 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
References to use
edit- First Look at ‘The Parts You Lose’ Reveals Aaron Paul as a Fugitive on the Run, has details about H Collective's various projects
- Japan’s Rakuten Invests In H Collective’s ‘Brightburn’, ‘xXx 4’ – Cannes
References to use. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 20:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
- H Collective, Gran Via team on ‘The Vineyard’
- ‘Breaking Bad’ Exec Producer Mark Johnson Teams With The H Collective & ‘Love Guaranteed’ Director For Coming-Of-Age Movie ‘The Vineyard’
References to use. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 00:16, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 16:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 19:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 18:09, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Wiki Specialist LLC
editThe paid-editing service Wiki Specialist LLC has falsely claimed that they worked on this article. They quote The H Collective here, "Wiki Specialist LLC Company has truly done an amazing job. They have not only created a well-researched page but are maintaining it efficiently as well." The service is lying about their work, and if the quote from The H Collective is valid, the company is encouraged to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. At this time, I have contributed over 94% of the article's content, and it is only happenstance that the content is uncontroversial to date. If the company's performance is covered in a negative way, then this article will include that coverage in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 13:40, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Note: Added new link to above "See also" template. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:33, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Planned films
editThe "Filmography" table had included planned films, but with the removal of older reports in favor of newer reports, it seems like listing planned films is too unstable. It seems more appropriate to list completed films in the table. Just because the company announces a project in development does not mean it will see light of day. For example, this mentions Counter Spy, but there has been no update since, and the official website no longer mentions it. The problem is that it is hard to tell if no updates means the project has been dropped or if there is still a future. So instead, I've added a sentence after the table to mention the projects in development based on the official website. Presumably the lack of a project's appearance will mean it is no longer an active prospect. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 01:19, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
(Regarding Vineyard and Shadow Song) I don't get it why the info has been consistently taken down as THC already announced production and both projects are being produced by Sid Ganis and Mark Johnson respectively. Both projects have the scripts ready now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LALALA2021 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC) [1]
- LALALA2021, as stated above, plans for a film does not equate production. For example, Counter Spy was planned, but it has never been brought up again. There is no value to mentioning plans unless tangible results surface. If these films enter production, they can then be mentioned. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 16:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
XXX 4
editI was considering removing content about XXX 4 since it remains unproduced and came across this, which may warrant enduring coverage about this particular project, compared to other ones. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 16:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
- The lawsuit has now been mentioned in the article. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 16:39, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Undisclosed paid edits
editHello User:Lucicol is cool, I noticed you added the undisclosed paid edits flag to this article. I'm reviewing the page for any issues. Can you clarify which editors or edits you were concerned with? I also noticed another section here on the talk page about a company who falsely claimed to have worked on this article, so I wasn't sure if that was related. Content-wise, the article seems to be pretty neutral other than probably too much unnecessary information about the different leadership roles hired out in the History section. WyldEys (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- WyldEys, yes, I think Lucicol is cool's template was based on the same matter above under #Wiki Specialist LLC, and there are links to various discussions about that paid-editing service's claim. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:52, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Erik: thank you for the clarification and for taking care of the flag. WyldEys (talk) 14:30, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
History, and other edits
editAnother editor merged the "Company history" and "Project history" sections into one "History" section, and I reverted this merge. One section is more internal and focuses on how the company has been run, and the other section is more about the films that have been produced. A couple other points:
- The "Description" section that was taken from "Company history" is misleading because it indicates that the corporate roles are current, but it is possible that these have changed since the announcements
- The "Legal issues" section does not satisfy WP:STRUCTURE, and "Controversy"-type sections are generally frowned upon. The lawsuit coverage fits in "Company history" and does not appear, from reliable sources covering the company since then, to be worth a distinct section
Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 11:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
May 2024
edit
ResolvedThanks, Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 01:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)