Talk:Cultural impact of Star Wars

message: Didn't there used to be a page around here somewhere with a list of pop culture references to Star Wars?  For example, noting when in The Simpsons television show a Star Wars reference appears and briefly describing it. Just wondering. 67.53.78.15 06:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pop culture articles, especially when they take the form of lists, don't stick around long, I'm afraid.  Ichormosquito 23:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Drat. It's not like they are not "encyclopedic" or anything. The list was quite long and I've seen other equally long ones on wikipedia for pop culture items, so I wonder just how long the "don't stick around long" is. Still, I haven't been able to find the history of it. And aren't "reasons for removal" of significant items usually posted on the talk pages? Maybe I've not searched long enough. But, oh well. 67.53.78.15 16:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I spot two problems in this article.
# "Another example is U.S. President Ronald Reagan's labeling the Soviet Union as an 'evil empire'. This reference assumed — correctly — that the fictional Galactic Empire of Star Wars had entered the American lexicon."
# "Similarly, Reagan employed 'Star Wars' as the colloquial name for his Strategic Defense Initiative program."
Point 1 presumes, perhaps unwarrantedly, that Reagan was making a conscious reference to the "Empire" of the Star Wars films.  The combination of the words "evil" and "empire" do not, by themselves, justify this implication.  Imperialism as an instrument of foreign policy predates the Star Wars films by several thousand years, and the Soviet state from WWII onward certainly positioned itself as an empire with the invasion and occupation of numerous neighboring states.  Unless a quote from Reagan or one of his speechwriters positively linking the remark to the Star Wars Galactic Empire surfaces, the association is unjustified.  Point 2 may be propagating a falsehood.  Did Reagan ever use the term "Star Wars" to describe the Strategic Defense Initiative?  Or was it only those public interest group opponents of the program who were using the term to ridicule it?  Unless these issues are addressed with citations, I will delete the first assertion and reword the second point in a few days.  Robert K S 13:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No one has addressed the above issues, so I have modified the article to remove or rephrase the incorrect assertions. Robert K S 23:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reagan 

message: "Star Wars fundamentally changed the aesthetics and narratives of Hollywood movies,[6], switching the focus of Hollywood-made Films from deep, meaningful stories based on dramatic conflict, themes and irony to sprawling special-effects-laden blockbusters, as well as changing the Hollywood film industry in fundamental ways. Before Star Wars, special effects in movies had not appreciably advanced since the 1950s.[6]"
There's some backup given for the special-effects claim, but I'm a little taken aback by the implication that pre-Star-Wars Hollywood focused on deep, meaningful stories based on dramatic conflict, themes and irony (also, what does "focused on themes" even MEAN?). I suspect an overly strong interpretation or a misreading or possibly even a not very good book, but I don't have the book, so...I'm wondering if there isn't a more nuanced approach to be taken here.
Wintersweet (talk) 06:24, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Likely overstated claim 

message: Many claims are made with regards to the technical aspects of the Star Wars films and their lasting effects on the industry.  While it is unquestionably true that the Star Wars films CONTRIBUTED to a paradigm shift in Hollywood big-budget productions, it is ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE to claim that Star Wars (episode IV) was "the first" or "one of the first" of a series of films to do this.  Example:  2001 a Space Odyssey.  People like to discuss its deep themes, but the true impact of 2001 was its SPECIAL EFFECTS.  Notable examples include widespread use of extremely complicated set pieces (such as the spinning set in the initial sequence where Bowman is jogging), as well as the images of Earth and Jupiter.  At that time, no real life color images of the entire earth had ever been taken (high orbit images capture only part of the earth in frame), nor any of Jupiter.  Both shots were synthetic.  The point is that 2001 has a more significant place in the timeline/history of the evolution of big budget action/sci-fi films in Hollywood.  No one can debate the role that Star Wars played.  However, it is not the first "notable" example.68.6.76.31 (talk) 00:49, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impact on Production and Technical Aspects; Star Wars Was Not Truly Groundbreaking 

message: References 3 (Emerson) and 11 (agencynews.com) have become unavailable and I am unable to find alternative sources for either one. Policy is to wait at least 24 months but I am unsure if that is from the date of publication or unavailability so I am placing this section for future reference. 82.72.123.186 (talk) 12:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linkrot  

message: Disagree with merge proposal. The Chewbacca Mask Lady article is a meme article of which there are many. It's also somewhat long, has a picture and infobox, additional info about Candice Pain, it would be an awkward merge that would probably result in loss of information so it doesn't overwhelm this article with undue WEIGHT. -- GreenC 15:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Chewbacca Mask Lady]] merge proposal 

message: Star Wars fandom says discuss possible merger here, but there is no section on it? shadzar-talk 15:02, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  where is the discussion? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:22, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:57, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: In  The Phantom Menace Special Edition, it says:
:With this release, the Knights of Renesmee became the first amateur group to remake an entire film trilogy (the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy) at full length. 
I don't see the works of this group among the fan films.
Should they be?
--Error (talk) 21:06, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knights of Renesmee 

message: There is an article about the unreleased Return of the Ewok but not about the released R2-D2: Beneath the Dome. --Error (talk) 21:12, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Beneath the Dome

message: This fenomenon has been gaining traction recently. Not sure if it was covered by enough reliable sources to become noteworthy, but it's a very old issue that more people have started talking about in the wake of the racist harrassment of Krystina Arielle. It concerns the proliferation of false rumours and disinformation in the Star Wars fandom, via websites like Bounding Into Comics, or Pirates and Princesses, and youtube channels including Mike Zeroh, Clownfish TV, Overlord DVD, Geeks+Gamers, That Starwars Girl, Midnight's Edge, DrunkCPO and several others. Incidentally all of these websites ans youtubers are part of the Comicsgate movement, and present themselves as the voice of the Star Wars Fandom, under the moniker The Fandom Menace. I think this needs to be mentioned in some fashion, if reliable sources cover it.
Incidentally, it strikes me as odd that The Fandom Menace redirects here, and makes me think somebody got the wrong impression that "the Fandom Menace" is a nickname the Starwars Fandom has given itself, which is false. The Fandom Menace is actually another name for the alt-right Comicsgate Movement. 46.97.170.20 (talk) 10:56, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  False rumour mills and disinformation sites 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The Fandom Menace is the name of a loosely affiliated group of Comicsgate-adjacent internet trolls who have drawn attention to themselves with the racist harrassment against John Boyega and Kelly Marie Tran. It is NOT an affectionate nickname for the Star Wars fandom. The Fandom Menace needs to either redirect to Comicsgate, or be given it's own article. 46.97.170.40 (talk) 11:03, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Fandom Menace redirects here