![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This ref might belong here (if someone adds a section on the soundtrack). [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmlieberman ( talk • contribs) 2014-11-14T19:28:55
References
Please note: when checking source (BoxOfficeMojo), click "Foreign" section, not "Summary", and, as the gross is wrong, you must do the maths yourself. Thanks. Thomas Linard ( talk) 00:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
This section is extremely misleading and is based solely upon two highly erroneous newspaper reports. The US has only one rating ("R") for the 15+ age range: it is perfectly normal for a UK 15 certificate film to receive "R" rating. (Indeed, unlike UK 15 certificates, a US 10-year-old could see the movie so long as they are accompanied by an adult — something which is illegal in the UK!) Technically speaking, there is no controversy other than that perceived by authors and those they have approached for quotes.
I recommend that this section be removed (or rewritten to emphasise that there was an alleged controversy). Mrstonky ( talk) 21:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Lugnuts reverted my writing in historical accuracy. Of course their is no research about the accuracy of this movie. But peoples do speak about his accuracy in article, and journal paper did write about this period. so what?
Generally, I think I'm going to stop writing on Wikipedia... if citing scientific paper is not enough, if peoples are doing revert without even starting a discussion, this project is lost. I will write my scientific paper and let peoples like User:Lugnuts doing the copy past... have fun. -- Gagarine ( talk) 20:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Should a "Historical accuracy section" for Pride be deleted or not. See the ongoing discussion about it. Gagarine ( talk) 19:36, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:FILMHIST, there can be a "Historical accuracy" section if there are numerous reliable sources that explicitly compare the film to history. If there are not many sources, details can be interwoven elsewhere in the article. We cannot take sources only about the history and extrapolate comparisons to the film. For example, this is a source that talks about the film and the history. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:46, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: |edition=
has extra text (
help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (
link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This ref might belong here (if someone adds a section on the soundtrack). [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmlieberman ( talk • contribs) 2014-11-14T19:28:55
References
Please note: when checking source (BoxOfficeMojo), click "Foreign" section, not "Summary", and, as the gross is wrong, you must do the maths yourself. Thanks. Thomas Linard ( talk) 00:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
This section is extremely misleading and is based solely upon two highly erroneous newspaper reports. The US has only one rating ("R") for the 15+ age range: it is perfectly normal for a UK 15 certificate film to receive "R" rating. (Indeed, unlike UK 15 certificates, a US 10-year-old could see the movie so long as they are accompanied by an adult — something which is illegal in the UK!) Technically speaking, there is no controversy other than that perceived by authors and those they have approached for quotes.
I recommend that this section be removed (or rewritten to emphasise that there was an alleged controversy). Mrstonky ( talk) 21:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Lugnuts reverted my writing in historical accuracy. Of course their is no research about the accuracy of this movie. But peoples do speak about his accuracy in article, and journal paper did write about this period. so what?
Generally, I think I'm going to stop writing on Wikipedia... if citing scientific paper is not enough, if peoples are doing revert without even starting a discussion, this project is lost. I will write my scientific paper and let peoples like User:Lugnuts doing the copy past... have fun. -- Gagarine ( talk) 20:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Should a "Historical accuracy section" for Pride be deleted or not. See the ongoing discussion about it. Gagarine ( talk) 19:36, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:FILMHIST, there can be a "Historical accuracy" section if there are numerous reliable sources that explicitly compare the film to history. If there are not many sources, details can be interwoven elsewhere in the article. We cannot take sources only about the history and extrapolate comparisons to the film. For example, this is a source that talks about the film and the history. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:46, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: |edition=
has extra text (
help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (
link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)