User talk:EVula/MK: Devastation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Lord Raiden

Didn't Christopher Lambert's official webpage confirm him as playing Raiden? If my memory is correct, than why is he not even mentioned on the page? The S 03:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Movie History

Unless somebody can cite a source for that long "extract" in the movie history section, I'm going to remove it. Jeff Silvers 01:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Page makes mo mention of Mortal Kombat: Ressurection. Dessydes 00:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is Mortal Kombat: Resurrection? A quick Google search only returns fanfics and download sites for some soundtrack. Jeff Silvers 22:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay guys, why is this page full of fake and outdated info? The cast list is a joke - Christopher Lambert's official site did claim he was returning, and Linden Ashby has talked about being in negotiations for this a few times, and that's IT. There's no back-up for anything else on here. On top of that, both of those cast members were based on the old version of the film, back when Drew McWeeny's script was actually considered for use. McWeeny himself said on AICN that the script was based on Deadly Alliance - not Deception or Armageddon, since he wrote it before those games ever existed.

Tony Jaa? Ziyi Zhang? Why do people make up lies? There's nothing to back this up, nothing at all.

But as I said, that's all outdated crap now, because the latest news is that New Line is going back to square one with a prequel story that focuses on Sub-Zero and nobody else. Seen here: http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Movies&action=page&type_id=&cat_id=270338&obj_id=52111

Somebody erase this whole page and/or clean it up pronto, please. It's almost wall-to-wall FAKE. User: Anonymous 08:30, 30 August 2006

We relly need to figure out when this movie is coming out so that Mortal Kombat fans know wich is coming first the new movie or the new game.

[edit] Protection

I have had this page protected (see here) to stop the constant edits that are usually unsourced, unproven, or just plain outright vandalism. Hopefully now this will start looking more like an encyclopedia article. -The Haunted Angel 13:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

FlavioTerceiro 03:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation no more

I just removed the "Other possible cast" section. Why? Because it was all unsourced, speculative drivel. Any attempts at adding a similar section will be met with an angry revert if a source is not provided with the edit. EVula 00:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You know what I think? I think we should put up a warning telling people not to add ANY actors to this list at all, it is really getting out of hand. All my watchlist is is changes to the actors, and most of it isn't true. There are changes to this list every half an hour or so and it is getting out of hand. The Haunted Angel 00:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, if a verifiable source can be provided, I have no problem with people adding more actors. Hell, even a source saying there is a rumor that so-and-so is being considered for something is better than nothing. Otherwise, I'm just going to treat it as vandalism and summarily revert it. EVula 00:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I think this is really getting out of hand. We should really mention then that any info MUST be sourced, or else it will be removed quickly. The Haunted Angel 00:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I think calling it out in the article is (a) unencyclopedic, and (b) unnecessary, as the Wikipedia rules clearly state that "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable" (right below the textarea that users have to use to add that content, no less). Just revert (and maybe warn) as needed, as far as I'm concerned. Much easier to do. :) EVula 01:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't mean call it out in the article, I mean put one of those warnings up that only appear when you are editing an article... I don't know the correct term.... it seems not many people pay attention to the Wikipedia rules in this article, the warning may gain some attention, if only a little, but hey, your call. The Haunted Angel 01:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, a comment is what you're talking about. I've got nothing against that; I'll add one now. EVula 01:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Seen it, great work! The Haunted Angel 01:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Johnny Cage didn't die??

Why would they bring back that crotch kicking pansy?He died in the second one.AeomMai

He dies in the games aswell, during MK II, but he still comes back. Something about when the realms merge he finds an opening back into Earthrealm. The Haunted Angel 23:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

If you read the article you should know that Devastation will replace Annihilation as the official sequel for the first film. I don't like his game version either but I thought Linden Ashby kicked ass in the first film. -TheHande 17:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually, if you read the article you should know that it rumored that Devastation will replace Annihilation. There has been no official confirmation about the story. (and yes, Linden Ashby kicked ass) EVula 18:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, thanks, and i do agree, his movie version was good, but he really and truely did suck in the games. E.x the "Punching Bag" Fatality? What was that crap?--AeomMai 00:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No more bullshit

I cut everything unsourced, and we now have inline references. Cite or be reverted; this is your only warning. EVula 16:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

"There is no knowledge that is not power." And there is no original research that is not reverted. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 06:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed some references

I removed some outdated references that were no longer valid from the article. I also removed some unsourced speculation that came from those references. Wesborland 16:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Improving the article

I've straightened up the structure of the article to be more respectable, although I'm not going to get around to addressing the content of the article tonight. It seems, though, from The Unofficial Mortal Kombat 3 Movie Page that there is history reaching back to the beginning of 2004. Using the sources on that movie page, we can trace the path of the film's development hell. Plus, the last update was July 11, 2006 about Robin Shou possibly not returning and a blurb about the possible plot, so news is reasonably fresh. This information can be worked into the article as well. I have plenty of helpful links on my user page to help shape this potentially upcoming film article. Be informed, though; if the history reflects extremely poor chances of it ever being produced, then I may propose this article for deletion. Of course, counter-arguments on keeping it will be welcome. Just remember that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 03:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] So, which is it?

Even with the hard work of some users, this article is still a horrid mish-mash. One paragraph in particular gives me a headache. The "Casting" paragraph is a mere three sentences long but it's enough for a couple of contradictions. The first claims Christopher Lambert is returning as Raiden, the second says no actors from the previous two films are coming back and the third says nothing has been officially confirmed. So, really, which one is it? As a side note, this article is really starting to bug the hell out of me. Do we even know for sure if the film exists yet? You'd think Midway would have said something in between the massive media hype for MKA... And, no, IMDb is not always reliable- bear in mind it said there was a Zelda film coming out with 50 Cent providing the voice of Epona. I can't even begin to say how wrong that is. --L T Dangerous 11:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

So help improve it. I just fixed up the structure the best I could with the content that was already there. I suggest using The Unofficial Mortal Kombat 3 Movie Page to track back information; figure out what's reliable and what's not. I agree with you about IMDb; don't depend on any casting news from this film's IMDb article because it's still in development hell and bound to be corrupted by rumors. I'm not sure how much actual content we can put together besides a little history, actually, hence my possible intention to delete it. I just improved 30 Days of Night last night, so I'm not feeling up to another expansion anytime soon. You can help out -- look at the citations and rewrite the article solely based on their content. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 14:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to point out that, at one point, the article was actually fairly well sourced, and had links to older rumors that helped smooth the transition between conflicting information. However, Wesborland removed it [1]. If someone else would like to restore the information, feel free; he and I have gone back and forth enough times in this article that I don't want to revert him anymore, regardless of the quality. EVula 14:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
The only problem is working out what's even true. Don't get me wrong, MKO is usually very accurate. But it seems to me we're using fan sites with little backing up their claims as citations. I remember the earlier version with plenty of sources but, unfortunately, it was still very contradictory. Despite this thing having been rumoured for about a year now, we're really no closer to finding out if it exists or not. I don't want it deleted in case it does but I am confused as to just how little we've heard about it. And any truth has, as we've seen, been buried under a wastepile of lies and rumours. --L T Dangerous 17:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it's too difficult to work out what's true or not. Any kind of report based on "inside sources" or anonymous "scoopers" should never qualify as verifiable information. Information straight from the lion's mouth -- previous franchise actors, director/producer, etc -- qualify as article-worthy. Contradictions will happen even from official sources, but it's a matter of stating the order in which certain information appeared so the reader can follow a timeline of the changes. I don't think it's impossible to dig out the truth from under lies and rumors -- trust me, you should've seen Spider-Man 3 and The Dark Knight before other editors and myself gave the articles serious makeovers. You know how the saying goes -- if there's a will, there's a way. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 18:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm also willing to have a bit of contradictory evidence, especially (and this is important) it is labeled specifically as such. For example, I tried to not state that any of the information was official, and almost always made references to the information as being rumors. At the very least, documenting such rumors comes in handy when the article is finally released and there is a section dedicated to the development process. EVula 18:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I removed some outdated sources because I thought they were no longer valid. Feel free to revert it if you think otherwise. Wesborland 07:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More sources?

Are there any more sources where we can get information or pics to improve the quiality of the article? All there is out there is forum posts of desperate fanboys. --Wesborland 22:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Check out The Unofficial Mortal Kombat 3 Movie Page. Try to track down any reliable sources, or even use keywords from the postings to Google and find the actual articles themselves. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
There are plenty of links there. I'll try to enlarge the article with those sources asap. If anyone wants to get started here they are. --Wesborland 18:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Is deliberately adding false and unsourced information to the article (claiming it to be an "unconfirmed rumour") against the rules? Can fanboys be reported? --Wesborland 18:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

In my experience with film articles, unconfirmed rumors do not meet verifiability standards. Information should ideally come from those involved with the film project and have been identified as such (so no anonymous scoopers). I don't think fanboys can be reported, as it seems to be a content dispute rather than outright vandalism. Just revert unconfirmed rumors where they appear, and replace it with verifiable information. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article needs rewrite from scratch from reliable sources.

I just nixed pretty much the entire article, since pretty much all of it was from unreliable sources, making for a rather awful article that fails verifiability dramatically, and just makes it a vehicle for rumour mongering. In particular, avoid themoviecenter.wordpress.com. Not only is a blog an unreliable resource, but pretty much all of the articles are either plagiarized without giving credit (e.g. their Happy Feet write up is taken straight from Variety), or plagiarized with a few key facts changed to spread lies (e.g. see the discussion on their Warcraft article on the Talk:Warcraft (film) page, bottom section). Horrible, horrible source. And I'd say avoid the fansite too: they seem to mostly cite outside sources, if they do cite those. If you want to use fansites anyway, I'd suggest trying to find a consensus on this talk page about it being appropriate first.--Codemonkey 00:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, I think what should be done is dig up any reliable sources that discuss this film, then merge this article into a Sequel section in the article of the last film, Mortal Kombat: Annihilation. It doesn't seem like production is going to be underway anytime soon. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 00:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, I haven't really read up on this project yet. I'll give the article a week to see how firm the project is according to reliable sources, and how much notability claims there are that can be supported by reliable sources. If it isn't enough, I'll put it up at AfD for deletion, or delete and merge. I think that would be reasonable.--Codemonkey 00:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
AfD? I don't think that's necessary as long as it can be confirmed that this movie is planned (which it can) --Wesborland 16:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Can it, though? As I intimated above, quite some time ago, this movie has been confirmed by neither Midway or New Line- or any other film production company, for that matter. We keep seeing comments supposedly made by the likes of Chris Cassamassa and Chrostopher Lambert- even if they did make such statements, I'm afraid they're not the ones making the movie. Frankly, we don't need to turn Wikipedia into a rumour mill. I know you're a little attached to this article and all but there is absolutely no proof whatsoever for this film's existence. We don't know any actors or characters, we don't know any filming schedule, we know nothing of a plot. Any rumour we've heard has been either disproven or contradicted in another rumour. The only "information" we have gleamed thus far is from IMDB which, as I said before, suggested a Legend of Zelda film with 50 Cent voicing Epona. Not only that but since IMDB has given credence to the cringeworthy rumours (read: lies) about a Pac-Man film, I think it's safe to say it's not a 100% reliable source. This article has been full of more bullshit than anyother MK article I can think of, from phony cast lists to rumours that contradict themselves. Mortal Kombat 8 was recently deleted because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball- and we know MK8 is coming out. Why, then, must we entertain this article by acting as if we know the first thing about this film and have reliable proof on the matter? The first thing we hear from any film production company of from Midway that states this film is happening and I'll buy right into it. For now, not so much. All I'm even finding on Google is mirrors of information from Wikipedia and IMDB. Proof, please. Then I'll buy it. --L T Dangerous 22:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
LT makes some really good points (particularly no confirmation from game studio or movie studio), and based on those I'm going to put it through AfD to at least get a consensus on this. Wesborland and others feeling it should stay are free to make their case there. --Codemonkey 02:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/v/u/User_talk%7EEVula_MK%7E_Devastation_7e1d.html"