Revision as of 00:01, 16 March 2022 editAnomieBOT (talk | contribs)Bots6,574,397 edits Adding/updating {{OnThisDay}} for 2022-03-15. Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OnThisDayTagger← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 02:06, 10 January 2025 edit undoJohnadams11 (talk | contribs)305 edits →New Introductory Section: new sectionTag: New topic |
(40 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talkheader}} |
|
|
|
|
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=Art|class=GA}} |
|
|
{{ArticleHistory |
|
{{ArticleHistory |
|
|action1=PR |
|
|action1=PR |
Line 37: |
Line 37: |
|
|action6oldid=950054730 |
|
|action6oldid=950054730 |
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
|currentstatus=GA |
|
⚫ |
|topic=media and drama |
|
|
|otd1date=2010-03-15|otd1oldid=349863230|otd2date=2011-03-15|otd2oldid=419036810|otd3date=2014-03-15|otd3oldid=599536847|otd4date=2017-03-15|otd4oldid=770364934 |
|
|otd1date=2010-03-15|otd1oldid=349863230|otd2date=2011-03-15|otd2oldid=419036810|otd3date=2014-03-15|otd3oldid=599536847|otd4date=2017-03-15|otd4oldid=770364934 |
|
|otd5date=2022-03-15|otd5oldid=1077030410 |
|
|otd5date=2022-03-15|otd5oldid=1077030410 |
|
|
|action7 = FAC |
|
|
|action7date = 2024-10-27 |
|
|
|action7link = Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/The Godfather/archive2 |
|
|
|action7result = failed |
|
|
|action7oldid = 1253439950 |
|
⚫ |
|currentstatus=FFAC/GA |
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
|topic=media and drama |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|vital=yes|1= |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Film|core=yes|class=GA|American=yes}} |
|
{{WikiProject Film|core=yes|American=yes}} |
|
{{WikiProject Organized crime|class=GA|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=low|organizedcrime=yes|organizedcrime-imp=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject United States|class=GA|importance=Mid|USFilm=Yes|USFilm-importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Library of Congress|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Library of Congress|class=GA|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject New York City|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject New York City|class=GA|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Sicily|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Sicily|class=GA|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Mid|USFilm=Yes|USFilm-importance=Top}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{annual readership}} |
|
{{annual readership}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |
|
|maxarchivesize = 125K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|counter = 5 |
|
|counter = 5 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 2 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 2 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|algo = old(90d) |
|
|algo = old(180d) |
|
|archive = Talk:The Godfather/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:The Godfather/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}} |
|
}} |
Line 66: |
Line 73: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Disambig == |
|
== Nomination for ] == |
|
|
|
|
{{u|Gareth Griffith-Jones}} and {{u|Some Dude From North Carolina}} you're both being disruptive and need to hash it out here. Stop reverting to your preferred version. ] 18:20, 16 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Nominating for FA. ] (]) 20:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
{{ping|Betty Logan}} {{ping|Mazewaxie}} {{ping|Vaselineeeeeeee}} {{ping|Wrath X}} |
|
|
I think the article is in pretty good shape, would any of you like to bring it to ] status? |
|
|
See ]. ] (]) 22:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Opening Paragraph == |
|
|
|
|
|
As noted in the article, this film is one of the greatest and most influential films of all time. Yet, the article's entire first paragraph makes absolutely no note of this. Has this issue been discussed before? ] (]) 01:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Its influence and the regard it is held in is covered by the fourth paragraph in the lead. I don't see this as an issue as these elements as a rule are not discussed in the opening paragraph. Indeed, ] (by which GA status is assessed) recommends covering these aspects after the opening paragraph, and states "Summarize awards and achievements using proper context in a ''later'' paragraph" . Obviously there are many valid ways of writing a lead, but the lead in this article follows a common format. ] (]) 02:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
::@] Thank you. The resource you linked is helpful and I can see where the first paragraph is uniform. However, to me at least, it is obvious that the fourth paragraph should be move to second. The film's acclaim is of far more notability than the standard intrigue and deal making that accompanies many film productions. One example of what I'm suggesting is the ] article. Your thoughts? ] (]) 03:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== New Introductory Section == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am proposing a new introductory section which gives improved visibility the universal acclaim and historical importance of this film. The present treatment relegates this information to the fourth paragraph. Comments welcome. |
|
== Hatnote == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::The Godfather is a 1972 American epic gangster film directed by Francis Ford Coppola, who co-wrote the screenplay with Mario Puzo, based on Puzo's best-selling 1969 novel. The film stars an ensemble cast including Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Richard Castellano, Robert Duvall, Sterling Hayden, John Marley, Richard Conte and Diane Keaton. |
|
The current hatnote (''This article is about the 1972 film. For the original novel on which the film is based, see ]. For the male godparent in many Christian traditions, see ].''), has an issue in the last part. ] sends a reader to a disambiguation page, and so the hatnote should say just that (... for other uses, see ].) However, even after ] agreed that the small correction was helpful, ] began reverting my edits by calling me "boring" and saying that the current version had been there for a long time. After Praxidicae reverted Gareth for being "silly", Gareth continued to revert everyone's edits. Now, the question is, which hatnote works better? ''']''' (]) 18:21, 16 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:Point of clarification, I did not call Gareth silly. I said the note was silly, further, you both edit warred. ] 18:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::That was my mistake. I thought they were going to start the discussion but they just started reverting. ''']''' (]) 19:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::The Godfather is regarded as one of the greatest and most influential films ever made, as well as a landmark of the gangster genre. It was selected for preservation in the U.S. National Film Registry of the Library of Congress in 1990, being deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" and is ranked the second-greatest film in American cinema (behind Citizen Kane) by the American Film Institute. It was followed by sequels The Godfather Part II (1974) and The Godfather Part III (1990). |
|
== Lee strasberg == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::The Godfather was the highest-grossing film of 1972. It was for a time the highest-grossing film ever made, earning between $250 and $291 million at the box office. The film was acclaimed by critics and audiences, who praised its performances—particularly those of Brando and Pacino—direction, screenplay, story, cinematography, editing, score and portrayal of the mafia. The Godfather launched the successful careers of Coppola, Pacino and other relative newcomers in the cast and crew. At the 45th Academy Awards, the film won Best Picture, Best Actor (Brando) and Best Adapted Screenplay (for Puzo and Coppola). In addition, the seven other Oscar nominations included Pacino, Caan and Duvall, all for Best Supporting Actor, and Coppola for Best Director. |
|
Played whom? ] (]) 05:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
] (]) 02:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC) |
As noted in the article, this film is one of the greatest and most influential films of all time. Yet, the article's entire first paragraph makes absolutely no note of this. Has this issue been discussed before? Johnadams11 (talk) 01:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
I am proposing a new introductory section which gives improved visibility the universal acclaim and historical importance of this film. The present treatment relegates this information to the fourth paragraph. Comments welcome.