User talk:Blofeld of SPECTRE

WARNING:THIS IS A COPYRIGHTED IMAGE, DELETIONIST + STRESS FREE ZONE!

ERNST STAVRO BLOFELD Doctorate in Evil Medicine "I've been expecting you Meester Bond. I thought they had you assassinated in Hong Kong by Number Three" Mr Bigglesworth Mrs Bigglesworth Blofeld's evil aquarium. "You were admiring my aquarium. $1,000,000 Meester Bond" Blofeld's evil pet piranha. "They'll strip a man to the bone in 30 seconds. Let this be a reminder to you all that this organization does not tolerate failure". (The Bald One slowly reaches for the anhilation trap door switch) S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Archives

Aug 2006 Sept 2006 Oct 2006 Nov 2006 Dec 2006 Jan 2007 Feb 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 Sept 2007 Oct 2007 Nov 2007 Dec 2007 Jan 2008 Feb 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008

"$ 1 million" or the "Alan Parsons Project" will indeed go into "phasing" ^{[citation needed]}. In a Belgian accent with Hungarian dialect "Lock on target veh-icle"

Blofeld's nuclear command center for intercepting NASA, Soviet and "Kreblakistani" rockets. It is operated by my North Korean henchman, an evil nuclear scientist and former world snooker professional Ill lit'le Kim Taylor. Scientific research conducted in Pyongyang in the 1960s confirmed that gigantic spectacles block out harmful nuclear radiation and that snooker balls are indeed radioactive and hazardous to the health. See him in action here demonstrating that the adverse effects can be avoided if adequate eyewear is worn

"Bring me that astronaut. You made a mistake my friend. No astronaut enters the capsule wearing his air conditioner"

Before messaging the Bald One please remember to give respect to the "magma" outside in the Japanese lake. Those spies out there can track the new activities of Blofeld by using this

Blofeld's Fembot

Warning. Anybody caught trespassing on the property of His Baldness with malicious intent will be eliminated by placing them in an overly elaborate and easily escapable exotic death situation. If you are visiting with tagging for images or have some "frickin" criticism you are likely to hear an amplified response of my elk or my alligator with irritable bowel syndrome coming out of one of the vents in my Japanese volcano previously owned by Hirohito. This organization does not tolerate bitching and the last thing my evil operation wants to do is attend Wiki Councils and be "extorted" by councillors. For those people without a funny bone in their body and for those out there that are as solemn as dust, I urge you to participate in some bearded Yak racing it'll change you forever. If these rules are not acknowledged I am likely to dispatch my metric tonne weighing henchman Israel Kamakawiwoʻole to sit on you personally and play you a nice relaxing old Hawaiian song to take a chill pill and lighten up.
Other than this His Baldness welcomes you with loving arms.

My volcanic elk warning off the image patrol

Problems listening to the file? See media help.

My angry alligator after a late night curry

Problems listening to the file? See media help.

Museum With No Frontiers

Ha, I'm ruining your clean talk page! I know you work with museum articles, have you heard of the above group? The article on them is about to be deleted as spam, I think it is savable. The same account also created Eva Schubert, the founder of MWNF, which I'm trying to fix up. EJF (talk) 14:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm feeling a bit jaded. Can't get any energy to expand any articles. Probably a mixture of the rubbish weather at home and the poor editing climate here. It'll pass I'm sure. Chin up, soon the deletionists will move on from images to pop songs and whatever. EJF (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that's fantastic! I'm a bit ignorant, I didn't realise that there was so much agriculture in Sudan. Google News has some more up-to-date statistics to bring it up to date on percentage of economy etc. EJF (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Too much US Government money going on the War For Oil, eh? They're only spending money researching countries they have interests in. The deforestation series of articles looks interesting. More stuff to add to the to-do list... EJF (talk) 16:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

"not a speedy criteria"?

Since when isn't {{db-spam}} a speedy criteria? Did you mean to say that the article Museum With No Frontiers isn't advertising meant to "promote some entity and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic". If, that is what you meant and I used the wrong criteria so be it but, please be more specific in your edit summaries when denying speedy deletion in future. Thanks. Jasynnash2 (talk) 15:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

:-P

Blofeld, just like always, I need to ask you something!! LOL. Sorry for disturbing you always. Shahid indicated to me that the word "high-profile" is POV, and I was wondering if we could use it in the following sentence: "...The high-profile Mujhse Dosti Karoge! (2002), Kunal Kohli's directorial debut, was poorly received in India despite generating revenue overseas...Her other high-profile film during this period was 2003's Main Prem Ki Diwani Hoon. The film, directed by Sooraj R. Barjatya under the Rajshri Productions banner, also fared poorly at the box office in India despite becoming a success internationally..." -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

THANKS!! :))) BTW, do you also think the word "femme fatale" is inappropriate?? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Just to be on the safe side, I changed it to "woman". :)) -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

If I change high-profile to notable, this is how it will sound like. "Her first notable release, Kunal Kohli's directorial debut Mujhse Dosti Karoge! was poorly received in India despite generating revenue overseas...Her other notable film during this period was 2003's Main Prem Ki Diwani Hoon. The film, directed by Sooraj R. Barjatya under the Rajshri Productions banner, also fared poorly at the box office in India despite becoming a success internationally." What do you think?? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 18:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Like you indicated, Mujhse Dosti Karoge! and Main Prem Ki Diwani Hoon were notable because they were high-budget films that didn't do well at the box office and furthermore, they were produced by two of the most reputable banners in India (Yash Raj Films and Rajshri Productions respectively). So basically, you are telling me to leave it as "high-profile"?? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Not bad bud!! You can do anything!! :))) LOL -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Blofeld, since the beginning of the fourth paragraph in the "Breakthrough, 2001–2003" section indicates what films she starred in what year ("Mujhse Dosti Karoge! and Jeena Sirf Merre Liye in 2002, and Talaash: The Hunt Begins..., Khushi, Main Prem Ki Diwani Hoon and the four hour J.P. Dutta war epic LOC Kargil in 2003"), do you think it is important to indicate the year later on. (For e,g, "Mujhse Dosti Karoge! (2002), directed by Kunal Kohli on his debut...Her other high-budget film during this period was 2003's Main Prem Ki Diwani Hoon.") I don't think it is necessary... What do you think?? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:29, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks bud!! I really appreciate your help!! Best Regards -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Clarification...

Sorry if I bother you too much, but I just want to clarify and explain why I'm so concerned and unsure.

This is the BBC quote which appears on the article:

According to BBC, "Preity Zinta ... gives her best. Watching her in the scene where she confronts Rani [Mukerji] during the wedding reception makes you realise how excellent she is as an actress."

This is the Indian Express quote I thought to add:

"The lady has not just looked glamorous but she has walked with poise, sat with grace, smiled with composure and spoke with calmness. Who would have thought that the bubbly girl could so skillfully shed her age-old tag and walk away as the don’t-mess-with-me lass. So all those who are in search of the peppy Preity, well guys you’ve dialed the wrong number this time."

• Do you think it will have to replace the current BBC quote, or just be an additional quote? (I mean should the existing BBC quote remain?
• Secondly, do you think the second quote contributes something encyclopedically too in addition to general response to the performance? Please read the quote - is it appropriate and constructive?
• Thirdly, the quote speaks about Zinta's attempt to shed her bubbly image with this role, which is not yet discussed in that part of the article, and is unknown to the reader. So I think one sentence describing the role as an attempt to shed that tag should be added, no? This aricle talks about that. I thought of something like, "Zinta described her role in the film as an attempt to shed her bubbly image, which had been repeatedly stuck to her by critics, and according to Express India, she succeeded:..."

Regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. "A brief preliminary sentence explaining it backed up by the quote would be good" - so what do you think about that: "Zinta described her role in the film as an attempt to shed her bubbly image, which had been repeatedly stuck to her by critics, and according to Express India, she succeeded:..." ? Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest:
"Zinta described her role in the film as an attempt to shed her vivacious public image. The Express India concurred that this was successful, stating, "The lady has not just looked glamorous but she has walked with poise, sat with grace, smiled with composure and spoke with calmness. Who would have thought that the bubbly girl could so skillfully shed her age-old tag and walk away as the don’t-mess-with-me lass. So all those who are in search of the peppy Preity, well guys you’ve dialed the wrong number this time."

The Bald One ^{White cat} 12:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, awesome! I'll add that. But as I said, at that part of the article, the vivacious image is not discussed yet, so what do you think about integrating the clause, "which had been repeatedly stuck to her by critics"? Do you have a better way to write this phrase? Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Well if you are discussing her intentions towards this film you need to mention to vivacious thing briefly as a background even if it discussed in detial later.

I would suggest something like:

"Zinta described her role in the film as an attempt to shed her vivacious image, that had been accentuated obstinately by her critics and the public throughout much of her career. The Express India concurred that this was successful, stating, "The lady has not just looked glamorous but she has walked with poise, sat with grace, smiled with composure and spoke with calmness. Who would have thought that the bubbly girl could so skillfully shed her age-old tag and walk away as the don’t-mess-with-me lass. So all those who are in search of the peppy Preity, well guys you’ve dialed the wrong number this time."

The Bald One ^{White cat} 12:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Amazing isn't it? The BBC quote was short, cocky and added nothing special.. Thank you Blof. You know Blof, if I think again, I'm not sure whether she was stuck with this image by critics specifically... I think it was more of a public image like you say... so I thought of: "...vivacious image, which had been stuck/touted with her throughout much of her career" Opinions? Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Tweaked. There ya go. I would probably go with the first one. "Public" was intended to represent both critics and the people anyway The Bald One ^{White cat} 13:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

So what do you say? Is it better to remove the clause and leave the "vivacious public image" say it all? Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I say "Zinta described her role in the film as an attempt to shed her vivacious image, that had been accentuated obstinately by her critics and the public throughout much of her career. The Express India concurred that this was successful, stating, "The lady has not just looked glamorous but she has walked with poise, sat with grace, smiled with composure and spoke with calmness. Who would have thought that the bubbly girl could so skillfully shed her age-old tag and walk away as the don’t-mess-with-me lass. So all those who are in search of the peppy Preity, well guys you’ve dialed the wrong number this time."

I like that The Bald One ^{White cat} 13:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WOW what a great job!! Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm a pain in the behind, I know... But please tell me Blof, "had been accentuated obstinately by her critics and the public throughout much of her career" - I know some readers (and editors!!) don't like long and complicated sentences. Tell me, if "Public" was intended to represent both critics and the people, so can we drop the critics? I know it's a stupid question, but you are the mind behind this sentence, so I must ask before I remove... Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

It concerns me because "had been accentuated obstinately by her critics and the public throughout much of her career" is beautifully written, but "by her critics" seems to contradict the fact that she was recognised for her versatility.... Do you get my concern? Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Well spotted, but LOL you were to one who said to mention the critics not me LOL! The Bald One ^{White cat} 18:10, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

You are right. Indian critics are confused, they praise her for verstility and still call her bubbly. They can say, "Bubbly Preity has given a fantastic performance". But the image is mainly not hers as an actress, but as a person... So here are my suggestions:

• The first one, just to drop the critics: "...vivacious image, which had been accentuated obstinately by the public throughout much of her career"
• The second one, to change the clause and not mention by whom she was called bubbly: "...vivacious image, which had been (stuck with her/attached to her) throughout much of her career.
• The third one, to remove the clause and describe it like this: "...vivacious public and screen persona (or just public). The Express..."

Which one is according to you the best Mister? Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Very good work on Banana production in Honduras - I think you are one of the only editors who can make a GA maybe in two days (or even less)... Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, so "public and screen persona", or just "public persona"? Screen somehow concerns me for the same reason, or maybe I'm concerned for no reason? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

OK fine - public image. What do you think about leaving a short clause to explain what image we are talking about: "She described the role as an attempt to shed her vivacious public image, which had been stuck with her throughout much of her career."... Is it OK? Can it be closed here? Please bear with me, I know I'm annoying. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

As I said it was fine and you should avoid the "stuck" label. LOL why do I feel like we are going rounds in circles!! LOL The Bald One ^{White cat} 19:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I know LOLL HAHA!!! Believe me you will miss these long circle discussions when I leave WP... So let's assume this subject is alien to you, and you see this sentence: "She described the role as an attempt to shed her vivacious public image" - would it make sense to you and give you additional info? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Si. LOL word perfection. Yes that is fine. I mean FINE!!!!! It implies that she developed that image over her career so there is no problem with it. The Bald One ^{White cat} 19:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL HAHAHAHAHA!!! Gracias! Thank you... I mean, THANK YOU. I see the KANK point as addressed - now you see another improvement. The cocky BBC quote was replaced with another which adds something encyclopedically, as you once said. But nonetheless, I'll think about the screen thing, and maybe I'll add it despite what we have said. Because, there is verstility, I mean, kind of roles, and there's persona which is always the same. Bette Davis was always known for her intense style, her always-present cigarette, her strong-woman persona, although her roles were diverse; Angelina Jolie is mostly known for her sexappeal and modern looks... I mean, there are roles, and there's acting style. Zinta played different roles, whether it's the unwed mother, the insecure and angry Naina, the prostitute, the journalist, the CBI trainee, the adopted daughter. But you know... Do you get the point? And do you agree with what I say? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the template is awesome - you don't stop reinventing yourself and your range of interests, I think if you participated in Who Wants to be a millionaire, you would take the million/s LOL... You have nothing to say about my above "analysis" LOL? Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

You know, one sentence in the source about the image makes me feel there is a lack in Zinta's article. Here's the sentence:

"Zinta has a reputation for choosing roles that go against India's traditional mores, even if she has smiled her way through them."

Meaning, not specifically her versatility but the kind of roles she played credited her with bringing a new face for a Hindi film Heroine: roles that go against traditional mores.

I think it should be mentioned, don't you? Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not at all intending to overcredit her. I'm completely against that - she's a great and successful actress. Well she's certainly not my favourite Bollywood actress ever. Out of the current generation of actresses, I mean, the Ranis and Aishwaryas, she is.

What I try to say is that the article gives the impression that she was credited for bringing because of being verstile, as if she was the first versatile actress. But that's not that. See this sentence, which we had worked on together:

Following her portrayal of a range of characters in Kya Kehna, Sangharsh and Chori Chori Chupke Chupke, Zinta was often recognised for her versatility as an actress.[12] Critics attributed her roles in these films as to establishing a new image for leading actresses in Bollywood

Instead of saying "of a range of characters" which is unclear anyway, isn't it better to change it to "characters that go against India's traditional mores" - which they actually are. Because of being roles that go against mores - she was credited with changing.

Unfortunately, after the first FAC, all of that was removed by... you know who... so you know. She was credited with changing because she played unconventional roles, non-typical roles.

What do you think and what do you have to say? Do you get my point here? Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I would love to add that, but the fact that from the beginning upon seeing this quote from the site, you felt some POV coming from my side, makes me skeptical whether it won't be a POV act to add that. I really don't want this article to become like a fansite, I was factual information, informative text, correct and precise text, I want it to flow and be written brilliantly, just like an FA requires. I've put a lot of work into this. Be honest, do you think the addition of these words will make it sound like POV (despite being sourced)? Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

We'll talk about it later, I'm tired of thinking about Zinta's article right now.

Things I've done this month are so few :(((

I've also created a template now:

I've laso created {{Mahesh Bhatt}}

And took some time to expand Veer-Zaara a few days ago.

Opinions?

Also have you seen/read The Kite Runner? I've heard the film version is outstanding! Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey how are you?? I unfortunately had no time to edit today, although I'd planned to go a bit further with addressing some of my other points with Zinta.... But it will have to wait... I'm busy... Btw, have you seen Heaven On earth trailer... I was shocked to see her in such a role, as a battered wife suffering from her loneliness in Canada, far from her family... Here's the entry of the film at the Toronto Film Festival site, where it will be premiered on Sep 6th...

What do you think? Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Blof. You don't have to answer now, because I'm now going, but I hope you can answer tomorrow. As I explained to you already, Zinta was not credited with changing the image because of her versatility, but because of the kind of roles she playes, roles that go against traditional mores, unconventional roles. That's why this sentence

"She subsequently played a variety of character types, and in doing so has been credited with changing the image of a Hindi film heroine."

seems misleading.

The first part of the sentence and the last part are fine, so I thought to change the "in doing so" part to something clearer, like "some of which credited her..." or "as a result of which".

It can also be a more complicated copyedit, like, "...a variety of character types, some of which went against traditional mores. In doing so, she has been credited with changing the image of a Hindi film heroine." - although this one may be too long for a lead...

What do you think? Best regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Do you have an answer? ;) Also, I'm now again going, so please keep an eye on the Shilpa Shetty article. One anon keeps adding fangush because of the new reality show she hosts. He adds a non-notable "controversy", unsourced claims, badly formatted additions, and he also attacks me, calling me stupid. Sorry if I'm exhauting you. Regards, Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Well I told you already. Pre Fa the article was going through many copyedits, I myself was confused. Only now can I recognise and notice minor issues. And I told you that in my view an Fa is not necessarily a sign of perfection - an article gets better. If you don't wanna help so it's fine thank you and bye. Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The fact that an article is an Fa does not suffice, I have to feel that it is good. I'm preparing myself because now it will go through extensive additions with her film releases, so I want to clear some POV. I want it to be completely perfect in my view before I leave. There is never such thing as "complete"; Wikipedia is an ongoing project. I had a few points I wanted to address after the FAC - the DCH part (done), the KANK part (done), the Jaan-E-Mann part (done), and now this one. I may find other points, it's quite possible. Obviously I want to expand other articles - I thought of going on with Manisha Koirala, and I will.

The only think I asked is if any of my versions of the text is OK and can be used to replacethe current version to avoid the misleading. Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't wanna make changes before I know I'm making the final copyedit, that's why I like discussing first. I want to add something I'm completely sure of, after all, we're talking about an FA. That's why I thought of different versions. The first part of the sentence and the last part are fine, so I thought to change the "in doing so" part to something clearer, like "some of which credited her..." or "as a result of which".

It can also be a more complicated copyedit, like, "...a variety of character types, some of which went against traditional mores. In doing so, she has been credited with changing the image of a Hindi film heroine." - although this one may be too long for a lead. Which version is the best according to you and does it have to be reworded? Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

If you want we can talk about it tomorrow, I have to go now.... Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

We'll discuss it tomorrow. As of now, how are you and what are you doing? Do you have any plans in life? What degree did you graduate with you said? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I need someone to talk to... and we haven't talked for quite some time now... IMO you can be an amazing journalist, because you're a sharp and intelligent person. I already can imagine you writing long, well-written and funny articles. If only Wikipedia gave some recognition to its editors other than that status of unknown and anon contributors, it would be a great break for people like you. Which country did you think to go for? Maybe Brazil? LOL Brazilian women are just gorgeous are they not? Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The language is another problem I guess, but you speak Spanish so you can go for Argentine, maybe you'll have an argentine success LOL.... But I think there are enough opportunities in the UK, there's no need to leave your country... Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Well Blof as you already know I have to go now, so I'll talk to you tomorrow. I ask you, please, to write me a reply to the above message tomorrow when you have time, or maybe you prefer me to come and let you know I'm here and we'll discuss it. I just want to address this point ASAP, as it concerns me a lot. Regards, and good night there in the UK... Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

What have you done? I didn't get your message... Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

"I've passed Rich Farmborough and the 180K mark.." - what do you mean LOL? Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

WOW!!!

Congrats! I know it's not appropriate to say that, but it means a lot. Editors do not spend 180,000 edits on vandalism so it's obviously on good things, and in your case it means that you're not only the most productive editor on the WP, but [maybe almost] the most active... I am proud of you. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

FPaS RFC

As a participant in the recent discussion at WP:ANI, I thought you should be informed of the new RFC that another user has started regarding FPaS's behavior.

• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Future Perfect at Sunrise

Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 16:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0

Hi there Blofeld of SPECTRE,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up if you are located near London at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon!

Thanks for reading.

·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 08:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Azerbaijan resources

The Azerbaijan Development Gateway has a nice page for each rayon. Here is its listing for Barda. Note that it names nearly all of the villages, plus some history and economic info. Together with http://www.belediyye.org it provides a nice crosscheck against GEOnet Names Server. For example, I discovered that Körpükənd was placed in the wrong rayon. Any thoughts? Phlegm Rooster (talk) 08:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

• Perhaps you could broach the subject with Carlos? I'm sure he is still steamed at me. I've come up with a stopgap solution for the villages I can't confirm, see Göcəkli for an example. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 09:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Templates

Hey, sorry for the delay in responding - been on vacation for a few weeks without internet access. I suspect your templates will most definitely be used and expanded over time, but there is a lot of information and oh so few of us active editors in the WikiProject. I update the Matn District's template when I have time, and will continue to do so, but for each city or village I add, I'm first going through and trying to see if an article exists with a different spelling, etc., so it's taking a while. ← George ^[talk] 12:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Dhanusa District stubs

Doesn't this formatting provide more ground for expansion? Ottre (talk) 20:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Answer

It is official that the 5M pool is closed. You may vote on the 10M or 20M pool. Georgia guy (talk) 16:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Nepal stuff

Labor Day weekend at North Cape May. I will add that extra information to my new articles (I thought towns/villages were automatically municipalities, right?) This template I designed may help finish Nepal faster. Just copypaste and fill in the parameters:

{{subst:User:Editorofthewiki/Sandbox/Nepal |name={{subst:PAGENAME}} |Zone= |District= |region= |pop= |houses=}}

Like this, for Sundarijal:

{{subst:User:Editorofthewiki/Sandbox/Nepal|name={{subst:PAGENAME}}|Zone=Bagmati|District=Kathmandu|region=central|pop=1984|houses=and had 374 households in it}} --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 18:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Lookin' good. I am tending to the FACs and trying to make Nki National Park a DYK and (hopefully) a GA. I can't believe how much was found on Sapo National Park! Any way you can help would be appreciated. 1964 Gabon has certainly been the longest FAC I've ever seen at three weeks now! It became so messy that Sandy had to restart it. Oh and FHB and Jean-Hilaire Aubame (which I was the primary author) became GAs recently. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 18:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid you have an error with your Nepal articles you are creating, when I click the link the reference, there it says NEPAL CENSUS 2001, but on the articles it says according to the 1991 Nepal Census. It should be 2001 not 1991.Mertozoro (talk) 20:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC) Oh I see. My bad. Mertozoro (talk) 20:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

No it shouldn't be. The rest of the data is from the 2001 census. If you click on population it CLEARLY indicates the data is carried through from 1991. Don't know why they didn't conduct the population in 2001. It says "Nepal Census Data 2001: Population 1991". Perhaps they got lazy. I agree I'd rather see 2001 figures too seems as the other data is The Bald One ^{White cat} 20:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Stubs

Well, I agree -- obviously. Didn't I already say these were speediable? Or are you now saying you're in two minds about zones vs. districts? I'm guessing that growth may be pretty slow after the current "sweep" is complete, so unless any of the zones are getting into 3 or 4 listing page territory, districts can be long-fingered for now. Alai (talk) 21:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

One gathers you didn't like the Zone maps, then. Alai (talk) 01:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, they're less than clear or distinct at 40x30. Flag'll do, I guess. Alai (talk) 14:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

That's indeed a bit better, though not exactly great. It could probably be improved by recropping to be less "square", erasing the external subdiv borders, and in-filling the zone being highlighted... But I just tried to do this in the GIMP, and it crashed on me, which has deterred me for the time being. Another thought is to try to combine and flag and the map into a single image, but I don't know that would be easy to make look good. Alai (talk) 15:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter

The August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Barda Rayon, Azerbaijan

So I found two Azerbaijani websites that say Barda Rayon has one city and 109 villages, Ministry of Economic Development and Toward Civil Society Center. 'Toward Civil Society Center' gives the names and populations for all villages in Azerbaijan! Hooray! I then improved the Barda Rayon article, and checked all 117 Barda Rayon village stubs on Wikipedia. The upshot is not a ringing endorsement of GEOnet Names Server. Four villages were listed in the wrong rayon; Bayandur, Azerbaijan (Tartar Rayon), Kəhrəmanlı (Yevlakh Rayon), Körpükənd (Zardab Rayon), and Yerevanly (Tartar Rayon). There were 25 stubs on villages that do not appear on 'Toward Civil Society Center' or belediyye.org; Akhmedalar, Aryadzha, Babalylar, Bala-Kurtlar, Bargyushad, Bëyuk-Sovla, Bozakhlar, Cırdaxan, Barda, Gelanly, Harahacı, Irivanly, Ismikhanly, Karadzhalar, Barda, Kazykurdaly, Kəpənəkçi, Barda, Kylyshly, Mincivan, Barda, Naibly, Barda, Osmanlar, Oto Kelanly, Pernaklar, Pirilyar, Quşçular, Seviyan, Azerbaijan, and Yuzbashilar. In addition, there were about 16 misspellings. There were about 85 stubs that matched up; I added the population number to those. I also looked over this modern telecom map of Barda to be absolutely sure. GEOnet Names Server's error rate is very high; 29 out of 117 is 24.78% incorrect. If this error rate holds for the other 59 rayons, it means there are over 1000 stubs on villages in Azerbaijan that no longer exist or are placed in the wrong rayon. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 00:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

• I guess because I respect your opinion. Aside from Carlos, where can I bring up this problem without being seen as a deletionist? Or should I talk to Carlos even though he said to leave him alone? Phlegm Rooster (talk) 21:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Jammu and Kashmir

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Jammu and Kashmir , a workgroup of WP:INDIA -- Tinu Cherian - 05:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Blofeld of SPECTRE. You have new messages at Tinucherian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- 09:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Task force splitting

I thought you might be interested in this discussion, since you had commented before on the possible scope of a Nordic task force. Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thai Museums

Will try to work on them today/this week as time allows. Will make them a priority TravellingCari 11:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the best help will be to try and find a Thai-reading editor who can help find/translate the information that is online, just not in English. Also I've found a book search is good because many are covered in travel guides to the region which help with basic info. Me, I think they're all notable unless they don't exist but that's me. TravellingCari 12:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

One down! Chose the one with the most fun name. :) TravellingCari 16:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Agreed re: culturally fascinating. And museums should never be deleted, but that's the bias again :) I ran into a greek-reading editor at some AfD -- maybe can round them up again for this round. I tried to work on some of those but English language sources were hard. Thailand is so easy because it's tourist haven. Found some fun sourcing and want to get it longer -- would be a fun DYK hook I think. Like your template -- NYC one would be scary ;) TravellingCari 16:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Someone tried it's a colossal mess. Agreed re: the lack of info in SE asia, Japan as well. TravellingCari 17:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Hey thanks for the kind comments on my main page design. I hope that you meant them because you removed them shortly after. If there was something that made you change your mind let me know, I'd like to hear about it. Happy editing! Scottydude _review 18:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Blofeld of SPECTRE. You have new messages at Scottydude's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Azerbaijan

Yes, GEOnames is uneven; it is dated in a sense - it is maintained, however. Dated sources and uneven sources are still reliable by WP standards; which doesn't require them to be infallible. The 1911 Britannica is a good example: it's dated. I'd guess there's nothing there about Bangladesh, Vladimir Putin, or extra-solar planets. Doesn't mean that they don't exist. But WP uses the 1911 Britannica extensively as a reliable source. Uneven sources are also fine: most sources are uneven. Most of the contents of the New York Times, the Brittanica, or whatever, is heavily weighted toward what its audience is wanting: no doubt, one can find articles or mentions in the Brittanica of most small US or English settlements, but large ones in Africa, South America, and Asia are lacking. Ditto biographies. Similary, the Great Soviet Encyclopedia will have greater coverage of the USSR than of similarly sized rivers, towns, or mountains in Uganda, Paraguay, or Indonesia. Per WP:BIAS, we should not perpetuate these biases, but should expand our coverages over the globe. And how will people expand the stubs? Easily, the most common way small English and US places get expanded: by residents or neighbors of the place. Yes, Azeris (like Nepalese) are less likely to be on the internet as Americans, but that's no reason to ignore them. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Interesting thought, but things that stay stubs for a long time is better than nothing. A stub is an adequate start to an article; and many stubs will and do remain stubs a long time. I don't know whether WP has tools to show what articles have been stubs the longest. There will also be stubs because there is little that we currently can know about them - most ancient personages - which meet the notability requirements, generals, admirals, kings of such and such, there doesn't seem to be a required policy that all semi-perma-stubs be redirected somewhere else, particularly if the redirection lessens the usefulness of the encyclopedia. Like, if all the places in the 3rd world are directed to their (usually stub) administrative districts would we have maps for each of them - and then when someone decides that the administrative district has been a stub for too long, then redirects it to the country, then what? No, for me, best to have something better than a blank slate on which to start. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:FILMS

Sounds great, good to see you back on the list. The project continues to get better and better with the new task forces, and I hope that we continue to get new interested members to join in to expand our article coverage. Welcome back (not that you ever really left) and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thai museum stubs

Hi BoS - I've replied over at WP:WSS/P about both this and the thailand-struct-stub/bangkok-stub proposal. Grutness...wha? 01:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC) PS - believe it or not I'm slow enough that I never clicked until now that you and "The Bald One" were the same editor :)

Azerbaijan redux

See my post at User talk:Phlegm Rooster. The sources he found are quite good, and the municipality structure has been laid bare by one of them. Now, we're getting somewhere. I have left a question for you & PR to ponder. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep - 4000 more changes. :-( I'm also glad that PR, you and I seem in sync on this - finally. :-) Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Why do you say that? See Yenikənd, Agdash, last one I've done. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I was making the same edit as you were, edit conflict. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Will try to find. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • As a last item; still lots of movings going on as new orthographies and name changes are discerned. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • AWB? Nope. All by hand - cut & paste. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Ecoleetage

Did you hear about Eco? He apparently quit (or took a long wikibreak--his message was sorta vague) because of the growing hostility toward WPedians, especially at his RfA. And it was his motto that "Heaven is other people." Sigh. I wonder if me or you will ever burn out. Sometimes, I can say, I've felt like it. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 19:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The new film by year template

Hi - are you aware that the name of the new combined film by year template Template:American films is very close to another existing template, Template:Americanfilms (with no space between "American" and "films"), which is a sidebar? I've made the mistake a number of times now. Would it be better to rename it Template:American films by year? Ed Fitzgerald "unreachable by rational discourse"^{(t / c)} 19:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald "unreachable by rational discourse"^{(t / c)} 20:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Palestine

Thanks man! More work to come. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

National parks

If you have the chance, you should read the history section of Nki National Park. Kinda sad ain't it. I don't know why I chose Nki, as there is a lot more on neighboring Boumba Bek, but I think this can be developed into a good article. With your help, of course. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 23:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Fancy writing an article?

I'll get onto the bot work shortly (possibly over the weekend), but I was wondering if you'd be interested in a little collaboration on that article we discussed about the RFK conspiracy theories? I figured a bit of construction in our userspaces would be a good way to begin, if you fancied it...? By the way, I'm back! Thanks for the messages while I was away Fritzpoll (talk) 14:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Bond

Maybe, but probably is one of the earlier Bond films. Not so much in the current continuity.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

Carnatic music terminology

Hi. The Carnatic music terminology is a definition of terms, like Glossary of musical terminology. The glossary page mentioned does not have any references! Similarly this page that I have started to put together has links to all the detail pages. Can we dispense with the requirement to cite references on this page, similar to the other glossary page? VasuVR (talk) 02:27, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Greetings again

Hi again, Blofeld-- here's the reply I promised you a while ago. You'd better pull up a chair and sit down, this is going to be a long rant: As I told Caspian, I keep looking in to find a way to come back, but the more I see the worse I feel. Betacommand's defenders, for one (all Admins)... And your Image-Admin friend above (archived now), for another example. Well, at least he had the decency to undelete the Public Domain image-- hoorah!-- but I'm missing something. Where's the outrage? I guess even this image-hater admits that it was a wrong deletion... so.. what? What happens to the vandal(s) who deleted this perfectly usable image? What apology goes to the original contributor-- whose contribution was basically pissed on? Nothing. This is just business as usual at Wikipedia. Contributions are always suspect, and deletions-- if done properly and recklessly by bot-- are always given the benefit of the doubt. But here is what is even worse-- your Image-Admin friend did not restore THIS perfectly usable fair use movie poster image from 1925! What could he have possibly been thinking? An inappropriate deletion was pointed out to him, and he let it remain.

Here is what I think he is saying here: Fair use images, even posters illustrating films in articles about the film are going to all be deleted eventually. Further, I think his lack of concern over the deletion of a Public Domain image indicates that it will eventually become "consensus" that all images will eventually be removed. Why risk a law suit? (I know that makes absolutely no sense, but this is fanaticism we're talking about.) Further, I believe that this anti-content, pro-nothing-ist attitude extends into article content, and articles themselves.

I don't see the AfD you won by a landslide as any kind of real victory either. How many editors' time was wasted in that needless AfD? And in other needless AfDs every day? And if no one had noticed the AfD, that material would be gone now. So where is the punishment for the fool who brought up this AfD? No where... he is free to make as many AfDs as he wants, even repeat-nominating articles, until he gets tired. And fanatics rarely tire.

And I do realize that these nutcases are in the minority-- but they are in power. They are, by and large, the Admins. Betacommand was an Admin until recently, and still-- even after the community has repeatedly said "Enough!"-- has many die-hard supporters, most of whom are Admins-- that in itself should be a big red flag saying, "Something ain't right here!" Yes, the true "Consensus", the majority of contributors, is constantly annoyed, outraged, and turned away by this anti-content fanaticism... But that is no comfort until the tide turns. I don't enjoy working against the spirit of this volunteer project, and the guiding spirit these days is to remove content, not to contribute. If you remove, you are helping Wikipedia. If you contribute, you are a problem. This is why full-out raving lunatics like Betacommand and many others are tolerated long after anyone who actually adds content to articles would be... They delete, so they are "helping" the project... I could probably spend all day listing perfectly acceptable Fair Use film poster images that have been inappropriately deleted... Here are a few quickies for your viewing pleasure: [1] (1925 film poster), [2] (1930 film poster), [3] (1929 film poster), [4] (1961 film poster)... And a few in the Public Domain: [5] (1922 film poster), [6] (1915 film poster), [7] (1921 film poster)... And here's a beautiful example of Wikipedian improvement at work: [8] (Not only was the poster removed, the entire infobox was removed after vandalism)... I could go on all day finding this kind of totally inappropriate deletion of content... Remember, the biggest problem with every one of these images was that the description was not done properly. Why was the remover not required to fix it instead of deleting it? And these are just images, not articles, because improperly-removed images still leave a trace in the edit-summaries. Improperly deleted articles are invisible to us non-admin peons... Pardon my French, but what the FUCK is going on here? People are free to delete randomly, disruptively, destructively, and this is what creates a sense of futility and drives good contributors away from this project... And about that little, specialty Wiki I'm working at now never being as "successful" as Wikipedia? Well, God save us from such "success"! ;-) Take care. Dekkappai (talk) 03:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feed-back, Blofeld. The cynicism didn't appear out of nowhere, it came gradually over 2 1/2 years of seeing this kind of stuff happen repeatedly (and I didn't even mention the POV-pushing, the edit-warring, the rule-making and rule-changing, and the non-stop discussion of those rules, etc...) I just find it intolerable that we have here a system here in which people are free to continuously make reckless deletion nominations without consequence. I can't see spending my spare time, my hobby-time, fighting such nonsense when I'd rather be doing something positive and constructive. Maybe I'll be able to come to a different view of Wikipedia eventually, but until then, I'll have to finally close out my talk page and stop looking in for a while. I wish you and the other good ones here the best of luck. Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 16:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey there, as you may know, I withdrew my RfA earlier this week. I am sorry if I disappointed you, as you stated your support for my endeavours. However, I could not tolerate the stress brought by the personal attacks and hostility that were being aimed my way. I am on Wikibreak now (just checking the site to make sure no one goofed up my pages) and I am not certain when or if I will resume full editing. But I wanted to say Hello and share my appreciation for your friendship. Ecoleetage (talk) 04:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

re: Polish cinema request

Hi. Yep, I'll have a look at adding the stubs in the next few days. Thanks for the kind words re: Celi's filmography. Lugnuts (talk) 07:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

{{Poland-film-stub}}

I doubt it's a problem as such, but it did strike me as remarkably hasty to be adding it alongside a clearcut speedy of a template that had already existed for some time, and was already populated, when you were actually in the very throes of creating it.

As regards application, however, I think it would be best to restrict it to those that are unambiguously Polish productions, and/or in the Polish language. Broader use would seem to me to seriously dilute any actual utility it might have. Alai (talk) 15:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

My apologies

Perhaps the facts that (a) no numbers were presented and (b) the Great and Powerful Alai said it was only used on 2 articles prompted my reaction. Please...don't throw me in the volcano...!!! :P Her Pegship (tis herself) 16:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

LOLZ

Well a bit busy again....... That why hadn't had time to visit and restart our discussion re Zinta - it'll need to wait a few days.

Now, I'm giving you randon questions. Make your choices, and please be quick and funny: Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

1. One habit you'd like to break: Editing wikipedia
2. On a scale of 1-10, rate yourself as a Wikipedian: 9
3. Other than you, the best Wikipedian according to you:Best encyclopedia writer? - Easily User:PericlesofAthens. Overall wikipedian? Probably BiNguyen.
4. A Wikipedian who's been your inspiration:In the early days User:Darwinek. These days I am self-inspired
5. An underrated Wikipedian:User:Lugnuts, User:Polylerus
6. A lesser known article you have worked on which you are very proud of:Deforestation in Brazil, not because it is a good article but because it contains very important content which was missing entirely.
7. If you were someone else, you would be:Richie Sambora from Bon Jovi
8. One thing you would like to change about Wikipedia:Deletionism and wiki lawyering
9. If you had an opportunity to come back in time, which celebrity woman you'd like to date? Greta Garbo in the thirties. Ursula Andress, Claudia Cardinale or Barbara Bouchet in the 60s
10. As a child you had a crush on:Sharon Stone
11. The hottest Hollywood actress:Angelina Jolie
12. The hottest Bollywood actress:Bipasha Basu
13. Bette Davis or Joan Crawford:Joan Crawford
14. Kate Bush or Madonna:Neither, I can't stand them both.
15. Tom Cruise or Nicolas Cage:Cruise
16. Rank in order of preference - Whitney, Mariah, Celine:(Dude I am a rock guy! These are girlie girl singers!. It should be more like Bon Jovi, Aerosmith and Guns and Roses or favourite guitarists: Hendrix, Satriani, Steve Ray Vaughan, Clapton and Sambora). They are all fantastic singers though. I like Mariah
17. Rank in order of preference - Meryl S, Julia R, Angelina J: Acting ability? as you;ve listed, hotness and likeability? Angelina first, Julia Roberts, Meryl Streep
18. Which actor was according to you the most perfect James Bond? Sean Connery although Timothy Dalton I think was the most convincing.
19. Who's acoording to you the next actor to play JB? Woody Allen
20. Your take on the following: A) The Oscars: B) WP:GA: C) Youtube D) Leona Lewis: a]over rated b] Not enough of them c]second best site on the web aside from wiki d]over rated, hot though. Great hair.
21. Your favourite Shania Twain song:From This Moment On
22. Love or Money:Money
23. Sex or Shania Twain:"Sex with Shania Twain" sounds good to me.
24. If you woke up tne morning and realised that you had turned into the most powerful admin on here (or even the owner of WP), you would:

Commericalise it and start making millions from advertising. Or create anarchy LOL. Just kidding

There you go