Talk:Up series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics 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.
???
This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.

Contents

[edit] Naming

I've moved this article from 7 Up (documentary) to Seven Up!, because this is the title given at IMDB. [1] All sources seem to indicate that the title is spelled "Seven Up" with an optional exclamation point, the next is called 7 Plus Seven, and the rest consistently use numerals (21 Up, 28 Up, etc.) use numerals. For example, this is how the titles are listed in a recent review of the DVD set at The Onion AV. [2] (Note: That link will expire in a few days.) --LostLeviathan 08:38, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Change page to "Up series"?

  • what about changing this page to Up Series? or is 7 up like an official name or somehting? Spencerk 04:17, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The page title is misleading. The page is really about the series of seven films, not just the first one. Anybody else reading this please weigh in with your opinion. Drwhapcaplet 18:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Seems to me the title is misleading, the article is about seven films, not one... Anybody else agree?

I vote to change it. Clarityfiend 01:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. --PurplePenguin 16:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree as well. --Jfruh (talk) 17:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I can understand the arguments each of you have made for changing the name of this page and I agree with them in general. The only thing I would like to say for leaving it as it is is that the way I found it was by typing '7 Up' in the search box. I don't know whether I would have thought to look for it as 'Up Series'. But that is just one persons experience.
If and when one any of you decide to make the move PLEASE, PLEASE be thorough and go and fix all the links to this page that already exist. Just leaving a bunch of redirects, although you can do it that way, is sloppy. The few times that I have moved a page I usually open a second window and have the page showing me all the pages that are linked to an article in the first and then perform all of the edit changes that I have to do in the second. Thanks to all who work on keeping this a good article and happy editing too. MarnetteD | Talk 18:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

It seems there is a consensus that the article should be moved to Up Series. I will do this myself on December 3, 2006 unless anyone objects before then. Tommy11111 04:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I have performed the move. All further discussion should take place at the talk page for Up Series. Tommy11111 22:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately you did not follow wikipedia's process for moving a page you cut and pasted it which loses the edit history and we now have a mess. I will let the people who know how to do this know and hopefully they will be able to fox your mistake. MarnetteD | Talk 18:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. BillyH 19:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unclear

The following sentence from the article sounds very confusing:

"Some therapists show their clients the series to explain that a given person's reaction to the various interviews may have as much to say about the subject, in their interpretation of what they think that the participants are saying, as it does about the people taking part in the film."

[edit] On the Media interview

I note that On the Media just did an interviewon Apted. Maybe they will have the transcript ready in about a month. -- PinkCake 06:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Errors/criticisms

I am not a regular contributer so forgive me if I'm not going about this quite the right way. There are a number of factual errors in your article. The three 'upper class twits' did not mention what careers they wanted to pursue at 7 and certainly did not mention specific firms or banks. The three working class girls did not mention drugery nor did they even imply it at 7 or 14 (at 21 they seemed somewhat defensive admittedly). Neil's life did not at all seem layed out for him at seven (He wanted to be an astronaut or a coach driver and did not think he needed to go to university because he didn't want to be a teacher). It is also false that none of the 'upperclass twits' appeared in the program after 28 up. in 35 up 2 out of the 3 appeared. Also the tone of the article is rather unprofessional. Calling 3 of the kids upperclass twits might be ok but then saying it was unsuprising they did not appear is both unfair and incorrect. All three seem to me to be very reasonable and unstuck up adults from what we see in the movies.

  • You could not be more correct I have done a major edit on this page and I hope you come back across it some day and that you will either approve of it, OR make other edits to make this page even better.MarnetteD | Talk 30 June 2005 14:03 (UTC)

Just in case my last edit summary causes confusion...I meant 'this year', not 'last year'. Slip of the hand. BillyH 11:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

The following is such a bad run-on sentence that I do not understand it. Could someone who does understand it please reword it? "Some therapists show their clients the series to explain that a given person's reaction to the various interviews may have as much to say about the subject, in their interpretation of what they think that the participants are saying, as it does about the people taking part in the film."

[edit] Suzy

As I understand her, Suzy does leave open the possibility that she may feel differently in seven years and thus her future participation should not be regarded as absolutely out of the question.

(Having seen the film again since writing this, I fear that I misunderstood her. I hope she will reconsider.)

Kostaki mou 04:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm watching 28 up and they spell her name Suzi, not Suzy. I haven't looked at the other films to see the spelling, but which is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.183.185 (talk) 01:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

That is the only film in which that spelling is used. Presumably, Suzy herself used that spelling at the time and reverted to "Suzy" afterwards. (Similarly, Simon used "Symon" for one film and reverted to "Simon" afterwards.) Kostaki mou 23:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Simon

He has evidently reverted to that spelling of his name. His mother died of cancer some years ago (certainly before 42 Up).

38.117.238.82 05:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Erroneous Links

The links for Peter Davies, Susan Davis and Charles Furneaux lead to different people of those names. I don't know how to fix them as they are apparently made the same way as the red nonfunctioning "links" that were no doubt intended for these also.

Kostaki mou 04:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:The Up series DVD.jpg

Image:The Up series DVD.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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Flaws"

I have deleted the "Flaws" section -- I originally retitled it "Criticism" and added a POV tag, but upon reading it again, I realize that it is solely original research and opinion. The article should have a "Criticism" section, but the original section contained no quotes, citations, or references to outside material. I will try to find information about criticism of the series in the future -- if anyone would like to help, please do! Graymornings 06:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello Graymornings. If you didn't already please check the edit history of the anon IP that is trying to enter this info. It is a single purpose account trying to enter one persons dislike of these films and/or Apted and they have been blocked once for violating the 3RR. It looks like they are trying to avoid that but, if they persist, they can be reported at WP:AIV or WP:ANI. Thanks for you vigilence in keeping an eye on this page. MarnetteD | Talk 13:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I did check the history, and since it seemed to be an anonymous "rant," I decided it wouldn't be controversial to delete it. I do think the article needs a "Criticism" section -- I'm sure I've read criticism of the film somewhere. I'll do research and get back to it. Thanks! Graymornings 15:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Update: this user seems to be repeatedly trying to insert this highly POV section into the article. He or she has put the material back in fifteen or twenty times, with various editors inevitably removing it. If you see it again, please help by deleting it. Graymornings 05:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Class

"with the explicit assumption that each child's social class predetermines their future"

This also comes up in the "Message" section. I thought the whole "class predetermining" thing was the central hypothesis being tested, rather than one of the assumptions. Any chance a citation for that can be found? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.11.155 (talk) 15:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit protection

This article seems to be a consistent target of vandalism. Could we talk about edit-protecting it? Graymornings 17:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Memorable?

The article says on Suzy "In one of the most memorable scenes in 7 plus seven, her Labrador catches and kills a rabbit in the background". Is it a fact that this is "one of the most memorable scenes" or is it a writer's opinion? Regardless, I think this bit of trivia contributes little to the article, suggest to remove it. Odedee (talk) 04:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I vote for keeping it. It's of interest. I think you're being a trifle rigid, frankly. Kostaki mou (talk) 01:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Rigid? This is clearly an opinionated statement, and a bit peculiar at that. There are numerous memorable scenes in these moving films, but to point out the one which involves a dog, rather than humans, is ludicrous, at best. Odedee (talk) 06:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I changed the text, eliminating the rabbit but keeping the fact Suzy's parents own an estate, which is more pertinent to the article. Odedee (talk) 06:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I vote for keeping it too. It was a memorable scene, hands down. Please put it back in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.24.56.60 (talk) 20:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


I think the only thing of interest about the scene is her reaction and even that isn't as interesting as something like her saying she would vote conservative and then when asked why she says she doesn't know and isn't even interested in politics.--97.82.195.71 (talk) 01:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Will someone please do the pages for the American version of this series?!!!

Someone go and do the Age 7 in America page and its sequels NOW. Get to it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.24.56.60 (talk) 20:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)