Jump to content

User talk:Sock/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8→Archive 10
This archive covers all talk page posts in 2015.

WikiCup 2015 launch newsletter

Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.

Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. Miyagawa (talk) 20:31, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

January - 2015

The recent personal attacks and long term violation of copyright is impossible to justify. I have brought it to ANI now, look Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Overall disruptive user. Bladesmulti (talk) 16:15, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

There is a problem. Do you got a minute to solve it ?

The problem is this page, American Cinema Editors Awards 2013. There is no page as such. I tried to create one, but it's redirecting itself to American Cinema Editors. However, that should not be the case. Please can you stop this redirection, So that I can create a page like American Cinema Editors Awards 2011. CAN YOU HELP ME ?? DtwipzBTalk 15:02, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Dibyendutwipzbiswas: I'm glad I get to tell you this! I figured this out for myself after an immense amount of time trying to figure it out, but it's much easier than it may seem. When you get a redirect, you'll see the name of the redirect page under the real page name. For instance, click the link: American Cinema Editors Awards 2013. You'll find yourself on the redirected page, and you can try this. In this case, it shows "(Redirected from American Cinema Editors Awards 2013)". If you click that blue link (not on the talk page, but on the American Cinema Editors page), you'll be led to this page, which you can edit to change it from being a redirect. It took me quite awhile to figure out how to do this, don't worry. That was kind of difficult to word, so tell me if I said anything confusing! Sock (tock talk) 15:06, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Got your point. So all I have to do is remove the redirection from this pageand make my own edits. Right?? DtwipzBTalk 15:11, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
@Dibyendutwipzbiswas: Yes sir! Just hit the edit button and have at it! Sock (tock talk) 15:12, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, man. I was really lost there. Happy Editing!! DtwipzBTalk 15:15, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I love your username

And the nice photo of you on your userpage. I noticed because before my morning coffee, and with the sun shining in my eyes I thought one of your edits on my watchlist was mine. I'm glad I clicked through. Nice to meet you. —Soap— 14:24, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

@Soap: Right back at you! I've done the same thing with some of your edits before as well, haha. I've seen you around a little bit, but I seldom leave "hello" messages on talk pages because most people ignore them, in my experience. Pleasure to meet you as well! Sock (tock talk) 14:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Pulped

Hey there Sock.

Thanks for taking care of the Pulp Fiction page.

I'm not sure why you removed the link to the wavecat playlist - after all that seems to be the only complete copy of that movie's soundtrack (there's an incomplete one on YouTube and several lesser ones scattered around @ SoundCloud, Spotify & more on YT).

I'm not a total noob, (I hope) - but maybe misunderstand the reason why a resource which seems perfectly relevant to me is removed. Help me to understand your edit, please.

Perhaps there's a better or more appropriate way of submitting the link?

Please accept my fully prostrated quirkafleeg, (in advance) for your kind advice: _o_

HKgamer (talk) 01:33, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

@HKgamer: Thank you for coming here to discuss it with me! Basically, that link serves as an extraneous bit that isn't really relevant to the article. If someone wants to find the soundtrack listing, they can do that simply by Googling. If you look at album and soundtrack pages, we don't link to places to buy it, we link to databases like AllMusic. In the case of films, it's places like IMDb, or maybe Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes for those who want to look at reviews. I know you were acting in good faith, and I appreciate your effort to help! However, I think the link included was unnecessary for an encyclopedia. Thanks! Sock (tock talk) 01:38, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay :-) - I get most of that (ofc) & thanks for disambiguating.

But wave.cat isn't selling music, though & though a soundtrack listing is integral to the index of that page, none of the pages that you suggest as appropriate actually contain the music.

Surely wave.cat's list, as an online repository of the actual recordings is relevant?

Kinda like the actual sound of music might be more relevant in the experience of that movie, rather than it's title alone, The Sound of Music, maybe?

/me is 'stretching a metaphor...'

HKgamer (talk) 02:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
For the edit summary of "The sources aren't there to look pretty" on Blue Is the Warmest Colour! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 21:00, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I have my moments :P Thanks Lugnuts! Sock (tock talk) 21:03, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Birdman accolades

When I was editing the article, by editing I mean I was adding awards from here. In between that you made a edit, which in turn made my edits disappear because I didn't save them. I lost my hours of work in there. I'm not blaming anyone but myself for that.

All I am asking can you please add the awards that aren't there on the pages. I'm having a exam tomorrow, otherwise I wouldn't mind to do it. Can you please do this? DtwipzBTalk 15:41, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

@Dibyendutwipzbiswas: I know that feeling, trust me. You just have to make sure that you copy your revision from the lower area and save it somewhere, like on a subpage or in a text file.
The problem with adding everything from IMDb is that much of it isn't notable. That's why I removed the Black Film Critics Circle and the North Carolina Film Critics Association. Honestly, a lot of the awards that are still there aren't notable. But the bare minimum for inclusion in an accolades list is that the ceremony have an article on Wikipedia. I'm not encouraging that you make a bunch of stubs for awards and associations, they have to meet the notability guideline. Especially recently, people are making stubs exclusively to add awards to accolades sections, and that's not how it should be done. I'll go through and add whatever meets that minimum requirement, but I won't add anything without an article to start. I'll have to do this tonight, though. Sock (tock talk) 16:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
OK. DtwipzBTalk 16:19, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
About that 'notable' thing. May I add "Village Voice Film Poll", "Santa Barbara International Film Festival". "Palm Springs International Film Festival", "Hollywood Music In Media Awards", "Camerimage". DtwipzBTalk 13:48, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
@Dibyendutwipzbiswas: Seeing as Village Voice is a newspaper and does not have an actual awards event (like the National Board of Review), I'd say no to that one. Santa Barbara and Palm Springs are both perfectly fine. Hollywood Music in Media Awards doesn't have an article and doesn't appear to have any coverage outside of reporting the awards that they give, so I'd say that fails WP:N in my opinion. Camerimage is definitely fine. Sock (tock talk) 13:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
So, "Santa Barbara", "Palm Springs", and "Camerimage" made the final cut !! I am adding these up. DtwipzBTalk 14:22, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Hail, Caesar! has been nominated for Did You Know

Foxcatcher

Further to your edit of Foxcatcher, if Miller is co-producer maybe the Infobox marking him as producer needs to be changed too? I don't know, but I figure you do so change it or don't, I leave to you. -- 109.78.108.156 (talk) 05:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@109.78.108.156: I think you misinterpreted my edit. Miller is a producer of the film, but the lead said he co-produced (likely because other people produced it as well). That isn't correct, so I dropped the "co-" from it. Does that make sense? Sock (tock talk) 11:46, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Birdman

I wanted to create a Year-End list for Birdman like Boyhood and Snowpiercer. But the problem is there is way too many publishers, articles and writers to include. So, I am asking is there any way you could help me to figure out which publishers and writers to include in here ??

I started a draft. DtwipzBTalk 11:45, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Glee (season 6)

Hello, there is a current ongoing discussion revolving around the style of crediting writers for the TV series Glee, over on the talk page. I thought you may be interested in voicing your opinion. Thank you and cheers, LLArrow (talk) 07:58, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Plot for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Llewyn_Davis

Hi, I made the edit to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Llewyn_Davis to add that he was beaten at the start of the film (I forgot to login so I think it shows as an anon edit).

I don't understand why you reverted my edit, in hindsight the chronology in the movie (as a standalone piece of work) is perhaps open to interpretation, but this interpretation is not discussed at all in the article (only in the talk page) and or in the movie. As description of the movie plot, it seems an error to leave this out and makes the wikipedia page appear to be inaccurate.

Would love to hear your opinion on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyroneking (talk • contribs) 12:39, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

@Tyroneking: Thank you for bringing it here! I really appreciate you starting a discussion about our disagreement, it's always a pleasure when it doesn't turn into an edit war. As for why I reverted it, it's unnecessarily repetitive in my opinion. I find that saying he got beat up after a show at the beginning of the plot section only to reincorporate it at the end is a bit of a time waster. Why not start where the film's timeline does, and have the scene where it takes place in the plot; after his concert? If we can't come to an agreement between the two of us, I'd be happy to open a discussion on the talk page. Thanks again! (: Sock (tock talk) 12:45, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
@Sock: Hi, thanks for your response. IMHO that plot point itself is open to interpretation, so I guess we're both seeing it from different POVs, which is OK by me ... but, I hate to see Wikipedia looking inaccurate. Maybe we could refer to the issue in the plot description itself - maybe at the end add "This scene is also portrayed at the start of the film." That way it's nice and precise (slightly "the best kind of correctness" ;) without being too thoughtless. Anyway, nothing so serious in my eyes, so I'm happy if you think it's just not right. KR.

The Dark Knight/The Dark Knight Rises Country of Origin

The American Film Institute does not credit the United Kingdom as the country of origin for either The Dark Knight or The Dark Knight Rises so this is why the AFI citation was placed.Einsteinbomb (talk) 01:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The AFI are frequently problematic in this area. Where several other sources may state that it was co-produced in several countries, AFI often only includes the US. This is way too trivial for me to take to the talk page, but I still don't really see the purpose even if the AFI wasn't an issue. Sock (tock talk) 02:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
The American Film Institute does cite Great Britain as the country of origin in Batman Begins; this was because Syncopy Inc. had a larger role in that film than in either The Dark Knight or The Dark Knight Rises. I'm inclined to side with the American Film Institute because these films are the intellectual property of an American film studio (Warner Bros.) and were produced by an American production company (Legendary Pictures). Syncopy Inc. was cited as a production addition namely due to the fact that it Christopher Nolan's company, but to warrant a country of origin for solely Syncopy Inc. is not wise. Einsteinbomb (talk) 02:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Long term vandal

Hi there! In reference to your question, I guess sometimes we forget to mention this, but there's a persistent, disruptive user known as the Martial Arts Vandal who targets martial arts-related pages, mostly action films that star a martial artist. He's been at it for around five years now, so we've resorted to bulk rollback and indefinite semi-protection on every single page that he edits. The problem is that some of his edits actually are constructive, so it's difficult to spot him unless you're familiar with the case. His M.O. is to tirelessly edit war over petty disruption: MOS violations, genre warring, original research, etc. If you see an unexplained mass rollback on film-related articles by Ronhjones or me, it's likely to be related to this guy. If you see hm, the best thing to do is just leave him alone and wait for Ronhjones to block him. This vandal will edit war for hours every day over the course of weeks to keep his changes. I've half-seriously begun to wonder if he's a rogue bot. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thank you for helping make Guardians of the Galaxy a GA. Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
@Favre1fan93: Whoa! I didn't realize it'd been promoted. Congrats! That was incredibly fast. I tried to keep up with the nom, but one of you always changed the problems before I could help, haha. Great work to you too! Sock (tock talk) 12:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Hail, Caesar!

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

There is a deletion discussion at Central Ohio Film Critics Association, a topic similar to one in which you participated here. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Also, at 2013 North Carolina Film Critics Association Awards and 2012 North Carolina Film Critics Association Awards. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Her (film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Her (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 00:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

The nomination is on hold until February 15th. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:57, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Her (film)

The article Her (film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Her (film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 05:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Enthiran/archive1

I have opened the peer review for the film. Please do suggest any changes that I should make before I go for FAC. — Ssven2 speak 2 me 04:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

For you efforts

The Purple Barnstar
I'm awarding this to you in hopes that it offsets the aggravation that you had to put up with in the last couple hours. Many thanks for your vigilance. MarnetteD|Talk 17:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


@MarnetteD: Thank you very much! Today was certainly unlike any other day I've had on this site. Plenty of people have been angry with me before, but this was a new level, haha. And yes I do! I've always loved. However, including that infobox would be lying, as my favourite animal is the chinstrap penguin. Red pandas are in a close second, though! Sock (tock talk) 21:05, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Her (film)

The article Her (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Her (film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 00:01, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you so much for for writing Her. Such a great film. 12 Years and Her were, without a doubt, the best films of 2013. They're now both GA! Well done again. Neuroxic (talk) 23:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Just a comment out of amazement

Up until March 2009, no one thought to register the name "Sock"? Snow -I take all complaints in the form of rap battles- 00:53, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Snow Rise: Believe it or not, waaay longer than that. I only got this name this past July. 24.209.10.243 (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Didn't realize I was signed out, but this was actually me, as I guess you figured out :P Sock (tock talk) 16:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh, you transferred your contributions? Is that a fairly seamless process these days? I remember vaguely, from when I autoconfirmed that it was still hitchy, but that was four years back. But that truly is astonishing, about the name staying free. That many years of angry trolls just not even bothering to look. Still, you must run in to the occasional editor who gives you grief just on the presumption of the name, though. But then you also have that disarming little joke in the signature. :D By the way, if you have any busy work for District 9, I'm happy to lend a hand. Snow -I take all complaints in the form of rap battles- 05:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
The process is WP:USURP. I went from User:Erikster to User:Erik because of that. If you were so inclined, you could probably usurp User:Snow. :) Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 12:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh trust me, several people have. There was a veeeeeery long debate over some stuff on Leonardo DiCaprio's article and I changed my name from Corvoe to Sock in there, and the editor who was disagreeing with me tried to use it against me. Kinda confusing, given that I have a very long history here and have never used nor been under suspicion of sockpuppetry. I just ignored it, haha.
Also, what Erik said! Sock (tock talk) 16:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hopeful

Sock, you have over 20,000 edits, most of them in article space. You got 80 articles, and a bunch of FAs and GAs. You made contributions to RFPP and to ANEW, to ANI and to AIV, and your block log is clean. Also, you have a Red Panda in your edit notice. I don't know if you do a lot of CSD nominations or AfD work, but I assume you are well aware of the various policies and can speak on them intelligibly: there really is no reason not to run for admin, unless of course you got skeletons in the closet. RfA loves content contributors, and you seem to be one. User:Kudpung, would you consider recruiting this editor? Drmies (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

@Drmies: Thank you very much for your kind words! I've dabbled in CSD, and usually only participate in AfD's when they involve a topic I work in (films, mostly), but I'm very open to working in those areas. I just have a tendency to focus on editing articles. I'm incredibly flattered by your analysis of me, though! I'm glad I didn't leave too bad a taste over my mistake on Daniel Day-Lewis' article, haha. And I've always been interested in going for RfA, but hadn't really given any thought to if I was ready yet. Sock (tock talk) 17:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
No worries. Look, you don't necessarily have to be an AfD participant, or a very active one, to succeed at RfA, but deletion is of course one of the most powerful tools we have--I suppose maybe in the order deletion, blocking, protecting. I saw your note on your user page, which is why I asked you. Kudpung follows the RfAs more closely, and he can perhaps give better advice, and in the business of film, MichaelQSchmidt is an active editor and admin who might want to weigh in. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
If this does happen, I would like to co-nominate Sock. For me, he has stood out among editors in his clueful and civil conduct. Let me know if that is feasible! Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 17:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
@Drmies: I'm glad you spotted the note! I always assumed I needed more under my belt to go for RfA with a chance of success, so it's good to hear that it isn't necessarily the case. Also thank you very much, Erik, that means a lot! Sock (tock talk) 18:33, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, Erik is kind of a rookie here, I believe. Listen, don't be a co-nom, Erik--be a nom. Let's wait for Kudpung, who's taking his sweet time since he's probably on a beach or eating something delicious for which there are no words in English. Sock, if you do think you have skeletons, or past disagreements that got out of hand or that you are unhappy with, feel free to drop me a line via email. Drmies (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
@Drmies: I've just sent you an email. Luckily my closet is quite empty, but one (fairly recent) incident stood out as a "play it safe and bring it up" type thing. Sock (tock talk) 15:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:56, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

hey

so I had something happen perhaps user/operator error on my part....kinda a simple thing but potential problem non the less....I was trying to link the page for the new Coen film Hail,Caesar!(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail,_Caesar!) to my facebook page and since there is an exclamation point at the end of the URL it will not stay in the link when shared, which results in a page not found when you click the shared link. The exclamation no matter how you type or copy will not be allowed to be part of the (blue)link. Not sure if this is a facebook thing or url thing with the exclamation at end of link..perhaps a work around will work. I am new to this wiki and its cool that you can contact contributors etc. I somehow managed to see you post to that site, and seemed to be knowledgeable and a part of the Wiki force:) Thanks, and perhaps my message makes sense. If any questions or work around resolves let me know davidshaneduke at the G mail:) Take care and don't get lost:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:25FF:3EF0:0:0:0:3C (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I created the redirect Hail, Caesar (2016 film), which you can use instead: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hail,_Caesar_(2016_film). Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 20:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

In retrospect

I think I probably overrated movies like Shutter Island or Inception. Movies like that maybe depressing to many viewers. PS171 (talk) 14:23, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

BrokeNCYDEs listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect BrokeNCYDEs. Since you had some involvement with the BrokeNCYDEs redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 17:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Broke ncydes listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Broke ncydes. Since you had some involvement with the Broke ncydes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 17:57, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Happy Easter!

File:Chocolate-Easter-Bunny.jpg
All the best! "Carry me down, carry me down; carry me down into the wiki!" (talk) 02:05, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Different title

Hey, I reverted the edit to File:Cybernatural 2014 poster.jpg. The reason for this is that this file is titled to reflect on the previous name of the film. Any new posters should be done under the new name of the film, Unfriended. I also kind of wanted to wait until an official poster was released instead of the teaser poster, but I guess that the film company isn't going to release anything final poster-wise until the film hits home video. In any case, I'd upload the teaser poster to File:Unfriended 2015 teaser poster.jpg so that it's clearly marked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

  • My basic idea with keeping the old poster in general (aside from having the files name specific) is that this can be moved to the bottom to the marketing/release section to reflect on the marketing and name change. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:53, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
    • @Tokyogirl79: The old poster is not valid to be included anywhere under the infobox and still be claimed as fair use, and it's inaccurate to keep it in the infobox. I was going to request that the file be retitled, as the old poster serves no further purpose. Sock (tock talk) 14:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Suicide Squad Edit

Why did you delete my suicide squad film page changes? Its all over the news, and its a VALID news, like jesse has been cast as lex luthor, jim parrack as deathstroke, jay hernandez as el diablo on the film. Why did u delete all that changes? I've been trying to stay in the code of conduct within this forum, but I think you can't just delete all the changes like that, I'll wait your answer. Thanks, Regards Ggooberbichest on April 30, Thursday, 10:24PM (GMT+7)


Reference errors on 25 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Powers (really long winded additional title in brackets because of a nearly the same sounding other network TV series)

Hi

I fear you were right, sry, I know it's a pain :)

I have put a logical argument as to why we should not make up definitions of rules by adding letters or words into the MoS sentences @ Talk:Powers_(PlayStation_Network_TV_series)#Page_name

Please go ahead and assume that I agree with a move to "Powers (U.S. TV series)" If you like, you can quote me on that. I only see the UK other named one from the DB page, so guess you were right :)

Chaosdruid (talk) 02:25, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 May newsletter

C/2014 Q2 (Lovejoy) is a long-period comet discovered on 17 August 2014 by Terry Lovejoy; and is one of several Featured Pictures worked up by India The Herald (submissions) during the second round.

The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Belarus Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.

Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Apologies

I am C. West I am formerly somegreekgeek, after three months I have created this new account, and controlled my anger. I would like to apologize for past, vandalism. And I have watched the movie " The Babadook" and you are correct and the page was not a critique. C. West 120 (talk) 14:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

BOM

I'm just saying that the top 50 list is sourced from BOM, just like with the top 10 adjusted, which is sourced from Guinness we had a discussion on whether we should add or not the 2012 re-release gross of Titanic to the total. And in the future, you should go on the talk page and start a discussion before you want to change things like this. DCF94 (talk) 15:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

"When sources disagree..."

Could you elucidate on which sources disagree with The Washington Post about the reception of Chappie? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: For starters, Metacritic, which we often use for summary statements, refers to the reviews as "mixed or average". Beyond that, Empire Online and Esquire call the reviews "mixed", while Business Insider was the only other place I could find "negative" being used. And the Post article you used did not state that reviews were negative, it states that "few are cheering" the film, and mostly criticizes Die Antwoord's performances. Sock (tock talk) 14:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
The Post article said it was "panned by critics". The Empire source is legit (a listicle is a men's magazine is not what I would consider compelling), but it's really not that difficult to find multiple round-ups that state it received negative reviews: [1], [2], etc. I really think you're wrong here, but whatever. If you really don't want any opening statement, I can live with that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
One approach I've taken is to show the breakdown of reviews from Metacritic, going from the category with the most reviews to the least. In this case, it would be 20 mixed reviews, 11 negative, and 8 positive. I think it helps to report this distribution because it shows the degree of the film not being positive. Not sure if this particular detail would provide better insight for readers? Erik II (talk | contrib) (ping me) 19:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Batman Arkham Knight

Hey Sock! Long time no talk! Hope you've been well. I see you've been editing the Arkham Knight page and helping out there. I didn't know if you have played already, or are just looking to help, but I know the plot section is in need of work. I'm trying to avoid it for the very last paragraph, as I'm super close to fully beating the game, but don't want to see it here until I do. That said, I don't know if you'd be willing to work on it to help clean it up some. If not, (and you don't care about the spoilers) would you be ever so kind as to copy/paste what is currently there (not including the info after it states that Wayne blows up his manor, which I think is just the last paragraph), in to my sandbox so I can work on it, without a worry of seeing the ending? Thanks! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

How've you been, Favre? Yeah, I haven't been around too terribly much. University got insanely busy, and then I went straight into full-time work, so I haven't had much time to edit until recently. I would definitely be able to cut down on it once I finish the game (which I'll be doing tomorrow), and I can start a little bit tonight for some base-level trimming. I hope you've been enjoying the game! I personally think it was a small step back from Arkham City, but it's still a solid 9 for me. Sock (tock talk) 06:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Not to bad. Same boat as you, jumped right into some full-time work, so I relish the time I get to edit. Obviously wan't sure if you were playing (which is great that you are!), so we can just tackle the plot once we've each finished. I got to the ending on Friday with like 94%, just mainly the Riddler stuff to do, and the remaining bombs (hope to cut down on some of that tomorrow), so I saw the first two of the three endings. Also hoping to do the Harley and Red Hood DLC soon too (as I got both with my preorder). I've been enjoying it and would give it in the 9 to 9.5 range. The biggest gripe I've had (which I'm discussing with Darkwarriorblake over on his talk) is the Batmobile tank battles. Worst part in my opinion, but they have slowly grown on me. Loved the twist they added. Thought it was brilliant, and especially loved when we went after Johnny Charisma in the Studios and got that song. Absolute gold! Haha. But yeah, if you plan to stick around the page for a bit, what I've told Dark to look at when he gets back on the page is the character section, the plot, the reviews (that might need some chopping; I did a bit before the game released, but it is still quote heavy and chunky) and the PC issue section. And also so you know, in regards to anyone trying to add voice actors: it has to come from a reliable source. Some will try to add IMDb (obvious no-no) and Twitter accounts, and Twitter is usually okay, but as you know, the user needs the blue check for us to use it. Which is unfortunate when we clearly have the actor self confirming their role, but their account is not verified. So some times reviews help with this. And for the plot, if we can find any third party sources commenting on it, that's great too. That Forbes article you added (which I had seen and was going to add if you didn't) will be perfect to source the endings once we've gotten the prose better. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
As I am very tired, I'm just gonna ask one quick question. The naming throughout the plot section is extremely clunky and inconsistent. I was wondering if it wouldn't be better to utilize real names? Just a thought. Sock (tock talk) 06:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
To the best of our ability, we're going to try to emulate Batman: Arkham City as it is a FA, and to another extent, Batman: Arkham Origins. So I think last names after first use, kind of like the MCU plots. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Got it. Further, on the note of verifying the appearance of voice actors and characters, I discovered this source on Liam O'Brien's article (might wanna go into edit mode for this):

Rocksteady Studios. Batman: Arkham Knight. Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. Scene: Credits, 13:05 in, Voiceover & Mocap Talent.

This, to me, seems like it would be sufficient to use for sourcing who plays who, and for sourcing what characters appear as well. This could eliminate the need for countless sources, I think. Sock (tock talk) 17:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Sadly, as with Arkham Origins, the actors are just listed alphabetically, without association with a character. So we can use it to verify if an actor was indeed in the game, but not for what character they voiced. That's what sucks about all of this, is the list of actors are there, just not associated with the characters. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Your username

Please consider changing your username, per WP:IU. When I noticed an edit you made to Michael Cera, I immediately investigated "sock", thinking it was of course a vandal. I looked back through your talk page and see you actually changed your name to "sock" after you had some experience editing. Please consider a user name which doesn't needlessly attract the attention other editors. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 08:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: I've had this username for over a year now, and no one else has commented on this being an issue. If it comes up more, I will consider changing it, but I think if my username violated WP:IU, it wouldn't have been changed by a sysop in the first place. I don't mean any disrespect, but I don't think that the confusion of one user justifies me changing my username despite the hundreds of users I've encountered over the last year who did not express confusion (except early on, when people didn't realize I was Corvoe). It took you only a few moments to realize that I wasn't a vandal, so I believe this to be a non-issue. That, and if my edit wasn't vandalism, a simple username alone isn't much of a reason to assume that someone IS a vandal. But as I said, if more people appear to be confused by my username in the future, I will definitely consider changing it. Thank you for your concern. Sock (tock talk) 11:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Organization method hampers and cancels other edits

I'm glad to see you are making efforts to keep the Batman v Superman article organized, but you've steamrolled over a lot of work I just contributed, little by little, adding author credits to references. Please re-insert what you removed, or consider smaller scale and quicker edits. I'm not sure that inline references aren't a better choice anyway... but that's another issue for some other time.--SidP (talk) 18:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@SidP: I'm incredibly sorry! I only got one notification of an edit conflict, and I was careful to only replace the reference section in that edit. I'll be sure to restore those edits right away. Again, my sincere apologies. Sock (tock talk) 18:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
I believe I've reinstated all of your edits. The ones removed were very inconsistent, so I may have missed one or two. Please let me know if you see anything else wrong. Sock (tock talk) 18:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't think it was intentional. I know with especially popular articles this kind of thing happens, that's why I was doing small additions instead of a more lengthy session, to avoid doing the same thing.--SidP (talk) 19:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@SidP: I probably should've had the foresight to do the same. I'll be sure to keep that in mind for the future! Sock (tock talk) 19:19, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Ant Man

Saw an opportunity, took it. I found it good to have a bit of fun around here. Lots of times it can be a bit stressful around here. Rusted AutoParts 18:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: I'm not mad, haha. I honestly just had no idea how to react to it. I was taken aback that it was you who did it, but I did laugh. I went through a brief moment of "should I, shouldn't I" on saying anything, but figured it wasn't necessary. Thank you for the chuckle, I needed it! Sock (tock talk) 18:45, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
...I laughed... - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Harley Morenstein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tusk (film). 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) 09:01, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Everest (2015 film)‎

Hi there! I wanted to let you know that the reason I added that link to the See Also section is because another editor (Highadventurer96) and I are having a bit of a dispute about the books on that page. You can see most of it on my talkpage, section 'Trouted' - the gist is that HA96 claims to have been there in 96, and wants to ensure the public has the full story, while I agreed with your "The books are not sourced to be "based on" credits" edit removing the books.

HA96 and I have previously butted heads over their adding the book The Storms to multiple pages in a way that I viewed as promotional, and while I thought we'd worked it out, apparently there was some bad blood.

Any chance I could get your perspective on the situation? You've been here for far longer than either of us, and I'd appreciate a veteran's opinion. Thanks! NekoKatsun (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Wow, so if I put a Harry Potter book in block quotes, I can totally print and sell it? Didn't know that, thanks for the info!!!!!-79.223.25.25 (talk) 19:39, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

@79.223.25.25: That was an admittedly ignorant sentence, but edit summaries are just too short to explain things adequately sometimes, which is unfortunate. The key difference is that we are not making profit off of the quote. What I should've added is that we should have credited the original source, but it's irrelevant now, as I've paraphrased the synopsis. Sock (tock talk) 19:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Fantastic Beasts

Hello Sock! Will you please take a look at Draft:Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (film) in the filming section? I think the article has enough sources to have its own article in the mainspace, and it's already filming or if it is not then it is about to in this week (looks like). --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:32, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

@Captain Assassin!: A huge red flag for me is this part: "From actors' Instagram postings, it looked like the filming had already begun in early August 2015." That is information synthesis, plain and simple. You need a reliable source stating that filming has begun, or even a cast member stating that it's begun, but saying that it appears to have begun is fruitless and can't be sourced. Sock (tock talk) 02:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Got it Sock Sock! (like Quack Quack! - never mind a joke ) Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Long time no talk

Hi Sock! Just to let you know I've nominated one of the lists we worked on nearly a year ago for FLC List of accolades received by The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) and have added you as co-nominator. Hope work/college is going well. Cowlibob (talk) 18:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@Cowlibob: Well hey there! Long time no talk indeed! Thanks for that nomination, I was actually planning on cleaning it up a bit and nominating it myself, so thank you a ton for going ahead on it! And work's going pretty well. My internship ends soon and then it's just a few weeks until I'm back to school. How've you been doing? Sock (tock talk) 18:53, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Life's good. Finished up uni and am now in the big bad world of work, trying to keep up with the odd film when I can. This year's been pretty great for films: Mad Max: Fury Road, Ex Machina, Kingsman: The Secret Service being particular highlights. We still have The Revenant, a goddamn Star Wars film, Christoph Waltz taking on Bond in Spectre, Tarantino's western at the end of the year. Cowlibob (talk) 19:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:The Fantastic Four (unreleased film)

Hello. In case you aren't watching the above page closely, I wanted to give you a heads-up about a recent comment, Requested move (August 2015). The editor may not realize it, but appears to be proposing an undo of a page move you performed earlier, and does not appear to have addressed you directly. Regards, – Wdchk (talk) 14:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

@Wdchk: Thank you for informing me. I've commented on the request. Sock (tock talk) 15:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Precious again

list of accolades
Thank you, Corvoe Sock gnome who knows who's a boy's best friend, for quality articles on musicians, bands, albums and films, such as The FP, for lists such as that of accolades received by Gravity, for precision and pardon, for a cute infobox of yourself and "You don't want that face to frown, do you?" - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:30, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 958th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 September newsletter

The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.

In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far Scotland Casliber (submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was Philadelphia Coemgenus (submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.

The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

  1. Belarus Cas Liber (submissions), who is competing in his sixth consecutive Wikicup final, again finished the round in first place, with an impressive 1666 points in Pool B. Casliber writes about the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. A large bulk of his points this round were bonus points.
  2. Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points), second place both in Pool B and overall, earned the bulk of his points with FPs, mostly depicting currency.
  3. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), first in Pool A, came in third. His specialty is natural science articles; in Round 4, he mostly submitted articles about insects and botany. Five out of the six of the GAs he submitted were level-4 vital articles.
  4. Somerset Harrias (submissions), second in Pool A, took fourth overall. He tends to focus on articles about cricket and military history, specifically the 1640s First English Civil War.
  5. Washington, D.C. West Virginian (submissions), from Pool A, was our highest-scoring wildcard. West Virginia tends to focus on articles about the history of (what for it!) the U.S. state of West Virginia.
  6. Somerset Rodw (submissions), from Pool A, likes to work on articles about British geography and places. Most of his points this round were earned from two impressive accomplishments: a GT about Scheduled monuments in Somerset and a FT about English Heritage properties in Somerset.
  7. United States Rationalobserver (submissions), from Pool B, came in seventh overall. RO earned the majority of her points from GARs and PRs, many of which were earned in the final hours of the round.
  8. England Calvin999 (submissions), also from Pool B, who was competing with RO for the final two spots in the final hours, takes the race for most GARs and PRs—48.

The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.

Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!

Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk:The Martian (film)#Lead section

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Martian (film)#Lead section. Thanks. Chamith (talk) 20:53, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Discussion regarding MOS guidelines

Hi I've been noticing some film production sections are getting really unweildy and I thought you might enjoy contributing to my discussion about brainstorming updates to the MOS:Film to address these. The discussion is located here --Deathawk (talk) 04:51, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

wassup socks!!!!!!!!!!!1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.79.15.49 (talk) 14:42, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Sock. Nice catch of the Department of Redundancy Department situation here. Due to the combination of the whims of the people who created the series and WikiP naming conventions we have the fun redundancy List of Episodes episodes article. Its existence always gives me a chuckle so I thought I would share it with you. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 13:53, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Padlock for The Martian

What is your rationale for this? --2602:306:BC24:A1E0:3DCD:72EA:CE5E:FBF5 (talk) 13:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello, I hope you've been doing well! I have not seen much of you lately. I assume you're busy IRL? Any good movies that you've watched recently? Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 14:25, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey man! You assume correctly. Life's been getting pretty crazy as of late, with no signs of slowing down. I've been trying to help in the background where I can, but I've been avoiding discussions since I just don't have any time to contribute very much. And most recently, I saw The Martian, which I thought was fantastic. I was a big fan of the book, so I was happy to see it done justice. I'm currently dying to see Sicario, and will probably be going to see that this weekend. What about you? Sock (tock talk) 15:15, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I've seen The Martian as well and loved it! I tried to see Sicario a little while ago, but there were technical issues that caused me to leave. Otherwise, mainly watching a bunch of TV shows. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:37, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I've been on a TV binge as well. What have you been watching? Sock (tock talk) 18:28, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Right now, it is The Walking Dead, The Leftovers, Person of Interest, and Fresh Off the Boat. I'm up to date on these. There are a few other shows that I watch on occasion, but am not keeping up with as actively. What about you? Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 18:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm also walking TWD. I just recently watched all of iZombie's first season, which was a very pleasant surprise in its creativity and fun. I also finally watched all of BoJack Horseman, which I loved. And Rick and Morty's second season came to a sad end. Standard intake of Bob's Burgers as well. Trying to watch American Horror Story: Hotel but it's been really week this season. Sock (tock talk) 19:11, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

AHS: Hotel - Recurring cast

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_Horror_Story:_Hotel#Recurring_and_Guest I would really apprecite you voicing your opinion on this ridiculous matter. THANK YOU! LLArrow (talk) 19:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@LLArrow: I'd be happy to, but for the future, please be sure to invite others to participate in conversation in a neutral manner, as this notification clearly presented a bias in my opinion. Sock (tock talk) 03:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
I see your point, but I in no way was attempting to sway your opinion, just expressing my own. And even then I'm not expressing opinion on which way to side on the matter, but rather that this issue arose to begin with; and an overall sense of exhaustion with difficult editors; and I was quite miffed when I wrote it. Sorry to come off that way though. LLArrow (talk) 05:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015: The results

WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. Belarus Cas Liber (submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to United States Rationalobserver (submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup Award

Awarded for participating in the 2015 WikiCup. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 19:34, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 is just around the corner...

Hello everyone, and we would like to wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2016 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. There are some changes we'd like to announce before the competition begins.

After two years of serving as WikiCup judge, User:Miyagawa has stepped down as judge. He deserves great thanks and recognition for his dedication and hard work, and for providing necessary transition for a new group of judges in last year's Cup. Joining Christine (User:Figureskatingfan) and Jason (User:Sturmvogel 66) is Andrew (User:Godot13), a very successful WikiCup competitor and expert in Featured Pictures; he won the two previous competitions. This is a strong judging team, and we anticipate lots of enjoyment and good work coming from our 2016 competitors.

We would also like to announce one change in how this year's WikiCup will be run. In the spirit of sportsmanship, Godot13 and Cwmhiraeth have chosen to limit their participation. See here for the announcement and a complete explanation of why. They and the judges feel that it will make for a more exciting, enjoyable, and productive competition.

The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. The judges are committed to not repeating the confusion that occurred last year and to ensuring that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Figureskatingfan (talk), and Godot13 (talk).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 13:41, 20 December 2015 (UTC) {{clear}}

@Bzuk: Thank you Bzuk! Apologies for not getting back to this sooner, I haven't exactly been around much lately. Hope you had a good holiday, and happy New Year! Sock (tock talk) 00:30, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2016!

Hello Sock, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2016.
Happy editing,
TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:18, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

@TriiipleThreat: Happy holidays to you to, my friend! You guys been keeping on the Marvel articles? Sorry for going AWOL, life decided it didn't want me to have any free time. Sock (tock talk) 00:30, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas!!
May you and your family have a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help and support, and of course all your work, on Wikipedia!

   – Onel5969 TT me 03:39, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
@Onel5969: Great to hear from you Onel, and thank you! How've you been? Sock (tock talk) 00:30, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Hey there. Long time no *speak* . Just trying to keep busy. Our collaboration on that one article is still my only claim to FA status (although you did the vast part of the work). Been writing a lot of articles lately, mostly on older films and actors. The research can be pretty fascinating. Have you been taking a break? Onel5969 TT me 00:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sock/Archive_6&oldid=1142744996"