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 |
I think we should get more sources before we list all of DreamWorks' past composers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.28.115.207 ( talk) 18:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I think We would all agree to some romance in the movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.205.97.40 ( talk) 08:45, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
I want him removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.131.60.222 ( talk) 06:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The current plot summary is pretty confusing. I was going to try to fix it, but it's so confusing that I didn't trust myself to be able to make sense of it. The recent bot edit did fix the vandalism, but left the real problem of incomprehensibility. Anyone know enough about the film to be able to fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlsusc ( talk • contribs) 02:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree, it currently reads like fractured English. 60.234.236.221 ( talk) 07:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Nikhat Kazmi of the Times of India's 4 stars? Her ratings are highly questionable.
I don't know who, but someone keeps adding "master" onto the furious five's names. Like I've said many times, the furious five ARE NOT masters. Po is their master now, and Master Shifu is Po's master. Any changes involving "master" to one of the furious five's names will be reverted. Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 00:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Actually you are the one who is wrong, If you watch the first film again during the tournament sequence (at 3:12 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stx4Qxtf2as&feature=related) Shifu says "And finally Master Tigress" also Po says "They are five MASTERS, I am just one me!" later on in the first film so this is not vandalism TrueFaleel ( talk) 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm very surprised that there is no mention of Rating in the main box on the right, under the movie poster, with the basic info on the film. Anyone know what it is? 166.94.128.10 ( talk) 18:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
It appears as if the claims as to surprisingly specific species of animals are someone's personal observations. The movie doesn't specify, and even if the claimant is a biologist that's original research.
I'm not saying the claims are necessarily incorrect; probably 90% of them are correct. I'm saying that, because of the core reason we have an OR policy in the first place, that these things need citation. One cannot say, "Well, it's obvious that's a Javan rhino" because to the vast, vast majority of the audience, it's simply a rhino. Calling it a Javan rhino requires specialized personal expertise, and we cannot use our own specialized personal expertise because there's no way of knowing if the editor is a scientist or some kid making a guess. These claims need verification. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Is it necessary to mention who voices who in the "Plot" section when their names are listed in the "Cast" section right below it? Sorry if this sounds naive. User:Immblueversion ( talk) 20:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
The subject about many "Chinese stars" boycotting this film is misleading. This gives the impression that the whole of China is boycotting the film, when in reality the vast majority of Chinese audience gave it a positive review. A correction to that section is required ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.182.141.178 ( talk) 04:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
MOS:FILM does not dictate any section ordering, so the claim that we need to follow the way the sections are laid out in these guidelines is patently false. For one thing, just because "Marketing" is secondary does not mean it goes at the end. It is secondary in being the kind of content that is not expected in a film article on a regular basis. The topics under "Primary content" are what are expected in the article in a regular basis. It has nothing at all to do with order. Having "Theatrical release" allows us to talk about the release in theaters and how people responded to it there. We are not bound to fully isolate the details of the release from how people are responding to it. Read MOS:FILM—nothing talks about the ordering of the sections. We can talk about other sorts of ordering, but what exists at MOS:FILM exists to talk about specific elements, which can be woven together. Some articles will have just a "Reception" section, and some will be thoroughly broken down. Erik ( talk | contribs) 11:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
4.1 Lead section 4.2 Plot 4.3 Cast 4.4 Themes 4.5 Production 4.6 Release 4.6.1 Home media 4.7 Reception 4.7.1 Critical response 4.7.2 Box office 4.7.3 Accolades 4.8 References 4.9 External links
5 Secondary content
5.1 Documentaries 5.2 Controversies 5.3 Soundtrack 5.4 Adaptation from source material 5.5 Historical and scientific accuracies 5.6 Marketing 5.7 Further reading
-- Tenebrae ( talk) 18:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
...on "Critical response." My apologies; I glanced too quickly. You are correct. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 18:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Some chinese people boycott it for they don't want the chinese culture to be sent to the world by the united states at all times... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.125.4.18 ( talk) 14:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
The date that this movie came out in it's home country, which is the US, was released on May 26, 2011. The date it was released on Canada, was May 27, 2011. The link you provided was not related to what I am trying to say here; using other movie articles for examples, such as Toy Story 3, which has the film released at a different date in Taormina, which is much smaller than Canada is included in the infobox. Happy Feet, for example, was released in Australia in a different date then it's home country, and it is incuded in the infobox. Legend of the Guardians, was produced in the United States, and it came out on a different date in Australia. There are many, many, other articles that have different release dates int heir infobox, and there is NO EXCEPTION for Kung Fu Panda 2 to have just one release date in its infobox, if it came out on a different date in Canada, the second largest country in the world, should be stated. I, and all the other contributors to this article would really apreciate your cooperation. Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 20:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Is it worth simplifying matters by just saying May 2011? It seems like there are awkward situations where we feel compelled to notice that the film was released in some other country one day before it is released in the United States. It's a level of precision that seems unnecessary for the infobox. Historically speaking, it seems like a good highlight to have the month and the year. The specific date works better in context, especially to avoid these awkward situations. Just a thought. Erik ( talk | contribs) 15:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I have been having a problem for several weeks now with a contributor changing the release date on the infobox of this article. It is starting to turn into vandalism now, since the release date has already been disscused above. Also, this is not the first time I've had vandalism problems with contributors on this article. I've also came across other users reverting vandalism on this page's edit history. I suggest having a semi protection lock on this article, to reduse the amount of vandalism. Does anyone else agree? Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 22:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
In a future sequel, problems that may be dealt with: 1) Po may be forced to choose between his beloved adopted father and his biological family, who are alive after all. 2) Will the relationship between Po and Tigress remain a friendship, or will it develop into a romance? Das Baz, aka Erudil 19:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
At one point, Po and Tigress give each other a friendly hug. Just buddies. But - then, right away they become a bit embarrassed and self-conscious. Does DreamWorks have an iron-clad rule afainst Romance? Maybe not. Das Baz, aka Erudil 17:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC) Shen agrees that one is free to move on and choose one's own path - and then deliberately he chooses the path of evil. Das Baz, aka Erudil 17:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
How on Earth can DreamWorks be contemplating four more films! One more, maybe two, I can handle. But four! I know Star Wars lasted for six films and the Bionicle Saga lasted for a decade, but they were different. I doubt that Jack Black, Angelina Jolie and Dusten Hoffman will want to stay on for that long, let alone the other Furious Five actors. I just hope they don't extend this madness to the Shrek films, which went on for three films more than the film characters could really cope with. It was torture watching their stories being strung out that far. ProtoDrake
The problem with users changing the release date on the infobox has returned after the semi protection expired. If this keeps up, the page may have to become fully protected, or protected for much longer then before. Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 21:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kung Fu Panda 2. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://ir.dreamworksanimation.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=698481When 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) 10:52, 13 December 2017 (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 |
I think we should get more sources before we list all of DreamWorks' past composers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.28.115.207 ( talk) 18:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I think We would all agree to some romance in the movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.205.97.40 ( talk) 08:45, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
I want him removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.131.60.222 ( talk) 06:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The current plot summary is pretty confusing. I was going to try to fix it, but it's so confusing that I didn't trust myself to be able to make sense of it. The recent bot edit did fix the vandalism, but left the real problem of incomprehensibility. Anyone know enough about the film to be able to fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlsusc ( talk • contribs) 02:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree, it currently reads like fractured English. 60.234.236.221 ( talk) 07:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Nikhat Kazmi of the Times of India's 4 stars? Her ratings are highly questionable.
I don't know who, but someone keeps adding "master" onto the furious five's names. Like I've said many times, the furious five ARE NOT masters. Po is their master now, and Master Shifu is Po's master. Any changes involving "master" to one of the furious five's names will be reverted. Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 00:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Actually you are the one who is wrong, If you watch the first film again during the tournament sequence (at 3:12 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stx4Qxtf2as&feature=related) Shifu says "And finally Master Tigress" also Po says "They are five MASTERS, I am just one me!" later on in the first film so this is not vandalism TrueFaleel ( talk) 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm very surprised that there is no mention of Rating in the main box on the right, under the movie poster, with the basic info on the film. Anyone know what it is? 166.94.128.10 ( talk) 18:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
It appears as if the claims as to surprisingly specific species of animals are someone's personal observations. The movie doesn't specify, and even if the claimant is a biologist that's original research.
I'm not saying the claims are necessarily incorrect; probably 90% of them are correct. I'm saying that, because of the core reason we have an OR policy in the first place, that these things need citation. One cannot say, "Well, it's obvious that's a Javan rhino" because to the vast, vast majority of the audience, it's simply a rhino. Calling it a Javan rhino requires specialized personal expertise, and we cannot use our own specialized personal expertise because there's no way of knowing if the editor is a scientist or some kid making a guess. These claims need verification. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Is it necessary to mention who voices who in the "Plot" section when their names are listed in the "Cast" section right below it? Sorry if this sounds naive. User:Immblueversion ( talk) 20:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
The subject about many "Chinese stars" boycotting this film is misleading. This gives the impression that the whole of China is boycotting the film, when in reality the vast majority of Chinese audience gave it a positive review. A correction to that section is required ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.182.141.178 ( talk) 04:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
MOS:FILM does not dictate any section ordering, so the claim that we need to follow the way the sections are laid out in these guidelines is patently false. For one thing, just because "Marketing" is secondary does not mean it goes at the end. It is secondary in being the kind of content that is not expected in a film article on a regular basis. The topics under "Primary content" are what are expected in the article in a regular basis. It has nothing at all to do with order. Having "Theatrical release" allows us to talk about the release in theaters and how people responded to it there. We are not bound to fully isolate the details of the release from how people are responding to it. Read MOS:FILM—nothing talks about the ordering of the sections. We can talk about other sorts of ordering, but what exists at MOS:FILM exists to talk about specific elements, which can be woven together. Some articles will have just a "Reception" section, and some will be thoroughly broken down. Erik ( talk | contribs) 11:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
4.1 Lead section 4.2 Plot 4.3 Cast 4.4 Themes 4.5 Production 4.6 Release 4.6.1 Home media 4.7 Reception 4.7.1 Critical response 4.7.2 Box office 4.7.3 Accolades 4.8 References 4.9 External links
5 Secondary content
5.1 Documentaries 5.2 Controversies 5.3 Soundtrack 5.4 Adaptation from source material 5.5 Historical and scientific accuracies 5.6 Marketing 5.7 Further reading
-- Tenebrae ( talk) 18:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
...on "Critical response." My apologies; I glanced too quickly. You are correct. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 18:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Some chinese people boycott it for they don't want the chinese culture to be sent to the world by the united states at all times... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.125.4.18 ( talk) 14:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
The date that this movie came out in it's home country, which is the US, was released on May 26, 2011. The date it was released on Canada, was May 27, 2011. The link you provided was not related to what I am trying to say here; using other movie articles for examples, such as Toy Story 3, which has the film released at a different date in Taormina, which is much smaller than Canada is included in the infobox. Happy Feet, for example, was released in Australia in a different date then it's home country, and it is incuded in the infobox. Legend of the Guardians, was produced in the United States, and it came out on a different date in Australia. There are many, many, other articles that have different release dates int heir infobox, and there is NO EXCEPTION for Kung Fu Panda 2 to have just one release date in its infobox, if it came out on a different date in Canada, the second largest country in the world, should be stated. I, and all the other contributors to this article would really apreciate your cooperation. Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 20:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Is it worth simplifying matters by just saying May 2011? It seems like there are awkward situations where we feel compelled to notice that the film was released in some other country one day before it is released in the United States. It's a level of precision that seems unnecessary for the infobox. Historically speaking, it seems like a good highlight to have the month and the year. The specific date works better in context, especially to avoid these awkward situations. Just a thought. Erik ( talk | contribs) 15:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I have been having a problem for several weeks now with a contributor changing the release date on the infobox of this article. It is starting to turn into vandalism now, since the release date has already been disscused above. Also, this is not the first time I've had vandalism problems with contributors on this article. I've also came across other users reverting vandalism on this page's edit history. I suggest having a semi protection lock on this article, to reduse the amount of vandalism. Does anyone else agree? Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 22:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
In a future sequel, problems that may be dealt with: 1) Po may be forced to choose between his beloved adopted father and his biological family, who are alive after all. 2) Will the relationship between Po and Tigress remain a friendship, or will it develop into a romance? Das Baz, aka Erudil 19:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
At one point, Po and Tigress give each other a friendly hug. Just buddies. But - then, right away they become a bit embarrassed and self-conscious. Does DreamWorks have an iron-clad rule afainst Romance? Maybe not. Das Baz, aka Erudil 17:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC) Shen agrees that one is free to move on and choose one's own path - and then deliberately he chooses the path of evil. Das Baz, aka Erudil 17:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
How on Earth can DreamWorks be contemplating four more films! One more, maybe two, I can handle. But four! I know Star Wars lasted for six films and the Bionicle Saga lasted for a decade, but they were different. I doubt that Jack Black, Angelina Jolie and Dusten Hoffman will want to stay on for that long, let alone the other Furious Five actors. I just hope they don't extend this madness to the Shrek films, which went on for three films more than the film characters could really cope with. It was torture watching their stories being strung out that far. ProtoDrake
The problem with users changing the release date on the infobox has returned after the semi protection expired. If this keeps up, the page may have to become fully protected, or protected for much longer then before. Monkeys 9711 ( talk) 21:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kung Fu Panda 2. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://ir.dreamworksanimation.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=698481When 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) 10:52, 13 December 2017 (UTC)