Crisco 1492

∞Who?¿? 08:40, 29 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

This is a note to let the main editors of ? (film) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 1, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. 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 one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 1, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

?

  The ed17 likes this.   Bonkers The Clown likes this.

• Genius. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 01:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
• What a difference a year makes! :-D BlueMoonset (talk) 02:46, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• LoL, thanks everyone. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:13, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Glad they went with my suggestion. I look forward to seeing the reaction it gets on Fish Day! Prioryman (talk) 23:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Awesome... but I doubt there will ever be so short and great a prank again :( Is there any movie titled ! or $ or another one called ??☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:56, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I think we have $, but not Indonesian. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:59, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, Indonesian stuff is your expertise... I really like this "prank". Cool stuff. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hey,

I was thinking that seeing as we have 3 pictures for Easter, and there are three prep areas in which it will be Easter for some readership, that we should have those pictures up. April Fools has 3 slots where it's April 1st for people too. Surely Gibraltar can come up as soon as those dates are over? Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:35, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Those Easter poles look terrible at 100px, so I deliberately didn't use it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Do we get discretion on that then? It was a-oked at the nomination. (There's no way to ask that question online that doesn't sound passive-aggressive so please believe me when I say I genuinely want to know} Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:39, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Yeah, we've got discretion. "Not every submitted picture can be featured in the picture slot of course," at WP:DYKSG, which also says we should save the good images so they can run. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:42, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Crisco -- you promoted my Burleydam hook just now, but it seems to have got lost? Probably the headache of Easter & April Fools? I'll be offline over much of Easter, so keen for it not to get lost for ever. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 16:58, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Cheers. After a break something always falls through the cracks! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Espresso Addict, I'm sure we'll find a way to get it in. Maybe we should pull it back so it can run after April Fools, when you're back, rather than try to squeeze it in before hand? On the other hand, if a hook has to be removed from a set because of some issue or other, we have a ready-made replacement, though that would likely be for an Easter Sunday prep area, which seems less than ideal if you're not around to see it... BlueMoonset (talk) 23:39, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• It likely got lost between the edit conflicts while I was promoting. I'll undo my promotion of the hook now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 28 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks! Espresso Addict (talk) 11:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Could I get your opinion on two fair-use rationales? File:Spider-Maneffects.ogg and File:Webshootersfilm.jpg. Neither media is essential to the article, though they do add legitimate supporting illustration.

Incidentally, is there a message board/taskforce where I could ask these questions to avoid bothering you each time? Thanks as always for the help. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:53, 30 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I'd use {{external media}} for both of them, assuming there is a website that hosts them legitimately. If they're not essential or close to essential, I doubt they pass WP:NFCC#8. I don't mind answering questions about this kind of stuff. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Also, note that statements like "The article as a whole is dedicated specifically to a discussion of this work." are patently false... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Nah, they're not essential. I'll simply recommend that they be cut. Thanks as always for the help! -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:22, 30 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• You're welcome. Cheers! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:23, 30 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Since I hear you are a expert on the subject. I was wondering what could qualify as a image for the effects section that doesn't have to be a external link? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 19:41, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Shooting styles, effects which gained a lot of commentary, stuff like that. The fact that they are artificial webshooters does not mean that visuals are inherently necessary. I think Eraserhead and Ruma Maida have some decent examples. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I am kind of confused though. That seems to be what File:Spider-Maneffects.ogg has. It depicts how the special effects are made in the high school battle scene. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 13:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
• Oh, that one's not only because of NFCC#8. The doctrine of minimal use would apply there, and I can't think of a reason for having it hosted locally. If the video was uploaded or hosted on the other site by the copyright holder, we can use {{external media}} to point readers that way. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:01, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Don't really have a external link of this video that I know of. This video was edited by a another editor. Unless you think the full video can be a external video that is? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Yeah, that would be fine, as long as the hosting site owns the rights to the video. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:12, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Well then. I think I may have a idea (that is if youtube makes a good external image). But I still personally want to find a actual image for the effects image. What about a image like this explaining the CGI of the Lizard a little better? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:27, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• That doesn't look to be the copyright owner. Is there anything at the official website? That would be much easier. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

It seems to be Sony Imageworks official youtube site. Which is who created the video. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Even the website says that's it is it's main youtube site. So can that qualify? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Okay, that looks fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

3rd party asked for comment by nominator: Normally it is ok If and ONLY if the work furthers the readers understanding more than prose can allow. In this case I think the video meets that requirement as the Lizard character is a large component of the film and its technical underpinnings are mentioned throughout the article. The web shooter article, if we are to be very, very strict probably provides information that text can accurately replicate as it isn't a complex image, that said I'm not sure where it falls in terms of copyrightable material since it's a series of basic shapes rather than some complex, identifiable image. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Darkwarriorblake explained this on the GA nomination and I requested it to be moved here. I want to get this cleared up since there is another editor ok for the video file. Which is making me struggle on deciding what to do. Also I did ask if images like these could work if they had commentary if I were to remove the video file but I didn't get a response about that one yet. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 17:23, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I'm generally a lot more strict than some others, so naturally there will be some wiggle room. As for the web shooters, I doubt they are {{pd-simple}} as they are more than just squares, rectangles, and circles. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Dengar2, di Wikipedia EN juga turut merayakan April Mop. Kakak pernah nggak berkontribusi ttg April Mop? Soalnya, inikan udah bulan April. --Akbar ini dari Kalbar 03:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Belum April, masih hari besok. Saya... kontribusi untuk April Mop banyak sekali, di hampir setiap bagian halaman depan Wikipedia bahasa Inggris. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Ya Allah, "betuah kame'". Kenapa sy bisa lupa? Nah, kakak bisa lihat yg satu ini, karya Bung Erik. --Akbar ini dari Kalbar 04:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Wekekek, kalau itu tak mungkin nampak di halaman depan sini. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks! Glad to help! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Would you be willing to do a brief interview for the Signpost? Please email me if you have time for a few questions. Thanks! --Pine^✉ 19:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why did you post a warning on my talk page?  I'm allowed three restorations, especially if they are making progress, and this may be the first time since I've been a Wikipedian that I've reached the 3rd restoration.  Is there something I should know?  It also seems odd that you would suddenly take an interest in my edits immediately after I spent hours responding to you yesterday.  Unscintillating (talk) 22:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The moment I saw that giant question mark pop up on the main page and hovered over it with my mouse, I knew there was only one individual who could be singled out as the culprit. =P Kurtis ^(talk) 00:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Ah, isn't that profiling?   Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:29, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Well, let's just put it this way — the greatest DYK in history has suddenly become the greatest TFA in history. I put 2 and 2 together. =) Kurtis ^(talk) 01:32, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
    • And so here I am, blushing... thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't follow the goings-on at TFA discussions, so I was completely surprised and delighted to see your huge question mark on the Main Page! Well done! That's another one for the record book. Congratulations! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:20, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, terrific stuff. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• LoL, thanks everyone. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:27, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Let me pile on; it's a wonderful 1 April setup, especially since (unlike previous articles, such as George Washington) it's not easily made to sound confusing or otherwise tricksy. Nyttend (talk) 02:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks, again. Shame we can't get toilet paper orientation to FA... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:22, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have to agree, it was great. I didn't even realize it was Wikipedia April 1 until I saw it. At first I assumed that there was no TFA ready and a bot updated a ? to point it out. Ryan Vesey 03:55, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Oh, that would be fun indeed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:01, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Simple and perfect. Couldn't be better. Also, at first I read the talk discussion below as Adminectomy. Bgwhite (talk) 06:39, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Now that would hurt! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:46, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

diff  Why would an admin provide support to two delete !voters engaged in a referencectomy?  Delete !voters do not need to remove references from the topic of the AfD, because they believe that the entire topic will soon be deleted by consensus.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• That is not a reference. It is for finding new references. Of value in an AFD, yes, but not for the article's readers. The consensus currently emerging is clearly against having such an external link. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• You can say it is "not a reference", but you are using a slightly different meaning of the word, and avoiding the point.  No one found a problem with the material until after the start of the AfD when the nominator decided to remove it.  The consensus that is "emerging" is being built on two editors attracted to the article by the AfD, both of whom are !voting delete.  It should be obvious to you that there is a problem with removing material that supports notability from an article, during an AfD.  Unscintillating (talk) 05:14, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Nobody was reading the article until the AFD, so the point is moot. The article itself had seen no edits (except for bots) in over a year. If you disagree about the removal, feel free to comment at the current AFD (more visible) or talk page, and include the link for finding sources. I've already told you, if the link is meant to help find sources it should definitely be posted at the AFD. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I am right! I am right!! I am never wrong!!! Sigh. --Randykitty (talk) 13:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

•   Facepalm — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hey Crisco, I just came across this article by Special:Random, as I was curious if you would be able to help improve it. It's a Dutch East Indies newspaper, so you probably would know where to look for and could translate Indonesian sources. Chris857 (talk) 03:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I might be able to find some, yeah... I'll see what I can do. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Crisco, I realize that AFD is taking up quite a bit of your time at the moment (that's April Fools Day ;-) ), but when you have a chance, can you please take a look at this and see if the rationale for closing down the review as unsuccessful (that is, rejected), is a valid argument for doing so? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Sure. Actually, I've been writing a little about William Bell for a conference next May. Just a basic introduction to Canadian youth literature for Indonesian audiences. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yep, the most bizarrely presented FA ever, congrats!!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• TU — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:32, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Support (whatever it means), yesterday's TFA was great, can't imagine how that could be surpassed! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:09, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks Gerda. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hey Crisco, I just found out that a lake near my house Fish Lake, Minnesota used to have a swastika beach page 40. Is that trivial information or is it something that should be put into the article? Ryan Vesey 00:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Might be worth including. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Apparently it can be found here as well. What's the best way to include it, since it is based on primary sources. "As of 1914, a beach on the lake was named 'Swastika Beach'."? Ryan Vesey 00:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
• It's actually listed at Western use of the swastika in the early 20th century [1] The article makes it appear like that is still the name, something I can't confirm or deny. Ryan Vesey 00:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Well, we all know how much to rely on something written into a WP article without being adequately sourced. IMHO, the use of "as of" here would be slightly ambiguous. You could say "maps of the area dated [year] indicate [defined location] was named Swastika Beach<ref>citation/link to map</ref>". -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 02:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I'll go with that. On a related note, the entire no original research and avoiding interpretations of primary sources really hurts my academic writing. I've gotten pretty good at writing in the encyclopedic style that I often get criticized for relying too much on sources in my college essays. On another related note, I need to get back to User:Ryan Vesey/Temp. It would have been in the mainspace long ago but trying to get all the deaths in there bogged me down. Ryan Vesey 02:14, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I'd go with OhC's suggestion. As for interpreting primary sources... I'm having the same problems. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

The editor in question has disrupted Wikipedia for far too long and caused probably half the drama at ANI over the past few months. Jimbo's written that Carbuncle threatened his family, and DC has been edit warring in two places today alone. Coupled with the blatant off-Wiki personal attacks which DC proudly authors, it is high time we realise s/he is NOTHERE.

Jimbo has never accused me of threatening his family. I have not and would not do anything like that. I have not caused "probably half the drama at ANI over the past few months" and anyone who frequents ANI will know that this is an absurd claim. You have started a ban discussion with provably false claims, although editors unfamiliar with me might assume that they are true since, after all, they were written on the admin board by an admin. In a less serious context, I wouldn't care, but since you are trying to get me banned, I am going to insist that you either correct the record or substantiate your claims as soon as you are able. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 04:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• I was busy with RL, something I suggest you do. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Edited with a parenthetical and link, in case you or someone looking at this page misses that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
    • Crisco1492, I pointed out your errors on ANI. When you didn't correct them, I left a polite message here. Your response "I was busy with RL, something I suggest you do" is unnecessary rudeness and, frankly, bizarre given our relative levels of investment in WP. As you have already been told, Jimbo's comment was not directed at me. Although it appears that the result will be the same, I insist that you correct your ban proposal once again. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
      • If you could, by email, indicate who it was referring to, I would be happy to look further into it before reediting the statement; circumstantial evidence at the time suggested you, although if you have been misjudged there I will be happy to redact that part of the proposal. I apologise for accidentally misrepresenting Jimbo's closing statement as a direct announcement that you had threatened him, and promise to not do so in the future. As for the rudeness... suffice it to say I've had a very long day, both on and off Wiki, and I apologise for being overly brisk. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
        • What is your e-mail address? I would be happy to send the identity/evidence to you, but not through the Wikimedia e-mail forwarding system. (Reason being, I believe that Mr. Wales falsely made the claims of being threatened, and so it would not be appropriate for Wikimedia Foundation servers to be handling such evidence, from a legal perspective.) Just state your e-mail address here. - 2001:558:1400:10:4C57:5FC3:DF40:AE76 (talk) 13:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
          • I'd rather not post it in such a public forum. I'll make a throwaway address instead. BRB. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
          • Crisco1492, if I'm going to jump through hoops it will be to pursue action against you for making such an egregious accusation. I have told you that you are wrong, someone else has told you that you are wrong. I don't need to explain any further - fix it now. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
            • I've already created the account. You may email your argument to crisco1492 outlook.com. Someone else says that s/he believes I am wrong, but there is no doubt that Jimbo stated (not necessarily accurately) that someone behind that forum was dangerous to him and his family while closing a thread started by you. At best it's guilt by association. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
            • Surely someone such as yourself recognises that discretion may be necessary, such as when one of the forum members said I was a sock of Benjiboi and if they were wrong they'd "eat their hat". I was doxed within several hours. I already offered an accommodation to you by creating a throwaway address, as you (or an unrelated IP address) felt uncomfortable sending information via the system already available. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
              • Jimbo's comment was not about me in any regard, so it makes no difference what that IP tells you. Are you going to correct your statements at ANI or do I have to take further action? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:40, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
                • I am in the midst of doing so. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
                  • Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
                    • Done, including a rev delete. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
                      • Rev deleting 250 edits to hide something you said seems a little out of order to me. Shouldn't you have just said sorry? Or used strikethrough? Kevin (talk) 22:14, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• No personal attacks. I'll block you next time. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

In the peer reviw of Kahaani, you mentioned the difficulty in understanding a sentence (Some actors mingled with the crowd—their job was to appreciate the camera angles and accordingly apply sindoor (vermilion) on Balan's face so that accidental exposure of her eyes to sindoor could be avoided.). Now explanatory notes have been added to ease the understanding. Can you please have a look and see if that part is more understandable now? Thanks.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Maybe later. Really gotta buckle down on my school work. Mid-term seasons coming up soon. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Sure! A "study break".--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Reply