This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
April 16, 2022. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that none of the original core Ice Age cast returned for
The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other characters aside from Scrat are also absent, like Louis, Peaches and Shira. Should this statement be on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18D:4700:2D30:2913:E077:6AB8:1F69 ( talk) 23:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
User:Thriley, User:Iamnoahflores, User:ZX2006XZ, User:Bkissin - I did look at the future film notability guidelines, and have reviewed them in detail. If anyone thinks that they call for acceptance, please explain in detail, actually citing the actual wording of the guideline. Robert McClenon ( talk) 07:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to fix this too. ZX2006XZ ( talk) 18:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I think there is a disconnect between what NFF says and the reality on the ground. If I'm going by GNG, the sourcing seemed to be largely blog-focused, but I'm not focused on the notability question. I have frequently suggested that the subject is notable. However, the sourcing needs to be there. My larger concern is around the tendentious resubmission of the article, often without any substantive change. I understood the ANI situation to be that in this particular context, we are waiting until the release of the film before accepting (so as not to condone tendentious editing). Bkissin ( talk) 22:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
@ Kaleeb18: Now what? ZX2006XZ ( talk) 14:20, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondarysources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films).ZX2006XY and I have fixed that. And if y’all had a discussion to not put the article into main space until it’s released why would y’all not say that here also? I see no reason why this article in not ready to be put into main space. ― Kaleeb18 TalkCaleb 16:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Kaleeb18. Why do we have to wait until January 28? What's the point when the draft has been reworked? ZX2006XZ ( talk) 17:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
What the guideline says is:
Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines.
Has the production itself received significant coverage by independent secondary sources? I can see that there has been a great deal of non-independent coverage, as is often the case with planned movies. The usual notability criterion for released movies is review coverage, which really is independent and secondary. But apparently some of you have the idea that if you push enough electrons, some of the coverage will become independent and secondary by magic. Robert McClenon ( talk) 21:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Was the soundtrack released by Walt Disney Records or Hollywood Records? I’ve been seeing both used for news reports, so if anyone can find a direct source from Disney, that would be great, thanks! SlySabre ( talk) 18:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
See this link. ZX2006XZ ( talk) 19:37, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
The producers were supposed to put the 20th Century Studios logo at the opening and closing of The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild! But the 20th Century Studios logo did not appear because it was omitted and was not credited in the film and the Walt Disney Pictures logo appeared by mistake! I'm reclaim because they didn't use the 20th Century Studios logo! The film was supposed to go with the 20th Century Studios logo. And it wasn't supposed to start the movie without the 20th Century Studios logo! That's why I'm reclaim! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.122.235.208 ( talk) 22:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
@ ZX2006XZ: Read WP:FILMMUSIC. If a soundtrack is not notable, a film article does not need both a music infobox and a track listing. Films like Bad Times at the El Royale need a track listing because they feature a number of pre-recorded songs. This is not one of those films. It is a film score. A music infobox and a track listing are unnecessary. Also, stop reverting my edits to #Release. Per Template:Infobox film, the only release important for an American film is an American release. We do not need to include the territories in which it will later be released. Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 20:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
I do know that this movie marks the sixth installment in the Ice Age franchise, but there's one little question: is the film canon to the theatrical films? Because Peaches, Shira and Granny are absent, contradicting the fourth & fifth movies, and what if there's a firewall between the defunct Blue Sky (the franchise's original studio) and Walt Disney Pictures? Please be free to respond. -- Sstanford2 ( talk) 05:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
It is a sequel! It is clearly yet another film in the franchise. It is also a spin-off, which is a type of sequel that changes the focus to different lead characters. But why do editors insist on emphasizing [2] the claim that it is a "standalone sequel"? Surely the amount of separation and the degree to which this story stands alone from the previous films is not only subjective but in any case irrelevant and unimportant. Please stop adding "standalone" back to the intro. -- 109.76.139.121 ( talk) 17:48, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor continues to insert "standalone" into the summary [6] without any edit summary by way of explanation, or any comment here. As I said above, this distinction is pointless ( WP:UNDUE), and it is not even supported by anything in the article body (not sourced, and WP:FILMLEAD). -- 109.79.64.54 ( talk) 00:05, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: AryKun ( talk · contribs) 12:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
So I really don't think there should be any question that Cartoon Brew is a quality source.― Kaleeb18 TalkCaleb 13:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Z1720 (
talk) 17:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Kaleeb18 ( talk), ZX2006XZ ( talk), SlySabre ( talk), and Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk). Nominated by Kaleeb18 ( talk) at 12:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC).
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
April 16, 2022. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that none of the original core Ice Age cast returned for
The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other characters aside from Scrat are also absent, like Louis, Peaches and Shira. Should this statement be on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18D:4700:2D30:2913:E077:6AB8:1F69 ( talk) 23:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
User:Thriley, User:Iamnoahflores, User:ZX2006XZ, User:Bkissin - I did look at the future film notability guidelines, and have reviewed them in detail. If anyone thinks that they call for acceptance, please explain in detail, actually citing the actual wording of the guideline. Robert McClenon ( talk) 07:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to fix this too. ZX2006XZ ( talk) 18:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I think there is a disconnect between what NFF says and the reality on the ground. If I'm going by GNG, the sourcing seemed to be largely blog-focused, but I'm not focused on the notability question. I have frequently suggested that the subject is notable. However, the sourcing needs to be there. My larger concern is around the tendentious resubmission of the article, often without any substantive change. I understood the ANI situation to be that in this particular context, we are waiting until the release of the film before accepting (so as not to condone tendentious editing). Bkissin ( talk) 22:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
@ Kaleeb18: Now what? ZX2006XZ ( talk) 14:20, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondarysources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films).ZX2006XY and I have fixed that. And if y’all had a discussion to not put the article into main space until it’s released why would y’all not say that here also? I see no reason why this article in not ready to be put into main space. ― Kaleeb18 TalkCaleb 16:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Kaleeb18. Why do we have to wait until January 28? What's the point when the draft has been reworked? ZX2006XZ ( talk) 17:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
What the guideline says is:
Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines.
Has the production itself received significant coverage by independent secondary sources? I can see that there has been a great deal of non-independent coverage, as is often the case with planned movies. The usual notability criterion for released movies is review coverage, which really is independent and secondary. But apparently some of you have the idea that if you push enough electrons, some of the coverage will become independent and secondary by magic. Robert McClenon ( talk) 21:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Was the soundtrack released by Walt Disney Records or Hollywood Records? I’ve been seeing both used for news reports, so if anyone can find a direct source from Disney, that would be great, thanks! SlySabre ( talk) 18:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
See this link. ZX2006XZ ( talk) 19:37, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
The producers were supposed to put the 20th Century Studios logo at the opening and closing of The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild! But the 20th Century Studios logo did not appear because it was omitted and was not credited in the film and the Walt Disney Pictures logo appeared by mistake! I'm reclaim because they didn't use the 20th Century Studios logo! The film was supposed to go with the 20th Century Studios logo. And it wasn't supposed to start the movie without the 20th Century Studios logo! That's why I'm reclaim! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.122.235.208 ( talk) 22:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
@ ZX2006XZ: Read WP:FILMMUSIC. If a soundtrack is not notable, a film article does not need both a music infobox and a track listing. Films like Bad Times at the El Royale need a track listing because they feature a number of pre-recorded songs. This is not one of those films. It is a film score. A music infobox and a track listing are unnecessary. Also, stop reverting my edits to #Release. Per Template:Infobox film, the only release important for an American film is an American release. We do not need to include the territories in which it will later be released. Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 20:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
I do know that this movie marks the sixth installment in the Ice Age franchise, but there's one little question: is the film canon to the theatrical films? Because Peaches, Shira and Granny are absent, contradicting the fourth & fifth movies, and what if there's a firewall between the defunct Blue Sky (the franchise's original studio) and Walt Disney Pictures? Please be free to respond. -- Sstanford2 ( talk) 05:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
It is a sequel! It is clearly yet another film in the franchise. It is also a spin-off, which is a type of sequel that changes the focus to different lead characters. But why do editors insist on emphasizing [2] the claim that it is a "standalone sequel"? Surely the amount of separation and the degree to which this story stands alone from the previous films is not only subjective but in any case irrelevant and unimportant. Please stop adding "standalone" back to the intro. -- 109.76.139.121 ( talk) 17:48, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor continues to insert "standalone" into the summary [6] without any edit summary by way of explanation, or any comment here. As I said above, this distinction is pointless ( WP:UNDUE), and it is not even supported by anything in the article body (not sourced, and WP:FILMLEAD). -- 109.79.64.54 ( talk) 00:05, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: AryKun ( talk · contribs) 12:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
So I really don't think there should be any question that Cartoon Brew is a quality source.― Kaleeb18 TalkCaleb 13:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Z1720 (
talk) 17:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Kaleeb18 ( talk), ZX2006XZ ( talk), SlySabre ( talk), and Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk). Nominated by Kaleeb18 ( talk) at 12:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC).