Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 20 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 3.

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:DC (film). Thanks! RangersRus (talk) 12:35, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RangersRus, did you thoroughly review the draft before declining it? The last time it was reviewed, filming hadn't ended and the first full-length trailer didn't premiere at Cannes, both of which happened now. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:27, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Trailer premiere is also part of unveiling and announcement. Recently, a discussion took place where a film's notability was in question as it was nominated in a category to premiere (full film) at Cannes with most agreeing that the mere selection/nomination at the world's most prestigious film festival does not amount to in-depth coverage. This is why some changes to WP:NFILM wordings were considered to be changed, making it more clear and precise, either coming soon or maybe done already, as editors interpreted it differently. RangersRus (talk) 11:50, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have a doubt that WP:NFF says "films produced in the past which were either not completed or not distributed should not have their own articles, unless their failure was notable per the guidelines." Actually what makes a film notable? Films like Mookuthi Amman 2, 7/G Rainbow Colony 2, Benz (film), Demonte Colony 3, Mental Manadhil are notable? But films like Draft:DC (film), Draft:Vishwanath & Sons, Draft:Seyon (2026 film), Draft:Kanchana 4, etc. don't have articles. Why these films not notable at the same time above mentioned are notable? ~2026-29650-30 (talk) 17:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

None of these are notable Mookuthi Amman 2, 7/G Rainbow Colony 2, Benz (film), Demonte Colony 3, Mental Manadhil. What usually happens that long time editors have the option to create articles bypassing AFC review and some who actually review are not experienced in the film notability area. Unless, if some experienced reviewer steps upon them, either will be moved to draft but if move vandalism happens, then they can be nominated for draftify or deletion at AFD. RangersRus (talk) 22:17, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Freida Pinto for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria, or help improve the article. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regard to the article's featured status (see review instructions). Hog Farm _Talk 21:32, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Benz (film), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benz (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't put articles in main space without full content like Valli Thirumanam (film) or Sattendru Maarudhu Vaanilai (which I know you didn't create). There is no 'A' in the producer of the latter films name as per the trailer. DareshMohan (talk) 01:09, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have access to Athiradi Padai? I only have access to the Telugu version [1] and I can tell it has both reshot and dubbed scenes. If I had the Tamil version, I could decide which version is predominant. Per the ending of this review [2], part of the film is dubbed. DareshMohan (talk) 07:14, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I don't have access. Though the Telugu version seems the original version, we can't act with lack of sources. I think the article's title is decided by recognition/sources, like Vaathi. Or maybe they acted like how Sergio Leone did in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:31, 23 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Recovery Eminem Alternative Cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What is your logic behind "let this file name be the de facto one", as mentioned in your last edit summary? Asking because since you reverted rather than discussing and said that, I'm now unsure whether the better option is to:

1. Revert you again, but with the added caveat of a) marking your upload for a CSD reason, and b) asking a file mover to move the previously-established poster (that is, prefer keeping history of established poster), which I'm not sure a file mover would be willing to do, for WP:FMNN #1 reasons
2. Leave your poster link there, upload the existing poster over top of it ("overwrite if you may"), and let whatever processes are supposed to be playing out in this series of events happen (I have no idea if this would cause your upload to be deleted as a duplicate or if it would cause the original with the speedy template currently placed to be deleted and then cause someone to need to delete the upload history of the new file so that its only revision is one that had previously been in a different title since 2017 (and potentially as far back as 2012; it's likely most of the history is just shrinkage of the current poster)) (that is, this option potentially removes 14 years of history attached to the previous file or could end up just being deletion of your upload but with more steps)

I believe the previously established poster is more appropriate both as it was the main theatrical poster (the ones with subsets of characters IIRC were alternate designs and not the main one) and because it contains the billing block (I both believe this lends to its legitimacy/appropriateness--as a bonus, it also makes said billing block clear to page watchers since an intermittently frequent form of disruptive editing to this article is to add several actors to the lead that are not in the billing block, against consensus/style guidelines). This is why I tried to push toward discussion with my revert. - Purplewowies (talk) 00:52, 27 May 2026 (UTC) (I might also raise this line of thinking/discussion on the article talk page. Purplewowies (talk) 00:54, 27 May 2026 (UTC))[reply]

The poster I uploaded seemed acceptable since it had the final US release date. I don't know that posters with billing blocks are mandatory (the earlier one only had four actors' names on top, not the main cast/crew below). Still, if you feel it meets WP:FILMPOSTER and the newer one doesn't, you may overwrite File:Wreck-It Ralph.jpg with the desired poster (the older file name is unclear). I thought the one I uploaded was fair since it had the main cast rather than cameos like the older one. Why does the billing block matter when you can't see the crew details in low-res files? The poster of the sequel doesn't have the billing block. Kailash29792 (talk) 01:03, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The more important reason IMO for keeping the original poster is that the newly uploaded one was an alternate design and not the most commonly used one; the billing block bit is more of an "and also" on that reason. (That is, if a non-billing-block version of the poster existed and had been the file, I still believe it would have been more appropriate due to it being the most commonly used one.) I'm confused about how "Wreckitralphposter.jpeg" is unclear, though--it's "what it says on the tin" as they say: a Wreck-It Ralph poster. Uploading over top of your new image feels too much like a cut-and-paste move but for a file (but the other option I raised here feels bad for another reason), so I'm holding off on doing anything for now and have raised the issue at the film's talk page to get other input. - Purplewowies (talk) 01:38, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Star Pilot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:47, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Benz (film). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it's WP:TOOSOON for mainspace, as determined by this AfD consensus.. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 03:30, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Expand this. It releases tomorrow. DareshMohan (talk) 02:54, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]