User talk:Sensorium

Welcome!

Hello Sensorium, 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
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Manual of Style
Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

-Poli (talk • contribs) 05:12, 2005 July 25 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:JamesGunnPromotional.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JamesGunnPromotional.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

--Complaint-- I am inclined to agree with those other authors you are arguing with.

Please don't turn Wikipedia into the unofficial James Gunn Slither fan page.

Stick to the facts. Mentioning 84% fresh rating is a fact. Let readers draw their own conclusion from these facts. Use Occam's razor when editing on wikipedia. If Slither is truly an amazing hit with critics, then let the facts speak for themselves. I don't remember this film being nominated for any oscars. Every year Entertainment Weekly and other major film magazines list a BEST OF list, a top 10 of film. Please wait until the end of the year before you proclaim Slither the best film of the year.

The movie is not even out on DVD yet.

If the movie makes some of the critics' top ten lists, then you have a better case for calling this film the best horror film ever.

My 2 cents. Lurker4life 23:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

fixed THE DESCENT

saw your point about THE DESCENT. It never occurred to me to change that. I will change in accordance with consistency. thanks for pointing this out.

have a good night

I like the new addition to the Slither page, "more neutral sounding."

hey, I think we can work this out.

I noticed a change on the Slither page that mentions "this is the best reviewed horror film in years" but also mentions the negative effect of the movies box office on the genre. I checked out the article that is being used as the source. the research checks out. Filmmaker Eli Roth and the Slither's Producer Paul Brooks are used as sources in that article. so the multiple sources back up the assertions in that article.

I guess I don't mind saying that this movie is the best reviewed horror film in years as long as the statement itself is neutral. the current statement is more neutral sounding. did you write it? if so, then I approve.

as far as Lloyd Kaufman goes, I will stand my ground on this. In fact, in Slither James Gunn pays homage to Lloyd Kaufman by having him play a cameo in the film AND he even has The Toxic Avenger playing on a television in the background. In the video diary that Gunn plans to release along with the Slither DVD, James Gunn says that "Lloyd Kaufman taught me everything I need to know about filmmaking." So, I don't think there is anything wrong with listing him as an influence.

anyhow, in the spirit of compromise, I think I feel better with the new addition. if you are cool with this, then hopefully we can put this behind us.

take care.

Guerillas on a Plane

Talk:Snakes on a Plane#Slander

chocolateboy 21:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lloyd Kaufman

I feel like you are being obtuse about the Lloyd Kaufman thing. YOu said that James Gunn didn't have Lloyd on his mind when he made SLiTHER right? Then explain WHY Mr. Gunn has the Toxic Avenger playing on a television set in the background of one of his scenes? And explain WHY Mr. Gunn has his old boss from Troma starring in a cameo appearance? When directors do this, they are clearly paying homage to their influences. Often times when a director places an old movie on a television screen in the background of their movies, they are paying homage to their favorite movies/directors. How could Gunn NOT be thinking about Kaufman? That, and they made Tromeo and Juliet together. If Lloyd or Toxie didn't appear in SLiTHER then I would agree with you.

But your argument is that Lloyd Kaufman and Troma had no connection to Gunn's thought processes regarding this film. Clearly, Lloyd Kaufman was very much on his mind since (a) Gunn pays homage to Lloyd's work with the Toxic Avenger film clip in SLiTHER and (b) because he ASKED Mr. Kaufman to be in his film.

Please don't be so literal/obtuse about this. I want to work with you to create fun but honest Wiki page. For instance, I liked Jeeper Creepers. But the director of that film is also a registered sex offender. Some people may not want to mention that since they like that film. But that is the truth/fact.

Hopefully we can see eye to eye about this. Guerillafilm 20:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Slither (film).

For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 12:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC).

Replaceable fair use Image:JamesGunnPromotional.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:JamesGunnPromotional.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 that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 22:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ST1929-Tromeo-Juliet.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ST1929-Tromeo-Juliet.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Thespecialsmovie.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Thespecialsmovie.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Phantasm.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Phantasm.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LolliLove.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:LolliLove.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Rettetast (talk) 13:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Slithermovieposter.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Slithermovieposter.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:The-Brood-1979.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:The-Brood-1979.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Toycollectornovel.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Toycollectornovel.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:ST1929-Tromeo-Juliet.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:ST1929-Tromeo-Juliet.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:05, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ST1929-Tromeo-Juliet.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ST1929-Tromeo-Juliet.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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Mike Peel (talk) 17:55, 13 July 2012 (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) 13:08, 23 November 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) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]