. For people, it's usually last name, first name. For most other things, you can use ((PAGENAME)), which sorts per the first letter that comes after Template:. In the above example, it'd put it under J for John instead of S for Smith. If you have any questions or anything, let me know. I've been doing this template categorization stuff pretty much fulltime for about a year and a half. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 07:32, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mick Jackson has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Forest Whitaker has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, My Father the Hero (1994 film) , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. LizzieHarrison 16:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Robert De Niro has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for deletion page. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:11, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Mr. Billion, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Billion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Orange Mike | Talk 22:32, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kevin Lima has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Andy Fickman has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 05:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Home Alone 4: Taking Back the House. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I note you have already been warned with regard to 3RR above. I have also warned the other party involved. In addition, please be more careful with your edit summaries and keep them to a brief description of your edit. There is no place for comments such as "First you need to calm down and stop acting like a baby" in an edit summary as you did here. Regards, _wjemather^bigissue 02:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HI Movie buff! Thanks for your contributions! Sorry for the cold reception. People have a tendency to issue warnings rather than assume good faith... I've noticed you;ve been creating a lot of articles about films and directors. This is good but can you please use stub categories e.g 2000s-comedy-film-stub with a (( )) around it. Also if you are starting Amercian films please add Category:American films to your article. ALso see the lists, e.g List of American films of 1984. It would be great if you could built up these lists of missing films and add films you start to the lists by year. So e.g Sam the Man you list that on the list of American films of 2000 page. You follow? Don't worry about other people giving you a hard time for now, but we do have certain rules which can often make editing frustrating but once you learn the ropes it should be a breeze.Please try to follow my advice. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 22:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to add some, but I am very busy!! If you also copy the cast section too to the articles you start like Sam the Man that's OK.... Are you interested in any other films outside the states? Because we could sure use more editors adding missing films from countries like France, Italy, Germany and Hong Kong. I started all of the world film lists too, the idea is to have the fullest most comprehensive guide to films by year and by country so building the lists like e.g Italian films of 1965 is a start. We do however try to avoid short films and non notable independent films...If you click edit on say List of American films of 2000 you can see how the tables are formatted. You just copy the sections and add the relevant details in between. Try to keep them in alphabetical order though. You might find it useful actually to red link the missing films into the lists first and then work through by director if that is your preference.... At the bottom of the lists are the imdb directories A-Z. The notable films can be copied into the tables and red linked and then started... Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 22:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK cool. I'm actually not as active as I used to be in films but I did start the WP:Actors a while back which includes directors, cinematographers, producers etc. User:Lugnuts is the one to ask about formatting. If you have any general queries about guidelines to style and film project goals try asking somebody like User:Erik or User:Nehrams2020. I always fonud it best though to get on with my own tasks. The biggest priority in my book for films at the moment is building up the Italian and French film lists by year and getting the articles started. There are numerous sites dedicated to French cinema and Italian cinema... But if you want to try to provide a fuller coverage of American films first whatever you feel like. But as you can imagine there is already much bias towards US films on here and world cinema is often neglected. You'll find the most missing articles from places like Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Japan, Hong Kong etc Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 23:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I second what Dr B has said above - always great to see new people helping out in the film department. EVERY edit is a valid contribution. Any questions, please don't hesitate to ask either myself or post on the talk page of the film project. Lugnuts (talk) 08:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Rachel Talalay, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hangon)) to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ~ ς ح д r خ є ~ 07:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A page you created, Love Is Better Than Ever, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, organisation, or web content, but does not indicate why its subject is important or significant.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 22:11, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A page you created, Fearless Fagan, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, organisation, or web content, but does not indicate why its subject is important or significant.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 22:12, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:David Wain has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article C.H.O.M.P.S has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Fourth Wish has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ride a Wild Pony has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Bandido (2004 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article American Daylight has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Final Cut (1995 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Nostradamus (film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Siam Sunset has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:25, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:John Polson has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Matthew Bright has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated C.H.O.M.P.S, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C.H.O.M.P.S. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:29, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated The Fourth Wish, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fourth Wish. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:29, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Ride a Wild Pony, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ride a Wild Pony. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:29, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Bandido (2004 film), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bandido (2004 film). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Siam Sunset, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siam Sunset. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated American Daylight, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Daylight. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Starship (film), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Starship (film). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated The Final Cut (1995 film), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Final Cut (1995 film). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 22:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Collectonian makes a good point on AN/I -- you should probably review WP:CANVASS at your earliest possible opportunity. Self-reverts are your friends.... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for continuing to WP:CANVASS after being warned against it. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text ((unblock|Your reason here)) below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look at how many posts I had on my talk page today, I didnt even see your post.--TheMovieBuff (talk) 22:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know, that would be a more convincing argument if you hadn't come over to my talkpage to respond to it. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:34, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...to help avoid having your film articles PRODed and AfDed is to spend a bit more time on each one and flesh them out. You can, for instance, check out their entries on TCM.COM and ALLMOVIE.COM, where there is usually some useful information which can be used. I find the "Notes" section of TCM particularly valuable for information about a film's production and pre-production periods, and ALLMOVIE often has awards and nominations that aren't listed on IMDB or TCM.

Of course, there's no guarantee that having a more complete article will stop it from being deleted, but it will certainly help in arguing for the film's notability, and it will also be less likely to attract the attention of those who object to the creation of film stubs. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try to add a cast column and a reliable source e.g NY Times. TCM etc, that helps. But I think all of these nominations were in bad faith and didn't even give you a chance to improve them. As far as I can see they are actually mainstream films, some of them pretty bad movies, but wikipedia is not here to judge what is good or bad. Sorry you encountered this but hang in there, by the looks of it most in the community agree with me and think they should be kept and worked on in a spirit of collaboration many unfortunately are lacking in on here.. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 00:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you simply add a couple of lines about plot, with a couple of external links, that could help. Other than that, I can't give you any constructive suggestions - this is the extent of my film-article-writing, and it's only because I watched the damn thing at some point. Don't get discouraged, though - it's always good to see good, gung-ho new editors. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you could start them like The Fourth Wish or Love Is Better Than Ever are now with cast and a reliable source for a reference this should be OK. ALso be careful on nationality of films. You claimed a lot of them were American but were solidly European co productions or even Australian!! Please don't be discouraged by this, and tlet the inevitable outcome of the being kept as testament to their notabilty and acceptance of your will to expand. We do have certain standards as you can clearly see, if you can try to follow our advice I doubt you'd encounter any trouble. Regards. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 01:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at what's been done to improve Starship (film) to get an idea of where your articles should be headed towards. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are short articles, but all directed by a notable director. I feel PROD overkill here! Thanks to everyone who's helped expand these stubs. Lugnuts (talk) 07:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Although you should add around the top 10 in the cast rather than the top 4. Also you can link the 2006 as 2006 (2006 in film). As long as you add all of these films to those listed I talked about previously.. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 23:05, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Word of advice on uploading posters. Please don't use the format you've currently been using. A] It'll pick up a bot for deletion because you have no licensing at the bottom, B] You have to wikilink the name of the film at the top . Rationale for Fair Use in [[ ]]. Otherwise at a later date the bot will read it and fail to recognise the article it is being used in. So please copy all of the contents of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Love_is_better_than_ever_ver2.jpg&action=edit. The source must also be stated out side of the template so the bot can read it. This will ave you being drilled deletion warnings later, but above all, you must including the licensing tag at the bottom. See File:Nightofthescarecrow.jpg now. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 14:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Purrfect. Remember to add the titles to pages like American films of 1976 though so people browsing will come across them by year.. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 18:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Some more minor things. See my changes to this. Otherwise you're doing really well. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 21:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try to take more care with you director stubs too, Randall Miller is unreferenced. It needs to have a reference otherwise it is classified as a BLP vio, (it must adhere to biography of living people) and claims however trivial must be cited. You should list his films in a filmography section. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 21:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, MovieBuff. I noticed the AfD on that article too late to offer any input there, but I've done a little work on the article. I see you've gotten the red-carpet welcome treatment from the Film Project's ambassador of goodwill ;-) I also notice you're starting a lot of very short articles on notable subjects. It's frustrating, of course, that the kind of grab-ass games (like PRODs and AfDs) that people play around here have likely helped stifle growth, so that those notable subjects don't have articles already. Anyway, I've found a good way to start decent articles fast is to use a "Skeleton" file. Set up a "Skeleton" article, with all your usual sources, parameters (credits, date of release, etc.), and links to your regular sources-- allmovie, variety, NY Times, whatever-- and just do your searches, then paste the basic info into the form. Take a few minutes after that do some more searching, and to polish the article up, then you should have a perfectly presentable stub, if not start-article within a few minutes. For an example of what I'm talking about, see: User:Dekkappai/Tools/U.S. Sexploitation, then go into edit-mode. This works particularly well when doing articles on one particular genre or film series. Dekkappai (talk) 20:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi from me too. I've been involved in a few of the debates Dekkappai mentions above. I want to stress that you shouldn't take it personally - or get discouraged - when an article is nominated for deletion. It's always best to assume good faith, which means that the nomination is to generate debate as to whether the article stays or goes. I've argued strongly for one of the articles Ride a Wild Pony to stay (which it has) and for another C.H.O.M.P.S to be deleted. The interesting thing is that I think both articles have improved significantly by being nominated. Dekkappai has now found a few references for C.H.O.M.P.S and I did the same for Ride a Wild Pony. So nomination isn't a bad thing in itself. Of course, if nominations are made on a frivolous or vindictive basis, then there is cause to complain as they do take up people's time. There are proper ways to address such instances, but I think these particular ones don't fall into this category. Dekkappai's suggestion above, is a good one, and will mean that the article is a lot better developed when it first "goes live". Anyway, in short, I just wanted to encourage you not to give up and stress that, from my perspective in any case, the involvement in the deletion debates was not personal or any reflection on your effort to create new articles. Cheers, Wikipeterproject (talk) 23:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Porkys has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Transporter series has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:K-9 series has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mexico Trilogy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:Hungarian film director templates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for merging into Category:European film director templates (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:38, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vicky Jenson has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stephen Norrington has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stuart Baird has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stephen Daldry has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Joe Wright has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:06, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a discussion on the talk page and at WP:FILM and consensus seems to be to include the television films. There are articles for some of these, so at least those with an article should be included, but then it would be awkward to randomly exclude those television films which do not yet have an article. Note also that the essay you cited on WP:FILM is just that, an essay and not policy or a guideline. Демоны Врубеля/Vrubel's Demons (talk) 19:14, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know whether anyone was aware of this essay, but even this essay only says that "Red links should be avoided", not that Red links are not allowed. In any case you also removed links to existing articles, and it is quite clear that most if not all redlinks in the template have the potential to be developed into an article. Демоны Врубеля/Vrubel's Demons (talk) 19:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the red links have articles, some of them quite detailed and including third-party sources, on the German Wikipedia. So that alone indicates some notability. That no one has created them so far is not a reason, there is no deadline here and removing the redlinks makes it less likely that anyone will ever develop them into article. If you are unhappy with the template try to get a new consensus about the inclusion of television films. Демоны Врубеля/Vrubel's Demons (talk) 19:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is The Revengers (film). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Revengers (film). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dudes (film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not information aside from basic IMDB information regards cast, etc to make this a relevant article. Fits better in a filmography on director/actors pages, unlinked.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -Cam^T|C 21:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Boywithxrayeyes.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Frankensteinreborn.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 00:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Straightintodarkness.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 00:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine that you must have some reason for continually removing films directed by James Whale from the template for films directed by James Whale. However, seeing as they are, in fact, films directed by James Whale I can't imagine that it is a very good reason. Please stop removing Whale-directed films from the template. Thank you. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 17:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Um gee, how about checking the sources at James Whale? Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 17:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Take three seconds and search Google. Is the New York Times sufficient to establish Whale's direction of Hello Out There? Is this sufficient to establish he directed the training film? Instead of blindly and stupidly reverting edits based on the thoroughly UNreliable IMDB, maybe in future it wouldn't be too much trouble for you to, you know, look at a single Wikipedia article in which Whale's directorship of these films is clearly established by reliable sources. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 17:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Gremlins has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear "TheMovieBuff", I notice you've made it a personal mission to remove The Transporter from the template for films directed by Louis Leterrier. I can't see why though, seeing as how this film was directed by Mr Leterrier, and it's not like this is a state secret that isn't documented. As such I would ask you to please stop removing The Transporter from the template. Thank you.Happy Evil Dude (talk) 13:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 20:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!! I was wondering if you could make film director templates for the Category:Argentine film directors people. There are tons of notable directors and their films need sorting/expanding/starting. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of them are notable but in particular Luis César Amadori and Leopoldo Torre Nilsson could do for starters. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reduced the size of the navbox by grouping the books into there series, which allows easier navigating. I did explain this in the edit summary. Do you disagree with this change? d'oh! _talk 06:15, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Frederik Du Chau has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 21:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert me without an edit summary. It is a waste of space to have one film for each decade in the Paul Greengrass template. Erik (talk | contribs) 00:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Director templates do not need to be consistent by breaking down by decade. If you have an example like Template:Paul Greengrass, there will be mostly-empty lines where the directed works can be better grouped together. I'll be watchlisting where I fix templates to avoid such empty lines. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add mostly-empty lines to director templates. It is possible to be "consistent" to a fault. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WT:FILM#Director templates. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a Bob Clark film. It's not well-known that it is, but in ClarkWORLD, a documentary about him, it's made very clear that he was the director of this film. Lithistman (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm watching ClarkWORLD right now. The documentary makes it VERY clear that B & B was filmed shortly before his death, and released after he had died. A documentary about the man is a far more reliable source than IMDB. Please quit reverting the movie out of the template. Lithistman (talk) 17:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stop removing the Up series from the template. I don't know what the hell your problem is with the series or with using edit summaries, but even if you did bother to explain yourself I highly doubt there's any justification for removing it. Propaniac (talk) 14:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, after looking at the rest of your Talk page, is it your mission statement to randomly delete movies from director templates? Propaniac (talk) 14:06, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They're films that premiere on TV. Nobody on Earth classifies them as a TV series instead of a film series. Perhaps someone could have informed you of that earlier, if you'd mentioned in an edit summary that you were removing it because of a mistaken belief that it's a TV series. Propaniac (talk) 15:43, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:David Slade has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Frederik Du Chau has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vicky Jenson has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:14, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stuart Baird has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:14, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Eric Darnell has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 20:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me what sense it makes to have the template, though, when he's only directed DreamWorks films and those already have a navbox. It's redundant. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 05:33, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simply re-adding Henry VIII (TV serial) to ((Pete Travis)) will not make it a film. It is a two-part serial produced by a television company, and broadcast on television. It has nothing to do with films and did not have a theatrical release anywhere in the world. Bradley0110 (talk) 12:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you admitted that breaking down by decade can be going too far in some cases. Are you telling me that five films cannot be presented in a single row? Erik (talk | contribs) 20:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Burr Steers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:27, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Deep Freeze (film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deep Freeze (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ridernyc (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your language is very beautiful and necessary. I will teach English, and Wikipedia help me. I will translate article with dictionary. 188.18.89.183 (talk) 20:16, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Deep Freeze (film), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that for the 2003 horror film Deep Freeze, director John Carl Buechler created a giant trilobite as the "monster"? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:05, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, the decade breakdown in director navboxes is only for cases where it's otherwise difficult to get a proper overview of the filmography. The breakdown makes the navbox more intrusive, so when it's not absolutely necessary it should be avoided. I also highly encourage you to leave an explanaition when you revert an edit, it is confusing and bad etiquette to not communicate in such situations. Smetanahue (talk) 03:21, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please, you need to come up with a better argument than that many film director templates have decade breakdowns. You can NOT claim that all navboxes have such divisions, because it's just not true. The very template Wikipedia template messages has a section with three rows of links, so it's obviously not too much for a film template to have this as well. The only reason for decade breakdown is when there are so many titles that the overview becomes difficult without dividing the navbox somehow, but this is definitely not the case in the vast majority of the templates. That many navboxes of a certain type (again, not at Wikipedia at large) do something wrong is not a reason to continue doing it wrong. I will undo your reversal at Template:Terry Gilliam and I do not expect you to revert it again until you have provided at least one genuine argument here or at my talk page. Smetanahue (talk) 07:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:KaBlam! has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 14:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Underdog has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:43, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am wondering if you think it would be a good idea to rename director templates to include the word "Director". You may have seen some other editors add writing or producing credits to some templates, and I think it is in part due to the template being just the person's name and not focused enough. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey pal, you do not blow away half of a director's career from his template. And you would certainly never do it without prior discussion on the Talk page. What is the matter with you? Varlaam (talk) 17:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Welcome Stranger (film), and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://welcomestranger.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:04, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Out There was directed in 1950. Please stop introducing false information into the James Whale template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.226.162.41 (talk) 17:24, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Are You The Cow Of Pain?. Thank you. OpenInfoForAll (talk) 18:02, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Carlos Saldanha has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:03, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see you removed the co-directed film Dead of Night from Template:Basil Dearden and Template:Robert Hamer. I had added it for the sake of consistency with Template:Charles Crichton. If we prefer to exclude co-directed films, should we remove Dead of Night and Train of Events from Template:Charles Crichton? I would prefer a consistent treatment, either to include or to exclude from all the templates. Goustien (talk) 01:19, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello TheMovieBuff! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:35, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey, considering your name and all, are you interested in joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Film? RAP (talk)12:35 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I love how your keep rationale's a total non sequitur. It has nothing to do with how many films are on the template. It has to do with Saldanha working for Blue Sky, making the template 100% redundant to the Blue Sky template. Do you really think we need two templates that navigate the same damn thing? That's just template creep. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:21, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey on Template:James Whale you reverted my last change, which I see why and doesn't bother me even though I disagree, but shouldn't you also then change the Hello Out There page as well? --Jnorton7558 (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In Think Like a Man, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages Chris Brown and Kevin Hart (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Solo for Sparrow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Coles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:11, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

The Plunderers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Marsha Hunt, John Saxon and Jeff Chandler

Almost You (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Karen Young and Brooke Adams

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Claudelle Inglish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Arthur Kennedy

Mara Maru (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Richard Webb

Nightmare Honeymoon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Beck

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.0.210 (talk) 20:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Doctor, You've Got to Be Kidding! (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to George Hamilton

Emil and the Detectives (1964 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Heinz Schubert

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Wiki Award You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.4.17 (talk) 20:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Carnegie Hall (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Marsha Hunt and William Prince

Cowboy Up (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Marcus Thomas

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There's a merger proposal relating to an article or articles you've contributed to, relating to the Ramona Quimby books. You are invited to read about and discuss it here: Talk:Ramona (novel series)#Merger Proposal. Thank you. Tlqk56 (talk) 00:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove ((sortname)) templates from filmographies as these are how we keep them sortable. This is how to properly add a link to the entry you edited. Cheers. Elizium23 (talk) 20:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Templates such as Steven Spielberg, Andrew Stanton or James Cameron includes writing and production credits. Why not the Wachowskis template? -Hyliad (d) 16:50, 27 August 2012 (CEST)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Parker (2013 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parker (2013 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Zac  02:30, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Out of Sight, Out of Mind (film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Out of Sight, Out of Mind (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Pulse Pounders has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreleased film with no reliable sources except one claiming it would be shown somewhere we swear - even if it existed this would not deserve its own article without multiple notable and reliable sources giving nontrivial coverage

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DreamGuy (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rob Letterman has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Blazeland has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFILM. No sources found, no notability besides its director.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 08:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wayne Kramer has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 08:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Charles Stone III has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 08:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Matt Reeves has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 08:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Danny Steinmann has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 08:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rob Letterman has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of ((Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde)), ((Treasure Island)), ((Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea)), ((Around the World in 80 Days)), ((Journey to the Center of the Earth)), ((The Shining)), ((A Christmas Carol)) and ((The Invisible Man)), I thought you might be interested in the discussion about the use of derivative works templates in author bio articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels#Derivative works and cultural references templates.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:46, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On an unrelated issue, I see you specialize in movie related templates. I was looking at WP:VA and feel that templates should exist for Jean Cocteau, Walt Disney, Frances Marion, David O. Selznick, Irving Thalberg, Hal B. Wallis, and Darryl F. Zanuck. Are you interested in creating any of these?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Diff'rent Strokes has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:29, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems silly to include only one homage/tribute to It's a Wonderful Life, when there have been so many. Either all of them should be included, or none. Trivialist (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Wonderful Life#Popular culture also lists It's a Very Merry Muppet Christmas Movie, and there's It's a Wonderful Tiny Toon Christmas Special (which just redirects to List of Tiny Toon Adventures episodes). Trivialist (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rob Letterman has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 06:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've been undoing my changes to director navboxes, where they have been arbitrarily split by decade. There are not enough links to warrant splitting into sections, and it leaves multiple sections with one or two links only. Sure, when a director has a great number of films, then I can see that there could be an argument to split (although I'm against it myself), but some of these just have 5 or 6 entries, so there is no need to split them. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I popped a note on the talk page of an editor experienced with templates, etc, who is in agreement with me. Please see User talk:Frietjes#Film director navboxes. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's talk about it somewhere central before you start undoing them all again - the film project maybe? --Rob Sinden (talk) 18:08, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Phil Lord and Chris Miller has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 14:31, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia.

I noticed an article you worked on. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

• dates
• years
• commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
• common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

This applies to infoboxes, too.

Thanks, and my best wishes.

Tony (talk) 03:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some time last year that Robsinden guy changed a bunch of infoboxes so that they no longer list movies by year, which I find, and I think you do as well, to clutter them up too much. I'd rather revert them if I could, but I am not as used to Wikipedia protocol as you are. Would it be better to just go ahead and revert them now, that Robsinden is in semi-retirement and probably has moved on, or start a discussion to attempt to do so? Crispus (talk) 19:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In editing Death Hunt, I noted that two other films based on a similar topic were out there, but had some errors that seem to have creeped into almost all the reference sources. The biggest mistake is the confusion over the titles, Mad Trapper, an alternate title for Challenge to Be Free (1975 US production) and The Mad Trapper (1972 British made-for-television docudrama). Take a look. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See revision. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To you and yours

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear TheMovieBuff,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Little Richard (TV miniseries). Since you had some involvement with the Little Richard (TV miniseries) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:46, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Carlo Carlei, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. JumpiMaus (talk) 18:03, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thieves Quartet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thieves Quartet until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 15:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:REDNOT: "Red links may be used on navigation templates with links to existing articles, but they cannot be excessive". If there's only one or two red links in a navigation template, please don't remove them.—Chowbok ☠ 19:17, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've resized the release years for the works listed on many directorial templates, as it saves space and, in my opinion, overall just looks pretty lovely. Although, to establish a consensus, where might you recommend I bring it up? –Matthew - (talk) 22:39, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article J. B. Rogers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J. B. Rogers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheMovieBuff. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:57, 26 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Category:Films direected by Jack Starrett, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ^Avic_ennasis @ 04:38, 19 Tevet 5777 / 04:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:John Pasquin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:50, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Due to your editorial involvement in ((101_Dalmatians)) I thought you might want to participate in the RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#RFC: Overhauling the Disney franchise templates for consistency.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:40, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheMovieBuff. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:53, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lee Unkrich has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Edwin L. Marin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:11, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Risk (fillm). Since you had some involvement with the The Risk (fillm) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 15:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Breakfast with Einstein has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable film, no independent coverage, does not meet WP:NF

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BOVINEBOY2008 12:35, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Breakfast with Einstein is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breakfast with Einstein until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BOVINEBOY2008 11:08, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Northeast of Seoul has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Likely doesn't meet WP:NFILM

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 17jiangz1 (talk) 17:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Frankenstein & the Werewolf Reborn! has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable film with no independent 3rd party reviews.

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frankenstein & the Werewolf Reborn! is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frankenstein & the Werewolf Reborn! until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Donaldd23 (talk) 22:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Werewolf Reborn! is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Werewolf Reborn! until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Donaldd23 (talk) 22:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:34, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Hollywierd has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable, unreleased documentary about a direct to video horror film. No coverage found during a WP:BEFORE.

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 22:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eye of the Eagle 2: Inside the Enemy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eye of the Eagle 2: Inside the Enemy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 23:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article American Soldiers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Soldiers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

BOVINEBOY2008 22:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article White Rush is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Rush until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 00:15, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Month of Sundays (2001 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Month of Sundays (2001 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 15:13, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Partners in Action is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Partners in Action until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 21:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to determine if the article Fright Show is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fright Show until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Dronebogus (talk) 23:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fright Show is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fright Show (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Dronebogus (talk) 00:34, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Fright Show, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. RL0919 (talk) 17:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dot.Kill has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable film

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 01:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dot.Kill is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dot.Kill until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

DonaldD23 talk to me 02:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Flashfire (film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flashfire (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 19:46, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Delta Force One: The Lost Patrol has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable film, appears to fail WP:NFILM as no reviews cited or found in a BEFORE.

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonaldD23 talk to me 16:30, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Broken Vows (1987 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broken Vows (1987 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 01:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Naked Fear is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naked Fear until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 00:20, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Angel of Pennsylvania Avenue is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Angel of Pennsylvania Avenue until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:05, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Month of Sundays (2001 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Month of Sundays (2001 film) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:10, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cover Up (1991 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cover Up (1991 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

The Film Creator (talk) 20:16, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Martin's Day is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin's Day until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

The Film Creator (talk) 21:31, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheMovieBuff. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Fright Show, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheMovieBuff. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Fright Show".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:40, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Last Man Running (film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Last Man Running (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Happy editing, 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 05:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Out of the Rain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Out of the Rain until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

The Film Creator (talk) 03:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Young Toscanini is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Toscanini until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

The Film Creator (talk) 03:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spirit Lost is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spirit Lost until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

The Film Creator (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Charlie Chaplin has been nominated for merging with Template:Charlie Chaplin filmography. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:56, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Recess has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 15:22, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Russian Holiday is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russian Holiday until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]