Talk:Central Casting

message: from VfD:
Slangdef --fvw<SMALL>*</SMALL> 02:45, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
*Merge and redirect to stereotype. Keep as rewritten. Dbiv 03:24, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: As of 17:57, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
* Del
*# fvw<SMALL>*</SMALL> 02:45, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
*# RoySmith 20:37, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tally 

message: This seems to be another of the many articles for which WP policies fail. These pages cover subjects that are important but taken for granted by society, and for which there are therefore few or no reliable secondary references. This is a horrible article as it stands now. Breezily written, with few references, probably original research, and answering very few of the questions a reader might have (Who founded it? How was it founded? What were its major events? Where are its locations? Who are its officers? How does it work for actors? How does it work for producers? What are its relationships with other stakeholders in movie production? What are its prices? How does it handle monopoly so well? What is the role of a casting director? How does it relate to other casting organizations, if any?). David Spector (talk) 15:44, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: David, Wikipedia will always be a long way from completion. But I agree that this topic needs work. Would you want to collaborate on the article? Erik (talk | contribs) 15:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

text: I assume that you don't have any special knowledge of this subject, because you made no such claim; if my assumption is wrong, then my following remarks are off-base... Thanks for the invitation, but I believe that an article like this needs to be written by someone who is intimately familiar with the subject. We aren't a regular encyclopedia that pays experts to write the articles, but on the other hand we shouldn't write when we have no knowledge whatsoever of the subject. Such improvement wouldn't be much. My best contributions have happened when I knew the subject well, and only had to find good references to support what I already knew was the truth of the subject. Again, thanks. I would rather that we wait for someone actually employed in the movie business who could write knowledgeably and in depth. Compare with the articles here on mathematics, which are excellent because the authors knew what they were writing. There is no rush to edit if we want quality. Just my opinion, of course. David Spector (talk) 12:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  A poor article as it stands, but potentially an important one 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Central Casting. 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/20120714121311/http://www.centralcasting.com:80/ to http://www.centralcasting.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:54, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified