Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:40, 31 May 2014

Please read this box first! Welcome to my talk page! Questions, information, warnings? Say it here! Please post new topics at the bottom of this page, please sign your topic by placing ~~~~ (four tildes) at the very end, and please remember, assume good faith! You can click here to start a new topic.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

First archive Second archive Third archive Fourth archive Fifth archive

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

You had violated WP:3RR

You need to stop violating WP:3RR. I am so mad at you for violating WP:3RR, If you keep violating WP:3RR, you may be blocked from editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NiamhBurns10 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

The LEGO Movie

You need to stop reverting the edit on The Lego Movie. At present, you've violated WP:3RR since reverting me marked your fourth revert on that page. You need to take your edit to the talk page and explain why you think it should be included in the plot section. I would read WP:FILMPLOT over, and note that this kind of thing isn't included on Misplaced Pages. I'll have to report you if you revert again. Please, just take it to the talk page and we can get a consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NiamhBurns10 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

American Hustle Accolades page

Hi. Hope you're well. I've recently been doing work on this page with the aim of making it a featured list. Since you're the article creator, I thought it best to ask you whether you think it's ready for nomination and if so to nominate on my behalf. Cowlibob (talk) 11:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

@Cowlibob: Wow, you've done a lot of good work on it. Look at the featured list criteria, I would say that it's definitely read to go. I'd be happy to nominate it. Corvoe (speak to me) 12:48, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Hope we have luck on our side. Cowlibob (talk) 15:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey, we've had one quick review of this page for FLC. I think I've resolved most of the points. The mix of nomenclature was brought up. To resolve this, I hoped to changed all instances of the phrase "awards & nominations" to --> accolades and "wins and nominations" to --> awards and nominations". Is that ok? Cowlibob (talk) 17:04, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

@Cowlibob: That is exactly what I would've done, so yes. I apologize that I haven't been able to help much. Been working on a video series with friends, it's taking up a lot of time. Corvoe (speak to me) 17:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey. It's gonna soon be a month since our FLC nomination and we've only had the one review. I wonder if you had any ideas on how we could speed the process. Do you know anyone in WP:FILM or other FLC article creators who'd be willing to review? Hope you're having fun with your video series.Cowlibob (talk) 17:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not very familiar with the featured list process, as I've never done this before. What we could try is posting a request for reviews at WT:FILM, maybe someone with spare time will pit by and give it a peek? Corvoe (speak to me) 17:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Worth a shot. Also I've in the past weeks: messaged Rambling Man (who gave us a quick review in response which is resolved), JuneGloom07, Another Believer, ChrisTheDude and Bloom6132. I don't know if it's worth messaging more people who've done Featured lists especially Film related ones. Cowlibob (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey. We have one more review. I think I've solved most of the issues. The only one left I think was to change the colour of the infobox background to non-blue so that it passes the WCAG AAA contrast test and doesn't clash with the blue text. http://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/ I'm unfamiliar with changing colours so was hoping you'd be able to sort it out. Cowlibob (talk) 11:18, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Billy Boys dyk

I've suggested a new hook for the Billy Boys DYK. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 06:59, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

I've reworded it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nick Principe, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Michael Myers and Halloween (film) (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) 10:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Rob Mayes

On 1 May 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rob Mayes, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that actor Rob Mayes once wanted to be a U.S. Navy SEAL? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rob Mayes. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:24, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

A Railway Collision

FYI, I've replied to your query at Template:Did you know nominations/A Railway Collision. Prioryman (talk) 11:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

hey

I noticed that you're the guy that made articles for all those metalcore bands. Are you still interested in that kinda music? I was wondering if an article could be made — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.39.255 (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Not particularly, but I remember how to make band articles and can definitely tell you if someone is notable enough. Who were you looking to make an article for? Corvoe (speak to me) 19:55, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Nick Principe

On 8 May 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nick Principe, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Nick Principe became a stunt performer so he could portray monsters in films? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nick Principe. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

English-language

I think it is appropriate to use "English-language" to counter systemic bias on Misplaced Pages. I don't think that the absence of any language should mean we assume that it is English. When we say American or French or Chinese, we suggest that it is the home language. There can be cases of multinational productions which have a specific language, which can be a key characteristic of the film. In this case, if we're disputing if it's just American or British-American, then we should default to the common characteristic shared in either case. I don't see any specific guidelines about this, but there is a WikiProject at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. Erik (talk | contrib) 19:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

@Erik: The revert was based on personal belief. I don't think it's particularly useful to disambiguate the language at all, personally (the infobox does that job just fine). However, I know my opinion is not absolute. I won't revert you or anything if you restore it, but I'm unconvinced of its necessity or helpfulness. Corvoe (speak to me) 19:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Colin Farrell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ondine (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) 08:49, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Chad Smith/Will Ferrell

How is it irrelevant? It has been a ongoing joke feud between the two for many years and they will appear together on Jimmy Fallon next week for a charity drum-off. They have raised over $300,000 for their charities. It's a major event in both of their careers and should be included.Jason1978 (talk)

@Jason1978: See my comment on the talk page. I apologized for saying "irrelevant", as that's inaccurate. However, it's insanely overlong and does not deserve it's own section. Maybe a small paragraph under "Career" is appropriate, but not a huge, quote-filled subsection. Corvoe (speak to me) 17:22, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@Jason1978: New section looks much better. Good work! Corvoe (speak to me) 17:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I didn't see your first response before responding. I think being a major event in his career it needs to be placed under career, which is split into different sections and doesn't fit in any of those either. I agree the original posting was too filled with quotes. Thanks! Jason1978 (talk)

Looks like someone else has now removed this saying discuss on the Will Ferrell talk page however left no reasons for it's removal. I pointed out there already was a discussion on it and feel the information posted is important to Ferrell's bio since it's a major event not gaining more media attention than most of his recent films have.Jason1978 (talk)

DYK for Chase Williamson

On 17 May 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chase Williamson, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Chase Williamson graduated from USC weeks before being cast in John Dies at the End? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chase Williamson. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:34, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Erik call

@Erik:, my IP is currently blocked since I'm at school and some idiot was vandalizing. I'm sure you know how it is. So, I have to message you from my talk page. In regards to your last edit to Edge of Tomorrow, U.S. should have periods between it. That's all. Thank you :P Corvoe (speak to me) 13:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I changed it. However, looking at MOS:ABBR (search for "United States"), either way is acceptable. :) Erik (talk | contrib) 14:14, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Due to a detailed Variety article about Edge of Tomorrow here, I rearranged the sections a little bit. Seems like the box office forecasting has become substantial enough for its own subsection, at least. And there's probably more marketing detail to add. I also updated the infobox to state 30+ countries instead of just the UK. However, regarding the London part, I'm not sure if that should count since it is a closed and controlled event. I don't believe that reviews ever come out of these kinds of premieres, so I'm not sure if it should be classified as a release. (Not to mention that saying just "London" implies a public release.) What do you think? Erik (talk | contrib) 14:22, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

@Erik: Definitely agreed that pre-release tracking is worth a subsection. I'm perplexed by the "30+ countries" change. The UK release was only included since they co-produced the film. I would personally advise against this, but I'm no rush to change it. You make a good point for the London premiere, and I think the change you've made is good for now. If we figure out the specific location of the London premiere (i.e. Leicester Square), we should change it to that. The London premiere will be the first premiere, so I think it should be specifically mentioned if more information comes out. Also, the premieres should count since the infobox is supposed to include its earliest release, "whether it was at a film festival, a world premiere, or a public release".

I'm gonna keep working on the article (I'm hoping we can get it up to GA soon after release) but you seem to have a very good grasp on what to do. Corvoe (speak to me) 16:07, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

UPDATE: Autoblock is gone. Victory. Corvoe (speak to me) 16:59, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

A whole pile of reviews came out for Edge of Tomorrow! (I wonder if they decided to screen it for critics to offset the bad press that was emerging.) Spencer Maverick set up a section, but I rewrote it, citing a bunch of reasons to do so. Can you review the section and provide feedback on the talk page? Like if we should have "Reception" separately from under "Release" and if to rename it "Critical reception" or not. Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) 01:07, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

@Erik: At a glance, it's looking good! As a tendency, if "Reception" is included under "Release", it's usually when the release section is otherwise small, and it's usually titled "Critical response". I'd say in this case – especially since the film is bound to get well over 100 reviews – that separating it into it's own section is totally reasonable. There's already three subsections in Release. I'll be sure to look at the section tomorrow, maybe add a few more reviews to it and do some clean-up and paraphrasing. Personally, I think the extremely specific nature of the review count is a bit much (the whole positive/negative bit). I get what you're trying to do, keeping the percentage from changing 95,042.5 times before release, but it's just a little weird looking, and a bit long-winded. If you decide to keep that section, you need to write out all the numbers, since they're lower than 10. But again, if it were me, I'd include the percentage.

Not entirely sure how cohesive that was, so I'll come back tomorrow. You'll have to forgive me; I've been awake for over 90 hours (woke up Monday, haven't slept since). Oddly, I stopped sleeping after watching The Machinist for a second time. Not entirely convinced I won't be awake for a year straight now. Corvoe (speak to me) 02:27, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! I don't have a preference for where to put the critics section. There are good reasons either way. I find "Critical reception" and "Critical response" interchangeable; the use of "Critical response" at MOS:FILM does not necessarily mean it has to be used universally. (I personally never liked the structuring of the release-related sections at the MOS, such as "Box office" being a section separate from "Release".)

I guess I am particular about reporting RT and MC scores. I'll try to explain my thinking with a comparison of examples. The Avengers has 92% at Rotten Tomatoes but 69% at Metacritic. Gravity has 97% at Rotten Tomatoes and has 96% at Metacritic. Looking at Rotten Tomatoes alone, The Avengers and Gravity seem like equal contenders in quality. However, using Metacritic as well, it's more clear that The Avengers was a "pretty good" film (meaning that in the RT plinko, most reviews fall on the positive side) where Gravity is "near perfect" or whatever. That's why I favor spelling out the methodologies every time; they're not conventional to general audiences. I've played around with the RT/MC wording for a few years now, and this is what I have at the moment, albeit on the detailed side. :-P Another worthwhile consideration is that statistically speaking, the number of reviews should generally be 32 to be stable. Meaning that if you have five reviews, additional ones will change the outcome greatly. If you have 32 reviews, though, additional reviews will be unlikely to change the outcome very much. Erik (talk | contrib) 13:51, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I think a good middle ground would be to negate the percentage, but include the average mean. It shows the exact opinions considerably better, like you said. I think showing Avengers's 8/10 as the focal point, rather than the 92%, would convey general opinions a lot better. Metacritic is basically the "Cream of the Crop" section of RT as well, so we have to keep that in mind. RT includes far more critics, some less "respectable", but a broader sample (in my opinion) returns truer results.

For this instance, in pre-release, I would say including scores is fine, but leave the percentage until the film is widely released. Corvoe (speak to me) 13:54, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you suggesting to take out the RT percentage entirely? I think that would be hard to keep out any film article. :-P Erik (talk | contrib) 13:59, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't know. I'm trying to think of alternate options :P That's pretty much all I got on how to help without the super long specificity. Corvoe (speak to me) 14:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe the details could be relegated to notes that readers can jump to if they are interested in a further breakdown. Anyway, kind of interesting to see how the early summer blockbuster films are getting good reviews -- Godzilla, X-Men, and Edge of Tomorrow. Erik (talk | contrib) 14:20, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe so. We'll think of something, I'm sure. We could also try removing RT and Metacritic averages entirely, and just using the reviews themselves for early opinions. That'll be hard to keep steady, but it might be the happiest medium.

In reference to the high-rated blockbusters, I think it's exciting. It's a good indicator of changing times, that just because a movie will (probably) make a shit load of money doesn't mean it can't be great. I've seen Godzilla twice, so that pretty clearly states my opinion, and I'm seeing X-Men tonight. A bunch of my buddies who saw it last night said it was excellent, and I'm sure I'll echo that opinion. Also, I'm extremely excited for Edge of Tomorrow and I'm confident it'll be great. And finally, four words: Guardians of the Galaxy. August can't come soon enough. Corvoe (speak to me) 16:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree that it's exciting! I was really surprised at how subversive Captain America: The Winter Soldier was, for example. I saw Godzilla last weekend and enjoyed it a lot, though I think Pacific Rim was more fun in the mega-fighting sense. I'm curious to see what a Godzilla sequel would do. I saw a rumor that it would be an island of monsters, which seems cool, but I can't help but imagine a dirt island since all the trees have been knocked down and the grass trampled. :) X-Men: Days of Future Past sounds like a really neat ambition; I never would have thought that it could stitch together the trilogy and prequel's timelines. Edge of Tomorrow looks like great fun; I enjoyed Source Code a lot and look forward to a variation on that theme. I'm not excited for Guardians of the Galaxy, more because the premise is confounding to me, but if it gets good reviews, I'll see it. Will be seeing The Help tonight though, since my partner and I finished reading the book this past week. Hope you enjoy X-Men! Erik (talk | contrib) 17:18, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Winter Soldier is my third favourite movie this year so far (below Godzilla and Lego Movie), absolutely excellent. I wasn't a huge fan of First Avenger, so it was a wonderful surprise. I'm sad to hear that you aren't excited for GotG. I've read the source material several times over, so I'm extremely excited. That, and I love James Gunn. And the entire cast. I'm just really excited is all :P Truthfully, I don't even know what the premise is yet, but I don't care. I'm going to the midnight premiere of that film, and I'm about 99% sure I'm gonna love it. I mean, it's tagline is "You're welcome" for cripe's sake. That is perfect. Corvoe (speak to me) 17:24, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I never read the GotG source material, so I guess I am seeing it like Snakes on a Plane, which was a silly/fun premise that had a lot of Internet frenzy but turned out not to be so great. It does seem like it should be pretty good, so I'll follow its coverage for sure. :) Erik (talk | contrib) 17:35, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Just overhauled the "Box office forecast" section here, especially to be more retrospective. Can you let me know what you think? I was trying to get the North America-related stuff (like The Fault in Our Stars) upfront and out of the way to segue into box office expectations outside the United States. Erik (talk | contrib) 19:02, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

My Colin Farrell revert

Thanks for your note. Angelina Jolie is known the world over for being an actress so putting that she's an actress would be redundant. Everyone else mentioned in the intro is known, maybe not as much as Jolie, but known to general interest readers. Nicole, however, is not, so sticks out like a sore thumb even if people can click on her name and find out who she is. Actaully, it looks even weirder that way because as a reader you think "Why is this woman's name linked? I've never heard of her." In reading, you always want people to "get it" and keep reading, not click away. Now people who don't know think, "Ah, she was a Playboy playmate. Okay." I don't think mentioning Nicole as a Playboy playmate is bloated at all: That's what she was known for and it illustrates the kind of fun Colin was having at the time. If she were a medical illustrator, I would have put that in, but it just so happens her most known job is to have been a Playboy playmate, so let's not discriminate against these people. Hope this helps!--Aichik (talk) 15:27, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

@Aichik: Thank you for the clarification. That does makes sense, actually. It saves the reader time from clicking on her name to figure out information we could list in the article. In my opinion, the inclusion of the parentheses in the lead, "(including Angelina Jolie and former Playboy playmate Nicole Narain)", is unneeded since it's listed later. I saw that the section was also reworded, clarifying who everyone was. I think this was a nice touch, personally.

All the same, thank you for the courteous reply! Corvoe (speak to me) 15:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Happy to help!--Aichik (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Edgar Wright, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marvel (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) 08:50, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

X-Men: Days of the Future Past

Hey, Corvoe, you are welcome for my recent edits of the article. However, I have to ask you a favor. Can you request copy edit for the article on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests? The rule for requesting is limited to two, and I already used up mine, so I am asking you to do it for me. The film's plot summary is getting too excessive details, might as well letting experienced copy editor to help getting it done. You can ask them to get the summary put to 700 words without omitting the important plot points.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 21:05, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

@NeoBatfreak: I actually have a tendency to copy-edit plot sections myself. I'm not a member of the Guild, but I'm heavily considering joining them. I'll give it a trim and see if you think it's good enough. If not, I'd be happy to request it. Corvoe (speak to me) 21:08, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 21:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

@NeoBatfreak: Plot is now down to 649 words. Corvoe (speak to me) 21:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Uh, now it is, and it's actually 648 words. Edit conflicts are annoying. Corvoe (speak to me) 21:35, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes it is. Hope you don't mind the hidden note.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 01:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Not at all! I just noticed you added that instead of changing it or anything. Corvoe (speak to me) 01:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

♥IBCPirates♥

I wasn't sure if it was because it was your old talk page, but I left a message there about Frozen, and I didn't know if you saw it or not. Oh well. BTW, I need your help on something.--IBCPirates (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I probably missed it. What can I help you with? Corvoe (speak to me) 22:19, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

One, your picture on your page looks exactly like Martin Freeman, the actor who plays young Bilbo in the Hobbit. Two, can you puh-lease help my friend, 30SecondsToMars with editing? I would help her myself, but I'm clearly not there yet. She is struggling ah-lot. --IBCPirates (talk) 22:23, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

You think Sam Rockwell looks like Martin Freeman? I totally disagree, but to each their own :p And what is the page she's working on? I'll see if I can squeeze it in. Corvoe (speak to me) 23:14, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes! They do look alike! And Sam Rockwell also looks like Peregrin Took. I don't know...I think it's either the nose or the eyes that make him look like Martin and Billy. If he shaved off that scrawggly beard (Quote from Jack Sparrow in "At World's End" XD) he'd look more like them. Actually, I think it's Sam's eyes that make him look like Billy and Martin. What do u think? And Massie is working on the page 'Oceans' By her fav band, Evanescence. She also tried to work on Freedom Writers, but I have no idea how that is coming along. She's on right now, FYI. --IBCPirates (talk) 23:32, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi again! I might not be on for a long time, so just letting you know. BTW, I put a picture on my user page about what I do look like. You should check it out. c ya! --IBCPirates (talk) 00:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

The Avengers

For some reason my edit summary got cut off, the rest of it should have read "open this can of worms". The wording was discussed ad nauseam and that was settled wording.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 10:04, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@TriiipleThreat: Ahhh, okay. I understand that. Quick question for Thor: The Dark World though: saying "In (film name), (plot summary)" is extremely strange to read in my opinion. I agree that my wording was poor, but I think it should be changed. Corvoe (speak to me) 11:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

It seems fine to me, "In (film name)" is synonymous with "in the film".--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:35, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@TriiipleThreat: Eh, I guess. Reading it out loud sounds extremely weird to me, but I'll leave it. I'll get used to the uniformity of the MCU articles eventually. Corvoe (speak to me) 13:30, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

You changed my edit to A Million Ways to Die in the West

All I wrote that Jamie Foxx was listed in the cast list reprising his role as Django from Django Unchained. I have seen the film and Jamie Foxx is in it reprising the role of Django. I dont see why it was deleted.

The film isn't out yet, and we have no verifiable way of proving that he's in it. You could very well be right, and if you are and I can find a notable source to prove it, I will happily restore your edit. Worst case, it'll be restored tomorrow. Corvoe (speak to me) 14:05, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok thanks the film was released today in Australia thats why I wrote it.

I restored it! I apologize for not checking other release dates. I can't find a source that he was Django, so I'm gonna hold off on adding that. Corvoe (speak to me) 14:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I just added to the page today the character Ryan Reynolds played and just wrote that Foxx was reprising his role from Django Unchained,

The FP - reprise

Hi. Started going through it, and it looks pretty tight. Made some small c/e changes. Got to the Costume section and changed the first sentence. When you go to FA, they're going to look at writing style. See how I changed that sentence? Try not to use words like "got", and never use a contraction except in quotes. I'm not going to make any more style changes, that should come from you. I'll finish the rest over the next two days. So far, here's what I have:

Lead Section

• ("The FP") - parentheses and quotes are redundant should read either: Frazier Park (The FP), or Frazier Park, "The FP", - (but see my note below on the FP)
• March 16, 2012, (there should always be a comma after the year, per MOS)

Plot

• Angered, JTRO ends their friendship - who? It reads now like he ends his friendship with L Dubba E.
• You used to have something explaining 245 and 248, etc… I don’t see it anymore. It needs to come back early in the plot section, so folks will understand.

Throughout

Be consistent, sometimes you have The FP, other places the FP (personally, I think it should be the latter) Try to limit the number of times you use quotes around words to punch them. If overused, they become distracting, and have the opposite affect than what you intended.

That's all I have through the Casting section. Pretty tight. I didn't check for paraphrasing issues... which is HUGE in FA. You'll get editors that simply go through the sources and if they find close paraphrasing they will automatically reject it. So be aware of that. The other issue, which I think you've addressed is the copyright issue.

More tomorrow. Onel5969 (talk) 22:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@Onel5969: All have been done except the 245/248 part. Looking at the reviewed version, the first paragraph of the plot has remained almost completely unchanged. I'm not sure what explanation I had for them, or even how to describe them, really. Neither of their motivations are established, there's no real backstory. I'm not sure. Corvoe (speak to me) 13:42, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I seem to remember there was a line in there somewhere explaining that they referred to the street names, or street numbers, something like that. Onel5969 (talk) 13:54, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I figured out what you meant. 245 is from the south, 248 is from the north. Not really sure how to word it though. Take a look when you can. Corvoe (speak to me) 16:42, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

But do the numbers 245 and 248 refer to streets? The change you made still doesn't deal with the meaning of the gang names, just where they are from. I think after your new sentence, "The leader of the southern 245, L Dubba E, battles and defeats the leader of the northern 248, BTRO.", you need another short sentence saying something along the line: The 245 and the 248 refer to _____________.

I'll try to get my hands on the DVD again, it must've been in the featurettes. I feel like it was area codes for phones or the end of a zip code. Not sure how fast I can add this. Corvoe (speak to me) 19:32, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Okay, it was bugging me. So I had to find where you referenced it. You never actually added it to the text of the article, but it was in a discussion we had on your talk page, which you've now archived. What you said was: " They explain on the featurettes that 245 and 248 were area codes that separated the north and south parts of the town. I'll watch through those again to see who said it." So you don't need to say who said it, just insert a sentence, like "The 245 and 248 were the area codes that separated the north and south parts of the town." Onel5969 (talk) 21:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Only two more notes - Make sure all the quotation marks, single and double are the straight kind, not slanted or curled. (I've tried to do some of that, but may have missed a few); and I'm not sure if the titles of the different editions should be in quotes, or italicized.

@Onel5969: I added a note for the gangs, I think it's a happy medium. Doesn't add a non-sequitur to a very important plot point, but still provides the information. I think I got all the quotation marks. Corvoe (speak to me) 17:57, 31 May 2014 (UTC)