Talk:Divine Intervention (film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Tariq Shadid
Who is Tariq Shadid, and why is his opinion noteworthy? Jayjg (talk) 19:17, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
- He's an MD with an opinion, according to Xed. Since he's not a reputable film critic, I removed his opinion from the article, but Xed reverted...four times in fact. --Viriditas | Talk 11:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Xed's revert war
Four reverts in less than 24 hours:
- 11:31, 4 November 2005 Xed m [1]
- 10:37, 4 November 2005 [2]
- 09:10, 4 November 2005 Xed m (rv weasel) [3]
- 18:32, 3 November 2005 Xed m (rv bizarre censorship) [4]
Xed has also added citations that do not support claims in the article, particularly:
- "After a vigorous campaign by Zionist activists to bar the movie" [5]
This non-neutral cite does not appear to make this specific claim.
- "based on a spontaneously declared informal policy" [6]
The cite does not make this specific claim.
In the above two examples, Xed simply cited his opinion, not the alleged citations. When I politely pointed this out to Xed in the edit summary, he reverted and responded with: you've been caught lying. you can't review all those pages in 3 minutes!. He's partly right; it only took me one minute--not three--to discover that Xed had fabricated content in at least two specific instances as demonstrated above. Due to this behavior, I've added the totally disputed tag. --Viriditas | Talk 12:01, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- Weasel tag-team in effect - Xed 12:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] citations
Can we find a citation for "spokesperson John Pavlik stated that the Academy had never made a decision on that issue because Suleiman had never submitted his film"? If there's any kind of formal submission process, it should be clear-cut as to whether or not the film was submitted. -- Danny Yee 23:35, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
- It's already cited in the article. [7]. Another POV of the submission is offered here which is also cited. --Viriditas | Talk 01:04, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
-- According to same article, article was not submitted because the Executive Director of AMPAS said it was not eligible for submission based on the fact that the UN doe not recognize Palestine as a country. (--preceeding unsigned comment by 209.212.72.19)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Divine Intervention film.jpg
Image:Divine Intervention film.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Electronic Intifada
Although its claims are more than plausible in this case, electronic intifada is not a reliable source.--Rataube (talk) 06:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)