Talk:The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent

Poster

This page needs the poster from this movie's IMDb page to be up-to-date. $uperFan32 (talk) 12:23, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Non-free images are not supposed to be used in Drafts. Once it is ready to move to main space, it can be added. BOVINEBOY2008 23:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent

I really have to disagree with that assessment. It's been met with significant media coverage, the crutch was that since filming had not begun, it failed WP:NFF. A reliable source has been provided to confirm filming had begun. Rusted AutoParts 22:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: I would very much like a response to this. If not could you show me where to submit a dispute in regards to this decision? Rusted AutoParts 06:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Notability of Future Films

User:Rusted AutoParts - I normally tell editors who disagree with my assessments on whether to accept drafts that they should ask for the comments of other experienced editors at the Teahouse. I still think that would be a good idea. They have read the same guidelines as you and I have. However, I will advise you to read the third paragraph of the guidelines on future films again. It is very common for editors to read the first and second paragraphs, and then think that films should have articles when they start principal photography. Perhaps the guideline should be reorganized. I call your attention to:

Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines.

The draft says that it has started principal photography. It doesn't say anything about principal photography, probably because there is not much to say about it. The weather is nice in Croatia in October. In general, films are not notable until they are released in theaters. They are occasionally notable when they are still in production, but usually not. A film is notable in production if the press reports that one of the supporting actresses was fired by the producer and had to be replaced, or if the press reports that filming was disrupted by protesters. The draft that you have submitted says that the film is in production. That doesn't make its production notable. The film will be notable when it is released.

It is common for editors to think that films are notable when they begin production. They are only notable if production itself is notable. Maybe the guideline should be clarified. You can ask for opinions at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Moving to main space

So, the thing says that you shouldn’t move the draft article until filming has begun. But, it has been shown that filming has indeed begun. So why can’t I move it to main space? FilmLover72 (talk) 15:52, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

The guidelines at WP:NFF simply say that a film should not have a standalone article if main production has not been shown to have begun. It does not say that if a film has begun production that it should have an article. It still needs to meet notability guidelines, i.e. "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". BOVINEBOY2008 15:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

But there are literally pictures that show that filming has begun. Don’t believe me? Just type in The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent on Twitter and you’ll see tons of photos of Nic Cage filming with Pedro Pascal on the movie. FilmLover72 (talk) 18:39, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not denying it isn't in filming. I'm not really even defending the AfC decline. But I'm saying that just because a film is in production does not guarantee that it gets an article. It still needs to meet WP:GNG. BOVINEBOY2008 20:00, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for explaining it to me. I now know better and will try not to make the same mistake. FilmLover72 (talk) 22:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@SummerPhDv2.0:, @Robert McClenon: The film HAS received significant coverage though. Entertainment Weekly, Global News, The Hollywood Reporter, along with the most reliable sources when it comes to movie news covering casting that's linked in the article too. This film article meets the same standard MANY film articles that don't get that level of coverage gets and truly baffles me how this was pushed back into draftspace when it clearly doesn't fail guidelines for NFF or GNG. (Also irritated I was not informed of the delete discussion so I could've aired my objections there). Rusted AutoParts 18:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

My irritation about not being invited to the deletion discussion grows considering that discussion only lasted for *two days* with only one additional comment. That's not a fair consensus in my opinion. Rusted AutoParts 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

That definitely seems fishy. I would list it on WP:DRV. Also, the claim that the filming itself has to be notable is unsupported. Production encompasses development, and we have direct coverage about the film's development. The point is to show that there is real-world interest in the topic. The start of filming is just a hard threshold set by WikiProject Film because things can fall apart before that point. Much less likely for that to happen when the cameras start rolling. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 13:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Lily Mo Sheen

Should Lily Mo Sheen's name link to her mother? If she has no page, surely it would be better to have no link than link to a person that isn't her? 2403:5808:3660:0:FFF9:F39A:D0DC:3A67 (talk) 06:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Actually, linking to her very noteably celebrity mother is linking to another page that has more details about her. One of the most noteable things about Lily is who her parents are. Normally, inline links to another page are there so that more details can be sought. Until Lily has enough imdb or other credits, linking to mother makes sense. 50.46.9.120 (talk) 09:19, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Dude