This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.35.2.8 (talk) at 06:05, 26 August 2010 (→The Signpost: 23 August 2010). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 06:05, 26 August 2010 by 68.35.2.8 (talk) (→The Signpost: 23 August 2010)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
| This is Nehrams2020's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 |
 | Welcome to my talk page.
|
The Signpost: 16 August 2010
- WikiProject report: A Pit Stop with WikiProject NASCAR
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: ArbCom releases names of CU/OS applicants after delay
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Get Low (film) references addendum
Hi
Your handle says Nehrams 2020 but I am not sure if that is your name. I left this message with Bearcat and Cinemaniac86 but perhaps they are no longer involved in the maintenance of the page on the Get Low film.
I noticed there were only a handful of references/external links about Get Low, the Sony Pictures Classics small budget film currently in release.
There is a video editorial online on Get Low that may interest Misplaced Pages in referencing the content. It's really well made and if after reviewing it you may think it is worthwhile adding the reference to the list of sources that have produced editorials, essay or content related to the film.
http://midnighttracks.net/2010/getlowvid
Hope this helps in some way and hopefully it is not scorching hot in San Diego this time of year.
CinemaFanCA
76.170.118.23 (talk) 00:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Get Low - A reference worth evaluating
Nehrems 2020,
Thank you for the encouragement but the WP guidelines you mentioned are a little over my head. I just thought the editors that put the Get Low page on wikipedia may find this video editorial interesting and worth referencing in the section on references/external links, that is if some of you would view the video and decide amongst yourselves.
From my experiences with wikipedia simply editing or adding a section for someone who is not a long-time editor is a waste time since someone like me is neither familiar with all the guidelines and any contribution is considered by some editors as vandalism.
The best thing is simply to point out some possibilities to you guys and let you decide on it amongst yourselves. For this reason I left a notice with Bearcat, Cinemaniac86 (?) and another person besides you who all worked on producing the Get Low page.
I'd be curious to see what comes out of this if any.
I believe the video editorial has copyrights from Sony and the editorial producer who put together the storyline for the film/commentary.
Thanks and best,
76.170.118.23 (talk) 10:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Get Low - Reference added
I took a chance and added the reference. You guys will decide if it a worthwhile addition to the references incuded with this film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.118.23 (talk) 20:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 August 2010
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Cryptozoology
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Proposed decision of climate change case posted
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
You vandal you!!
Apologies for suspecting you of vandalism on "The Sandlot" with this edit: Somehow you got the name mistaken as "The Right Stuff". I corrected it, then tried to track down the edit, assuming you might be leaving a trail of vandalism that would need to be corrected. If you were doing something automated that explains this error you might want to follow up yourself in the wake of what you were doing at that time. If you were making a systematic error I assume you have corrected it by now. I just thought you might want to know. --68.35.2.8 (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)