User talk:TheRealFennShysa

Archives
November 2004 – June 2006

Heh

You know, sometimes, even when you're in the midst of very fervently disagreeing with someone, you reread something, you chuckle, and you tip their hat to them for that bit of cleverness, if not for anything else. — Mike • 15:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Netwriter

Since you seem to be having the same problem with this individual, I'm wondering if you could advise me who I should raise a complaint with? He is continually posting my name on his userpage against my wishes, and despite my continually removing it. In additon, he keeps deleting my requests from his talk page that he not do so, in an apparent attempt to hide them.

Thanks for any help. Nick Cook 22:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! Nick Cook 09:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: this Afd

Hi, wanted to drop you a note here rather than on User talk:Netwriter re this Afd. I'm sure you didn't mean it to sound this way, but noting that "very little of Netwriter's contributions survive in the current revision" can come across as if to suggest his contributions were less than constructive. Particularly for a newer user, this can foment a "the rest of the community is against me" feeling. Thanks for taking this into consideration. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your edit to Independent film

I am referring to this edit[1]. It seems you are mistaken in calling this link spam, that site is both on-topic and non-commercial. Please try to assume good faith in the future. HighInBC 20:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Once again you have removed my link for 'self promotion'. As I already pointed out to you and the talk page of the article this is not just reason for removing something. It seems as though you are simply reverting me repeatedly without attempting to discuss it. I gave 24 hours notice on the talk page asking for peoples opinions on this link and that is the place to discuss it. Please stop unilaterally reverting my edits without justification.

To quote the guideline WP:NOT that you pointed out to me:

You are free to write about yourself or projects you have a strong personal involvement in. However, do remember that the standards for encyclopedic articles apply to such pages just like any other, including the requirement to maintain a neutral point of view, which is difficult when writing about yourself.

Simply being involved with the website in question does not preclude it. If you have an objection regarding the encyclopedic quality of this link please address that. Do not simply revert me. Thank you. HighInBC 17:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I have just read your response on the talk page now, thank you for addressing the encylopic value of the link this time. Please assume good faith in that this was not an attempt to promote my site. While it does retain it's copyrights it does not turn a profit and is ran for the sake of other independent film enthusiests. HighInBC 17:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Raiders of the Lost Ark

It's not vandalism; it's the truth!

"Knoxville's mother hen"

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Awarded to TheRealFennShysa for his diligence in keeping the Knoxville, Tennessee article, a newcomer magnet, on track while patiently educating newcomers on the "Wikipedia Way". --A. B. 13:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

of interest

Thought you mind find this MfD of interest. PT ^(s-s-s-s) 19:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Think of the Children!!!!1!

I don't know about you, but I personally witnessed seven human beings physically explode before my eyes after reading Sins Past. O, the horror! Let the truth Free! How many more must suffer explosive reactions? This madman must be stopped! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

filmmaking links

Just wanted to let you know that I reverted the links you restored to the article. They are indeed good sites that showcase low-budget films, but at the end of the day they are sites to view films, and a limited genre of them at that. Per WP:MOS, article links should be minimal and directly pertinent to the topic. Personally, I feel that even the links that remain are too biased towards indy filmmaking as it is, but that's certainly not surprising, as it is the mode of filmmaking that far more people have experience with. In any case, just wanted to let you know of my edits, in case you wanted to discuss further either on our user pages or on the article discussion page. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola 18:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Animaniacs

I never said Pinky and the Brain contained Animaniacs shorts. I'm aware that PatB was its own show at that point. I just meant that since PatB spun-off from Animaniacs, it should be included that the PatB DVDs come out the same day, just as a tidbit. That way, fans of both shows would know when both come out in one easy sentence as opposed to having to search individually for Animaniacs and then Pinky and the Brain. Doodoobutter 21:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism of Steve Irwin

• The Steve Irwin article had pictures of penises in it. I reverted back to the last clean version and strictly warned the user who added them that he risked being blocked. Capitalistroadster 21:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Bowler's Rifle

I've added a citation for the Bowler's rifle trivia on the Brico County page. It comes from the recently published Firefly: Official Companion, Volume One by Joss Whedon. Shsilver 13:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

List of Indenpendent Films

TheRealFennShysa (Talk | contribs) (revert - HOW is that film significant?)

Commenting on you edit removing Video de Familia from the list of Significant Independent Films. That film caused a commotion upon its realease in Cuba, critics hailed it and the audiences were devastated it for it's sincere portrayal of a taboo subject. This is english speaking Wikipedia, not Anglo-culture only. It would be more appropriate if you researched the topic somewhat before making such desitions and potentially discouraging involvement.

Star Wars kid

I just noticed your comment on your last edit. Does he no longer live in Trois-Rivières? If so then it is fine with me if you put the information that he did back in. I'm just concerned since it is a fairly small town and it seems like an invasion of privacy since someone could look up his family in the phone book. I've done the same kind of thing with some other living person articles. Wishing you all the best. Steve Dufour 13:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, Fenn, fancy meeting you here. Just thought I'd drop by and say hello. HamillianActor 02:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

fair-use images

The usage of Image:B5 delenn03.jpg in Mira Furlan is not consistent with the Wikipedia fair-use guideline on images. The guideline outlines television screenshots as fair-use "for critical commentary and discussion of the cinema and television." Furthermore, the requisite detailed fair-use rationale on the image's page specifies that "the image is only used to illustrate the fictional subject, and not to illustrate a non-fictional but related subject (such as the actor or illustrator)."

The image is not used for informational purposes of Mira Furlan, nor related critical commentary where it would be appropriate. It is only being used to show the reader what Ms. Furlan's character looked like on Babylon 5; a usage which would be fair-use on the character's page (and is), but not here. I've removed the image again and I hope this makes sense to you. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 22:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:ZachPicture.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ZachPicture.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Rossrs 03:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Zacherley.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Zacherley.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Rossrs 03:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I see you

I see that you are clearly just as annoyed as I am about the category changes to the various Star Wars articles from "science fantasy" to "science fiction" or even this new "science fantasy/science fiction (disputed)" trend that this user has attempted to begin. The dispute is being argued in the Talk:Star Wars page and I would really appreciate it if you would run in there and back me up. Thanks. :) The Filmaker 02:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Question

---

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Star_Trek:_New_Voyages&diff=92942190&oldid=92857422

I see you reverted my edit to the Star Trek New Voyages page; I uploaded an image, but this upload is not even in my contribution history.

Please be honest with me: Did you really find a red-link when you got there? If you say "yes," then I will believe you.

If you are innocent of this delete, then someone esle deleted my valid upload -I had copyright permission, as I had explained in edit comments.

Thank you in advance for your assistance; I don't much check my talk page; You may reply to me at Gww1210@aol.com

GordonWatts 10:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I certainly can't delete an uploaded image - that would take an administrator, which had already happened at the time, as the image link was displaying a red link to a non-existant file. Simple as that. TheRealFennShysa

That is right - I had all but forgotten how uploads work; I have not edited here in months if not years. Thank you for the info and the reply. If I am not mistaken, the admin deleting it must notify the person who uploaded it by a message on his or her talk page, and that never happened; I am at a loss on how to proceed; If I find time, I may go to the village pump or some similar page and see assistance. Thank you once agian, and take care.GordonWatts 02:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:24 protection

Well, Academic Challenger (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) blocked the user indefinitely, but he did leave a note on the block log that it was a vandal sockpuppet. If the guy comes back tomorrow under a different account, then I'll consider temporary protection of the article(s). Nishkid64 00:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

And, I have watchlisted both pages. Nishkid64 00:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Molodzianowski

Thanks. I blocked him. Academic Challenger 00:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)