Talk:Elevator to the Gallows

Fair use rationale for Image:Ascenseur echafaud.jpg

Image:Ascenseur echafaud.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, peops, i just changed the words "abseils up the office block" to "climbs on a rope up the office block." Abseiling is about descent. One could use an abseiling device (in 1955, there were figure-8 devices) to, with difficulty, ratchet oneself upwards, but not only did the protagonist not have one (or prusiks) ...he did not have a climbing harness or anything like that. That is a really thin rope to just climb up with only your hands and feet...but he was supposed to be ultra-tough, so, hmm, maybe he used the wall a little; no problem. Awesome film, by the way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.188.220 (talk) 20:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 12 March 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Number 57 22:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

---

Elevator to the Gallows → Ascenseur pour l'échafaud – There are other English titles: Lift to the Scaffold and Frantic. Without determining which English is the most commonly used, the article should use the original French title instead. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 07:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 08:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

• Support when there are conflicting English titles we use the original. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose WP:UE, there are English-language titles in use, so we choose one of them to use. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:20, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Which one then? --George Ho (talk) 10:31, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

The article is already using an English-language title. If you wish to use a different one, or to choose between English-language titles that exist in the real world, I suggest you withdraw this nomination and file a moveoptions move request. Though swapping a US title for a UK title may have WP:ENGVAR implications. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 06:15, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I have come this far, so I can't. Also, there is no unanimous consensus at this time. Also, there is WP:DIVIDEDUSE guideline; read it. --George Ho (talk) 07:02, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose WP:UE - This is the english version of WP, and if there is an English version of the name already in use, it should remain the same English version since there is no compelling, logical, or common sense reason to change it to an alternate variation, nor to the French version either.74.104.150.176 (talk) 22:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. There have been numerous discussions on the talk pages of non-English language films on this general topic. For those interested in the subject, the most intense one took place in February 2012 at Talk:Bande à part (film)#Requested move. All the arguments are already there. Among those, I feel strongest about giving deference to The Criterion Collection which, while founded in the U.S., distributes throughout the English-speaking world and has a high reputation among film scholars. That argument (and various other additional arguments, citing film guides), was accepted at most such discussions, although it was insufficient to convince opponents of returning Bande à part (film) to Band of Outsiders.
  In the case at hand, The Criterion Collection issued this film as Elevator to the Gallows. Throughout the history of this article, which was created in January 2006 as Elevator to the Gallows, there have been back-and-forth moves between its French and English titles (October 2006: move to French — March 2007: move to English — August 2007: move to French — January 2010: move to English). It has remained as Elevator to the Gallows for more than five years and, while discussions such as these are always valuable in keeping the subject alive, there is no evidence that the other two English-language titles, Lift to the Scaffold and Frantic (1958 film) have had use comparable to that of Elevator to the Gallows or, more importantly, been used for any VHS or DVD releases. IMDb lists 39 international titles for this film but indicates, as its final item, "World-wide (English title) Elevator to the Gallows". —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 02:47, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. While I'm the one who (somehow; for some reason) tracked and added one of the alt English titles (Frantic; I guess in a contemporaneous 1965 Time mag cover story I cited in 2010; Time story now alas behind paywall), I take Roman Spinner in particular (nice review) and others above's leads. Criterion probably seals it for me, too.

I will say the "title clutter" in the article intro, after these years away, no memory of the film or the title or anything when George Ho (thank you) alerted me to this discussion, before I realized I was part of the clutter, was a little 'curious' to me. I'm not personally ready to delve further now; and can in fact say 'It's part of the beauty of [Wiki's; and all our; Google Translate's ...] cross-lingual [and commercial] communications'. But I guess my curiosity could signal openness to an alternate routine Wiki approach. Swliv (talk) 12:30, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Comment. Difficult one, but I would come down in favour of a more literal English title than the current one. I doubt there will be agreement on that, since the English title I'm familiar with ("Lift to the Scaffold") might not suit American readers, whilst the present title certainly doesn't suit UK readers. So there is a good case for using the French title. Deb (talk) 19:06, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
• Support. In the spirit of WP:UE, we use English when there is an established English language common name and the original language when there is no established English language common name. This is a case where there appear to be three equally valid English names (Elevator to the Gallows, Frantic and Lift to the Scaffold) and different names in different varieties of English for a topic with no strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation (Elevator to the Gallows and Lift to the Scaffold). Since there is no predominant usage in reliable English-language sources and several competing "foreign terms" [translations], I think we should follow the conventions of the language appropriate to the subject, which in this case is French. DrKiernan (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 27 June 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) George Ho (talk) 21:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

---

Elevator to the Gallows → Lift to the Scaffold – If we can't use the French title, then what about the other English title? There are Frantic (alternative US title) and Lift to the Scaffold (UK title). I checked Google Books. While the current title is most used, other titles have been also commonly used. However, Region 2 DVD uses the Lift title; so does the Region 4 one (Australia & NZ). Region 1 DVD uses the current title; so do American sources. Frantic has not been used by DVDs, so that's out. Blu-rays haven't been released yet, so let's not use databases about Blu-rays then. WP:UE has a section, WP:DIVIDEDUSE. I'm not sure whether WP:RETAIN applies; it doesn't mention "title(s)". --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 16:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 06:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• Sort of confused why there is even an issue here -- there are multiple English titles, all of which would be acceptable, so why wouldnt we just WP:RETAIN the current one?--Yaksar (let's chat) 19:46, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

That depends on which English title is common Americans, British, Canadians, Australians, and New Zealanders. As I hate to admit, I don't care much for either English title. There wasn't a consensus to go for the original French title, but I have wondered whether the current title has been well-known to non-US people (or movie watchers). --George Ho (talk) 21:42, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose It has an english title already, why change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.14.212.141 (talk) 07:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose scaffold is not just the échafaud, it is also any framework, whilst gallows is associated with the meaning that échafaud conveys; construction sites have many lifts (elevators) in scaffolds, but a lift (elevator) to the gallows conveys a different meaning, better portraying the French title. -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 02:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Tavernier: ex foreign legion parachutist officer - ?

Who said that ? As far as I remember, he is referred to as having been an officer with the parachutists, not especially parachutists of FFL (FFL is mentioned in talk between the German tourist and the young carjacker about Indochina war in general, o. k. But no reverence to Tavernier). --129.187.244.19 (talk) 09:30, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Unsuccessful suicide attempt

The plot summary states "They both swallow phenobarbitone pills and pass out, but not taking a lethal dose, both soon recover." This is incorrect: Florence Carala says "You took too much. Mistakes save lives." I've rephrased to avoid the issue. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 06:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)