Talk:A Cure for Pokeritis

Character names

There's some disagreement in the literature about the names of the main characters. The 1912 Moving Picture World plot summary gives their names as Bunny and Mrs. Sharpe (and John Bunny's character is named Bunny Sharpe in some period Vitagraph advertising). A few modern sources seem to have inherited this, although not generally the reliable ones suitable for Wikipedia (at the time of this writing, IMDB names them the Sharpes). However, at least in the print that is currently available (and viewable on the Internet Archive), the characters are unquestionably identified as George and Mary Brown in a letter that appears onscreen at about 7:52. Most other reliable sources that name the characters call them the Browns, as well. Because our MOS for film titles (and, presumably, characters) suggests we follow from the primary source in case of confusion, I've had the bulk of the article go with George and Mary Brown due to the letter in the film. As to why there's even two sets of names in the first place ... neither I, nor any evident sources, seem to suggest any reason at all. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

The name "Brown" may have been used to make the names of the main characters "Brown and Bigelow." This article doesn't refer to that advertising company but the article about Cassius Marcellus Coolidge who painted the "Dogs Playing Poker" pictures, referred to here, does. One might suspect that Brown and Bigelow had something to do with this movie, perhaps having the letter scene inserted in the re-release. This is sheer speculation, of course. 162.89.0.47 (talk) 18:02, 23 February 2018 (UTC) Eric

Film title

In the intro paragraph, it's stated that A Cure for Pokeritis is a re-release "alternate title"; however, nowhere is mentioned the film's original title. I think that the original title should be an important part of the article. If the original title is unknown, lost, or if this type of short was typically untitled, I think that info should be mentioned as well. (And to think of it, there can't be an "alternate title" if there wasn't an original title to begin with!) 2600:8800:786:A300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 05:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I think you're missing the "Sure" in the re-release title. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 07:04, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Does this still meet WP:FA?

Do others feel this still meets WP:FA? I think the lead could be expanded to properly meet summary style, some sections (Home Media, Music) are not sufficiently well-researched and well-written. A minor thing, but the Notes could use some curation (I note the presence of red links and the gambling note). I'll list at WP:FARGIVEN and please discuss below. Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Caleb Stanford: Overall the article is not that bad and the errors are fixable, even though the main editor has not edited since 2020. So I don't know if there is anyone else interested in saving the article, but any user who offers is welcome. 181.204.42.146 (talk) 21:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)