Talk:Transporter (franchise)

message: Shouldn't the infobox be Infobox media franchise as on every other franchise? The character infobox doesn't add anything relevant to the article so I'm changing it to a franchise infobox but feel free to add a comment here or even revert my changes if you have some valid reason as for why we should use the character infobox. Retle (talk) 23:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, moved the character infobox to the character part of the page. Retle (talk) 00:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Character infobox on a franchise page?!

message: This page has been totally stupid.
I don't know wich person had that "clever" idea to write exactly the article "Beyoncé Knowles" and put in Frank Martin for Beyoncé Knowles.
It should be deleted instantly.
This page could be written in Uncyclopedia but not here.
I'm really angry to read this sh**!!! 02:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has been completely overhauled and is now decent. Blackngold29 (talk) 01:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't remember now, but bizarrely I think it might have been his comment that prompted me to rewrite it. MickMacNee (talk) 01:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Good job on the rewrite, I've been slowly improving all articles in The Transporter series, you are welcome to help me if you wish. Blackngold29 (talk) 01:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This page...

message: Why is the Tom Cruise movie Collateral mentioned in the See Also and External Links sections? As far a I can see there should be no reference to that movie in this article. It has no reason to be on the page about Frank Martin. Unless someone can give me a good reason to keep it, I'm deleting these references.--BigBang616 (talk) 19:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you had seen both movies, the connection is pretty clear. But that's not good enough for wikipedia, see this edit . MickMacNee (talk) 00:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had seen both films prior to asking the question and I didn't understand the connection between the two films until I read that edit you suggested. That's very interesting and that was something I hadn't noticed. Thank you for directing me there. Perhaps that should be placed back into the article somewhere.--BigBang616 (talk) 01:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Collateral

message: The Rules section is terrible. Looking over the revision history, there seem to be several different versions of each rule and no consensus about how many rules there are or what does or does not count as a rule. The Additional Rules heading says the list "may include but is not limited to....." Why does it say "may include"? If they're given as rules in the film, then they're rules; if they aren't they're not. And "not limited to"? Either list all the rules or none of them. The Rules of the Car subheading seems just as poorly written. I've never seen any of the films, are the Rules of the Car given as distinct from the overall rules? There are a couple of stylistic errors (missing quotation marks, odd capitalization) etc., particularly rule 8:
8. "No Matter what's Your paid to do
beyond what Your paid to do".
I have no idea what that means, but the only way it makes even a hint of sense is if you replace 'your' with 'you're'. As written, this seems like a trivia section for fans to read and get a quick laugh but it makes no sense at all to someone who hasn't seen the films. It needs to be fixed (accuracy and standard form) or it'll be deleted entirely.Some kind of scientist (talk) 20:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rules