User talk:David A McIntee

Welcome!

Hello, David A McIntee, 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:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Hi, David. Welcome to Wikipedia. (I'm going to assume that you are David, the author of Sanctuary, etc., rather than a fanboy pulling a rather obscure and pointless prank, just because maintaining that much skepticism is exhausting.)

You are, of course, as welcome to edit here as anybody else, on pretty much any subject. However, you should probably be made aware that Wikipedia has a guideline about editing articles about yourself. The most relevant bit is this part.

The additions you recently made to David A. McIntee aren't really problematic, but in future it'd probably be best if you noted any corrections or updates that the David A. McIntee article needs on its talk page rather than editing the page itself. There are a lot of Doctor Who fans on Wikipedia, and one of us will doubtless be along shortly to make the necessary adjustments. (This guideline is just a formality to preserve the neutral point of view that Wikipedia aspires towards.)

On a purely fannish level, whatever happened to the plan for a Guy de Carnac novel? Is that one of the projects you've got scheduled for release this year?

Thanks for your time, and again, welcome to Wikipedia. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it is me- I stumbled across this entry and decided to sign up and clarify a couple of bits.

OK, you said "However, you should probably be made aware that Wikipedia has a guideline about editing articles about yourself. The most relevant bit is this part." Looked at the link, Gotcha. I'm updating my own site right now, so basically any future contributors should be able to get stuff from there, or I'm not hard to find around the web, on OG etc.

"On a purely fannish level, whatever happened to the plan for a Guy de Carnac novel? Is that one of the projects you've got scheduled for release this year?"

Yes, it is. Actually it's a trilogy, but probably only the first part will be out this year.

David A McIntee 09:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, every time I tried to edit that last comment to put the signature in, it makes me log out and back in again - I'm running Firefox with wiki cookies approved on the whitelist, but still... Arg, it's doing it for this new comment as well- I hit "save page" and get "Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data. Please try again. If it still doesn't work, try logging out and logging back in." That *is* annoying. (and probably enough to keep me from bothering...) And I haven't even had breakfast yet.

David A McIntee 09:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that can happen with an annoying frequency. Not all the time, just often enough to be a pain in the neck. One of the down sides of one of the most popular sites on the Internet having a nearly all-volunteer staff. :( —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 13:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody might want to change "Represented by Redhammer" to "Represented by Peter Cox" as Peter and his business partner are dissolving the company and taking their clients their separate ways. I sure can pick 'em.

David A McIntee 15:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax Entries?

if you check the radio times, you'll find Gareth is listed in the credits, as for Rochelle Gadd, the BBC themselves told me that she would be appearing in it as that character. I don't post hoaxes. James Random>< Save your breath

And if you'll check this thread on Outpost Gallifrey you'll see the guy who made it up confess: http://www.gallifreyone.com/forum/sh...ad.php?t=87653. There's another thread (the big "Daleks are coming" one) where someone also confesses to taking that acknowledged hoax and putting it on Wiki.Lonemagpie 14:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Details

As we have you here perhaps you could fill in some biographical details to help flesh out your entry (place and date of birth are generally required although other things like education, influences, etc. are also handy) and perhaps provide a picture (as Wikipedia likes to have the entries illustrated). On a sidenote Beautiful Monsters has come in very handy for providing references for the various Alien and Predator entries :) (Emperor 13:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

--

OK, born in Stirling, December 31st 1968. Education- East Plean Primary, Bannockburn High, Falkirk College of Technology (which I think has subsequently had its name changed and become one of these new minor-university things). Married, with four cats.

As for a picture, um, try here: http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g1/Lonemagpie/meBF.jpg

And I'm always around on LiveJournal or Outpost Gallifrey, so don't be afraid to ask "what happened to this project" or "what's with that" or whatever. I don't bite.

Thanks for that - I added the birthdate. You will need to upload the photo yourself but they make it easy see: WP:UPLOAD, as it is your photo the best bet is to go for the Wikimedia Commons option which makes the image freely available for use across the Wikimedia projects. (Emperor (talk) 03:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I'll bung a picture up next week - got to get Reservoir Ferengi done by Monday!Lonemagpie (talk) 14:15, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CGI Timeline article

In regards to your comment that the trench run animation in Star Wars was not computer animated, I would recommend that your view this vintage documentary piece. It shows quite clear evidence that the piece in question was conputer animated. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I know Dan O'Bannon had done fake CG work - this post on TrekBBS should cover where I was coming from: http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2813770&postcount=69 Lonemagpie (talk) 21:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference coding

I noticed your attempts to put in a reference into the Brian Blessed article. You may want to check out our citation guidelines and our guidelines for identifying reliable sources. While the Kika and Bob website demonstrates the show exists, it doesn't demonstrate notability (shown by non-trivial coverage in reliable sources), and the front page doesn't prove that Blessed is involved. Normally, notability isn't inherited, but Brian Blessed is notable enough that it wouldn't hurt to mention that he's involved. I've fixed the citation on the Brian Blessed page, and I'll include the differences here for your own reference (with differences bolded):

<ref> {{cite web|url=http://www.kikaandbob.com/castandcrew.html |title=Cast and Crew page on the Official Kika and Bob website.}}</ref> If you have any questions, feel free to ask on my talk page. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks for that - I was getting a bit flustered trying to figure out the code for that. Lonemagpie (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alien runtime

Hi David, I noticed your edit to Alien (creature in Alien franchise)‎ and wondered if you actually were David A. McIntee the author. Since you indicate above that you are, I have a question for you: I did a lot of work a couple of years ago on the article Alien (film) using your book Beautiful Monsters as one of the main sources, among others. In the book, you indicate that the cinematic release of the film ran 119 minutes, while later video and DVD versions ran 116 minutes due to the different frame rates between film and video (p. 14). A few weeks ago, a discussion started on the article's talk page in which another editor argues that the film's theatrical runtime was 116 or 117 minutes, based on a number of other sources, and challenges your figure of 119 minutes, claiming it is unreliable in light of these other sources and because the book doesn't indicate how you arrived at this figure. Assuming you are, in fact, the author, you may be in a position to clear this up for us. Would you mind giving a response either at Talk:Alien (film)#Alien running time or here, indicating how you arrived at a figure of 119 minutes for the original theatrical runtime and why most other sources seem to give a figure that's a few minutes shorter? Your comment would likely go a long way towards settling this argument. Thank you. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, I wrote that, like 8 years ago... ISTR going by the BBFC's website, which gave the length of footage as well, from which you can calculate an exact time (since other reference sites all gave slightly different runtimes back in 2004). Having said that, my maths may be wrong, as the BBFC now (they've updated their site several times since BM was written) give a runtime of 116:35 for the original theatrical release.Lonemagpie (talk) 15:28, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Snake in the Eagle's Shadow, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Spy Who Loved Me and You Only Live Twice (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heroes and Villains (TV series)

Hello, I removed a sentence you had added to Heroes and Villains (TV series) but also started Talk:Heroes and Villains (TV series)#Showing in 2013. Please comment on that talk thread. Thank you. --Marc Kupper|talk 18:01, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reck

I gather you wrote the article on Reck, in which you said he was shot by the Nazis. Do you have a ref for that? Richard Evans etc say he died of typhus.

Sardaka (talk) 10:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was in the foreword to one of the Penguin Editions, IIRC, which said the typhus story was just an official line. I'll have to scour the spare room for the book to find it.

Thanks. Details will be greatly appreciated for the benefit of the article. Have just finished reading Diary of etc. Fabulous book.

Sardaka (talk) 08:51, 25 May 2015 (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) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]