User talk:Steve

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

Userpage	User talk	Sandbox	My contrbs
Userpage	Leave a message	Sandbox	Contributions

• To keep discussions centralized, any new subjects posted to this page will be replied to here.
• If I leave a message on your talk page, I prefer to continue the discussion where it began, but reply wherever you see fit; here or there, I'll make sure I see it.
• Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~).
• New discussions start below old; you can start a new topic.
• If you wish to talk privately, you can email me.
• Discussions are archived periodically.

Archives

July 2007–December 2007 (88kb) | December 2007–April 2008 (57kb) | April 2008–October 2008 (75kb) | October 2008–December 2008 (58kb)
December 2008–February 2009 (62kb) | February 2009–May 2009 (53kb) | May 2009–July 2009 (60kb) | July 2009–August 2009 (58kb)
August 2009–December 2009 (65kb)

Brazilian battleship Minas Geraes

Hey. This article was on the main page yesterday, and I just wanted to thank you again for all of the help you provided during its FAC. Regards, —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 01:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

You're very welcome! I was pleased to see it come through the day relatively unscathed, with only a couple of queries on the talk page—testament to the time and effort you put into it. All the best, Steve ^T • C 08:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Fashion Architecture Taste

Thanks for the offer Steve. I think it may not be finished actually for quite some time. :) But I'll try to be patient. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent edits to FAC The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie

Thanx for the edits Steve!! I was exhausted yesterday when typing it, so I did make a lot mistakes. Also in the The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie#Filming section can you revise this awkward section: Draper explained that the the production would often "sneak into locations and run". Thanx! ATC ^{. Talk} 22:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Also in the lead, the problem is some sources say "Family Feature Film" and others say "Best Family Feature". I called the festival and they said their is no such thing of a "Best Family Feature" award and it's a "Family Feature Film" award. ATC ^{. Talk} 22:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I went ahead and made those tweaks; sorry for jumping in to do the copy-edit without doing you the courtesy of asking first; this morning (UK time) was my only opportunity, and I guessed you wouldn't be around until this evening. All the best, Steve ^T • C 22:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. I had stuff to do, so wasn't around barely at all when I sent you the message. Um...I know I might be making a little bit of a fuss about it, but in the interviews with Polly and Michael; they both said it won the "best family film award", so I'm not entirely sure what that means. Maybe when announced as the winner, the announcer said: "It's one of the best family feature film awards given out."? I'm not sure exactly. What do you think? ATC ^{. Talk} 00:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

It's hard to pin down exactly what it's called, as Google returns no overwhelming consensus. However, the Hamptons Festival website does call it the "2005 Family Film Audience Award", if that helps. Steve ^T • C 00:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Another listing in another category does or did call it "children's feature film award" and a blog site, which took all the photography at the Hamptons Film Festival that day for all of the screenings. The lady I spoke to on the phone said that is not a category, so it must've been typo. (Also, just so you are away, I tried retrieving pics and the lady on the phone said they don't have any copyright permission to lend photos, and the copyright permission belongs to the blog site.) Anyway...maybe if we had more people see this, we can get more ideas. ATC ^{. Talk} 02:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

HI Steve! I'm contacting you to let you know that I've restored your recent edits to the article, some of which were lost after subsequent edits went in. As per Tony's most recent comment here I was wondering if you have time to make the final copyediting push before the FAC is closed? Your edits were good, and I seem to have lost perspective with this article because I've worked on it a little too much. Thanks in advance. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

A section in particular that can use a little work is the Casting section. Thanx Steve! Oh, and thanx, Truthkeeper88 for all of you hard work. You have worked a lot on the article, and appreciate it. ATC ^{. Talk} 21:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

A lot of your edits have been great Truthkeeper88 and I think the article is almost perfectly written. ATC ^{. Talk} 21:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Changeling

Just wanted to let you know that I added an image of Eastwood at the Cannes Film Festival to the release section in the article. I asked the author to let us use the image back around the time that the article was at FAC in the hopes of getting you another free image for the article. Unfortunately, the author didn't get back to me until today. Anyway, better late than never. Feel free to reword/adjust the image as you see fit. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

No, that looks great to me. Kudos for going through the hoops required to let us use this image and for those you've located for use in other articles. Thanks, Steve ^T • C 18:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

The Godfather

The IP from Heat (1995 film) is editing the genre at The Godfather. Wanted to give you a heads-up. Erik (talk) 13:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out, but my hands are a little tied button-wise. I can't semi-protect the page (not that that's what you were suggesting) because I've expressed an opinion on the talk page about what the genre should be (unlike Heat, where I only entered the conversation afterwards—at the time I protected I didn't have a particular opinion either way). I'm sure it'd be OK, as the IP is likely a block-evader, but some noise could be made of it per WP:UNINVOLVED. The IP is editing outside consensus, so if he/she continues to edit war I think a report at WP:RPP might be successful. Steve ^T • C 13:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I forgot that you weighed in. Does not seem to be further activity at this point, so it may not be an issue after all. Let's hope I haven't spoken too quickly... Erik (talk) 13:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

On the other hand, the IP passes the duck test as being a sock of Pé de Chinelo, so I wonder if it would be out of the question for me to wield the hammer based on that alone... Steve ^T • C 13:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Nah, get someone else in on it. Regardless of the IP's block-evading, genre is a valid issue that the IP is just causing trouble over. Erik (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes

It looks like the wording and the linking we originally set up to report Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes may be off, and I think our language has proliferated a little bit. :) See this discussion. Erik (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

SECR K and SR K1 classes FAC attempt

Hello again. As you previously assisted with the SECR N class FAC by reviewing the article and making suggestions for improvement, I'm wondering if you'd like to review this article as well? Any prose tightening and identification of areas that require explanation would be most helpful. Thank-you, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 22:45, 23 January 2010 (UTC)