Talk:Multiple Maniacs

message: It appears that there is some issue about the photograph placed on here of John Waters. I would suggest that the photograph STAY until there has been a consensus reached as to its appropriateness for the article. 
My opinion is that the fact that the editor who posted it took the picture is irrelevant; with the tough guidelines we have for fair use, etc. it's clear this is an image we can use, and it illustrates the filmmaker. I am failing to see the issue here. However, if there is an ongoing content debate, please seek consensus or use arbitration to resolve it. Thanks. NickBurns 21:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *The image is found under the info-box, which is appropriate.  Since Water wrote the movie, his image on the article illustrates the content.  --DavidShankBone 16:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * I've just left the image as is,  since I see you've taken to auto-reverting and your talk page suggests you have previous for doing this.  Life's too short, so I'll just ask for comments StuartDouglas 16:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: On a different note, my understanding was the one link per page to actors etc was correct and that the link is best placed in the infobox.  Is that not the case? StuartDouglas 16:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: This is a dispute about the need for an image of the director on each of his movie pages, with this movie in particular being an example. 16:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there's anything wrong in having a picture of David Waters on this article, but where it is at the moment is unsightly. Find somewhere else to put it and put on the left hand side of the page. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Actually I'm the editor that complained and, on reflection, it's really not worth the hassle of arguing about an image on a page for a film I don't even like.  I do think it looks bad (although placing it more sympathetically in the text would improve that) and think any user of Wikipedia looking for info on John Waters moveis is soon going to get bored of seeing the same picture on every page, but really, it's a minor thing compared to all sorts of pages on Wiki which are just plain nonsense.  It's too easy to get a bee in your bonnet about little things on the internet and I may well have been guilty of that here, for which apologies. StuartDouglas 12:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for Comment: John Waters Image

message: It appears that somebody is vandalizing this page quite often in a short period of time. Should it be protected?
The DarkArcher was here 21:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you protect please? I've been expanding it and it's taken quit a lot of work.Mike P talk 23:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

text: This problem seems to have resolved itself. Thanks. Mike P talk 14:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: The description says that the cross is inserted into Divine's rectum. Is that certain? In the narration she only says "My most private orifice" and as she is supposedly a woman there are two choices.Saxophobia (talk) 18:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They used a chocolate candy bar for the "smudges". The scene is discussed at length by Waters and Mink Stole in the documentary Divine Trash, as well as countless interviews over the years. It's never been an issue. Mjpresson (talk) 19:21, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "Rosary Job" 

message: Are these the same character?  Steve is mentioned as Cookie's new boyfriend and then, I'm guessing as I haven't seen this unfortunately, Cookie is with "Rick".  There isn't a Rick listed as a character.Jtyroler (talk) 04:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Added character to cast list. Thank you. --Mjpresson (talk) 04:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve and "Rick"