Talk:Stand and Deliver

message: Needs:
# Developed Plot summary
# Include cast and crew information.
angel
fabian escalante
ramirez
jaime a escalante
# Character biographies are few & undeveloped
# At least two other developed sections of information (production, reception (including box office figures), awards and honors, themes, differences from novel or TV show, soundtrack, sequels, DVD release, etc.)SkierRMH 06:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub

message: :Image:Stand and deliver.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 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 02:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Stand and deliver.jpg

message: This doesn't describe the film at all, at the moment it's made up from a few lines that should be in the intro and trivia sections. Could someone who's seen the film please fix this, cheers. ArdClose (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synopsis 

message: :Image:Stand and deliver.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) 07:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Stand and deliver.jpg

message: "Nethead" is currently listed as a character.  Nethead is in fact just a name that Jaime occasionally uses to refer to Angel Guzman.  Unless I see a response saying otherwise within the next week, I am going to remove Nethead from the character list and merge his description with that of Guzman.  71.224.13.255 (talk) 01:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nethead 

message: On the discussion page of another article it has been written that at one time or another South Park has satirized just about everything and that it adds little to say that this or that was the topic of a South Park reference. I'm personally undecided on the matter but wanted to put the idea out there. PurpleChez (talk) 20:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: South Park

message: "most of them got 4s and 5s on the 5 point exam." needs clarification. If the result is available, then exact number of students that got 4/5 should be known. "Most" is ambiguous; was it 2 out of 12 students or 11 out of 12 or?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.29.182.215 (talk) 04:20, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many is "most passed"? 

message: On October 29, 2013, Rachael Maddow reported other cases of plagiarism from Rand Paul, this time during a speech to the Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference on June 12 and the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce on March 19. Buzzfeed reported on the two cases of plagiarism on the same day; but Rand Paul's office has yet to respond. Great50 (talk) 02:11, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rand Paul plagiarism 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support - should be Stand and Deliver (disambiguation) on the base line. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: The article claims "Escalante actually first began teaching at Garfield High School in 1974 and taught his first AP Calculus course in 1978 with a group of 14 students. This claim is not supported in the link provided, and it may be entirely fabricated. The Washington Post article referenced in the same section(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/13/AR2009091302414.html), written by a man who investigated the incident, reports that all 12 students took the test and all passed. No information about a decades-before test is mentioned in the cited source. Suggest deleting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedRingOfLife (talk • contribs) 17:35, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed Accuracy

message: With regard to this edit: can you please give a valid reason for the content removal? Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 14:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the removed Rand Paul story is trivial, tangential, and about Wikipedia and Mr. Paul rather than being about the movie. It is also way over-sourced: WaPo or NYT would suffice. Further, an old Rand Paul speech which plagiarizes Wikipedia is not much of a "legacy", as it is more of an unintentional one-time namedrop. Surely the article can part with that tiny paragraph. The material rightly belongs in the Rand Paul article.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kentucky Senator