Talk:The King of Comedy (film)

message: The external link to a poorly copied partial scan of the People magazine article has it's link in the notes section, as a reference from the section in the article which paraphrases it.  However, a user continues to insert the external link within the article, making a section of that article into a highlighted external link.  There is no need for two links.  The correct way to add an external link is either in the reference/notes section, or in the external link section.  Please do not reinsert the external link into the article.  Thanks! Donaldd23 11:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed it to an actual reference (publication title, date, page) rather than a link to a scan, so we don't need a link at all. I suspect it's spam anyway, because the first thing you see at the top of that link is a link to an article on another site - presumably, adding the link here will increase the search engine rankings of that external article. There's no reason why we need scans of references rather than a standard citation (notwithstanding the copyvio status of the scan), and no reason for external links unless it's to a legitimate online edition of the referenced work. Thomjakobsen 22:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Addition of an external link within the article

message: Point the link to something like rotten tomatoes. The inclusion of just a few minor links is a bad sample....and who the hell ever heard of/reads Empire magazine?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.96.160.34 (talk) 16:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the UK's biggest film magazine. Article: Empire (magazine) Thomjakobsen 21:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External reviews 

message: :Image:KingOfComedyPoster.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) 18:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:KingOfComedyPoster.jpg

message: :Image:Kingofcomedydvd.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) 18:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Kingofcomedydvd.jpg

message: Not that it is vital to the film's article, but the band is British and uses the British spelling of 'Harbour' in their name. See a review of one of their cds at http://thep5.blogspot.com/2008/01/pearl-harbour-dont-follow-me-im-lost.html If we are going to keep the reference to this obscure band in the article then we should at least spell it correctly. Donaldd23 (talk) 02:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pearl Harbour reference

message: I'm fairly sure that Michael O'Donoghue (from SNL) is present in the scene where Pipkin is monopolizing the payphone. Can this be confirmed and mentioned in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbeechwood (talk • contribs) 04:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Uncredited Actors

message: Would rather get an opinion or consensus of some kind on this before changing it, but the final sentence in the plot description reads as follows:
The references to Rupert being stiff, forcing a smile and nervously preparing seem completely wrong to me. I re-watched the ending to confirm and none of those things seem true, no stiffness, the smiling seems genuine and he doesn't seem nervous at all, he's behaving pretty similar to how any talk show hosts do during opening introductions like that. There's always the chance I'm misinterpreting things, but I'm 99% sure I'm not. To remove the ambiguity and any potential personal opinions on the matter dictating the description of this scene, is there any sort of reference for this maybe? Like De Niro or Scorsese talking about it? A released script? Although that last one is not necessarily going to be valid as things change between script and screen all the time.
61.245.148.179 (talk) 12:23, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Unless there are sources that discuss this, it doesn't appear to seem that he is nervous. Removed. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 14:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Final sentence in Plot section

message: Rupert Pupkin is delusional and one has to wonder if it is "real" or ala Inception or it is in his mind.  Film Theory: The Joker Is Not Real (Joker 2019 Spoiler Free) there are some reality "disconnects" (Rupert's fantasies) that make one wonder?  Are their any reliable source that touch on this idea?--174.99.238.22 (talk) 03:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the ending all in his mind?