This is the
talk page of a
redirect that targets the page: • Saw (film) Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:Saw (film) |
This article was nominated for deletion on 6 January 2023. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is it right that this is called "2003 film" but included in the category 2004 films (together with Saw itself) ? -- Beardo 03:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
If this was a 9.5 minute 2003 film, than how is the following sentence possible?
It was created from a scene that they chose from the script of Saw (2004).
The Dude 4 16:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
And the Script for Saw (2004 film) was already written. This short was made to promote it and make the full Saw film. GroundZ3R0 002 ( talk) 22:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Are these titles a pun on: seen, scene, seesaw, as well as hacksaw, hack??
< http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0387564 >;
< http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0495241 >.
Thank You,
[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 02:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Jigsawpuppet.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 19:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
This is a little ridiculous, but the discussion for merge, which can be found here, has been going on for a little over a year now, and I am the only one to contribute to the discussion in that whole time. I don't wish to break policy, but since the article has vastly improved since its merge nomination, I feel it is a "Keeper" article, and the merge discussion should end. Agreements? GroundZ3R0 002 ( talk) 18:58, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
the paralized victum was credited as "Body" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.121.194 ( talk) 19:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus to keep Saw (2004 film) at its current title. No consensus on whether to rename Saw (2003 film). -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:20, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
– The 2003 production was under ten minutes, and clearly constitutes a short film, which is a different class of production from the full-length films that are generally title with "film" in our articles. I think that this is a principled distinction by which we can avoid the question of whether the widely released 2004 hit film is the primary topic of the term "Saw (film)". bd2412 T 15:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
This is the
talk page of a
redirect that targets the page: • Saw (film) Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:Saw (film) |
This article was nominated for deletion on 6 January 2023. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is it right that this is called "2003 film" but included in the category 2004 films (together with Saw itself) ? -- Beardo 03:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
If this was a 9.5 minute 2003 film, than how is the following sentence possible?
It was created from a scene that they chose from the script of Saw (2004).
The Dude 4 16:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
And the Script for Saw (2004 film) was already written. This short was made to promote it and make the full Saw film. GroundZ3R0 002 ( talk) 22:29, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Are these titles a pun on: seen, scene, seesaw, as well as hacksaw, hack??
< http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0387564 >;
< http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0495241 >.
Thank You,
[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 02:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Jigsawpuppet.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 19:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
This is a little ridiculous, but the discussion for merge, which can be found here, has been going on for a little over a year now, and I am the only one to contribute to the discussion in that whole time. I don't wish to break policy, but since the article has vastly improved since its merge nomination, I feel it is a "Keeper" article, and the merge discussion should end. Agreements? GroundZ3R0 002 ( talk) 18:58, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
the paralized victum was credited as "Body" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.121.194 ( talk) 19:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus to keep Saw (2004 film) at its current title. No consensus on whether to rename Saw (2003 film). -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:20, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
– The 2003 production was under ten minutes, and clearly constitutes a short film, which is a different class of production from the full-length films that are generally title with "film" in our articles. I think that this is a principled distinction by which we can avoid the question of whether the widely released 2004 hit film is the primary topic of the term "Saw (film)". bd2412 T 15:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)