User talk:Palm dogg/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Triumph of the Will
Can you come up with some citations that back up the claim for Triumph being the "greatest documentary"? It seems that there might be support for it being considered the greatest propaganda film, but citing it for documentary is bound to be controversial. Was it ever chosen as the greatest DOCUMENTARY by a poll of filmmakers, critics or the public? Can you find citations from major critics who made the claim? " widely regarded as one of the most effective pieces of propaganda ever produced" is not the same as being cited as the greatest documentary, so better cites are needed. -- Samuel Wantman 07:01, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
It's difficult, because Triumph is a foreign film and most film critics tend to be Amero-centric. (And are reluctant enough to include Birth of a Nation as a great film) Here's my argument, and then I'll list the positive reviews: Triumph gave its director major international recognition that no other similar film has done, and carries extremely high name recognition. Pretty-much EVERY newspaper ran major obituaries when Riefenstahl died, and ALL of them mention it with high praise. I challenge you to find me a major critic who does otherwise (Although everyone obviously disagrees with the message, like Birth of a Nation it's famous for it's techniques) By contrast, most people can't name her other pioneering film, Olympia. Second, is there a line between documentary and propaganda? Almost everyone calls Triumph both, and the Documentary catagory also contains Michael Moore films Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11, both of which are considered (especially the latter) propaganda.
Here's the praise I could find (Give me a critic and I'll dig up more): Roger Ebert called it a "great documentary". [1] The Wall Street Journal called it "pioneering", "a mélange of documentary and propaganda" and "revolutionary in its cinematography and editing". [2] The New York Times said Triumph was a "daringly innovative documentary" and that it "deeply influenced later generations of documentary makers and television commercial makers." [3] The Guardian of Britain, while calling it a "documentary" also said Triumph was "renowned and reviled as the best propaganda film ever". [4] The Washington Post refered to it as an "the most effective Nazi propaganda of all time", an "overly long, but fascinating documentary", and "brilliantly shot and edited". [5] The Economist, said indirectly said "[its] filming and editing techniques both broke new ground, and many shots that now seem commonplace had never been seen before." [6]
However, because it is extremely controversial, I would be willing to have it moved under "German" cinema, perhaps in tandem with Fritz Lang, Werner Herzog, or Wolfgang Petersen. Palm_Dogg 11:56, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
User:68.45.255.183
Hi! 68.45.255.183 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) has been blocked for one month. One week obviously didn't work. >: Roby Wayne Talk 17:18, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Your link in Nine Billion Names of God
Had you looked at the talk page then you would have seen that a previous editor added such a link but it was promptly removed (as yours has been) because Wikipedia policy does not allow links to sites that are illegal under U.S. law. That is the way things are right now and they are not likely to change in the near future. Please refrain from making any such edits in the future as they will always be promptly removed by someone to stop Wikipedia from getting shut down by copyright infringment lawsuits. Thank you. Loom91 12:57, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- YIKES!! That certainly was not my intent. Thanks for the head's up! Palm_Dogg 13:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Salaams
Salaam, What up dogg? --JuanMuslim 1m 05:30, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
This type of censorship makes me sick
Vote to keep, show these hypocrites what's what, tolerance? ha, only when it's good for them--Diatrobica;l 23:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Need your help
Editor's contributions singled out for his faith, please help keep this notable article--172.159.25.124 16:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Ikiru
Hi, I noticed you moved the picture on that page. Did it look bad where I put it? I liked it more in the middle of the article, where it illustrates the text more instead of looking tacked-on at the end. I won't start an edit war over this, just curious about your reasoning :) - Bobet 23:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Triumph of the Will (Nomination)
I tossed in a few more Riefenstahl quotes, including (Thank God for the AP!) the one about anti-Semitism in Triumph. Any other suggestions? Palm_Dogg 09:39, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- No specific suggestions. Hope you don't mind my not voting to support, I only do that if I've really had a chance to study the article, which in this case I have not; this was an omission I noticed at a casual reading. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:33, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Your Welcome
Glad I could help The Catfish 20:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Copyright of Triumph of the Will
Assalamu alaikum. I'm afraid I don't remember where I got that bit of information. I'm sure it was on a web site where I was researching the copyright status of World-War-II-era images, but I can't seem to find it now. I'm sure that Riefenstahl lost her suit because of Britain's Enemy Property Act of 1953, which was specific to Britain and never applied to the U.S. In the U.S., the entire film is considered copyright the Riefenstahl estate, so all stills would have to be {{fairuse}}. Sorry about that. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 20:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Edits to the constitution
If you post a link to that version, I'll switch to it. I suspect other users will as well. Dave (talk) 08:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Category:Republican (US) Wikipedians
I'm not sure how important uniform titles are, but since the Democratic Party title is Category:Wikipedian Democrats (US), it would make sense to have the republican party category named Category:Wikipedian Republicans (US) - unless there was a reason you put the US before Wikipedians. firenexx 15:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- That would make sense, I suppose. firenexx 15:22, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Scouting article improvement
User:Gadget850 has started User talk:Gadget850/BSA article improvements as a step toward improving the BSA section of Wikipedia. Please visit this page and participate if you are interested or cross yourself out of the "Interested Wikipedians" if you are not interested. Thank you. Rlevse 18:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Please adopt your state
I have now completed the transition from state list to articles on Scouting in each state, as per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards, for merger and improvement of articles. Please help fill in some blanks at Scouting in Illinois! Thanks, YiS, Chris 09:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Osprey copyrights
I agree the illustrations are great and would be useful, but we would have to get Osprey's permission. If they let us use them at all, they would probably strictly limit how they could be reproduced. Yet current Wikipedia policy - I believe - mandates only free-use images be posted, so I'm not really sure what to do. Osprey probably has a copyright department that handles requests, which are best done through some kind of agent experienced in such things. It would be best to talk to one of the Wikipedia volunteer legal counsel for advice on the matter - I seem to remember there being a list of them somewhere. Good luck! --Jpbrenna 07:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Image:Badr.order.gif
Sorry, I forgot where I got it. It was some time ago. I'll look it up on Google. --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 23:53, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Fair use images
I notice that you have a lot of fair use images on your user page (according to this report, 119 of them on User:Palm dogg/Images). You should know that, in accordance with Wikipedia:Fair use#Fair use policy, you can't display these images on user pages. I suggest that you either remove them from your user page, or write the link like so: [[:Image:Somefile.jpg]] (note the colon at the front) so as to link to the image without displaying it. --bainer (talk) 01:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
You
Hi. I've been seeing your edits around a lot lately and wanted to say hi. I also wanted to get to know you better. Many editors come and some come on crusades to change things. You go to the University of Chicago apparently which means you should have a pretty good backing in social sciences. One nice thing about wikipedia is once you get to know people you can decide how closely you look at their edits. I've found Zora to be reasonably neutral and when she makes an edit I often don't bother to check it out unless it's interesting. However, sometimes editors don't leave edit summaries and you need to be more wary. So, what kind of person are you? You use footnotes so that's a good sign. Hi. Just making conversation... do do do... hi. gren グレン ? 03:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Three images
I recently uploaded Image:Badr Highway.gif, Image:Badr Campaign.GIF, and Image:Battle of Badr.jpg for the Battle of Badr page. All three of these images are copyrighted, but their creators have allowed the use of them under certain conditions. Could you please help me determine what license I should use? (All the relevant info is on the image pages) Your OrphanBot recently made some thinly-veiled threats against them, so I'm eager to get this resolved ASAP. Thanks! Palm_Dogg 08:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, we can't use the images Image:Badr Highway.gif, Image:Badr Campaign.GIF, and Image:Battle of Badr.jpg. The restriction of "no commercial use" would cause problems if, in the future, Wikipedia were to do something like publish a CD to help pay for the costs of running the website. If you can convince the creator to license the images under something like one of the acceptable Creative Commons licenses, the images can stay. --Carnildo 05:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Scouting Barnstarn
Did you see this proposal? Scouting Barnstarn --evrik 20:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Ran (film)
I couldn't help but notice (Edit Wars, grrr...) that you resumed doing some revamp work on the Ran page. I'm getting another page ready for a Featured Article nomination (Battle of Badr) but afterwards I was going to turn my attention back to Ran, now that I have the Criterion Edition and Stephen Prince's "The Warrior's Camera". Let me know if you're interested in collaborating. (This probably wouldn't be for another week or so) Palm_Dogg 11:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- As you may guess from my User page, I tend to primarily edit entertainment articles that I'm interested in. Ran is in my watchlist, as I'd added the DVD cover pic back in August, not long after I'd bought and watched the film. However, I've only seen it once (too many DVDs to watch) and the recent revamping was done in repsonse to seeing the {{peerreview}} template, and the to assist with the systematic removal of unnecessary date links (try doing a whatlinkshere to a date article!). As such, I don't know how much help I'd be, but I'll certainly keep an eye on proceedings and provide some input if I can. Gram 11:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Conventional warfare "linkspam"
Hi. I noticed that you recently made an edit to conventional warfare and I was hoping you could weigh in on a particular issue there. Thanks! uriah923(talk) 22:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
the Battles of Charles Martel
Palm dogg sorry it took so long, the book was late -- here is a good list of the battles of Charles Martel -- if you would put them in a battle box in the Charles Martel article, or the Battle of Tours, whichever you feel most appropriate! The Charlamagne list is coming, and thank you greatly for working with me. THE BATTLES OF CHARLES MARTEL:
Battle of Cologne
Battle of Amblève
Battle of Vincy,
Battle of Tours
Battle of Avignon,
Battle of Nîmes,
Battle of Montfrin
battle of the River Berre
Battle of Narbonne.
Thanks again for working with me! old windy bear 04:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Palm_DoggThanks, you are a pleasure to work with. Movies are a hobby of mine too! I just got an original copy (okay, orginal print on dvd) of Akira Kurosawa's treasure, Seven Samurii. Starship Troopers I hated. Where to begin? He admitted he did not read the book! They turn the real poltiical issues into jokes, no battle armour, the bugs are totally misrepresented -- I hated it. Made a mockery out of what was and is a great book that asks some pretty intense questions -- should the franchise be totally without civil duty? Why do men fight? Why should they fight? Oh well, thanks again, and I will get you the info on Charlamagne first, then Belisarius, then Subutai. You and I work well together, and I thank you!old windy bear 16:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Islamic article review
Hello Palm dogg, you seem to be knowledgable wih Islamic Conquests. Can you take a quick look at Moslem Conquest of North Africa and Battle of Carthage (698) to see if they are legimate? They are stub articles, with very few incoming links. Thanks Wendell 05:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Done. Palm_Dogg 06:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
user: Palm dogg Great job! You are the man on these boxes, and this is something I think we do well together, and it really adds to the article! I will have Charlamagne's next week. Would you look at Belisarius and Subutai? If I gather the battles on both (for the former, he was the greatest of the Byzantium generals, "Justinian's General," and the later was the "Dog of War" for Ghenghis Khan, though he is most famous for his complete anniliation of the Hungarians at the Mohi, and the conquest of Russia. Your campaign boxes would add to both articles - I have enough here in my own library on both to put the list together if you will work with me on the boxes, which you do better than I do! Did you put in for the Military project? I did, but I won't win, don't have enough support. I would have liked to have been an assistant - I really do know my military history. Oh well, let us get back to work! Thanks again for your help -- it really added to the article. Hey, what about putting a copy of Martel's battle box on his article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Martelold windy bear 14:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey Palm, do you realize Tours was the LAST 'GREAT' BATTLE, other than Berre or Narbonne, also both fought by Martel, which was an atempt to exand the Islamic sphere of influence, and it's "empire?") Ain al Jurr was the first internal battle fought as the last Umayyad Caliph, Marwan II, seized power in that battle. This battlebox shows how vital Tours was, as it represented, together with the following campaigns, the LAST EFFORT to expand prior to the implosion of the Islamic Calpihate. I think the boxes really add to the fairness and completeness of the article. if you want my help on any of the other Islamic Conquests, I am very familiar with that entire period, and not just from the Western Histories -- I read Arabic, and have read their histories of that period, which are fascinating.old windy bear 14:57, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
user: Palm dogg Great job on breaking up my conclusions in the Battle of Tours -- we do work well together! Your splitting the conclusion up, trying to factually sum up it's place in history by splitting what was a very complex question -- because the view has varied over time. Western scholars, the majority, ALWAYS agreed it was of macrohistorical importance, though Lewis influenced some folks circa early 20th century. Almost all modern western historians are in complete agreement that the campaigns of Martel in toto, with Tours as the centerpiece, were of macrohistorical importance in keeping the Caliphate out of Europe while it had the power to conquer it. After the Zab in 750, that ability no longer existed as you know. It is true today that some arab historians are saying "oh we could have it we had wanted to!" But Palm, trust me on this, I have read the Arab Chronicles of that period in Arabic, and then, and up until the Ottomans began rewriting Muslim history to suit themselves, Tours was regarded as one of the greatest disasters of Islamic history. Anyway, your splitting it up was great, THANKS! (Did you see my note on Starship Troopers, I wll go next weekend to get my notebooks? That paper is there, and may have some real value -- it was far more controversial then than today, believe me! old windy bear 20:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
user: Palm dogg Hey buddy! Working on Charlamagne today, and I have another to add to our list of generals, if you are interested -- Alp Arslan, the "Valiant Lion" who defeated the Byzantines at Manzikert! If he had not died quite young, he might have rivaled Alexander or Ghenghis Khan, he was that good. Interested in a campaign box for him? Also, if you need any help on the Moslem Conquest of North Africa and Battle of Carthage (698) (which is basically no article at all, just a stub, and the battle was a truly vital one, in the Byzantine loss of it's african themes!) let me know. They could both stand some expansion...AND, i will have the paper and notebook on Starship Troopers for you next weekend. Hey, I am willing to mail you those materials if you want them.old windy bear 20:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Robert A. Heinlein Novels Template
I've created the new Robert A. Heinlein bibliography and placed your Template:Heinlein (Novel) template on that page. I also moved the template in the main Robert A. Heinlein article up to the Bibliography section, where it serves a good purpose to summarize the list of Heinlein novels for quick reference. I edited the template to make the name conform with the convention on Wikipedia that the name include the middle initial A. Thanks for creating the template, and just in time too. Hu 02:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
