Talk:Enough

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Unknown This article has not been rated on the importance assessment scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot overview, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film. We are always looking for new members! Join us today!

Contents 1 RfC 1.1 Visiting response 2 The Movie Poster and infobox 3 Stub tags/Cleanup

[edit] RfC

Should criticism of this movie's advocation of lawlessness, self-righteous hedonistic deception and aggression, and the 2-wrongs-make-a-right belief be noted, or should they be forbidden from inclusion under the belief that they are 'crap' or some other discreditting description? LawAndOrder 13:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

"It could be argued that..." is a clumsy way to start a sentence, even more so right at the beginning of an article. Before we even know what "Enough" is, we're plunged into someone's opinion of it. But I think you can legitimately have a "Criticism" section later. You might call it "Reviewers' Opinions". Find some professional critics who say how awful the movie is, quote them, and cite your sources. Or better yet, link to them if you can. BrianH123 05:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

What in the world are you talking about? The Criticism section WAS in a separate section, not at the beginning of the article, and it DID NOT begin with "It could be argued that..." LawAndOrder 16:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm talking about this:[1] "It could be argued that..." is in the second sentence of the article. I see though that you didn't write it. Someone else did. BrianH123 17:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Unless the movie sparked some sort of national debate, engendered a social phenomena or used viewer responses as some sort of publicity stunt I can't imagine how personal responses would be appropriate for the article, movies come out all the time that appear to advocate behavior that would be illegal and offensive to some peoples morality, I don't think a single example that was not even particularly popular or controversial should be singled out 13 January ET

[edit] Visiting response

This article is little more than a plot summary. It could grow in other directions. Has someone with legal, sociological, or domestic violence expertise critiqued it? If so, quote them. Otherwise the disputed insertion smacks of original research. This belongs in a separate section after the plot description. Regards, Durova 07:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Movie Poster and infobox

Someone please put a movie cover and a detail in an info-box for the movie.

[edit] Stub tags/Cleanup

This article lacks information and content compared to other film articles on Wikipedia. It lacks an infobox, movie poster/DVD cover image and is badly organized. Therefore, I've added apropriate stub tags to the article and left the cleanup tag that was already part of the article. S3BST3R 05:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)