Talk:The Conversation

message: :Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
*
* — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erik (talk • contribs) 01:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: References to use

message: I get the feeling that this is an attempt to avoid giving spoilers, which is exactly what I came to this Wikipedia article for. If that's the case, I shouldn't have to argue that this is misguided. Anyways, I did find a spoiler. I would update the article myself, but I haven't seen the movie.216.195.28.24 (talk) 03:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: will sort that out soon, thanks for pointing it out.  Geoff B (talk) 09:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing plot spoilers

message: While Gene Hackman's character Harry Caul is similar to his character Edward "Brill" Lyle in Enemy of the State, there has been no canonizing elements attributed by the producers of either film, despite some critics' comparison. Therefore, I would not use the title "Sequel" as it would confuse the reader. While there may be coincidental elements that may have been used, such as the identification badge Hackman's Caul wore being used as a legacy id badge used by Hackman's Lyle, there are too many elements that don't match up, including age, mental demenaor, medical condition (consumption of alcohol in Conversations by Caul contradicts Lyle's hypoglycemia), and career track. While it's not completely impossible that Hackman's two characters could be the same person, it is folly to call Enemy of the State a sequel to The Conversation.
Hey is it oke if I add some stuff regarding the films reception???? I don`t know how the whole English source citing works, in Dutch wiki we just have a source list, so if I make mistakes could you please help instead of undo my hard work that way wiki will never improve!!!! 62.45.130.67 (talk) 05:03, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Sequal' (re: "Enemy of the State") should be taken out

message: There's a possible error in the passage about the film's production. If Antonioni's movie Blowup was 1966, and if, according to the quotation, Coppola saw it only "a year or two before," then it can't be true that the screenplay was completed in the mid-60s. Flagging this, but don't have time to follow up just now. Thank you.
Eroston (talk) 18:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenplay Development Timeline 

message: Careful listening to the phrase "He'd kill us if he got the chance" as spoken/played early in the film places virtually 'equal' emphasis on the key words "kill us", inferring (just) a possible threat to the speaker and his paramour. At the end of the film, when the phrase is heard, the word "us" clearly has heavier emphasis than the word "kill", inferring a different meaning, i.e., justification for the speaker to act first. Or, was this just Harry's perception of what was said? Tricky! Don't you just love what they do in movies?66.81.105.227 (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A bit of a 'cheat' 

message: I'm new to editing Wikipedia, so please excuse me if I'm not approaching this properly, but I see a couple of brief edits that can be done to the box office section of this article. I think the edits show, rather than tell, and eliminate editorializing. 
Could we rewrite to say the following:
:The film made $4,420,000 in its domestic gross on a $1,600,000 budget. Coppola's The Godfather Part II, also released in 1974, grossed more than $47,500,000 domestically on a $13,000,000 budget.
*"The Godfather Part II". http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=godfather2.htm. Retrieved Feb. 26, 2015.
Thoughts? Vivatheviva (talk) 18:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That's great, feel free to make the edit yourself! There's really no need to discuss such a simple edit. To be precise the first sentence still needs a source though, but don't worry about it. I'll include the ref for that in the infobox template myself. Heinerj (talk) 20:21, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for replying! I will go ahead and make the change. Like I said, I'm new to this. Vivatheviva (talk) 06:24, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Box office 

message: Why is the alternative end not mentioned at all? Harry is arrested for the alleged murder of his girlfriend Amy and her alleged lover after their dead bodies where found in the hotel room, where the director was murdered. Any clue? VINCENZO1492  23:56, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No alternative end mentioned? 

message: http://www.filmsite.org/conv.htmlMarcin862 (talk) 20:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good detailed summary, maybe could become a link? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Conversation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020115151208/http://www.soundtrack.net/soundtracks/database/?id=2939 to http://www.soundtrack.net/soundtracks/database/?id=2939
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Conversation (website) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 09:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 09:39, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The Conversation →  – My bot and I just changed 150 instances of The Conversation to The Conversation.  There are only 140 articles linking to the article about the film.  Since new additions of The Conversation could be either about the film or the website, I would like to have The Conversation be a redirect to Conversation (disambiguation).  Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:59, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Film has been notified of this discussion. Vpab15 (talk) 18:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject United States has been notified of this discussion. Vpab15 (talk) 18:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 30 September 2021 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Not moved. There is consensus against this proposal, and since this is being repeatedly proposed without success, I suggest there should be no further RMs on this in the near future, until and unless some significant new evidence (e.g. page views or usage in sources) showing that the primary topic may have changed.   — Amakuru (talk) 12:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The Conversation →  – This is a very generic title, and there are several articles of the same name and likely more to come. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

text: Also, it looks like the last RM discussion ended not even four months ago, so it seems premature to try for a new consensus considering no particular change since then. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 13:39, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

text: *
*Support - "The Conversation", being so generic, could refer to multiple topics. With only a few hundred daily views, this doesn't seem like it's likely to be such an overwhelming primary topic. And, if we look outside of the United States, it is unlikely that readers from further abroad would expect to end up here. Adding a parenthetical seems like the best option. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  19:21, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 8 February 2022 

message: If only it were possible, would it not be fitting if (for once) this Talk Page could be renamed "The Conversation"? Or might the spooks at the NSA/CIA have something to say?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.182 (talk) 09:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk:The Conversation