Talk:God's Not Dead (film): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 04:17, 2 April 2014 editMjolnirPants (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers8,669 edits →Reception: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 04:22, 2 April 2014 edit undoAnupam (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,403 edits →Urban Legend: moreNext edit →
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 15:		Line 15:
	: describes the film as being "based off a chain email popular ten years ago". Probably should be noted.] (]) 07:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)		: describes the film as being "based off a chain email popular ten years ago". Probably should be noted.] (]) 07:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
	::One Christian source, one Atheist source, and one film industry source, it's good enough for me. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 12:23, 1 April 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->		::One Christian source, one Atheist source, and one film industry source, it's good enough for me. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 12:23, 1 April 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			The Patheos blog links do not meet ] and are unacceptable for this article - they are ] blogs and are unreliable. The one by ET, that User:LM2000 is fine and I've added that back in the article, in the appropriate section. Furthermore, you are violating ] and ] with your addition of addition of as well as . Please undo your edits. Thank you, ]<sup>]</sup> 04:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

	== Synopsis ==		== Synopsis ==

Revision as of 04:22, 2 April 2014

Film: Christian / American Stub‑class

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the Christian films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about religious debates. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about religious debates at the Reference desk.

Preorder tickets?

Considering that pre-order tickets were available for the film months before it released, it's likely that a significant amount of the revenue from opening weekend came from those and not from other movie-goers. Is there going to be any way to statistically tell how much money came from pre-order tickets? Silverseren 02:22, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure there is a way. AFAIK pre-ordered tickets are generally considered part of the opening take, so long as they are used during opening weekend. I don't think it matters, however. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 21:33, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Urban Legend

It seems the first thing most people notice about this film is the similarity between it and a certain urban legend. In fact, I've noticed it from all sides, Christian and Atheist. I am of the opinion that these similarities are enough to warrant the inclusion of their mention in the article, and I'd like to encourage anyone reading this to weigh in on the discussion.

Atheist pointing out the similarities
Christian pointing out the similarities

I haven't done so yet because I am would like to see sources based in the film industry making the comparison, and I haven't noticed any who outright say it, just those who repeatedly imply it. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 04:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Entertainment Tonight describes the film as being "based off a chain email popular ten years ago". Probably should be noted.LM2000 (talk) 07:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

One Christian source, one Atheist source, and one film industry source, it's good enough for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MjolnirPants (talk • contribs) 12:23, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The Patheos blog links do not meet WP:RS and are unacceptable for this article - they are self published blogs and are unreliable. The one by ET, that User:LM2000 is fine and I've added that back in the article, in the appropriate section. Furthermore, you are violating WP:OR and WP:SYNTH with your addition of addition of this reference as well as this link. Please undo your edits. Thank you, Anupam 04:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Synopsis

The descriptions of Josh and the professor given in the official synopsis are a part of the story and should remain. A movie in which a polite, warm-hearted atheist professor debates a closed-minded Christian student is a very different one from this one. Therefore, it is not a violation of WP:NPOV to include descriptions of those characters pulled from a primary source. I would argue that it's not a violation to include descriptions based on reviews and expert opinions, even if one of them opines that the professor in the film is one of the worst philosophy professors imaginable, but not being a violation and being conducive to a good article aren't the same thing. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:03, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Reception

Is there any need or use for a 'Christian appraisal' subsection? I don't see any other such section, even on other Christian films. Is there any precedent whatsoever for this? MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 04:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Categories: