User talk:Blake Burba

Hello, Blake Burba, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
Your first article
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

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, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place "{{helpme}}" on this page and someone will drop by to help. You can also contact me if you wish by clicking "talk" to the right of my name. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree

Blake, yes, of course I agree ("since" is better than "from" in Bobby Fischer). I didn't see the limitation of "from" until you pointed out! The second time I changed back to "from" was a complete accident (confusion resulting from being in software "Edit Conflict" when I tried to put in several minor edits). (Sorry.) Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 09:35, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Blake Burba (talk) 09:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise- You're welcome

Thanks also for your work in The Shining. I wrote about 80% of the article as it now stands, though little of the pop culture section, although I heavily re-edited that part. I'm more of a content & big-picture guy and less of a style & small-details guy, and I really like well over 99% of your editorial changes. I reverted two out of how many you did? (It seems like seven million.) (BTW, the phrase 'military martinet' is used a lot although you are correct it is redundant. The phrase derives from Col. Jean Martinet a drillmaster of the Fr. army during the reign of Louis XIV)

Cheers--WickerGuy (talk) 21:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Crucible (1957 film)

Thank you for the cleanup. Bahavd Gita (talk) 15:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Blake Burba (talk) 15:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

subquote style proposal

I posted about MOS style. You probably disagree with my preference, so I invite your response there. Nick Levinson (talk) 08:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT Films in the Romance Films

On your comment on their not being a long history of LGBT romance films. I found the earliest definate romance film I could find. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Anders_als_die_Andern This film was created in 1919. There are acutally older LGBT films but most of them I wouldn't consider romance. -Rainbowofpeace (talk) 18:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The oldest lesbian one I could find is 1929. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Pandora%27s_Box_(film).-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 19:06, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shining minutes

You are quite right that it is 24 minutes as stated in the main body. Thanks for noticing the discrepancy.--WickerGuy (talk) 17:34, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS The use of the word "overtly" in the Kubrick article re "Alternate adaptations" should probably have been "explicitly". However, there is no harm in omitting the word.--WickerGuy (talk) 17:34, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Starship Troopers edits

I like your trimmed edit. I'm keeping an eye on this section because we don't want it to explode into a fan-crazed cruft piece, so keeping it concise is always a plus. Bravo! SeanNovack (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jaws

Thanks for all your help in Jaws (film)! I thought about asking if there's anything on the writing that can hinder me in this... igordebraga ≠ 20:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see a response - specially after the first complaints appeared. igordebraga ≠ 16:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Hello BB. First let me say thanks for all the work that you are doing on WikiP's film articles. I noticed your edit summary here [1] and it sent me on a search for what the IP was trying to do. Near as I can tell they were trying to add the release date for the film in West Germany. The IP was making several edits like this and I am fairly sure that they were using IMDb to make these changes. Of course we don't use that website as a reference and in the case of the Pink Panther article the WG release date isn't really notable IMO. While this isn't really important in the grand scheme of things I thought I would pass along my thoughts and thanks again for all your work here. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your complimentary words. They are much appreciated. MarnetteD | Talk 19:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jaws

Thanks for the pickup, friend! Looking at my edit, I feel fairly sure I was intending what you achieved. Regards, DocKino (talk) 06:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, standard "-ly" adverbs don't take a hyphen. Here's our Manual of Style on it (under #3, fourth bullet point), and that agrees with all mainstream American English styleguides. DocKino (talk) 04:35, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ferris Bueller's Day Off image date

Regarding this edit of yours, the edit you undid seems consistent with the image's description. DMacks (talk) 21:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica Lange

Hi Blake Burba. Excellent work there in eradicating all the fluff and cruft. I particularly enjoyed your comments involving the use of "garner". I'll keep an eye on the article to make sure these changes don't get reverted. Keep up the good work. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:55, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Current ANI report: User:MarkAlexisGabriel and socks redux. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 05:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI #2

New sockpuppet confirmed. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:12, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article restructuring at the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 02:44, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Shawshank Redemption

No problem, I'm a big fan of the film. I'd overhaul it towards a GAN but I just don't have the time right now. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 01:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you very much Blake. Take care. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any time. Blake Burba (talk) 04:31, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Hopkins

Regarding your recent RV of an edit of mine in the article Anthony Hopkins, if you check MOS:POSS you will see that either Hopkins’ or Hopkins’s is acceptable, so there is nothing ‘possibly specious’ about Hopkins’s. I’m used to reading Hopkins’s in newspapers such as The Guardian, the possessive form taken in the article’s references from that source, so I changed the form to what I was used to. I suspect the extra sibilant in these cases is less common in American English and certainly Weblish generally. Can I invite you to check the possessive case in the article Gerald Manley Hopkins? Actually, I have to confess I was unaware that the MOS allows both options, so you are correct in saying that Hopkins’ is ‘perfectly fine’ and I was incorrect in making an unnecessary change where the usage in the article was consistent. However, by my count, we now have one Hopkins’ and two Hopkins’s, so the usage in the article is currently inconsistent! I’m happy to go back to Hopkins’ now that I’m clearer about the MOS on this. Regards Welham66 (talk) 14:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my somewhat aggressive edit summary. Intended to separate the reckless and careless from the intelligent and thoughtful--you're in the latter category. I'd be thrilled to change all to "Hopkins'..." Purely a matter of preference for simpler forms when possible. "Hopkinses" to me seems more difficult to say easily, even when read to oneself. Cheers! -Blake Burba (talk) 14:53, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No apologies required. All the best. Welham66 (talk) 15:10, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Current/Past Members of the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Hello again. I saw you rvt of the OR on the article for the film of A Clockwork Orange and I wanted to make you aware that it looks like we have someone who is trying to do this on several articles. Here are the two I've found so far

Mes5523 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Wzk5057 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Psupsychmom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

In another venue (coffee house after a screening of the film, chat room etc) these might be interesting ideas to discuss but they don't fit here at WikiP. Who knows if this editor will keep creating new accounts but I thought that I would clue you in so you can keep an eye peeled for more of the same. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:50, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll be editing rather sporadically this evening (as is my wont) but I'll keep my eyes peeled. Best -Blake Burba (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rats I know there was a third one. I hope that you have an enjoyable evening when you can get away from here :-) MarnetteD | Talk 22:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

T-Rex

I added two sentences, not one. Though it is sparce, my two sentence, three clause paragraph helped readers know more about his stage and screen career, as well as his effect on pop culture.

Please assume good faith and help me improve this article. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 05:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, no. Go forth and annoy another. --Blake Burba (talk) 05:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's "sparse". --Blake Burba (talk) 05:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your editting skills, I love them. I love you and everything about the word "sparse," which I can now spell correctly. You have added to my knowledge. Now I must take what you have taught me, my lover, and go add to the Rex Harrison article. If you're not gonna help bake the cake, don't put your fingers in the icing. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Tom Cruise

Why are you spoiling this article ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Napsync (talk • contribs) 15:27, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm editing according to Wikipedia policies in an attempt to maintain the quality of the article. I hope you will do the same. Blake Burba (talk) 19:43, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. It looks like the cat has been removed from all of the film articles. I think that the deal is that you can have a cat for an actor but there are limitations one of which is that you don't add it to every film/TV show/or play that they have been in. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 02:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks for your contributions. SwisterTwister talk 00:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Blake Burba (talk) 00:39, 20 May 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) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]