User talk:BillDeanCarter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, BillDeanCarter, 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
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! 

Contents 1 Orphaned fair use image (Image:LaJolla Playhouse - Farnsworth Invention.jpg) 2 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Aaron sorkin studio60 promo.jpg) 3 CineVoter 4 CineVoter 5 About the new screenwrites project 6 Orphaned fair use image (Image:A Few Good Men - Stageplay.jpg) 7 Sketch comedy 8 Proposing to merge List of basic classics topics to Classics 9 FA image comparisons re: Sorkin article 10 Hey Bianca 11 Aaron Sorkin 12 William Monahan GAC 13 Deletion 14 Deletion - Reference to Great Book "Tripoli" 15 Picture of the Year 2006 16 Hi 17 General note: Personal attack on User talk:Essjay. using TW 17.1 March 2007 18 Issue de table 19 Mars FAC 20 Screenwriter stubs 21 Monahan 22 William Monahan comments 23 Crybaby Comment 24 FAC 25 RE: Aaron Sorkin at State University? 26 William Monahan 27 Film biography 28 Award 29 page view ranking 30 Thank you

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:LaJolla Playhouse - Farnsworth Invention.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:LaJolla Playhouse - Farnsworth Invention.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Aaron sorkin studio60 promo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Aaron sorkin studio60 promo.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CineVoter

[edit] CineVoter

You voted for the Cinema Collaboration of the week, and it has been chosen as Gladiator (2000 film). Please help improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia film article.

Cbrown1023 talk 00:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the new screenwrites project

Hi, I left a suggestion in the new project's talk page, but since you are the one who started it, I want you to know that if widened to include all film crew biography articles (directors, screenwriters, cinematographers, film editors and film music composers), it would become a very important addition to our needs. Also it will draw a lot more participation than if it stays specific only for screenwriters. I will be very glad to help personally and by bringing more editors to participate. Hoverfish Talk 15:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:A Few Good Men - Stageplay.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:A Few Good Men - Stageplay.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. - Tragic Baboon (banana receptacle) 22:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sketch comedy

Are you interested in doing work on comedy- and humor-related articles with me? If I see enough interest, I may propose a WikiProject.--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 11:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposing to merge List of basic classics topics to Classics

Seeking concensus on proposed merger at Talk:Classics. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 02:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FA image comparisons re: Sorkin article

I'm still looking into this, but just wanted to point out existing Featured Articles Sydney Newman (with Image:Sydneynewman.JPG, Kroger Babb with Image:Monikamovie.JPG and James T. Aubrey, Jr. with its logos. These might be used for supporting arguments for the DVD commmentary screenshot, the posters, and use of series logos in the Sorkin article. Or uh, potentially it may lead to someone pulling the images from those articles too. (I don't think that comparison with FAs on actors and TV series is going to fly due to their inherent visual nature - producers and network executives are closer to the screenwriter role.). Anyway, hope this helps Bwithh 16:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm starting at zero and trying to work back up to a handful of images over at WP:Fair use. It's a battle.-BiancaOfHell 18:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey Bianca

I was wondering, could you go into a bit more detail about the Main article you wanted to link off "Layout and Structure" in the Solar System article? It sounded interesting, but for the life of me I couldn't figure out what it would entail. Thanks.Serendipodous 17:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aaron Sorkin

No, I haven't contacted that user. If you'd like to contact him to see if he'll allow commercial use, feel free (and in case he's concerned about his picture being used commercially, you may want to read User:Fastfission/Noncommercial for ideas). If you'd like, I could contact him since I already have a Flickr account and have gotten a couple people to change the license before. ShadowHalo 19:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Before anyone does contact him, you're sure that's Sorkin, right? I wouldn't want to use a picture of someone else because of an incorrect comment someone made on the page. ShadowHalo 19:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I'll flickrmail him to see if he'll release it. The second picture cannot be used here though since it's a derivative work of a copyrighted work. Taking a picture of a copyrighted picture will not make it free. ShadowHalo 20:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

He said yes. I'll upload the picture to the Commons and add it to the article. ShadowHalo 15:57, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I've never really considered writing anything about that because there's a lot of information at WP:ERP. I usually just ask if they'd be willing to change the license to make it as easy for them. I think you have to have an account to upload files, so I don't want to put up any barriers to contributing a picture. I never present myself as an official or even as a regular contributor. Usually it's something along the lines of "Hey, I really like the picture you took. I'd like to put it on the article about him on Wikipedia" and then briefly explain that Wikipedia needs it under a free license because it lets other people use its content. ShadowHalo 16:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Before you do, use those as examples; don't copy and paste. Anything that long looks huge in Flickrmail. Good luck! ShadowHalo 16:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I combined one of the messages I sent with yours:

Hello, I really like the photo you took of William Monahan and yourself (http://flickr.com/photos/bmt/260317916). I'd like to add it to the article about him on Wikipedia, but this would violate your copyright on it. Would you be willing to license it under either the Creative Commons Attribution or Attribution-ShareAlike license to allow others to use the picture? If so, you can go to edit next to "All rights reserved" on the picture's page and select one of those two from the menu bar.

It's important to provide a link so that they can get to the image easily and know which picture you mean. Also, Flickr allows people to select a Creative Commons license, so it's better to go with that than the public domain since you don't have to forward the permissions to anyone. It's also good because most people like to be attributed in the credits and the CC license requires that. If the person does say yes, tell me so I can give you a few pointers on uploading Flickr images to the Commons. ShadowHalo 16:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Awesome. I believe you need a Commons account to upload, so make sure you do that. I would recommend uploading the original file first so that other people can work from the original if they want. You can use the Flickr template to add information about the picture, including a link to the original picture and the person's Flickr account or homepage. Both of the Aaron Sorkin pictures use the Flickr template, so feel free to take a look at what's there. The search feature on Commons doesn't work well, so you'll need to categorize pictures (I forgot to do that with the second one). I'd recommend using Category:Writers from the United States and Category:Men. As far as cropping, I'm not quite sure if there's any way to do it losslessly, but the image is large enough that it shouldn't be a big problem. ShadowHalo 21:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there is. Just pretend the image is on Wikipedia and it'll work. ShadowHalo 22:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you uploaded the image from the Flickr page itself. If you look above the picture, there's a button that says "All sizes" which will take you to higher resolution versions when available. ShadowHalo 22:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep in mind that "a lack of images does not in itself prevent an article from achieving Good Article status" (from WP:WIAGA). If there's an image in the infobox and the article's text is good, then you don't need to wait to add more images to nominate it for GA status. ShadowHalo 22:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Monahan GAC

Hi there. I've placed William Monahan on hold pending work on a few minor issues; you can read my comments here, and I hope you find them constructive and not too harsh :) Best wishes, Fvasconcellos 00:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey again. I don't know if you're aware, but a Good Article candidate can only remain on hold for 7 days—that will be tomorrow, and although it's improved, the William Monahan article still needs a bit of work. If you need more time, just let me know, and you can work on it pressure-free and renominate it later :) Best, Fvasconcellos 23:29, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. When you're ready to renominate it, go ahead—feel free to drop me a line if you'd like me to review it again. Sorry for not replying sooner to your comment on the 23rd—I've been busy, and it got lost in my talk page. Good luck and happy editing, Fvasconcellos 23:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a fresh look at it as soon as I have time. Best, Fvasconcellos 14:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, I've passed the article. The lead does need work, and I've left some more comments on the Talk page. Have a nice day, Fvasconcellos 15:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, that was fast. Wouldn't you rather have had it go through at least one round of copy editing from a fresh pair of eyes before FAC? Still, I wish you the best of luck, and I'll weigh in when I can. Fvasconcellos 20:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC) P.S.: I see you've expanded the lead. Good work—just be careful with the rest of the article now, so the lead's text is not too similar to the text presenting the facts it's supposed to summarize.

[edit] Deletion

I deleted something I think you might have wanted to have deleted. If I was incorrect, let me know, and I will undo the deletion. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 06:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion - Reference to Great Book "Tripoli"

Why do you keep deleting very appropriate refernces to an excellent new book on The Barbary Pirates, William Eaton and the history of the US Marines. I have watched these references continually be removed from numerous pages by you. You removed the references that I put up there and sited "popups" there were no popups used in the edit.

In response to your reply to me. No I am not the author of the book. I also don't see why that would be of any concern. Surely if you had written a book, you would be allowed to point out its relevance to subjects within the Wiki.

Remember also that just because you "wrote" an article on someone - BTW - that sort of ownership goes against the entire sprit of Wikipedia - doesn't mean that you have the right to unilaterally decide what is appropriate.

I looked at the case file you mentioned. The point you had was that the book had nothing to do with a writer but only to his screenplay. This does not address the 10 other edits you made to a single contributers edits (now two contributers) based on a suspicion that the author was actually adding their own book and that references to barbary coast, William Eaton, etc. etc. (Central Characters in the Book BTW) were somehow "willy nilly" additions to Wikipedia.

Remember the spirit of Wikipedia edits is to improve an article, not to judge and single out users for what seem to be jealousy, flimsy interpretations of Wiki etiquette, and your own misguided feelings of ownership over the contents of this wonderful resource.

Also, I would have rather contacted you via e-mail so that this could have been handled as a conversation, but since you have not seen fit to include contact information, here we stand.

[edit] Picture of the Year 2006

I assert to have voted for 5 in the Commons Picture of the Year 2006 competition. BillDeanCarter 00:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Hi Bill. Do you have any particular relationship w/ User:Sklocke? He seems to have been harassing User:BiancaOfHell. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up ®} 16:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General note: Personal attack on User talk:Essjay. using TW

[edit] March 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did here: User talk:Essjay. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.  Meteoroid »  01:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop inflaming the situation, lest you be blocked. – Chacor 04:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Your comments are unacceptable. Please stop, or you will be blocked. – Chacor 14:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Please review WP:No personal attacks, thanks. Gwen Gale 14:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I've asked that administrators consider blocking you briefly as you continue to make personal attacks on other editors. Your behavior is unacceptable. --ElKevbo 06:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Why? Because I presented an opinion with a little bit of verve? My behavior is unacceptable? That's my line, and I was talking about the lynching of Essjay.-BillDeanCarter 07:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

All of your contributions to that particular page have been abrasive and abusive of other editors. You could have chosen to express yourself differently without incessant personal attacks on editors with whom you disagree. I don't mind you disagreeing with others but the manner in which you chose to do it is unacceptable. Calling other editors "whiners" and "babies" is not how we work in a collegial manner. That you continued to do so even after other editors asked you to stop is what made me request someone take action against you. I don't know if anything will come of this but I hope you understand that how you reacted was contrary to our principles and harmful to the community. You can disagree without being disagreeable. --ElKevbo 07:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Issue de table

Well, the feast is over for this time, and off we go into a period of intellectual fast. But mayhaps will we meet again some day to make more medieval merry! My regards to you for your comments at the nomination.

sincerely,
Peter ^Isotalo 07:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mars FAC

Hi, I made a minor reply to your comment here, kind regards sbandrews 13:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Screenwriter stubs

See the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Screenwriters page -Category:Screenwriter stubs has been created from consensus ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 11:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monahan

Thanks for the compliment. I copy-edited the article, I hope you like. I would suggest shortening the opening a little - some things - like the plot summary of Tripoli - don't really sum up the article (the Tripoli line is basically the same as the one later on down in the article).

Done. I have to briefly mention what Tripoli is about, but I significantly shortened it.-BillDeanCarter 02:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed "intensley" from header (intensely being an opinion/POV). "voraciously" in the first paragraph reads nice, but it's also a slightly POV term (maybe put it in quotes and cite a source if a source used that word to describe it). Same goes for the subsequent "remarkably" (which I removed), "by chance" (removed), "in any event" (rm'd), "arduous" (removed). Also removed "over breakfast" (too much information :-)), as well as "Monahan met with Scott to discuss Tripoli on the day the 9/11 attacks took place" - sounds like too trivial a piece of info - I mean the 9/11 mention.

All fine. I changed "voraciously" to "frequently".-BillDeanCarter 02:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I find "year after year he secured work at a clip plentiful enough to fill out a classic Hollywood montage sequence" to be a grossly self-indulgent sentence, not really in encyclopedic style (and violating WP:NPOV and WP:V - i.e. can you verify that the pace was "plentiful enough to fill out a classic Hollywood montage sequence"?) Definitely should be removed. The same probably goes for "transitioning staccato-like".

Okay, removed. I was trying to find some way of giving a sense of the "taken off" nature of those years. I went overboard, but pared down it hopefully reads nice. But actually please feel free to copyedit it further because I can't be trusted anymore on this paragraph.-BillDeanCarter 23:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Also "with no final cut on his career in American cinema in sight", which I removed, too blatant a POV. "was truer to Monahan and Scott's vision" - how so? "considerable praise" - considerable probably out to be removed.

Hmmm... It's a director's cut that is Scott and Monahan's vision. It's clearly Scott's vision because it's a director's cut. It's more Monahan's vision as well because his shooting script is now full intact. I'll have to give this more thought.-BillDeanCarter 23:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Tackled. I wanted to inform that parts of Monahan's shooting script were in the director's cut, and so I basically said that.-BillDeanCarter 01:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

"Monahan captured the city's blue-collar speech with remarkable authenticity, no doubt owing to his youth spent in the many neighborhoods of Boston." - this is cited, and without checking the ref I'm guessing that a review of the film mentions it, so to avoid a POV you should put it in quotes and mention that it is the opinion of whichever newspaper.

Okay, I reworded it and made it known this was the description given by The Boston Globe.-BillDeanCarter 00:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

"Currently working" - replaced with "As of 2007" - "currently" is too time-dependant - what is "current"?.

Sure, excellent.-BillDeanCarter 00:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

"prolonged vegetable state" - don't understand - probably POV or someone's opinion.

Hmmm, this is Monahan's POV, and I'm basically talking about his POV using his POV. I guess paraphrasing is the thing to do here.-BillDeanCarter 00:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Removed. I'm not even sure what he means here. It sounds like he's saying he doesn't like to sit on his ass for the amount of time it takes to write a novel. But even though screenplays take less time, I think he's still cooped up in an office. No need for the sentence.-BillDeanCarter 00:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The "Awards and honors" section - kind of weird - probably needs to just be removed - since you mentioned most of this elsewhere. What you didn't mention already just add to the article at the appropriate moment.

Removed and incorporated.

Good otherwise, sorry if I sound tough, but I think it'll improve the article. Mad Jack 22:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'll have to address your other points later, but I appreciate them very much. It's the kind of stuff I somewhat knew had to go, but needed to hear or see in writing from another Wikipedian. Thanks.-BillDeanCarter 23:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

And all your points addressed. Let me know if I didn't fully address some of them, or if you have further comments. I much appreciate the time you took to go over this article.-BillDeanCarter 00:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Seems good, I tweaked that Marco Polo sentence. Tell me if it seems clearer now. By "truer to Monahan and Scott's vision"/director's cut, I just meant that you ought to have explained what Monahan's lost vision was in this case - a longer film, more detailed characters, a lost sub-plot, etc. things along those lines. If Monahan used "prolonged vegetable state" you could just quote him if you want to use it and if it makes sense in the context of the paragraph. Cheers, Mad Jack 06:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like by the time I'm seeing the article, it's come a long way! Looks pretty good to me - I made some minor copyedits. I noticed you're trying to create a unified format for all the screenwriter articles (I saw questions about the Controversy and Marriage and children sections). I wonder if you've considered having the Screenwriter project under the auspices of Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography (maybe it already is?) That way you could use the standards they've already set, and add new ones for sections specifically applicable to screenwriting. That way it's not just "well, I did it this way last time." <shrug> Hope this and the edits help. Best wishes MarkBuckles (talk) 01:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Monahan comments

Thank you for your contributions to the Gladiator article, I have nominated it for GAC yesterday, so I'm waiting on that (I will soon move on to get Leslie Nielsen to GA). I don't think I'm ready to review articles for FA status yet as I don't know the guidelines that well, and have just recently become accustomed to the GA standards. I read the article and I don't see it having a problem reaching FA, but there are other reviewers that will have to determine that. I have a few suggestions: (ignore them if they go against the FA standards) add more wikilinks to some of the terms (such as Catholic and Hollywood). I believe you are able to wikilink items more than once throughout the article, so once in the intro, and at least once more in the article would probably be beneficial. In the Working scripts through production and after section, there is one statement that stands alone about the pre/sequel for The Departed. If you can, either incorporate it into another paragraph or expand it some more if possible. In the Becoming a producer section: "Nevertheless, as a producer Monahan would have obligations alien to a screenwriter, such as..." Although FA articles are supposed to have compelling prose, I don't think alien should be used here, as the article is meant for readers of all ages, and they may get confused of the wording. Maybe consider "unfamiliar" or "foreign". So again, ignore these if you don't think they apply, these are just similar issues I sometimes see when I review GACs. I hope the article passes, and if it does, I will mention it as one of our film-related articles in the WP:Films monthly newsletter. If you haven't already, consider joining the WP:Films project, we'd enjoy having you as a member. --Nehrams2020 04:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crybaby Comment

It was not clear that you were making a reference to Mamet or anyone else for that matter. I wrote a concise, clear comment about what I thought of Essjay's intellectual dishonesty (in contrast to some people who expounded on notions of truth in philosophical essays), and I found your comment flip and glib. At that point, it was not even clear that Wales knew/cared about what was going on, and Essjay had not apologised (he still hasn't). Irrespective of the fact that Essjay was an obvious fraud and liar [1] using his "tenure" to influence edit wars, the sheep came out to support the wolf and someone needed to speak up.

Finally, I hold a PhD in theology and several advanced degrees in canon law, plus a doctorate in particle physics, and an honourary doctorate from Brandeis, and I have been nominated for the Nobel peace prize on 2 separate occasions. So I speak with the enormousness of my authority when I say, "naughty naughty comment! but no big deal ;)" - Abscissa 10:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FAC

I beleive you have done some significant work in proposing your article for a feature? I see you are from WIkiproject Screenwriters. I am soon going to propose and start the WIkiProject Film Makers project - which should become a major project to look after articles on all actors, directors, cinemtographers, producers wtc. Do you think it would be a great idea if your project became a sub project within this framework.E.g actors would be a sub project also. WikiProject Screenwriters would be a part of the wider WikiProject Film Makers. What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 13:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] RE: Aaron Sorkin at State University?

Hi BillDeanCarter,

I created the "State University of New York at Purchase Alumni" category to categorize all of the people listed in the "Famous Alumni" section of the article "State University of New York at Purchase" article. I don't know anything about Aaron Sorkin, I was only going by the claims of the person who added him to the famous alumni section.

You can remove him from the category if you want to, but I suppose it's possible to take classes or graduate from more than one college. SquareShot97 03:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Monahan

Hi there. I'll have another look as soon as possible, I'll be very busy this week. Best, Fvasconcellos 15:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Film biography

Hi please see the new Wikiproject proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. We are aiming to start Wikipedia:WikiProject Film biography which will encompas all bio articles related to cinema.

Please see User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld/Film biography page model. It would be great if your project could unite with this new project and work as a section of it. Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 19:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Template.

SCREENWRITERS

Albanian • Argentine  • American • Australian • Austrian • Belgian • Brazilian • British •Bulgarian • Canadian • Chinese • Croatian •Cuban • Czech •Danish •Dutch •Egyptian •English •Filipino •Finnish •French •German •Greek •Hong Kong •Hungarian •Icelandic •Indian •Indonesian •Iranian •Irish •Italian •Japanese •Korean •Mexican •Nepalese •New Zealand •Norwegian •Pakistani •Polish •Russian •Serbian •Spanish •Swedish •Thai •Turkish •Uruguayan •

Please respond I know you are busy pursuing your FA but please take time to discuss this. Cheers ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Award

Thanks, it was no problem. Congrats on your patience—has the article been promoted?. Best of luck on future endeavors! Fvasconcellos 22:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] page view ranking

Hi there, the tool that I use, one that we use at the end of every episode of Wikipedia Weekly Podcast can be found here. It lists the top 100 pages for the previous calendar month if I'm not mistaken. Also, there was an article about this fact (regrarding 300 and thermopylae) on the wikipedia Signpost this week here: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2007-03-20/News and notes. Hope that answers your question. Witty lama 01:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for the review barnstar for William Monahan. It is always nice to work together with other editors to improve an article. Awadewit 05:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)