# Talk:The Fabelmans

Way back before I was born, Spielberg talked about a film project called 'Growing Up', which was intended to be shot after Close Encounters of the Third Kind, but was abandoned when pre-production of 1941 became overwhelming. Growing Up was purported to have been a semi-autobiographical story about Spielberg's growing up in Arizona. Any chance this is that very project, revived some 43 years later? I can not find any citations to back it up at this stage.Robbmonster (talk) 09:02, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Just thought that I think for the casting section, we need to add a photo of Gabriel LaBelle (he plays the main character Sammy Fabelman, based on Spielberg himself) to the table where the images of Michelle, Paul and Seth are, since he is the lead actor of the film. Can anyone find any current image of him suitable for usage on Wikipedia so he can be added in, or if anyone who is a photographer who is a user on Wiki Commons who's going to the TIFF premiere on Saturday that they provide a photo of him from the event? Maybe one of the whole cast on the red carpet or on the stage with Spielberg at the podium introducing the film? If so, it would be appreciated.HM2021 (talk) 00:17, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

We need to fill in this detail so that the "filming" section of this article does not have unnecessary "holes" in it. Nmchandran1 (talk) 12:45, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

HM2021, I noticed you keep trying to insert a critical reception summary into the lead. Per WP:FILMLEAD, "Any summary of the film's critical reception should avoid synthesis, meaning it should reflect an overall consensus explicitly summarized by one or more reliable sources." There are no sources cited in the article that I've seen supporting this summary statement. What source(s) are you tying this to?Also, the plot section should be less than 700 words (see WP:FILMPLOT). I haven't seen the film yet, but someone with knowledge should work on trimming that down. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 16:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

So, because the movie got acclaims it only "underperformed."
But if it hadn't received any acclaims it would be a "box office bomb"?
Talk about double standards and hypocrisy.
How 'bout some standardized consistency. 2600:8800:395:B000:29D5:1B81:3B8F:3E99 (talk) 13:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

What's your point?? The article is very clear. It underperformed at the box office compared to other Spielberg films. That's an objective fact determined by revenue. It received critical acclaim. The two concepts are distinctly different. Critics can love a film even if it doesn't make much money. Sundayclose (talk) 13:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The redirect When the horizon's at the bottom, it's interesting. When the horizon's at the top, it's interesting. When the horizon's in the middle, it's boring as shit! has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 15 § When the horizon's at the bottom, it's interesting. When the horizon's at the top, it's interesting. When the horizon's in the middle, it's boring as shit! until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 01:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Just a note that this article appears very well written and I think could deserve a WP:GAN or WP:FA nom :) @HM2021: Would you be interested? Caleb Stanford (talk) 23:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm definitely interested. This film really does need some attention and it deserves the nomination. HM2021 (talk) 03:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
@HM2021: Sounds good! I think the nomination should come from you, as you have done most of the work on the article. See WP:GAN/I#Nominating. I would be happy to provide an initial review after the nom (lots of work stuff going on this week, so probably sometime this weekend). Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

The redirect Life's nothing like the movies, Fabelman has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 9 § Life's nothing like the movies, Fabelman until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 20:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I saw Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sammy Fabelman just now, and I do not think a merge is warranted. We are able to WP:SPLIT out by subtopic. Like if an article's "Production" section gets very long, we would be able to split that into its own article. That can apply here too. WP:SIGCOV also says, "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material," so the expectation that we need coverage about the character as the main topic is unreasonable. I think a balance can instead be worked out to see what the film article should cover about the character and what the character article could dive more into, just like we would try to balance a film article's production coverage and the full production article itself. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I agree. There's definitely going to be eventually more coverage on the character coming in year's time when retrospective lists happen, all of which can help make the character page more "notable" enough. Plus, the page saw a major viewership surge after the death of David Lynch (John Ford in the film). So, there's 100% no need to merge the page on Sammy into the film's article, and to just let it stay as a spin-off page. HM2021 (talk) 23:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

The redirect You can't just love something, you also have to take care of it has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 21 § You can't just love something, you also have to take care of it until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 05:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

The redirect You do what your heart says you have to, 'cause you don't owe anyone your life has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 21 § You do what your heart says you have to, 'cause you don't owe anyone your life until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 05:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

The redirect Movies are dreams that you never forget has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 21 § Movies are dreams that you never forget until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 05:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

The redirect Guilt is a wasted emotion has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 21 § Guilt is a wasted emotion until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 05:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Why are there so many copyrighted images in this article? I have removed four of them, but have left one, even though I feel it's not necessary. HM2021? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:58, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing this GA review point, Krimuk2.0. Sincerely, the reviewer 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 00:30, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

HK 北區 North District 粉嶺 Fanling Green Code Plaza mall MCL Green Code Cinemas January 2023 Px3 04.jpg
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)