Talk:Gunslinger (film)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gunslinger.jpg

Image:Gunslinger.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Wrong movie poster

The picture used for the movie poster is from an upcoming film with the same name. I took the liberty of removing the link to the image from the article until this can be fixed. 96.46.17.119 (talk) 23:47, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gunslinger (1956 film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Erachima (talk · contribs) 01:57, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Images

I am quite skeptical of the illustrative value (and therefore the fair use copyright status) of File:MST3K Gunslinger.jpg. This is not an article about MST3K, so an image that primarily shows the MST3K characters is neither, in my view, useful nor justified on this page. I believe that's the only outstanding issue here.

So, you could either remove the image, optionally replacing it with something more illustrative (a pivotal scene from the film?), or you could ask for the fair use wonks to review it. If they agree with it, I'm fine with it. --erachima talk 01:57, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I'll list it at WP:NFCR, along with the other MST3K images used in these GAs: The Brute Man, Laserblast and Night of the Blood Beast. The discussion is here. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 20:18, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

@Erachima:, the image has been deleted. Are there any other things to address? Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 20:11, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

In that case, nah, looks Good. --erachima talk 22:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: Move. Cúchullain ^t/c 18:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

---

Gunslinger (1956 film) → Gunslinger (film) – The only film called gunslinger with an article. the current title seems a bit overspecific Sarah Danielle Nix SarahDanielleNix (talk) 23:41, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

• You are correct that it is the only one with an article. However, Gunslinger (2012 film) exists as a redirect to Mennan Yapo. So I'm undecided as of yet (what's policy for stuff like this?) Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 23:48, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
• Comment is the 2012 film a real film? On the disambiguation page and the director's page it says it is an upcoming film -- 70.24.244.51 (talk) 02:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose whether it's ever going to be made or not - it's been in the news since 2009 and I'd guess more Josh Hartnett fans are searching for when this film is going to come out than are searching for the 1956 film. There's enough WP:GNG coverage of the film in Variety and so on to make it notable as a never-made, suggest we keep the 1956 film recognisable while press releases on the new film are ongoing. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:50, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
• Comment: Per WP:NCF#Between films of the same name, if none of the films are the primary topic, and the primary topic is something else, the film articles are all disambiguated with the year. For example, we have the primary topic Titanic as a redirect to the page on the famous ship; then we have Titanic (1943 film), Titanic (1953 film), and Titanic (1997 film); and finally Titanic (film) is a redirect to Titanic (disambiguation). However, the naming guideline is silent if one of the film articles is a redirect, like in this case. But once the Gunslinger (2012 film) page is restarted, the guideline would say that this page will have to be moved back to Gunslinger (1956 film). Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
• I think that the Gunslinger (2012 film) redirect link should be erased, as the date of the film is still uncertain, so having this redirect just confuses people. SarahDanielleNix (talk) 01:58, 21 November 2013 (UTC) (Is this how to sign posts?)

I agree. --BDD (talk) 18:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

• Support Use a hatnote to the effect of For the upcoming film, see Mennan Yapo. Even that is pretty weak, though. --BDD (talk) 18:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
• Support. When someone manages to scrape together enough reliably sourced material to write an article about the new film project, we can revisit the situation. Until then, Gunslinger (film) is fully sufficient to disambiguate our actual existing content. Also, I'm even opposed to the idea of a hatnote link to Mennan Yapo, since that article also doesn't contain any material about the project. Fans of Josh Hartnett should peruse Google unless and until enough material exists for an actual article on the project, or at the very least a somewhat fleshed out section e.g. in Yapo's article. --85.197.20.10 (talk) 09:04, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
• Support per nom and PRIMARYTOPIC. Article for another Gunslinger film doesn't exist. -- Wikipedical (talk) 06:06, 28 November 2013 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gunslinger (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121217040909/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/mst3kcollvol6.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/mst3kcollvol6.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:33, 30 April 2017 (UTC)