Talk:Bitter Harvest (2017 film)

Film Distribution

Is there any news about world distribution of this film?--Юе Артеміс (talk) 01:35, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Tagged for COI

I've reverted this article to an earlier version as even the tagging for WP:COI was not properly addressed on this talk page. Personally, the article reads as WP:PROMO. To add to this, it's been used as a WP:COATRACK for the Holodomor.

My take is that it's a WP:OTHERSTUFF issue and doesn't actually pass the WP:GNG test. I wouldn't be adverse to nominating it for WP:AFD. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:54, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Please check the talk page and its history more carefully. I added the {{Connected contributor}} notice, complete with diffs right around the same time that I tagged the article with {{COI}}. I had no comments to make beyond that, as the combination of the correct formal notice here and the edit history should have made it quite clear what the issue was. Murph9000 (talk) 01:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

That's fine, Murph9000. The IP has, however, continued to edit against advice, and has not responded to anyone outside of inappropriate ES. I'm calling this a case of WP:NOTHERE, and also don't believe that it meets WP:N. I'll propose it for deletion after I've checked for any indications of notability other than a few articles. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 10:34, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, the lack of response to talk is the major problem. They have had plenty of notices on their talk page now, and reverts on the article with edit summaries clearly asking them to come to the talk page. My major issue isn't so much WP:NOTHERE (but that is a valid concern); but all of WP:COI, WP:IDHT, and WP:OWN. If a WP:SPA is at least willing to talk and work with us on CoI, instead of just trying to force it (and now with WP:THREATs[9][10]), we can work with that. They might even have some valid concerns in there, things which should be corrected, but we will never know unless they stop disrupting and threatening, and start talking. Murph9000 (talk) 17:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I looked back in on this out of curiosity, and saw that there is a new IP editing with obvious COI. I have added it to the COI notice in the header. Murph9000 (talk) 22:52, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Soviet Famine or Holodomor?

an event that still haunts Europe to this day ? Sources are needed about haunted Europe. Xx236 (talk) 06:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Toned down the hype.

Toned down the hype a bit. Also, does this movie really have four producers and four executive producers? John Nagle (talk) 18:23, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's a source, an article in Screen Daily.[11]. What to take from this? John Nagle (talk) 18:33, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

@Nagle: What I make of it is that the film is being bankrolled as an agenda piece. I guess there's nothing to do about it considering that it's hardly the first time films have been made as soft propaganda or hard propaganda pieces. Unless there are any RS attesting to an agenda other than profit, we're going to draw a blank for the moment unless it's mentioned in passing that it's being bankrolled by one person... which is UNDUE given the lack of any form of reception or anything else other than that it exists. I'm still partial to an AfD based on WP:TOOSOON and WP:NFF. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. When they get at least a festival screening and some reviews, then it's time to expand the article. John Nagle (talk) 05:28, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2016

95.158.49.193 (talk) 08:32, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Not done: The article has been protected specifically to prevent you from continuing to edit it, as you have failed to respond to many attempts to deal with your obvious conflict of interest (COI). As you have an obvious COI, you need to be discussing changes first, and cooperating fully with the Wikipedia community. You need to demonstrate understanding of and willingness to comply with the COI policy (see also the messages on your user talk page). Also, COI users should be using the {{request edit}} process, not {{edit semi-protected}} (as you did here).

Additionally, you need to respond to the issues raised at AN/I (see the notice given on your talk page), in particular to address the issue that you appear to be engaging in WP:EVASION of an indefinite WP:BLOCK given to a named user account (the block applies to the person, not just the account). We want to have a neutral point of view article which is both fair and accurate (and fully supported by references to reliable sources), but the COI and possible block evasion are the more immediately urgent issues. Lastly, and extremely importantly, you need to review Wikipedia:No legal threats, and unconditionally withdraw your legal threat. You can find the AN/I thread at WP:AN/I § Legal threat at Bitter Harvest (upcoming film).

Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 09:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

"The plot" section

Currently, the section on the plot is a mess, conflating the general name for the Soviet famine with the "Holodomor" which is the descriptor for the concept of the Ukrainian elements of the famine as being being genocidal. Office Worm made an attempt at straightening it out here, but it's actually contrary to what the plot has been described as (being Holodomor as the backdrop). I was looking at this yesterday, but couldn't think of a way around the current conflation of the two schools of thought.

We need to follow what the sources say. Any thoughts from other editors as to how to address this? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:14, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Max Irons and Samantha Barks

They are actors, not lovers.Xx236 (talk) 08:54, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:11, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

In 2008 no such "Ukrainian government under Yanukovich"

The article currently claims that in 2008 Ukrainian Canadian Richard Bachynsky Hoover began to seek financial support from the "Ukrainian government under Yanukovich". The problem with that is that not until the February 2010 Ukrainian presidential election there was no such "Ukrainian government under Yanukovich". The government of Ukraine 2007-2010 was the Second Tymoshenko government under President Viktor Yushchenko. So either Yulia Tymoshenko('s ministers) and Yushchenko also also didn't help Richard or Viktor Yanukovych suspended earlier financial promises. Either way no Wikipedia article can make it look like Viktor Yanukovych was much more than an opposition leader in 2008 (and 2009). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

 Fixed the problem by removing mentioning Yanukovych. If later sources do arrive that it was the government under Yanukovych specifically who refused financial support for the film this information can be incorporated into the article (of course). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Neutrality

The plot section mentions an "anti-bolshevik resistance movement", but the "movement" in question was, according to the very page linked to, a quasi-fascist right-wing nationalist organisation which slaughtered Poles during world war II. Id there an issue of bias here, or even of potential cryptofascism? Should the page be changed to reflect this? 74.101.152.41 (talk) 18:02, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Actually, there are no references to his joining any particular movement, much less the Independent Army it's been wikilinked to. For the moment, I've tagged it for a reliable source stating this to be the case, and am removing the link. There appears to be some form of flouting of WP:NOR happening here. There were a multitude of partisan movements/'armies' all across Ukraine at that time. Anti-Bolshevik (if he does join such a 'movement') does not automatically mean the UPA. In fact, considering that the protagonist's background is Cossack, it seems highly unlikely that he would have joined the Ukrainian Insurgent Army: ... wrong side of Ukraine for the Kuban Cossacks. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Facepalm I just realised that I was right off the mark, full stop. What Ukrainian Insurgent Army in 1932? It didn't exist!... and Western Ukraine wasn't part of Soviet Ukraine until after WWII. Who on earth added that trashy piece of POV WP:POINTyness to the plot in the first place? This is an article about a film, not a WP:COATRACK for arbitrary political ignorance. Please pay attention to dates/eras! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 09:28, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Released.

It's in US theaters now. Reviews are starting to appear.[12] Probably worth an update after the weekend. John Nagle (talk) 06:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Well it's about time. I've been watching this one for three years as its title kept changing. Thumbs down to the promoters who kept pushing this one on Wikipedia before it was ready. wbm1058 (talk) 01:52, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Initial numbers and reviews are in.[13]. US first week gross, $297,808. UK opening weekend, $9,277. Ukraine opening weekend, $136,177. Those are dollars, not thousands. Those are very small numbers. No rush on updating the article; the movie is already being dropped by theaters, and we should have final theatrical release numbers in a week or two when it closes. John Nagle (talk) 19:12, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Final US theater gross, $557,241.[14]. (Two theaters are still showing it, daily gross is about $89; it's done.) John Nagle (talk) 05:25, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Citations regarding historical facts

I have removed the following citations from the plot summary. They will be helpful for a potential "Historical analysis" section, but do not belong as part of the plot summary of a fictional work. If there are challenges about the historical events referenced in the plot section, they should be sourced with references discussing the film. Any application of citations regarding real-world historical events would constitute original research in this context. Thanks.— TAnthony^Talk 20:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

• Jones, Adam (2010). Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction. Taylor & Francis. p. 194. ISBN 9780415486187.
• Timothy Snyder. Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin. Basic Books, 2010, pp.50–51. ISBN 0-465-00239-0
• Andrea Graziosi, "Les Famines Soviétiques de 1931–1933 et le Holodomor Ukrainien.", Cahiers du monde russe et soviétique, 46/3, p. 457
• Nicolas Werth, "La grande famine ukrainienne de 1932–1933" in Nicolas Werth, La terreur et le désarroi: Staline et son système, Paris, 2007, p. 132. ISBN 2262024626
• Boriak, Hennadii. Sources for the Study of the << Great Famine>> in Ukraine (Cambridge, Mass 2009)
• "The famine of 1932–33". Encyclopædia Britannica online. Retrieved 2 November 2015. The Great Famine of 1932–33 – a catastrophe unprecedented in peacetime. Of the estimated six to eight million people who died in the Soviet Union, about four to five million were Ukrainians... Its nature is still debated... Brigades of special agents were dispatched to Ukraine to assist in procurement, and homes were routinely searched and foodstuffs confiscated... The rural population was left with insufficient food to feed itself.

Present section "Reception" (March 5, 2017)

This section gives overview and (single) reference. Additional references might be in order. Quotation is unnecessary, and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.211.242.178 (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

In a week or two, the final numbers and reviews should be in, and we can finish here. John Nagle (talk) 20:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Added final US total gross of $557,241. It's still in two US theaters, but the $45/day receipts aren't going to change the total much. John Nagle (talk) 21:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Heavy uncited editing by anon

About 20 edits by 95.158.53.148 (talk · contribs).[15]. No cites. Many changes to factual items. Addition of information an insider would have. Possible COI. With cites, this might be OK, but I reverted some of this pending better sourcing. John Nagle (talk) 18:22, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Request for locking/special protection due to vandalism

The article has been repeatedly vandalized and disrupted for reasons unknown. Could I request admins lock or provide some manner of editing restriction to the article to prevent this from going on further.--SavageEdit (talk) 11:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Impartiality in the article

Contributors should avoid using overly personal language ('tenacious') in reference to people and events involved with the film. Similarly, Hoover's research on the Holodomor, while commendable, should not be depicted in an overly effusive, borderline promotional, manner. The page is not here for the promotion of the film or its makers, nor a substitute for Wikipedia's own page on the genocide.--SavageEditor (talk) 15:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Multiple Issues Template

Hi, I came across a few issues on this article that I couldn't fix on my own so I've added the 'multiple issues' template to focus our efforts.

1. Factual Accuracy - the Production section contains a lot of info that I haven't been able to verify. I don't really know where any of that information has come from, nor do I know if it's relevant in the first place.
2. Neutrality/POV - there are various statements that aren't very "encyclopedic" and sound like they were written as an autobiography or essay. Given the political underpinnings regarding the subject of the article we should be more particular with our language when mentioning events like Holodomor, genocide and steering clear of terminology such as "dark tragic diabolical terror" unless it's a clearly designated quote from someone relevant to the film.
3. Tone - Language like "testy neighbourhoods" etc. Similar to prior issue of accuracy, some lines sound like someone is inside the mind of the screenwriter/producer, without a citation seeing sentences like "[this is what] triggered him to..." How/from where do we know this? Is this supposed to be a quote or from a user? The current style does not suit an encylopaedia.
4. Cleanup/Copy Editing - there are various spelling mistakes, formatting inconsistencies and grammatical errors. I can probably clean this one up myself but it will take time, however I'd rather fix the previous problems first if they are unsuitable.

I hope I've done this correctly, perhaps Tone and POV could be combined? Please reach out with any concerns. Thank you. --PrinceKael (talk) 08:33, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for this, I have returned to this article a few times to weed out the ranting with which a certain editor repeatedly insists on bloating the plot. Today I have addressed the article as a whole and hopefully improved it somewhat, although I have not gone so far as to check all of such references as are given. I haven't removed the templates as there may well be issues I have missed but maybe they can be removed soon. I suggest that page protection be implemented the moment the WP:COI inevitably returns, and at each subsequent instance. Maybe they will get the message eventually. Cheers! Captainllama (talk) 12:41, 30 June 2022 (UTC)