Talk:Show Me Love (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Show Me Love (film) article.
Article policies
Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1


Contents

[edit] The name revisited

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

A close call. But I do not think there is a consensus to move at the current time. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Is there still consensus for keeping the film title at Fucking Åmål? Or is it better if the film is at "Show Me Love"? (I prefer the latter, as all English speaking countries use that title - In no way, though, do I intend to sideline the original title) WhisperToMe (talk) 22:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

With no response I added this to requested moves. IMO the previous move discussion used poor rationale (Like "I like this title better" stuff) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Oppose The previous discussion is here. Considerable evidence of English usage of this title is given. I would prefer not to move; there's nothing wrong with having intriguing titles. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm not protesting any "intrigue" of the old title - It happens that this is an English-language encyclopedia and that the title used in Anglophone countries is "Show Me Love" - Even though "Fucking Åmål" is an English phrase, it is used in Scandinavia. Remember that Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) exists. What has changed since 2006 is an increased emphasis on Wikipedia:Reliable sources. In order to say "The original title is more popular" - for instance - one will need a reliable source. Blogs, most fansites, etc. generally do not cut it. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Are there any other examples of Swedish films retaining their original title on Wikipedia? I support a move. -Duribald (talk) 03:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

  • I am going to oppose based on the Swedish title being in English, so I think it meets WP:UE criteria. Iamaleopard (talk) 02:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
    • 1. Just because the Swedish title is a bunch of English phrases doesn't mean that it is the film's "English name" - all of the versions of the film actually in English use the title "Show Me Love" - The versions of the film using the original title are NOT in English. WhisperToMe (talk) 10:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Exactly! The title is, by the way, taken from a line in the movie: "Det är bara för att du bor i Fucking Åmål!". This is clearly not English. -Duribald (talk) 10:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support based on English distribution the English name will be more familiar. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your decision to say there is no consensus, I dispute it. If you look at User:Iamaleopard's posts, he has less than 100 edits - He hasn't been on there very long, and there may be concerns about newly-registered users (he registered 10 January 2008). This, and the fact that the other opposing person, Septentrionalis, has not given any rebuttal to my response makes me see consensus. If the opposing sides do not respond to criticism of their positions, does this mean they no longer maintain their stances? Does this mean their stances no longer should be considered? I might move it anyway because only one person who has had more than 100 edits opposed it this time. The ratio of posts (oppose v. support) is 2 to 4 or 33% to 66% - But if you remove Iamaleapord's post from consideration it becomes 1 to 4 or 20% to 80%. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:02, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Lamaleopard is not an established editor. This means we have 4 votes to 1 for a move. Of those who have actually contributed to the article 2 are for a move and no one is against. -Duribald (talk) 17:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
When I made the call I looked at Iamaleopard but it does not seem like a sock puppet account which is the reason for ignoring opinions of IP addresses or new user accounts without much history. I'll put a compromise to you, If Septentrionalis puts a rebuttal to you position in the next 24 hours, I'll consider his reply, If I think he is justified then I'll alter my swing vote to his side but if he does not reply within 24 hours, or if I disagree with his arguments, I'll move the page. Acceptable? --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 17:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
That works. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 17:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Moved. I'll leave you to tidy up the lead etc. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 18:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Fucking Åmål original poster.jpg

Image:Fucking Åmål original poster.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 insure 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) 21:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

begun Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] On References

At long last there are two really good academic sources for information about this film, lengthy articles by 2 Swedes, Griffiths and Rosenberg. I have used their articles as a basis for the recent addtions/re-writes. --Punavuori (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Do they appear on the web? I would love to read them (if they were ever printed in English) WhisperToMe (talk) 22:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

After a quick search, I have not found these on the web; but I came across them in Scandinavian academic (paper!) journals (but good news: the articles are in English! For full details see footnotes): the Griffiths article looks at the small-town Åmål aspect and the actual filming, and the Rosenberg article looks at the lesbian theme: both mention quite a bit about the public and media response. It was after reading these excellent articles that I was inspired to contribute to this page :) --Punavuori (talk) 12:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stating the patently obvious?

I had removed the patently obvious statement: "All of the English-language releases of the film use the title Show Me Love, which lacks the English-language swear word "fucking" as seen in the Swedish title." But you could equally state that the English-language releases fail to mention the town of Åmål. Yet, as Griffiths and Rosenberg mention in their articles (see footnotes), it was reported that outside Scandinavia most reporters and the general public alike thought that Åmål was the name of a person, especially when Åmål gets written as Amal, it is an Arabic/Herbrew name. As I had now added an explanation of why the the name of the film was changed I think it is no longer necessary to state the patently obvious. --Punavuori (talk) 06:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)