User talk:Grapple X/Archive

Rachel Weisz

Thanks for your help, It is very important for the nomination.--Gduwen (talk) 22:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

fant

You can say that half of the song is "thrash metal" musically, not vocally, the other half is totally away from that --Asdfmovie (talk) 03:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

So it's thrash metal... but it's not thrash metal? This does little to nothing to justify removing mention of it entirely. GRAPPLE X 04:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Appreciation

Hi, thanks for you copy-edit effort on Airbus A330. I've read and understood your comments regarding the Notable accidents/incidents section, but I've decide to leave the info alone, because, as the subheading implies, they're notable. Anyway, many thanks for your effort, and I'll be back again in the future. Cheers ;) Sp33dyphil ^{(T • C • I love Wikipedia!)} 05:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Slash's Snakepit

I wasn't too sure on the brackets, will bear that in mind with future edits. Added the singles as well. Thanks! =) HrZ (talk) 09:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Manhunter

No problem :¬)

I saw the film on video many years ago, well before Silence and the "remake" - I found the remake terrible compared to the original. Manhunter was more "realistic" I thought and much more terrifying, much more similar to how I imagined serial killers like Dahmer and Nilson would be - no warning and suddenly you're in their cook-pot!

Good luck with the GA Chaosdruid (talk) 17:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your review! Now if the first season article passes its own review, I'll be ready to bring the season to WP:GT. Very exciting stuff! :) Thanks again! — Hunter Kahn 04:30, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

• Wow, thanks for your fast and obviously thorough review! I'll keep in mind what you said about the lede before I bring it to GT. Normally, I only cite material that is somewhat controversial and expected to be challenged in the lede, per WP:LEADCITE, but I could definitely throw some inline citations in just to further establish it's all cited. Again, much appreciated! — Hunter Kahn 20:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
  • I added inline citations to the parts of the lede that I thought could be problematic or questionable. Let me know if you think more are needed, as I'm willing to add more if need be. — Hunter Kahn 04:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Excellent! Thanks again for your help! — Hunter Kahn 14:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

The Cats of Ulthar

Thanks for thinking to add a free image to the article! I don't know why I didn't think of that one myself... Canadian Paul 05:22, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Tried looking for cats or Lovecraft in Commons, but eventually settled on Dunsany. I'd imagine that would be all that needs added unless a cover of the relevant issue of Tryout turns up somewhere. GRAPPLE X 14:58, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again!

Thanks again for the review! I made some changes based on your GAN suggestions, although if you think the quote boxes should be even wider, feel free to let me know or change them yourself. Once again, appreciate your attention to the article! — Hunter Kahn 14:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I think it looks okay now. They're more boxy than column-y now. GRAPPLE X 14:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

• I find my offline sources using Newsbank, a news archive resource I get for free through my local library. You should check your own local library to see if they have it or something through their library website. I didn't know my offered it until I sort of stumbled upon it by accident. If you don't have it, but you need some specific news articles or something for an article you want to expand, let me know and I can try to look some up for you. — Hunter Kahn 00:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

White Tulip

Thanks for the review! :) Ruby2010 talk 15:21, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the other review too. It's really appreciated! Ruby2010 talk 20:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the Persuasion review, despite the fact you dislike Austen! :) Ruby2010 talk 23:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

With a passion! But I'm trying to keep the backlog clear, so a review's a review! :P GRAPPLE X 23:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Enthiran

Hello, thanks for your review and help. I've addressed the citation issues by adding 2 citations while removing a misinterpreted citation and its line entirely. I can assure that the article will no longer undergo further edit warring or major changes, since the film is far from its initial release and hype, during which several registered and unregistered users to constantly changed its contents. Any other concerns with the article? EelamStyleZ (talk) 19:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Good Article reassessment

Mr.Grapple. I would like to let you know that I have made a GAR for Laurel and Hardy. The reassessment can be found here. GamerPro64 (talk) 02:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Enthiran GA class assessment

Hi, having just reverted some changes to budget figures and the page title which are part of the pattern of long term edit-warring on this article, I am puzzled as to why you raised this as an issue for stability but later decided to ignore it and class the article as GA. I have added a comment to the GA review and if the page requires protection (yet again) I would be prepared to put the article up for reassessment as being too unstable to be validly classed as GA. Perhaps you could clarify your conclusion in the GA review? Thanks Fæ (talk) 05:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Can you have a look at this gross dispute thread, especially near the bottom where I talk about my experience on the Shriya Saran review? Do you think that maybe you were too easy to pass Enthiran, or that the other reviewer was to hard for Shriya? Actually the nominator of Enthiran has now admitted that the article was not really ready. Would you consider withdrawing the GA status until some fixes are made? BollyJeff || talk 12:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Which issue do you mean, the numbers issue? That wont be settled anytime soon, but we are least going to change the language to say claim/estimate, etc., which I think is good enough for now. I was talking about all the broken and dubious references. Please have a look at the Shriya link that I provided above. Everything that was disallowed there is present in Enthiran, even blog links. I think that maybe that guy was too tough, but perhaps a happy medium can be reached. BollyJeff || talk 13:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, another set of (reviewer) eyes would be a good idea. BollyJeff || talk 18:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Manhunter GAN

I have reviewed Manhunter (film). There remains issues with the article's references, along with a few other minor issues. Please take a look at my comments, and respond back when you are done fixing the article. In the meantime, I placed the review on hold for seven days. Thanks, Ruby2010 talk 17:27, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Unruhe

Hello Grapple X! I'm just here to apologise for undoing your edit to Unruhe. I think a combination of computer illiteracy and Twinkle got the better of me. Anyway, your edit is now reinstated. All best, Chris TehGrauniad (talk) 00:23, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

It's ok, would probably not even have noticed it if you didn't point it out. :P GRAPPLE X 00:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Beyond the Sea

Hey, thanks for sorting the plot out. Good work on Manhunter by the way, sorry it didn't get through its first go at FAC. --BelovedFreak 17:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah well. I'll get it to the standard needed eventually. I'll probably move on to some more X-Files stuff as well, since my plan to work on Miami Vice episodes is going to go nowhere fast given the scarcity of good sources. Might try rounding out some more season one eps to GA if possible, since Beyond the Sea is looking ready. GRAPPLE X 21:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

episode references in plot summaries

re: your edit comment - I disagree, actually. I think footnotes are much more cumbersome for this sort of reference (and really, we're not exactly citing anything. We're internally linking a plot point to the article it refers to). I understand how it might look intrusive, but I think that's because most Wikipedia plot summaries don't have enough real-world perspective. Referring explicitly to other works in the series should be encouraged, not avoided. And actually, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)#Plot summaries specifically recommends this style. With that last point in mind, especially, I think it would be best to restore the inline references. Thoughts? --Fru1tbat (talk) 21:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, then, feel free to revert back to the notes in brackets instead. My concern was that it interrupted the flow to jump from story-telling to real-world asides, so I treated it in the same manner as List of The X-Files characters, which cites episodes when referring to their contents. If the MOS says otherwise then go with what it says. GRAPPLE X 21:32, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

3RR

Just to let you know, if Ceoil reverts again, don't revert it, report him for violating 3RR. If you revert it you will just get warned also. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:36, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I'm aware of that, which is why both time I've tried directing him to the relevant talk pages to avoid edit warring. GRAPPLE X 21:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I assume he is buddies with Geist, seems strange for two people to turn up defending his POV all of a sudden. They've blatantly ignored at least 3 lengthy edit summaries explaining the situation just replying "RV" so I'm fairly sure they don't care for our opinion or discussion. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Still, guiding people in the right direction at least implies an attempt at helpfulness when someone impartial looks and sees why things are being removed. GRAPPLE X 21:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, just disheartening when it feels like the time you take to explain things is wasted on deaf ears.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

And again. Off to 3RRNB then. GRAPPLE X 21:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

My ears are burning. Your logic was taken in and rejected. Tough. After that, try me. Ceoil 21:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Dont template regulars. And its ye guys are the buddies descenting on high from a project, tag teaming. Ugg, and please. Ceoil 22:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:DTR [1]. Conversation with Ceoil will probably serve you better, if you truly wish to resolve your differences. Kafka Liz (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

It's been tried, and ignored. GRAPPLE X 22:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah, all I saw was sniping in edit summaries rather than talkpage communication. Did I miss something? Kafka Liz (talk) 22:09, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah you may have missed the actual conversation on the talk page. —Mike Allen 22:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

There exist two conversation in relevant places, what you saw was not "sniping" but directions to where constructive discussion was taking place. GRAPPLE X 22:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I merely meant I saw no conversation between Ceoil and Grapple X. On any talkpages. Seriously, guys... talk to each other. Kafka Liz (talk) 22:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

If someone has already ignored being twice asked to join in a conversation concerning their actions, is a third time going to change anything? Ceoil had already refused twice to converse, that can hardly be found to be due to this being poorly handled. GRAPPLE X 22:21, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Mike with all due respect and I'm sure your lovely, but you miss the point. Tag team reverting, templates, back hand discussion and scheming (here), projects trying to trump local editorial discreation, misrepesantion of intention. Pot kettal black. Do what ye want. I'll be gone for a few days anyway, so off to the noticeboards, to follow up yer implied treath. Ceoil 22:28, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't frequently go to noticeboards, sorry. The point is, if there is a guideline in place (which implies consensus has been established by more than three editors), why should it be ignored? Neither of you have discussed the basics of the problem here, which has now become more than just numbers in an infobox. —Mike Allen 23:14, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

More of a problem by your design. Are guidelines law now or something. Ceoil 01:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I really don't know why you're in this, since your reverts were just "rv" and "Undid revision", which doesn't constitute shit. The only point you've proven is that you can tag team with a friend in a content dispute. Should I place a barnstar on your page or here? —Mike Allen 01:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Guys, really? Can we at least move this to the PF page so Grapple isn't needlessly bothered with it? Kafka Liz (talk) 01:59, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Eh, keeps me busy. GRAPPLE X 02:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

We are on the PF talk page.. talking to ourselves... —Mike Allen 02:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Mike, my friend, if your going to go the level of edit summaries, and concoct (if Ceoil reverts again, don't revert it, report him for violating 3RR) a conspiracy from the actions of one lone editor fighting a group who are clearly all friends let me be frank and talk to you on your own level. Your sig is fucking huge, headace inducing and idiotic all at once, but at least it allows people to see the tool following. Are you ten? Ceoil 9:29 pm, Today (UTC−5)

Thank you. Have a nice life. ;-) —Mike Allen 02:36, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Good one Mike. But dont waste my time with faux politeness. Thanks yourself. Ceoil 02:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Copy edit

Hey, back in March you copy edited the Slash's Snakepit article after I requested at the Guild of Copy Editers. It has been reviewed for GA status and I have done most of the corrections to the article and expanded on others. If it is not too much trouble, could you perhaps take a look at the article now and see if needs to be CE a bit more? =) HrZ (talk) 15:03, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll read through it now. Is there anything in particular you think needs looked at? GRAPPLE X 15:10, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I recently made a change to the first paragraph in the Ain't Life Grand and second breakup section, and the last sentence in the same section. Could you check them? Also, the reviewer state ""Beggars & Hangers-On" was released as the first, and only, single from the album while they also shot music videos. Run on sentence." Can't think of how to fix the sentence. Apart from them, think the rest is pretty much fixed. Thanks! HrZ (talk) 15:22, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Which songs were video shot for? I could re-do the sentence better by mentioning those. GRAPPLE X 15:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

You know, he actually doesn't say, apart from Beggars & Hangers-On, he doesn't say what the other videos were. After a quick look, couldn't find any sources for other music videos from that album either. =\ HrZ (talk) 12:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll see if I can find anything out for you then, and rejigger it. GRAPPLE X 09:23, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Found a source saying that a video was made for "Good to Be Alive" here. GRAPPLE X 10:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! Think that's everything done, should, hopefully, pass now. HrZ (talk) 12:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Good luck! If there's any other changes needing done, don't be afraid to ask. GRAPPLE X 12:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! And will do. HrZ (talk) 12:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I do believe I forgot to say, thanks for your help getting Slash's Snakepit to Good Article status! =) HrZ (talk) 15:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations, man! GRAPPLE X 15:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Manhunter PR

Hey, I will have another look at Manhunter at some point soon. Feel free to ping me again if you're finishing up the peer review and I've forgotten.--BelovedFreak 23:30, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I'm really sorry I didn't get around to this, I didn't expect it to go to FAC so soon! Basically, I think you've done a great job with the article. My biggest worry for FAC is that people will pick up on prose issues. Now, prose is really not my strongest point, but on reading through, some parts seemed a bit weaker than others. For example, there is still some tense inconsistency that I believe was picked up at FAC before (eg. "Joan Allen ... recalls meeting with representatives...", "William Petersen recalled filming ...", "William Petersen has commented ...", "he later recalled ..." There are also a few bits that still seem to me to be a bit informal or colloquial, like "figure out" or "doing right by his victims" (not sure about this one, but it doesn't sound quite formal enough to me.) Have you had (or considered having) someone completely unconnected to the article give it a run-through? I know how hard it can be to spot the little things wen you've worked on something for a long time.

Anyway, it's certainly come a long way since I first looked at it. Best of luck getting it through FAC this time. --BelovedFreak 11:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Canceled vs Cacelled

It's too trivial to fix one way or the other, but both "cancelled" (UK) and "canceled" (US) are acceptable spellings. In US spelling, normally you would not double a consonant on an unstressed syllable.

Given that Batman is a US title, some would argue that the US spelling should be preferred (assuming the rest of the article consistently uses US spelling). CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 23:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I never knew that it was a word that had different spellings across the pond. My mistake then. Something every day indeed. GRAPPLE X 23:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

"Minor" edits

Just so you know, substantial comments probably shouldn't be marked as minor, like you did here. Some people set their watchlist so that minor edits aren't shown, and then they'd miss your comment. I don't know whether or not this was just a one-time mistake, but I though I'd mention it. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:29, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I have them set to minor by default, as the majority of my edits are gnome work. I should maybe turn that off from now on. GRAPPLE X 23:40, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

It's fine to have them on; you just want to remember to uncheck the box when making significant edits. If you uncheck the box, you have to remember to check it when making small edits. You can't really win either way :/ . –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 13:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

AC/DC

Hi there, per your suggestion, I've started a discussion at Talk:AC/DC#High Voltage in discography section. Thanks again, Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

User:Hoponpop69 has taken deep offense to my disagreeing with him and filed a harassment report against me. Here it is for your interest, since you were involved - Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#A user is cyberstalking my edits, reverting them, and harassing me. If you want to comment, please do - if not, then no problem. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Heat

I think that the consensus was to use "crime film". The talk page discussions seem to show that. I think it just got changed by someone, and it's really being changed back to "crime film" now. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:45, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Sort of—the consensus was to use "crime film" in the lead sentence to avoid bloat, but every discussion on genre on that talk page seems to okay action as a valid genre elsewhere, which is why I restored the action category. I think the lead at one point used "Heat is an action crime thriller film", or words to that effect, which is where the paring-down was aimed at. GRAPPLE X 21:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Deep Throat (The X-Files episode)

Hi, just to let you know that I've replied to your comments at the GA review, but I'm pretty tired right now and I'd rather not finish the review until I'm a bit more awake, so I'll give it another check through tomorrow. Good work, by the way, I noticed you'd been improving a few of the season one episodes. :) --BelovedFreak 20:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look over it and do what I can. I'll probably end up applying a lot of the comments to the other articles I've been working on too. My plan is hopefully to bring the first season to Good Topic status - though your "Beyond the Sea" article did set a pretty high benchmark. GRAPPLE X 20:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, it would be nice to see a whole season as a good topic. Anyway, this one looks fine now, so I've listed it. Well done! --BelovedFreak 08:31, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, man. I appreciate the time and the help. :) GRAPPLE X 13:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) --BelovedFreak 14:50, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

Congratulations!

Thanks for all the work you did in making Deep Throat (The X-Files episode) a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. (The picture is the real "Deep Throat", Mark Felt, by the way...) In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Thanks for the heartFelt message. That was an awful pun. I've reviewed one article today and will probably do more this evening when I get round to getting some trousers on. I hadn't realised how big the backlog had gotten, though the last time I checked the list was in the middle of a clearance drive. GRAPPLE X 15:56, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	You did it again!
	Another round of congratulations are in order for making Conduit (The X-Files) a certified "Good Article"! Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

A cupcake for you!

Thing has been on the GA list for months. Thank you very much for taking the time to do the review, I spent a long time doing that so its nice to finally see it promoted. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:33, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:The Jersey Devil (The X-Files)/GA1

Hi. I've begun a review of this if you'd like to address it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Scream (film)

I have taken your suggestion and with some improvements submitted Scream for FAC here. If you would like to voice your opinion on the matter one way or another I would appreciate it but if you're too busy I understand. Thanks for reading. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Squeeze (The X-Files)

I've stepped in and reviewed Squeeze (The X-Files). Please take a look at my comments and respond back on the review page when you have finished. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 18:16, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Breaking Bad

Hey. If your concern was whether Breaking Bad would be too goofy, don't worry. It definitely isn't. Weeds is a show with a similar premise that is a little too goofy, but Breaking Bad isn't. And if you're an X-Files fan you shouldn't definitely watch it since Breaking Bad was created by X-Files writer Vince Gilligan. — Hunter Kahn 14:44, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

See, it's from watching The X-Files that I was worried the goofiness might come in - Gilligan did a few pretty awful episodes for that series (I don't know if you watch it, but there's one, for example, about a psychic who turns his home into the house from The Brady Bunch - an episode which came right between one about child murders and the series' finale, no less). But if he's sticking to his darker side with it, it should be good, as some of the best X-Files eps are the darker Gilligan ones - if you've never seen any, check out season 4's Paper Hearts. It's a pretty good one for not needing any experience with the show. I'll definitely see about picking up some eps of Breaking Bad, though. Thanks for the tip! GRAPPLE X 14:50, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Award

Thanks Grapple. Keep up the good work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fallen Angel (The X-Files)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Fallen Angel (The X-Files) 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. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 12:15, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!

100px	New GA!
	The article Fallen Angel (The X-Files) you nominated as a good article has passed ! Thank you for nominating this article. Puffin Let's talk! 17:59, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again for your review! GRAPPLE X 18:00, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Would it be ok if you reviewed Djungarian hamster please? I nominated it. Don't worry if you can't. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 18:10, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing it, I think I have corrected the issues, can you check on the the review page? Thank you. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 20:02, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Shapes

I came across Shapes (The X-Files) today after watching the episode and I was surprised that it was marked as a stub, I saw you improved the article far beyond that status and I think you should def. nominate it for GA. Rymatz (talk) 23:04, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Glad you like the improvements! I've been working on the first season of the show, and I'm nearly halfway to getting them all to GA status. Some of the ones that were more recently created as articles don't have as many sources as the others, so I ordered up the book that the missing stuff is from - when it gets here I'll be nominating a whole raft of articles for GA status, including Shapes. If you're interested in The X-Files, there's a wikiproject that could do with some more manpower - every little helps! GRAPPLE X 23:09, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the Thirty-Eight Snub review! I've implemented your changes. — Hunter Kahn 04:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Reviews

Hi. Any chance you could review Mongalla, South Sudan for me? It needs somebody unrelated to look at it I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'll get to it tonight. GRAPPLE X 21:12, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to do so. I've given the article a minor copy edit and bit of expansion and a little reworking and I think it is now of an acceptable quality of prose. It now covers the key areas of History/Politics, Geography, and Economy. If there is anything else you want let me know, but a look through google books and web it seems to be almost as good as it could be right now, especially if you view how tiny the settlement is on google maps..! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:29, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi! Thanks for reviewing Korkoro :) Which picture in the reception section would you suggest removing? Suggest the one which is not very easy on your eyes. Also, did you find any serious paraphrasing issues? I wouldn't be online till tuesday, so please don't expect a reply from me till then. _morelMW^illiam 10:42, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

More GA reviews

Hi, I will read through the articles tomorrow if that's OK. Regards.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:43, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man. I really appreciate all the help! GRAPPLE X 11:46, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Sound job again. Very well done. All three passed. If you follow the same formula as you have been doing it might be possible to get all of the episodes up to GA eventually, although maybe the first series has more info on production than later series.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:28, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I've got as much info for the second series as for the first, but after that it tails off dramatically - there is stuff out there, it's just that any books I have here are from very early in the show's life. I'm probably going to venture off elsewhere after I finish with this season, maybe get back to my old Manhunter' article, or maybe look into working towards the Four Award with something. I dunno. But thanks again for the reviews! You're going to stop seeming like a super-villain if you keep doing people favours like that. I'll keep an eye out for anything you need reviewed in the future so you're not waiting long, and if there's anything else you need help with don't hesitate to ask me. GRAPPLE X 14:32, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks I would appreciate that. there is stuff "out there" you say, But is it the truth..? the irony.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:34, 22 August 2011 (UTC) I do have an article approaching GA nom actually. Let me know though when you are free to review in the next few days.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Gimme three hours and I'll be ready for the rest of the night, and for most nights after that too - week off work to take it easy means I'll be around more. GRAPPLE X 17:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi, can you GA review Ted Frank? Its listed just past half way down the GA nominations page under Law. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm on it. GRAPPLE X 12:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. The listing has now shown up on the GAR page! Apologies if it is heavy reading for you but law is so poorly covered on wikipedia. Earlier I started the Supreme Court (Sudan) which was missing entirely! Sudan alone has over 100 notable courts. The article should be comprehensive given what is actually available about him. I used all I could find in google books. Would be nice to have a photograph though for quality's sake.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Reading the article, he seems a man who would appreciate publicity, I wouldn't be surprised if he made public appearances that could be photographed if someone were to be there. It's probably just a matter of time. GRAPPLE X 13:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Road to... (Family Guy) GAN

Your concerns have been addressed. Gage (talk) 02:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

GAR

Thanks Grapple, I really appreciate you taking the time on this. I've done quite a bit of research into it and if you google him its pretty comprehensive. Really needs a photo in the infobox though. I'll try to request one, or if I can find his next appearance at a uni could perhaps contact a university to photograph him perhaps? Dunno. Anyway, thankyou.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. As I said in the review page, if you knew he was going to appear at a university, you could contact anyone here who frequently edits pages concerning that university. This seems to be his site, and says he'll be at the University of Idaho and the Gonzaga University soon enough. GRAPPLE X 13:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Good catch, thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Lazarus passed GA with no edits required. Young at Heart and Roland require some minor edits.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:44, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I think I owe you a pint. GRAPPLE X 18:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Great job again mate, you really have a winning formula.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again for taking the time to do the reviews! GRAPPLE X 21:03, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

De nada. I gather you are saving the Pilot episode to last? Probably the hardest as I'd imagine that has more sources than any other. WOuld be interesting though to see if you could get any of the episodes from series 3 onwards up to GA and whether adequate sources exist to do so.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:10, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The pilot is the last episode to do for this, but I'll do the season article last of all. I just wanna push the pilot back until I'm done the others since I also need to sort out a page move for it. "The X-Files (pilot episode)" is not only unusual in terms of MOS, but the episode is not called "The X-Files" at all, so it's pretty much just incorrect. I wouldn't mind tracking down some more information about "Home" and "Paper Hearts" as they're some of my favourite episodes, but at season 4 it means I'm out of print sources, relying mostly on DVD sources - though the special features grow in number each season, so season four has a lot more meaty features to pick through than season one does. GRAPPLE X 21:16, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I fixed some minor issues myself but E.B.E is a straight pass other than that. Well done again!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again! I owe you one. Let me know if you've anything you need reviewed and I'll save you the hassle waiting on it. GRAPPLE X 19:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

No worries. I am working on the sister article of the Ted Frank article at the moment. Should be ready in a day or two. Just want to ensure that I have the main cases and important points adequately covered by some more research and then I'll give it a read before posting at GAN. I did request a photograph but to no avail. I gather he is probably a very busy man with no time for us wikiites. Some time I must give the Kathmandu article a solid cut and edit and then it might be ready... Unlikely to be near future anyway! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:13, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I've reviewed the other three, just some very minor outstanding issues. Please notify me on my talk page when you've addressed all three.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:35, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! Honestly I'm happy to review these articles. You have the right formula so they don't require much to promote them. "Short and sweet" as they say. I've just GA nominated my Center for Class Action Fairness. Its under law, but might not have shown up on the page yet. Can you kindly review it? Cheers, I'll watch out for further nominations!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:33, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Cheers for the quick response, all three passed. You are building quite a collection now!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:47, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll get that article reviewed for you tonight when I'm back from work. GRAPPLE X 14:55, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Cheers. Did you used to watch the Outer Limits too? I remember watching that although the quality of the episodes varied greatly I thought, some were awesome, others not really.. I've been watching Appropriate Adult of late, the 25 Cromwell Street has to rival Toom's nest in terms of creepiness.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Never seen it at all, but I've been meaning to track it down. And I missed Appropriate Adult when it was on, I saw a lot in the papers about it coming up but missed the actual broadcast. My luck. GRAPPLE X 15:10, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Both episodes can be seen on ITV Player]. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Well that's this evening's entertainment sorted out. Cheers! GRAPPLE X 15:23, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Wasn't as good as I'd expected to be honest but worth a view. They definitely got the appearances and scenario as good as they possibly could have.It sort of takes you back in time to 1994/5. I'd have much rather it was about the killing itself rather than the aftermath! West was dressed exactly like him, Rosemary spitting image, it could have been her herself for all I knew, but Dominic West is certainly NOT convincing as a serial killer. If Fred really was like the way he portrayed him hardly surprising so many women fell for him. But West is a great actor and spoke to Janet Leach herself a lot about Fred's mannerisms, so maybe on the surface he did appear a nice guy but underneath a complete sadistic nutcase! Rosemary it seems though was the particularly cruel one. It really does bring the memories back I remember when it was on the news back in 1994 and I remember at the time I was playing the computer game Pang a lot on my Commodre 64! Somewhat bizarrely I still associate the spooky music on the Mt Fuji level with girls found under the patio and in the bathroom walls and that horrid peach orange dilapidated house! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Cheers, appreciate that! Nice one. Did you watch the Fred West programme last night afterwards?

I uh, actually got a bit sidetracked with um Jersey Shore... GRAPPLE X 05:45, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk:The Day After Tomorrow (TV special)/GA1

Hi. Thanks for reviewing this! I've now gone through the article and made the recommended changes. Regards, SuperMarioMan 17:21, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

I will try to resolve the issues within two days. If I have no activity on the article after those two days, please be sure to notify me. Rainbow Dash !xmcuvg2MH 23:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Beat me to it

Hahaha, it looks like you beat me to improving Atari video game burial. I was going to work on it after finishing up with Capcom Five, but oh well, no worries. If you're interested, maybe we could to a GA review swap? Axem Titanium (talk) 22:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. I'll start the review tonight for you. And I have no idea what possessed me to revamp the article at all (I'm in the middle of working on a Good Topic project entirely unrelated to it), but it was a quick enough task. Hope it's as good it should be. GRAPPLE X 22:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Oops, looks like the article is still undergoing some work. Thanks for reviewing my article, but if you'd like to take a raincheck on that GA review, just let me know when you're ready and I'll do it. ;) Cheers, Axem Titanium (talk) 05:15, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again for the review. Just drop me a line when you, and I guess Marty, are satisfied with the article and I'll start. Cheers, Axem Titanium (talk) 14:50, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I think I'm satisfied with it, should be good to go if you've got the time. Thanks. GRAPPLE X 05:45, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Cool, I'll get to it asap. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:21, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah nuts, someone beat me to that too (I've been tragically busy with job apps, sorry). Consider this an IOU for a GA review in the future. Post on my talk page whenever you want to claim it. Look forward to working with you again in the future. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:33, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Always the way of things. I'm thinking of having a comb over the games mentioned in the reports of the dump, maybe seeing if there's a Good Topic to be made out of it, so I might hit you up for that. GRAPPLE X 04:34, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that might be valuable. If you're feeling ambitious, you might try to tackle North American video game crash of 1983, which I suspect would be a key article for such a Good Topic, depending on your scope. Axem Titanium (talk) 02:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Atari burial article

Just wanted to say good job on the extra material and rewrites. Also, please keep in mind the video game projects guidelines as well as you work through the article. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 00:49, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorru about the instant revert, I didn't realise you were continuing to edit past that or I'd have waited to see how it all turned out. Looking at the guidelines it seems to be geared mostly towards games themselves, the only real overlap between content discussed there and content present in the article is the whole "popular culture" thing - and I'm unsure as to whether the music video being mentioned in the article fits the notability criteria established there. I'll see if it comes up when the article receives its GAN review from a fresh set of eyes, I guess. GRAPPLE X 00:55, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Regarding the pop culture part and notability in regards to legacy, it has precedence via other GA and FA articles I've been involved in, such as Space Invaders and Pong. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 01:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh I don't mean the section itself, I just mean that specific music video. I'd fire more actual instances in there if I had something to back them up with, I'm not opposed to the idea of their addition. Also, do you still contribute to Retro Gamer? I've flicked through all the copies I have at hand and tried the website (which, from what I can tell, doesn't carry any of the magazine content), but not seen any mention of the incident. You wouldn't happen to know if it has been covered in an older issue? Would probably be worth me chasing up a back issue if it was going to be of use. GRAPPLE X 01:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'm still a freelancer and accuracy reviewer for Retro Gamer. In fact I have part 1 of a two part series on the Atari brand in this month's issue (Computer Space on the cover). There hasn't been an article on the burial, though I'll probably be covering it in the US video game crash feature I'm doing for a future issue. And no, they don't carry any content on the site, just back issues for purchase. Though there are pdf's of the old version of the magazine available in torrents. I'd caution using those older ones though, those are from the previous publication of the mag (before it folded and was brought back by Imagine Publishing with Darran at the helm). Those tended to be less reliable and even went so far as to copy material directly from fansites with little to no fact checking. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 01:24, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Didn't realise you'd done the Computer Space one, I flicked through it for anything relevant about the company's downfall but didn't turn up anything not covered elsewhere. I'll keep an eye out for anything relevant in the next part, I guess. GRAPPLE X 01:27, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

No, I did the Atari Inc. article in the Computer Space issue pg 84 "From the Archives". The Computer Space feature was done by my friend Paul Drury, though I did proof it and source a number of the photos). Part 2 in next issue is on Atari Corporation. Unfortunately when you're given 6 pages there's only so much you can fit in. Though I always try to include some facts and quotes not seen elsewhere in each article (and there were some in this one). Were you looking for anything specific? I have access to a large amount of resources regarding that brand and the pre-NES industry in general. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 02:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

What I'd love to add first and foremost would be a nice reliable source discussing the widespread doubt over whether the whole thing even happened or not. Every time it comes up on a forum or the like, there's a large amount of denial and doubt that shows up, but without it being reported in something considered reliable, I can't really discuss it properly in the article other than in a passing mention. If you have anything to that effect, it'd be great. After that, I guess having probably the best print source currently available on the genre would be a good source to cite for opinions on the matter, regardless of what they actually are. GRAPPLE X 02:32, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to see congrats on the GA. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 05:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I've put it up for an A-class review after beefing up the refs a bit more. GRAPPLE X 18:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Korkoro

Hi! Thanks a lot for dropping by. I didn't get that WorldCat ref part. Should I use that WorldCat link instead of the GBooks link? Could you show me a wiki article where Worldcat is used? That would make me get it. _morelMW^illiam 13:15, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

It's handy to use it to cite that a book exist, as citing the book itself can sometimes seem a little confusing. I've used it myself in articles such as Squeeze (The X-Files), although in that case I found it useful as it allowed me to cite that the book was a novelisation. Still, it might appease the FAC crowd, who are tough on sourcing, to use both the book and the WorldCat page together to show that the book exists. GRAPPLE X 15:23, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I added WorldCat link to the reference. What do you think about the sources, Patrin and Hammer to Nail? _morelMW^illiam 16:20, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look, but as long as there's editorial oversight on them they should be grand. The folks at WP:RSN are good for weeding out acceptable sources from duds, too. GRAPPLE X 21:41, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks a lot for helping me out with this multiple images template. I started a thread on reliable sources noticeboard 3 days ago, but there is no response yet. _morelMW^illiam 04:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I chimed in, but also asked for more opinions in my post and edit summary. GRAPPLE X 05:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Hope to get more opinions soon. I reduced the images' widths by the way; just found that images are not rendered the same way in all the monitors. _morelMW^illiam 07:22, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

And the heat is building up at WP:RSN. _morelMW^illiam 07:29, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

WASP-24b GAN

Hi. Thanks for considering a review for the article, I do appreciate it. I don't think I'm going to repost these exoplanet articles for a while, at least not until I can more clearly define what an exoplanet GA should really look like. But I appreciate your offer. I'll let you know when I do. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 23:04, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Since you've got a few on the boil there with similar subjects, the biggest hurdle should be the first one - once you've that done, you have a template to use for all the others that you'll be able to work with quickly. Have a look at any other GA or FA planetary articles to see what the basic framework is, I guess. GRAPPLE X 23:23, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Article

The article Atari video game burial 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 needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Atari video game burial for things which need to be addressed. Deadly∀ssassin 10:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Grapple X. You have new messages at Talk:Atari video game burial/GA1.
Message added 07:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deadly∀ssassin 07:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	You did it again!
	Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making Atari video game burial a certified "Good Article"! Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 18:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Licence to Kill

Hi, can you review this? Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:35, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Since you asked, there is a nomination that needs to be reviewed - but I'm afraid of asking for someone who's nearly achieving a television Good Topic (I've just started to watch The X-Files, so I'm getting familiar and impressed with your season 1 articles!) to look for such a short article... (but hey, how much info can you get on an obscure and nearly 60 years old episode?) igordebraga ≠ 02:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

And here I thought Niven was first. I'll have a read at the article now but I might not get a review done until tomorrow (all depends on how distracting Patricia Tallman continues to be...), but I'll get it done for you. GRAPPLE X 02:45, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. GRAPPLE X 20:39, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

X marks the spot

Hi Grapple, I've reviewed your DYK nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/X (The X-Files) and I have some issues with the hook. Could you see my comments and together we can work out something that can go on the main page? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

casino royale

Thanks for the review - I'll go over the two links properly when I'm back in front of a computer on Sat evening - (i'm trying to keep up with a mobile with a dodgy signal at the moment! Cheers. - SchroCat (^ • @) 08:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I've sorted it myself and expanded the article. *Thanks!*♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:55, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi there

Hi there! I see you are a big fan of The X-Files (me either), so I was wondering if you could help me to improve the main article to the condition of a good article. Thank you. Electroguv (talk) 14:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure. I'll get some work done on it tonight. Given its size and scope it might be worth going for a peer review for it before nominating it, as well. We can cross that bridge when we come to it. GRAPPLE X 14:38, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. Thanks for responding. How about giving each of us respective part of the article? For example, I will try to improve "Conpection" for next 3 or 4 days, while you will handle the upper part for same time. I think that article needs "Season synopses" section and total reworking of "Series overview" folder. Thanks, Electroguv (talk) 15:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

One plot overview could be used instead of season-by-season synopses, I think. I'm also not completely sold on the need for the "International" section, to be honest. I'll have a check when I get back from work to see why the article was delisted as a Good Article the last time round, as that would give a list of imminent fixes that I could see to. GRAPPLE X 15:15, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi there! Just wanted to say that I will be absent for this weekend because of a trip. Improve the article as you can in that time, but please don't touch "Conception", as I shall handle this part. I'll inform you when I will return and then we'll think about what to do next. Thank you. Electroguv (talk) 18:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Paper Hearts

Congrats, a straight pass, only a minor tweak was needed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:03, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again! GRAPPLE X 18:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks Grapple X for helping to promote Paper Hearts to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 00:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I take it you're a fan of the episode? GRAPPLE X 00:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

No, I awarded you the barnstar coz you helped to promote an article to GA status, not because I'm a fan (I didn't even know what the Paper Hearts was). I think Wikipedians need to give a fuck (as opposed to not giving a fuck) about rewarding people's good work with barnstars. Please show your appreciation to those around you today (at least give one barnstar to a person each day, will ya? :D). Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 23:33, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

One fuck a day. Got it. Now to convince the wife... GRAPPLE X 23:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

BTW

Hello, Grapple X. You have new messages at Sp33dyphil's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• Above comment: Made of win Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:14, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: Mario & Wario assessment

Hey, I've made edits to the article based on your suggestions... I've added a development section, although it's pretty bare bones given the lack of information available about the game (at least in English). I did use NinDB as a reference for both the allusions in Pokémon and Kirby, but I'm not sure if it qualifies as a reliable source (it's not on Wikipedia's list of sources). I also added the page number to the SSBM guide source. Do you think the article is up for C-status or is there more I should do? --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:54, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I've had a look at it, and rated it a C now. GRAPPLE X 13:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Pan Am

Please voice your opinion here, based on what you replied to earlier on the Project page. Jayy008 (talk) 19:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Core articles

It looks like we'll go ahead with the Top 500, so I'll make the list complete with wiki-links. The big task will be to reassess the articles old and new and update WP:FILMCORE accordingly. Then we can count up the assessments for the bars! :) By the way, any thoughts on nominating yourself as a coordinator? I think it would be great to have someone foster the collaboration initiative with me. Erik (talk | contribs) 19:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I toyed with the idea, so if you think it'd be worthwhile then I probably will. I'll see if I can post up a list in plain text of the top 500. We'll only have to add 250 at the absolute most, though, but I have the feeling there'll be a greater amount of stubs as a result. GRAPPLE X 20:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Here is a plain list of the Top 500. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, well there we go. I'll get a move on it now then. GRAPPLE X 20:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

This might be better. The other one, downloading it in plaintext, didn't show line breaks between film titles. Erik (talk | contribs) 20:20, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Let me know what you're going to do so we don't overlap in tasks. I haven't done anything with the plaintext list yet. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to be adding them to the table at WP:FILMCORE in batches of about 50 or so. Working on the first one now. GRAPPLE X 21:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Done the first batch. Going to take a break for a bit for some coffee. If you want to work on some in the meantime let me know, the ones I haven't yet added are listed here. Click "edit" to see them with line breaks for easier work. GRAPPLE X 21:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

You don't have to finish them all now. Wish I could help, but I was busy with errands most of tonight. If you want me to pick up where you leave off, I can do that tomorrow. Erik (talk | contribs) 02:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Got half of them added so far. Taking a break to work on some fixes for a GAN I've been working on, but I should be able to get back to doing some more. I might leave the last 100 of them - I'll let you know here if I give up or not. GRAPPLE X 02:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

There's 50 left, and I am definitely going to bed now. If you get them done before I get up again, great, if not then I'll finish them up. GRAPPLE X 06:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Breathe! :) I'll help you review. Erik (talk | contribs) 19:28, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

FYI, the top 250 may have changed order. I can work on that and find the missing films. Want to let me do that? Take a load off! :) Erik (talk | contribs) 19:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

You know, I never thought of that. I'm going to be goign through the talk pages for the list and adding the core=yes tag to each of them, so I'll not edit the list itself in that time. GRAPPLE X 19:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I'm thinking about moving the second half of the list up anyway since the filmmaking articles and such don't really need to go in between the halves. Erik (talk | contribs) 19:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense, it just was easier for me to add to the bottom when I was doing it in stages. GRAPPLE X 20:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

My fault that you were missing four! The spreadsheet had Last Tango in Paris at #255 for the previous ranking (and the current ranking is in a black-background column that's easy to overlook). You rock for making the expansion and finding the assessment classes, though! I'm kind of surprised we have one that's not created -- India Song. We oughta make a DYK out of that! :) Erik (talk | contribs) 21:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Technically there's two, since Some Came Running is just a heading on the novel's article. Getting those created and DYKed would be a nice way to start, though. GRAPPLE X 21:27, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Got this draft done so far. Doesn't seem to be a lot out there on it, really. GRAPPLE X 19:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Aqualung

This user helped promote Aqualung (Jethro Tull album) to good article status.

Well done. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:35, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Thanks Grapple X for helping to promote Aqualung (Jethro Tull album) to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 04:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again! GRAPPLE X 17:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Reportedly haunted locations in Washington, D.C.

Hi, can you GA review this for me?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll get on it in the next day or so, bit hectic IRL this week but I should have some time tomorrow night. GRAPPLE X 16:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but how else do you discuss ghosts huh?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:12, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I was thinking that a few lines in the lead, and then again in a 'background' paragraph that would repeat the cited stuff that needs copied from the lead, could explain that everything is basically an account of what someone else claims to have seen, which would allow you to drop that level of explanation in further instances. GRAPPLE X 13:41, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I believe the concerns identified have now all been addressed.

Thanks for that, check out the external link documentary some time if you have time, quite interesting. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, can you review Benjamin Ogle Tayloe House when you have a moment? Anything you want reviewed?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:33, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll definitely check the doc out soon. Gonna be busy the next few days but I'll probably check it out on Monday. If you're wanting to review something, I still have The X-Files (season 1) needing reviewed, it's the last article needed before I can go to GTC with the season; but again, I'll probably not be free to fix anything with it for the next day or two. GRAPPLE X 02:48, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Wow, a straight pass, wasn't expecting that one! I did put a lot of work into it yesterday though... I'll likely look at reviewing season one tomorrow if that's OK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:34, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

The Call of Chtulhu

Sir, sounds good to me! Any assistance offered is appreciated. Regards PurpleHeartEditor (talk) 05:05, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

2011 WikiProject Film coordinator election

Voting for WikiProject Film's October 2011 project coordinator election has started. We are aiming to select five coordinators to serve for the next year; please take a moment from editing to vote here by October 29! Erik (talk | contribs) 12:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Surreal Barnstar
	For your excellent work on Dick Laurent's death. It's wild at heart and weird on top. Just don't look into the radiator... Lugnuts (talk) 07:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

My dog barks, some. Mentally you picture my dog but I have not told you the type of dog which I have. Perhaps you might even picture Toto from The Wizard of Oz. But I can tell you my dog is always with me. Arf. GRAPPLE X 07:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK nom for India Song

Hi X, I've reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/India Song and I would like to try and hammer out a better hook with you. Could you see my comments at the nomination page and reply there? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Haha

I just noticed your comment about the runoff voting (thanks to MarnetteD, haha). Sorry I didn't address it! I intended to start a new section since it would get more attention than another subsection, and I didn't think there had been anything more added. At least we have some input now! Erik (talk | contribs) 16:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Not a bother, so long as we get somewhere with it. GRAPPLE X 21:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of List of awards and nominations received by The Elephant Man

Hello! Your submission of List of awards and nominations received by The Elephant Man at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PM800 (talk) 21:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Loughisland

Hi, you undid the deletion of victims' names from Loughinisland massacre. I agree with your interpretation. The same point is being discussed in Kingsmill massacre . Feel free to contribute if you think it will help, but if you don't want to that's fine. Regards. --Flexdream (talk) 17:22, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Cite video template

Hey. Gadget850's proposed changes to Template:Cite video are now being tested. Check it out.–RalfiParpa (talk) 06:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Pulp Fiction

Well done. Best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 01:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Copy edit an article I'm GA reviewing?

Hi Grapple, I've got a GA review on hold (trying to help out with the GA backlog), and the nominator is pretty antsy. I think it needs a quick copy edit for prose, grammar, etc. Would you mind doing a run through of it? The article is Blair Waldorf. Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 22:47, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

In return, I'll gladly review your next GA nomination :-) AstroCog (talk) 22:51, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Starting now. I still owe you for the last Twin Peaks one you did, given how thorough that was, so we're good. GRAPPLE X 20:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that! AstroCog (talk) 02:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe not brilliant but I think I've taken a lot of the informal tone out and fixed the poor way quotes were handled. Don't like the heavy recurrence of the phrase "love triangle" though, but since I don't follow the thing I don't really know how to better rephrase individual instances. GRAPPLE X 02:50, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your copy edit of the Blair Waldorf article. I appreciate you taking the time. -- James26 (talk) 06:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Not a bother. GRAPPLE X 14:09, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, can I ask why you removed the commas that preceded certain quotations, and replaced capitalized quotes with lower-casing (as in "we have no right to expect Gossip Girl to be a paragon of morality. . .")? I checked the MoS to see if this was a unique Wikipedia matter, and couldn't find anything. Just wondering. -- James26 (talk) 20:21, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Commas before a quote are poor punctuation—the comma indicates a pause, whereas the quotation is used as part of the sentence and should flow as though it's a natural progression of the sentence. Imagine how the punctuation would be if the quoted text wasn't actually a quote, and then you'll have the punctuation right. As for the casing, you don't need to keep to sentence casing when you quote a piece of text—if the quote is the beginning of the sentence, but isn't being used at the beginning of the sentence, you can drop the capital. It looks more pleasing to the eye to see proper casing throughout, and again, aids in the flow of text for the reader. GRAPPLE X 20:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation. I'm most familiar with the style of commas used here, by Purdue University. One of the sources, from the L.A. Times, also uses commas before introducing a quote. Finally, I've seen an example of the same thing in the "Quotation marks" section of the MoS.

Please don't take any of this the wrong way. As mentioned, I do respect and appreciate your contributions to the article. Just thought I'd point this out in case the article contains this usage again in the future. -- James26 (talk) 20:45, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Like I say, it depends on how your quote is handled—newspapers will generally phrase a sentence with the emphasis on "here is a direct quotation", in which case the pause is warranted; whereas if seamless flow is needed, for example in a sentence using multiple quotations or a quotation and several other clauses, it's better not to force that pause. It's not a hard and fast rule, though. It helps to just read the whole thing aloud and take out any commas you don't actually stop at in speech, which is usually how I approach copy-editing here. GRAPPLE X 20:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Though I'd prefer to go with the former approach, I'm actually glad we had this discussion, since I've enjoyed looking into this. :) -- James26 (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

X-Files

Congrats on finishing the set. Here's the box for when you make the GT nom:

The X-Files (season 1)

25 articles

"Pilot"

"Deep Throat"

"Squeeze"

"Conduit"

"The Jersey Devil"

"Shadows"

"Ghost in the Machine"

"Ice"

"Space"

"Fallen Angel"

"Eve"

"Fire"

"Beyond the Sea"

"Gender Bender"

"Lazarus"

"Young at Heart"

"E.B.E."

"Miracle Man"

"Shapes"

"Darkness Falls"

"Tooms"

"Born Again"

"Roland"

"The Erlenmeyer Flask"

igordebraga ≠ 22:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! And thanks for putting the book together. I'm going to add a bit more to the season article as suggested in the GA review for it before I bring the whole thing to GTC, but unfortunately something has gotten in the way of my time... GRAPPLE X 22:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Given you offered your services/sources, I'd be thankful if you added more info on "The Host", - though I think your sources are already there (and I also put something I've seen in the DVD documentary). And maybe on Little Green Men (The X-Files) too. (among the many articles on my "to do list"... the fact I should be busy IRL and have 4 - though one is being reviewed - articles on the GAN shows I shouldn't hurry) Hope you'll find the time/motivation to put the above topic on the GTC too! igordebraga ≠ 04:42, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm off work tomorrow so I'll have a comb through it all then for you. I'll dump some info into "Little Green Men" too. I still need to get round to sorting out that GTC, keep on me and I'll try to get it sorted this week. GRAPPLE X 04:54, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Still waiting to see you post that topic on GTC, and probably work on Little Green Men. In the meantime, I expanded 3 (The X-Files) a bit - what do you think it still needs? igordebraga ≠ 02:24, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

You caught me, I'm a lazy sod. Sowwy. I added some citations to "Little Green Men" and tidied it up a bit, though there's still a lot of material with CN tags - no idea where it came from. Perhaps it's mentioned on the DVD extras? I couldn't find much to add for "The Host" bar one short aside. I gave "3" a more thorough going-over, redoing the lead, the refs and the broadcast information, and adding another bit of information about another of Duchovny's girlfriends appearing in the first season. If I could get a good source for it, I'd be tempted to mention Tea Leoni's appearance in season 7 as well (that man gets around!). If there's any other episodes you're working on, let me know. Also, you should add your name to the wikiproject - the more active names on it the better it looks! GRAPPLE X 03:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Decided to improve Irresistible (The X-Files) too - can you can check data for that one? Also thought if I asked you to allow me start the GTC... igordebraga ≠ 03:10, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Have started putting the nom together now, and have just realised I should contact the two editors of the GAs in the topic that I didn't do. I'll drop them messages now and keep the nom open in a preview tab until I hear back. I'll also have a look over Irresistable for you - if you have the DVDs, there's quite a bit about it on the extras, so it should be a good one. GRAPPLE X 16:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I have no problem with you creating a The X-Files season 1 topic. --TIAYN (talk) 21:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Happy days. I've credited you and Belovedfreak for your contributions to the topic. GRAPPLE X 21:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There's really nothing on your books to add at least to the reception of 3? ([[2]] is complaining about what I got!) And what about D.P.O., which I'll expand later? igordebraga ≠ 20:57, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid they're all production-oriented, but I'll see if I can turn anything up for you for those episodes now. GRAPPLE X 23:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Dishonest accusations of vandalism.

Don't make them. The edit you reverted was blatantly obviously not vandalism. Either you failed to actually look at what changed, or you just thought you'd lie about your reasons. Either way, it was shoddy and unacceptable. 190.46.108.149 (talk) 23:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, edit warring is vandalism, as your previous blocks for 3RR transgressions show. Now fuck off my talk page you ignorant little cunt. GRAPPLE X 23:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Vandalism: Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Who's the ignorant little cunt here? 190.46.108.149 (talk) 23:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Probably the one who completely side-stepped the 3RR point that was specifically mentioned, you fucking weasel. Come to think of it, this can all be solved by bringing you there again. Consider this your heads-up about it. GRAPPLE X 23:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Just remember that you were reverting without any justification, apparently deliberately attempting to compromise the quality of Wikipedia. That is vandalism, and the 3RR does not apply to reverting vandalism. 190.46.108.149 (talk) 00:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Are you broken or can you not just understand how this works? GRAPPLE X 00:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Could everybody tone down the incivility, please? Grapple X, the IP is correct that content disputes are not vandalism. Period. Calling them such is wrong, and, if done intentionally, can be considered a personal attack. IP, it's also wrong to say that "reverting without justification" is vandalism. Grapple X was not reverting you to reduce the quality of the encyclopedia--the two of you (plus others on these articles) simply disagree about what is a better way for the article to read. Good faith editors can legitimately disagree about what should be in an article...that, of course, is why we have talk pages to discuss things, not just edit summaries, and why we have dispute resolution processes for when local editors can't come to an agreement amongst themselves. IP, you're going to get blocked again if you don't take the step of civilly going to the talk page and discussing the issue. Remember, edit-warring is still edit-warring, even when (heck, especially when) you think you're right. Grapple X, while I understand that you're being provoked, descending into incivility to match the IP (calling xyr a "fucking weasel") isn't appropriate either. And, as a side note, we do all realize we're arguing about how to describe a couple of movies, right? Qwyrxian (talk) 04:52, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

For the record, as is stated above, I called 3RR violations vandalism, which they clearly are. GRAPPLE X 09:23, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:NOTVAND, "Some users cannot come to agreement with others who are willing to talk to them about an editing issue, and repeatedly make changes against consensus. Edit warring is not vandalism and should not be dealt with as such" (emphasis added). I know it seems odd, but Wikipedia has an extremely narrow definition of what vandalism is. The term is very very often misused, so no fault on your part for not knowing it. But while the IPs edits had tons of problems, I don't see any that fit the defiintion of vandalism. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Project A119

Hello Grapple

a few weeks ago, I translated your article Project A119 into the german Wikipedia. Today I started a candidacy for it to get it promoted to the german counterpart of a Good Article. (de:WP:KLA) I mentioned that I only translated it and that you are the main author. A user asked, if there are more books handling the topic instead of the high number magazine and newspaper articles. Until now I mentioned Carl Sagan - A Live, Critical Assembly: A Technical History of Los Alamos During the Oppenheimer Years, 1943–1945 and Lunar Exploration: Human Pioneers and Robotic Surveyors as source books. Do you know more books about about Project A119? Thank you very much. --Bomzibar (talk) 19:26, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately not - it's quite a secretive project, so the majority of information on it has come from newspaper articles which followed the revelations of the project made in the journal Nature. Generally the information known has come from Reiffel himself, and he hasn't published anything on the matter, simply speaking to the press about it. However, the newspapers used are generally very reputable, if that helps. GRAPPLE X 09:26, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

However, if you turn anything useful up that's not already in use in the english-language article, I'd love to hear about it - I'm currently trying to bring it to Featured Article status and some more meat would be brilliant. GRAPPLE X 09:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Up until now the only maybe useable thing is this link because it lists a number of sources. I don't know if there is anything new for you in it. The german version of a featured article is a thing this article never can reach because the requirements for this decoration are as high as Mt. Everest. --Bomzibar (talk) 18:46, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

The Nomination sadly ended without a result because there were not enough people voting. --Bomzibar (talk) 08:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Terminator Salvation

There is no consensus stating that the sentence should stay in the lead. The debate is whether it's "negative" or "mixed". Since this is in disagreement (see the discussions in the talk page, previous to the current one for example), the consensus is clearly not to state either for now to avoid debate. Please self revert - your reasoning was false. 94.230.85.129 (talk) 16:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

No it wasn't. Your opinion is the only one which has supported outright removal of mention of the film's negative perception in the lead, and so you cannot rely on consensus to back you up when you do not have it. GRAPPLE X 16:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

IP vandal on Terminator salvation

Notifying for admin intervention now; already requested block. He/she seems determined to enforce own rules... --Williamsburgland (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

X-Files asterisks

We have a prerogative to maintain consistency throughout articles in the project. Every season page but Season 1 marks with asterisks episodes that are generally regarded as not being "Monster of the Week" episodes. This is a discrepancy that must be corrected. If you disagree with the asterisk use and wish to go through the proper channels to discuss it, feel free, don't do it by mutilating valid edits. My opinion on the asterisk use is unstated, but I recognize the importance of protocol when dealing with a controversy like this, and the importance of maintaining consistency throughout the project. Please don't get in the way of that. MarcelB612 (talk) 02:45, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I am the one who went through proper channels, having brought up a discussion on the relevant project's talk page. A small pool of editors commented, and although narrow, a consensus was reached. I've continually invited anyone restoring the (frankly, unreliable and [[WP:OR|original research) asterisks to join in the discussion and see if consensus is different now, but this has not been followed through by anyone as of yet - so I am not the one ignoring "protocol", having stuck to consensus, and now having created consistency. GRAPPLE X 02:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Peter-assment GAN

I addressed your concern about the image, but I am not sure what you are referring to in your other concern. Please see here. Gage (talk) 05:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Chapter 27

Hi, thank you for your GA review of Chapter 27, I fixed some things. I added some reliable sources (but I didn't find any better replacement for Locationlohan.com) and I mentioned the film's plot in the lead. If there's still something wrong please help me (but I can't do anything for the plot, I haven't seen the film).--Earthh (talk) 14:37, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

X-Files Mythology

I'm really fine working on whatever. The reason I'm going through seasons 2 and 3 is that I just got a bunch of those Season Guides, so I have book access. If there's something you'd rather me work on, though, I can do that too.--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:00, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Whatever's easiest for you. I don't want to steal something you really want to do, but if you're equally good for any of them then I'd quite like to work on the mythology ones to put a topic together. Only if you don't mind. GRAPPLE X 17:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'm going to work on Monster-of-the-Weeks stories and some of my favorite episodes from the later seasons, like "Triangle" and "Dreamland," etc.--Gen. Quon (talk) 06:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I think I had something bookmarked for Triangle on my old computer, a review or interview of some sort. I'll dig it out for you to see if it's any use. GRAPPLE X 18:25, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

That would be awesome. I'm finding it harder and harder to get reviews for the newer episodes, surprisingly. I think I'm going to focus on season 6 and 7, because, oddly, they're some of my favorites. Thanks for the tip on the Did you know template. I'll give it a whirl.--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Reviews for the mid seasons are tricky - the initial buzz died down so Entertainment Weekly stopped covering it quite as much, and a lot of the online sources which covered seasons 8 and 9 hadn't started yet. Reviews for the Dogget era are easier than the post-movie stuff, though. The AV Club stopped their coverage with season 5 and the first film, but they're going to resume it in the new year so that should prove useful. "Drive" might have some stuff online if you search for Bryan Cranston, since he's getting to be quite a big name now with Breaking Bad and his film work. GRAPPLE X 19:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been relying on the season guides, Critical Myth, and the smattering of reviews I can find here or there. If the AV Club starts the reviews back up, that'll be wonderful.--Gen. Quon (talk) 20:06, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Happy new year!
	we wish you a merry christmas and a happy new year! Pass a Method talk 20:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Deep Throat (The X-Files) Review On Hold

Hi Grapple X. I really enjoyed reading your Deep Throat article. There are just a few minor points that need addressing, and I have put the article On Hold. Cheers, Moisejp (talk) 07:14, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Congratulations, the article has passed. Keep up the good work on The X-Files-related stuff! Moisejp (talk) 06:47, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Don't worry, with the wikicup coming up, I've got a lot of work planned for WP:TXF! GRAPPLE X 06:48, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. Afterwards, I was thinking, if you wanted to develop the Deep Throat article slightly, maybe you could include a sentence or two of background about each of the Watergate Deep Throat and the Donald Sutherland character in JFK. I've seen JFK (and found the Sutherland character to be especially memorable) and as anyone of a certain generation or who has seen All the President's Men, I'm familiar with the Watergate Deep Throat—so I immediately understood where the article was coming from in the type of character the X-Files Deep Throat was supposed to be. But readers who aren't as familiar with these two references may have a gap in their understanding. Anyway, it's just a thought. Take care. Moisejp (talk) 21:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

That's a good idea, I'll do that now. Thanks! GRAPPLE X 22:01, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! I really like your additions (I tweaked them slightly, though—see what you think). Well, I hope we have a chance to work together again sometime. To be honest, I don't know The X-Files really well, though. This particular article just caught my eye as being especially intriguing and appealing. Maybe I'll keep my eyes open for any of your future GA nominations that jump out at me. Bye for now, Moisejp (talk) 01:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

It's a good thing you jumped in one that one, then, as it doesn't spoil too much of the series for you, just some of the first season—I've got a GAN for the successor character, X, which would spoil episodes from seasons 2-4! It's a good series, though, even if it did get ridiculous at the end. The first few years were wonderfully dark and paranoid, and Deep Throat is a good example of that. GRAPPLE X 01:22, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Monday (The X-Files)

Hello! Your submission of Monday (The X-Files) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The X-Files

I have noticed you like The X-Files. I do too. I've also noticed that you've helped get a good portion of it's episodes to GA status. How about we do the same for the show's actual article? It's really good, but needs a little dusting. How about it? RAP (talk) 16:00 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Might be worth bashing out a framework of what is and isn't needed. Simplifying down each season's production (there's two GA season articles but the others are pretty stubby) would be the most sensible route, and there's any God's amount of material for the reception of the series as a whole. I'd probably lose the international broadcast section as it's wholly unsourced and a bit useless. GRAPPLE X 16:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Pilot (Once Upon a Time)

Thanks. Have you been following the series? I really like it so far. Ruby 2010/2013 02:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Never actually heard of it before today. Don't know if it's on over here, to be honest. GRAPPLE X 03:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

That's a shame. The show's not for everyone, but I find the fantastical entertaining (as clearly you do, being a fan of The X-Files and all!) Ruby 2010/2013 03:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd imagine RTÉ will pick it up sooner or later. Looks like it might be worth a watch. I think I vaguely remember seeing something similar a lock of years ago, that same kind of "all the fairy tales at once" thing. GRAPPLE X 03:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for the North Dakota list fix! Very creative prose writing ;) Best, Ruby 2010/2013 04:10, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

No baw. Seemed an easy fix, figured I'd grab it. GRAPPLE X 04:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

X-Files Episode Template

Hey, just wanted to say that I really like the look of the new episode template!--Gen. Quon (talk) 15:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I based it on the one used for the South Park episodes, just took a bit of effort to update every page. GRAPPLE X 17:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Reviews

Hey? Howz things? Anything you want reviewed?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey man. Things are good—and you? If you want, I have a few GANs clogging up the queue. Got some uni work to sort out this weekend but after that I can return the favour if you want. GRAPPLE X 15:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Have you got anything nominated at the moment? I haven't, although I do have one in the pipeline, should be ready in a week or two..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I've got a few that would count towards the WikiCup, if you're up for doing anything—Anasazi (The X-Files), The Blessing Way (The X-Files), Paper Clip and The X-Files Mythology, Volume 2 – Black Oil. Let me know when you've nominated anything, and I'll be sure to get on it good and quick. GRAPPLE X 15:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Beginning reviews on all of them now. I should have my article ready for GAN by this time next week, I'll let you know when..♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Congrats all passed, thanks for sorting the issues out so quickly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:31, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking so much time for them. I owe you. GRAPPLE X 21:18, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Per Manum

Pregnant Kathy McCready is undergoing an emergency caesarian is necessary.

What does that sentence mean? I saw it on the main page after clicking on the DYK. I would fix it, but I can't understand it. Please fix it. Viriditas (talk) 12:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Oops, the "is necessary" isn't meant to be there. Fixed it now, thanks for pointing it out. GRAPPLE X 17:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

No worries. I'm a bit more concerned that DYK reviewers are not quite doing the job. Viriditas (talk) 00:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2011

Please do not attack other editors, as you did on Alien Ressurection. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 75.177.158.228 (talk) 02:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I made absolutely no personal attacks, now get off my talk page and pay some attention for once. GRAPPLE X 02:37, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Would you care to "F*CKING DISCUSS" that? And friend, you don't own your talk page. So pay attention for once. 75.177.158.228 (talk) 03:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Swearing is not a personal attack. Calling you a fucking retard is, though. You can either go discuss your opinion somewhere relevant, or continue to act like petulant child here and get nowhere. Your call. GRAPPLE X 03:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

LOL...♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2012/Submissions/Grapple X

Hey, I'm afraid I have removed one of the GA reviews from your submissions page, as it was a little short. This is not to say that it was a poor review, just that it was too short to be awarded points. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 11:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Naturally, it wouldn't be fair if I was to remove the review because you had performed some of the cleanup yourself; I think that is assumed. It's not that there was necessarily anything poor about your review, but if only a light review is needed, then points can't be claimed; in the same way, if someone was to come across an article on new page patrol, give it a quick copyedit, add a category and then submit for DYK, the would not get points. If, however, they came across a stub, copyedited, expanded, copyedited again, found an appropriate image and then nominated for DYK, they would. There was concern about GAR being "easy points", and that something we want to avoid, and so "easier" GARs (some quick-fails, some insta-passes, etc) are generally discounted. Using some examples of my own reviews, I stand by my closures at Talk:Burj Khalifa/GA1 and Talk:SitNGo Wizard/GA1 (now deleted) and believe they were wholly appropriate, but they would not be eligible for points in the Cup. J Milburn (talk) 13:06, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll probably end up being stricter in reviews then, which is probably a good thing anyway. GRAPPLE X 13:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Article Advice/Help

Hello. I've been recently adding pictures to some of the sixth and seventh episode pages, and a certain admin keeps reverting my edits, telling me that the pictures/screen-captures fail NFCC#8, even though they feature fair-use rationale and are used in the infobox appropriately. His edits are sporadic, and target random articles, such as the ones here and here, and I've tried talking to him, but he is firmly resolved to deleted my additions. Any idea how to fix these issues? I'd hate to leave an article without a picture, because it just looks odd to me.--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I noticed the image deletions. I think the best way to go about it is to use free images elsewhere in the articles, of the cast or crew, or the filming locations. That way the article gets illustrated but there's no reason to delete the images since they're free. GRAPPLE X 14:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

"Leonard Betts" GA review

Hey, just wanted to get your opinion. "Leonard Betts" has been on hold for over 7 days and the reviewer hasn't contacted me to tell me if everything is better or whatever. How should I got about dealing with this, since it's practically in limbo.--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Contact the reviewer, and if you don't hear back in a day or two, mark the review as needing a second opinion so as to attract someone else to finish up. GRAPPLE X 18:55, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry to keep bugging you with all these X-Files questions. I do have another. If I haven't substantial edited some of the potential GAs you nominated, can I review them? Or is that a conflict of interest since I'm on the X-Files Project? I just ask because I notice the list is getting pretty clogged with all our nominations, but no one seems to want to review them!--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I would assume so. Maybe drop a note on WT:GA or at the Good Articles wikiproject to ask about it, but if you're not responsible for the content then I'd probably assume it's okay. You might want to be a much harsher reviewer than usual to assuage any suspicions though, just to be sure to be sure. GRAPPLE X 03:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

"They" said it would be OK as long as I review ones I haven't edited, which is about three of your articles, so I'll get started. They said since we've written articles, we would have a better idea at what to look for. Good idea to be a little harsher, I'll try my best. I'd love to get these articles up to snuff!--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup

I'm impressed with your run at the WikiCup (I even decided to drop by one, which I don't know if you'll submit). Wondered if you could help me by taking a look at my FAC (and I need to work on more submissions other than that and a GAN!) Thanks. (also for this, which also motivates me for more X-Files work...) igordebraga ≠ 04:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a wee look at your submissions tonight. Manhunter's not for the cup, though, it's work I did last year that I wanted to wait to submit until after some other projects I'd been working on were done (the X-Files GT and an FLC which didn't pan out). If you want to get some more work done for WP:TXF, I think we're really close to a season 6 GT, and maybe halfway to season 2 as well. I'll be working on seasons 2 and 3 soon so that might be a good one to sort out. GRAPPLE X 04:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: WP:TXF?

Thanks for the invite! I was thinking about joining but wasn't sure how much I could contribute; mainly I've been fixing minor things and adding reception. I've just gotten into the series after reviewing some articles for GA on here and have been watching some reruns, mainly of the second season. I think I'll just join now an dsee what I can do. If you have any ideas I'll be willing to help out! Glimmer721 ^talk 02:55, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, a lot of what I initially started doing was gnome work, and it then led to more. I was still working my way through my first viewings of the series as I started so I was wary of seriously editing anything in case I spoilt future episodes. I've stuck up a message on the project talk page about a few articles we could improve for Wikipedia:WikiWomen's History Month, if you're looking for anything in particular to work on. I'll probably get stuck in on the smaller articles (I like working away on the articles no one else is likely to touch), if you maybe want to gnome over some of the bigger ones (Reyes, Scully and Gillian Anderson). I think Anderson's article is in pretty solid shape already and could make GA with relative ease, too. I've also outlined a lot of future GT plans in my user space if you want to look over what the long term plans for the project are, here. Welcome aboard, though! What have you seen so far, anyway? I think the second season is really where I was hooked—seasons 1 and 4 have the best individual episodes, but something about the overall quality of 2, and the cliffhanger ending of the season, just had me gripped. GRAPPLE X 03:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, BBC America is unpredictable in the time and which episodes they air. I first watched the pilot on YouTube and then started DVRing episodes on BBCA, which has been jumping around. I've seen "Eve", "Fire", "Beyond the Sea", "Aubrey", "Little Green Men", "The Host", "Blood", and I just recently watched the movie and "Irresistible". My library has all of the seasons but the first 2 discs of season 1 are out and overdue, so I have no idea when they will be returned, sadly. Right now I might just go through the episodes and seasons and add reviews. I'm kind of interested in the season pages. Glimmer721 ^talk 20:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

"Aubrey" was truly terrible. I was thinking of trying to come up with some free images for the season pages, maybe maps of filming locations or something of the sort, so if you had a season article you wanted to work on I could start with that one. Something based on File:James bond world locations films.PNG might be good. When you say the movie, you mean the first one or I Want to Believe? Still haven't seen I Want to Believe yet myself, but the first one is probably the last time the mythology was truly brilliant ("Two Fathers" and "One Son" told a great story but the dialogue was dire. The phrase "alien foetus" should never get to the point where it sounds overused!). GRAPPLE X 21:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I saw the first movie; I'm going to watch more of the series before I watch I Want to Believe. I was thinking about working on the season 2 article. I was going through and sourcing some things in the production section from citations borrowed from other articles, but some things I couldn't find anywhere else (like wanting to set "Little Green Men" in Moscow). Is that in any of your print sources? Glimmer721 ^talk 02:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look through them tonight for you, but I might not be online for a couple of days. If there's anything else you need sourced I'll take a look for that too. GRAPPLE X 13:54, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

That's fine. Thanks in advance! Glimmer721 ^talk 17:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

None of the books that cover the second season mention the fact. I'll check the DVD features when I get a chance for you but I'm not sure it's in there at all. Dunno where that particular piece of information came from. GRAPPLE X 18:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. It may be best removed. I've added a paragraph about X and the casting of the character; seems other important characters introduced are Alex Krycek and the Alien Bounty hunter which I'll add soon (haven't seen an episode with those two yet, though). Would the three new characters and their casting info be okay under a "casting" subsection? It's kind of like Skinner in the season 1 article. Glimmer721 ^talk 02:24, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Might be best under a level three header under a level two "Production" heading, but that's exactly the kind of information that's useful. GRAPPLE X 02:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, yes, that was what I was referring to with "subsection". ;) Glimmer721 ^talk 01:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Arnold in Terminator 4

I was looking at Terminator 4 page and it says there that Arnold's face likeness was rendered on Kickenger's body using CGI, but Arnold never acted in the T4 movie. The face likeness was recreated in CGI by scanning a mould that was used in the first Terminator movie. According to the reference supporting this [3], Arnold Schwarzenegger only "secretly worked with McG" and approved the final result.

So I believe my edits, which you reverted, are rightful. The text Arnold Schwarzenegger and Roland Kickinger misleads the reader to believe that Arnold actually acted in the movie along with Roland, whereas the modified text Roland Kickinger with CG-rendered likeness of Arnold Schwarzenegger correctly conveys that only Roland acted, and Arnold did not, though his likeness was used. (The modified text could be worded more concisely. Perhaps the word facial could be added for more clarity.) I await your input on this, including any references you can provide that shows that I'm wrong. Thanks. -- ADTC ^{Talk Ctrb .} 07:31, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

My mistake then. I could have sworn that I'd read about Schwarzenegger using motion capture to augment this but perhaps that was simply a production rumour. I'll defer to your wording. GRAPPLE X 13:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I undid your revert in Terminator (franchise) page. I also added the reference and additional HTML comment for further clarification, as well as the word facial. The reference and comment had been copied from Terminator Salvation and edited. Thanks again. -- ADTC ^{Talk Ctrb .} 04:07, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

WWHM!

Hi Grapple! Awesome to see that you added something to the WikiWomen's History Month. Can't wait to see the content flow :) Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 00:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I dunno about flow, maybe trickle, but I promise I'll deliver something. GRAPPLE X 00:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Review

Hey, OK? Any chance you could review Llantwit Major for me?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	With great appreciation, I award you this barnstar for completing Good Article reviews for the December 2011 Good Article Nomination backlog elimination drive Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 03:33, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep doing a great job, Grapple. AstroCog (talk) 03:33, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

RFC

Could you comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television#Reformating_Emmy_Awards_episodic_Directing_and_Writing_templates.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand your response.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I think I misunderstood your initial points, I've now explained what I had thought was going on. GRAPPLE X 22:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Review

Hi, I saw that you reviewed Darla. I nominated another article Connor from the same series Angel. Can you take the time to review this one as well? Thanks. September88 (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Two questions regarding Project A119

Hello Grapple X, after a first nomination round for the german version of Project A119 ended without enough feedback I started a second one, were I got a little more feedback until now. There are two questions I cant answer myself so I want to ask if you could do that. The first was if there are any of the press reports from late 1957 reporting about the soviet programm available as an example and the second is do you know who made the freedom of information act request to get the files about the project? --Bomzibar (talk) 12:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid I honestly don't know, for either of those. The freedom of information request doesn't include any information about who actually lodged it, so unless someone comes forward then we may never know. However, I'm almost certain that it would just have been an anonymous member of the public, so a name would essentially be meaningless. As for the Soviet program, information on it is nigh-impossible to find—anything that I could find is already present there. Sources for anything to do with either project are rare, as both are still highly classified; as well as the fact that most of A119's documents were destroyed, and that Russia is still very secretive about its goings-on, even from 50 years ago. Sorry I couldn't help, but good luck with your work. I'd drop by if I knew enough German to help... GRAPPLE X 16:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, thank you for your trouble. I solved the problem with the soviet program by giving it it's own chapter and calling it Press rumours about a soviet program. All in all the article is doing better than last time. It has one more week of time and needs only two more pro vote or one mor pro and one user changing his vote after my corrections. It let you know about the results. --Bomzibar (talk) 09:33, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I have a few questions regarding A Study of Lunar Research Flights Volume I. Do you know how it was released? Printed or digital? And so, is there anywhere a digital Version of it because I was asked what is the content of Volume I so I want to take a look inside it. And as a second question: Do you know who researched that the other Volumes were destroyed and if it is known why they were destroyed? Best regards --Bomzibar (talk) 16:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

A Study of Lunar Research Flights Volume I was released digitally, and can be read as a PDF here. As for the other papers, the names of two more are known (1958's Possible Contribution of Lunar Nuclear Weapons Detonations to the Solution of Some Problems in Planetary Astronomy, and 1959's Radiological Contamination of the Moon by Nuclear Weapons Detonations), but both The Guardian (a respected English newspaper) and the book Lunar Exploration: Human Pioneers and Robotic Surveyors have reported that all seven of the unreleased reports were destroyed by the Illinois Institute of Technology in 1987. I could only conjecture as to why, but given that this is around the time that projects such as Brilliant Pebbles were being considered, so that might be a contributing factor. It's hard to say really. GRAPPLE X 16:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, that helps me a lot! Are you sure with the Illinoiis Institute of Technology of the place where the Volumes were destroyed? Because a May 2000 Interview with Reiffel in The Observer (which you quoted as from The Guardian) states that Reiffel produced eight reports between May 1958 and January 1959 on the feasibility of the plan, all of which were destroyed in 1987 by the foundation. I identify this foundation with the Armour Research Foundation. What do you think about that? --Bomzibar (talk) 17:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

ARF is IIT's research institute. It's now named IIT Research Institute, but it was previously called Armour Research Foundation. You could specify that it was ARF, but IIT is still the parent university of the institute. It's up to you.

Yeah, I just realised my mistake. Again thank you for the great Informations. --Bomzibar (talk) 17:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem, glad to help. If you find any new information I'd love to know so I can improve the version here too. GRAPPLE X 17:31, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Reformatted Emmy templates

I don't know if you have noticed, but I have done the revision. Only {{EmmyAward ComedyWriting 1976–2000}} really seems to border on needing reworking. However, since nothing else really does, I think I will leave it too. What do you think?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I would create decade templates if I were creating these from scratch, but these are existing templates.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Looking good—really appreciate the work you put into this. If your worry is that {{EmmyAward ComedyWriting 1976–2000}} seems too big, bear in mind it'll begin collapsed on most pages as it sits under the navigation templates for them; so anyone seeing it has opened it themselves, meaning it's not going to be intrusive or distracting. They can always be split into decades later if needs be, the hard work was writing it all up in the first place. Dividing that out is a lot simpler. GRAPPLE X 06:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I just created Pilot (The Cosby Show) and am now considering splitting into decades. It was harder to see the bolding than I had hoped.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 10:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I see what you mean. I think some of the problem is that it stands out less with the black text of the unlinked entries, which is a problem that'll gradually be fixed; but a decade split would still alleviate this a lot. GRAPPLE X 12:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I am going to redo {{EmmyAward ComedyWriting}} {{EmmyAward DramaWriting}} and {{EmmyAward ComedyVarietyMusicWriting}} later this week.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

If you want, I can do the decade splits for you; I don't mind putting them together. Which ones would you say could do with it? GRAPPLE X 19:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I tend to watch the things that I create and not watch the others. Thus, I would probably want to create the new splits for {{EmmyAward ComedyWriting}} {{EmmyAward DramaWriting}}. {{EmmyAward ComedyVarietyMusicWriting}} is one I don't have much interest in and has the greatest need for resplitting. If you could split that one and make sure the right subtemplates are on the right pages and the redirected templates are working or are properly replaced with the new redirect. I.E., Suppose {{EmmyAward ComedyVarietyMusicWriting 1950–1974}} is renamed {{EmmyAward ComedyVarietyMusicWriting 1957–1969}} make sure the {{EmmyAward ComedyVarietyMusicWriting 1950–1974}} code works as redirect or is replaced on each page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I have finished splitting these into decades.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions?

Tonight, I am going to start implementing the decades for the episode awards. For some time, I have thought season articles should be linked to the proper subtemplates for {{ScreenActorsGuildAwards EnsembleTVDrama}}, {{GoldenGlobeTVDrama}}, and {{EmmyAward DramaSeries}} or {{ScreenActorsGuildAwards EnsembleTVComedy}}, {{GoldenGlobeTVComedy}}, and {{EmmyAward ComedySeries}}. E.G., The West Wing (season 1) should be linked to {{ScreenActorsGuildAwards EnsembleTVDrama 2000–2009}}, {{GoldenGlobeTVDrama 1990–2009}} and {{EmmyAward DramaSeries 1976–2000}}. I have been trying to think about a way to do this. The first time I brought up the idea, I got no responses. To my surprise, the second time I brought this up, I got a lot of negative feedback. As I look around at episode articles with templates on them, I am wondering if there is another way to approach this? You seemed to have a lot of formatting thoughts, so I am running this by you.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea. If the season in question is what has won the award, then there's no point not adding the template to it. If it's one of those instances where the award is based on a calender year, and therefore isn't really given to a specific season, then maybe just the parent series article should be tagged with it. My only wonder is whether the template should have links to the series and season (eg The West Wing, season 1), or just the season in question (eg, The West Wing); though this I think only really applies to the Emmy awards. GRAPPLE X 16:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

My thinking is that {{EmmyAward DramaSeries 1976–2000}} should have The West Wing, season 1 or The West Wing (S1) and that {{ScreenActorsGuildAwards EnsembleTVDrama 2000–2009}}, {{GoldenGlobeTVDrama 1990–2009}} should have The West Wing, season 1/season 2 or The West Wing (S1)/(S2). It seems odd to me to just allow Emmy to have this linkage and not the other articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

From what I can see, the Emmys are the only ones that use an eligibility period similar to the run of a television season. I'm just not sure it's a good idea to link multiple seasons for those that don't do this, although perhaps the ensemble cast awards would allow you to decide which season is the chief contributor to the award (recurring roles come and go, so whoever is specified in the award might only have worked on one of the eligible seasons). To be honest, my gut feeling is that only the first of two eligible seasons is really considered in these things (eg the 94–95 season for the 95 awards, and not so much the 95–96 one). GRAPPLE X 16:46, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

So you think that the Emmy templates should have them, but the GG and SAG templates inherently complicate this issue because they are not synchronous with the television seasons. I would say that about 70% of the GG and SAG awards are based on the first of the two seasons, but I think that typically a large number of episodes from both seasons are part of what is considered for the awards. Suppose 16 weeks from the first season and 8 weeks from the second season are part of an award period. Also, suppose that the first season had 16 of its 24 episodes in the period and the second season had 8 of its 24 episodes in the period. Furthermore, suppose we are talking about the 5th and 6th seasons of a show that had 140 episodes by its 6th season. Why is it O.K. to link to a series when the award is for 24 of its 140 episodes, but not for seasons where the award is for 16 of its 24 and 8 of its 24 episodes?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:28, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Can I ask you whether it makes a difference whether you consider this based on the articles having the templates or the templates having the links. When I think of The West Wing (season 1), I really think it should have {{EmmyAward DramaSeries 1976–2000}}, {{ScreenActorsGuildAwards EnsembleTVDrama 2000–2009}}, and {{GoldenGlobeTVDrama 1990–2009}} on it. To me it seems a minor problem that the template has seasons which are only partly relevant to the latter two templates.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

• I got two of the three opposing discussants at the original debate to consent to a trial conversion. I have revamped the templates. I think they look O.K. We have articles for several of the seasons that swept all three of the major series awards: Ally McBeal (season 2), 30 Rock (season 2), 30 Rock (season 3), Modern Family (season 2), The West Wing (season 1), The West Wing (season 2), and Lost (season 1). However, we are missing articles for several.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

  I see that some of the season articles are missing; I'll be gone tomorrow but I should be around Friday/Saturday with little to do, I can whip up a basic framework for the missing seasons. Culling the information from IMDB seems like the quickest option, as their airdates, running orders, writer/director credits etc are usually sound and that's all that's really needed to put the bare bones together. A quick sentence summary for each episode shouldn't take too long either, I assume. If you want to stick red links for the missing ones into the templates then I should be able to get round to them using that as a checklist. GRAPPLE X 04:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• I'm not sure how many years you want to go back. I also don't want people seeing these with redlinks right now. I'll get a list of drama together going back to 1990:

1. Mad Men 1-4
2. The Sopranos 1, 5, 6
3. Six Feet Under (TV series) 1-3
4. The Shield 1
5. The Practice 2-3
6. Party of Five 1-2
7. Northern Exposure 2-4
8. Twin Peaks 1-2
9. Picket Fences 1-2
10. L.A. Law 1-5 (going back to 1986)--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comedy forthcoming.

1. Everybody Loves Raymond 6, 7, 9
2. Sex and the City 2-4, 6
3. Extras 2
4. The Office (UK TV series) ?
5. Curb Your Enthusiasm 3
6. Cybill 1-2
7. Mad About You 2-3
8. Roseanne (TV series) 4-5
9. Brooklyn Bridge (TV series) 1
10. Cheers 1-2, 7-9 (includes some earlier seasons)
11. Murphy Brown 2, 4 --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 09:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you made any progress on these?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:47, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Shit, I totally forgot about this. Looking at the list, I'd say Twin Peaks could be ruled out, there's only 30 episodes total and List of Twin Peaks episodes is FL-status anyway, so there's no real point duplicating its content. I'll see if I can fire some of the drama ones out when I get up in the morning (it's 5:51 am), Mad Men would probably be a good start with that. GRAPPLE X 05:51, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I imagine that a lot of things happened in those Twin Peaks seasons and if one really wanted to one could create season articles. However, I agree that Mad Men would be a great place to start. Did you make any progress?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Have put together Mad Men (season 1) for a start, using what information was already in other articles. I might try to polish it up a bit for a DYK nomination as that might get enough attention for someone else to copy the format for seasons 2 and beyond, but there's not enough in the parent article to cannibalise for other seasons without researching them properly. Given that, I'll probably put together the first season of other series, where applicable, and hope that gives a template for future creation to follow. And as for Twin Peaks, I think season two could have warranted an article, but season one is so short that it probably doesn't, so although one season would benefit, it would leave the other being quite threadbare. I plan on working on that series over the next few weeks anyway so I might be able to work on a solid pair of season articles for it as I work through the sources I'll be using for the episodes. GRAPPLE X 08:53, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

You should add content from 65th Golden Globe Awards, 14th Screen Actors Guild Awards, Directors Guild of America Awards 2007 and Writers Guild of America Awards 2007 for other honors. Also mention the specific Emmy article for that year.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 09:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I swapped out the template and added the links. You should be able to do that though.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 09:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Capcom Five FAC

Hey Grapple. Congrats on A-listing the Atari burial! Also, thanks for your notes on this FAC. Do you have any further comments to add before providing support or opposition? Thanks, Axem Titanium (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll have another look at it now, I see you've gone through the refs and refined them, that should definitely be a big boost. GRAPPLE X 00:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Millenium

Hey, I don't know if you noticed, but there was a small issue with "Dead Letters" and it's still on GA hold. Forgot to notify you earlier!--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Hadn't noticed it, I'll see to it now. Thanks. GRAPPLE X 13:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Fringe is addictively good

Just wait til you get to the second season! You won't be able to leave your house til you've finished. ;) Ruby 2010/2013 04:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I had seen some of the fourth season on TV as it's been airing (I think Sky1 is maybe a few week behind, the last one shown here was either "Making Angels" or "Forced Perspective"). I'd digging the "monster-of-the-week" stuff but what mythology episodes I saw in season four seemed a bit iffy. I'm not sure how to describe it, but the way everyone seems so cavalier about this whole two universes thing makes it all seem a bit too jokey. I'm hoping there's enough incredulity in the interim seasons to balance that out, though. GRAPPLE X 05:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

It'll become more natural the longer you watch. The dual universe aspect is in my opinion the best part of the show. They really do a good job making it believable, which may be why the characters appear to lack incredulity. It's a shame you've been spoilered of what's going to happen though! Ruby 2010/2013 07:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I drink, I'll forget it soon enough. How's the task force proposal coming? GRAPPLE X 08:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Eh, not well. Will probably have to scrap it. Some editors might complain of the excess of popular culture articles, but there aren't enough to get even a taskforce off the ground :/ Ruby 2010/2013 19:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Is there a minimum amount of support needed? If it doesn't get going then I'd be perfectly amenable to expanding the scope of WP:TXF to include a few other things (had already been wondering if perhaps Harsh Realm or Space: Above and Beyond could get bunged in, so a focus on cult tv wouldn't be a bad idea); but if you'd rather keep it to itself I could pester a few people who might be interested enough to !vote. GRAPPLE X 20:13, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm...that actually sounds rather interesting. Is there a precedent with combining like-minded but unrelated popular culture articles into a TV taskforce? I'm looking at this for reference. That said, I wouldn't want to intrude on TXF Wikiproject, which seems to be pretty successful, unless you and other editors were OK with it. Thoughts? Ruby 2010/2013 20:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

No idea about any precedent, but I would doubt that the other members would be opposed, though of course I'd run it past everyone there first. Nudge a few more editors with similar interests to see if you can grab enough support !votes to set up the task force as is; perhaps User:Astrocog, User:Belovedfreak, User:Drovethrughosts, User:Hunter Kahn or User:TonyTheTiger would be interested in chiming in, they're all active to a decent degree in WP:TV. GRAPPLE X 20:35, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Thinking about this further, I think I'll have to revisit the idea at a later time. I want to focus my time on some other areas for now (like getting P & P to featured status). When you brought Manhunter to FA, did you request a copy edit first? Ruby 2010/2013 05:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Two! Once before its first FAC and once before its third (and successful) one. I don't think the second was completely necessary but it was a tremendous help, as User:Stfg pitched in during the FAC to help with any fixes he caught before I did; and another set of well-tuned eyes on top of the first one helped smooth things out even further. I'd say drop it in for a peer review when you finish doing any changes you yourself see as necessary, and when that's over you should hopefully be satisfied enough with its completeness to let a copyedit be the final polish that's needed. Given the subject matter, you might also want to ask User:Wadewitz if she'd like to look it over, besides having authored a gillion FAs, it falls broadly under her speciality GRAPPLE X 15:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC).

Good advice that I shall (mostly) follow. :) I haven't found Peer Review to be all that helpful in the past, although I suppose I could ask Wadewitz to look it over while it's there. The article still has a ways to go though, but eventually it'll get that star! (What's funny is that I don't even like the film all that much; the 1995 version is vastly superior, but it's already featured). Ruby 2010/2013 18:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

PR is far from perfect, but sometimes it's better than nothing. You might get a better response if you just drop a line at WT:FILM asking for help without actually opening a peer review. There's also an ongoing drive to improve women's history articles throughout March (WP:WWHM) so you might find that contributors there would be amenable to having a look over an Austen adaptation. Be loud, it always helps when asking for help online. GRAPPLE X 16:16, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Millennium GAs

I finished two more of the Millennium GAs that you submitted.--Gen. Quon (talk) 18:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Was just about to start a review on that frigging one with the weathergirl "The Rain King", so I'll have a duke in when I get that sorted. Thanks! GRAPPLE X 18:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

You description of that episode made me laugh. Thanks for reviewing!--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

User:EdwardsBot/Spam

Please send yourself a test message first and take a look at it (you can easily make a test list somewhere). Then determine if you want to send this to everyone. Ideally any talk page message should include an unsubscribe link and a full timestamp (for archive bots). --MZMcBride (talk) 00:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, fair enough. This still all seems like sorcery to me. Thanks. GRAPPLE X 00:13, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict with the bot, heh) I made a test list here: User:EdwardsBot/Targets. I also set the bot to start again, using this test list. The bot runs every five minutes. It should be starting any second now... (there it goes!). --MZMcBride (talk) 00:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Removed the test to make way for a second one, the use of magic words to generate the month created the wrong link (my fault). I'll run another test with the intended result instead now. Thanks again. GRAPPLE X 00:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The first time is always the most painful. ;-) --MZMcBride (talk) 00:31, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Peer review

Hello. Would you please carry out a thorough peer review of Ra.One here? I'd be much obliged. Some people have already given quite some inputs, but they are all involved in the editing process; I'd like a completely uninvolved editor to review this. Cheers. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 08:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Newsletter Jan-Feb

Hello!
I am a member of WikiProject India and have been working mostly on Indian film articles. Thus, though enrolled today, i am technically a member of WikiProject Film too. But i only came across its newsletter today over here. The newsletter is a good way of keeping updates of the project. I liked it! Hence though of letting you know that. But frankly speaking i wouldnt have bothered to reach you if i didnt have any problem in it. I did not like the line; "A significant number of these are on Asian cinema—you can help counter systemic bias by reviewing these articles!" that comes in the second point related to ongoing GA reviews. Did you notice that a significant number of them are actually American movies? Not just there, but same case is also seen in "Coming to theaters" section? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I saw that the GA nominations had a good amount of both American and Asian films, but my experience is that American films tend to find a reviewer more easily because more editors will be familiar with them, so an encouraging note to review the others too might help that. As for the new releases listed, I simply copied the information from 2012 in film, and even then I tried to list as many non-American films as I saw there. If you're familiar with new releases in Indian cinema then by all means add them to the 2012 in film article, as they'll then be there for whoever puts the next newsletter together to list as new releases. I didn't look anywhere else for new films. Also, the more global the 2012 in film article is, the more useful it will be for everyone, not just American readers (I'm Irish, so most of those films won't be released for me for another couple of months, so it's useless to me really). I'm glad you liked the letter though, it's my first time putting one together. GRAPPLE X 16:11, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Well... fine! No problem. But glad that you brought it up. I wanted to raise this concern somewhere. (Obviously not on someones talkpage. Will raise in some forum too.) Most of the articles in general deal with only American films. All the year wise lists, genre wise lists, etc. mainly enlist American films. I dont know why. Where do Chinese films go? Its a big task to do. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 17:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

International Award

Hello Grapple X, today my german translation of Project A119 got, after long discussions and a lot of work with the article, the Lesenswert-Trophy which is the german equivalent to a Good Article. As I translated your version it is also your credit. So, if you want, you can add this icon to your users page. --Bomzibar (talk) 21:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Bomzibar—and congratulations! I'll let you take all the credit for it, because I know translation is a tough job. I was actually thinking of you this morning, as I was wondering if these two articles might be useful to flesh out the background of the project, showing the general disinterest the American public had in sending men to the moon before it actually happened. Doesn't mention Project A119 at all but it seems to me that it's a good way of getting across why such an idea was ever entertained. GRAPPLE X 21:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the articles. But sadly I think I can't use them. If there is no mention of Project A119 it would be own interpretation if I put it in linkage to the project. There was quite a lot of controversy on that the article included too much own interpretation and that was the main work that had to be done before I got the Lesenswert-Vote from all voters. Yes, it is as it seems, requirements for award winning of articles in the german wiki in comparison to the english wiki is a little bit as if you compare Mount Everest with the Kilimanjaro. So the english base article I had was really good. --Bomzibar (talk) 21:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I see what you mean. I was thinking that, in the Project A119#Background section that discusses things like Sputnik and the Space Race, it might be useful to use those links to source a sentence along the lines of "The American public did not initially warm to the prospect of a manned lunar mission, with Gallup polls from the time showing the populace's disinterest in the United States government funding such a program". I'm going to re-read them again to see if it's worth adding that to the English-language article, which I might put through a peer review some time this year. If I turn up anything else of relevance I'll be sure to let you know. GRAPPLE X 21:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Roadrunners + Book

Oh, awesome! That article will be very nice. As for the Hurwitz and Knowles book, I was lucky enough to get it through my university library. I have to return it in a few weeks though, so I'm trying to get all the good I can out of it.--Gen. Quon (talk) 21:39, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant news. Any chance you could scan a few pages of it? I'd really like to work "Squeeze" and "Deep Throat" to FA over the course of the year and anything the book could add would be brilliant. If you can't scan anything then could you maybe even look over what it says about those ones? GRAPPLE X 21:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I was actually planning on doing that this week-end some time. I'll send you the pages when I'm done!--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks a bunch. My email should be attached to this account, just use the "e-mail this user" link. GRAPPLE X 03:46, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure thing. There's a ton of info on the pilot as well. I'll just send it over in waves. ;) It might take a while to sift through; there's at least a couple hundred pages!--Gen. Quon (talk) 04:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant. I'll be working on Millennium and the characters of The X-Files this month so there's no rush for it. Would help get the project some of its first featured content though, which is always a good thing. GRAPPLE X 04:16, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, I'll be scanning more during my spring break, which is in a few weeks, so you can expect even more then, as well.--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

GA

Hi. Can you review 2008 attacks on Christians in southern Karnataka for me? It is very comprehensive! Anything you want reviewed?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh wow, that's big. I'll get started now. It'd be great if you could give Monica Reyes a look over, I've been doing some female characters for WWHM. GRAPPLE X 16:18, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, I know it was a biggy, so appreciate it. I will review yours tomorrow if its OK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, there's no rush, was just improving it to tie in with March as women's history month. GRAPPLE X 21:41, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Not sure how old you are but you might remember Shadow from Gladiators?. Pretty shocking what happened to him isn't it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:36, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Shit yeah I remember Shadow. He went on my second whistle. Didn't know he ended up on drugs though, that's pretty weird. GRAPPLE X 20:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I always knew there was something sinister about him but I thought the bad ass image was an act! I remember when the steroid scandal broke it always seemed like they were covering something up! He's barely recognizable see this ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:41, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Wolf was always the sinister one, I thought, no one else ever seemed a patch on him. Still a bit of a downer to hear about. GRAPPLE X 20:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Email

I just sent the Pilot and Season 1 scans to your email. I uploaded them through YouSendIt. Would you like the rest of the seasons when I get them scanned as well?--Gen. Quon (talk) 20:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks chief! If you're going to scan them for yourself anyway then I'd love a copy, but if you weren't going to then it's alright. GRAPPLE X 20:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I was planning on it. I have 3-4 done that I'll send later today.--Gen. Quon (talk) 20:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant. I've already submitted "Squeeze" for a copy-edit, and it had a good peer review last year. I think it could make the cut, hopefully. Are there any episodes you think we should also focus on as well? GRAPPLE X 20:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I think "Pilot" and "The Erlenmeyer Flask" might be good. I know there was a lot of info on "Triangle," but I don't know if that's a super-important episode. Also, maybe the series finale?--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Flask was promoted to GA before we even got started so I'd say there's a lot of stuff we could still add to it. Might be a good idea. GRAPPLE X 00:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Worth a shot. I'm not super-sure how FAs work, but, like I said, "Triangle" had quite a production section. The only thing that would probably need to fleshed out is the reviews. I assume we'd have to remove the Critical Myth stuff.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:49, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Might not. I think it qualifies as an expert self-published source. Season 6 is the next one that AVC would cover so another review is simply a matter of waiting, and I could add one from the Shearman book too. GRAPPLE X 00:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Cool. I guess I can just hold out for a bit. I've been using Amazon's preview function to sneak peeks at that book, and I added a small blurb about "Triangle," but it definitely could be expanded. Good to hear about Critical Myth, as well.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

That's how I first saw it, then I figured it was worth picking up. Might be a good idea to check with WP:RSN for another opinion on Critical Myth to be certain sure. GRAPPLE X 01:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Also, about the pages. I just managed to create a PDF of the book, so when I'm done, I'll be sure to send it your way.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant. I'm doing a bit of work on an album article at the minute, but I plan on giving a few GA reviews over the next few days for whatever season 6 articles of yours I've had no hand in. After that I'll see what I can add to these season 1 articles and see if we can prepare any for further promotion. Should be a busy week! GRAPPLE X 01:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Awesome. Also, I've finished reviewing a couple of your nominations. If you ever have time, I'd love for you to review some of the season 7 articles that I've nominated, like "Millennium" (which would tie into your current project) and "Hungry." That is, if you have time; I realize your pretty busy at the moment! Spring Break is coming up for me, so I'm getting ready to really work on season 7 and 8.--Gen. Quon (talk) 02:36, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I'm about two articles short of being finished with Millennium for now (bloody Genge books only do half a season at a time), so I'm in no rush to finish that. I'll try to get some reviews done this week. I'm leaning towards season 6 as it's the one closest to being finished in terms of being brought to GTC, but 7 is also getting there so I'll try splitting my reviews between those two. GRAPPLE X 02:40, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

That sounds fine, do what ever is easiest! Also, I made a template for the Millennium articles to help you along.--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! GRAPPLE X 03:01, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Television episode and season articles badly needed

You may want to get in on the fun at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television#Acclaimed_Writing_and_Directing_Award-winning_episodes_update.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Precious

	inventive reviews
	Thank you for DYK reviews which add to the article, well written, witty, considerate, helpful, seeing potential improvements. I first thought that Chinese Whispers was one of a kind but am happy to watch the same qualities elsewhere. I also like that you write poetry! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:02, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you ready for your bold GA suggestion for the Great Dismal Swamp maroons? I never nominated, so will need guidance. The author did, but is blocked. If you are not afraid, let's try! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:28, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Go for it. I'll give it a review and see what it's like. If you have any trouble with the nomination procedure then let me know and I'll give you a hand; otherwise I'll see it pop up in my watchlist and get on it. GRAPPLE X 16:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Done, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Done!!! I can't believe it, thank you, so helpful and efficient. - Would you support the author? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:50, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Decorated the top of my talk with it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Nice! If you need anything else reviewed in the future, just let me know. GRAPPLE X 14:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Passion: He was despised --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:38, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

32 DYK

		The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		"It gives me great pleasure to garland you with this award." You gave us details of Millennium, India Song, Elephant Man ... – thank you! Sorry I didn't notice your achievements a bit sooner. Hoping for more, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:18, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Wide Open (Millennium)

The DYK project (nominate) 15:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Krinsky v Doe

Hello, Grapple X. You have new messages at Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Krinsky_v._Doe_6.
Message added 01:16, 16 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Justinesherry (talk) 01:16, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

FA Article Ideas

So, I was thinking of which episodes could potentially ever be FAs, and I made this list:

• "Pilot"
• "Squeeze"
• "The Erlenmeyer Flask"
• "The Host"
• "Clyde Bruckman's Final Repose"
• "Jose Chung's From Outer Space"
• "The Post-Modern Prometheus"
• "Bad Blood"
• "Triangle"
• "The Truth"

Maybes:

• "Tooms"
• "Beyond the Sea"
• "The Unnatural"
• "All Things"
• "Hollywood A.D."
• "Requiem"

Those episodes are the only ones with a lot of information written about them, the former more than the latter. What do you think? Any thoughts/additions/subtractions?--Gen. Quon (talk) 02:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I'd rule out anything from seasons 8 and 9 (though you've only mentioned "The Truth") as there's a lot less production information there compared to earlier seasons. Seasons 1 to 3 have three production books (Lowry, Lovece and Edwards), so they're probably the easiest targets. Season 1 has a definite four reviews per episode to pick through (EW, Den of Geek, AVC and the Shearman book) plus whatever else turns up on an individual basis. Anything with a semi-notable guest star is also useful as interviews might allude to their roles, although anyone who has since gotten too famous (I'm thinking John Hawkes, CCH Pounder or Luke Wilson for example) probably won't. I think Pilot, Squeeze, Deep Throat, Beyond the Sea, The Erlenmeyer Flask, and then possibly Tooms and Ice are a good starting point, and I'd also say that Jose Chung is a good bet too, as it's generally seen as the best episode of the series and has much more attention given to it than your average fourth season standalone (Home does too, to a lesser extent). If an episode has the material to bulk it out beyond its GA-status (most of the mentioned ones here already are at that stage), then exhaust what you have and look into a peer-review. One a time would allow focus to be pooled together, as we can catch any slips the other makes before any review would pick up on them. I've got Squeeze sitting in a queue for a copy-edit, and I think I'm going to put it forward for FAC when that's done. If you want to pick your favourite to focus on then we can basically apply anything learnt from that, whether it's successful or not, to all future efforts. I think the lack of contemporary reviews is going to be a hurdle, as the EW ones are the closest to the release and after that, everything is about 15 years after the fact. I pulled up a few for Deep Throat and Squeeze from their first airing but it was hard work; perhaps access to newspaper archives would be useful. I can use LexisNexis through the university library, but I genuinely have no idea how to actually work it. GRAPPLE X 03:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, that sounds good. I think I'm going to work on "Clyde" through "Bad Blood." There's quite a bit of info on those out there and I know that a "Themes" section should probably be added for both "Clyde Bruckman's Final Repose" and "Jose Chungs'" which I'll try to do.--Gen. Quon (talk) 16:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

This might prove useful for any of the Darin Morgan episodes. Cite it as coming from Cinefantastique, that site is only using a transcript of the magazine article. GRAPPLE X 01:13, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

It seems the full text of Philosophy of the X-Files is found on Google Books here. There are chapters dedicated to "Jose Chung" and "Clyde Bruckman", and analysis of other episodes elsewhere. I'm not quite sure how it goes about this (it's a different, smaller pubisher than this and this, which have published the similar Pop Culture and Philosophy books I own), but it may contain good things for a themes section. There are also chapters of analysis on Mulder, Scully, CSM, and Skinner. They are all separate papers written by different philosophers. Glimmer721 ^talk 23:47, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I've just added some nice information from that book to "Squeeze", thanks for the link! Which books do you own, Glimmer? I'd love to be able to trace a little more info for the new "themes" heading for that article, if you have anything relevant, if not then it's still looking like a good addition. GRAPPLE X 02:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I don't have any X-Files books (including that one) yet, though my library has several of the ones you've used and all the DVDs. I've been taking notes/writing drafts from the philosophy book on Scully here; I've seen some interesting things in that book on "Lazarus" and "All Things", but sadly no "Triangle". Thanks for the article you found by the way; there's a great quote for Carter that can definitely be used (and kind of sums up why I'm not really a shipper). Glimmer721 ^talk 02:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

For context, make sure to mention that Aristotle was Plato's student, it actually serves to correlate the two more strongly as well when you think about it. Looks good though! GRAPPLE X 02:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to pop in so late again, but that's an awesome find Glimmer! And your Scully addition looks very, very good. :) --Gen. Quon (talk) 00:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Yikes

I didn't notice this for all the edit conflicts. Please be more careful in future. I'd hate to see a valid argument derailed by a overly passionate expression. See ya 'round Tiderolls 04:32, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

In my defence, I did tone down the original draft. GRAPPLE X 04:36, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank God. Tiderolls 04:39, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

William B. Davis

I noticed that the article William B. Davis has been on review for a long time with comments listed since the 5th. I know you're not the nominator, but the review called for some more research so I figured you would be able to help there with your print sources. Happy St. Patrick's Day! Glimmer721 ^talk 22:46, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I could see what I can come up with out of them, but that autobiography of his would be a better source, if only I had it. I might still be able to salvage something over the next few days, hopefully. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

"Examination"

I was tweaking the "Per Manum" article today and noticed the Examination: An Unauthorized Look at Seasons 6–9 of the X-Files book that was being cited. I'm going to try and get that through my university library next, and I was wondering if you'd like a scan of it when I'm done. Also, I'm finished compiling the PDF of the Complete X-Files, but it's huge, so I might have to send it in chunks.--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:47, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

If you get hold of it, that'd be brilliant. Seasons 8 and 9 seem like they're going to be a real challenge so a book would be great. If it's easier for you to send stuff in chunks then do that. I finally got my old printer/scanner working, so are there any sources you've seen me use that you want me to send over? GRAPPLE X 19:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not sure if there will be enough sources for some articles, but then again, we can always try! I'll try to send the PDF over in chunks. As of right now, I can't think of any sources that I need, but I might have to poke around first.--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I've got the official guides for seasons 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7; the Edwards books (1 to about halfway through 4); the Lovece one (1 to halfway through 3); Shearman and Pearson; and the Genge Millennium book that only does the first 12 episodes. I've access to JSTOR through uni though so if there's a journal article you're after (can't do newspapers though) then I could get it. GRAPPLE X 22:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I have the season guides (did they ever make a season 8 and 9 guide?), but I don't have the Edwards or Lovece one. Funny, I have an site that provides access to newspapers, but not journals. Interesting!--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:10, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I've tried looking through journal stuff before; there might be some stuff of worth for deeper character studies, or possibly for thematic articles (along the lines of Judaism in Rugrats), but there's very little on an episode by episode basis. GRAPPLE X 00:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Along the lines of "Judaism in Rugrats", I think a "Religion in The X-Files" would be a really interesting article to writer.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:58, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Would be worth looking into. "Beyond the Sea", "All Souls", "One Breath", "Miracle Man", and that "The Blessing Way"/"Paper Clip" arc all deal with it to extents so there should be stuff out there to work with. There's probably loads I've missed too. GRAPPLE X 01:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

There's also the "Biogenesis"/"Sixth Extinction" alien astronaut God-maker thingie. And the fact that The Smoking Man says he's an atheist in "Requiem", I believe. Either way, it would require a bit of work and a lot of sources. I'll keep my eyes open.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Now that I think of it, there's a lot of Christ imagery in both the "Sixth Extinction" episodes and I think critics picked up on that; plus "Talitha Cumi" has a whole bit about Smith wanting people to believe in God. GRAPPLE X 01:49, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

You know what, I might just start this now...--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:56, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Start as a sub-page of WP:TXF, we can work on it out of the main space until it's meatier then get it through DYK. GRAPPLE X 01:58, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

You know, I don't know how I forgot it, but there's also "Improbable". GRAPPLE X 01:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, you're right. Sheesh, there's just too many. I made this Religion in The X-Files, if you or anyone you know may be interested.--Gen. Quon (talk) 02:09, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll go through the articles for episodes where it features heavily and see what can be pulled out; I imagine that Philosophy of The X-Files book would have something useful in it too. GRAPPLE X 02:10, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Found a use for JSTOR after all, when BelovedFreak was writing the "Beyond the Sea" page, one of the sources he used was a paper called "Religion in The X-Files", in Journal of Media and Religion. I'll try to get hold of it some time next week. GRAPPLE X 02:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Awesome. The article doesn't look too bad, even though it was just started. I'm not exactly sure as to how the format should go, but, hey, I guess it will just happen.--Gen. Quon (talk) 02:32, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

It'll come together. We'll probably end up throwing everything into it, then cutting out the chaff. If we can get 1500 characters of new text we can get a DYK credit for it, if it's on the main page it'll get a few other editors poking around refining it too. GRAPPLE X 02:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For your excellent work protecting yesterday's TFA. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! But it really was nothing. The kind of ignorance I saw on that talk page just vindicates Knight further, really! GRAPPLE X

lol, that is so funny. BTW, it got almost 90,000 views yesterday! Mark Arsten (talk) 18:52, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Christ on a bike. I meant to check last night but the pageview tool doesn't tick over days until 5 AM my time (6 AM now the clocks have changed) and I forgot this morning. That's a pretty huge number, even for TFA. GRAPPLE X 18:54, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Gravity the Seducer

I've done a GA review, and it is now on hold. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

• Congrats on the pass. I was looking at this and was wondering why you didn't use Talk:Sang Pencerah/GA1 for 2 points. (I'd probably do pretty well in the cup myself, but I don't really need a reason to edit). Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

  I keep forgetting to add GA reviews. I tend to do them as a pay-it-forward for receiving one so I don't usually remember that they're worth points. I don't think I'm struggling for points at the minute though, but I might round up all the ones I've done recently before the round ends. GRAPPLE X 02:53, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

  Ah, that makes sense. Well, I do like QPQs... *hint* :-). Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

  Don't worry, I owe you one. Might not be done until thursday or friday though. GRAPPLE X 03:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

  Oh, I won't worry about that. Thanks Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

BBC Airdates

Hey, I have a quick question. Does the liner notes of your DVDs give the airdates for when the episode aired in the United Kingdom? I can't seem to find them on mine, just the American dates.--Gen. Quon (talk) 13:37, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Yep. There's a booklet that's maybe 20 pages long for each one, and it lists the writer, director, BBC airdate and DVD chapter titles for each episode, as well as mentioning any special features for that episodes (picked up season nine as it was closest, for example it gives a deleted scene for "Lord of the Flies"). It's probably a region-specific thing since the main market for English-language DVDs in this region is the UK and Ireland, and both receive several BBC channels, whereas I think America only gets one (and would get Fox to air the episodes first anyway). GRAPPLE X 19:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Well that's pretty awesome. As I said, my copies only list the American date. Do you think we should specify in the articles or do you think it really matters? Also, do you think we should switch from the Sky 1 dates to solely BBC since they're easier to cite? Also, one more thing, I was able to find Cinefantastique through one of the databases I use, and luckily I can download the articles as PDFs. I'll try to collect them and then send them over some time.--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:17, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, brilliant. I figure we should cite whichever comes first, Sky1 or BBC—if both can be cited that would be much better, as any viewer in the UK can see BBC, but Sky1 is part of a subscription-only service (which would explain the very low rating share you'll have seen for Sky1 broadcasts of the episodes). GRAPPLE X 19:20, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense now. I think adding the BBC date in there too might be a good idea. As for the Cinefantastique reviews... boy are they scathing. I think it's on a scale of four stars, but I'm not sure, since none of them have gotten above a three, save "The Unnatural". They gave "X-Cops" (my fav from season 7) a one star and they gave "Roadrunners" (my fav from 8) zero stars. Ouch. But, I guess it's just the opposite side of the coin, and we need those too.--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:44, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

If there's a harsh review of "Squeeze" I'd love to see it, a peer review last year noticed that there was only one negative review among those I could find (and I've since found more reviews, all of which are positive...). GRAPPLE X 19:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks like the earliest I can get to is season three, but I'll keep looking. There really is a wealth of info here. I need to get it all sorted out.--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:53, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, just sent you a bunch of PDFs.--Gen. Quon (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy days, I'll go have a duke now. I remember using the small Google Books abstract to cite something from Cinefantastique for a season 1 episode based on what I could read of it, I'll have a look and see which it is in case that would help you track it down. GRAPPLE X 23:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Cinefantastique Vol Number Etc...

OK, here's all the volume numbers and everything:

Season 4: Cinefantastique October 1997, Vol. 29 Issue 4/5 (Double Issue)
Season 5: Cinefantastique October 1998, Vol. 30 Issue 7/8 (Double Issue)
Season 6: Cinefantastique October 1999, Vol. 31 Issue 8
Season 7: Cinefantastique October 2000, Vol. 32 Issue 3
Season 8: Cinefantastique April 2002, Vol. 34 Issue 2

I'm working on finishing season 3, so I'll promptly send 3 & 4 ASAP.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Awesome! No rush, though, on sending it, as I'll be away for a few days from tomorrow and already have some good stuff here to work with. Thanks a bunch! GRAPPLE X 00:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I just sent it anyways. ;) No problem. Good find!--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:02, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I think I might be able to bring it up to GA quality now that this helps pad out the production side of things. There's also a section on William B Davis in the same file that I might be able to use for his article, it's in danger of failing its review (the nominator seems to have forgotten about it). I can try and salvage that one tomorrow morning. GRAPPLE X 01:08, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

This seems to be the one covering season one, I believe Dr Blofeld turned it up initially. I don't know if that helps any though. GRAPPLE X 01:15, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Glad you can use it! I'll try to see if I can get that season one guide.--Gen. Quon (talk) 02:02, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

An award for you

Golden Wiki Award In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 66.87.0.87 (talk) 21:25, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Is there anything in particular that stood out for you? GRAPPLE X 22:05, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

"Examinations"

I just got Examinations from my library and let me say, it is awesome: there is so much production info and interesting factoids tucked in that book (stuff that could really help expand season 9, too). I'll send you the scans ASAP.--Gen. Quon (talk) 02:41, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Happy days. I'd love to get stuck into some of those articles, I figured it was best to save creating them until there was enough information to source a good DYK hook; if that book's good then we're in the clear for some of those. GRAPPLE X 02:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Just sent the email!--Gen. Quon (talk) 16:39, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again. Looking though these Cinefantastique ones, they're going to be amazing in the future for binging some of the cast and crew articles up a bit, which has always been a worry in the back of my mind before. Fantastic source to come across! GRAPPLE X 20:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Also found this, LAX-Files: Behind the Scenes With the Los Angeles Cast and Crew, which has TONS of production info for seasons 6-9 as well. I put out a request for it and I'll send you scans of that when I (hopefully) get it. In the meantime, a preview is available on Amazon. It looks like seasons 8 and 9 will shape up rather nicely after all!--Gen. Quon (talk) 21:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Nice find! I'm starting to wonder if it's possible to eventually promote pretty much the whole project now! GRAPPLE X 21:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

With all the info we're finding, I honestly think it is a true possibility. Seasons 9 and 8 will require a bit of work, but they won't be as impossible as I once thought they would.--Gen. Quon (talk) 21:47, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

The only issue I can see would be the albums and merchandise, but those could be merged into list articles where they wouldn't need huge amounts of info per entry. GRAPPLE X 21:54, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I was planning on starting the "Songs in the Key of X" album one of these days. Also, I just realized Examinations only has a smattering of season 8 and 9 reviews because the author, Tom Kessenich, really hated those seasons (can't say I blame him... season 8 was decent, but season 9...)--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:09, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I already exhausted everything I could find on Songs in the Key of X and The Truth and the Light, I don't really know if there's much else out there. I'm wondering if they might work as entries in a List of The X-Files albums article if we can't actually expand them further. And say what you will about season 9, but "John Doe". Oh man. GRAPPLE X 01:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Some sad news. My library was unable to interlibrary loan the LAX book, so I might just have to save up the money and just buy it. It will probably take a bit though. I guess in the mean time, there's always the (limited) Amazon preview. :( --Gen. Quon (talk) 16:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried using Worldcat to see if any nearby libraries stock it? Would save on you having to actually buy it; but I can see if it's listed on Amazon.co.uk for less than what your American one is. GRAPPLE X 16:32, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Not listed on Amazon.co.uk unfortunately. GRAPPLE X 18:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Just checked, couldn't find it on Worldcat. I guess I'll just buy it one of these days.--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:01, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

The longer you leave it the likelier it is it'll go down in price; most of the books I picked up were a penny (then postage costs too but still). I could chip in some for it and get you to scan some of it, if you want. GRAPPLE X 19:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, dropping in here (have you seen the Signpost interview, by the way?), I was wondering if either of you were interested in the season articles? I haven't seen anything past season 2 yet (though I'm planning to rent 3 from the library soon, I'm just missing a few episodes from 1 and 2), but I did work a little on the article and could probably carry over information from episode articles to other seasons like I did there. What more would be needed for the production section in season 2? Glimmer721 ^talk 00:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Working on responses there now! I don't think there's much extra needed for that one, it looks quite good at the minute. I'd say base it more on the length of season 8 than season 1, as the latter has a lot of "conception" material that won't need to be matched elsewhere. I've been meaning to sort out the season article for 6 as it's very close to a GT nomination, so I should get on that soon. GRAPPLE X 00:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Looking at S2 again, I'd say it's about ready for GAN with the exception of its reception section, which could do with a few reviews. You might be able to find reviews for the full season if you look for reviews of its DVD release (IGN, DVD Talk, Slant, etc), or a synthesis of individual episode reviews to build a picture of its highs and lows could also work. GRAPPLE X 00:34, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll search around; most of the stuff I've found is on questionable sources. DVD Talk doesn't give too much critique (not here, either). Is this the IGN review? Thought the second paragraph especially of production may need more sources and information besides Scully's abduction...what about other contributions and additions to the show and mythology, like "Colony"/"End Game" and "Anasazi" (Samantha's "reuturn", setting things up for season 3, etc)? Glimmer721 ^talk 02:16, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the IGN one. I think you could probably get away with adding some information on how X, Samantha, the Bounty Hunter, etc, have been received too. There's stuff in X's article that could be straight copied over if you think it would work. GRAPPLE X 02:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

If I have some free time this weekend, I'll try to add some Nielsen data to Season 2. Examinations had excellent info for season 8 and 9, which I already added. I wish there were more rating info available though; I know that "Compilation" site is out there, but it is just a fan site and thus not reliable. :( --Gen. Quon (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Avengers

Are you an Avengers fan by any chance? I created the Randall and Hopkirk episodes about 5 years ago but I'm tempted to start the episodes of the Avengers too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Joanna Lumley Avengers? Never actually seen it. Could probably be convinced to give it a look though, just so long as I don't have to watch the Ralph Fiennes movie. GRAPPLE X 20:30, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Lumley was The New Avengers. I'm talking about the original series. This book actually writes about the X Files and The Avengers and The Thin Man in the same book. I've written the pilot episode Hot Snow (The Avengers). If I nominate for GA can you review it? I've looked in google books and web and tried to make it as comprehensive as possible..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Not convinced about the cast list, but the rest looks good. This book has a little info about the original broadcast history of the series in case that's useful to you. GRAPPLE X 15:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, added a bit. Why what's up with the cast? You want it in the infobox? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd tend to just add it in the prose section (the way you have Ian Hendry and Patrick Macnee). The plot section is a little short so if it's expanded (if the plot of the missing sections is known) then there should be room to slot it in. There's nothing strictly wrong with it, but I just tend to think lists of cast members look better in prose. GRAPPLE X 16:34, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

WP The X-Files in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject The X-Files for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 23:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Good Article Church of St Peter, Berende

Just curious to learn your opinion, do you feel this Church of St Peter, Berende is a good article? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 03:21, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, probably not. It seems more like a good DYK article; a few more sources or even another solid paragraph of information would really go a long way. GRAPPLE X 03:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I too feel it is not a good article! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 03:58, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Contact the primary contributor to see if they're aware of any additional material that could be added, and maybe drop a note at any relevant wikiprojects in case someone else may be able to expand it too. GRAPPLE X 04:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Interested to share our opinion with the reviewer User:MathewTownsend? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 04:04, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I would say yes, given that its a small obscure church in rural Bulgaria. It has a history summary and architecture summary and the required content. Sources are not abundant no but I would pass it as a GA myself. It could do with more work though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Please allow me to play a joke on my Undergraduate students

I am a college proffessor and I am playing a small prank on my U.S. History 341 class. Please allow my minor edits for the remainder of this day. I would greatly appreciate your help in this prank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhight6 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Well-Manicured Man

I did a quick sweep of my PDF scans and a database and I couldn't find anything that jumped right out at me, but I'll keep looking. I'm sure there's something out there.--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:14, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing in the Cinefantastique articles, and I couldn't see anything in the scans of the Hurwitz and Knowles book. Did that book cover the first movie? Most of what I have turned up is from sources to do with that, so it'd be worth looking what they say about it. I'll re-read the Shearman book when I get a chance, too. I think the trouble is just that when he appeared in an episode, there always seemed to be something bigger to discuss than his role. I figure he's going to be the most difficult character article to sort out, as after that it's just a matter of corralling the sources we have to promote the main characters. Some of them (like Alvin Kersh) are pretty much there already and just need a tweak, really. GRAPPLE X 03:21, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Also wondering if you saw that Glimmer and I felt that "Triangle" should be bumped up to A-Class. I'm hoping to maybe include the class fully in the project so I felt that was a good start to try it out. If I see anything else of a similar high standard I'll probably contact another user (generally the GA reviewer) to discuss promotion; let me know if you're keen on the idea or if you'd prefer to just use GA and the featured classes as our benchmarks. GRAPPLE X 05:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I think it did, but I forgot to scan it. Dang it.... I knew I missed something. I'll try to get that book again. Also, with the Triangle A class situation, sounds awesome! I know very little about what A class is though, what exactly is it?--Gen. Quon (talk) 12:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

A-Class is the highest rating that can be assigned to an article that isn't featured. It's basically the step between GA and FA, but not all projects use it. GRAPPLE X 14:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh well hey, that sounds great! :)--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:12, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Grapple X. You have new messages at Talk:Senior_Prom/GA1.
Message added 05:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Blog Post on WikiCup

Hi,

My name is Elaine and I'm a communications intern with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. I'm working on a post about the WikiCup for the Foundation blog [4]. Since you are the leading contestant in this year's WikiCup, I would love to do a short interview with you either by phone, Skype, or email to ask you a few quick questions. Let me know if you're interested! You can reach me at communicationsinternwikimedia.org.

Thanks,

Elaine CommIntern (talk) 19:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Modest Barnstar
		You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.7.204 (talk) 00:34, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Emma Hollis

Just to let you know, I've done a review. The article is now on hold for one week. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:38, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Topic

Looks like you went through all the steps, and I don't see any issues. I know I did the cat creations a while back so that's set. Thanks for doing that. I'll see if I can muster the energy to do the X-Files topic tonight. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:23, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

There's no rush on it if you've not the time (it's going to take some counting for the stats page as there's topic overlaps, for example). Just wanting to make sure I didn't leave a mess to be cleaned up. GRAPPLE X 04:25, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Btw, would you be able to close the Chartjackers or Lovato GTs tomorrow, ideally both? I'll try to figure out closing the lowest one (music of the sun), then from there I should be able to close at a good enough rate to be caught up before the round of the cup's over.

Yeah, I'll sort those out today. They're both small so it shouldn't be much work. GRAPPLE X 12:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Chartjackers done. GRAPPLE X 13:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Lovato sorted too. GRAPPLE X 19:27, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Helps out a lot. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother, I don't mind a bit of work. If you're stuck for time in the future just drop me a message with which topics are fine to close and I'll be able to do that for you. GRAPPLE X 02:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

GA review?

Hey Grapple X, wow, you're doing an amazing job in the Wikicup. You mentioned on my talk page that you might be interested in reviewing a potentially disturbing article that I was working on. I've just nominated Lynching of Jesse Washington for GA, if you're interested. It contains some pretty graphic pictures and descriptions, part of a pretty sordid chapter in American history. Not fun to read about, but a fascinating study of human nature nonetheless. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look over it when I get back from work tonight. I'm vaguely familiar with the incident already, mostly from that "barbecue" postcard. GRAPPLE X 10:17, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh really, I hadn't heard of it before a few weeks ago. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:58, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

We covered lynching in secondary-school history years ago (our brief overview of American history was mostly race-related, which I guess makes sense given the situation in this country); there were some pretty brutal photographs of this one (the barbecue postcard sticks out in my mind), and I think a few others with hooded klansmen. We mostly focussed on Leo Frank in terms of specific cases though. Wish sometimes I'd kept the subject up instead of dropping it so early. I'll get on the review soon, just thinking it might be better after dinner. :P GRAPPLE X 17:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Interesting to hear that. I never learned too much about lynching, just the basic outline. I had thought it was just people being hanged, didn't realize quite how brutal it got. I've been working on a Klan leader, as well--he wasn't as focused on lynching as his predecessors, though. But yes, probably want to wait until after dinner to read through it--I had to keep closing my browser window when people by when I was working on it. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:21, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I've jotted down a few notes on it so far, I'll have a full review done in a bit. GRAPPLE X 03:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Cool, no rush, take your time. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• Alright, thanks for the comments, I'll get started on it. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:41, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• Better you than me... Anderson was gruesome enough. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:51, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, the article's I've been working on have been heading in a worrying direction. I'm not actually a psycho, if anyone's wondering. BTW, Grapple, I think I took care of your comments on the GA page. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

• Not a psycho, eh? Why not do something on Shawn Spencer or something for a change? Bozo the clown maybe? Oh, wait... clowns are disturbing... or you could get It to FA... Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

• Actually, I'm staying away from clown articles, I think an admin got desysopped after a conflict at Clown a year or so ago. I might work on a cult mass suicide article next... Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

• As long as its not about racism, I think that's a somewhat refreshing change. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

• I'd be happy to collaborate on a cult suicide, that shit is fascinating. Or the Waco siege maybe? I'll have a look at the GA review now. GRAPPLE X 15:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

• Hey, thanks for the GA review, I'm really glad to have this one promoted--the research wasn't always easy. I'd like to take it to FAC, but there are a couple more books I'll have to read through to satisfy 1c. The Waco siege is fascinating, I recall watching the coverage 19 years ago. There's a ton out there on it and it's kinda controversial (Ok, more than kinda), so that would be a real tough article to get to high-quality. The cult I was thinking about was the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God, maybe the main article, but it would be much easier to do one of the cofounders. But that's down the road for me. Thanks again! Mark Arsten (talk) 17:28, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

• Not too familiar with that one, but that's probably a good thing as I won't be predisposed to anything. GRAPPLE X 17:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

• Just read your interview in the signpost, good job, that was pretty interesting. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks! There's another one on the wikimedia blog due soon as well, I think, about the cup. Are you interested in the series much? GRAPPLE X 18:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
    • I've never gotten into it really, I'm not sure I've watched it though, I should catch some episodes sometime. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Fresh Bones (The X-Files episode), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use your sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 03:07, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I think I'm aware of how to edit, thanks; perhaps you might want to look at what you're doing before you revert a correct change and condescend to template drop me. Cheers. GRAPPLE X 03:11, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiThanks

WikiThanks

Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.2.10 (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Nifty Find

I was browsing through the old X-Files official site, and found plot synopsis for Season 8 and 9 episodes. They also have a "Research" page, like this one for "Medusa" that could potentially prove useful for production sections.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, wow, man, I thought that site would be long dead! That'll definitely prove useful; especially as the DVD features for later seasons are pretty lacking in that kind of nitty gritty information. GRAPPLE X 01:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

• I'd strongly suggest archiving parts used though. Doubt it'll last long. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:28, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Bathroom sex

I've suggested an alt hook with pic. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 04:44, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Askmen.com. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 11:48, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Grapple X. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Muhammad_images.
Message added 15:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Brendon ishere 15:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

My apologies

After discussion in Template:Did you know nominations/The Gift (The X-Files), I don't know what else to do other than add alternatives in DYK discussions myself. Look, maybe next time, before adding alternatives or making changes, I must first discuss anything with you. Deal? --George Ho (talk) 21:26, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Dude, there's nothing wrong with suggesting alts, it's a constructive process and I appreciate it; I just didn't think any of the alts suggested were much of an improvement, as I prefer hooks that are shorter to ones that are longer. I feel that if you explain everything up front and people are less curious about the article and might not read it when they see the hook. Ultimately it's up to whoever puts the queues together to decide which to go for. GRAPPLE X 21:29, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

....If I could add another alternative, how much explanation must I give? --George Ho (talk) 21:39, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Article

Hey Grapple, you have Highbeam, right? Do you think you could send me a copy of this article? Also, I'm trying to find an obituary of Hiram Wesley Evans for a GA review but haven't had any luck, could you take a look? Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 06:12, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Sent you five articles; unfortunately none of them are obituaries, but it's all I could find that mentioned the man. GRAPPLE X 13:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

re: That gum you like is going to come back in style

Will do - and that's some mighty fine coffee you've got there. Need to rewatch this series now! Lugnuts (talk) 07:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I've spent all week trying to figure out where my copy of the first season went; it's driving me nuts. But thanks for any help you can offer. GRAPPLE X 13:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I've opened a peer review for the article if you have the time to contribute anything; if there's anything you want me to look over for you in return I'd be happy to pitch in. GRAPPLE X 01:51, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For cracking me up over my morning coffee with this [5]... Khazar2 (talk) 16:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad to have started your day off right. GRAPPLE X 16:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

The Smoking Man

I reverted that guys edits twice, and he still is going at it, but has yet to explain his motives. What's the next step?--Gen. Quon (talk) 18:23, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:ANEW. I'll write up a report now. GRAPPLE X 18:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I just finished The X-Files (season 6) and nominated it for good article, if you want to have a look at that; I guess I had already started and just forgot about it. Also, I finished reviewing "Gethsemane".--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:46, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, shit, I forgot you'd started that. I'll address it soon; I'll try to get season 6 reviewed tonight so we can put the season up as a topic. GRAPPLE X 19:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

No biggie. I think I started it after all of season six's articles were promoted, but then I was tantalized by season seven, and then eight, and kind of forgot about it. Whoops on my part!--Gen. Quon (talk) 19:51, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I reported the IP. Sheesh, he is dead-set that Mulder and Smokey were aliens. I requested a block; I hope he doesn't move onto Scully next...--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

The IP seems static so a block should fix it. Just leave it for now as you don't want to get into hot water yourself for reverting too much; it's been reported and the reverts are more than enough to see action being taken. You wouldn't believe the nonsense people add sometimes; I've had to revert people who instead Mulder should be called "Fox Spender" or that, for some odd reason, Well-Manicured Man should be called "Rovingmere". GRAPPLE X 03:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I did go a little gung-ho. I'm hoping that since I was reverting obvious vandalism, I'll be OK, which seems to be an exception to the three-revert rule. But I'll just stop and wait it out. Rovingmere, nice.--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:23, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

You should be alright since it's a continuation of behaviour which was already deemed disruptive; just it's best to err on the side of caution. And yeah, he insisted that the estate WMM lived on was called Rovingmere and that obviously meant the character was named that too. Because obviously the US president is Mr. White. GRAPPLE X 03:29, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, at least that had a semblance of a rationale. "Mulder iz an alium LAWL" is just obnoxious.--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Don't ever watch the History Channel stoned, it's just a bad recipe for a freakout. GRAPPLE X 03:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Our alien vandal finally got blocked after he moved onto Scully. Don't mess with Scully.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:53, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Jeez, it took that long? Red tape is not fun. GRAPPLE X 12:16, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh great.. I was wondering when that would start up again.--Gen. Quon (talk) 20:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

May I direct you...

...to the talk page for Zombi 2? --Ryanasaurus007 (talk) 00:38, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Question about Reviews

Do you think this site would count as reliable reviews a la Critical Myth or Robert Christgau? Sarah Stegall (which just redirects to SFScope, which she writes for and seems to be a legit site) seems to be a published author, and according to her page, her reviews have been cited in quite a few published books, including The Philosophy of The X-Files. Thoughts?--Gen. Quon (talk) 20:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, according to this page, it says she wrote online content for TV Guide and helped write the first three official guides to The X-Files, which is verified by Amazon, so I'd assume she's good, right?--Gen. Quon (talk) 20:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I was going to say she's credited in some of the official guides, yeah. I assume it would count as an expert self-published source (some of the material in Project A119, which passed a WP:MILHIST A-Class review, is self-published by an expert in that field, so does seem a legitimate form of source). Maybe ask at WP:RSN to be sure to be sure though. GRAPPLE X 20:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you happen to have any articles on either "Surekill" or "Invocation"? Those seem to be the only Season 8 episodes that I can't find a lot of production info on.--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so, but I can have a look through Highbeam (you applied for an account yet?). If you're struggling, I learnt during the Millennium episodes to focus on the cast and crew when I could—who wrote/directed it, have they written or directed others, have the cast members been in previous episodes, etc. Do you have the season 8 DVDs? If not I can check them for features for you. Side note: Kim Greist from "Invocation" is absolutely yummy in Manhunter.

I have not, but I don't know what that is. I will try your suggestion. I have plenty of reviews, I'm just seriously lacking on any substantial production info. I really need to just buy that LAX-Files book; it seems like it has all the answers. And thanks for the movie suggestion. ;)--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:55, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

HighBeam is a newspaper archive available online; if I've added anything with a "subscription required" tag that's where it's come from. WP:HighBeam should have information on how to apply for a free one-year account; it'll definitely prove useful to you. GRAPPLE X 22:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Feedback request

Hi. I'm aware you've worked on a lot of television related topics so I was wondering if you could have a look at a userspace draft of Meat (Torchwood) which I've worked heavily on? I'm hoping to put it forward for selection for WP:Did you know as once I transfer what I have to mainspace it meets the criteria for fivefold prose expansion. What I'm wondering is whether the balance of sources I've used is okay and whether it's neutral enough. I'm aware of some of your episode contributions as well such as Episode 2 (Twin Peaks) - kind of stole the structure of the plot section from that one. This is the first episode article I've worked on significantly and it's an area I'd hope to work on articles more on in future. Thanks for any feedback Eshlare (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Your sources seem fine to me. The lead reads a little heavy but I think it's just some of the detail you use (I wouldn't mention producers so up-front, for example, saving them just for the article body instead). Lead length seems about right for the size of the article though; scale-wise I'm comparing it to the Manhunter article I wrote which has about the same word count. I'd give the whole thing a copy-edit but if you stuck it in for GAN a reviewer would point out where that's needed anyway; I could either comb through it now and steer clear of reviewing it or vice versa, I guess. What I would say is that the citations for Walker are handled a bit too precisely—they point to two chapters in the same book, both written by the same fella, so include the book in the bibliography once with no chapters specified, and simply cite "Walker, p. XX" at a given time (for example, "Squeeze" cites several different chapters of the Lowry book used—one for the episode and one for viewer figures—but given that it's one book with one author then the chapters themselves don't need to be worried about. As for neutrality, you've cited quite a wide variety of critics there so if it comes off as too positive or too negative that's simply unavoidable; NPOV doesn't mean compromising comprehensiveness for the sake of balancing two sides, it simply means being fair about it and letting the actual critical consensus show, even if it is highly positive or negative. GRAPPLE X 22:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Season 7

I nominated the Season Seven article for GA, if you would like to review it. If not, no worries, and definitely no rush!--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll try to have a look at it tonight, writing up a plot summar for "Maranatha" right now but it shouldn't take much longer. Another season article at GA should be good. GRAPPLE X 01:03, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good; like I said, no rush at all. Also, I finished the "Walkabout (Millennium)" review.--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Maus GA review

Just so you know, I've put up Maus for a GA review. Thanks for your help at the Peer Review before. CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 07:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother. I'll keep an eye out in case I can help out during the review. GRAPPLE X 12:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

X Files Infobox

I was reviewing some Doctor Who articles and I was wondering: do you think we should maybe one of these days make a unique infobox kind of like this for The X-Files. We could keep "Type" for Myth-arcs or Monsters-of-the-week, but instead of Companions, we could have Monsters-of-the-week. We could also put cites there, because I've noticed that on a lot of the mytharc episodes, it just mentions in the lede that the articles are related to the mythology, but no where in the article body does it mention the info. Anyway, just an idea I had.--Gen. Quon (talk) 20:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that might not be a bad idea. I had been wondering about doing one for Twin Peaks, as it has a large "starring" cast I'd want in the infobox but not listed as "guest stars". An X-Files one would be good. We could match the coloured bars to the navigation templates, and include a space to put a ref for the cast so it doesn't just follow the last-listed actor. I don't know if I like the way the Doctor Who box breaks the cast up, though, but perhaps we could break it by "guest" and "regular" (so people like Jerry Hardin or Laurie Holden wouldn't be lumped in with the guy who plays that stoner in "Quagmire" that one time, for instance). It's been a while from I played with code like that but I'll have a fiddle about tonight and see what I can come up with; if you beat me to it then it might be a good idea to do it in a project space first as a test (Wikipedia:WikiProject The X-Files/Infobox, probably), then move that to Template:TXF Infobox when it's ready. GRAPPLE X 14:05, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Good idea. I agree with the fact that the Doctor Who cast listing is weird, but the fact that you mentioned we could have a space for the ref is definitely a plus. I'll fiddle around with it sometime.--Gen. Quon (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I had a go and thoroughly botched it. Whoops.--Gen. Quon (talk) 18:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Marita Covarrubias

I've reviewed the article here and put it on hold. I do admire your efforts to keep the GA backlog manageable. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:57, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but I should probably review more; I still owe a few reviews to User:Gen. Quon and I've been meaning to target some of the articles on WP:WC/REV. I'll have a look at your review now, thanks for having a look at it. GRAPPLE X 02:03, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

• Wow, you guys at the Cup have a page for everything. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:06, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, J Milburn and The ed have that stuff down like it no thing but a chicken wing. Me, I couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery... GRAPPLE X 02:09, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

• Like Impressive comment indeed. K, I'll stop bugging you. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't mean to make you think you were bugging me, if you got that impression. :( GRAPPLE X 02:14, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

• Oh no, there was a "... so you can touch up that article so I can pass it quickly" which I implied but... rather poorly. :-)  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:18, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

GA Advice

Hey, this has nothing to do with The X-Files, but since you seem to be the WikiCup champ as of right now, I'd like your advice on this article I'm GA reviewing. I feel uncomfortable promoting it with the level of sources (almost entirely primary) and total lack of reception and ratings, but I'd like a second opinion. If you can give it a quick scan, that would be awesome.Gen. Quon (talk) 15:45, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, to me it seems to need much more sourcing than it's got; there's not a single review and only two secondary sources used. There's also casing issues (I fail to see why cul-de-sac should be capitalised, for instance) and it generally seems too short to go anywhere. I generally err on the side of optimism so I'd give them the week to try to expand it but if it doesn't shape up while it's on hold then fail it after seven days. GRAPPLE X 15:50, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Is there anyway you could comment on that GA and jot your opinion down real quick, if you have time. I told the editor I'd get a good second opinion, and I trust your judgement. Thanks.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

There in two ticks, ping me again in 10 minutes if I haven't by then. GRAPPLE X 00:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a ton. That advice should be really helpful.--Gen. Quon (talk) 14:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother. Drop me a line any time you need another opinion on something like that. GRAPPLE X 15:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

GA

Could you review the GA nomination of Compton-Belkovich Thorium Anomaly? I've been told by my mentor that it will pass. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 09:19, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll give it a look this evening after work; though the sciences are something I'm extremely rusty on. At a cursory glance, though, I'd say the lead definitely needs some expandings; summarise the "description" and "formation" headings with a sentence or two each and add that to the lead. GRAPPLE X 10:20, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

• On the topic of GAs, I've replied at Talk:Ruma Maida/GA1. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

  Already half-done responding there. :P GRAPPLE X 10:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

•  Done - what you said, Grapple X. Could you have a look? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 10:47, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Still on the subject of GA - could you have a look at Jacobus Deketh? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 10:49, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

It's looking to be on the short side; given that list of sources I would imagine there's a heft more to be said. Even if they're mostly duplicative, a one-sentence lead is still a no-no; always try to summarise the article as best you can in an article's lead. Leonard Reiffel might be a good model for a short biography article to see how to work with limited content. GRAPPLE X 19:01, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done - expanded lead. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:22, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review Grapple. Is this what you had in mind for a screenshot?  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks great, shows exactly what the two visual styles look like wonderfully. GRAPPLE X 19:01, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

GA

Could up help with some of the things you outlined? I'll do the refs tomorrow. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 22:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll try to see to the aesthetic changes but I'll not be able to do any expansion without access to most of those sources. GRAPPLE X 22:34, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay! I'll do some more advanced things. I'll be done within 3 days. By the way, it's going to be a DYK on the main page in 9 hrs, 18 mins! About the name - the capitalized name is the official one, according to original documents. No radiation data could be found about it. I have only seen the "-" be used in documents, not the other one. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 22:42, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Have made a few changes for you. I moved the page to fix the title; the hyphen might be used elsewhere but MOS:DASH is the internal guideline we use here for consistency (things like "Mason-Dixon line" with a hyphen will also be common in other media but again, we use an en-dash for that). I kept the capitalisation as I see the sources are treating it as a proper noun. I don't think there's anything more I can really do without doing additional research myself, but if I was to invest that level of editing into the article I would no longer be impartial enough to finish the review myself. If you still need a hand later in the week it's on hold for, then I can pitch in and request another opinion on the review, though, but it's generally tidier to avoid that as it can take a while. GRAPPLE X 01:35, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Maida

Well, I've expanded the article by about 2000 characters. Any ideas of what is needed before a FA nomination, aside from expanding the lede a bit? (I'll do that after breakfast) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC):

Eep, that's some progress. In terms of FA, if there's any international reception material you could find that would be a major boost; even checking things like Allmovie might turn up something that would help round that out. That's the only thing that sticks out for me, but I'll give it another combing over tomorrow (have to do something to keep my mind off the big game). GRAPPLE X 01:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

• Well, I've dug up a little about international performances but no international reviews. Allmovies.com just had a cast list.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:07, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  That's a bummer. Still, looking and finding nothing goes towards comprehensiveness anyway so it's still a plus. GRAPPLE X 02:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  Totally. I'll just ask someone to copyedit the article and then nominate... don't really want to worry about the guild, as both times they managed to get there after the article had passed FAC (Chrisye and 1740 Batavia massacre). Thanks for the feedback! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:14, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  Not a bother. Like I say, I'll give it another check in the morning but you'll want someone else to copy-edit it, my prose isn't generally brilliant (took two GOCE copy-edits for my only successful FA to make it over the line). Still waiting on a request or two over there but I'm a patient enough fella so I don't mind. GRAPPLE X 02:22, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  I'd appreciate it. Manhunter looks quite good though, and it's a fairly recent promotion too! I'm sure you could get another to FA, especially with Highbeam (useless for Indonesian films, but American and British films? Probably pretty sweet). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:28, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  I've a few TV articles sitting on the backburner which should hopefully be done by the year's end, just a matter of tracking some loose ends down. Highbeam's hit or miss but it's given me some good info on things like TV viewing figures that I couldn't get elsewhere. GRAPPLE X 02:34, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  • I haven't even tried writing about Indonesian TV shows... heaven knows many have very little coverage in mainstream sources.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:43, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

    I can imagine; I'm working on an American series now that had developed quite a big cult following (there's 10+ year-old movement to revive it, even) and finding sources for that is pretty hard; I can only imagine how scarce they might be when you don't have several countries worth of stuff to comb through. GRAPPLE X 02:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

    Indeed.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

• Just a note that the article is up for FA here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

• Replied at the FAC. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

• Ping. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. So, is "derp" related to "dord"? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

  Well I guess they're both related to density. GRAPPLE X 15:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

GA (again)

Would you say I've now done the improvements to CBTA? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 09:44, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Will it pass? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 15:06, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Hold on; I'm passing it now. GRAPPLE X 15:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For helping out with the GA and passing it! Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 15:12, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Relations between the MIB

You seem to know alot of unsolved mysteries, would you care to know any clues how the Men in Black (franchise) ever got the information about these people and how the franchise, during the beginning of their production, was also being watched by the government authorities as well. Later, --GoShow (...............) 22:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Not quite sure what you mean; at any rate I don't really know anything about those films to be honest. Sorry. GRAPPLE X 22:56, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

PR

I've replied at the Peer review.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Jesse Washington

Thanks again for the GA review on Jesse Washington, it's at FAC now, in case you're interested in reviewing. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Glenview Mansion

The nominator of this DYK has come up with a new ALT2, so if you could stop by and check it out, we'd greatly appreciate it. I'd put a brief hold on the nomination due to issues with the original (and preferred) hook, now resolved, but as the new ALT was introduced when those fixes were made, the hold remains pending your review. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

"The Walk" plot summary

I've just added a plot summary to "The Walk", and I'm going to work on one for "Oubliette". I used a transcript of the episode I found on the Internet mainly as reference, so it should be pretty accurate, although I'm not the best with plot summaries. Is there anything else that could be easily added to the article (it's currently stub-class)? I'm going to add the A.V. Club review. Glimmer721 ^talk 23:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to hijack this post, but I'm sure if you want some books/magazines scans, Grapple or I could hook you up.--Gen. Quon (talk) 04:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what you could add that would be readily available online but I can email you over some relevant scans. The plot summary looks good but I'd stick in the cast members as it goes along (like is done in Squeeze (The X-Files) or Episode 2 (Twin Peaks)), as people like Anderson and Duchovny won't be listed in the infobox so it's good to give them a mention in the plot summary. GRAPPLE X 13:59, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Just tried, I can't attach something to an email sent through wikipedia's "email this user" function; so fire me over an email the same way and I can reply to it with some PDF files attached. GRAPPLE X 14:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok I will try that. Thanks! Glimmer721 ^talk 22:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Seem to be having trouble attaching attachments but I'll get this stuff to you as soon as I can; I'm checking updates now but I'll fire it over through gmail if I can't sort this hotmail bastard out. GRAPPLE X 23:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Figured it out, had to send it through a file sharing service (DropSend, as apparently someone else has registered my email address at YouSendIt, which is just odd). Let me know if you want more. GRAPPLE X 23:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did get the second email, though I haven't clicked on the link yet (it says I can download it 10 times over the next week, so I don't want to do it until I'm ready to use it). Glimmer721 ^talk 02:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Cool. If I can find a way to compress them better than winrar does I should be able to email them through gmail's 25mb limit; pdfs are a little too big to zip that small though. GRAPPLE X 02:21, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

If either of you is interested in Season 5, I found this which could help with reception. (It was in "Bad Blood"'s article). Glimmer721 ^talk 23:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Cheers, should be useful. Good catch. GRAPPLE X 23:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

MIB

Grapple man, how do you do, no problem I was hoping you knew more about the people, you seem to know a lot about mystery and and science investigations as I am, I was wondering if you knew a similarity between the real Men in Black and how the Men in Black (franchise), but, you didn't that's fantastic with me, although, I did find a report how they were almost cancelled on their first film, since they were being watched, due to their files from witnesses, if you find anything feel free to echo your facts and smooth sailing, thanks anyway, and whether good or bad, have a day (:_:).--GoShow (...............) 00:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Precious peer review

When you reviewed the Great Dismal Swamp maroons you said you were open for more reviewing: the Precious article is up for peer review, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a duke at it today then. GRAPPLE X 14:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review today? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:21, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, shit, forgot about this. I'll look at it now. GRAPPLE X 20:16, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

That article is FA now! Following my initials, I nominated an article I wrote myself for GA for the first time, in case you are interested, Die Himmel erzählen die Ehre Gottes, BWV 76. - Did you know that you are an awesome Wikipedian? (12 March) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Squeeze (The X-Files)

Hi, Grapple X, I've just begun the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE request page. Please feel free to discuss, revert or correct my work if I'm doing something I shouldn't. I'm sorry that you've had to wait so long for the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:59, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I really appreciate it, and I don't mind the wait either. GRAPPLE X 10:17, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

No worries; I've now finished the copy-edit - I expanded some of the direct quotations from the sources for accuracy. I hope the article's okay for you; good luck with your planned FA nomination. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I really appreciate the work you put in, it looks terrific. Sorry about that accidental revert in the middle of it though! GRAPPLE X 03:38, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, happy to help. :-) . Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:33, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Prometheus... Dude I put in a Reference to an article that confirmed it....

Dude, it wasn't just my personal Opinion. I linked to the published article by Leigh Paatch that openly stated it was prequel, following the release of the trailer.... This was even before the "Yutani" viral video with Noomi was released. I practically spat out what I was drinking when "Weyland" followed by "Yutani" showed up. Not to mention that the "timeline" on the Weyland website has an entry for the discovery of "Acheron LV-426" and the promise that an expedition was going to follow....

Colliric (talk) 14:16, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

My mistake. Your edit summary made it seem as though the trailer was your only source; though bear in mind that the Weyland-Yutani corporation has been used as an easter egg all over the place. Angel and Firefly both referenced it, and they're definitely not connected to the Alien universe; and I'm pretty sure it even showed up on The John Larroquette Show. GRAPPLE X 14:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Imperial triple crown

It gives me great pleasure in awarding Grapple X with this standard imperial triple crown for work on improving content here in wikipedia. Well done! Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I can only imagine how annoying it is to update that page. GRAPPLE X 13:57, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

GTs

Hey. Would you be able to promote the bottom 2-3 GTs today or tomorrow? I'll have some free time tomorrow night so I can catch up, but this way it's not insurmountable with the one free day I have. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll get on those today. GRAPPLE X 11:21, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Got the Kolsberg cruiser and Group 12 elements done, do you want the next one (Konigsberg cruisers) done as well? GRAPPLE X 20:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

That one can be closed as well. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Reopening The X-Files

I came across this from Tor.com, seems reliable. They only do select episodes (though it's just about all the notable ones) though and are up to season 4. Might be helpful for reception and themes. I read through the pilot one and it seemed good. Glimmer721 ^talk 15:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look this evening and see what it's like; good catch. GRAPPLE X 16:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The pilot one at least seems like a good review; the others maybe not as much. Also, "Nisei" and "731". Glimmer721 ^talk 16:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

BTW, that edit war over whether Scully is an alien or not deserves a mention at WP:LAME. Glimmer721 ^talk 00:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It's also happened over on The Smoking Man and Fox Mulder in the past. In fact, the history of the Fox Mulder article is ridiculous. GRAPPLE X 00:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Haha. Is it the same IP? Glimmer721 ^talk 02:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

There's a couple of different ones at work. This one's the same person (different IP though) as the one doing the same edits previously; I'd go into the other vandalism but it'd spoil some of the late series stuff for you. GRAPPLE X 02:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Kessenich Scans

I just sent you the scans for the Kessenich that I promised you about a thousand years ago.--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! I'll see what I use it for this week. GRAPPLE X 22:31, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Monique Jeffries

Thanks very much! I think I've addressed the outstanding concerns, but let me know if you disagree. — Hunter Kahn 03:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Born again xfiles.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Born again xfiles.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:16, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

A strong foundation

	for a strong article
	Thank you for the review at Ruma Maida. The article has passed FAC, making it the first Indonesian film FA. Hope "Squeeze" can follow suit! To thank you, I am building you a Batak Toba-style house; a vacation home, if you will. Although Lake Toba is incredibly beautiful, remember to watch out for mosquitoes!  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:07, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I've Italian blood, mosquitoes ain't no thing. Glad to see you've laid claim to an en.wiki first! GRAPPLE X 06:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

• Careful, they're big — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

  I suddenly love this tiny boring island of mine. GRAPPLE X 06:34, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

  Like — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Songs in the Key of X: Music from and Inspired by the X-Files

The article Songs in the Key of X: Music from and Inspired by the X-Files 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 needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Songs in the Key of X: Music from and Inspired by the X-Files for things which need to be addressed. GoP_T^C_N 15:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Are you aware...

...of the picture slaughter that is occurring here? Granted, a few I agree with, (like "The Beginning" and most 9th season episodes), but a huge chunk of those have very solid FUR arguments and are critically examined in the article (or production section). What can we do?--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:26, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I answered keep on a good few and tried to beef up the FUR rationale on those. This is rather ridiculous.--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Songs in the Key of X: Music from and Inspired by the X-Files

The article Songs in the Key of X: Music from and Inspired by the X-Files you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Songs in the Key of X: Music from and Inspired by the X-Files for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself? GoP_T^C_N 10:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

New article

Hi Grapple, I just put latest project into article-space, Clarence 13X. A founder of an American new religious movement (there sure are a lot of those). In case you're interested, it's up for GA or PR, and could probably use a little copyediting. One issue is that he went by three different names over the course of his life, so I'm not sure what to refer to him as. As it stands, I'm referring to him by different names in different sections, which may not be ideal. I saw WP:COMMONNAME, but that raises more questions than it answers for me. In any case, if you're interested, any help would be appreciated. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

The books used as sources would probably be the best way to gauge a common name; if the majority of them use a single name for the man throughout their course then go with that, or if he is frequently introduced by one name and then discussed, as here, by what he used at each juncture, then go with the initial introductory name. Frankly I'd probably use his birth name and have each adopted name as a redirect but I don't know what the sources predominantly use. I'll try to have a look at it for you soon but I've been meaning to give Ruby2010's Pride & Prejudice FAC a review and the missus has set up a busy weekend (on the plus side, Prometheus tonight!) GRAPPLE X 17:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey, sounds like a good weekend planned. Pride & Prejudice should be a good review, hope it passes. I settled on an attempt at a common name, I think the article follows the same pattern as Malcolm X now. They actually knew each other, as it turns out. Clarence was a bit more unorthodox than Malcolm though. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

You know, I never saw Malcolm IX. Hope I'm not missing out. GRAPPLE X 23:26, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

LOL, but actually, Malcolm IV was the best, in my opinion anyway. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:05, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

• Hey, how did you like Prometheus? Anyway, Clarence 13X passed a GA review, but if you'd like to peer review it (whenever you have time) that would be cool too. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

  It started wonderfully, built a pretty solid world in a kind of cross between Alien and 2001. Then the final act got into gear and it wasted it all on a terrible terrible plot that threw a whole lot of nonsense together in a bid to overwhelm. Any one of the half-dozen plot threads they had would have been enough to run with on its own. Anyway, yes, I'll have a look at Clarence soon and see what I can offer; is it on PR at the minute? GRAPPLE X 23:02, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for !voting

	at my successful RFA
	Thank you, Grapple X, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of Wikipedia's labours. I will provide mosquito spray for this page, should you require it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For your assistance in the promotion of Lynching of Jesse Washington to featured status. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Science Fiction Barnstar
		For being out of this world and believing in your gut to ignite the imagination, philosophy, and knowledge for many inspired sci-fi followers, including me, GoShow (...............) 03:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The Post-Modern Prometheus

I just got both "Triangle" and "The Post-Modern Prometheus" copy-edited. I submitted "Triangle" for a peer-review, in addition. What do you think I should do to "The Post-Modern Prometheus"? I think it has the potential to go to FA, but it was never a favorite of mine like "Triangle", so I'm blanking as to what to add. Any thoughts?--Gen. Quon (talk) 15:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look over it in a tick. By the way, The A.V. Club have started their season 6 reviews now, so far it's only been "The Beginning" but "Triangle" shouldn't be too far away. GRAPPLE X 15:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

My season 5 DVD has a few documentaries of the series as a whole up to that point (I think they were made to hype the film coming out), and although I can't remember much specifically I do know one of them had Kevin Smith talking about the final scene in "Prometheus", where Mulder takes Scully up to dance. If you have a copy of that then it'd be worth watching, if not then I'll dig mine out and see what I can add. GRAPPLE X 15:29, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

FYI: I just took out the first two discs of season 4, so I'll work on the plot summaries for "Teliko", "The Field Where I Died", and "Sanguinarium". "Post-Modern Prometheus" looks good, though I'd see how "Triangle" fairs at PR and FAC before worrying about it. Glimmer721 ^talk 19:05, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Awesome, I added all the info from The AV Club to "The Beginning" and I'm awaiting more. This has been overdue! As for the season five documentaries, I only have the slim line version of 5, so I don't have any of the cool bonus features, so anything you could add would be awesome. Glimmer, if you need any scans or anything, I can probably hook you up.--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll dig it out tomorrow when I get a bit of time to watch it all and see what's mentioned. I'm looking forward to AVC's "Drive" review as they review Breaking Bad regularly and they'll probably draw some interesting comparisons. GRAPPLE X 22:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Have you ever hovered your mouse over the pictures on the AVC reviews (mainly VanDerWerff's)? Anyway, many of those images that were up for deletion have been deleted now. Glimmer721 ^talk 15:44, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Knew it, well worth a read for the Breaking Bad comparisons. GRAPPLE X 23:28, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		for creating high-quality articles of "niche" subjects, such as Nude per l'assassino, Le foto proibite di una signora per bene and Luciano Ercoli. Great! Cavarrone (talk) 20:01, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Always been a fan of giallo films, and I figured I should go in and start some articles with the proper titles instead of waiting for someone to give them translated titles instead. I've a few more in the pipeline, too, if sources avail themselves a bit more. GRAPPLE X 20:04, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Grapple

Hi! Would you mind leaving a few tips at the List of Ed, Edd n Eddy episodes talk page, as I'd like to get it through FLC once and for all, or maybe start the peer review? :) All the Best, --Khanassassin ☪ 16:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Nudge

Hey Grapple, just a nudge about a possible PR of the Asiatic Black Man. I gave it a once-over again today after taking a few days off from it, so hopefully I got the obvious stuff out of the way. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:07, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: Sette scialli di seta gialla

Hello, Grapple X. You have new messages at LF's talk page.
Message added 07:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

X-Files GA Nom

I just noticed that The X-Files has been nominated for GA. Do you think it's ready?--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:20, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

(TPS) I was just going to notify both of you, personally I would advise that the article gets taken down because sourcing is currently suspect. There are 'citation needed' tags, ref dates are not consistent and links are dead/formatted incorrectly. TBrandley doesn't appear to be a major contributor to the article (albeit changes here and there); consensus ideally should be reached before an TV article like this gets reviewed. Best to explain to him on his talkpage. -- Lemonade51 (talk) 17:34, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm currently working on article. TBrandley 17:38, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Then it would fail the GA criteria; "it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute" and "if editors are directly telling you that you shouldn't review the article because they're in the middle of major changes, or if the article is changing so dramatically and so rapidly that you can't figure out what you're supposed to be reviewing." Lemonade51 (talk) 17:47, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm of the opinion that it needs a good combing over. TBrandley, we'd love your help, though!--Gen. Quon (talk) 18:45, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

It could do with a good stern look for sourcing. The content doesn't have to be exhaustive for GA but what is there should all be sourced properly, and in a consistent manner. If you see anything lacking a good ref, add a CN tag to it and one of us will likely be able to add something to support it. Combing through the current refs to keep them all uniform in presentation would be a great way to start tackling that beast, I guess. GRAPPLE X 22:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

The critical reception section could be expanded to include the series as a whole; currently it's really only the pilot and season 9. What about the peak and fall and mythology? Glimmer721 ^talk 15:48, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you all know, I have put the article on hold after reviewing. Could do with someone double checking/adding sources given that it's a big scope. - Lemonade51 (talk) 21:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Sette scialli di seta gialla

I reviewed this article for DYK. Is there any chance you could add a 'Cast' section to the article as I mentioned in the review? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For your outstanding support and dedication in getting Yogo sapphire from a new article to DYK to GA to FA and FOUR. The team effort of the uncountable people involved in getting this unique article to FA is a textbook case of teamwork in article improvement, ie, what Wikipedia should be, not what it all too often is. I can never thank everyone enough. PumpkinSky talk 23:24, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Flickr Question

Do you think this image was really taken by "satin_shirt". If so, it would excellent to add to Annabeth Gish's article.--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Doubt it, it says the photo was taken this year (Gish was in CSI this year and looked a fair bit older and thinner, so that's out), and the guy's account is nothing but publicity shots of TV stars sorted by series. It could be that he takes them all himself but it seems iffy enough to me to avoid it just in case. GRAPPLE X 03:31, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

• Hmm... The person may scan them I mean, 3000px +? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

• Its also possible that he took them with a regular camera (digital cameras at the time were terrible) and just scanned it this year. I'd suggest looking to see if it had previously been published; if it had and was credited to FOX or something, probably not free. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:36, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

• Could be. Try a Tineye search using a few of the different sizes and see if it turns anything up. GRAPPLE X 03:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Squeeze

Hmm? Like — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:48, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

It's been a busy month for WP:TXF but it's worked out grand so far! Thanks for the input at the FAC, I appreciate it. GRAPPLE X 00:49, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, congrats from me too. The second FA is always the hardest (mine was, anyway). BTW, did you know that Marshall Applewhite was a fan of the X-Files? Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

• Really? 1740 Batavia massacre flew through the process. Third was even easier, thanks to some great reviewers  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:29, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

This one seemed a lot easier than the first one, which took three attempts; there's also another nomination I never went back to as I'm still not too sure what was actually wrong with it. I've a third lined up that should go by grand, I think, but after that the well looks dry. GRAPPLE X 01:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

• Well, speaking of wells, I could always use feedback on ? - It has a bit of irony in it.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Congrats!

I guess "Squeeze" passed FAN review! Congrats!! This whole shebang is coming together nicely.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:51, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it went well. Thanks for the spotcheck! I assume "Triangle" is on the horizon? Successive ones should be easier I guess since we can apply successful formatting in advance. GRAPPLE X 00:56, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully, yes. I asked for a peer review, but no one's responded yet. I made quite a few tweaks to the article while I was monitoring the process of "Squeeze". If you have time, I'd love if you could see if it needs any fixes. I assume most issues will be prose releated; I ain't no poet.--Gen. Quon (talk) 00:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Totally random question, but do you know how many people have to come to a consensus on the Good Topics nominations board for them to be promoted?--Gen. Quon (talk) 03:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Not too many, really. I've seen them go through with three or so supports, provided there's no opposition. I found out today I've apparently been made a delegate there a few weeks ago without realising, so I should probably start looking at closing them myself without waiting for someone else to give me the all-clear first. GRAPPLE X 03:48, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Glad to see you back. Want anything reviewed? Can you review L'Enfant Plaza Hotel for me?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll have a bash at it tonight. GRAPPLE X 18:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Concerning "Triangle"

"Triangle" just got peer-reviewed. The comb-over was pretty intensive, but only minor. The reviewer suggested I re-submit it to peer-review before FAR. What do you think I should do? I feel it is ready.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 01:11, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

To be honest I think it's looking in good shape. I haven't seen the changes you've made from the PR but I'll look at the diffs soon. I'd suggest just having a read at the FAC for "Squeeze", seeing if any of those issues apply to "Triangle" and trying to match those up. For instance, there was some stuff suggested about trimming the infobox by adding the season link to the |season= field and dropping the "list of episodes" link, so that'd be a good idea. Aside from that kind of thing, just double check the ref formatting is perfect and that any non-free files have solid rationales; make sure there's some alt text for any files. I'm not sure how that works in the case of the video so maybe ask at WT:FAC how they usually treat video embedding like that. I'd offer to do a source spotcheck when you put it up but it seems Figureskatingfan has already given the sources a looking over at PR so you might not need one (which is a lifesaver, that's been the thing that's held up my past FACs most). If you think it's ready then by all means go for it, but check the changes you've made so far with Figureskatingfan to see if they're what she was after, it might help to have someone basically ready to support the article from the outset. Good luck! GRAPPLE X 01:20, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I made the changes you suggested and I'll ask Figureskatingfan if it looks better. After that, I think I'll just go for it!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:44, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Mag Scans

I found this forum that has a section devoted to magazines. I also found this, scans from a magazine noting the "20 Coolest Moments in The X-Files". Certainly useful.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, for funsies, I decided to email Frank Spotnitz a few questions, mostly concerning aborted script ideas, through his website. It might be cool to get a reply (which I guess can't be posted on here), and he might even feature it on his site!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

ALSO found this. Probably totally worthless, since it's a fansite, but it's interesting to look at. I didn't realize that "This is Not Happening" nearly got 17 million viewers. That's pretty good for the crappy later season.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:49, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Cools. I'll have a duke over that stuff. I imagine Fox marketed the shit out of "This Is Not Happing" given the return of Mulder towards the end. That'd bring in a few curious watchers. GRAPPLE X 18:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

That'd make sense, although I think "DeadAlive" was the most effective of the "Where's Mulder" stories. That and maybe "The Gift". I liked that one.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:49, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I liked "The Gift". There's something very season one-ish about season eight, probably because they stripped down all the layers of humour and metafiction that had built up since season five onwards. GRAPPLE X 22:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

There's something weird about it: as a fan I feel I should hate it, but I'm still strangely intrigued by it. Looking back, I wish season 6 and 7 wouldn't have had all the "cutesy" episodes like "The Rain King" and "Fight Club". I still can't stand Season 9.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Nine is truly terrible bar the two Doggett-centred episodes; a season of "John Doe" and "Release" would be well worth watching. Seasons six and seven have some great episodes like "Monday","Hungry", "Theef" and "Drive" but there was definitely a sense that since they'd killed off the best bits of the mythology they had to experiment in a lot of directions that didn't work to fill the seasons out. GRAPPLE X 00:43, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

In completely other news, I may have found access to viewership numbers for seasons eight and nine.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:22, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Wahey. We could average out each season and add a graph of average season ratings to The X-Files which would be useful. GRAPPLE X 03:26, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, the results are in, and it looks like I could only get a bulk of season nine filled in. Still some missing pieces. Its seems like there's diddly-squat for season 8.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:26, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Damn. Have you tried HighBeam? GRAPPLE X 04:27, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

A little bit. That source from the Google page up there a bit that I posted cites its sources, so I may try those.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 18:10, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

On a whim, I emailed Nielsen, and they said they'd be willing to give me all the info we needed... for a price. I wonder if I can use my "student" status to help this. Either way, I have no clue how we'd cite it.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:24, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

If we can show that it's definitely come from Nielsen by forwarding emails to the VRT then perhaps it'd be okay. I'm honestly not sure. Try dropping a note on WP:RSN to see how it could be handled. GRAPPLE X 04:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I dropped them a line and we'll see what happens.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:47, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Song question

Anything we can do with this? I've fixed it up from what it used to be like and, once I expand the lede, I think I'll submit it for GA. It's part of our project, but I don't know if there's any topic we could stick it under.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Funny you should think that, I just figured out a music topic earlier today when I saw you starting to work on the song. I might grab one of the songs on Songs in the Key of X and work on that to help round it out a little more too. GRAPPLE X 19:32, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, let me know when you do nominate it, I'll get a review done quick. GRAPPLE X 22:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Did you see I nominated a different "song", BWV 76? (in your archive) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

today is a good day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:19, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I saw that, was a pretty quick turnaround for it! GRAPPLE X 10:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Must have missed that one; I'll give it a look soon too if this rain stops kicking my wireless out. GRAPPLE X 13:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

How is your weather? For personal anniversary reasons I would like to see that 5 July, any chance? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:14, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I just nominated it. I used a lot of archive stuff to cite things. Also, do you think a topic like this would be a good idea?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I think the topic would need to consist of all the monster-of-the-week episodes. What's the Revelations thing? GRAPPLE X 13:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

It's a DVD collection that was released before the movie, and it had a bunch of MOTWs on it. Just a thought. Would it be ridiculous to have about 100 episodes for a topic?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:04, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Wait, I actually think I have that. Two discs, little interviews from Spotnitz for each episode? I don't think a topic that big is too insane (you should see what WP:MILHIST are up to) especially since we have the most of it done already. GRAPPLE X 15:09, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, but they have something like 50 active editors. Three is enough for me: Chrisye, List of songs recorded by Chrisye, and Chrisye discography. If I finally get a picture of her, I could do the same for Gita Gutawa. (Cool song though, Quon. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:29, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, they've got the drop on us there; but we still have the majority of the relevant articles promoted anyway so it's not about (wo)manpower. If you're putting a topic for Chrisye together I don't know if the discography article could stand in lieu of the individual articles for his albums or not; there's a few discography topics that contain all an artists' albums and some folk might expect the same. I'd say it'd be fine as the discography could be grown out into a subtopic and the article itself covers that whole scope but you might want to be prepared to argue that case just on the off-chance. As for pictures, if you have a scan over WP:GT/WP:FT you can see quite a few custom-made free images acting as representative of a subject, especially for things like The Simpons and Final Fantasy; if you had some abstract free image that represented Gutawa in a recognisable way then that'd be fine and dandy. A stave or clef or the like would be grand. GRAPPLE X 15:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• I was thinking "Overview of Chrisye" as the topic, actually. I'd have "Chrisye discography" and "Songs recorded by Chrisye" as separate topics as well (the first would be albums and films, the second would be the songs) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  Could work. When you say films do you mean scores or acting appearances? GRAPPLE X 00:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  I was thinking of scores and acting (he acted in two of the three films he helped score) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  If it's only two acting roles it's grand, otherwise I would have suggested a filmography. GRAPPLE X 03:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, he wasn't pleased with the whole filmmaking experience. You know, I think I found a new hardest topic. I used to think island articles were difficult, but I've found myself consulting Gtranslate and other Wikipedia articles every five minutes while writing about a bishop (who has a really popular movie about him out now). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:10, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  It's a long shot, but given Ealdgyth's preference for writing about religious figures, she might be of some help (though she usually deals with the middle ages in Europe). Other than that, I got nothing short of breaking into the Vatican archives (which I have always wanted to do). GRAPPLE X 03:15, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Oh, I have sources. Can't help it if I have to look up what tertianship is (still don't know if I'm using it and novitiate correctly) and who W. Ledóchowski was. I don't have the contextual knowledge to make it easy :( — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:22, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

So what about this topic?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 18:39, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

It's big but it's beautiful. The Revelation set could probably be handled in the same manner as the Mythology boxes, though without a plot summary of the set as a whole. GRAPPLE X 20:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Shield of the Trinity

Unfortunately, the tag you added had nothing to do with the problems you alleged... AnonMoos (talk) 23:34, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

It was the closest fit for drawing attention to MOS issues; things like URLs as link rather than as refs is a basic wikification issue. GRAPPLE X 00:00, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Is it? Why not go to the article talk page, and explain your concerns in a more detailed and useful manner than as annotations to a tag seemingly intended for a somewhat different situation... AnonMoos (talk) 02:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Did it draw your attention to the issue? Clearly. So it worked. GRAPPLE X 13:50, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'm going to change anything just yet, but I'm willing to reply to and discuss any concerns expressed on Talk:Shield of the Trinity... AnonMoos (talk) 20:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hello Grapple, I wanted to ask you a favor if possible. I'm going on Holiday between the 3rd and 13th of July and I just wanted to ask if you would mind adding Prometheus (film) to your watchlist or if it's already on there, just keeping an eye on it for vandalism. I'm intending to get it copy edited and sent to GA when I get back so just don't want vandals corrupting refs or info while I'm gone. It seems relatively stable so even after 10 days I might come back and there aren't many edits. If it is on your watchlist I'm simultaneously letting you know that I won't be active in dealing with the vandalism. I've asked the same of Tenebrae and Illazilla though so no pressure. I mean all the cool people are doing it but if you don't want to that's ok. No pressure.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll add it now. I had it off my watchlist since I didn't want to catch any spoilers but now I've seen it I guess I should bung it in there. Enjoy your time away and don't go wildly insulting the naive folk wherever you head. :P GRAPPLE X 20:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll do my best. Thanks G. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:04, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• Hey Grapple, I recall in a discussion a month or two back you said you found cult suicides interesting, right? If you're interested, I just put Marshall Applewhite up for GA. Even if you don't review it, you might find it an interesting read--fascinating guy, in my mind. Also, remind me to review your article at FAC if I forget, that looks pretty interesting too. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  Backwards talking little people, interesting? Pssh. I'll give Applewhite a look now, I had meant to do a GA review for Gen. Quon today and was beaten to the punch on it so I still owe some love to someone; should hopefully get that and Gerda's Bach article seen to. GRAPPLE X 21:12, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks, it's longer, but hopefully easier reading, than the last article of mine you reviewed. This is about 3/5 of my rough draft though, so I saved you some work at least. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the GA review, I think I've hit all your points. Glad to hear you liked the article, I find this quite fascinating. I don't recall when I first learned of Heaven's gate (unlike Waco, which I distinctly recall watching burn on the news), but I'll probably add an infobox but I haven't gotten around to it yet. Accedie is doing a copyedit of the article now too, as it turns out. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

  I'll dander on over now. I'm about 5 years to young to really recall all these things going on but I for some reason have always grown up with the understanding that Waco was a heavy-handed piece of state terrorism; I blame Bill Hicks for that one. Heaven's Gate was always just that archetypal cult suicide for me, even after Jonestown. GRAPPLE X 20:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the quick response, and the detailed review. I think Heaven's gate is kind of the "perfect" cult in some ways, I think Rick Ross has made a similar statement. One thing that you have to give HG credit for though, is that they did not drag kids into it, like Waco, Jonestown, and the Solar Temple. As far as the question of whether Waco was murder or suicide, I really don't know. At best, there was major negligence on the government's part though, far too heavy handed. That became a major talking point of the far-right anti-government types though, so I've never wanted to associate myself with criticism of the Waco siege. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

    It's kind of weird, because over the pond being anti-government, etc, seems to be mainly a right-wing thing when it's much more of a leftist thing here. And here here it's almost entirely devoid of that entire spectrum; though it could be argued that republicanism is largely left-wing, so maybe not entirely. Might be rambling here. GRAPPLE X 20:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

X-Files collab

I still need to finish the series - decided to go back after a long break, last one I've seen Empedocles - but since you asked about "a season I want to go to town on", ,auybe I'll focus on Season 4 - after all, articles such as Teliko, Unruhe and Synchrony (The X-Files) are just there to make sure every episode in the season is represented. Maybe I'll search for books, maybe just get your scans (specially as Gen Quon put that link for magazine stuff), the only certain thing is that I'll try to help when I can. (though unlike you I can't use the articles for WikiCup points anymore...) Also, nice to see some extra recognition! :) igordebraga ≠ 19:08, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Good to have you back on board! I've recently replaced my hard drive (dropped a tin of food on the last computer) so I don't have some of the scans I could have sent you, but if you ask Gen. Quon he might be able to provide you with a Cinefantastique write-up on the full season. I do have the Edwards book which covers some of season 4, and the official guide by Andy Meisler, so if you need anything from either of those I'll be able to send them your way. If you don't have the season 4 DVDs I'll also be able to help with the special features from those. GRAPPLE X 19:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I can send (both of you, actually) stuff if you need it. :) --Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:36, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Quick peer review?

A couple weeks ago you commented on the SYK nomination for Chongqing model, and suggested it may soon qualify for GA. I was considering putting it up for nomination soon, but was wondering if you might be interested in giving suggestions for improvement? Regards, Homunculus (duihua) 02:12, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Having a skim through now, I'd suggest making sure that anything in the lead which uses an inline reference is present and referenced in the article body, once that's done you can strip the refs out of the lead itself. I'm also seeing a mixture of quotation marks used, including 'single quotes' and “curly quotes”; preference is usually for the "double straight ones". I'm also wary of using phrases like "the striking black campaign"; I'd probably treat the name "striking black" as a proper noun as it currently reads like several adjectives ("the campaign which was striking and black"). GRAPPLE X 02:19, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Albertus Soegijapranata

Feel free to have a look; it's done for now. Don't know if its your cup of tea, as it is about the person and not the biopic. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I knew that much (haven't really been one for biopics to be honest). I should be able to get it seen to tomorrow evening GMT. GRAPPLE X 09:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

• I saw the film Saturday, actually, and it seemed that it was not so much a biopic as using his life and presence to frame a number of interrelated small plots. An interesting concept, but poorly executed (a young girl, aged 8 or so in 1940, still looks age 8 in 1948) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  I saw something similar recently where they did the same with Virginia Woolf, and it was bloody awful (even with Ed Harris!). GRAPPLE X 12:50, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  I don't doubt it. Soegija had

  1. A young Chinese girl whose mother was taken as a comfort woman during the Japanese occupation; the girl subsequently questions why she is the target of discrimination
  2. A Javanese nurse who loses her brother in the war and how she deals with it
  3. A Dutch reporter who is sympathetic to the Indonesians and falls in love with the nurse
  4. A Dutch soldier who is a complete racist but ultimately decides the war is pointless... right before he's shot and killed
  5. A young man who tries to learn how to read while being a guerrilla
  6. A bunch of musicians who had minimal character development or relevance, but still ended up having several scenes to themselves
  7. A Japanese spy and officer who misses his daughter and is killed by the Indonesian guerrillas
  8. Seogijapranata, standing there all austere...

  Needless to say, the 100-something minute film goes really quickly and yet tells very little. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

• <threadjack>Hey, have you ever read David Foster Wallace's article about Lynch? It delves into what it means to by "lynchian". Pretty interesting read, in my mind, anyway. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

  I haven't, but I will. Thanks for pointing it out! GRAPPLE X 01:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

  Ok, I've supported. I've always thought it would be fun to work on some art films or something, so it's good to see this article moving ahead. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

  I do eventually plan on working Eraserhead to some half-decent level at least, and I think a filmography article would be a viable FL. GRAPPLE X 10:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

  Interesting, well, let me know if you ever need a hand on them. After reviewing the Twin Peaks article I decided to have a David Lynch marathon this weekend. I've watched Blue Velvet, Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive, and the first three episodes of Twin Peaks over the weekend. Good times... Mark Arsten (talk) 04:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

  Fire on The Elephant Man too. I managed to catch a screening of it in Belfast a few years ago hosted by the man himself (Lynch, not Merrick). He really does use that voice normally. GRAPPLE X 04:23, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• <threadjack> Added more pictures! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

  The last one (the grave) looks particularly good, the colours make for a nice break from the others which seem a lot more drably coloured. GRAPPLE X 13:13, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

  Well, the church at Gedangan is fairly nice. The rectory had more of a role in his life though (he stayed there, after all). I admit, the lighting was terrible when I took the picture of the cathedral, but even framing is a pain in that location (lots of trees blocking the view from the street). More or less ready for FAC, I think. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

  Architecturally it's lovely, but the red-brick colour means it doesn't pop out at you like the nice pastel blue and yellow of the other image. It's a useful and relevant image to have. GRAPPLE X 14:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

  Indeed. And the reason I told Mrs Crisco we'd go to Semarang (her hometown) for her birthday. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:33, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

  Nice. I should see about convincing the missus to take a trip to Alamogordo. GRAPPLE X 14:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

  Remember to bring a phone card. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

  I hadn't realized you worked on that article about the burial, pretty interesting stuff. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah Grapple, it's pretty cool. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

  I need to dig those bad boys up some day just to prove it happened. Might overhaul the article a little now that highbeam should provide a little more contemporary news reporting to help it. GRAPPLE X 04:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

  It's probably green slime now... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

New song

Thank you so much for the good review of my first good article, a pleasure Taking you up on your generous offer, I nominated Unionskirche, Idstein, tentatively under Architecture, although there is almost more on history, art and music in it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

That one found a reviewer quickly. - the other one is still lacking that little green light ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

As soon as had thought so it was fixed by a mind-reading helper ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Twin Peaks episode

Template:Infobox Twin Peaks episode has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. WOSlinker (talk) 19:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Leonard Reiffel birth date

I found 1927 somewhere and than googled around. Two websites are: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962NASSP...5....../0000161.000.html and http://books.google.com/books?id=l4RUAAAAMAAJ&q=%22Reiffel,+Leonard%22+1927&dq=%22Reiffel,+Leonard%22+1927&hl=en&sa=X&ei=d2j3T_GEN8elrQHH8-SKCQ&ved=0CFkQ6AEwBw 22:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Awesome. I'll try to track a copy of that book down through a library; cheers! GRAPPLE X 22:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

FAC

Hello. Could you take a look and post your opinion at the FAC of Ra.One? I'd be much obliged since the nomination is old and in need of more opinions. Thanks! ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 18:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the comments. Several updates have taken place, take a look :). Cheers! ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 10:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Some Serious Coolness

Frank Spotnitz answer one of my questions I submitted about abandoned script ideas here. Maybe it's nothing, but I find it pretty cool. Thought you'd enjoy that.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

That's pretty cool. Keep bombarding him with stuff we want for articles! :P A good sinister ghost episode really was something the show missed out on—"How the Ghosts Stole Christmas" works as a comedy and "Born Again" just doesn't work. A Morgan and Wong script on the subject definitely would have been something worth watching. GRAPPLE X 23:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The plot that he mentioned sounded interesting. I wonder if we could weasel it into an article somewhere.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm 90% sure I've read about other abandoned scripts elsewhere too. Might be worth firing them into a sandbox somewhere to see if we can do anything about them; perhaps a heading in the list of episodes about unproduced scripts, or an article if we get enough material. GRAPPLE X 23:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I remember reading somehwere that Morgan and Wong wanted to do a script involving an abortion, but Carter vetoed the idea. That sounds pretty dark, but I can't remember where I read it (I think it was the Kessenich book). And then there was the Mulder abduction episode from season 8.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:45, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

One of the sources I used for Daniel Sackheim's article mentioned a script that was read but returned to a freelance writer, it goes through the writer's attempts to submit it a few times and probably says more but I was only skimming for Sackheim's name. GRAPPLE X 23:48, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Which source was it? I'd love to collect these. There's also the "Squeeze" prequel that was written by the dude who played Eugene Victor Tooms.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Paone, D. W. (2010). Mickey Rooney Was Right: How I Spent My Lifetime Following a Dream When Logic and Those Around Me Said to Stop. AuthorHouse. ISBN 1449076262. GRAPPLE X 23:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, I made this. Feel free to help me expand it. I based on the Doctor Who one.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm wondering. Do you think it's a good idea to include info on plots that developed into other episodes, like Tilt-a-Whirl thing that inspired "Drive" and the seperate dog stories that helped create "Alpha"? I don't really seem any harm in having them.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Possibly, but only if there's enough reliably-sourced never-made-at-all scripts too for balance. "Orison" is another one to look at for a script that came out of a completely different idea, too. And I know Stephen King at one point wanted to write for Millennium before deciding to do "Chinga" but I doubt that's worth including; would be good for the "Chinga" article though. GRAPPLE X 00:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I got Chinga taken care of the other day. I think there's quite a few scripts that were abandoned out there.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Added another one. It's looking good now. GRAPPLE X 03:44, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't now if you saw, but I made this. I think it looks pretty good, although I have no clue about the pictures.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

It's already in the DYK queue, you should receive your credit for it in 24 hours. As for images, I'd go for one of the writers mentioned, maybe something about Final Destination since that's going to be the most high-profile one. GRAPPLE X 00:19, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, cool! Didn't know. I think a good or featured list route is the best way to go, but I don't know how to do that.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:52, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:FLC is pretty much the same as WP:FAC. I have one as a candidate now if you want to have a look at how it works. I'll have a look through some more of the print sources and see what else turns up and we can see about getting a copy-edit or peer review done. What print sources do you not have? Also do you still have access to wherever you got the Cinefantastique articles? GRAPPLE X 00:58, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I have the season guides for 1-7, the Complete X-Files (digital), and the two location guides. I also have Part 1 and 3 of the "Unofficial X-Files" Guides. I don't have the Lovece (or whoever it is) or the Edwards one. And yeah, I still have the Cinefantastique articles. They're saved as PDFs on my computer if you would like them.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Two location guides? X-Marks and LAX or have I missed one? I have the Lovece and Edwards books, I'll check those then for extra material. The Edwards one is going to be really useful when I finally get round to the big fella's article, it's got a nice solid bio in it. Could you check to see if you could find an article from 1998 called "TV's Best Kept Secret Improves in its Sophomore Season"? It's about Millennium season 2, should also have information about Wong, Morgan and Johannessen. It's cool if you can't find it though; if you can't then send over the season 5 TXF article as it's the season that needs the most love right now; I need to set myself a good set of articles to do for this cup round. GRAPPLE X 04:07, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

The second location guide is the LAX one, I recently got it. I'll look for that article. I think its in Cinefantastique, which I have access to. Also, is there a season you want to work on? I can send over those articles if you want them.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:50, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Boom. Found it. I'll send it over with the season 5 article, too.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:53, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I think season 5 is missing the most articles (save for S9); it's also the last one I really got into properly. I'll have a go at what's left of it. I'm working on MM season 2 bit by bit but without a good production source I'm only tackling the episodes with additional material present (awards won, DVD commentaries, etc). Nearly finished one you'd probably enjoy if you saw it, it's a Darin Morgan script and it's basically an X-Files episode with different theme music. I'll try nudging Wizardman about promoting the season 6 topic if I see him active, I'm not keen on doing it myself as I reviewed a lot of the stuff in it and don't want to seem nepotistic about it. :( GRAPPLE X 23:59, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I think I'll start Millennium in a few weeks. I'm nearly done with Smallville, so I'll need something else to waste my time with. ;) Also, I just sent the article. As for season 5, sounds good. I think there's only four episode articles left to do, but they're all stubs. Season 4 has a few too, but I think Glimmer was going to tackle some of those. I think I'll work on season 9, even though it is my least favorite season of them all.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Monster (Millennium)

Hello! Your submission of Monster (Millennium) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! LauraHale (talk) 06:20, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

X-Files Season 2

If you have time, could you look over The X-Files (season 2). I put it up for GA and it was reviewed, but a second reviewer said it needed a more thorough prose check. The initial GA I got included little more than cosmetic suggestions. I hope some of the GANs I've nominated haven't been speedily reviewed and are lacking... I've been wondering that for awhile.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I know my reviews tend to be harsher than GA needs them to be, so I'm not really sure where the line aught to be. Personally I like to see a more in-depth review but if I'm confident enough to bring an article to GAN then it's not far off the criteria anyway. I'll given season 2 a looking at now for a bit of a copyedit. In the future if you think a review's been too light, revert the pass, keep the review open and suggest a second opinion yourself. GRAPPLE X 20:33, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyediting it now. It'd be a good idea to add airdates to the episode citations though. GRAPPLE X 21:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, good point, I'll get on that. And maybe I'm just feeling "territorial", as there's a certain editor (or editors) who is not really involved in writing the articles and then is nominating them. :P--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:37, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that; the last one isn't really ready at all. GRAPPLE X 10:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I tried working on it: changes. It was basically the same prose that has been there for awhile.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:21, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Why is "Lord of the Flies" cited as a reference for the guest cast? GRAPPLE X 17:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Because he just copied some of the work I did on Lord of the Flies without changing it.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:13, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll be back soon, and I'm willing to copyedit. Are there any episodes in particular? I've seen through "Tunguska". Glimmer721 ^talk 14:26, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Any of season 9 or 5. Those are the main ones. I'm not too worried, though.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:09, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Portal:Indonesia

Could you take another gander at this and let me know what you think about balance? I changed it a bit, but I'll be gosh-darned if I add a featured content section (redundant to Selected Foo, IMHO) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I assumed a "featured content" section would just look like the ones at Portal:Jane Austen or P:MM, but if you feel that's redundant then don't include it. I'll take a look at it now and see if anything pops out at me. GRAPPLE X 01:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the column width suggestion, seems to have worked like a charm. I've added images to many of the blurbs too (Torajan clothes are cool!). I looked at the Featured content you showed and it's manageable for small portals, but with 17 FAs, 3 FLs, and 58 GAs the MM style would not work very well. :-(  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:18, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• I was thinking it might be; you work too well for your own good. Portal:Film lists pretty much everything and it looks far too ridiculous. A link to WP:ID will let people find that kind of thing easily enough (when I get round to an X-Files portal eventually there's already a subpage of WP:TXF with all the showcase stuff I'll link to, rather than duplicating it, but Millennium is a significantly smaller field so I figured a list on the portal itself would never get too big). 04:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• I guess only featured content, at the bottom of the topics page, may be acceptable. We'll see what Rabbit can do with that collapsability function. (He's got it in there already, just want to see if it can be somewhere else)

• I'd say you could get away without it. It's a very broad topic in general so if you start along the path of listing promoted content you'll eventually wind up with the mess that is the film portal's content list, which dwarfs the rest of the page. It's the same at P:DOH, you have as much space devoted to just promoted content as the whole rest of the portal, which detracts from the work done to keep the portal itself fresh and interesting. A smattering works but don't drown it (I realise both of those portals are featured but I highly doubt those wall-of-text lists were a requirement for their promotion). GRAPPLE X 04:39, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• Sure hope not. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:41, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• As the past year at WP:FL has shown, even the interpretation of featured criteria can change in a big way, so don't let people use those portals to cite precedence. GRAPPLE X 04:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• Agreed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:59, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Now you're thinking with portals

Yeah, I was planning on it eventually (no immediate plans though). I'd be happy to peer review your portal, though be warned that I'm not that experienced with them yet! I'm not even sure if mine is remotely close to FP or not. :) Ruby 2010/2013 03:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, this week's the first I've been dealing with them too. I'll have a look over yours tomorrow afternoon then and see what I can do. GRAPPLE X 03:37, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• I must say at a glance it looks decent (like your workaround for the topics page). However, the portals/projects things may look better centered (or, since you have a few, maybe joined) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks! Look better now? Ruby 2010/2013 05:02, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• And the projects? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:11, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• Speaking of, what's the deal with the image map on Portal:Jane Austen/Projects? It doesn't seem to be doing anything; though if I understand the intent of it, then [[File:Old book bindings.jpg|80px|link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Literature]] would accomplish the same thing more cleanly. {{Related portals2}} is probably easier though. GRAPPLE X 05:20, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

As you wrote that, I was overhauling it. :) Hopefully it looks better now (albeit a bit more plain). Ruby 2010/2013 05:41, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for helping keep an eye on Prometheus (film)! Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:57, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

To be fair, it didn't need much minding. But thanks. GRAPPLE X 18:04, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I noticed, I thought maybe it would be calm and I suspected most issue would be with the plot section, but it seems I was worried for nothing. But still you added it to your watchlist to help so I appreciate it. If it had gone to hell I'm sure you would have sorted it and I would be giving you an extra cupcake. But you have to EARN the extra cupcake. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. On one hand I like sugar, but on the other I do hate cupcake icing. Make it a potato apple and we're on. GRAPPLE X 19:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Re-Reviewing Reviews

Per this, I think many of TBrandley's reviews are going to be disqualified. Does that mean we will have to renominated already passed GAs? Or can group members that weren't heavily involved in the articles look over the ones that might be up for evaluation? (As in, I check over your Millennium articles, and you check my X-Files ones, for example)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:23, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I believe that'd be the best way about things. I doubt anyone wants to go through the hassle of putting a few dozen articles through GAR so it's easier all round to have a second opinion on each review. If you want to give me a list of all the ones you'd like me to re-review I'll work through it; and I believe the only reviews he's done for me are a few recent ones that I'll go dig out. GRAPPLE X 08:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Here's a list of the reviews I'm worried about. I'll try to get a more specific list in a sec.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 13:16, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Here's the complete list: "Get the Girl", "Demons (The X-Files)", "Aubrey (The X-Files)", "E-mail Surveillance", "Halloween (The Office)", "Adam (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)", "F. Emasculata", "Fearful Symmetry (The X-Files)", "Wetwired", "Avatar (The X-Files)"," Never Again (The X-Files)", "Chinga (The X-Files)", "Jump the Shark", "4-D (The X-Files)", "John Doe (The X-Files)", "Provenance (The X-Files)", "Providence (The X-Files)", and "Trust No 1". I feel bad that there are so many. When I go through yours, I'm just going to drop a note on the GA review page saying that, since his reviews have come under scrutiny, I re-reviewed the article and fixed certain issues, and I'll provide a link.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 13:39, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, per the discussion, it says that the X-Files article don't need to be re-reviewed because of their "style and layout are consistent and prose is of a GA standard". I reviewed them, and agreed with that too. TBrandley 14:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Ed, Edd n Eddy "Today's FA"

Sorry, the point issues at the above's request is my fault, I fixed it. Do you think it's support-worthy now? :) All the best, --Khanassassin ☪ 18:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Easy mistake to make. When you're requesting a non-specific date slot the points total rarely matters; it's more to award "more deserving" articles in case of multiple claimants for the same day (I think there was a case of this pretty recently, if memory serves Rwanda beat out another article due to a huge date significance bonus). GRAPPLE X 18:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

"William"

Could you give "William" a quick look-over. Its being GA reviewed by TBrandley, who's done a pretty intense review, and he requested a look over the prose.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 18:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry it took a while, was away for a few days there. Had a comb over it for you. I think you could trim about 100 words out of the plot summary, but it's been a while since I saw the episode so I'm not sure where to take it from. Also not terribly keen on the piped links to episodes, I'd just outright state that an event occurred in the given episode rather than pipe to it. You could justify a higher word-count if you trimmed some out and then made the count back up with the references to other episodes as technically the count wouldn't be given over just to plot summarising. GRAPPLE X 09:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

X-Files Episodes

Just thought I'd drop a line and say that every episode of The X-Files now has an article, although some are more stubby than others.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Fuckamaboo. That's bloody awesome. I'm beginning to wonder if my all-at-once approach to Millennium eps could be dropped. I could probably fire out the remainder of season 2 over the weekend if I just put together an infobox and a reception section, got DYK credits for those, and worked on plots, etc, over time. I think it'll be a while yet before the Lone Gunmen eps get reliably put together as I don't know if there's much for them bar the Shearman book. GRAPPLE X 15:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

There's a little bit of info on Spotnitz' website, but it's not much. Also, I finally finished the series (I was holding out for the longest time) and... boy, was season 9... interesting.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:49, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

You only just finished recently? Yeah, season 9 is just a whole different show basically. I liked Doggett as a character but Reyes didn't work at all for me (I think it's just Gish, she's not really very good). I also thought the production values actually hurt it quite a lot—it's something I noticed from season 6 onwards, with the brighter settings due to the LA filming location, and the more obviously actory actors as opposed to the less-known, still-brilliant Vancouver actors—but The X-Files should never have looked as Hollywood-slick as that last season did, it takes all the grittiness out of it and only reinforces the fact that the 90s zeitgeist it captured was definitely dead by this point. Still, though, "Release". Wow. If they kept going with one episode like that a season I'd still be watching it now. Although how terrible was "Sunshine Days"—especially given it's the last MOTW and last non-finale episode? GRAPPLE X 17:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I had long ago finished all the Mulder episodes, and finally forced myself to watch the rest. Half of it wasn't bad. I quite liked "4-D" and "Release". Even "Audrey Pauley" wasn't bad. But then there were episodes like "Lord of the Flies" and, yes "Sunshine Days" that made me scratch my head. That was a bad way to end the MOTWs. It should've been "Release" before "The Truth". I'm fond of seasons 6 and 7, I don't know why, but that last season was... something. I wish they had just called it a spin-off. Then I could justify not really liking it. Although I did enjoy Duchovny's "cameo" in "William", but that's kind of sad that I got excited for literally a 1.5 second blip.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

The whole baby thing just really wrecked the series. It brought things from Mulder and Scully being these tiny cogs who could never achieve anything to them being nearly messianic. I know season 7 already dabbled in that but it was more metaphorical than literal; Mulder's blood was a physical vaccine that would save people in a real kind of way, but then his son is now a magic magnet messiah? No. No thanks. GRAPPLE X 03:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Then they pushed the magic retcon button and shipped him off. I can only hope, that if a third movie is made, that it won't suck.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

X-Files Prose

I just have a quick question. Should we include the line about the mythology of The X-Files in the lead of the episode articles. I'm being told that I should remove the term "mythology" in a handful of my articles that are being reviewed, such as here. What's your thoughts? I just want everything to be consistent.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Personally, it seems that "mythology" is widely held to be the name for those types of episodes. I supposed you could explain that it means the continuing story of the government conspiracy to cover up extraterrestrials. Glimmer721 ^talk 17:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the term is the correct one to use; avoiding it just creates an easter egg link anyway. GRAPPLE X 17:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

What's your opinion on the pic I added to this?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I just saw that, I really like it. GRAPPLE X 22:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Since its a free file, do you think it should replace the title card in the parent article?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah. Fire it in as a lead image there, and probably any of the other articles like merchandise, music, religion etc. GRAPPLE X 23:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

How do you think the List of Monster-of-the-Week characters in The X-Files article should be cleaned up?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I have no idea. It might be better to think about not treating it as a list of episodes and more as a concept; there's been a lot written about how the "monster of the week" thing allowed the show to try out so many different styles and ideas so just an article on it as a concept, and how that was well-received (Clyde Bruckman, Prometheus), not so well received (I can't off hand think of any particular negative criticism dealing with the actual idea of MOTW eps, just eps that fared badly individually); or even subverted (Jose Chung, Paper Hearts, etc). Might be a better approach to take. GRAPPLE X 20:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Good point, because some of them (like Clyde Bruckman, or the lady from "Monday") don't really fit the bill for what I'd call "monster". I think the page should be redirect to something like "The X-Files and the Monster-of-the-Week format" (or something not as clunky). I like your idea about more essay-y type stuff. We could have a "List of Simpson' guest stars"-type section that just has a who's-who with the actor/actress playing them. That would cut down on the prose and still provide a succinct list.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 01:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

There is, I believe, a list in there somewhere of guest stars on the series, which could easily be sourced out fully. GRAPPLE X 02:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The Office ratings

Hi! When/if you have a second, could you perhaps pull up the ratings for The Office episode seen here (like you did at User talk:Gen. Quon#Re: Getting The Office ball rolling...)? It should be listed under NBC ("Branch Closing" is the article if you're curious). I still don't have access to Highbeam, so your help would be much appreciated! BTW, I'd forgotten I had agreed to look over P:MM. Would you still like me to give it a glance? Ruby 2010/2013 04:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

If you have the time spare, that'd be great, but I'm still building content for it so it's not going anywhere in a hurry. The Office received a rating of 8.05 according to that link, doesn't give any other information on it though. You should check to see if the free highbeam accounts are still available through here, you'd find it useful for some of the stuff you work on. GRAPPLE X 04:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:HighBeam/Applications is where you'd find that, in case you want to go asking. I'd recommend it, it's proven really useful to me so far. GRAPPLE X 04:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I've signed my name up for an account. Ruby 2010/2013 05:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Cool. If you need anything else in the meantime give me a shout; if it's something small like a fact or figure I'll drop it here, if it's a whole article then email me about it and I'll send it along. GRAPPLE X 05:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

That would be great. If I find anything I'll let you know. Ruby 2010/2013 05:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

What I've been doing

Since you asked. Got anything at GAC right now? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:40, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Have a biography I'm working on but it's not quite ready yet; mostly just trying to get this scanner re-installed. Any of your GACs you're particularly wanting seen to first? GRAPPLE X 12:57, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• To be quite honest I can barely remember what I have there ATM. I guess the one I want finished most is Sudirman, but that's at least twice as long as Carter will be when he's his article is done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

BTW, Genge 1997, pp. 8–9 doesn't point anywhere. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I've got that fixed now. And ignore that email, I can't get this scanner working at all. I'll try taking it down to the university library when I get a chance, hopefully some time this week. GRAPPLE X 14:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• Alrighty. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• I got a better-quality image of the Wong brother, but no clue which (there's three, but I think Nelson wasn't active after the early 1930s). I see Episode 2 is still hanging :-(  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• There's no opposition to it so it should still be fine to go. Picture looks a bit better, the lighter tone makes it easier to make out. GRAPPLE X 09:54, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• Mhm, but I've seen them closed for lack of comments. Yeah, the new version is much more useful (and clearer) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah but two supports and some addressed comments is more than those usually get; when Manhunter was finally promoted it was a very short candidacy of a few comments, really. I think it's okay. GRAPPLE X 16:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• BTW, if you were to write an article about films produced and released in a country (defunct, in this case), would you include documentaries? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

  That's a tricky one. I'd be tempted to include things like Baraka, Koyaanisqatsi or Man with a Movie Camera but those are art films using documentary footage rather than a Blue Planet style documentary. Depends what the list looks like. GRAPPLE X 16:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

  Ahoy. Still missing 1941 - 1944. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:53, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

  Seems like you could fit them in there, it's not too lengthy that it'd skew things. If you're looking for some of the missing information, the British Film Institute keeps a database of pretty much every film and might have some of it. GRAPPLE X 00:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, I'll take a peek (doubt I could get any plot information out of it though). Most of these are lost, sadly. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  No, the plot info is pretty hard to come by, but it might have some cast info that you're missing. GRAPPLE X 00:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Alrighty. Luckily its only the really early ones which have little data (some of those records are based on interviews with the director years after the fact... like 1950 or 1960) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Congrats

Speak of the devil, eh? That was easy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:02, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, you should ping me about FACs more often. :P GRAPPLE X 01:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

• Glad to see Cas commented. (Wondering what happened with that last edit that was reverted) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  I assumed it was a misclick with Twinkle or Huggle or the like. GRAPPLE X 01:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Perhaps. It happens. Argh, 30 films in 1941. At least 1942-1944 only have a grand total of nine (with five of these shorts) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Have you decided on including docs or not? If the list's growing significantly there might be ground to spin it out; but if docs don't account for enough to spin it out then maybe a time-based thing would work (I know you're already going just by the Dutch East Indies period but splitting that time period in two might work if you get too long). GRAPPLE X 01:26, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  I'll probably keep them as I can only find evidence for three or so (one which I missed earlier, Tanah Sabrang). There'll be a grand total of 103 films, so not too long methinks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  With the information you're using on each, that seems grand then. 103 items in a directory-style list is grand but if the entries were more in-depth it might make sense to split it. Depends if you plan on creating what's missing (in which case I'd say keep it as is) or if you want to have the information on films which maybe don't have enough to warrant a separate article listed there instead (in which case you might end up with larger entries which would expand the list out to spinout size). If you need information on any more of those films, drop me a line, my university has a pretty solid film department so the library's bound to have something. GRAPPLE X 01:57, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  • I'd say about... 20 or so... of those films are worth an individual article, although perhaps more Si Pitoeng than Pareh. Other than that a list entry would be enough. After this I'm thinking of doing List of film production companies of the Dutch East Indies; that would only have about 20 entries though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

    I'd say that would need to be more summary-style than this one; maybe lead in with a table of names/years active/number of productions before following with a section of prose on each. GRAPPLE X 02:08, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

    Hmm... Yeah, probably. Tan's Film and Java Pacific Film already have articles, and there are at least two more companies that are worth an article. Some of them, though, like Nancing Film Corp, only released one film. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

• Actually, I accidentally used my rollback while looking at my watchlist on my phone. Thanks for assuming good faith! Also, good work on your new FA! TBrandley 01:44, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  I've done something similar with articles (although on a laptop, so... oops). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Fuck beans

I had to laugh. BTW, check out the new lede. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks good. "Later films could be in Dutch, Malay, or a local language." is the only iffy bit; for one it seems present despite referring to a long time ago, could -> would should fix that bit. For two, unless there were too many indigenous languages used to list then it would probably be better to list them. You could also get away with linking Indonesia in the "modern day Indonesia" bit. GRAPPLE X 04:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

• Not in the sources :-( Way too many possibilities (see Languages of Indonesia). Might as well link to an FA (nice to see others' work still stands). Looks like you're going to have an easy time at the cup this round. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Aye, linking to that from "local language" would also work well. And yeah, focussing on topics definitely paid off this time round, I didn't think it'd end up giving me over 100 extra points. With "Episode 2" passed I need to figure out a good FAC to plan for the next round though. One with bonus point prospects would be pretty handy! GRAPPLE X 04:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Difficult but definitely high priority. Of course, you could try an Irish film... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  The Commitments or Once would probably be easy to get good sources on. I'd also consider The Wind that Shakes the Barley but am I fuck watching it again. GRAPPLE X 04:20, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  The plot seems to be in fairly good shape for Wind (longer than most plots I write, but then again I'm against 20% of an article being plot). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:31, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  There seems to be a bit of context that could be cut out by just linking to the relevant history articles; and probably some smaller details that could be trimmed out too. It's just probably one of the most depressing films there is. GRAPPLE X 04:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  I don't doubt that. Sounds like a strong film though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Aye, it's potent. It's rare to come by something that gives the underdog's side in something, especially in a war that nobody really won (I guess some of the more honest Vietnam War films come close, Platoon or Full Metal Jacket probably. But they're less about a nation's history and more about one generation). It's strange, though, given its success, that The Dead School, a novel which deals a bit with that same time period in some of its plot threads, has never been filmed, when some other works by the same author have done relatively well. Ach well. (Don't let all the miserable stuff fool you, though, we're still a nation with good humour. Do check out The Commitments if you ever get a chance, Roddy Doyle's a fantastic man for comedy and the film doesn't lose a drop of that). GRAPPLE X 04:47, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  I'll be sure to drop by a rental place later and see if they have it (with subtitles, for the Mrs.) Wow, The Commitments and The Dead School are in poor shape. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  I'm always afraid to tackle book articles like that; I studied English for years and I just assume that every book ever has thirty thousand academic sources I'd need to comb over. :/ GRAPPLE X 05:03, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, but you need to limit to the major works/names. Belenggu is limited to about 8 writers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Episode 2 (Twin Peaks)

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Episode 2 (Twin Peaks). TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Mythology Explanation

I know this is a long read, but is the correct interpretation of the whole mythology plot? Did I miss a huge section about time travel and stuff? Or is John Keegan just making things up. http://www.entil2001.com/series/x-files/reviews/season4/4-1.html Just thought I'd ask you. I should probably re-watch the series. I never thought the Colonists were future humans; I thought they were true-blue aliens.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that's pretty bizarre. And wildly wrong. "Purity" (the black oil) is clearly just the blood of the colonists, as can easily be seen in the first film when the neanderthals attack that first one. From there it controls a host, and can gestate a new alien inside the host. The colonists want to take over earth as they had, at one point, initially seeded it with life. The rebels oppose the colonists' interplanetary empire, using that facial mutilation to stop themselves being attacked by purity. The Syndicate are working with the colonists because they know defeat is inevitable and would rather be spared from being possessed by purity than risk fighting. There's definitely no time travel (except in "Synchrony" but that's totally unrelated). GRAPPLE X 11:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, that's what I thought, but I just wanted to clarify. Although I kind of like the idea of time travel to explain the "Aliens wrote the Bible and made humans" arc at the end of season six. Kind of like "Sphere" by Michael Crichton. Anyway, I'm glad that's cleared up.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:16, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

As a child I saw a trailer for Sphere and for years the only image I had about it was that viperfish lunging out. When I finally got round to watching it I was hugely disappointed that it wasn't actually an atmospheric horror along the lines of The Thing or "Ice". The whole X-Files aliens-wrote-the-bible thing is really just a ham-fisted take on the ancient astronaut idea; though the unmade alien-egyptians ep would have handled that way better. GRAPPLE X 20:30, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree; that Egypt idea sounded rather cool. I think the issue I have with the aliens-n'-Bible story was the fact that so many episodes suggested the existence of a God (or gods) in the X-Files universe ("All Souls" is the one that comes to mind, I guess you could sorta argue "Terms of Endearment" by proxy...) and the idea that the aliens wrote ALL religious texts just seems counter-intuitive. Besides, wasn't the Navajo language created, like, 200 years ago. That's why I actually like the idea that a couple aliens spaceships fell through some sort of time vortex and crash landed 4.5 million years in the past ("Biogenesis", "Provenance"). And therefore, it just looks like they created everything. I guess that's just my wishful thinking.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:48, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Well "Anasazi" implied that the Ansazi people were aliens (somewhat corroborated by "Vienen"), so the language could have spread from there. The strongest blow against aliens-are-God (even if the Smoking Man clearly states this, I think in "Reqiuem" maybe) is the fact that God actually shows up in "Improbable", and looks a lot more like Burt Reynolds than Brian Thompson. Though my get-out-of-shit-stories-free card is that everything after season 6 ended is Mulder in the coma from "Biogenesis" imagining straight up everything, Dallas style. GRAPPLE X 20:56, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

That would've actually been a funny way to retcon everything in the series finale. Mulder is sentenced to death and is going to be killed by firing squad, only to wake up with Kritschgau, Scully, and Skinner staring at him. That would explain why the mythology starts to make no sense, as dreams are rarely straight forward. But Fowley still dies.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:19, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

"Millennium" Christmas Article

This might come in useful to you.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Ooh, good find. Not a great ep but I seem to be the only one who thinks so. GRAPPLE X 20:31, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Did you see this as well? That, hopefully, will help you out.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:50, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I check up on BacktoFrankBlack.com quite often so I knew the book was in the works, it'll be brilliant to use for some of the articles. I'd like to bring one to FA eventually (one TXF, one Twin Peaks, I seem to like moving between series) so I'll be keeping an eye out for a copy. I'm seriously considering picking up Henriksen's autobiography Not Bad for a Human, too, to work on his bio article. GRAPPLE X 16:41, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Plus, with autobiographies, you never know what kind of production info you might get. I know I was flipping through Mindy Kaling's autobiography at my local library, and I managed to get some info for "The Dundies" episode that I worked on spiffing up the GA quality.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:48, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Philoctetes

Grapple X, I was looking through old DYK reviews to find ones that still need someone to re-review or check on a point that had needed fixing and had been addressed by the nominator, when I ran across the Philoctetes double hook. As best I can tell, you have passed it, but there is no tick to indicate this was indeed your decision. Can I ask you to put the formal tick on it (either green, or gray if AGF sources), so people building hook sets can be sure this is ready to go? Many thanks. (And if it isn't ready, please indicate what's still needed, preferably with one of the not-ready icons.) BlueMoonset (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Have added a tick for clarity; though you might want to give a brief review of the alt I suggested. GRAPPLE X 15:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello

I was wondering if you could leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Awake (TV series)/archive1. But you don't have to. Thanks! Also, you have comments at Deep Throat (The X-Files episode)'s peer review. TBrandley 16:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I saw those, thanks. I integrated a few already and will get round to expanding the publishing info soon. I'll try to have a look at your FAC now, but I'm not a very good reviewer at featured level so I might not be too useful. GRAPPLE X 16:36, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

That's fine. Anything helps, thank you so much. TBrandley 16:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for your comments. I have fixed all of the issues. TBrandley 17:51, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Mondo Cane

It's time for moi to go to sleep, so I'll check on your progress in about 8 hours. Pretty well put together article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Started as a DYK but I hit the 1k word mark and figured I should pad it for GA. I wish I got to listen to it a little more before my dad yoinked it for his car, though. I'll be finished pretty soon but I'm in no rush. GRAPPLE X 15:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

• Well, it's done. Looks good (interesting how you've focused on Italian stuff recently, that's like if I switched from Indonesia topics to athletics or something) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:18, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

  Well I'm 1/4 Italian from my father's side, so it's always interested me. Mondo Cane was just a nice intersection of that and my favourite singer (same fella sang for the group behind King for a Day... Fool for a Lifetime, which you also reviewed). Though the Olympics are on, you could do Indonesian athletes... GRAPPLE X 23:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

  I did five Paralympians earlier. That's enough. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

  The transformation has begun. GRAPPLE X 23:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

  Nah, but Mark's has. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:57, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

  I thought it had already finished? GRAPPLE X 23:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

  Oh, he's only in the 1st degree so far. There's another 32 to go, and then he has to fight Jimbo. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:07, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

  Two men enter. One man leaves. GRAPPLE X 00:11, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

  For all the internets. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

For the vandalism reverts, VHEMT sure seems to attract some interesting reactions. But in the future, you probably should try to avoid calling people "cunts" on-wiki. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I only do it when I'm right though. GRAPPLE X 19:14, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I just don't want to see an Arbcom case about you, that's all. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't really mind. I come here to create content, if I'm censured for being a bit coarse I'm not really missing out; but I'd sooner lick a cat's balls than miss out on an opportunity to call a condescending white supremacist a cunt. :P GRAPPLE X 19:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, and that was a odd remark on his part, about VHEMT being a threat to white people. Say what you will about them, at least they're not racist. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

It does make me sad that the people most opposed to VHEMT are those who society would most benefit from not having more of. :/ GRAPPLE X 20:53, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/A Town Called Mercy

There was a problem with the length of the article: text copied from previously existing articles, even if edited further, does not count toward the 1500 character requirement. This problem has been resolved, but I supplied a new ALT in the interim, and can't review that myself. Can you please stop by and check the new hook, with a view toward approving the article? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I spotted the problem you raised, I alerted Glimmer to some additional sources for expanding it; I had assumed that with the length fixed my initial review would stand as I kept my hands clean from editing; though I'll go and review your new proposal as well now. GRAPPLE X 19:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

It was the rewording of the hook that made a new check necessary: if I'd simply modified the word to "around" it wouldn't have been an issue, but no, I had to add in the over 100 bit, too. Thanks for your patience. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:26, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother, glad to see another non-Olympic hook ready to go to be honest. GRAPPLE X 20:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the patience guys, I'm knew to DYK. Glimmer721 ^talk 21:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The X-Files (season 2) GT

I hope you don't mind, I nominated season two for Good Topic. Just out of curiosity, would it be better if I ask those involved in the editing before nominating? The only reason I went ahead and did it was because I had just finished up the last few.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm okay with you going ahead; I think Igordebraga and Belovedfreak are the only other contributors with maybe one each, you can drop them a line to let them know it's going on; I doubt either of them is going to mind. How many are mine anyway, three or four? GRAPPLE X 00:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

It actually looks like quite a few: "Ascension", "One Breath", "Firewalker", "Colony", "End Game", and "Anasazi". I think I had 12 or so, so we're basically co-nominators for the thing.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Cool. Three more seasons to finish, one movie (which I still need to watch) and the episode list. GRAPPLE X 00:29, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, we're really nearing the end. As for the movie, IMO, it's a decent season five episode, and not really what I would've wanted for the (potentially) final X-Files movie.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, Season Three is VERY nearly being done. Just need to get the season page looking nice.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:32, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I think it's probably feasible to get pretty much everything to GA status within a year or so; at least all the stuff with enough sources out there (some of the crew I dunno about). GRAPPLE X 00:34, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Crime and Dissonance

Couple small issues. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

A thought

Hi G. I decided to post here as this isn't really related to the discussion about the film title. I don't know that we need to have consistency across all articles regarding "Camel case" (I had never heard that term before so you taught me something new and that makes it a good day!) While I know the pluses about consistency I kinda like the hodgepodge that WikiP is. At a guess I would bet that there would be a big pushback if anyone tried to change the second e in EastEnders :-) I appreciate your stance on this so I just wanted to add this as food for thought. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 15:48, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I had assumed that the general case was against it, but if there's a few prominent examples of it being used then I'm not against it. I guess a discussion at WT:FILM could gain a view about what to do with things like eXistenZ (which would require a page move) or Alien³ (which I assume would work with the DISPLAYTITLE magic word). The hodgepodge nature of the site stems from local consensuses on different things (for example, birds are given capital letters across their names, like Corn Crake, due it being agreed upon by WP:BIRD, although other animals like giant anteater use lower case); so I'm not sure if one project with differing approaches is the best way to go. Plus I guess it'd be good to rattle some cages, I do intend to attack WP:NCF with a big sharp stick some day soon after all. GRAPPLE X 16:07, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

You are so right about where the hodgepodge comes from. I was amazed to see (years ago now) that the composers project rejected navboxes when everyone else was going gaga for them AND were trying to jam as much info in them as possible. I look forward to whatever you can do to NCF when the time comes. MarnetteD | Talk 16:24, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I really just want to tackle the whole always-use-English approach and go back to using original release titles. There's now plenty of films passing GA, even FA, with their original titles so clearly there's no strong opposition to it and the guideline could do with reflecting that. And yeah, things are weird out there. I think the classical music project still doesn't really do article assessment, and the different approaches projects like milhist and video games take to A-Class is pretty diametric too. GRAPPLE X 20:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Spotnitz on Millennium and 3rd TXF film

You've probably seen this already, but just in case... Ruby 2010/2013 04:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Hadn't seen it, thanks! I did see on facebook earlier that the guys publishing the new Millennium book already have their next project planned, so hopefully it's something meaty. GRAPPLE X 04:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Carter

You aren't using "Gradnitzer, Louisa; Pittson, Todd (1999). X Marks the Spot: On Location with The X-Files. Arsenal Pulp Press. ISBN 1-55152-066-4." or "Hurwitz, Matt; Knowles, Chris (2008). The Complete X-Files. Insight Editions. ISBN 1-933784-80-6." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

You're right indeed. I've lost my scans for the latter so I'll remove it; the former I just clean forgot to actually read through and use. I'll take a leaf through it now to see about using it. Thanks for the heads-up. GRAPPLE X 14:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• You're welcome. The script's ugly, but it works. I finally wrote about a Canadian director, although she's rather niche — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• Give me CA$4000 to film someone's bust and I'd put together a lot more than 12 minutes... :/ GRAPPLE X 15:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• Well, it's interspersed with other stuff (I remember a source says part of it deals with the sister having a sexual encounter with a black man, drawing parallels between his blackness and the blackness of the mole). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• That makes a bit more sense. I'm a fan of the John Carpenter zero-budget approach, had no idea how something so small would hit a four figure budget. GRAPPLE X 15:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• Well, her most expensive (The Art of Woo) was only $500,000, so... not sure how it could have been so much. Renting the equipment, maybe? Or, if she did it right and got the rights to reuse parts of The World of Suzie Wong (instead of just using it), that would account for 75% of the budget right there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:15, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• Further info. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Director's Cut

Hello! Your submission of The Director's Cut at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Ian Rose (talk) 12:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Triangle FAR

Is there anything else you think that "Triangle" could use? The review page has been moving kind of slowly, but I assume that's to be expected.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, FAC/FLC are slow processes. Takes a few weeks. I'll stick a support in there and qualify that I have helped out to some extent in case that colours the weight of my support. Even still, 3 supports plus my might-count-as-one should be plenty. GRAPPLE X 15:34, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, cool. That would be awesome. I've never done this before, so I don't really know what to expect!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:38, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

A smooth first time is pretty cool, though, so that's good. Plus the intense scrutiny here helps you identify your weaknesses to figure out where future attempts need the most work (Manhunter struggled with prose so I knew to wait for copy-edits for my next two, for instance). It helps solidify a good framework for future episodes we put through, as we get a better idea of what works and what doesn't. GRAPPLE X 15:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Your vote must be magic, since it just passed. Thanks for the help! :)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Well done! The first one's always the hardest. I see we both have the next ones lined up anyway. Thinking about bringing Carter there eventually too, when I comb through a few more sources and see what's missing. GRAPPLE X 16:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That will seriously help the project. Yeah, I think I'll focus on "The Post-Modern Prometheus" now, and see what happens.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That's a good one to go on, the structure of the article is similar so you can follow the same layout and the like. GRAPPLE X 16:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Psathyrella ammophila

Hi, you reviewed my hook for Psathyrella ammophila and pointed out a problem, which I fixed seven hours later. It's been five days since then and I'm assuming that no one else is giving this a tick because they're waiting for you to come back to it. Would you mind checking out the addition I made and passing the hook if it's okay now? Thanks!  :) Julia\^talk 20:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I totally didn't see that pop up in my watchlist. Sorry! I'm on it now. GRAPPLE X 20:04, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Julia\^talk 20:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Episode 14 of Twin Peaks

Hi. I believe the image in "Episode 14" needs its rationale to be expanded per WP:NFCC. Just dropped by to add a quick issue :) TBrandley 15:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

X-Files Question...

I've noticed that a lot of pages on here credit Duchovny as "Recurring" or as a "Guest" in Season 8 (and 9, but that I understand), when in reality, he was fully credited as starring in the episodes he appeared in. Is there a better way to word that, because being a recurring character is what Walter Skinner was in the original 7, Duchovny still starred in Season 8, only in half the episodes.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:04, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. You mean the The X-Files article or individual episodes? If it's the former I'd say explain how he was credited fully, noting that he's "starring" in the season 8 eps he appeared in and just wasn't listed when he didn't appear. Can't recall off hand how they did "The Truth" though. GRAPPLE X 03:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

That's a good idea; I just wish I could find a good word for it, because "recurring" isn't right... From what I remember, he was full credited as starring in "The Truth", because they had five stars in that one (Duchovny, Anderson, Pileggi, Patrick, and Gish). Also, the producers noted it was weird that Duchovny was credited as starring, because, usually, when an actor leaves and then returns, they're simply credited as guest starring.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:13, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

How's it look now?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Try "intermittent"; it implies that there are periods of both activity and inactivity, compared to "recurring" which simply implies repetition. And yeah, I think it's pretty much because of how hugely identified with the series he and Anderson were. When you say "The X-Files", the logical next thought is "Mulder and Scully" (not "Mulder and Scully" though, eugh). It's hard to find another series so keyed into its main star(s); Miami Vice is really the only other one I can think of. Shows like Murder One, Twin Peaks, Law & Order, the whole CSI franchise, all either had huge ensemble casts or a rotating door policy of stars, whereas those two had their iconic pairings and you could never deny that those are what made them so popular. GRAPPLE X 03:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that looks good to me. GRAPPLE X 03:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Cool. I made some additional tweaks to the parent article, including adding a new pick for the Opening Sequence section, since I feel the original title sequence is more well-known than the season 8 one.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense. Thinking of tackling it properly or just working incrementally on it? There's a few of the large articles there that are going to be a real beast to work on. :/ GRAPPLE X 03:57, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

As of right now, just incrementally. I think after I (hopefully) get seasons 3 and 5's mommy articles done as well as the handful of season 5 episodes left, I might move onto it. I'd like to beef up the Religion in the X-Files as well as the Dana Scully and Fox Mulder articles too, before I die.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I know the feeling; I keep finding a new pet project and abandoning it again fair and quick. So much to do and not enough time to get to it. :( GRAPPLE X 04:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but at least, as far as hobbies go, this is an ultimately fulfilling activity. ;)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:03, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Been a while since WP 1.0 bot ran but I think we're reaching, what, 2/3s certified now? GRAPPLE X 04:05, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I was looking over Religion in The X-Files the other day, and it struck me as strange that the "religious themes" section relies mostly on "Beyond the Sea", and more about the flipping of the dynamic rather than their religious beliefs (and I dunno, I never really thought that episode had many religious themes either). Glimmer721 ^talk 14:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it should really be more about "All Souls" and probably "The Sixth Extinction" arc and stuff. Maybe even "Redux" and "Gethsemane", because that was largely a metaphor for the existence of God. I guess the biggest hurdle I have is how to organize it all.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

It was really just throwing together what already existed in articles at the time that could be copied over; a proper handling of the subject as a whole would likely look at Scully as a believer in God, and the increasing use of aliens as a metaphor for that. GRAPPLE X 04:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

What about other religions? For example, "Kaddish" had Judiasm. It is "Religion in The X-Files", after all, not just "Christianity". (Besides, didn't they basically prove every religion/myth/folklore out there?) Glimmer721 ^talk 18:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Well given that episodes like "Biogenesis" deal with aliens and the Qur'an and Tanakh, I had meant Abrahamic God rather than Christian God. But yes, there are other religious beliefs used elsewhere; I believe several Navajo complained about their portrayal in "Anasazi" and how the Navajo characters in it breached real religious beliefs, for example. GRAPPLE X 18:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

There's also Satanism, in "Die Hand Die Verletz", and I'm sure there are others. And we can't forget "Improbable"...--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

That's Satan worship, rather than Satanism; don't be upsetting La Vey, now. Surprised The X-Files never really tackled Scientology, as there's a Millennium episode that would have worked better on TXF that does it wonderfully. GRAPPLE X

This is totally off-topic, but do you think that the X-Files Lexicon could be considered a reliable source? They're starting to make a Season/Episode guide, such as this one? I know they're affiliated with the LAX-Files book and have had plenty of interviews, and their episode pages have quite a bit of information on them.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I imagine the interviews would be reliable but I'm not sure about the other content. Might want to ask on WP:RSN. GRAPPLE X 15:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

GA help

I mentioned you here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Dunno if I'm the best person to review a medical article given the sterner levels they're held to; but if he's struggling to find a helpful reviewer then I'll be glad to step in and help. GRAPPLE X 16:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Manhunter (film)

This is a note to let the main editors of Manhunter (film) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on August 15, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 15, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Manhunter is a 1986 film based on Thomas Harris's novel Red Dragon. Written and directed by Michael Mann, it stars William Petersen as offender profiler Will Graham, Tom Noonan as serial killer Francis Dollarhyde—"The Tooth Fairy"—and features Brian Cox as Hannibal Lecktor. Manhunter focuses on the forensic work carried out by the FBI to track down the killer and shows the long-term effects that cases like this have on Graham, highlighting the similarities between him and his quarry. The film features heavily stylized use of color to convey this sense of duality, and the nature of the characters' similarity has been explored in academic readings of the film. Opening to mixed reviews, Manhunter fared poorly at the box office at the time of its release, making only $8.6 million in the United States. However, it has been reappraised in more recent reviews and now enjoys a more favorable reception, as both the acting and the stylized visuals have been appreciated better in later years. Its resurgent popularity has seen it labelled as a cult film. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Yey! Just a shame I missed the 25th anniversary last year. :( GRAPPLE X 23:03, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• First TFA, eh? I'm waiting til September, methinks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Which one's that for? GRAPPLE X 23:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Chrisye's birthday. After that I'll put a hiatus on TFA/Rs until April (if ? passes). Both my other FAs are October-related — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Would be worth trying to get one of your Chrisye FLs as that week's TFL. GRAPPLE X 23:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Could be, but the backlog at TFL is insane. Looks like Miami Vice is going smoothly, congrats. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• It's like a Soviet bread line, but you could poke one of the delegates and ask to be fast-tracked for date relevance; I've one sitting waiting but it has no date attached so I'm happy for it to run whenever. I think most of the ones that are approved but unselected are the same. Vice has technically passed (along with your warm as chicken shit candidate) but I wanna wait til the bot runs and adds the star before I start tooting about it. GRAPPLE X 23:24, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Same as me. If its not in the Signpost I can't toot about it yet. Speaking of tooting, the steeplechase has a backlog too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• WP:CROWN? It tends to grow like a beast until someone snaps and does it all. GRAPPLE X 23:29, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, that's the one. My first crown was given a couple days after applying, so I must have a skewed view of it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:35, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Good timing, I guess. I managed to qualify for the second step while waiting to be updated for the first. :P GRAPPLE X 23:37, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• LoL. Great. Guess it's some sort of annual thing like the actual derby  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• Well, guess we can toot our horns. See? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

  Hmm. I'll probably still wait for the bot before I start updating my crown nom and all those fiddly bits. Though if it's definitely all gone through I'll probably be nominating List of songs recorded by Faith No More by the week's end. GRAPPLE X 23:54, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

  Awesome. I've got a co-nom up there, and once that gathers enough support I'll close the peer review and bring List of films of the Dutch East Indies. Won't go to Featured topics until after the bot goes through. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

  Wizardman shanghaied me into a delegate role over there so I feel confident enough to say I'd accept it as a topic nom already. GRAPPLE X 00:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Alright, I'll see how that works (shanghaied, eh, Jackie?). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:07, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Something like this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Works for me. There's room to create sub topics and upgrade the original topic to reflect this, but the two FLs should cover the full scope. GRAPPLE X 00:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Alright. Would it theoretically be possible to add another article once it's created (say Chrisye concerts, which would require some major archive diving)? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:23, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, that's fine. If you create it before nominating the topic then it'd have to be promoted first, so don't create it til you're ready. You'll have three months worth of retention time between creation and the topic being nominated for delisting (which still takes time so you can still keep the topic together if it's promoted during the topic's removal candidacy). GRAPPLE X 00:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  I'd only have to get it to GA anyway to not worry about the delisting. Of course, I'd gun for FA. K, nominating. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  I'd have figured it for a list; but yeah, GA is all you need as >50% will still be featured. GRAPPLE X 00:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Well, he put on a grand total of three, so a list wouldn't cut it. I was thinking about 5k characters per concert or so, with another part dealing with tribute concerts (and whatever you want to call his Kidung Abadi concert... did you see the article on the song yet? Crazy technology.) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:49, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Three concerts? Eep. And the song sounds pretty awesome. Here I thought Mondo Cane was a jigsaw puzzle! GRAPPLE X 00:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Well, three noteworthy ones at least (he had gigs at clubs and restaurants, including over a year in New York). There's a recording on the internets, but I's a man who followz ze rulez. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Probably worth including a bit about those, though. And I've yet to actually listen to the fella, I should probably hit up youtube to see what I can turn up. Recommendations? GRAPPLE X 01:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  The article's Spanish too, apparently. For comparison, his article in Spanish. That's... weird. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:11, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Definitely worth it... although I'll have to hunt down information on the Dekade and Badai Pasti Berlalu concerts. I'd suggest "Andai Aku Bisa", but if you can dig it up you can't go wrong with "Malam Pertama" or his covers of Fariz RM's "Sakura" and Maladi's "Di Bawah Sinar Bulan Purnama". If you like more of a rock feel, "Cinta yang Lain" with Peterpan is good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:11, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Looks like someone's translated the relevant article when they've found it. I did it myself with Project A119 from Portugeuse (and I think someone's then translated that into Ukranian and German) and I've seen the Spanish version of Atari video game burial be a translation of our one. It's nice to see that writing a good article does help out beyond what you can immediately see. GRAPPLE X 01:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  They've been cleaning up on translations. 1740 Batavia massacre was translated to Spanish last month. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:22, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Bloody thieving Spaniards. First the World Cup, then the Euros, now this? GRAPPLE X 05:23, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

• Well, could be worse. They could be taking user pages. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Some day, when you least expect it. GRAPPLE X 05:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  So we need something like "Yo no hablo español"? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  I think I just need to avoid my local Mexican joint and start eating potatoes again. GRAPPLE X 05:57, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  I'd kill (perhaps) for a taco or fajita... unrelated note, the US Republican party had a good week for featured content. How were the songs? — Crisco 1492 (talk)

  I gave "Cinta yang Lain" and "Malam Pertama" a listen; wasn't really sold though. I could definitely see "Malam Pertama" being popular here if it got the airplay when it came out, it sounded quite Barry Manilow/Elton John pop ballad-y to me. Then again, this is a country that kept Save Your Love at #1 for six weeks, and let Shaddap You Face keep both In the Air Tonight and Vienna off the top spot, so don't take my word for anything. GRAPPLE X 06:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, non-English lyrics are generally bad for a record's sales. I prefer slower pop, so I enjoy "Malam Pertama" and "Andai Aku Bisa" more than his faster songs like "Cinta yang Lain" and "Menunggumu". However, both those later tracks were pretty popular here. (On the other hand, he did a rap with Project Pop too... that was... awkward) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  I don't know, Jan Hammer did alright without English lyrics, but I guess a hit teevee show does that for you. Ireland (and the UK) had their own English-language release of 99 Luftballons, and didn't give a toss about Der Kommissar until an English-language cover showed up, so I guess you're not far off the truth there. GRAPPLE X 06:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  Well, Anggun and Agnes Monica switched to English for the international market. Nidji too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Hey. Did you hear the news? Congrats on your new FL, List of accolades received by Miami Vice. You deserve one of my homemade brownies. :) TBrandley 02:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

My ears always prick up at "homemade brownies", definitely for the wrong reasons. Thanks! It's not a much-loved topic on the site, from what I can see, but I'm happy to have gotten a few articles promoted within the field. You should check it out. GRAPPLE X 04:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget to add the FL to your main user page, with your top icons. :) I saw the FL status article, List of accolades received by David Lynch. I'll hunt down some more. :) Thanks for thanking me above! TBrandley 04:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

User page updated, whole new subpage made now that there's 5 pieces of featured content to show. GRAPPLE X 05:24, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Looks good. Keep working hard. I've only got 1 piece of featured content so far. TBrandley 17:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Triple Crown of Napoleon....

Dear Grapple X, well done on receiving this Imperial Napoleonic triple crown for work on all things outré (as good ol' Howard P. would say...) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

== FAC ==

Hi. Since your comments for the FAC of Awake (TV series) have been addressed, I was now wondering if you could support or oppose for its FAC. Don't have to though. Cheers and regards. TBrandley 00:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Manhunter

Congratulations for getting it as TFA today! Normally I would give you the Precious award for that, but now you have it already, remember, awesome Wikipedian of 12 March 2012? - Did you know that I had "manhunt" in a DYK: ... that when the German TV film Das Millionenspiel aired in 1970, some viewers thought they were watching a real manhunt and called the fictitious telephone number to register to participate? - Would you support Amazing Grace as TFA! I believe that some amazing grace is good for the project any day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I can see now why some people are cautious about going in for it. I'll have a look at the Amazing Grace nom but I believe the editor who brought it to FA wasn't keen on it going on the main page, I'll dig about and see if that's the case or not before I say anything. And I remember that hook, it was really interesting. GRAPPLE X 14:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

see Crisco or the respective talk, it was considered, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, it can be pretty bad... but reverts happen within minutes. Usually. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:12, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

• Vandalism, yeah, but I've had to correct a lot of instances of "corrections" of character names, as they're spelt differently in the film than anywhere else; that kind of thing could sit indefinitely given how obscure that knowledge can be. Ah well, I was away all night but I'm home and doing nothing all day now so I can watch it at my leisure. GRAPPLE X 14:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no experience of my own - you helped me to my one and only GA ;) - but know a friend who will do nothing the day, restore the version from before after it's over and take the good additions. - If you have a free moment, read the DYK article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, but Gerda, you'll have a TFA sometime soon! Yeah, those minor "corrections" could be killers. Not as obvious as giving a Korean name for an Indonesian woman, but still... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Lecktor, Dollarhyde

Would it be safe to assume that the latter is the correct spelling under the circumstances? Queenmomcat (talk) 21:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Yep; I've been correcting mistaken replacements for these two on-and-off for months. The film's credits, and on-screen mentions, give those spellings, which are different from the source novel. This is mentioned in the "Production" heading but unfortunately I still can't find a single source to say why it was changed. GRAPPLE X 21:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

FT question

Hi there, do you think that the list here User:Ryan Vesey/sandbox would make a good FT? Thanks, – Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 08:34, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Presidency of Ronald Reagan seems like a major omission but apart from that it seems like a solid topic. GRAPPLE X 11:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Note that at present it would only qualify for GT. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah. But given the subject I'd say some of those articles could be brought to FA without too much hassle. With the above addition (and assuming "we begin bombing" is omitted, it's certainly not vital but might be interesting) then we'd need three more piece of featured content for it to be a featured topic; Iran–Contra, the assassination attempt and Bush all seem meaty enough subjects that sourcing a good FA would be extremely feasible, and I imagine finding a collaborator for each would also be easy enough to allow for a shared workload (and multiple FACs at the same time). GRAPPLE X 12:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Perhaps. I'd rather work on an article on an experimental film right now (read about the director and take a guess, or cheat) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:13, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• I saw you mention that; it sounds interesting. Certainly no Six Figures Getting Sick, but interesting. :P GRAPPLE X 12:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Six Figures Getting Sick? Hmm... Lynchian six times over. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• It plays on a loop six times, so you're getting 36 Lynches. GRAPPLE X 12:26, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• And from '66. Oh my. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• 11:15, restate my assumptions. One: mathematics is the language of nature. Two: everything around us can be represented and understood through numbers. Three: if you graph these numbers, patterns emerge. Therefore, there are patterns everywhere in nature. GRAPPLE X 12:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• That sounds like something Ian Malcolm would say... with his hand on a woman's thighs — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• This conversation may take a brief hiatus while I post a few false positives to whatever system is blocking me editing my own talk page. GRAPPLE X 12:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Argh. Well, I'll be working on the article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:31, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Sorted, turned out the edit filter (yeah, apparently there's an edit filter) was blocking everything for a brief time. GRAPPLE X 13:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Really? Missed me. Hmm... I think I could nominate this for GA. My other one today, G. Kruger, could theoretically pass GA too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• I'd consider tabling the filmography in G. Kruger (Luciano Ercoli has a similar one you can crib). Aside from that I'd probably be okay passing it, it's short but it seems as comprehensive as it could be. I'm sitting on a few articles I'd like to push over that final hurdle to GA myself, might spend this week doing that as I don't know what kind of project I want to start next (thinking Eraserhead to GA/FA eventually maybe). GRAPPLE X 13:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I did something similar with Teguh Karya, but Sjumandjaja and Wim Umboh had too many works to make that feasible. Couple days ago I did a push to expand They Say I'm a Monkey!, which... well, we're not in Kansas anymore, Grapple. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, on a small scale it works but when it gets big it's better to simplify it down. And yeah, if films like that are what take us away from Kansas, then book me a flight to Kansas. GRAPPLE X 14:22, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• It's certainly something to make you feel uncomfortable, but all her works are like that (I'll send you one of her short stories). And now, I present... Frank's Cock. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Is it wrong that, before I clicked on that, I thought of Frankenpenis? GRAPPLE X 14:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oh my. At least he divorced her. My hook aren't very tame though, for this one. "... that that Frank's Cock split four ways?" indeed — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• YGM. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:07, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Crime and Dissonance/GA1

Check it out. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:54, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Notification

This is to let you know that Albertus Soegijapranata, an article which you have reviewed at the GA or PR level, has been nominated as a featured article candidate. Any feedback would be appreciated. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:23, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Episode 14 Twin Peaks

Hi, I'm just about to leave some comments for your new FAC. But, unrelatedly, Episode 14 Twin Peaks just got a through copy-edit. I was going to nominate also for FA, but since your its main contributor, I thought I should contact you. Anything else before nominating, etc.? Thanks, TBrandley 02:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I still think there could be some stuff added to it (actually just added another review a minute ago); I had actually asked Mark Arsten's opinion earlier on whether to focus on it for a future nom or to nom Deep Throat now. I'll work on it some more over the week, but if you're willing to go in as a co-nominator then I'd be up for that. I'll let you know when I think it's as comprehensive as can be; still wanna comb over some print sources and check the DVDs for anything relevant too. Congrats on "Say Hello..." by the way. GRAPPLE X 02:11, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay; great. Co-nom would also be great. I also think you should let the article's original creator know of all of this. Unless you'd like me to (I can). Thanks! It's actually great how that "Say Hello..." article passed, since it didn't get a peer review, copy-edit from another user, etc. Just one from me. Anyway, I'll try to find some more issues, but for now, I guess we might as well nominate the article for A-Class. Thanks again, TBrandley 02:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll let him know before it goes anywhere. Not sure where an A-Class review would be conducted but if it's going to head to FAC in the near future it might just be better with a PR, even an informal one from a few interested editors. GRAPPLE X 02:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Like a WikiProject Peer review for Television project, or something. You also forgot to sign there. Also, then, great. TBrandley 02:31, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Oops, did a five-tilde timestamp instead of a four-tilde sig. :/ GRAPPLE X 02:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you think a peer review should be started for the article? Cheers, TBrandley 04:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess it wouldn't hurt; I'm working my way through the series again so I'll start looking through the DVD features over the coming days for anything else that can be added to it. GRAPPLE X 05:14, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Dudebox

Great work, dude! I just went looking for such a userbox assuming one would have existed for years, and can hardly believe it didn't until 5 days ago. Qwfp (talk) 17:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, man. It runs off of a magicword to match your userpage without needing any input; so it'll read "Qwfp abides" for you. That'll give you more time to fix up a white russian. GRAPPLE X 17:10, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

A White Russian for you!

	White Russian Award for Dudeness
	Ok, I can't find a decent picture of the drink on Commons. Guess I'll just have to mix one up myself. Taking a photo of it before drinking it might prove tricky, though. Qwfp (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

They're still not sure it is a baby...

Again, that's an amazing job you've done on the Eraserhead article. Now time to stop staring at the radiator. Lugnuts ^{And the horse} 08:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I just went at it like regular chickens. GRAPPLE X 08:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

X-Files DVD dates

Hey. I've been looking for a reference for region 2 DVD releases dates for The X-Files, but can't find anything. Do you know of any where? Thanks, TBrandley 20:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't know off hand, but try IGN or DVD Talk to see if they mention anything. GRAPPLE X 20:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Eraserhead

The work you have done on the Eraserhead article is really awesome, keep it up! Jennyjupiter (talk)

Thanks! I plan on bringing it to GA/FA over the coming weeks, been on a bit of a Lynch high this past while. GRAPPLE X 05:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I highly encourage you do! It's in wonderful shape, you've really done wonders, the article used to be a bit of a neglected mess! Jennyjupiter (talk) 13:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again. I just stole the structure from the first article I really started editing and filled it in like a skeleton. Not sure which one to move on to next; probably start The Elephant Man, or maybe try finding more info on Ronnie Rocket. GRAPPLE X 13:58, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

• Or the man himself? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oh Jesus. That's like taking on... well, Jesus. Might not be the worst idea to split his bio in the way Lafayette's has been done. God damn it now I'm going to have to start it aren't I. GRAPPLE X 14:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

• Even Mark wouldn't touch Lafayette. Well, it's an idea. I may push to bring D. Djajakusuma to FA sooner or later. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Not much need; main bio is featured and two sub articles on his early life and military career are GA. The only thing stopping me poking some whoever's responsible to make a topic is the bibliography, which doesn't really have the same resonance as the man himself does. Plus I think they're still looking for me. GRAPPLE X 14:31, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, that's a problem. Eh, did you see Loetoeng Kasaroeng yet? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:37, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

• How big of a monkey? GRAPPLE X 14:40, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

• Not sure (probably lost), but this is a lutung. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

• Hmm. Take more than a few pints to get me into bed with one, but different strokes for different folks. GRAPPLE X 19:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
• Why not use two images in one to depict Spencer's baby (the previous one of the rabbit and the current one)? Or is just the screenshot from the film good enough? 124.182.212.65 (talk) 05:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Franz Kafka GA nom

Hi. Gerda and I are working on this and it's now nom'd for GA. Someone suggested you may want to do the GA review. If so, that'd be great and very appreciated. We plan to get it to FAC later. Thank you. PumpkinSky talk 15:25, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll give it a look. Not familiar with Kafka other than knowing the titles of a few of his works but this is a good way to learn more. GRAPPLE X 19:36, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for being willing to do the GA review. PumpkinSky talk 20:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

You are brave! Warning: "working on this" means for a few weeks we tried to improve something that grew in years ;) There's Wikisource for some of his works, including The Metamorphosis and some very short stories, to get to the core, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm putting in cites for your tags. As for K not writing in order, it's in the Brod book, which I finished reading last night. But dang me if I recall which page and the index isn't helping. So give me a bit to find it.PumpkinSky talk 22:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Take as long as you need; I'm not going to rush anyone. Gonna head to bed for the night but I'll take another crack at it tomorrow for images and the like. GRAPPLE X 22:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Userpage Barnstar
		I was trying to figure out how to center a userbox, and your user subpage taught me how to do it. Thanks :-) TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

There probably is a better way but kludges work. Glad I could be of assistance though! GRAPPLE X 22:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello

I was wondering if you could support/comment/oppose at Talk:Nightswimming (Awake)/A-class nomination for its A-class nomination. Thanks. TBrandley 22:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Working through some points now. Riddle me this though; does that show end on a cliffhanger? I wanna check it out but after I got burnt by Dirty Sexy Money (Sheryl Lee. I fucking hate you, Sheryl Lee) I tend to be a bit more cautious of watching cancelled series. Some cliffhangers, I don't mind. Millennium's cliffhanger sort of works in an abstract way; and Twin Peaks didn't exactly resolve much but its ending worked perfectly (not seen the film yet but it's a prequel rather than a sequel); but there's something much more satisfying about putting a series to bed with an ending that actually ends, like Miami Vice or The X-Files. I'm rambling here. GRAPPLE X 00:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Speaking of Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me, that article is a mess. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• I'm getting there. GRAPPLE X 00:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, no offence intended. Its just... well, the fair-use images alone are rather poor. One's a screenshot which fails FUC#8 and one's an album cover which is really similar to the poster. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, I didn't meant to imply I took any; I was just saying I will get to it, and probably within the year (I wanna start grabbing articles which'll score cup bonus points so Lynch films will be a big focus over the next few weeks and months). I'll not object to anyone wanting to strip out a bunch of unneeded stuff from that or any other ones (will make rewriting it easier, I prefer to work from scratch than from an extant article anyway), but I don't want to actually look at it til I'm done with the film. You seen any/many yet? GRAPPLE X 01:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Watched any of his films? My answer has two letters, and is the same as if I ask you: ever seen Lewat Djam Malam? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Awake does end on a cliffhanger. But the episode's are still very very good, the last few are the best ones. IMO. Thanks for accepting to review. TBrandley 00:57, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• How big of one? Like a "punch the teevee why the fuck can't I see more" cliffhanger or a "well I guess that works it's unresolved but maybe it shouldn't be resolved" kind sort of like the end of Eraserhead or the film version of The Shining, I mean what's going on there but at the same time, I don't want to actually get an answer). GRAPPLE X 01:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Well, it, I think, your second point, "well I guess that works it's unresolved but maybe it shouldn't be resolved". IMO. I've never watched any of those films, so I wouldn't really know about those. But, it, I guess, works out. It wasn't supposed to be the whole ending though, as series creator said himself. I don't really want to give you the ending, so. Awake is a police procedural fantasy drama, the police stuff is the same genre as the show Miami Vice. The fantasy is well, everything other than the crime really. It's great that someone wants to watch Awake. Have you seen the horrible ratings? TBrandley 01:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Still working through the "Nightswimming" but I caught 0.9 as the rating; I thought Millennium caught some bad ratings. And definitely check out The Shining, it's a classic. As for Eraserhead, fire me an email and I'll set you up. GRAPPLE X 01:36, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Awesome. :) TBrandley 01:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Comments added to "Nightswimming". You wanting this film? GRAPPLE X 02:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Absolutely. New comments at to the "Nightswimming" A-class review page. TBrandley 03:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Replied. Hit me up with the "e-mail this user" thing; I don't really want to fire copyvios onto the site. GRAPPLE X 03:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• Done. I've send an email from Wikipedia, my first time. Thanks, so, you've got mail. TBrandley 03:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

GAN reviews

Hi again Grapple, I noticed that you are nominating Operation Sandwedge for GA. Since I also have an article at WP:GAN, what do you think of our reviewing each other's articles? --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 07:03, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll give it a look over. GRAPPLE X 17:16, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll start the review this afternoon. --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 22:13, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

More X-Files Stuff

Now that school has started back up, my productivity will probably be hampered for a few weeks, but would you like to help me get Seasons 3 and 5's main articles up to shape? We're closing in on all the main articles being done, and if TBrandley can get the episodes to FL (that article looks really good now), we can all start working on the main article!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh the main article. Oh God that's scary. I'll see what I can do for one of the seasons, if you want to claim one I can do the other. You get that link I fired you about Post-Modern Prometheus? GRAPPLE X 03:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I could take five, as I've been working on those articles the most. I really don't care. I just now got the "Post-Modern Prometheus" article. Like I said, I haven't been on in the last week or so. Good catch though!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, if you ever have any time, could you take a quick look over "Post-Modern Prometheus". I failed to realize it was peer-reviewed and I tried to fix the issues I found. I also added the Tor link and pimped the reception section. Do you think its ready for FAC?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll give it a look soon. If you're wondering if it's ready, just compare it to our other recent FAs and see what the scale is like; if it stacks up well and has had been copy-edited then it's worth going for. GRAPPLE X 04:19, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Yeah, it looks good to me. I'd leave some comments at its FAC. Cheers! TBrandley 04:26, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Cool. I just nominated it. Feel free to leave suggestions. I think after it is squared away and the season pages are worked out, I will try to promote "all things". It seems to have potential.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 18:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Certainly does. I don't "Nightswimming" could ever get that much production. Unless a DVD is released soon. TBrandley 19:19, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I imagine a DVD set is likely. Check The A.V. Club out too; their "Random Roles" column tends to give some good interviews that can be useful for this kind of thing. Currently doing a source review and spotcheck for Prometheus now. GRAPPLE X 19:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

That's good. I'll have a look at A.V. Club, they have quite a bit of useful information lots. I've already done a image review, as seen in my comments. So, don't worry about that. TBrandley 19:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

[6] Just search for any notable guest stars and you're bound to turn up something; it's helped me plenty in the past for Twin Peaks, The X-Files and Miami Vice. GRAPPLE X 19:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm thinking of some now to search there. I also recently found some production from TV Guide here; it says the person will later appear on Touch, and notes that she was on Awake, which was that "Nightswimming". Don't know if that could be added to "Nightswimming" though. I'm tracking down some more production information. TBrandley 19:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

GA

Thanks for the review. This one's even shorter, but I think it would pass a GA review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

• BTW, did you ever read "The Editing Room"? Here's their take on The X-Files: I Want To Believe — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  Never read it. Thanks for the link; still need to get round to watching that one. GRAPPLE X 16:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  Saw it in theatres, when it reached Indonesia. If I remember correctly I was on a date with a girl from Klaten... Couldn't really get into the movie though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:18, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  I see. Glad you enjoyed it then. :P GRAPPLE X 23:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  At the time, yes. But it was my mistake to let the Mrs know how many exes and almost-GFs I had. Now she won't let me out of her sight. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:41, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Notice

Are you aware of Ronnie Rocket's GA review? Regards. TBrandley 22:54, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Guess I missed that. I'll have a duke now. Thanks. GRAPPLE X 23:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sense and Antisense (Millennium)

The article Sense and Antisense (Millennium) 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 needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Sense and Antisense (Millennium) for things which need to be addressed.

Boy, this template sucks. I have reviewed Sense and Antisense (Millennium), and have put the article on hold. Cheers, TBrandley 00:36, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

• You mean this?

• That got rid of the table background thingy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, it's a different template. I'm not a stickler for those coloured background notices though and the one used was a bit borked anyway. GRAPPLE X 17:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

A-Class Articles

Do you think either "all things" or "The Truth" are suitable A-Class candidates? I think, with enough work, both could eventually end up Featured Articles, even though they are later period episodes.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, if you have time, could you take a peek at The X-Files (season 5)? I think it might be ready for GA review, but I feel it is missing something.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Bit bust tonight and tomorrow but poke me again Monday and I'll go over them. As I remember it, "all things" is in great shape; haven't actually seen the article for "The Truth" yet. GRAPPLE X 22:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'm just going to do some various cleanup this weekend. I already worked on Mythology of The X-Files and I've spiffed up season 4's page.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

It's Monday. ;)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 18:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

On it now. I'll drop some comments on each article's talk page. GRAPPLE X 20:40, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I left some comments at the FAC for "Deep Throat". I'll try to get to "Post-Modern Prometheus" soon. What do you uys think of "The Eleventh Hour"? I know continuity will have to go and I might be able to find another review or two, but it seems FA worthy. Glimmer721 ^talk 01:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it looks pretty good. Why does continuity need to go? It seems wells sourced.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 01:51, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Either in writing or just plain deleted, considering "Doomsday", "Partners in Crime", and "The Stolen Earth" don't have any. I do have a better source now so I don't have to cite the episodes, but it's not really anything important. The crack is already in the writing section. Glimmer721 ^talk 01:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Looking at it, I don't know why it should go; but I do think if it stays it could move out of the plot section. Just as some shows use a "cultural references" section, something like this with a long-standing history of continually-accruing background would benefit from this, especially if you have another good source to back it up. I'll give it a proper scan tomorrow if you ping me again (sometime post-noon GMT). GRAPPLE X 03:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, Glimmer, me rikey. I found myself actually spending an hour or so coasting through articles on the doctor; curious as to what they'll do when the next one quits since I read they can only regenerate 12 times (reboot?). Ah well. You might wanna check this webcomic out if you don't; 90% of what I know of Doctor Who comes from that (and if it's in any way accurate, he really just seems like Dale Cooper with a time machine). I know I pointed Ruby towards it but I can't remember if I did for you too. GRAPPLE X 04:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Haha, Matt Smith actually auditioned for John in Sherlock a few days before becoming the Doctor; people joke there would be a cheekbone overload on that show if he made it. The Doctor isn't really like a cool detective; he sort of makes things up as he goes along (Moffat said that he was the kind of person who would jump off a building and work out how to fix it on the way down). The 12 regenerations rule (and thus, 13 incarnations, so we have 2 more) comes from The Deadly Assassin which I haven't seen yet, but supposedly it's debatable whether that's a Time Lord rule (because now they're all dead) or an actual part of anatomy, and apparently the Master was rewarded another regeneration cycle for helping them out once. Basically Moffat said they'll come up with an excuse when the time comes so the show can continue. Recent theories are that his cycle restarted when the universe was sort-of-rebooted in "The Big Bang" or that River transferred some to him in "Let's Kill Hitler". Anyway, there is someone who is going through all the X-Files episodes and making them into comics; they are currently on Episode 10 (link). Glimmer721 ^talk 22:27, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

• I laughed so hard at the "Deep Throat" one. Nice find! GRAPPLE X 22:35, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

  Oh yes, I can't wait to see "Humbug". Glimmer721 ^talk 22:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

• So now I have to drop by... hehe. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:27, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• I totally forgot I reviewed that already. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

List of films of the Dutch East Indies

Do you remember that? Up for FLC. The journalism award has four supports already. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:27, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Happy days; I'll get a look at it today. Had also planned on giving a PR to Terang Boelan. GRAPPLE X 12:47, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

• That would be happy days for me. TB is probably the (older) film most likely to pass FAC right now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for reviewing. Eh, do you think this is worth mentioning? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, that seems relevant enough for me. As for convertors, I don't know any, but WP:NUMIS or User:Wehwalt might know something. That's really just a hunch more than an educated answer though. GRAPPLE X 00:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Pinged and watchlisted. Now to dig in with Andjar Asmara - Sarastro gave quite a few comments and I'm scratching my head on some of these cuz there's no sources. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:51, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• That's what you get for going obscure. I'm never doing another US military black op again in my life. GRAPPLE X 01:14, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• LoL, by English Wikipedia standards nearly all my articles are obscure. Lie Tek Swie is a fine example of that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Wehwalt did great, we've got a contemporary equivalent now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:49, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

  Happy days. GRAPPLE X 14:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

On the batman article and an appeal for help on my new article.

Hi. My name is Angel. I am definately going to help you on the issue of the Batman homosexuality section. I don't believe that someone's opinion should take down valid sources especially on something as open-concepted as an interpretation.

I was wondering if you could help me with my new article on binarism which is in the toddler stage. If you know anything about the Gender binary and Genderqueer people please contribute to help me and if you don't then just read those two and the binarism article and you should understand what I'm talking about thank you.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 09:29, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Not something I have the slightest scooby-doo about but I'll give it a look. What exactly is it you need help with? GRAPPLE X 15:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Poll to Remove Ratings info boxes for all the Siouxsie and the Banshees albums

Hi, could you vote in this Talk:Siouxsie_and_the_Banshees#Poll_to_Remove_Ratings_info_boxes.-- Carliertwo (talk) 4 September 2012 18:03

Done, thanks. GRAPPLE X 15:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Just like to congratulate you for your wonderful work with the WikiCup. 1st place. :) Oh, and by the way, have a homemade brownie (boy, do I ever give out too many brownies, won't have any for myself, :0. Lol.) TBrandley 01:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Brownies are for sharing, just like a good hotbox. Thanks! GRAPPLE X 01:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

FAR Question

TBrandley told me that I need to wait two weeks before nominated "The Truth" for FA. Is this correct, or is that clause only talking about re-nominating a previously failed FA if it is the same article? Just wanted clarification.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 20:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Nope, the two weeks is only if a nomination fails. The terminology is a bit iffy because "archiving" an FAC is specifically the term for failing it, rather than just shuffling any finished one off into an archive, so it can be misinterpreted. You're fine to nominate as soon as one's passed (I believe I put "Episode 2" up the same day "Squeeze" passed, definitely it was within a day or two at most). GRAPPLE X 20:12, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Dostoyevsky

Hello,

do you know someone who could review Dostoyevsky on GAN? Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 13:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. I might be able to give a run at it but that's an even bigger subject than Kafka which felt daunting. I'm not sure who else to poke, I'd say the most literary of editors I'm familiar with is Ruby2010 but I'm not sure she takes requests. If no one picks it up I could give it a go within the next few days and ask for a second opinion if I feel overwhelmed. GRAPPLE X 14:12, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• A team review might be reasonable, but I suggest waiting a bit per criteria #5 (stability) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:36, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• Speaking of good articles, congrats on Eraserhead, looks nice. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks. It's at PR now; going to take it to FAC when I pick up the DVD and make what use I can out of Lynch's commentary. GRAPPLE X 20:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Time is unfortunately going to be a major issue for me until December (which sucks for my chances in the Wikicup...). Maybe try Figureskatingfan for a review? She's done great work so far on some important literary subjects. Ruby 2010/2013 20:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• That sucks; you were doing fantastic so far. If you do have time to fire anything together I'll try to get it reviewed within the competition time so you can grab the points. GRAPPLE X 20:56, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the offer (I won't make you review anything Austen :p ). And I never stood a chance anyway in the face of your amazing article turnout! As far as I can tell you've got this one in the bag. Planning on doing Elephant Man soon? Ruby 2010/2013 21:12, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• It's definitely the next film I do; Dude knows how long that might actually take though. I wouldn't have to review Austen stuff if you didn't work on it, you know... :P GRAPPLE X 21:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• Alas for you, I can't see myself forsaking Austen any time soon! I wet me feet recently with my first real literature article, so hopefully I've learned enough to start improving her novel and character articles (which are mostly in sorry states). Luckily I have a sort of partner in crime who may be able to offer her reviewing services, so you should be off the hook. Unrelated, I would imagine Elephant Man is the focus of a ton of scholarly research, so good luck! Very ambitious. Ruby 2010/2013 22:11, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• Without having looked too hard; I actually think it's probably the least analysed of his works (that or Dune) as it's essentially a straight biopic that's only really Lynchian by virtue of its production values (the Frederick Elmes cinematography and Alan Splet sound design still seem Eraserhead-y even given the setting). I think there's probably plenty of mention of it as an aside in discussion of Merrick himself but it's not really one that lends itself to deep analysis. All I can say is I'm glad someone else already tackled the two densest films in his oeuvre. GRAPPLE X 22:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

oh lord

With all the X-Files related FA talk... I realized that Bruce Campbell (like, the actor) dedicated an entire (short) chapter of one of his books to his involvement in the series. With me being bored in class I decided to try a little experiment with one of the most lowkey of lowkey FA candidates. A work in (the very early stages) of process... I dunno. Bruce Campbell (talk) 00:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I had assumed that was where you got interested in following the project. Have always meant to read his books; I'm now loving the fact that we're citing a source called If Chins Could Kill. Fantastic. :D GRAPPLE X 01:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Long-time X-Files fan. The episode in question isn't even one of my favorites episodes... but ehh, you gotta start somewhere. It's certainly no Squeeze. I would go live with that version of the article but I wanted someone to check through it for now. The X-Files goons have an unprecedented streak of work. Bruce Campbell (talk) 01:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Just to think, this time two years ago there were less than 20 GAs across the whole project. I'd certainly be glad to collaborate with you if you want to get involved in the project; I know there's not huge swathes left to do but between myself and Gen. Quon we should have access to pretty much any source you would need. If you want to take a gander, I've outlined a few long-term projects at User:Grapple X/GT prep; if you want to work "Terms of Endearment" to FA it would fit in nicely with "The Post-Modern Prometheus" having being promoted recently. Gen's the guy who brought that one to GA so I'm sure he'd be happy to pitch in too. GRAPPLE X 01:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

My main involvement on Wikipedia started off working on music related articles and I'm bored out of my mind waiting for some of my other GA nominations to pass before I finish a GA Topic I was planning... I'm not overly-familiar with TV and film related articles, but I'm a fast learner and I brought Darren Aronofsky to GA a while ago. I wanna learn my place in the project first, as I've noticed that The Truth was up for FA so I'd wait a bit before considering anything. Of course I've never worked on an FA before, so I'm weary.

I've looked at the prep page. 5/9 seasons completed, 2 up for nominations with one near the passing point, season 3 one article away... that's some ridiculous work. What's going on with articles like Unruhe and Teliko? I could practice by bringing them up to GA first if no one else is working on them right now. I just wanna be helpful to any way. Bruce Campbell (talk) 02:19, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Tackle away, not sure why season 4 has been languishing. It's not a hard format to work with; we've been using a relatively standard layout and sources so even picking another similar article, stripping it out to a framework (headings, infobox, etc) and filling it bit by bit should get you there pretty quickly. Some of the books are available on google books; some can be previewed on amazon. EW.com, The A.V. Club and the amazon preview of the Shearman and Pearson book should be good for reviews; there's official guidebooks that offer the viewing figures, etc (pick and episode and ask me or Gen if it's not in the article already); and production info can be culled from all sorts of places (interviews with guest stars can sometimes be found on AVC, or there's DVD features, the guide books, etc, and there's the X Marks book by Lousia Gradnitzer available on google books which has a lot of info on filming locations. If you get stuck at all just ask away. GRAPPLE X 02:32, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Excellent; there's certainly a large source of examples to base what a GA should be, and I'll make sure to adhere to the established template. I'll have some stuff done by tomorrow. Thank you for the help. Bruce Campbell (talk) 02:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother. Ping me again for any help, or if you need anything reviewed when you're done. GRAPPLE X 02:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm actually shocked at how much content I managed to scuffle together on what is basically a D-list episode. Because of its length I primarily modeled it after the Deep Throat episode article (which, coincidentally, just became a FA literally 20 minutes ago). Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I know; I'm now having that post-promotion panic as I had two future FACs planned but haven't finished up with them yet. Ah well, I'm in no rush. As for "Terms"; I've fiddled the headers a little to lump all the production info into smaller headings under a "production" heading, but aside from that it looks great. Wondering if there's any mention of it in the theme-based books (Philosophy of The X-Files, etc) to fill "themes" out more but if there isn't it's not an issue. Well done! GRAPPLE X 23:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah the theme sections isn't very good, since it's not exactly a "deep" episode, and generally a theme section is atleast suggested for a FA. I don't have any X-Files related books so I cant really expand it much further myself, and it's not like Campbell goes into much detail on the subject. Since The Truth is at FA now, I wouldn't want to cockblock it, especially since it doesn't have any supports yet or anything. I'll get a peer review done in the mean time and ask around.

What two articles were you planning to nominate? Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:33, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh, don't worry about "cockblocking" The Truth; Gen. is a generous guy with reviews so there'll be some returned favours there to help it along (I'll get to it myself after the request below which I'm working on). There's some very minor mentions of the episode here; and here (second one's not available but snippets might give something, who knows). If they don't help then the lack of anything else means you've satisfied comprehensiveness anyway. Was planning on firing up either Eraserhead or "Episode 14" of Twin Peaks; still need a little work on both though. GRAPPLE X 23:44, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I actually don't generally work with book references. After combing through some of them I've expanded the article a little bit more. Shockingly, it's actually one of the longer X-Files episode articles now. Is there a proof-reader/copy-editor involved with the project? I actually noticed that none of my edits were showing up on the "recent changes" thingy on the project page. Bruce Campbell (talk) 01:39, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

That template's buggy as hell; no idea where it compiles its list. Might be easier to make a subpage of WP:TXF with every project page listed so that the "related changes" button would give that functionality properly. There's no real copy-editor but I'll give it a comb tomorrow morning/afternoon so it's had an extra set of eyes over it. GRAPPLE X 01:42, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much; I requested a peer review too to be thorough. If this doesn't end up a disaster I'd like to nominate further lowkey X-File articles in the future. The X-Files project seems really well put together. Bruce Campbell (talk) 02:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

It's really clicked into place this past year. I'll try to get a look at the PR and add anything I can; but certainly no one'll stop you working on any other articles you have in mind. GRAPPLE X 02:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

FYI: I started writing the plot summary to "Sanguinarium" here (I previously wrote "The Walk", "Oubliette", "Teliko", and "The Field Where I Died", though those episodes made more sense). You are welcome to finish it and put it on the page if you'd like. Also, who wants to tackle "Synchrony"? The time travel in that made no sense. Glimmer721 ^talk 00:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

"Sanguinarium" was simple. Benjamin Horne was sick of his Civil War re-enactment so he magic-lasered a dude's face off; meanwhile Denise Bryson stuck some trousers on and chased him. GRAPPLE X 00:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I can work on "Synchrony" if you guys want me to. I'd probably start late next week. We need to get season 4 done, as it's one of the best seasons! :P--Gen. Quon (Talk) 01:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think anyone can cite that it's not comprehensive now. Bruce Campbell (talk) 22:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks good. I'm seeing a few duplicate links; User:Ucucha/duplinks is a great tool to use to catch these. Great work though. GRAPPLE X 22:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hi, Grapple X. I've seen your work at FAC, and was wondering if you could review Sadie Harris at its featured article candidacy? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 21:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll have a look. Have to admit the series was a guilty pleasure of mine but with the departure of Kim Raver I'll probably just stick to the spin-off (and KaDee Strickland...). GRAPPLE X 21:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I was so devastated to find out that Raver is leaving. Private Practice is another favorite of mine, but I hear it's ending after this upcoming season. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I addressed all of your concerns. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Further reviewing has been done of Sadie Harris, and I was wondering if you would consider supporting/opposing the article's promotion. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh, thought I had when I commented on ep cites. Whoops. Added my support now. GRAPPLE X 00:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and support, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

FT vs GT

Grapple, I was wondering why Chrisye and related articles are showing as GTs on the talk page and not FTs. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:14, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

That's odd. The last time I promoted an FT, it showed up as a GT until I had updated over half of the topics (I believe this was one of the coinage topics); I had assumed as I passed through them they'd update themselves. The talk page of the topic itself (Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Overview of Chrisye) shows it as an FT; as does Talk:Chrisye discography. Weird. I'm looking into it now. GRAPPLE X 03:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I made a series of null edits to the article talk pages; they now all display as FT components to me. Let me know if it's the same for you (you may need to purge the pages or your browser cache). GRAPPLE X 03:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Alright, I'll check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Working okay for you or do I need to try again? GRAPPLE X 03:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Not working, but don't worry about it. Gosh, my master's program has my head spinning. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• At the very least, do all three articles appear in Category:Wikipedia featured topics Overview of Chrisye featured content for you? If so then it's likely just a cache issue. Try making an edit to the articles' talk pages (null or actual, doesn't matter) and seeing if that helps. GRAPPLE X 04:05, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, that's fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Threadjack, which Twin Peaks episode do you want me to copyedit next? Mark Arsten (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

  Whatever you'd prefer, I guess; wasn't asking so much as letting you know you might want to read them (the commentaries I'm using are from a set I believe is out of print in region 1, but they're quite interesting). I'd probably go with "Episode 7" as it's that infamous all-the-cliffhangers-in-all-the-world one, and if I work another first season episode to FA it'll likely be that one. GRAPPLE X 20:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Ok, that does sound good, I'll take a look at it. That was a fine episode. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:34, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Certainly was. Rewatching the series as I'm going along (just finished "Episode 15" so it's pretty much all downhill from here); quite surprised at the stark change in cinematography between seasons. Might have to check if Frank Byers was replaced at some point but the tone has gotten much less soap opera and much more horror-movie, which I don't think I've ever noticed before. Anyway, how do you feel about the image used in "Episode 7"? I wasn't sure if it worked or not but I kind of like how unorthodox it is. GRAPPLE X 22:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

• Ok, started the copyedit, let me know if I get too crazy. But now that you mention it, I guess I can see what you're talking about. My favorite scene, though, is when Leland is standing in the jail cell under the sprinkler shouting "fire walk with me". Oh yes, the palate image looks good to me, no problems there. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

• Still nothing beats Cooper's first dream sequence for me. GRAPPLE X 22:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

• Hey, if you want, I'll copyedit Eraserhead next. You're going to FAC with that, right? Mark Arsten (talk) 20:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah. That'd be great. Midnightblueowl has given it a nice thorough peer review so it should be decent as is; but if you want to look at it that'd rock. Could you leave it a few days though? I ordered a DVD with a 90-minute feature on the making of it, so I'll be adding to it soon. GRAPPLE X 22:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

• Ok, sure, I can wait a few days. Mark Arsten (talk) 12:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Just arrived this morning (speak of the devil); should get it expanded today then. Thanks. GRAPPLE X 12:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oooh, sounds fun. I'll try to avoid the sections that are likely to change. The article seems pretty well written thus far, my favorite type to copyedit. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
• Also, have you ever thought of running for admin? Might be worth a shot. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Just finished watching it. Eraserhead was mentioned exactly once; the whole thing was basically 80% Inland Empire and 20% what Lynch gets up to daily these days. Really really was a bizarre choice to put it on the Eraserhead DVD and not on Inland Empire. As such I've nothing new to add, will probably nominate this one soon. As for grabbing a mop, I doubt I'd do much except possibly respond to WP:ERRORS. I used to have sysop powers on a browser game wiki so I know how it all works, but that actually entailed a small group of folk doing all the admin work at once. I just don't know if I have enough reason to go for it here (obviously I'd use the powers for vanity reasons like supressing redirects when I move sandboxes to main, etc). But thanks for the vote of confidence anyway. :D GRAPPLE X 15:29, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Huh, how annoying about that video. I'll try to finish the copyedit soon. I have been trying to get people to run for admin lately, it's real convenient moving over redirects and slapping the odd IP troll, but, whatever you feel more comfortable with. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Worst thing is, I haven't even seen Inland Empire yet (been meaning to but my copy of it has awful sound mixing which means it's far too quiet to hear on the laptop). I guess I could rally behind a nomination if others went in on it but I don't see myself putting my own name down. GRAPPLE X 15:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Ok, finished my run through Eraserhead, hope to see it at FAC soon! Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks a lot, man. I'll get to that final point on the PR now; if you're happy aside from that then there's no harm in nominating it tonight. I want to get "Episode 14" up as well but I want to hear back from the co-author before I do that. GRAPPLE X 19:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Wow, four supports in four hours, your nomination is sure off to a good start! Mark Arsten (talk) 01:20, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Twin Peaks GA Reviews

I just wanted to let you know that I will get around to those, but I have a huge Latin test on Monday, so I will probably not be super active this weekend. I'm sorry if that causes any issues, but I thought you should know so that you don't think I abandoned them. ;)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother, so long as you have time before the end of october (wikicup). :P Latin? Good luck! GRAPPLE X

Yeah, I should be able to get to them by Monday night, Tuesday morning-ish. Next week definitely. Yeah, Latin... that language gives me headaches.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 01:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Didn't peg you for a dead language scholar but there you go. Hope it goes well. GRAPPLE X 11:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm an anthropology major, and we're required to take a language. I thought Latin sounded quite interesting, but I'm not the world's greatest at it. ;)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Your guys' uni system confuses me. We just apply for a subject and do it for three years (or five if you're me and bomb out of everything). GRAPPLE X 19:49, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Hey speaking of GA reviews that you might be interested in doing--I just nominated Space opera in Scientology. Pretty fun article to work on, I bet it would be a fun article to read/review... Mark Arsten (talk) 22:31, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

  Oh, cool. I'll have a duke over that tonight. I had an epiphany about an article to collaborate with you on given your new age religion thing but I totally forgot what it was. GRAPPLE X 22:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks, and lol, I hope you remember. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the article suggestion, it reminds me a lot of the Church of the SubGenius. And thanks for the speedy GA review on Space Opera, I think I've taken care of the points you made. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:13, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

• I owed you one for all the copyediting. Yeah, Dudeism's great. I get to pretend to be religious but without any of the hassle. GRAPPLE X 01:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
• Hmm, are there any sacramental orgies in Dudeism? That would be a good marketing tool. And thanks for the pass of SOiS, I'm glad I tracked down the high-quality sources to build the article properly. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:22, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

• I guess I could give Julianne Moore a call but it might not go as planned.... GRAPPLE X 01:24, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

"Field Trip" Themes

Are you at all familiar with abductive reasoning? I found a very interesting source here (p. 189) that talks about it in "Field Trip". I added it to the "Themes" section, but I wanted to make sure it makes sense. If you have any time, could you give it a quick look-over and see if it makes sense to you? I think I understand what it means, but I don't want to misrepresent the source material. Thanks!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Entirely unfamiliar with it. I'm getting ready for work now but I'll read over it this afternoon and see what I make of it. GRAPPLE X 07:19, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense now that I've read it. Yeah, Mulder has a habit of looking at the effect and making a leap to the cause as a result, it's a good catch. Never noticed TXF in that book, I used it for some Miami Vice stuff before. GRAPPLE X 15:58, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

That came to my attention from this book as well; the whole first chapter is dedicated to it. Although that book doesn't have anything concerning "Field Trip". But it may help with the character article. Glimmer721 ^talk 17:00, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

That's a good idea. I added a bit more about it in the "Field Trip" article to explain it in layman's terms. We could probably just steal it for the Mulder article.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 18:06, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

What do we think about our draft of Scully? Seems like we can do a little bit more before moving to mainspace, and then adding on from there. Behind-the-scenes production info could probably be added to sections like "skeptic" and "faith", I think, but we could do that later. Glimmer721 ^talk 19:31, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for patrolling the Chrisye-related articles while they're on the main page. You're awesome!  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I had them in my watchlist anyway after promoting the FT so it wasn't any effort. Speaking of which, does that display as an FT for you now? GRAPPLE X 23:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, it's peachy now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:35, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Eraserhead

Hi Grapples. I don't know if this interview maybe of any use for the article. Mark Kermode asks a few questions about Eraserhead, although it's more focused on Inland Empire. Lugnuts ^{And the horse} 07:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

It's a good find; but the Eraserhead mentions are already covered. On a side note, he gave nearly the exact same speech about the need for final cut choices when I met him at a screening of The Elephant Man (which would have been around the same time; must have been on his mind heavily at the time). Thanks anyway! GRAPPLE X 11:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Semi-colons

Hi Grapple, this article gives a helpful overview of when to use semi-colons, which are notoriously tricky to get right. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what a caboose is but I'll keep an eye out for them. GRAPPLE X 15:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I didn't realize that was an Americanism, interesting. "Caboose" is also a slang word for ass, not very widely used though. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

As arse-backwards as this place is, we don't really have much in the way of steam trains. Plenty of asses though. GRAPPLE X 15:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

• Also, I'll try to eventually copyedit all the Twin Peaks episodes, could you give me an order of preference to do them in? Mark Arsten (talk) 15:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

  Oh, Jesus, whatever suits! Only do it if you want to, I'm probably not going to take many, if any, any further than GA so it'd only be if you wanted to yourself. GRAPPLE X 15:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Ok, so I'll look for the ones that aren't GA yet and hit them. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:17, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

    Of those I've worked on I believe that just leaves "Episode 5", haven't gotten round to "Pilot" yet. GRAPPLE X 16:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

    • Ok, I'll do #5 and then wait for Pilot. Do you plan on doing season 2? Mark Arsten (talk) 16:29, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

      Possibly; I guess it depends on whether I can pick up the gold box DVD set on the cheap. I have season two on its own and the features don't give anything specific about any of the episodes, so it might be pretty tricky to get them up to GA without any real production info. I'll probably manage "Episode 8" and "Episode 29" alright but beyond that I don't know. GRAPPLE X 16:35, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

      • • • • Ok, keep me posted. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

A-Class

Hi. I am just about to leave A-Class comments for "Gender Bender". Would you mind adding A-class review comments for Awake (TV series). "Two Birds" isn't ready just yet. Cheers, TBrandley 01:22, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll get on it. Not up to much tonight so I might as well help out. GRAPPLE X 01:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! TBrandley 01:27, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Nielsen Ratings? Maybe

I found this site which is a bunch of fans posting the Nielsen Ratings for episodes after they got them from the Nielsen press releases way back when. They list all the information, and, from the bits I've been able to cross-check, it seems legit. Could we get away with not citing the board, but rather the press release themselves? Such as: "{{cite press release |title=Whatever the title is |publisher=[[Nielsen Soundscan]]|date=14 January 2001|accessdate=19 September 2012}}" for this one, etc. What do you think?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. It's not really verifiable; but then again no unrecorded press release is (otherwise List of accolades received by David Lynch would include that time my university's cinema gave him a trophy for being himself). I'm honestly not sure. I certainly wouldn't credit it to Soundscan, though, isn't that the arm that was eventually spun off as Prometheus Global Media and that handles record sales? I'd ask at RSN to be safe. Though which episodes are you looking ratings for? I might be able to find them in highbeam, but it's patchy as to what it covers (sometimes a seasno will have some episodes covered but not others, which to me seems like highbeam's fault as I can't see why a newspaper would only give this information out some weeks and not regularly). GRAPPLE X 21:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm trying to track down season 8. Today, I found "This is Not Happenings" numbers, and I just can't believe the rest aren't out there somehwere...--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Reminder

You have new A-Class comments at "Gender Bender". Also, I replied at A-Class review for Awake. Cheers, TBrandley 03:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Responded at Awake; will get to "Gender Bender" now. Was working through a few things that got in the way. Speaking of which; how good is your understanding of the finer workings of WP:ACCESS? I raised a point at WT:FLC that I'd quite like to hear about as it concerns the next list I'm working on. GRAPPLE X 03:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

It looks fine to me, but I'm not that good. But just in case, I would ask User:RexxS to be sure; he has a great awesome understanding of WP:ACCESS. Cheers, TBrandley 03:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Might bug him directly; talking to a code monkey friend of mine now but if he doesn't know I'll see if RexxS does. Thanks. GRAPPLE X 03:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Congrats

Congrats on the promotion of Eraserhead. Luckily, Sadie Harris was promoted too. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Six days to promotion must be some sort of record, lol Bruce Campbell (talk) 20:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Wow. That is all. Lugnuts ^{And the horse} 08:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

• Quite impressive, at least. I'm surprised mine went through fairly quickly as well (although to be honest, I don't think I had an image review) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm actually more impressed that I seem popular enough that this is how I learnt it was promoted rather than checking my watchlist. Six days is incredible though I think Marshall Applewhite might have been quicker. Thanks guys; and well done TR. GRAPPLE X 13:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, well Mark's had several articles elected by adoration. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

• lol, I still don't know what happened with Applewhite, if only I could do that all the time. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I now have to figure out where to go next; was planning The Elephant Man in the future but I haven't even started it yet. :/ GRAPPLE X 16:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Um, I think this can go down as the fastest promotion! TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Terang Boelan

Could you or one of your stalkers take up the GA review for this article? I want to bring it to FAC soon, and I usually don't do that until it's passed GAC. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:21, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

If I do it, it'll be a straight pass as I covered everything at PR; unless you've added more since. If you're okay with that then I'll do it as soon as you let me know; if you want someone to have another look through it that's fine too. GRAPPLE X 17:55, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

• Hmm, I would prefer more eyes... Odd how the one I really want to bring to FAC is the one that is taking forever. Well, I want to bring Mereka Bilang, Saya Monyet! to FAC sometime soon, if you can do that.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

  Do you want the latter one peer reviewed? GRAPPLE X

  Not formally. I'm disappointed with that progress. Both TB and PB were archived with no comments (you rescued TB, but still...) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:40, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, if someone isn't keeping an eye on either WP:PR or the article in question then it can be a pain in the hoop alright. I'll see what I can make of Mereka Bilang then. GRAPPLE X 23:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks. Yeah, getting reviewers for Indonesia-related topics can be a pain. I'm surprised that the last 3 went so smoothly (Soegijapranata, Oerip, and Andjar) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:54, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Ping

As I said, I'm bugging you now that I finished something I was working on: what do you think? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:52, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Only briefly logging in while I make the missus breakfast; looks great but I'll have a better look this evening. Started adding comments for Mereka, will post them tonight. Can you keep an eye on Eraserhead for me, though (or ask at WT:FILM)? An IP insists on changing all the names to forename only and is "correcting" words that aren't used the way he thinks. GRAPPLE X 11:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• I'll try and keep an eye on it. My lecturer has me looking at the ontology and epistemology of Russian formalism, so... head meet wall. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• You could probably give a full review too, but I get if you're busy. What do you think about expanding the awards section like at ? a couple months ago? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• Shuffled the missus out the door about half an hour ago so I can sit down to it; do you mean you want a review on the list or more depth on Mereka? I'd say a bit more prose for the awards would probably be a good idea; not sure how I missed it. It's been a long weekend. :P GRAPPLE X 16:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• I guess Mereka is more or less ready (a couple blurbs). Yeah, the list. I'm not sure about its accessibility. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• In terms of access, the table is fine. I'd add alt text to the files though. I also think note A could be added as prose somewhere; leading with "Twenty-nine people" and adding something like "No directors of the time were female; the first woman to direct a film in the area was..." (or words to that effect). It seems odd to have to qualify your opening words like that, and the information seems interesting enough to present up front. GRAPPLE X 00:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• Fair enough. I'll probably nominate MBSM soon. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• Cool. If you're moving on with the director list, it might be worth pinging one of the FLC directors; your current nom is facing no opposition and I believe FLC is much more open to multiple nominations than FAC. GRAPPLE X 00:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• That might be tomorrow, but yeah, I'll do that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:33, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

X-Files A-Class review

I have a "The X-Files A-Class review" center ready to have to organize all A-Class reviews on a page. Good idea? TBrandley 18:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I created it, see WP:TXF/ACR; all A-Class reviews and requests have been moved there, including yours, as well as comments, if that's okay with you. Further comments should also be left there, as well as new nominations. Cheers, TBrandley 03:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Hopping on and off today but that sounds useful; thanks. I'll get a full look at it this evening. GRAPPLE X 13:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Emily

Have you seen this? If not perhaps 20:00-20:25 will whet your appetite. Need anything reviewed? I have an article myself I'll nom shortly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Nothing really needing reviewed at the minute (have one at FLC, if you want, but it seems to be going okay). Never seen that vid, I'll have a wee duke at it now. Give me a ping when you nominate whatever you're working on; I think I owe a review or two overall. GRAPPLE X 15:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Phallic architecture nommed, hope its of interest! Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Can you review? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I should be able to make a start on it tonight. Been a little preoccupied with keeping an eye on TFA but it seems to be quieting down. GRAPPLE X 20:54, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• Hehe, I knew it before he said it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I've addressed your points...♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:36, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Promoted. Sorry, fell asleep. :( GRAPPLE X 17:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Did you watch the episode link I left you?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:02, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For your work on today's featured article. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Just make sure your next TFA is fluffy pink clouds or the like. :P GRAPPLE X 18:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

• Like — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:30, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

...Single stupidest thing....

Be lucky I don't have you blocked for referring to me as stupid, because I could. Vjmlhds 01:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Please try. GRAPPLE X 01:23, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

BRD project

Hi, I have outlined a proposal for a potential project that you might be interested in at User:Betty Logan/BRD enforcer. The essence of it is a peer review system in relation to challenged unilateral edits. If you are not interested then no worries, I'm just seeing if there is any interest/suggestions at this stage before going to the bother of formalizing a proprosal. Betty Logan (talk) 00:55, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

While I admire the sentiment, I doubt it'll be something I'd be useful in. I'm a self-admitted grouch and don't really enjoy additional red tape, so it would probably end up frustrating me to be involved. Good luck with it though, good to see a constructive attempt at organised mediation. GRAPPLE X 21:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Triple crown

Hey Grapple X. I noticed you applied for a triple crown upgrade around the same time as I did. It's been almost a month since our requests. Who is entitled to award triple crowns? By this, I mean can we award the triple crowns to each other or is there a group of editors assigned to do it? TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 15:32, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

You know I'm not too sure; I'm 90% certain Casliber has done the past few runs but I don't like leaving it to one person carrying all the load. I'm generally content to let it sit for a while though as every time I could be awarded it I seem to have another piece of featured content in the pipeline anyway. I'll have a look in a minute and see about updating some of the list though. GRAPPLE X 17:42, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, let me know if you find anything out. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Gonna do a few tonight; yours should be second after Ealdgyth, which might take a wee while (she's some trooper). GRAPPLE X 17:54, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

"DeadAlive" and "Sixth Extinction II"

Sorry to bug you, but is there anyway you could take a quick scan over the above articles for the A-Class review? Since "The Office" has returned its sucked up quite a bit of my energy, but I'd like to dive back into those. Thanks!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Looking at DeadAlive now. GRAPPLE X 17:56, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Cool. I addressed the "DeadAlive" comments, and added a few comments to "Gender Bender".--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll have to get a look at those. Have a GA review to respond to first, and then I'll have a look at "Amor Fati" for you as well. GRAPPLE X 02:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

I was planning on giving you "The WikiJaguar Award for Excellence", but figured this would be best. Thank you for your help with List of programs broadcast by Fox, and the other editor, and comments all about that. Another thank you for your supportive comments during my block at my talk page. Sorry; just ran out of brownies lol. Oh well, have a barnstar instead! TBrandley 06:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I still think your ban was entirely misplaced; if you'd reverted the same amount of page blankings on, I dunno, assassination of John F. Kennedy, you'd probably have earned a star yourself. Ah well, just abide. On the bright side it does mean you can qualify for a "Valiant Return" triple crown next time you earn a crown. GRAPPLE X 02:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Film directors

Appears TRM is concerned about the need for the list. I've replied there, but... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Hold on, on my way. GRAPPLE X 23:08, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Danke (how do we say that in Irish?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Go raibh maith agat. (guh roe my agat)GRAPPLE X 23:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Kewl. In Indonesian it's "Terima Kasih" (te-REE-ma kah-SEE, roughly) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:21, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• That seems awfully phonetic; as an Irish and English speaker it just seems odd not seeing useless letters cluttering things up. GRAPPLE X 23:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Indeed it is! Just check out Wikipedia:IPA for Malay. Every letter only has one sound (except vowels)! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Wow. That sounds even cleaner than Esperanto. Although, despite how messy Irish dipthongs get (every consonant changes sound when it's aspirated, which in the case of F even mandates adding D before it because it would be silent otherwise; stop me if this stops making sense at any point); there's only a small handful of verbs which don't conjugate to a neat little pattern and that same handful are irregular across all tenses, unlike French which has different irregular verbs in each tense and several methods of conjugation, or English which just said "fuck verbs" and went off on a bender. GRAPPLE X 23:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Grammatically it's rather simple, you just need to know your morphemes. Like me(N)-, ber-, ke-an, -an, per-an, etc. I translated a book on Indonesian morphology before, actually. Don't think it's on Google anywhere. That being said, apparently I've been cited in a thesis (look for my family name). It's citing my look at the non-formal register in songs by Project Pop, which I posted on Scribd. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Wow, well done. That definitely trumps a fáinne. GRAPPLE X 23:52, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Considering how I likely mangled "Go raibh maith agat", I'm assuming I'll never hold a fáinne. Heh. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:54, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• The whole thing's generally done orally; learn it without looking at the real spellings and you'll fly. It's a language of really simple syntax (there's none of the faff that goes on in English, although Hiberno-English might be among the hardest dialects to pick up as a second language, oddly) but surprisingly poetic depth. GRAPPLE X 23:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• I've heard about that poetic depth of Irish... can't say I've experienced it myself though. My family is of mostly French extract — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

  It's one of those things where every saying is figurative rather than literal; things like "my name is X" are literally translated as "X is the name upon me". Though to be fair the whole language doesn't really have a concept of "ownership" in sense that "X has Y"; possessions are always "on" someone as though they're actually to be kept on their person. GRAPPLE X 00:07, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

  Ah! Perfect for Wikipedia — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

  Some day I'm going to take a refresher course to blow out the cobwebs and go buck nuts on ga.wikipedia translating Featured content. GRAPPLE X 00:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

After reading some of your past messages on the talk page of TBranley as well as in your own talk page, it seems that you're not familiar with what is vandalism on Wikipedia and what is not. The edits by Vjmlhds on List of programs broadcast by Fox were not vandalism. They were edit-warring and content dispute. Edit-warring is disruptive editing, not vandalism. Please read Wikipedia:Vandalism to see what is considered vandalism on Wikipedia. Thank you. Farine (talk) 02:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I really don't need a lecture on this from you; an edit entirely designed to blank a page for petty and spiteful reasons is clearly more than just "disruptive" thanks. GRAPPLE X 02:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

You're entitled to your opinion. But it isn't vandalism and no administrator or reviewer will ever treat this as such. Farine (talk) 02:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I hope for your own sake you don't continue to hold that position, because bad faith page blanking is something that admins, reviewers, and anyone else with half an ounce of wit will see as detrimental to the project as a whole. GRAPPLE X 02:11, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

No it's not. And if that's your reasonning then you can forget about ever being elevated to reviewer and even less to administrator someday. Farine (talk) 02:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion. Now please find something constructive to do instead of being an apologist for appalling bad faith actions. GRAPPLE X 02:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm a rollbacker, reviewer, autopatroller, and file mover, so maybe you'll find my input useful, Farine. Since Vjmlhds was blanking uncontroversial, sourced content, Grapple is right that it technically qualifies as vandalism. However, since explanations were being given in his/her edit summaries, I wouldn't describe it as a clear-cut case. Regardless, the edits were disruptive and POINTy. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually the edit summaries given only enhance the case for bad faith as they simply amount to "I don't like this page being better than others like it"; clearly an unconstructive and petty line of reasoning. Had a valid reason been given other than WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT I might have been convinced there was good intentions behind, but there clearly weren't. GRAPPLE X 02:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

You're right about it technically qualifying as vandalism, per Wikipedia:Vandalism#Blanking, illegitimate. The reasons in the edit summaries weren't valid as the policy mandates. It's just that personally, I usually only rollback an edit if it's a very obvious case of vandalism, such as replacing Izzie Stevens' entire article with "i love her". TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Whether it "technically" qualifies as vandalism or not in real life, the bottomline is that it is not considred vandalism here on Wikipedia. And when TBrandley tried using the reason that Vjmlhds was "vandalizing" the page , Beeblebrox automatically turned down his unblock request by explaining to him that it wasn't vandalism. Period. Farine (talk) 17:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

So you're just conveniently ignoring the already-linked Wikipedia:Vandalism#Blanking, illegitimate? Fair enough, just do it somewhere else and take your shameless apologism off my talk page. GRAPPLE X 18:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

What diff is this ruckus all about? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Check out the page history. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Let's see. This. And this, this, this one was particularly petty given how revealing its edit summary was in terms of motive. It goes on for a while further. GRAPPLE X 22:47, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

• It appears Farine is pointing to this one. I find myself thinking that vandalism was not a good label in this context, as it's clear that there was a major edit war going on at the time; if an editor did such a thing out of nowhere, I agree that vandalism would be a good label, but this one is (in its essence) a content dispute that should have fallen under WP:BRD. Now, as to who was in the right (i.e. what version is better...) well, you know my stand on FLs. A good revert, but labeling the reverted edits as vandalism was a little antagonistic — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

• The edit war began when Vjmhlds straight-up blanked a large swathe of sourced, neutral and solid content; the fact that this degraded into a back-and-forth edit war doesn't change the context of the original blanking, which was clearly malicious and done to make a WP:POINT. You know my stance on antagonism; it's a right and proper thing when it's directed in the right places, like editors who blank content for their own petty ends. GRAPPLE X 23:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

• As I said, I agree with you that his/her edits were rightfully reverted (and I've been known to send a barb or two before). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Triple crown

You have won some Imperial Napoleonic triple crown jewels (promoted by me). Congratulations! TBrandley 01:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Grapple X. This is GamerPro. Thanks for being a delegate for Featured Topics while I was gone. I plan on helping out again in the future. Also, congrats on getting Eraserhead to Featured Article status. I had my eye set on it myself and am glad to see it with the bronze star. GamerPro64 15:37, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother, I was glad to help out. Hit a stumbling block recently as the oldest noms contain my own contributions but I'd like to think I made some headway into them in the past. And thanks about Eraserhead; I was hugely surprised how quickly it all came together. GRAPPLE X 15:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

GGG (GA)

Hey, would you mind leaving comments and possibly supporting/opposing at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Going, Going, Gone (Grey's Anatomy)/archive1? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Kafka at FAC

See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Franz Kafka/archive1. I thought you'd like to know. Comments and improvements welcome. Thanks again for the help.PumpkinSky talk 22:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll get a look at it soon. I'll be nominating something this weekend (struggling to choose between one or the other) and I like to do three reviews when I nom, so this will definitely be one of them. GRAPPLE X 22:42, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Gender Bender naturally sounds more interesting.PumpkinSky talk 22:43, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Fair do; nominating now. It's leaner than most but that's down to the lack of sources compared to others; I'm satisfied it's comprehensive. GRAPPLE X 00:33, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

The X-Files

The X-Files was recently added on Netflix; is it worth watching the whole series? TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'd say so. It's a great show. I love "Squeeze", that's one of the best episodes, IMO. TBrandley 20:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I think I'll watch it when I get the chance. By the way Tate, I don't know if you saw my post on Sophie's talk page, but 2 days away from Wikipedia was too much. Lol, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Watch the first two seasons definitely. If, by that point, you're not hooked, then you can leave it. Those two are the bread and butter episodes and you're not going to enjoy the show if you don't enjoy those. If you want me to put together a "get to grips with it quickly" list I could, would save you watching some of the duds. GRAPPLE X 20:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

A list would be nice when you find the time. Also, you said you watch(ed) GA, right? I want to take an uncreated episode article to featured status; any recommendations? "Going, Going, Gone" was recently opposed for not being comprehensive (though I disagree), so I'm looking for an episode that would have a lot of available information for production. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. It would depend; "Going, Going, Gone" will be the subject of future material (for example, 99% of all the sources WP:TXF use are from at least a year after the airing of the episodes using them), so you want to avoid a situation where recentism is an issue. Is the episode unproduced yet, or is it a Ronnie Rocket situation where it's never been made and probably never will be? The former I'd steer clear of; the latter would be interesting. I like "un-subjects" like that, (Project A119 is another thing-that-never-happened) so I'd be interested in looking at it if that's the case. Thematic exploration is going to be limited in that case (Ronnie Rocket contains some thematic material based on the script but there's nothing about its cinematography, etc, because there simply can't be, for example) so you do have a pretty stern target for comprehensiveness. GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Lol, I meant an episode that's article on Wikipedia hasn't been created, so I could get a four award for it. I was looking for an episode that you feel would have a lot of information available to make the article comprehensive. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I get you now. Well, I picked up a Four for "Episode 2" of Twin Peaks, which was a deliberate effort; I knew it would be the meatiest episode after "Pilot". Anything which has a particularly noteworthy scene or plot, or introduces a recurring or major character would be a good bet (for example, look at how much of "Squeeze" or "Deep Throat" discuss their key characters, plus "Episode 2" has that dream sequence to work with). Season opening and closing episodes tend to attract a bit more sourcing too, which can help. If you have season DVDs, see which ones have material in the special features, too. That should help you get a gauge of things. GRAPPLE X 20:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a try at that. Do you know if you can get a four award if you're creating the episode from a redirect? TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Yep, that'll count. GRAPPLE X 21:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

"Episode 14"

Hi. I think we should nominate "Episode 14" (Twin Peaks) for FA now. You can actually nominate it now without waiting for "Gender Bender", if it is going to be co-nomination, then you can have both noms up at the same time. Cheers! TBrandley 20:26, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I was torn between which to go for. I'm going to be away tomorrow so I'll see Tuesday how "Gender Bender" has progressed; I can have two active noms but I don't want to oversaturate the place if one would be a spoiler effect for the other, though "Bender" looks like it's going quite quick. GRAPPLE X 20:30, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Already has 3 supports! Lucky. Well done. TBrandley 20:32, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

A-Class request

Hi Grapple! Since your commented on the first A-Class review, may I ask if you could take a look at Awake's new one. Cheers! TBrandley 19:28, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Literary theory

How well versed are you on literary theory? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:08, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

You might want to get a little more specific; but generally if it happened before 1920 and after 1400, I'm about as much use as a cock flavoured lollipop. What's the issue? GRAPPLE X 04:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• I'm going to be looking for a lay(wo)man to read this once I've finished and let me know how accessible it is. I'll probably pester Khazar2 as well, as he has a bit of a background in literary theory. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Hmm. I'm not familiar with the text, and while I'm familiar with the field, my areas of expertise would be Longinus, Seneca, Horace and Aristotle. I can give it a read for accessibility when you're done but content-wise I would be stuck for anything to add. GRAPPLE X 04:27, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, I've got content. Still a work in process, of course. I'm thinking I should easily make GA, maybe even *shudder* FA. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:28, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Academia at FA? What would Jimbo think? GRAPPLE X 04:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Hence the *shudder*. That and you can't move in academia without stepping on toes. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:39, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Scholars tile their floors with toes. GRAPPLE X 04:41, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• I'll say. "The sciences thrive in the creation of issues where there were none before." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:43, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• And people say the Daily Mail isn't scientific; that's all they ever do! GRAPPLE X 04:47, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Indeed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:49, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Since I've got you on the blower, you wouldn't mind doing another histmerge for me? Pretty please. GRAPPLE X 04:50, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• Sure. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  User:Grapple X/sandbox/7 -> Frequent David Lynch collaborators. It's such an obscure page it probably doesn't matter, but if I just copied and pasted it, that wouldn't be making any work for you... :P GRAPPLE X 04:56, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  And of course, admins need more work (btw, you keep missing that Olson ref... it doesn't go anywhere). I'm done with Theory of Literature for today; my brain is melting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:07, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  I need to bitch slap that Olson fella and tell him where to point. :/ GRAPPLE X 05:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  As a side note, this is obscure — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:13, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  I'm not too far behind (ahead?) on that count. GRAPPLE X 05:17, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  And gaining (losing?) all the time... GRAPPLE X 05:21, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  I think I broke the tool. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  Odd. I thought for a second that might have been its DYK day but that's not right. Try URL-hacking with the unicode for "?" instead maybe? I dunno. Bash it with a stick, maybe, too. GRAPPLE X 05:26, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  Dunno. Crazy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:28, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  Ready for RFA? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:28, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  Was thinking more FLC, but maybe. I had given it some thought recently. I'm taking a holiday soon (during the cup and all; bloody wife) so ask me again when I get back, no point starting something now if I'm going to duck out of it for five days in the middle. Anyway what's a good score there? GRAPPLE X 05:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  Scotty's changed it a bit, so I'm not sure, but I've got 925 or something. Jimbo has 376. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:37, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  "# of edits to Article namespace: 1617 -8 " -> Why does this not surprise me? GRAPPLE X 05:43, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  I have a strong feeling that an RFA for Jimbo would be a heck of a dramafest. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:44, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  Please excuse me, I have to force myself to read WP:BEANS forty times now. (Also it's 06:45 and I should sleep. If you have a minute could you glance over that list for me? Not looking anything thorough but just a gut reaction of "ready" or not). Catch you (later) in the morning. GRAPPLE X 05:47, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

  You're not the only one. Okay, I'll try and take a quick look. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

• I gave a copyedit and left some tags. I think TRM will ask you why you chose those particular individuals to point out. I'd personally stick with general trends. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:59, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Millennium Book

Out of curiosity, did you ever get that Millennium book that was being released? I just saw a picture of it, and it looks like its 512 pages! Wow! I need to jump back in and start editing The X-Files stuff again...--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks fantastic. The prices are really steep though so I'm going to wait a while before I pick one up. It should be a good read, though. Speaking of X-Files stuff, there was some more info in the last AVC review ("Emily") about unmade episodes; maybe we can bring that list to FLC soon with a bit more work? Would be an interesting candidate. GRAPPLE X 04:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Which review? I can't seem to find the area where it talks about that. I think I'm going to try to work on season 3's page and try to get that to Good Topic. Season 4 needs some love, too.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:57, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

[7] I don't know why I said newest. I think my head's fried. I found it while working on the Millennium episode also in there. GRAPPLE X 05:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, so apparently Steven King was going to do a Night of the Living Dead remake? That's what The A.V. Club and this says! Wow. Now to find a good source....--Gen. Quon (Talk) 05:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Does the book source for "Chinga" mention it? I know it said he wanted to do a Millennium episode for a while too. GRAPPLE X 05:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Not that I remember. I did find this, however, which, after proper citing, probably would work.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 05:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Rollback error

Sorry about that! I didn't even notice; I must have hit it and clicked something while on the loading screen. Wow, I feel embarrassed, lol. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Happens to the best of us. To be honest, it's why I never applied for rollback rights once I discovered Twinkle; I still get to rollback edits from a diff but I don't end up accidentally clicking it in watchlists, etc; plus the extra dialogue box gives me a chance to cancel an action. GRAPPLE X 20:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I always use Twinkle, unless it's obvious vandalism. What's nice about rollback is that when you rollback vandalism, then navigate to the vandal's page, and open up a Twinkle warning, the system automatically fills in the 'linked article' parameter. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

GAN

Got Talk:A Single Blade of Grass/GA1 done for you. I also get the rest done. TBrandley 04:24, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Frequent Lynch list

Hi Grapple. For info, I added a comment here. I watched Lost Highway last night, so I've been trying to improve the article too. Lugnuts ^{And the horse} 10:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Awesome. If you want any help with it, I have the Odell and Le Blanc book, it's pretty good for general details but it's quite brief overall. I'll be away for a few days now but if you have anything further on the FLC I'll get to it when I'm back; do you have the book you mentioned or do you know if it's available online (google books or amazon preview)? GRAPPLE X 12:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Replied at the talkpage. Have a good few days off. And don't tailgate anyone... Lugnuts ^{And the horse} 13:55, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Georges Grisez

Hi: You passed this for Did You Know, specifically saying it was long enough - but I count only 1,386 characters. Is my MS Word malfunctioning? Yngvadottir (talk) 20:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The DYK tool also showed me 1384 characters. FYI, Grapple is out of town for the next week or so. Ruby 2010/2013 20:34, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Issue resolved :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 22:03, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Independiente (Ricardo Arjona album)/archive1

Remember that you left comments here a long time ago? I'd like you to revisit the page :) Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21™ 21:32, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Twin Peaks

I forgot to tell you: I found Twin Peaks on Netflix and I discovered my parents used to watch it! We started watching it together (they don't remember many of the details) and we watched by the pilot last Saturday. We should get to the first episode this weekend. I really like it so far - I love weird stuff - and I'm looking forward to it. Glimmer721 ^talk 00:16, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. Just let me know when you've finished "Episode 2" and don't dare read about it first. GRAPPLE X 20:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

That will probably be next week. I haven't read much at all, honestly! Glimmer721 ^talk 22:22, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Avoid my next FAC too, it'll be the big reveal episode. But how did you like "Pilot"? GRAPPLE X 22:23, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I liked it a lot, especially the way the mystery was done and the crazy characters (and the slow realization that they are all cheating on each other). I also really like the music. My parents have the CD or cassette somewhere. Glimmer721 ^talk 22:33, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

The music starts really strong but Badalamenti didn't write much overall so it gets recycled and rearranged quite a lot. The ensemble cast is great, Jack Nance is always brilliant and it's pretty cool seeing all these guys reunited from past works (the psychiatrist Dr. Jacoby and the hotel owner Ben Horne had starred in West Side Story together, and there's a Mod Squad reunion down the line too). GRAPPLE X 22:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I've seen Episode 2 now. What was that? Glimmer721 ^talk 16:40, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

See, that's the kind of thing to expect when you're watching Lynch. What'd you make of it? GRAPPLE X 23:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I find it hard to judge each episode individually because of t he serial structure, but the dream thing was really up my alley since I'm really interested in dreams and abnormal dimensions. I also loved the bottle thing and the Tibet lecture. Glimmer721 ^talk 00:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the serial nature is really tight. Towards the end of season two it slackens a little but the whole one-episode-is-a-day structure just moves along at a perfect pace. The dream imagery picks up more in season two but for now it's all about Cooper being awesome. GRAPPLE X 00:20, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Church of the SubGenius

Hi Grapple, would you be interested in making some copyedits to Church of the SubGenius and maybe leaving some comments at a non GA-review review already in progress on the talk page? No pressure, but I would appreciate any edits/comments you can make. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:07, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll see what I can do for you. Might not be in a hurry as I've been away for a while and am catching up on what I left behind but I'll definitely get to it. GRAPPLE X 20:35, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, no problem, feel free to slack off :) Mark Arsten (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Excellent comments, thanks for the help! Mark Arsten (talk) 15:06, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother. Let me know if you need another look at it. GRAPPLE X 15:11, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

FAC

I have made a review of the article "Episode 14" that you nominated for FAC. I would like to request in exchange a review of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/May Revolution/archive7 Cambalachero (talk) 23:15, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Already started reading it; should have a review ready some time this evening. GRAPPLE X 23:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

• It's a massive article, eh? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of episode 14, have you gotten to check out those links I mentioned? Otherwise, I'm ready to support. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I had intended to use today, when I'm only working a half-day, to sift through them, but then I had to go and let my computer get smashed (again). I'll hopefully still be able to get access to pore over them but it might take another day or two. GRAPPLE X 06:56, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, no prob, just let me know when you're done. There's a chance I'll be offline for a while this week though. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:13, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I confused, it says on the page that it has been promoted, under the closing note, lol. TBrandley 14:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, congrats guys... I guess you didn't need my support after all! Mark Arsten (talk) 03:52, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Lynch book

Hi Grapples. The info from the book I cited is on pages 209-210. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll be adding that now. GRAPPLE X 19:03, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem. And again, excellent work in getting the FL! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:21, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Featured List Barnstar
	Congrats on the FL promotion of List of frequent David Lynch collaborators! Have a barnstar (sorry, I'm out of brownies, lol) TBrandley 17:10, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Bloody hell, that was quicker than I expected. Thanks for the star! GRAPPLE X 17:16, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Damn, and the Dutch East Indies film list took almost two months. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Don't worry, I think my next project is going to take about two years. GRAPPLE X 05:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Oh yeah, he's got a discography alright. Should archive those web references. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:56, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Oh that's not a discography; that's a full rundown of a film genre (or, it will be). I'll see about archiving things when I get nearer the end but at least half of them will be to the BFI, which isn't going anywhere in a hurry. :P GRAPPLE X 05:59, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Erm... oh my. Yeah, that'll be nasty. I'm thinking of doing Indonesian cinema by the five year period. Some years have over 100 films (starting in the 1970s), while earlier years have between 10 and 60. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:02, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Giallo#Giallo filmography should show you what I'm working with; I figured it best to eventually split it into a list of titles and an article about the actual genre, so the list there will go when this one is finished. Given that I've using at least two cites per title I might end up with the largest ref section on wikipedia. Why five-year breaks rather than decades, though? GRAPPLE X 06:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  The 2000s would have some 1500 films. If I provide plot summaries... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  I'd leave plot summaries out, especially as newer films are far more likely to have their own articles to link to anyway. GRAPPLE X 06:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Perhaps. For the 1950s and sixties, where the number is more manageable, I'd like to keep them. It's useful for the average reader, if the average reader cares about Indonesian films (I have no illusions, Andjar was only seen by 12k people) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Makes sense. Depends on the depth the list can afford to go to. With the giallo list I'll not be going into any detail, just a directory of titles with years and directors for indexing. But the much much much shorter list of video nasties which I've been considering doing would have much more in terms of individual details. I don't watch a lot of pleasant films in case you haven't noticed. :P GRAPPLE X 06:18, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  And yet there's still films you can't watch again. I'd probably just keep the genre like at our terribly impotent list. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  I could sit through Cannibal Holocaust daily, over dinner, but ask me to watch Paura nella città dei morti viventi again and it's not happening. Murder and rape and gore; fine. Maggots? Christ no. As for keeping the genre list the same as that one, I'll not be listing cast, and I'm giving the sundry international titles for each film so they can be found easier (for example, I'm familiar with Nude per l'assassino, while American audiences know Strip Nude for Your Killer, and for some reason it's also Tenebre braccia della morte to, I can only assume, a second set of Italians. Folk are odd like that). GRAPPLE X 06:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  I was thinking of those Irish ones you mentioned. The Mrs doesn't seem to have liked the most recent Resident Evil movie, so I don't think she'll watch it again. I didn't even bother; I've stopped liking gore, for some reason. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:33, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

  Oh, Jesus, yeah, I'm not watching a woman getting her fingernails pulled out cause her husband prefers Miceal to Michael. And gore to me is a bit odd; when it's all professional and CG it's as fake as anything, but show me a pig stomach and some red paint and I'm a happy camper. GRAPPLE X 06:36, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

So you'd laugh at Indonesian horror films. Actually, Cracked.com has done that a couple times. I thought Hantu Jeruk Purut was terrible. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Eh, I can't really claim we're any better... GRAPPLE X 06:44, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Title reminds me of Man Bites Dog — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

oops

my bad - fat fingers on android Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Don't sweat it, happens all the time. I think I'm just pretty revertible. :P GRAPPLE X 04:27, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The rollback button is a hazard on a smartphone...Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:34, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

What you said about Jimbo I've basically addressed to him on his user talk page.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Theory of Literature (2)

Hi Grapple, if you have the time could you look over Theory of Literature and let me know how accessible it is to a non-literary minded reader? Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look when I can (limited access atm thanks to a smashed lappy); though I'm not the best layman to ask, my degree's in English literature. GRAPPLE X 23:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, LOL. Geez, how many of us are there? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

• About 100 in my graduating class... times how many universities? I'd say maybe a jillion. Two jillion tops. GRAPPLE X 23:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

• Mark says he was once enrolled in a literature program too, so... Khazar too. I think Drmies has a background in either linguistics or lit as well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

• I guess it's the kind of field that lends itself well to writing articles. GRAPPLE X 00:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is one of the few places that literature types really fit in, yes--a nice break from my usual surroundings in that sense. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:53, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Archiving

Yeah, automation helps. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I set up my archives funny when I started but I might look into supplementing them with something automatic. It's a pain in the hoop to do. 00:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

• You could just copy my set up (it works fine). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Omicidio per appuntamento

Length issues. BTW, both this and the other one could use a poster in the article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Featured Topic

Hey Grapple. First off, Happy Halloween. Secondly, if you have a chance, to possibly close some of the nominations for Featured Topics? Been busy after Sandy so I can't really close any for now. GamerPro64 15:34, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll see what I can do. Had previously been neglecting things a little with the rush to score in the wikicup but that's done and dusted so I should have plenty of time to devote to it. GRAPPLE X 15:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

ACR

Hey, I have no problem that you reverted my close, since you were in the middle of reviewing. However, it is not appropriate to leave the ACR open too long with no activity – there are guidelines written on the ACR center that contest this. Regards, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, that's a bad idea. Large projects with active A-Class reviews like WP:MILHIST benefit from this as they have a high rate of turnover and need a system for keeping things moving. WP:TXF doesn't have anywhere near this rate of turnover and would benefit from reviews being left open until they're conclusive; a small number of editors working on a narrow project is going to mean that most reviews, if given a deadline, will be closed without consensus, losing any benefit of the review process even existing. If an article lingers at the bottom of a busy ACR queue like WP:MILHIST, it's because of genuine concerns, because that process is actively participated in by multiple editors; if an article lingers at WP:TXF, it's because a review hasn't been conducted yet, and closing it for timekeeping reasons is just red tape for its own sake. As there's no site-wide guideline for keeping ACRs open for a limited time, I see no reason to impose one where it has no benefit. GRAPPLE X 16:17, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I see your point, which is why I wouldn't close it very early, but six weeks with no activity is not right. The ACR for TXF is actually pretty active compared to others – there were I believe 5 open nominations. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

In all honesty that's a rate that won't keep up; it's the initial wave of everything that's been worked on in the months before the process began, but as time goes on, that won't be matched. It's an initial backlog and when it's gone there'll only really be a few articles as editors work on one at a time now that the ones they were already sitting on have gone through it. Closing inactive ones now just slows that down and delays future noms, I would say; I'd be loathe to add a new article to the queue when I see them cycled for inactivity but if they're left open then adding a review or two when a nom is added gets them all cycled through eventually. GRAPPLE X 16:27, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I approved Deadalive, by the way. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup award

File:WikiCup Medal Gold FX.png

Awarded to Grapple X for the strongest contribution of featured articles in the 2012 WikiCup. J Milburn (talk · contribs) and The ed17 (talk · contribs) 16:25, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Awarded to Grapple X for the strongest contribution of good articles in the 2012 WikiCup. J Milburn (talk · contribs) and The ed17 (talk · contribs) 16:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Awarded to Grapple X for the strongest contribution of featured and good topics in the 2012 WikiCup. J Milburn (talk · contribs) and The ed17 (talk · contribs) 16:28, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Batman:_Arkham_City#The_Plot

I don't know how to do the fancy neutral notice template, but you've probably seen there is a discussion at the above with the same user that there was a similar discussion with almost if not exactly a year ago about the current plot versus a substantially modified version. It's a case of he said, he said so it won't go anywhere with 2 users, so if you are willing to supply some neutral input it would be appreciated. Thanks for reading Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:58, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I've played through it a few times too so I know how the plot goes, I'll see what I can't work out. GRAPPLE X 00:25, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for providing your input, you said it a lot better than me, I'm quick to run out of patience and I've been doing far too much explaining over plots lately so my patience was already thin. Your edits to the plot were excellent improvements too. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:50, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Not a bother. It always puzzles me how plot summaries seem to be so prone to constantly changing while everything else is often left be. :/ GRAPPLE X 08:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Lol its always the case, look at Prometheus, very little if anything outside of the plot has changed in any significant manner at all since the film came out, I know one user added something about Chopin's Raindrop, and some users keep adding a name for the sequel to the sequel section, but nothing attracts attention like the plot, which I guess says a lot of people only read that and maybe the cast list. Or perhaps it is more benevolent and they are reading the detailed information but feel they have nothing to add, where the plot is open to personal interpretation and thus a lot more "I think this needs adding because I saw what happened as being this". On the flipside, virtually noone bothered with The Expendables 2 plot, but the listing of starring roles has been a frequent bother. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:58, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

A Room With No View

May review this later (all mine have been reviewed or are under review, yay!). Just a couple quick notes: the lede should have two paragraphs max, and your Genge footnotes go nowhere. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

• Also, Shearman's not used. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:03, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

• Fixed Genge, the source was missing |ref=harv. Shearman's used in ref 11 though. GRAPPLE X 08:30, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

• Alright, musta missed that as I was dashing out the door. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:41, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

• I usually tack it on the end, but it's sandwiched between stuff here so it's easily overlooked I guess. GRAPPLE X 08:42, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

• Alrighty, see you at the other side — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

User rights

Is there any particular reason you don't have rollback / autopatrolled / reviewer rights? Would you like any or all of them? Bencherlite^Talk 18:10, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Never really bothered asking, but if you're offering I guess I'll take them. :P GRAPPLE X 17:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

There we go. Do read WP:Rollback (in particular), WP:Autopatrolled and WP:Reviewer for details of what each entails. Bencherlite^Talk 17:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm familiar with the rights (sysoped on an external wiki before so I know patrolled edits, etc, and I've been using Twinkle so rollback is familiar to me). Thanks a bunch. GRAPPLE X 17:22, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

For your help on Church of the SubGenius; it is now a good article. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Good to hear, but I think your hard work might be in breach of their teachings. :/ GRAPPLE X 22:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Korkoro

Hello Grapple! There is an edit warring situation at an article page you promoted to GA status. This user and me don't have a good history and he is probably lashing out on me after I took him on a tour around wikipedia, showing him WP:RSN, WP:DRN and WP:ANI]]. I reverted his deletion asking him to discuss his concerns in the talk page and I am afraid, I have already violated the 3 RR. What would be your advice? _morelMW^illiam 12:55, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

You haven't broken 3RR yet but one more revert would do it. I'd say if he reverts the change again, you start a discussion on the talk page to debate it. Honestly I don't mind the edit either way; it's an interesting piece of information but at the same time it's very minor; a suggested compromise would be to replace it with a different piece of information about the cast instead, rather than simply worrying about removal versus retention. GRAPPLE X 13:48, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

GOCE November 2012 copy edit drive update

Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 31 people signed up for this drive so far, 22 have copy-edited at least one article. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive. We have reduced our target group of articles—November and December 2011—by over 50%, and 34 of the the 56 requests made in September and October this year have already been fulfilled. However, the rate of tagging for copy edit has increased, and this month we are just keeping the size of the backlog stable. So, all you copy editors, please do come along and help us! The September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest was won by Baffle gab1978 for his copy edit of Expulsion of the Acadians. Runner up was Gareth Griffith-Jones for his edit of I Could Fall in Love. Congratulations to both. The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight November 30 (UTC). You don't have to make a submission to vote! November 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight November 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin. Seasonal oversight: We had a slight fall from grace in the title of our last newletter, which mentioned the season in the northern hemisphere and thus got it wrong for the southern. Fortunately an observant GOCE member was ready to spring into action to advise us. Thanks! In future we'll stay meteorologically neutral. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Congrats

	Grand Winner GX
	You are hereby granted this years Wiki Foot in Mouth Award for your fantastically loquacious and well reasoned statement "I supported this one last time on the strength of its scope and presentation (MOS, neutrality etc etc), and now that the prose has been improved to match it I see no reason to support again."  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:00, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

...Potatoe. GRAPPLE X 00:38, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

• ... Potahto? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:09, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

AV Club Reviews

It looks like, in two weeks, The A.V. Club will start reviewing season 7 two at a time, like they used to do. That means we only have to wait, hopefully, 3 months for season 8 and potentially the Lone Gunmen reviews, which I believe they said they were going to start.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Happy days. Two at a time is weird, when they did just The X-Files and no Millennium it was three at a time. Lazy bastards... GRAPPLE X 00:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

FJ

Can't tell if alternate text works or not. --The Editors United (talk) 19:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

It'll only display if you're using a screenreader, which will read the page aloud; if it hits an image it reads the alt text to convey what the image is. GRAPPLE X 19:54, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

ACR formatting

Hey, when you made these comments, you messed up the layout of the ACR page, which lead to an incorrect closing by TBrandley. You added your comments after it said "Please don't edit anything below here." TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 05:11, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Millennium Book

Did you ever manage to get a copy of that Millennium book? If so, did it have any info on the "Millennium" episode? I think that article might have a chance at being an FA contender one of these days.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 07:00, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

No, haven't gotten round to it yet. Wanted to let the price drop a bit first, still looking at it being about £20 which is a bit high for something I'm mostly just going to use as a source here. It'll drop soon and I'll pick it up; if it's got good info on individual episodes it'll help me finish off the portal. I'd dare say there'll be some stuff on the "Millennium" episode, would be interesting to hear from some of the folk who didn't say anything about it in the TXF sources (like Klea Scott or Ken Horton, I guess). GRAPPLE X 13:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Are you aware of these? They could probably definitely help you fill out the season episode pages.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Shirts or knickers?

I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project. I've nominated you for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:30, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm normally a boxers man but I'll wear y-fronts for you. GRAPPLE X 23:31, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

• After that Drmies image I'd rather not, thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

• Now I have to know. GRAPPLE X 00:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

• Check out Bgwhite's link. I'm not offering it here, as that would mean opening it again. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

• Ha. I think there's a photie of my arse floating about somewhere. I'll just leave that tidbit there and see who's a good enough stalker to dig it up. GRAPPLE X 19:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

• I guess I'm not a good TPS :-p — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:19, 26 November 2012 (UTC)