Talk:Robot Monster

message: - Uh, the last paragraph on this page is lifted straight from the IMDB page which is linked to. Isn't that... plagiarism? -- 203.61.6.227 13:02, 22 Sep 2004
Yeah...quoth Wikipedia "By submitting your work you promise you wrote it yourself, or copied it from public domain resources ? this does not include most web pages. DO NOT SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION!"
Should we copyvio it? -- 165.121.131.171 22:54, 22 Sep 2004
nm. it's just the last paragraph, I guess it should just be left alone. -- 165.121.131.171 22:57, 22 Sep 2004
:According to IMDb's "Copyright and Conditions of Use", its data:
::… may not be reproduced, duplicated, copied, sold, resold, visited, or otherwise exploited for any commercial purpose without express written consent of IMDb. This license does not include any resale or commercial use of this site or its contents or any derivative use of this site or its contents.
:Wikpedia allows commercial use of its data under the GFDL, so lifting an an entire paragraph from IMDb, without any attribution, for an 8-paragraph article is quite likely a copyright violation. The cited paragraph (which is not the current "last paragraph", but rather the one about Phil Tucker's botched suicide attempt) must either be properly quoted and attributed, rewritten, or removed.
:I'll tackle it if I have time, but until something is done, I'm slapping the copyvio tag on the article. — Jeff Q 12:30, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Per the copyvio tag instructions, I've created a temporary page, Robot Monster/Temp, that contains the article minus the problematic paragraph. Please make edits on this page, including any rewrites of the excised material, until the copyvio process is complete. — Jeff Q 12:57, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: I've re-written the offending paragraph so as to avoid any copyright violations.  Hopefully that will resolve this matter.  See Robot Monster/Temp.  --Modemac 14:28, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio?

message: :However, these minority opinions are not widely shared among the majority of movie audiences who seek simple thrills and entertainment, and who leap at the chance to laugh at a hilariously bad movie.
Isn't it a tad POV to imply that everyone who can't see the supposed existential themes in this movie is "seeking simple thrills and entertainment"? (I haven't seen the movie, so I shouldn't really comment on their existence or nonexistence, but the vagueness of the explanatory paragraph seems to indicate that one has to look rather hard for them.) 85.166.69.122 09:27, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is. I'm surprised this comment was put up here more than a year and a half ago and the sentence is still in the article. Well, since people've had quite a while to dissent with your opinion and they haven't, I'll go ahead and remove it! 204.69.40.7 12:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV issue

message: It might be worth noting that the Sons of Ether page in the Mage:_the_Ascension basic book includes a picture of Ro-man. Unfortunately, I can't presently find the book in question, so I've no idea which edition it is.
* It's not in my copy, which is third edition. So it's either first or second. teucer 06:17, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referenced in Mage: the Ascension 

message: :Image:Ro man.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 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 04:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Ro man.jpg

message: :Image:Robotmonster.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 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) 04:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Robotmonster.jpg

message: That was the claim. Has it been verified? - 76.94.55.223 (talk) 05:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't Brothers Michael and Harry Medved own the rights to this movie?

message: Shouldn't the list of films in which George Barrows played a gorilla be in the George Barrows article instead of here? Dcwaterboy (talk) 21:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Barrows credits 

message: I believe this film a stereo soundtrack, making it one of the earliest general-release films with stereo sound. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 01:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: stereo

message: Should we take out the little blurb that says "considered the worst movie ever made"? I think it's redundant.2602:30B:8220:EF59:A546:B250:65A7:F8E2 (talk) 12:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Pop culture

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Robot Monster. 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/20061209191136/http://www.elmerbernstein.com/film/film.html to http://www.elmerbernstein.com/film/film.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113081922/http://www.elmerbernstein.com/news/rogerhall_tribute.html to http://www.elmerbernstein.com/news/rogerhall_tribute.html
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) 14:46, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the Aftermath section, some editor has tagged the reference to George Nader with "Which?" asking for clarification and claiming that it is weasel-worded. The article states pretty clearly that it is his performance in Robot Monster that it is referring to; there is no weasel-wording about it. I am removing the weasel-word tag, but I'm leaving the Citation Needed tag. rowley (talk) 07:45, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aftermath: no weasel words here 

message: In the Production section, it says that principal photography was completed on March 23, 1953.  However, the Reception section quotes a Variety review from December 1952.  Can anyone resolve this? 64.229.244.84 (talk) 22:05, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating inconsistencies 

message: In the animated movie "Twice Upon a Time" there is a character called Ibor the Video Gorilla. It's a robotic gorilla body with an old TV on its head. The TV resembles the helmet of the Ro-Man, especially since it has two antennae on it.
I have a feeling it might be a reference to the Ro-Man, especially since the Video Gorilla communicates using clips from classic movies. Tekelidook (talk) 15:53, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ibor the Video Gorilla