Talk:Stripes (film)

message: I'd propose a merger, as the fictious vehicle would not really seem to be notable to stand alone. A bit different than say Bond gadgets. Scoo 11:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I would agree. I don't think that it really needs its own entry. 216.158.61.10 19:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The Batmobile has decades of history, and the article shows. And while the Mach 5 article is a much more similar article to comare the two, I would have to say that the Mach 5 article at least can stand on its own, while there is little if anything to say about the EM-50 outside of it being a heavily armoured motorhome. I'd say merge before the EM is tagged for deletion (for it possibly being not notable). Radagast83 03:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

text: If I can gather more information on the EM-50 could that stop it from being deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.32.161.135 (talk) 05:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 68.32.161.135, it's not being "deleted", the information would be merged into this article, and then that article woudl redirect here. Anyway, what else would there to add? Radagast83 22:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Merge. It's not strong enough to stand on it's own. Dont even bother comparing it to the Batmobile, et.al. Pepto gecko 19:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger from [[EM-50]]

message: Has anyone written about the striking resemblance between Stripes and The Private War of Major Benson?   Some of the significant plot devices are the same:
* Cadet goes AWOL, gets caught and talked out of it
* Commandant is out sick, so the cadets train themselves
* Big parade scene with cadets sounding off with an unconventional cheer.  The general is impressed by cadets' unconventionality.  By passing this inspection, the school is allowed to maintain its credentials.  Rklawton 01:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Private War of Major Benson

message: :Image:Stripes.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 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 05:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Stripes.jpg

message: Wikipedia tends to frown on these kinds of sections without references so I'm pasting it here until it can be sorted out. --J.D. (talk) 21:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References in popular media

message: I noticed a definate goof in the extended cut, not sure if the orignal theatrical cut is the same.
In the bus station sequence, Louise is (to me) clearly wearing the rank of Specialist 5, yet during the graduation sequence, she is wearing Specialist 4 insignia.  ArcAngel (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goofs 

message: Evidence that John was living and working in Louisville:
* He was getting his shoes shined in front of a schedule for a University of Louisville sports team
* His cab has a roof sign advertizing the Bank of Louisville.
* He walks past the Stewart Dry Goods company of Louisville, Kentucky just before the rich lady gets in his cab.
So let's stop changing Louisville to New York City. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial setting

message: The song is so prominent in the movie, and yet it is not credited at the end.
I suppose this was before they got really really obsessive over musical credits, as they are now.
Varlaam (talk) 06:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[Do Wah Diddy Diddy]]" 

message: I suggest that the EM-50 Urban Assault Vehicle article be merged into this article.  As Erik has demonstrated on the EM-50 article talk page, the subject simply does not have enough independent coverage to show notability apart from the film article.  When merged, we can include a subsection under production on the origins of the vehicle.  At this point, the vehicle article describes the vehicle's fictional capabilities in an inappropriate in-universe manner.  Once all of that is removed, there is nothing left.  Merge here and describe the vehicle's origins and be done with it. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 17:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur with the merge since that article is likely to be a permanent stub and also suits the context of this singular medium. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 18:01, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

text: WP:MERGE says the merge discussion should take place on the destination page's talk page, so this is the proper place for it. The so-called original discussion was a comment by an editor that I've already pinged to weigh in here per guidelines. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:58, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Erik. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 16:13, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

text: A merge, rather than a redirect, seems the best course of action. Even when the content that gets saved in this manner is short. Lyrda (talk) 17:02, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: A merger definitely sounds like a good idea. I could imagine some fictional vehicles deserving their own article, but in this case, the chances are slim that anyone could find sufficient content to produce a decent article. - 129.242.224.25 (talk) 17:30, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your thoughtful comments, and for closing the other discussion, Slashme. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 14:47, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal