![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Given that Alison Bechdel herself has said she wants it to be referred to as the Bechdel-Wallace test, since Wallace is the one whose idea it actually was and Bechdel was the one who publicized it through her comic, would it not be better to name the page "Bechdel-Wallace test" and have a redirect from "Bechdel test"? Likewise it should be referred to as such throughout, except where noting the alternate form. It just seems appropriate to give credit where due, especially when it's been requested by the current namesake. Felice Enellen ( talk) 13:53, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
I just finished watching Archer season 7 episode 6 "Bel Pante: II" where the female characters are in a room arguing about the male characters when one of them laughs and says, "Suck it, Bechdell test". I thought this might be worth mentioning somewhere in the article JMargulies ( talk) 03:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
I think updating the statistics on the movies that pass/fail the bechdel test on bechdeltest.com would he beneficial to this article. It seems the data currently reflects statistics from 2015 that may have been updated on the website since then. Syoung18 ( talk) 05:31, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bechdel test. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The introductory sentence is very poor - it does not tell the reader what the Bechdel test actually is - it only says what it does.
I added an explanation complete with a reliable source, which was immediately removed for being "unsourced", which has not helped the article at all. Here was my addition - you may disagree with it or think it's inaccurate, in which case do please improve it instead of just deleting it.
References
Thanks ever so much. Cnbrb ( talk) 09:06, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Right, well as nobody seems interested in improving this, I have made the opening paragraph clearer, and reinstated the reference with more precise attribution. The article makes much more sense now to the reader. Cnbrb ( talk) 19:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
The chart in History shows female as blue and male as orange/red. Since there is a well-known convention which uses blue for males, and pink/red/orange for females, that is mildly confusing, especially since the text stating blue is female (and ALL the text within the box) is super-small. I did a double-take, and had to peer closely. Perhaps the colors could be switched for the sake of clarity? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:F4BC:DB4B:710E:8E0B ( talk) 13:45, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
The following hidden text inserted in the section is moved here for visibility:
Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 10:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Why is the statement about "Baby Got Back" necessary to keep if it no longer has a current reliable or valid source?
Reference 49, the
Lifehacker article that has been used here as a reference source for this statement, is not the original source of the statement.
The Lifehacker article merely (and briefly) includes this linked and underlined sentence about the the song, "After all,
“Baby Got Back” passes it."
The Lifehacker article is not claiming this statement as it's own original content, but instead it is clearly linking to another source for this statement, an earlier
TVtropes article. The problem is, that original source (TVtropes) has since removed that original statement about "Baby Got Back" from the original source article. The Lifehacker article no longer has a valid or reliable source for this statement.
--
Tengallonprophet (
talk)
16:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
There's a meme going around that says: You hate the moon landing video because it's fake; I hate it because it doesn't pass the Bechdel Test. The meme is more than just a superficial wisecrack. (Caution: Just to nitpick a little, the moon landings were recorded on 16mm film, not video.) — O'Dea ( talk) 03:53, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
The claim is made without citation that BT-passing films do better at the box office. There is a hidden comment saying we are not to put a citation after the statement and instead hunt through the list of external sources. This is both lazy and a violation of WP:CITE. By the way, I have seen in the last 24 hours websites dismissing this claim as a lie based on the fact there is no source cited, so it's doing the message more harm than good in not including a source. Indeed, based on my past life as a WP admin my first instinct is to remove it as unsourced information. Please put a source for this claim (there may be others but this is one explicitly being called a lie in external media because no source is given.) 70.73.90.119 ( talk) 14:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 11:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
First off, the heading could be conceived as inflammatory, but that was absolutely not the intention. English not being my first language and consequently me not being able to find a better title that wasn't a whole sentence or more led to me choosing this. Feel free to remove this and re-add it with something better (and without this paragraph, obviously), but I would ask to not let the clumsy headline colour your opinion of my point. And if my point was brought up before and/or there is nothing more to discuss, might I encourage a note of some kind about that.
The first paragraph states that it is not indicative of representation but indicative of active presence of women. That contradiction (yes, i know these are not synonyms, but they're still contradicting) should be cleared up. But mostly it should be made clear that the "test" is not a sensible test (after all, Showgirls passes and Mulan fails. I think Terminator fails, too, but there I'm not a 100% sure.) and that the origin was a poignant observation turned into a joke. That it is widely seen as a sensible metric is meming and not thinking about the subject (and leaving out this fact in applications of the test is just not... honest, I guess, or conscientious) . Maybe the effort to find a real metric should be mentioned in the beginning, and the difference between a meme and a more sensible metric mentioned (or illustrated by mentioning more sensible metrics inspired by this.).
[edit] Alright, stupid me. After reading more of the article I change my point to the limitations and more sensible alternatives should be mentioned in the first part. I'm leaving all of the above for authenticities sake and maybe there're salient points there, too (and this already has to be redone by someone with a more natural command of the english language, anyway. Thanks in advance). 94.217.102.221 ( talk) 00:00, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Given that Alison Bechdel herself has said she wants it to be referred to as the Bechdel-Wallace test, since Wallace is the one whose idea it actually was and Bechdel was the one who publicized it through her comic, would it not be better to name the page "Bechdel-Wallace test" and have a redirect from "Bechdel test"? Likewise it should be referred to as such throughout, except where noting the alternate form. It just seems appropriate to give credit where due, especially when it's been requested by the current namesake. Felice Enellen ( talk) 13:53, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
I just finished watching Archer season 7 episode 6 "Bel Pante: II" where the female characters are in a room arguing about the male characters when one of them laughs and says, "Suck it, Bechdell test". I thought this might be worth mentioning somewhere in the article JMargulies ( talk) 03:13, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
I think updating the statistics on the movies that pass/fail the bechdel test on bechdeltest.com would he beneficial to this article. It seems the data currently reflects statistics from 2015 that may have been updated on the website since then. Syoung18 ( talk) 05:31, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bechdel test. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The introductory sentence is very poor - it does not tell the reader what the Bechdel test actually is - it only says what it does.
I added an explanation complete with a reliable source, which was immediately removed for being "unsourced", which has not helped the article at all. Here was my addition - you may disagree with it or think it's inaccurate, in which case do please improve it instead of just deleting it.
References
Thanks ever so much. Cnbrb ( talk) 09:06, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Right, well as nobody seems interested in improving this, I have made the opening paragraph clearer, and reinstated the reference with more precise attribution. The article makes much more sense now to the reader. Cnbrb ( talk) 19:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
The chart in History shows female as blue and male as orange/red. Since there is a well-known convention which uses blue for males, and pink/red/orange for females, that is mildly confusing, especially since the text stating blue is female (and ALL the text within the box) is super-small. I did a double-take, and had to peer closely. Perhaps the colors could be switched for the sake of clarity? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:F4BC:DB4B:710E:8E0B ( talk) 13:45, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
The following hidden text inserted in the section is moved here for visibility:
Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 10:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Why is the statement about "Baby Got Back" necessary to keep if it no longer has a current reliable or valid source?
Reference 49, the
Lifehacker article that has been used here as a reference source for this statement, is not the original source of the statement.
The Lifehacker article merely (and briefly) includes this linked and underlined sentence about the the song, "After all,
“Baby Got Back” passes it."
The Lifehacker article is not claiming this statement as it's own original content, but instead it is clearly linking to another source for this statement, an earlier
TVtropes article. The problem is, that original source (TVtropes) has since removed that original statement about "Baby Got Back" from the original source article. The Lifehacker article no longer has a valid or reliable source for this statement.
--
Tengallonprophet (
talk)
16:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
There's a meme going around that says: You hate the moon landing video because it's fake; I hate it because it doesn't pass the Bechdel Test. The meme is more than just a superficial wisecrack. (Caution: Just to nitpick a little, the moon landings were recorded on 16mm film, not video.) — O'Dea ( talk) 03:53, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
The claim is made without citation that BT-passing films do better at the box office. There is a hidden comment saying we are not to put a citation after the statement and instead hunt through the list of external sources. This is both lazy and a violation of WP:CITE. By the way, I have seen in the last 24 hours websites dismissing this claim as a lie based on the fact there is no source cited, so it's doing the message more harm than good in not including a source. Indeed, based on my past life as a WP admin my first instinct is to remove it as unsourced information. Please put a source for this claim (there may be others but this is one explicitly being called a lie in external media because no source is given.) 70.73.90.119 ( talk) 14:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 11:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
First off, the heading could be conceived as inflammatory, but that was absolutely not the intention. English not being my first language and consequently me not being able to find a better title that wasn't a whole sentence or more led to me choosing this. Feel free to remove this and re-add it with something better (and without this paragraph, obviously), but I would ask to not let the clumsy headline colour your opinion of my point. And if my point was brought up before and/or there is nothing more to discuss, might I encourage a note of some kind about that.
The first paragraph states that it is not indicative of representation but indicative of active presence of women. That contradiction (yes, i know these are not synonyms, but they're still contradicting) should be cleared up. But mostly it should be made clear that the "test" is not a sensible test (after all, Showgirls passes and Mulan fails. I think Terminator fails, too, but there I'm not a 100% sure.) and that the origin was a poignant observation turned into a joke. That it is widely seen as a sensible metric is meming and not thinking about the subject (and leaving out this fact in applications of the test is just not... honest, I guess, or conscientious) . Maybe the effort to find a real metric should be mentioned in the beginning, and the difference between a meme and a more sensible metric mentioned (or illustrated by mentioning more sensible metrics inspired by this.).
[edit] Alright, stupid me. After reading more of the article I change my point to the limitations and more sensible alternatives should be mentioned in the first part. I'm leaving all of the above for authenticities sake and maybe there're salient points there, too (and this already has to be redone by someone with a more natural command of the english language, anyway. Thanks in advance). 94.217.102.221 ( talk) 00:00, 20 September 2022 (UTC)