Misplaced Pages

Talk:The Profit (film): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:16, 18 April 2008 editSteve (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users18,235 edits →Responses: addition← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:57, 27 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots8,079,119 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 4 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Film}}, {{WikiProject Scientology}}, {{WikiProject Religion}}, {{WikiProject Comedy}}.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(26 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{ArticleHistory
{{Not a forum|Scientology, or anything not directly related to improving the ]}}
{{Article history
| action1 = GAN | action1 = GAN
| action1date = December 22, 2007 | action1date = December 22, 2007
| action1link = Talk:The Profit#GA Review | action1link = Talk:The Profit/GA1
| action1result = Failed | action1result = Failed
| action1oldid = 177674187 | action1oldid = 177674187
| currentstatus = FGAN}} | currentstatus = FGAN}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{talkheader}}
{{WikiProject Film|American-task-force=yes}}
{{WikiProjectBanners
|1 = {{Film|class=B|importance=Mid}} {{WikiProject Scientology|importance=Mid}}
|2 = {{WikiProject Scientology|class=B|importance=Mid}} {{WikiProject Religion|importance=Low|NRM=yes|NRMImp=Mid}}
|3 = {{WPReligion|class=B|importance=Low}} {{WikiProject Comedy|importance=Low}}
|4 = {{Comedy|class=B|importance=Low}}
}} }}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{archive box|
|maxarchivesize = 250K
*]
|counter = 1
|minthreadsleft = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:The Profit (film)/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}


== Intro size ==
== Standardized cites w/ ] ==


= this edit by {{user|Laval}} is inappropriate. Per ], the intro/lede should be able to function as a standalone summary of the entire article's contents, including every single subsection of the article. Please, do not do this again without discussion on the talk page. Thank you, -- ''']''' (]) 23:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
*I standardized all the cites in the article with ]. In the future if you add new sources/citations to the article, please use the citation formatting. Thanks. ] 08:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC).
:] states: ] Please make sure to adhere to this. Thanks. -- ''']''' (]) 23:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


== GA Review == == actor credits incorrect ==


Mr. Hunt played by Lanny Fuettere, Mrs. Hunt, his wife, not credited, played by Sandra(Sandy) Mitchell not the name listed. Thank you for correcting ] (]) 22:57, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Talk||{{error:not substituted|GAList}}<div style="display:none;">}}
:'''] review''' (see ] for criteria)
{{#if:{{{overcom|}}}|<hr width=50%>{{{overcom}}}|}}
#It is '''reasonably well written'''.
#:a ''(prose)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''(])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#:: {{#if:{{{1com|}}}|{{{1com}}}|}}
#It is '''factually accurate''' and ''']'''.
#:a ''(references)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''(citations to ])'': {{GAList/check|aye}} c ''(])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#:: {{#if:{{{2com|}}}|{{{2com}}}|}}
#It is '''broad in its coverage'''.
#:a ''(major aspects)'': {{GAList/check|???}} b ''(focused)'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#:: {{#if:{{{3com|}}}|{{{3com}}}|}}
#It follows the '''] policy'''.
#:''Fair representation without bias'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#:: {{#if:{{{4com|}}}|{{{4com}}}|}}
#It is '''stable'''.
#:''No edit wars etc.'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#:: {{#if:{{{5com|}}}|{{{5com}}}|}}
#It is illustrated by ''']''', where possible and appropriate.
#:a ''(images are tagged and non-free images have ])'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''(appropriate use with ])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#:: {{#if:{{{6com|}}}|{{{6com}}}|}}
#'''Overall''':
#:''Pass/Fail'': {{GAList/check|nay}}
#:: {{#if:{{{7com|}}}|{{{7com}}}|}}<!-- Template:GAList --></div>

Comments:
#Is there a precedent for a "Taglines" sections? If there is, please show me an example of a GA/FA that includes it and that will be fine. Otherwise, I don't see why this information needs to be its own Level 2 heading, if present in the article at all (especially since the taglines can be seen in the posters and could easily be incorporated into the prose of the article).
#The plot section should conform to ] and should contain far more detail about the events of the film, rather than the general synopsis that is its current state.
#"(taken by some observers to be a parody of L. Ron Hubbard)" (Plot) requires a citation because it looks like ] in its current state.
#The lead should conform to ], which it comes close to doing, but does not quite satisfy. There is no mention, for example, of the plot in the lead (which will definitely need to be there once the plot section is expanded).
#All one-two sentence paragraphs must either be expanded or merged with surrounding paragraphs, as they cannot stand alone.
#The direct quotes in the "Reception" require citations immediately following them, even if they are contained in the reference at the end of the paragraph.

To allow for these changes to be made, I am placing the article on hold for a period of up to seven days, after which it may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work thus far. Cheers, ] 00:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
=== Addressing points from GA review ===
Thanks for doing the GA review, I will address the above points, and note them here, below. ] (]) 10:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
#{{done}} - Removed the '''Taglines''' section, as suggested above. ] (]) 10:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
#Plot expansion - pending. Will address this within the ]. ] (]) 11:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
#{{done}} - Moved a cite to specify/back up the L. Conrad Powers/L. Ron Hubbard comparison in plot section. ] (]) 10:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
#Lead expansion (summarizing plot a bit more). Will address this within seven days. ] (]) 11:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
#{{done}} - Merged small one/two sentence paragraphs. ] (]) 10:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
#{{done}} - Added citations after direct quotes in '''Reception''' section. ] (]) 11:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC).

Have updated the review accordingly. For the plot section, it can probably be shorter than is standard but, since the film has debuted (at Cannes), there should be some more information on the plot. In any case, just let me know when you want me to take another look at it if you get it done early - otherwise I'll be back once the hold is up and review it given the circumstances. Cheers, ] 15:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
*Okay, will do. ] (]) 16:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
**Please give me a teensy bit more time, I've had a lot on my plate but I will try to get on this soon. ] (]) 14:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC).
***No problem. This article is close enough and obviously enough has been done that I have no problem extending the hold. Cheers, ] 00:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this article seems to have become stale after the extended hold. For this reason, I am going to fail the article at this time. As the article is very close to being a Good Article, please let me know when these concerns have been addressed and the article has been renominated, and I will give it a second review immediately, so that you don't have to wait another month. If you feel that this decision is in error, you may take it to ]. Thank you for your work thus far. Cheers, ] 18:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
*Completely understandable, and I will do just that. ] (]) 04:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC).

== Court order ==
Please explain to me how a local judge has the authority to block a film's release nationwide? If it were released outside of ], would that not be completely outside the judge's jurisdiction? ] (]) 02:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
*Not sure exactly, we can only go on what's said in ] sources. ] (]) 02:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
*Likely it was blocked at the point of entry or distribution, so they couldn't do anything really except appeal which might have been rejected.--] (]) 05:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

== mentioning leaks of a supressed film ==

How does mention of the fact that this film has been leaked a violation of ]? ] (]) 02:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
:Have you seen any mention of this in a ]/] secondary source? ] (]) 03:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
*Is a video good? Or how about a link to the actual leaked (which may be deleted soon)? --] (]) 05:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
**Nope. Gotta be mentioned in a ]/] secondary source. ] (]) 05:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
***No it doesn't, you are wasting your time. This is not a matter of opinion. The film is OUT, for better or worse. ] (]) 06:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
****Yes, it is out, we can acknowledge that here on the talk page, sure. But unless that is mentioned in a ]/] secondary source, that info cannot be added into this article - it is an obvious violation of ] - Unless you can explain to me how that would not be the case? ] (]) 06:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

:Okay, I've changed my citation to something at . Given that it has been marked as ready for publication, I presume that it's okay to cite it here. ] (]) 07:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
::Please see my reply on your talk page. ''Wikinews'' is not acceptable to be used as a source on Misplaced Pages in such a manner. The only thing that ''Wikinews'' has gained even a small amount of traction for source usage on Misplaced Pages, would be for citing direct interviews done by editors on Wikinews. ] (]) 07:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Right. And for the rest of you, I've had a discussion with Cirt here about how to mention this new development. He suggests that we wait until some major news source picks up on this and THEN cite one of those. I have therefore reverted all my tinkering with this article including the very mention of the leak. Cirt has stated that he will do this himself. I'll just back off now. ] (]) 07:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
::::Thank you very much. ] (]) 07:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

==Mention of leak to the internet==

Personally I think the fact that it was leaked to the internet AND is barred from distribution is noteworthy. Thoughts? ] (]) 20:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
:It may not have been notable before, but the letter from Bob Minton's attorney to Luke Lirot of ''The Profit'' makes it noteworthy - and even though that is a primary source, it is good enough simply to attest that the letter happened. I'll put that in there soon. ] (]) 21:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

::I have already put it in, an anon IP keeps removing it. ] (]) 21:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
:::This is great, two obviously biased editors (Cirt has written ) trying to argue their point. Weak. --] (]) 02:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Please take a moment to read over ], and keep your comments on content, not contributors. ] (]) 05:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::"You are biased" = Personal attack? The "weak" referred to your actions, not your person. ] (]) 12:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


If this is how you are going to begin dialogue on discussing changes for wikipedia, "This is great, two obviously biased editors?" Let me shift gears a bit to match you.....

Ok... got it.

81.227 is a poopie-head!, Stinkerpants!

I can do that way, and if, at anytime, you wish to discuss the article, I'm here] (]) 14:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

== Request for comment - external links section ==
{{RFCmedia|section=Request for comment - external links section !! reason=Should a link to ] with a copy of this film and ] (itself a link to Pirate Bay) be allowed in the ] section of this article? !! time=13:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)}}
Should a link to ] with a copy of this film and ] (itself a link to Pirate Bay) be allowed in the ] section of this article? 13:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:FYI, the links in question are:
*
*
:] (]) 13:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
===Reasons to include===

The Pirate Bay And Digg links were included to give verification to the statement "The complete film was leaked to the internet in late March 2008" contained on the page. A statement like this is meaningless unless backed up with evidence. These two links provide irrefutable evidence, therefore are entirely relevant and appropriate. The Pirate bay link being primary evidence is therefore highly appropriate. Primary evidence supersedes secondary evidence and hearsay ( as in the case of the lawyers letter )] (]) 15:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)] (]) 15:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC) <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 14:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

===Reasons not to include===
*The distribution of this film by ] is not sanctioned by the filmmakers, see: ''Please Discontinue Distribution of "The Profit"'' (<nowiki>at http://z6.invisionfree.com/theprofit/index.php?showtopic=21</nowiki>), post by attorney for the film's producers, Luke Lirot. It is not that hard for an internet user to find copies of the film on the internet on their own, but the Misplaced Pages article about the film should not be linking to it, especially with this express notice given by the film's attorney. ] (]) 13:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:In response to the above statement by {{user|Wogglelump}} I should clarify that direct links to the film, in order to illustrate that the film has been leaked to the internet, is bordering on ]. But in any case, the source used for that particular sentence in the article is:
::{{cite news | last =McGowan | first =Thomas H. | title =Scientology/ Minton Letter | work =Hosted at website for The Profit | publisher =www.theprofit.org | date =], ] | url =http://www.theprofit.org/public_html/tfcomp/McGowanSCAN2934_000.pdf | accessdate = 2008-04-02 }}
:So direct links to the film at ]/] are not needed to satisfy ] for this information in the article. ] (]) 15:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Update:''' have been added to this article's ] section. Both have no real value to this article, and should be removed. ] (]) 18:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

===Responses===
No, no, and thrice no. Links to non-licensed copyrighted material or even just links to sites which explicitly provide a gateway to such material can get Misplaced Pages in a lot of trouble. That's why there are ] to the types of links one can include in articles. As the guideline says, "without exception". ] <sup>] • ]</sup> 18:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
*Agreed with Steve. The article could be altered to specificy who the leaker was, if desired, but links to the site itself are completely unnecessary, and those links in particular don't meet ] requirements anyway. ] (]) 18:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
*For the record, I have the copyright-violating links. While this RfC is still ongoing, the nature of the links is such that they should be removed. Anyone who has a problem with this action, please feel free to bring it up with ] or some such; I'll not hold it against you. All the best, ] <sup>] • ]</sup> 19:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
**In addition, at ], it says:<blockquote>...if you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of ] in the United States ().</blockquote> While there is a distinction to be made due to the fact that ''The Pirate Bay'' technically only hosts the .torrent files, we all know that were their servers kept in the United States, they'd have been shut down long ago. ] <sup>] • ]</sup> 19:16, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:57, 27 February 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Profit (film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Scientology, or anything not directly related to improving the Misplaced Pages article. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Scientology, or anything not directly related to improving the Misplaced Pages article at the Reference desk.
Former good article nomineeThe Profit (film) was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 22, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconFilm: American
WikiProject iconThis 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
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
WikiProject iconScientology Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is supported by WikiProject Scientology, a collaborative effort to help develop and improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Scientology. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on Scientology-related topics. See WikiProject Scientology and Misplaced Pages:Contributing FAQ.ScientologyWikipedia:WikiProject ScientologyTemplate:WikiProject ScientologyScientology
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconReligion: New religious movements Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
WikiProject iconComedy Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Intro size

diff = this edit by Laval (talk · contribs) is inappropriate. Per WP:LEAD, the intro/lede should be able to function as a standalone summary of the entire article's contents, including every single subsection of the article. Please, do not do this again without discussion on the talk page. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 23:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:LEAD states: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies. The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources, and the notability of the article's subject should usually be established in the first few sentences." Please make sure to adhere to this. Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 23:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

actor credits incorrect

Mr. Hunt played by Lanny Fuettere, Mrs. Hunt, his wife, not credited, played by Sandra(Sandy) Mitchell not the name listed. Thank you for correcting Mamahunt1002 (talk) 22:57, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:The Profit (film): Difference between revisions Add topic