Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
1 |
Contents |
[edit] About cleaning up
I'm just an anonymous contributor and admirer of the Wikipedia. I strongly believe that the "Errors" section belong to the film and should remain here in this article, with a title of its own. But let's be realistic about the trivia section: how many movies / stories have influenced that much our world cultures as a whole? And I mean plural because I'm Brazilian, and the impact is huge in any place I've ever been to. So, "The Wizard of Oz_(influence)" or something down that line (I honestly don't like my own idea for the name) should be moved to a whole new entry, with a link from this article and a small section saying exactly that: impact was and continues to be immense, so there's a whole entry dealing only with that. And it's been huge indeed. The moving is completely justifiable in many fields, and let's face it, the amount of items in that section won't get cleaned - they will grow larger than it is now. And it should, as Wikipedia should inform us about all possible (and meaningful) influences of the film everywhere else for our reference.
[edit] Re-jig?
I think this article needs to be re-jigged. Most people who visit the page will have a good knowledge of the plot. The plot is currently given a lot of space with a large amount of trivia dotted through it. So, those who know the film well have to wade through the plot outline to get the trivia they might not already know. It would work better divided properly into "plot" and "trivia". --Joff - 11 am Australian time 13 March 2006
[edit] related works
This Australian adaptation may be an interesting addition, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075030/ for the related works section
[edit] Vandalism?
Does anybody know how often this page gets vandalized? If it is often, then I feel it might be a candidate for Semi-protection. Purplewowies (talk) 01:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Confusing typo?
Am I mistaken or is the line:
Initially, The Wizard of Oz was considered a commercial success in relation to what was then considered its enormous budget, although it made a small profit and received largely favorable reviews.
...actually supposed to read:
Initially, The Wizard of Oz was not considered a commercial success in relation to what was then considered its enormous budget, although it made a small profit and received largely favorable reviews.
That seems to make not only the sentence but the entire paragraph make more sense. Patricia Meadows (talk) 16:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- I added it back because I'm almost certain that's how it used to be and you're right that it makes sense. I guess it was some vandalism that never got reverted. If I'm wrong, please revert and say why! --Tombomp (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)