User talk:Patar2094

Hi Patar2094! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like 78.26 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome Patar2094!

Maruf Parvez ❯❯❯ Talk 16:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Prison Of The Dead, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.

We usually don't consider IMDB to be a reliable source. You can read more about that at WP:RS/IMDB. Please submit the draft to articles for creation once you add reviews and other information from independent, reliable sources. Thank you! Mcampany (talk) 21:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm a little leery about some of the sources, as some of them appear to be self published sources. The issue with these is that in most cases they don't undergo the type of editorial oversight and fact-checking to be considered a reliable source, nor are they typically seen as a reliable source by other reliable sources. It's honestly fairly difficult sometimes to argue for a site's reliability when it comes to horror, unfortunately. For example, we need to be able to argue that The Schlock Pit is typically seen as a reliable source to justify their review and article being seen as a reliable source. This is often done by showing where the site has been frequently used as a reliable source by other reliable sources. It's something that would be seen as a relatively weak source for the most part, even though I would tentatively consider it usable. AllMovie is also a bit of a weak source since some think that the reviews are too short to be seen as in-depth. It's something I don't always agree with since the site doesn't review all movies, but it does make it less of a solid source than it could be.

I think it would be good to try to continue searching for sourcing. If we could find reviews or coverage in places like Bloody Disgusting, Rue Morgue, and other heavyweights, it would be easier to defend the film's notability if it was questioned. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:33, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, short fun fact: I worked in a video store when this released and one of my customers was the mother of one of the actresses in the movie. I was honestly a little star struck, as I absolutely love FMP. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:33, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ReaderofthePack: Thank you very much for your help with editing and advice! It was my first page and I started it wanting to turn some of the red links on the FMP filmography page blue (I'm a huge fan too). I just chose one of the first ones on the list, but wow is this one obscure! I stopped trying to find reputable reviews and started looking through David DeCoteau interviews since he seems to be prolific at those as well. They mostly seem to cover his bigger successes for FMP throughout the 90s, sometimes naming other smaller "teen-horror, Scream-inspired" releases like Shrieker and Talisman or they just skip over to Voodoo Academy and everything he's done after that. I've added a couple more sources from DeCoteau but they don't directly mention this film, just the period of his career when he produced it, so I'm not sure if they work. Patar2094 (talk) 22:51, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prison of the Dead, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

SL93 (talk) 23:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case there was any doubt of the film's notability, I added two reviews from books. SL93 (talk) 00:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Gingerdead Man 3 Roller Boogieman.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]