![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 6 July 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was withdrawn. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Genuine question, I've never heard that but someone has been writing plot and it keeps getting reverted.-- Krystaleen 01:43, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
I personally thought the one that raped Jonah Hill was Satan. When my girlfriend and I watched the movie yesterday, and every time new demon appeared, she would say it was Satan. Is their a reason why you concluded that the final demon was Satan? Also, I think it is notable to say that the beam killed the giant demon. TBWarrior720 ( talk) 11:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Even though it's Wikipedia policy to refer to actors by their last names, I wonder if an exception should be made in the context of the plot summary for this article, where the actors are playing characters in a movie. That is, the actors are Rogen and Baruchel, but the characters are Seth and Jay. Et cetera. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 13:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Nah, it sounds more professional and consistent with last names. I like that Wiki has these standards. That the actors are playing themselves has no bearing on how they are referred to in an article. Jed 17:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jedgould ( talk • contribs)
The section on sequel has a single sentence, backed up by a grand total of ten citations. Ten! Agreed, this isn't the worst case of such a point (54 citations for one statement holds that record, as far as I know), but I very much doubt all of those citations are needed. Per WP:OVERCITE, "more than three [citations] should be avoided as clutter." As I'm personally unsure of the verifiability of each individual source, I have commented out all but the first three for now. It would be very much appreciated if someone could provide a more permanent decision as to which citations can be cut. Thanks in advance! drewmunn talk 11:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
The Plot section of this article is just a blatant spoiler. It should be a short description of the overall movie and not an abbreviated description of each scene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.9.214.118 ( talk) 03:52, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm aware of the request to not lengthen the plot summary, but a first reference to Emma Watson had to be added other wise "Watson returns" makes no sense. I don't believe I pushed it over the 700 word limit. 68.146.70.124 ( talk) 15:48, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
It reads like it was well received, but I just watched it, and this is a seriously bad film, and I am sure the critics would not have thought otherwise. Self indulgent trash. I paid per view after reading the Wiki entry. Will anyone reimburse me? My Sky+ box (like Tivo) is stopping the recording as I have two other scheduled recordings. Saved. Thanks technology. But this should not read like an advert. Awernham ( talk) 23:27, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
HEAVEN IS WHERE YOU GET WHATEVER YOU WANT? See Twilight Zone 1.28 "A Nice Place To Visit" (1961) for a less simplistic take on the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jedgould ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Some genius decided to destroy the page by changing jobs such as writers & directors including others, i tried to fix it up but needs more work, can someone do it please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanHFC1865 ( talk • contribs) 20:11, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Page is briefly semi-protected to prevent the current edit war over genre. This is not an endorsement of any particular outcome, but the onus is on those proposing a change to present their reliable sources for it. This talkpage is an ideal place for that presentation to occur. -- Euryalus ( talk) Euryalus ( talk) 21:14, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Special:Contributions/177.10.48.77|177.10.48.77]] ( talk) 01:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
It says that the main cast of the film were in it, but Robinson and Hill were absent, should we add that? 2600:1006:B043:C2B9:B5F5:F3B8:3A82:15BE ( talk) 22:50, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 6 July 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was withdrawn. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Genuine question, I've never heard that but someone has been writing plot and it keeps getting reverted.-- Krystaleen 01:43, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
I personally thought the one that raped Jonah Hill was Satan. When my girlfriend and I watched the movie yesterday, and every time new demon appeared, she would say it was Satan. Is their a reason why you concluded that the final demon was Satan? Also, I think it is notable to say that the beam killed the giant demon. TBWarrior720 ( talk) 11:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Even though it's Wikipedia policy to refer to actors by their last names, I wonder if an exception should be made in the context of the plot summary for this article, where the actors are playing characters in a movie. That is, the actors are Rogen and Baruchel, but the characters are Seth and Jay. Et cetera. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 13:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Nah, it sounds more professional and consistent with last names. I like that Wiki has these standards. That the actors are playing themselves has no bearing on how they are referred to in an article. Jed 17:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jedgould ( talk • contribs)
The section on sequel has a single sentence, backed up by a grand total of ten citations. Ten! Agreed, this isn't the worst case of such a point (54 citations for one statement holds that record, as far as I know), but I very much doubt all of those citations are needed. Per WP:OVERCITE, "more than three [citations] should be avoided as clutter." As I'm personally unsure of the verifiability of each individual source, I have commented out all but the first three for now. It would be very much appreciated if someone could provide a more permanent decision as to which citations can be cut. Thanks in advance! drewmunn talk 11:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
The Plot section of this article is just a blatant spoiler. It should be a short description of the overall movie and not an abbreviated description of each scene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.9.214.118 ( talk) 03:52, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm aware of the request to not lengthen the plot summary, but a first reference to Emma Watson had to be added other wise "Watson returns" makes no sense. I don't believe I pushed it over the 700 word limit. 68.146.70.124 ( talk) 15:48, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
It reads like it was well received, but I just watched it, and this is a seriously bad film, and I am sure the critics would not have thought otherwise. Self indulgent trash. I paid per view after reading the Wiki entry. Will anyone reimburse me? My Sky+ box (like Tivo) is stopping the recording as I have two other scheduled recordings. Saved. Thanks technology. But this should not read like an advert. Awernham ( talk) 23:27, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
HEAVEN IS WHERE YOU GET WHATEVER YOU WANT? See Twilight Zone 1.28 "A Nice Place To Visit" (1961) for a less simplistic take on the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jedgould ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Some genius decided to destroy the page by changing jobs such as writers & directors including others, i tried to fix it up but needs more work, can someone do it please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanHFC1865 ( talk • contribs) 20:11, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Page is briefly semi-protected to prevent the current edit war over genre. This is not an endorsement of any particular outcome, but the onus is on those proposing a change to present their reliable sources for it. This talkpage is an ideal place for that presentation to occur. -- Euryalus ( talk) Euryalus ( talk) 21:14, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Special:Contributions/177.10.48.77|177.10.48.77]] ( talk) 01:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
It says that the main cast of the film were in it, but Robinson and Hill were absent, should we add that? 2600:1006:B043:C2B9:B5F5:F3B8:3A82:15BE ( talk) 22:50, 9 October 2023 (UTC)