User talk:Sailorlula

Hi, Sailorlula, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like this place — I sure do — and want to stay. Before getting too in-depth, you may want to read about the Five pillars of Wikipedia and simplified ruleset. If you need help on how to title new articles check out the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. If you need help look at Wikipedia:Help and the FAQ , plus if you can't find your answer there, check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my user talk page or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will be by to help you shortly.

Additional tips

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
You can sign your name using three tildes (~). If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Five will get you the datestamp only.
You may want to add yourself to the new user log.
If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
If you're still entirely confused, or would like to get a better grasp of your wikipedia skills, and you have an IRC client (or don't mind getting one), check out the Bootcamp. It's not what it sounds like, but it is fun and can help you with your editing skills.
If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.

Happy Wiki-ing. —Kf4bdy ^talk ^contribs

PS: This is not a bot and you did nothing to prompt this message. This is just a friendly welcome by a fellow Wikipedian.

Click here to respond to this message!

Re: 2001: Are the Satellites Weapons?

You make a very convincing case, and I definitely do interpret the satellites as weapons also. I've added to the satellite line, saying it is "presumably" a weapons platform, and elaborating on the significance of that. --Bungopolis 23:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Massive, spurious edit my eye

I take offense at your premature reversal of my edit of the 2001: A Space Odyssey synopsis. Several plot points were missing or wrong in the existing synopsis, and so i added points which are central to the plot. I've examined the film over 25 times, and have discussed it at a film school level, so my edits are not those of a dilettante.

I'd like to remind you that WP is not a personal soapbox, that is no one of us can claim "superior editor" privileges. WP is not censored, and so simply removing someone's edits that you a) don't like or b) don't agree with is contrary to the spirit here. If you want to contest or discuss any plot points I added, please start a discussion on the talk page and we can sort it out there. — David Spalding ^Talk/_Contribs 15:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2001: A Space Odyssey Revision as of 02:53, 9 December 2006

Sailorlula (Talk | contribs) (Changed 'Russian' --> 'Soviet.' Although they're probably Russian as well, they are definitely Soviet.)

Uh, pardon me, but how, exactly, do you know them to be Soviets as opposed to Russian? Although the the breakup of the USSR was still a quarter century in the future when the film was made, that dose not validate of invalidate the point one way or the other. There is no mention of the Soviet Union by name at any point during the film. The only county ever mentioned by name was the United States.

Just curious. -- Jason Palpatine 07:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jason:

They're carrying Aeroflot flight bags, which feature a Soviet hammer and sickle within the Aeroflot logo. Also, I believe the Soviet Union is visually mentioned in the film -- I believe one of the satellites has a CCCP (aka USSR) livery on it, if memory serves; it's too small to see on the DVD version. If the Soviet Union exists and they're Russian, then they're Soviet.

My main reason for this change is I'm guessing that it never even occurs to younger, newbie 2001 viewers that Kubrick was imagining that the Soviet Union was still around -- this serves as a gentle reminder.

Regards, Sailorlula 07:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The sattelite you are refering to only displayed the red star. No CCCP. Sorry. Aeroflot still exists today (unlike Pan-Am) and its logo still sports the Hammer and sickle emblem. -- Jason Palpatine 07:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How are you sure about red star vs. CCCP -- have you seen it on a big screen recently? That the Aeroflot logo today still incorporates the hammer and sickle is irrelevant. It's inclusion in the film clearly demonstrates that Kubrick was imagining that the Soviet Union still existed. What's the alternative, that he was imagining that the USSR would be gone, but that nevertheless Aeroflot would lamely continue to use an obsolete visual icon in its logo?

Sailorlula 07:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not arguing. I will not argue. It is a matternot even pointed out in the film one way or the other. So I will not say either or. It doesn't matter. I mearly replied to you as is proper in any conversation. Is that so wrong. I am not sying you are wrong. I am not saying you are right.

If you really want hard proof of your claim being valid, you might want to address the fact that the existence of the USSR is clearly stated in Clarke's sequel novel and Hyams' film adaptation of it. So in one regard -- you are 110% correct. I am mearly conversing with you; a fellow 2001 enthusiest. When I saw your edit, I actually thought at fist that you may have been refering to the conversation they were having before they started talking in english.. IE -- I thought that maybe you speak/understand russian. Enjoy, and thank-you for the insight. TTFN -- Jason Palpatine 08:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guy, I wasn't arguing either. I was editor-in-chief of two magazines for a decade, during which I developed a terse writing style. I guess it can end up sounding combative, which was not at all my intention, sorry Jason.

I have always wanted to know exactly what they're saying before and after Floyd's visit. I had a Russian guy working for me a while ago, but I never thought of asking him to translate for me!

Regards, Sailorlula 08:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Memory fails, but there's a web page out there on the World Wide Wiggly, where someone has translated what Elena says after Floyd gets up. Nothing amazing. I think her glaring look at Andrei says MUCH more. As for Soviet vs. Russia, I think the argument is moot. As far as teh story line, Kubrick was illustrating that "tribes" are still suspicious and protective. Watch what Andrei does when Floyd sits down. It's pretty subtle. But, like the motif of a "tool" (bone, pen, spaceship, supercomputer), there's a consistent motif of water (waterhole, drink, liquid food, meal at the room at the end). Whether Andrei is Soviet, or just Russian, it adds up to the same thing .. the US astronauts are hiding information from the other countries' astronauts. Just my two cents.... — David Spalding ^ta!k y@wp/_Contribs 13:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:2001LastMeal.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:2001LastMeal.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey 15:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

synopsis needs help at 2001's plot section

If you hadn't noticed (I hadn't), there was significant churn and edit warring over on the 2001 plot section, with an unregistered user making a lot of changes. I suspect the "damage" has been corrected, but the synopsis is still roughly 1200 words. The WikiProject Film guideline on this suggests 400-700 words, and I'm not sure this synopsis can be diluted down any more. Still, if you have the time, you might want to check in on that section and see if you can find an error, or add back in something you thought was significant and worth including. :) David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 14:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poole - HAL 9000 references

Hallo, I've removed a references tag which I think you had added in Poole - HAL 9000 on August 20 2006. I think the Waldrop and Cambell links are sufficient references. Please re-add the tag if you dispute the removal.

--Schwalker 07:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soviets

Hi, thanks for the note, didn't realize it had been an edit war situation. I'm one of those "the-film-doesn't-say-it-unless-it-says-it" guys.

I see above you wondered about what the Russians were saying. I've never seen this on the web anywhere so this is original research (xxx means I can't make it out). --

One of the ladies: Vot, v kotorom chasu xxxx? (Hey, what time does xxxx?)
Smyslov: V priblizitel'no dva chasa. (About two o'clock.)
One of the ladies: Mozhet byt' poydom v observatoriyu. (Maybe we could go to the observatory.)
Elena: xxxx (*I can't figure this out)

[Floyd appears. After he leaves ...]

Smyslov: Naverno yemu ochen' trudno. (It's probably very difficult for him.)
One of the ladies: Po-vidimosti. (Obviously.)
Another one of the ladies: Da, ochen' trudno. (Yes, very difficult.)

--Cam 14:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ordway

The reason for removing my reference to Frederick I Ordway published technical article passes beyond my understanding. Where should that reference go in the main article?

Source for Clarke on 2001

Sailorlula,

The source for the assertion that Clarke says he would have corrected the error about holding the breath in 2001 is the current DVD release of 2001 on one of the special features. As you state you removed this due to lack of any citation, I will put it back and specifically cite my source.

The source for the view of the Earth from Clavius is something I read way back in the 60s and would not be able to trace at this point. Clavius is way down near the south pole of the moon. It seems more to the point that at a crater that far south it would be impossible for the sun to rise directly over the monolith as it does in the film. The crater would have be near the moon's equator which Clavius is certainly not. I'll desist from restoring this until I can track it down, but I'll cite the DVD for the first point.

WickerGuy (talk) 23:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Names of spaceships in 2001

SailorLula,

I am not the fellow that has inserted references in the 2001 article to Orion III, Aries 1-B, and Space Station V. However, be it noted, that although the film never directly refers to these ships and stations by those names, the shooting script certainly does!!! An early draft of the screenplay circa 1965 (later to be significantly revised) is online in full at http://www.screenplays-online.de/screenplay/1

As I noted on the talk page, hobby model kits that were sold as movie tie-ins also referred to Orion III, etc. Even the "memorable quotes" section at IMDB refers to the character of the "Aries 1-B Stewardess". I didn't put this stuff in there, but I see no reason for its omission.

Perhaps it would be best if the Wikipedia article explicitly stated that the screenplay refers to the ship, station, and shuttle by these names even if these names do not appear in the movie. But to characterize them as "fanboy" names seems a bit harsh.

WickerGuy (talk) 19:49, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there:

Sailorlula here responding to your note. For years now, the general rule of thumb we've been following for plot/synopsis portions of the 2001/film article is simple and strict: if it ain't in the film, it doesn't belong in the article. WRT the scripts, you could find all manner of references in the various script fragments, both real and fabricated, that are floating around the web. Since even the genuine fragments of the script vary wildly from the final film, and since Kubrick was cutting and jettisoning frames of the film up to and after the premiere, that really doesn't amount to much.

Sailorlula (talk) 09:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MacArthur airport website

Hello It seems that you are extraordinarily opposed to the addition of macarthurairport.com to the external links section, citing it is not the official website. Just out of curiosity, how do you know its not? Btw, someone added it once again. Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 14:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2001

I think the bone is roughly in the correct position (10 o'clock to 4 o'clock vs. 11 o'clock to 5 o'clock), but you're right that it's totally the wrong orbiting vehicle:[1] The guy who uploaded it 4 years ago is indef-blocked. It would be nice if someone could do a proper match-cut, i.e. to try to do frame captures from just before and just after the cut. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:55, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]