User talk:Al Fecund/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Al Fecund. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Welcome!
Hello, Al Fecund, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
This has been deleted as an empty article (WP:CSD criterion A1). You culd work it up in your user space at User:Al Fecund/Piranha II: The Spawning and recreate when it's ready (or at least when you have some meat to add to the bones).
How to cite
Your welcome! Citing can be very confusing, and I suggest reading (or at least skimming) Citing sources. Personally I just use these since no one gets too pedantic until you approach FA level. The specific template I used was Template:Cite web.
Plot of Pulp Fiction
While I'm all for conciseness, I think that trying to cut it down further will result in losing too much detail. The guidelines say that the plot can be over 900 words if the film's plot is complex, which I think applies here. If you dig into the archives of the discussions that led to that section of the style guidelines, you'll find that it was a compromise. Someone went through all the featured film articles and made a table of their plot lengths, and the 900 word limit was roughly in the middle of those 19 articles' plot summaries. Like I said on Pulp Fiction's talk page, it could be cut down more but we're at the point of diminishing returns where it becomes increasingly harder to shorten the plot while keeping the details so much so that time could be better spent working on other parts of the article. By the way I'd encourage you to check out Wikipedia:Cinema Collaboration of the Week.
Films without article
Hi, and thanks for your contributions on films. Just one technical detail: instead of deleting started films from the project lists of films without articles, please, make a note or a strike and if needed correct the link to point to the existing article. The reason is that I use these lists to check all newly started films for Film template on the talk page, categorization, and check all links given (actors, crew, etc). Also for films found to exist under another title, I check on "what links here" for articles and lists that have the film under the wrong title. Happy New Year. And by the way, which article exists for Bat 21?
Welcome!
Hey, welcome to the Films WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for November has been published. December's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.
There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:
- Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
- Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!
- Want to collaborate on articles? The Cinema Collaboration of the Week picks an article every week to work on together.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around!
IMDB
As far as I know IMDB is NOT considered a reliable source because it is all user-generated content, which means there is no one author whose authority can be gauged. However, looking through the many links that I list at the end of this, I find that the movie credits might be from the Writer's Guild of America (but then what about film from other countries?). This is disputed. Personally, I think it is all user-generated, so I do not cite it (especially for its trivia). Use your browser's find tool and search IMDB for these: one, two, three, four, and five.
CineVoter 1-06-07
Cbrown1023 04:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
CineVoter 1-20-07
Cbrown1023 00:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
WP:Films Newsletter
The January 2007 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.