Talk:2020 in film

How to make sure that the text of this article doesn't look like an ad?

Some parts of the text of this article look like an ad. Look like they were written by publicists working for the movie studios. ... The situation is the same with the other articles about film in other years. But it changed recently, it was not like that before, you can check the history of those pages from some years ago.

I suspect the section "Film records" would help make much money for the movie studios that produced the movies mentioned there.

I'm just saying that the editors of these pages are a bit careless and copy-paste texts from mainstream news media, and that is problematic because mainstream news media is said to be easily manipulated by powerful groups like by PR executives, or in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

I'm just trying to suggest to the editors to be more careful when adding texts to these kind of articles, in which money is at stake, it is clear that money is at stake for movie studios depending on what Wikipedia says because many people read Wikipedia. If Wikipedia says good things about the movies they make, then they make more money.

Jktrhg (talk) 11:50 pm, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2019

the 3rd Dune reboot movie from Paramount's 20th Century Fox by August 2025 announcement. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:23, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 18 September 2019

Zedonathin2020 (talk) 23:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Please provide your suggested change in the "change X to Y" format. --Izno (talk) 01:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

New Format

People of Wikipedia, this new format that has been brought up by DeluxeVegan is without a doubt, the worse change I’ve ever seen in all my years on this site. I’m pretty sure no one wants to take extra time looking up separate pages to find certain movies. I think it’s makes a lot more sense to keep going on with the original format. Also, who actually cares enough about movies being released in Japan? (Asides from the Japanese people of course) Zedonathin2020 (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

For reference, this change was brought about by consensus demonstrated by a request for comment at Talk:2019 in film#Request for comment. DeluxeVegan (talk) 14:31, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

"consensus" by secret ballot is not a consensus. it is pretty clear that that "consensus" was by people who made absolutely no effort to consult with a wider audience, or notify anyone in advance of the intention to change the page. i have seen "excuses" that the page containing "list of all films" is by far the largest of those of wikipedia: that's because it's a long list, duh! and what do we do on the internet when presented with large tables of data to communicate to people? we use "paging!" the URL contains the page number that the person wants to see! it is 2020. this should not in any way be difficult! Lkcl (talk) 10:41, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

"it is pretty clear that that "consensus" was by people who made absolutely no effort to consult with a wider audience", Yes, I agree. ... The change should be reversed ... who wants to take the leadership to propose that change to the whole community? ... proposing that change (bringing back the old format) will bring success, it just needs leadership, who here has leadership? Jktrhg (talk) 10:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Clearly the answer is that we have to look for that information elsewhere, as the actions of current wiki editors seems to be oriented towards complete destruction of this accessible information, as current morons are only capable of directing and not doing things themselves. Clearly, that people who were adding information to old-style list are fed-up with these new Overlords. Oh, well - time to look for some other sources:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/calendar/?ref_=bo_nb_ydw_tab

https://www.imdb.com/list/ls026253657/?sort=release_date,desc&st_dt=&mode=detail&page=2&ref_=ttls_vm_dtl

Goood byeee wikiiiii - you were a good movie source for the past 10+ years for me. RIP 2020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.147.206.144 (talk) 10:57, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to talk pages about the format of 2019 in film and 2020 in film

Everyone seeing this is invited to the sections on WP:FILM and MOS:FILM about the format change that started on 2019 in film and in 2020 in film. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:38, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Events section

Is there any stated inclusion-criteria here? Should we try to add more from Template:National Cinema Awards? For example, if I find a decent ref for 55th Guldbagge Awards, will someone here object if I add it? To my eyes, the section is currently a little US-centric. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't think there should be a problem with listing awards of the highest order from other countries. DeluxeVegan (talk) 09:04, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I checked a few in the Asia section of the template, and of those I checked with year-specific articles (several), none had actually been written yet for 2020 ceremonies (neither had Guldbaggen, but I created that). This gives the Californians an understandable edge. One can of course find a cite and add a redlink, but for now I won't add any redlinks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Fox Animation Studios movies in theatres in 2020

After the success of Beauty and the Beast and The Princess and the Frog, Fox Animation Studios did not produced new traditionally-animated comedy movies in Fall 2020, because Fox Animation Studios was closed down in 2000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.77.79.15 (talk) 16:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/2020-in-review/the-best-movies-of-2020. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 09:56, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Walt Disney Animation Studios vs. Pixar Animation Studios

The 1990s animated films released by Walt Disney Pictures in order:

• Aladdin (1992) vs. Toy Story (1995)
• Tarzan (1999) vs. Toy Story 2 (1999)
• The Emperor's New Groove (2000) vs. Monsters, Inc. (2001)
• Treasure Planet (2002) vs. Finding Nemo (2003)
• Teacher's Pet (2004) vs. The Incredibles (2004)
• Chicken Little (2005) vs. Cars (2006)
• Meet the Robinsons (2007) vs. Ratatouille (2007)
• Hercules (1997) vs. WALL-E (2008)
• Bolt (2008) vs. Up (2009)
• The Princess and the Frog (2009) vs. Toy Story 3 (2010)

Note: Walt Disney Animation Studios and Pixar Animation Studios feature films are owned by Walt Disney Discovery. 50.66.184.121 (talk) 17:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)