Talk:Pumpkinhead (film)

message: :Image:Pumpkinhead.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 ensure 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) 04:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pumpkinhead.jpg

message: This article's production section is way too short and unsourced and it needs to be expanded in much more detail than what it currently has.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:10, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've got it on my list of things to do.  Since you bring it up, I'll see what I can find.  I'm not entirely optimistic, though, because this is kind of an older film, and it's never really been very popular outside of its cult following.  I don't really know what you expect people to add.  It's not like journalists write articles about twenty-five year old, low budget horror films in The New York Times.  Nevertheless, there are some sources I can check.  I don't have access to old issues of Fangoria, but that'd be the best place to look. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: I have noticed that in the past several years other Wikipedia users have created articles about the individual character/monster that appears in the film, but they are always redirected back to the film page.  I am writing hear to suggest to the other higher-ranking Wikipedia writers that I don't think it would be completely unnecessary to have a page for the character.
I have also noticed that when Wikipedia has articles for other characters in other horror films, it seems as though it is a matter of opinion that determines whether or not these characters receive the "individual article treatment".  I.E., the character Sam from Trick 'r Treat has a character article despite only appearing in a short cartoon and one movie, meanwhile Pumpkinhead has appeared in a total of four films AND a comic book series, yet doesn't have a character article on Wikipedia.
In case I didn't make my point perfectly clear, I believe that the Pumpkinhead character should have an article of its own and the page "Pumpkinhead (character)" should be either restored or rewritten.  I personally think that the only reason the previous attempts to create the character page were redirected to the film's article is because most of the writers here either don't like Pumpkinhead or don't think the character is "worthy" of a character article.  Again, this is only what I think based on what I have observed.  If other characters like Sam (just using him as an example) can have character articles, so can Pumpkinhead.
Chakor Channing (talk) 15:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual character article