User talk:Jim Stinson

Welcome!

Hello, Jim Stinson, and

• The tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article

And for more detailed information:

• Help pages - the instruction manual, contains everything you could possibly want to know
• The five pillars of Wikipedia - our principles, or how to get on with other editors
• Manual of Style - how to format articles, where to place pictures, and other stylistic matters.

You can also check out the community portal, which has lots of ideas on how you can help Wikipedia.

All of this information can be daunting, but if you have a question and can't find the answer, you can always ask

Hello, Jim. I took the liberty of adding the G&S and EN user boxes to your talk page. Userboxes are just for fun. If you don't like them, just delete them. I also added the Wikipedia notice for you, which I recommend you keep - It's supposed to be good for you.  :) Best regards, -- Ssilvers 03:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oregon, my original home state. Outstanding. :) How is Mt. Hood these days? Did they ever find those two guys from last December? Their bodies, I mean? OK, about diegesis... I'm not a theater maven. I never heard of that word until I saw it referenced in the article about music in Superman films, TV, etc. Then I saw this extremely pretentious and obscure debate about what diegesis supposedly is vs. some other concept I never heard of, and what could I say but "Shazam!" Anything would be an improvement over that article. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, there's been a proposal by

If you still have any specific wiki-formatting questions, need help with wikipedia writing style, or have suggestions for helpful illustrations for the article, I’d be glad to try to help. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page or the article’s talk page, or to shoot me an email: jacobolus AT gmail. So far, you’ve done a bang-up job, much better than what was there before. It’d be nice sometime to get the articles on digital compositing, chroma key, multiple exposure, blend modes, matte, alpha compositing, &c. in reasonable shape, and linked together in a coherent way. –jacobolus (t) 10:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: sources... at least on the digital side, some of Alvy Ray Smith’s papers/technotes might be useful: [1] [2]. He references Walter Beyer. “Traveling Matte Photography and the Blue Screen System”. American Cinematographer, May 1964: 266. And also: Raymond Fieldling. The Technique of Special Effects Cinematography, London; Focal/Hastings House. 3rd edition, 1972, 220–243. (Both about pre-digital compositing) I’m not sure where to track down old American Cinematographer issues, but Fielding’s book is on google book search. –jacobolus (t) 20:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, also, if you know of relatively recent (within online archives) papers that are relevant, I probably have access. –jacobolus (t) 20:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Duh! I've got Fielding (He taught me at UCLA too). Not too much there, if failing memory serves. It's a faux book: a collection of simmtee papers.Jim Stinson (talk) 01:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Well, if there’s something I should go read, recommend away! :-) Otherwise, if you have any questions/etc., I’m glad to help in whatever way I can (making diagrams, copyediting, tracking down recent journal articles, etc.). –jacobolus (t) 06:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ! I am new to wiki so i hope I'm typing this in the right spot! I'm reaching out to other users for help. As I understand it, I need to track down an established wiki editor to help me rid the first article i've created ("Stone and Stone")of the ugly box that was posted on top "This article has multiple issues....".

I know exactly how these complaints came about. In my ignorance on how wiki works, I gave myself the same nickname as the subject I was writing on and then a whole drama ensued, as it was assumed that I was my subject and that I was writing an autobiography! In truth, I am a huge comedy fan and biographer and was dipping my toes for the first time in wikipedia waters!

Any help or solutions you could provide me when you get the chance would be greatly appreciated! This poor little article certainly doesn't deserve such an ugly heading box because of my wiki-ignorance! Thank you in advance for your time! Comedybiographer (talk) 10:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, I've added the references you mentioned on the talk page. I'm reproducing them here:

• Clarke, Charles G. (1964). Professional Cinematography. Hollywood: American Society of Cinematographers. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Mascelli, Joseph V., ed. (1966). American Cinematographer Manual. Hollywood: American Society of Cinematographers. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Note that I made a couple of changes based on what I was able to find on the web ("American Cinematographer Manual" instead of "American Cinematography Manual" and location of Hollywood instead of Los Angeles). Can you verify whether these changes are correct? The ISBN would also be useful if you have it.

If you have any more recent references that you can cite instead of these, that would be preferred, as it makes it easier for other editors to track down the claims and ensure that the facts are not outdated.

To cite these inline in the text of the article, simply use the syntax {{sfn|author's last name|year|p=page}} or {{sfn|author's last name|year|pp=pages}}. Let me know if you have any questions! --diff (talk) 00:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! The two references were published before ISBN numbers existed. Since the shift to color was almost complete when they were published, they will not be out of date. As for personal citations, I'm already cited for my Videomaker article, so I don't see why my more complete (and lavishly illustrated) book citation would be inappropriate -- though I don't want to push it. Its ISBN is 978-1-60525-817-1. The book illustrations are owned by the publisher, per my contract with them; however similar photos not in the book are still mine. I'll see if I can find a good example for the article. The existing pic is a stinker -- shows no techniques except underexposure. Thanks again for your corrections and help.Jim Stinson (talk) 23:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, understood. I don't have a problem with the existing link to your Videomaker article, since a third party added it, but I'm sure someone will object if you reference your own book here. I'm about to reply to your recent message on the talk page -- sorry for splitting up the discussion into two places, that's my fault. Incidentally, it's common to indent replies by putting a colon in front of them in the edit box to make it easier to see who wrote what. If you edit this page you'll see one in front of my reply. You can add multiple colons in a row to indent more. --diff (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, many thanks, Diff. I'm sorry to be stupid about the technicalities.Jim Stinson (talk) 18:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Day for night, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the night scenes in the film Mad Max: Fury Road were filmed during the day? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Day for night. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the research I've been able to do, it seems that USS Walker (DD-163) and USS Mahan (DD-102) were both Wickes-class destroyers (a class which did indeed have four funnels or "stacks"); the only liberty the author seems to have taken is including both of them in the Second Battle of the Java Sea (Walker was slated for conversion to a damage-control hulk in 1939 and subsequently scuttled in 1941; Mahan, meanwhile, was scrapped in 1931. Both of these events took place well before the aforementioned battle). Hope this helps! --Special Operative MACAVITY^{Debrief me} 13:31, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Rosie the Riveter are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 05:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this is the work of a bot, because I have contributed to W- since 2007 and don't require welcoming. Also, my suggestion was specifically about improving the article.

A tag has been placed on

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. PleaseStand (talk) 15:10, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]