Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:29, 12 March 2007

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

Fight Club

Would you happen to be a fan of Fight Club at all? I have quite a few citations to work into my project, but I need a pair of ears for recording all the main points in the film's DVD audio commentary. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 16:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the special edition DVD has additional commentaries to the one on the plain DVD. There's a couple of bits about Nietzsche and The Graduate in the commentary (according to the film article's Influences section, anyway), so if these pop up, it's probably the right one. I'll try to find out if there are numerous commentaries. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 16:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Should you just take a notepad whilst viewing? Sure, that's what I do. WikiNew 17:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not in a hurry for the information. Just do it on your own time, and I'll work on using the other citations. Notepad is probably the best idea, just write down the facts in bullet style or however you like it done. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 17:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I took a look at the DVD to see if there was any chance that the commentary was captioned. (It wasn't.) However, though, there are four commentaries -- one by David Fincher, one by David Fincher, Brad Pitt, Edward Norton, and Helena Bonham Carter, one by Chuck Palahniuk (author) and Jim Uhls (screenwriter), and one by Alex McDowell (production designer), Jeff Cronenweth (cinematographer), Michael Kaplan (costume designer, I think), and Kevin Haug (visual effects supervisor). I absolutely do not expect you to watch all of them -- that's a high order indeed. If you do undertake any one of them, though, let me know what it is. I'm hoping to develop the themes and motifs in my project, so you could wait until I exhaust all possible resources, so when you watch with commentary, you can skip anything that you recall from the project as redundant. I really wish these things were captioned... I'd eat it up, practically. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 22:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The one with Fincher and the actors would probably be ideal. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 22:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

(Not thinking, I responded on my own talk page to your comment.. that's a first.) Anything theme-based would be nice... certain keywords like anything Nietzsche-based, self-identity, and whatnot. Listen for anarcho-primitivism, too -- another editor and I were discussing this theme on the film article's talk page. He seemed pretty set on supporting that theme, but I haven't really seen any outright evidence of it in the links on my project subpage. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 17:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Alright, thank you for trying anyway. I wasn't really sure what the commentaries would contain. You don't have to do anything further if you don't want to; I can imagine trying to juggle audio and video that aren't connected. Appreciate the effort. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 23:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Very nice! Thank you very much for all that information! I'm already thinking of ways to fit the information in. Is the Nietzsche thing nihilism? And the Z-word, does that have anything to do with Thus Spoke Zarathustra? —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 05:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Any plans to archive your talk page soon? It's rather long in the tooth... —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 15:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

There's definitely a lot that can be said about everything. I just worked in a couple of citations, and I'll see how much of your commentary I can add next. It's like a jigsaw puzzle; trying to figure out what fits. Can you check out Themes and suggest any kind of setup? There are some overlapping bits, and some independent observations would be nice. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 16:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your advice. I'll see how I can work things together. I've seen the VW Bug reference on a couple of other citations as well, so I'll work that in. One thing -- can you re-explain this: "Felt that the Narrators gendering of Tyler was based on Marla. He created Tyler as a male to fulfill a relationship that he felt he couldn't"? I'm not sure what it means, especially considering another part of the DVD commentary where the narrator hung up on Marla because he saw too much of himself in her. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 17:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Got it! That makes sense. Check out the final paragraph of "Self-identity" -- I find that piece of information very cool. I'm just kind of throwing quotes into the project and re-writing as prose, and I think I'll be fitting the passages together last. There's probably too many themes... I think I'll aim for a maximum of four; need to see how things break down. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 17:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, the reiteration is definitely helpful, goes to show that these themes aren't just mentioned in passing. I have to admit, doing this work on one of my favorite films changes my perception of it. I think I was originally interested in Tyler's dialectic, but these interviews and all have shaped a deeper philosophy than that. Definitely am looking forward to putting this article forward. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Definite reiteration! Film Comment has Fincher saying, "I don't know if it's Buddhism, but there's the idea that on the path to enlightenment you have to kill your parents, your god, and your teacher. So the story begins at the moment when the Edward Norton character is 29 years old. He's tried to do everything he was taught to do, tried to fit into the world by becoming the thing that he isn't. He's been told, "If you do this, get an education, get a good job, be responsible, present yourself in a certain way, your furniture and your car and your clothes, you'll find happiness." And he hasn't. And so the movie introduces him at the point when he's killed off his parents and he realizes that they're wrong. But he's still caught up, trapped in this world he's created for himself. And then he meets Tyler Durden, and they fly in the face of God - they do all these things that they're not supposed to do, all the things that you do in your 20s when you're no longer being wathced over by your parents, and end up being, in hindsight, very dangerous. And then finally, he has to kill off this teacher, Tyler Durden. So the movie is really about that process of maturing." How cool is that? —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I need help figuring out this passage, as I'm not sure what Norton is trying to say: "And in moving towards her ... in a way, I think she's almost like his female animus. She's exactly the same as he is, on a certain level, and he can move towards her and have a connection. He can go toward this more seductive, negativist approach or someone who's essentially saying, "Let's try something else. Don't go towards what you know already." So he moves towards that. I don't mean negative in the sense of bad, but in the sense of, let's contend with what we've been sold on." Any ideas? —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm kind of hung up on schoolwork for a while, so I'm putting any major editing effort on hold. The studies have kind of piled up, and I need to cut down on it. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 23:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks (Sandbox Info)

Ahhh, very much appreciated sir. Thanks for your help. ♣ Klptyzm ♣ 19:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Removing wikipedia ban

I have a friend from school that got banned but didn't understand why. Is there anything I can do or anyone else can do to remove his ban? He seemed really depressed since he just join today and got banned. Any Ideas? Thanks. Bloddyfriday 23:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Answer I was Banned due to a misunderstanding it has been fixed so you can delete this topic.The Real Phantom Triffle 17:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

yeah thats him.Bloddyfriday 19:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Spider-Man 3 Image

Heya. I was looking over the recent edits to the article, and noted you removed the image of the symbiote covering Brock. I read the edit summary, and agree that the informatity of calling him Eddie may be a bit much, he had been named in full prior to the image's insertion, and through prior images as well. Maybe i am misunderstanding MoS concerns in this regard? As well, the image looks good for a screen capture, and seems properly tagged. What am I missing that makes the picture unsuitable?Arcayne 12:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I see. Could it be possible that the person uploading the image didn't see the discussion regarding the image, since it has since been archived? The topic might be worth revisiting, as a great many more people are contributing to the article now, and a different concensus might need to be reached, in the interest of fairness.

As well, I am not sure what you are referring to when you say "an image of Venom that it would be one of a full body shot (or as close to that as possible) because we will need it for comparison purposes." In comparison to what? When it is on Parker as opposed to Brock? Do you know if there is a press still being released that satisfies the purpose you are seeking?

All images are eye candy, at least to some extent. Until a better picture comes along, I don't think it would be unreasonable to allow an image that the person uploaded with the proper tagging that has releveancy to the article. At least, until something better happens along.Arcayne 12:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Big, can you explain to me why the image cannot remain until you find the one you are looking for? I am not seeing the resistance to its placement as reasonable, and of course, ThuranX is a bit prickly.Arcayne 03:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Prickly? Interesting term. BigNole, I've since replied to his talk, where he told me to get off his talk page, and so I've sumamrized again all the reasons again, and supported your opinon that the screencap should not be included. ThuranX 03:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm having trouble Assuming good faith about someone who feels that his singular opinion negates repeated discussions, just because they're in the archives, and that his presences means there's a 'whole new set of regular editors'. Frustrating. I'll contact some of the OTHER 'regualr editors. I still don't see any value in having a blurry screencap. ThuranX 03:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I can understand why you think the image in question may be in question, but at least it is an image that is allowable, whereas the ones you are specifically looking for is not as of yet (if at all). My question is if there is some sort of guideline or policy that supports yout position of how "every image needs to serve a purpose greater ". I think that, because the picture in question was released as a marketing tool, that it appropriately belongs in the Promotion section.

And I am sorry for calling you prickly, thuranX. I have had some experience with other editors with civility issues, so I am wary of folk who are even a bit uncivil. Forgive me for painting you with a brush dabbed up with someone else's rudeness.I think you misinterpreting my actions; I am not negating the discussions prior to now, but clearly, Misplaced Pages changes constantly, and obviously, new concensus is constantly being reevaluated. Obviously, it is not a singular opinion questioning that prior agreement, as I am not even the one who uploaded a pretty clear (and not blurry, as has been described) image. I am simply questioning the practice of refusing genuine imagery for imagery not yet (if ever) citable. The article is read by people every day, and there is no apparent policy that says that we cannot satisfy reader interest by providing images noteworthy and interesting. And, seeing as the image was used as a promotion and inerted in the Promotion header, it seems appropriate.Arcayne 04:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know that the image was only available for viewing for 24 hours. If it is no longer valid, then it is no longer valid. The reason I thought it was appropriate was because people would want to see it. Some people use Misplaced Pages not for the biting citations of Thematic components but simply to get the skinny on the latest, reliable info on the net. Sometimes they want to simply see a picture, for example, of the new Venom. Since we don't have the one that would feed to Production header perfectly, we have to go with what we have, and that is an image that is still fair use. Will that change? Maybe. By that time, there might be a better one out there. I am not suggesting overloading the article with images. I am simply saying that this is an image of Venom - the only one we have at this time, and it seems good to have at least one image of the film version Venom.Arcayne 04:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand your point. Perhaps I need a bit more experience with the application of fair use images in order to judge better. I wasn't retying to be a dick; the revert just seemed odd to me. Thank you very much for being patient and explaining it to me, Big.Arcayne 12:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

On a side note, could I trouble you to pop over to the Braveheart film article and give me a heads-up on what needs work, and what you would do to shape the article along? I have some ideas, and some questions, but I was hoping you would give me an unvarnished view.Arcayne 14:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Smallville Fansites

Not being the type to visit fansites (except to mostly point and laugh), I am not advocating adding a ton of useless links that consist of little more than someone's AOLspace or MySpace blog channels. I am thinking that the top two would be fine. I am not married to it one way or the other, Big; I am wondering if the limiting of the fansites is more of a personal interpretation, a guideline or an adhered to rule.Arcayne 14:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC) Thought I'd add on that some FA articles do have a bit more in the way of fansites. MegaTokyo is one such FA article.Arcayne 14:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Spider-Man 3 Running Time

It would be most appreciated if you wouldn't change my edits. I have given reliable sources(despite your claims) and I would like you to stop impeding my hard work. Further changes will result in bans. .MtWotUp

hahaha. Bignole, report this guy for Harrassment and incivility. Coupled with his vandalisms, it should be good for a 24 block. ThuranX 03:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Idea

I think you should run for Admin. Your the best canidate in my opinion. You would probably get it. If you ever run for Admin let me know. Again thanks for all your help. Bloddyfriday 03:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, i don't know about that. I think he'd make a much better Prom King. :) Arcayne 02:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

A little Help

If you could help me with Saving an article called Twerp I'd appreciate it. This is also the last time I'm going to ask for help this month. Bloddyfriday 22:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

another fair use

I thought, after our recent conversation, that you'd appreciate this. The user's off his meds, but the bit is kinda funny.Arcayne 02:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Bond

True, but I don't like an image-less plot summary. Keep them and in a jiffy I'll nab superior images. Gun barrel and gambling table spring to mind. Or would you prefer Miami and Venice action sequences? WikiNew 12:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

For the gambling scenes, or (4th picture down)? WikiNew 12:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Your signature

Could you make it just tiny bit less loud? Sample:

*Keep - Film articles generally have information about special effects in the production section, and it's standard procedure to break off if you have too much information.  BIGNOLE   (Question?)  (What I do) 

It distracts a viewer's eyes from anywhere on the page... Autocracy 21:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

RE: Hulk DVD

I am working on this page and it is now up, so take a look The Incredible Hulk DVD Releases. I created a seperate article because the main article on the show was too big, so no point making it bigger. I know that it is not known whether the remaining seasons will be released but we can always hope can't we?! Also, check out TVshowsondvd.com, Season 2 is coming soon, they have a note about it fairly recently.

Cheers HeMan523:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

300 Movie

I am not sure what you are talking about, Big in regards tot he PR section...Arcayne 01:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Big, could you take a look at my edits in 300? Some dude is warning me about 3RR. I don't think I've violated it or anything, but another set of eyes might be helpful here...Arcayne 02:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the heads-up. The only other person to accuse me of 3RR was, well, you. And of course, that troll over in the CoM article.Arcayne 02:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, i don't know if he reported Thuran or Erik, but he did file a complaint on me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arcayne (talk • contribs) 02:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

Thank you for the assist. It is mathematically impossible to calculate the size of the drink I owe you. Next time there is a Wiki Get-Together, I will have been able to have engineers construct one large enough. :) We should probably let the other editors know about the tactic used here, so that we can watch each other's back, do you think?Arcayne 12:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be easy to fault Alex, but he and the other guys working the 3RR desk are probably severely over-worked, and likely get tired of people flouting th rules every which way. I left myself open by editing too boldly. That said, I am glad that you helped him to re-examine the evidence. Again, my thanks on that. We should be watching each other's backs, like making other editors aware when we need to tag out and let someone else jump in. You can bet your buttons they are probably working somewhat closely for the POV push.Arcayne 12:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)