Talk:Back to the Future (franchise)

message: Something has got to be done about the plot of every BTTF movie.  To me, a plot is what you read behind the box of a DVD and nothing more.  It resumes the idea of the story in a couple of paragraphs.  What we currently have is the entire stories, from the very beginning to the very end, with every little detail, and it's getting worse almost everyday. Soon, a plot will become as detailed as a script of the movie and we don't want to go there.  What I suggest: Completely (I mean, completely) replace the plot sections with the text behind the box of the related movie.  Opinions? -- Lyverbe (talk) 21:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Any objections in doing what I propose?  I'll wait until next monday.  -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Plot summaries need to be concise, but a DVD cover-lenght summary is too short.  There needs to be enough to allow the causal reader to understand the rest of the article (and in this case, the sequels) without previous knowledge, so there is a need to cover some details.  I agree all three of them are too long and need trimming. --MASEM (t) 02:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't make the plot section that short. Try retain the salient points of the story. On the other hand, I prefer pruning irrelevant sections of the plots' current forms. --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:18, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I thought everyone subscribed to BTTF articles were subscribed to this one too, but apparently not.  I was wondering why I wasn't getting any opinions.  So, ok, I won't change them to the text behind the DVD boxes, but they need serious cleaning.  I mean, badly.  For example, one of the last change on the plot of BTTF II is from "causes Doc to faint" to "causes Doc to say "Great Scott!" and faint".  You have got to be kidding me.  This is the kind of totally useless detail that needs to be removed. -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Great job Masem on the trimming.  I don't think I could have done it better myself! Thanks for your hard work. -- Lyverbe (talk) 22:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot sections are ridiculous 

message: Am I the only one who feels the "DVD Releases" grid needs an overhaul? Does anyone at all care about the 2002-2005 standard DVD release specific features anymore ("enhanced" MJ interview)? When the blu-rays come out, even fewer people will. And by whom is a 2010 release date expected by? Sure, we big fans are expecting it, but is the average reader (keep Wiki "encyclopedic"/generic in POV)? I was looking at the DVD release grid, and it just seems to "read" in an antiquated style. Yes, we all know the early widescreens were messed up, but isn't this old news now? It should be relegated to a paragraph or two only.MJEH (talk) 05:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "DVD Release" grid - Update!! 

message: The "canon" section is confusing and not up to the standards of the rest of the article.
Here is the section:
"The series has spawned comics and an animated series which although take place between or after the films, are all in their own 'what if' and alternate timelines as stated by writer, Bob Gale. However, only the episodic game by Telltale is part of the main continuity which takes place six months after the events of Part III.[1]"
Wanderer57 (talk) 04:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that -- Lyverbe (talk) 12:30, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canon 

message: "Back to the Future: The Game will be released by Telltale Games for the PS3, Mac, iPad, and PC, with Christopher Lloyd reprising his role as Doc Brown. AJ Locascio will provide the voice for Marty McFly.[17] Bob Gale will be assisting with the script. The release date is December 22, 2010.[18] Jurassic Park and Back to the Future are the two movies that Telltale Games will revive as games.[19] In a behind the scenes interview with the crew working on the game it was stated that the first part to the game is set to be 6 months after the story of Back to the Future Part III.[20]"
I request this be changed as it hasn't been released yet and its past the date shown here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinophile21992 (talk • contribs) 09:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: I've asked in Talk:List_of_characters_in_the_Back_to_the_Future_films#Considering_.22The_Game.22_in_articles, but I haven't got any reply.  Perhaps I'll get more chance here.
I wonder if the articles (not only this article but also dedicated articles to BTTF characters) should really use BTTF:The Game as valid information.  I think the articles should reflect what happen in the movie and not anywhere else.  For example, Marty's article states that he has visited 1931 which is not true for anyone who hasn't played the game.  I haven't seen any episodes of the animated series, but the list of episodes says they've been 3,000,000 years back, in 1790, in 1800s, etc.  If we have to mention The game years, I don't see why we shouldn't add those of the 'animated series'.  Do we want to go there? of course not. -- Lyverbe (talk) 02:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The Wikipedia page for the animated series says "Although the series takes place after the films, co-creator of the Back to the Future series Bob Gale has stated that it and the comics take place in their own 'what if' and alternate timelines and not part of the main continuity." so it's not canon. The The Game page also says "Gale stated that although the game is not part of the series canon,[23][25][26] it is possible that it could take place in alternate timelines." so no, I would agree that they should not be used as valid information and also should not be included in the timeline. Sander (talk) 16:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Considering "The Game" in articles 

message: One hour ago I found an article, edited in last december by an user no more active, named Back to the Future Part IV. Instead of listing it in the  template, I preferred to ask here, to avoid mistakes and request an opinion:
*The article, that should be wikified and referenced, speaks about the unreleased film, but some parts of it are unclear. The :Category:Unreleased films exists, and i've added this category. Is it correct? Could it be considered (technically) unreleased or cancelled?
*I've categorized it in BTTF main category, cause i don't know if the categorization into "BTTF films" is technically correct. Regarding the template, as said, I avoided to do any action. If "Films" section is not correct, I've (IMHO) supposed that "Universe" could be correct.
Anyway, other edits into this article (including infobox and "language" category) have been made by the original author. Sorry if the categorization and TL addition are erroneous; you could remove. Thanks for attention and regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 01:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:OR and WP:VERIFY, Wikipedia works with facts.  Here, the first section of this article is "Rumors".  Not only the article shouldn't be mentionned in the BTTF templates but it shouldn't even exist at all. -- Lyverbe (talk) 02:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

text: The article was once deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Back_to_the_Future_Part_IV).  Recreating a deleted article is a naughty thing to do :)  I've tagged the article for speedy deletion. -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:43, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The original edit was a redirect, now restored and protected. Thanks for the immediate help to my opinion request. I can consider the issue resolved... PS: I only recommend to control: in an Alternate 2012 the article may exists. :-D Regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 23:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: I've found an existant article about [[Back to the Future Part IV|BTTF IV]]

message: Does anyone have any idea why there is white space at the top of the article? ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 00:48, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: While fixing a ref, I also tweaked the arrangement of the templates at the top to eliminate some of the white space; but this is just a work-around. I'll try to track down which template specifically contains the issue so a more permanent fix; but I haven't edited templates in a while, so can't guarantee I'll be able to find the actual root cause. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:02, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you fixed the problem here, which is a start.  It never occurred to me to simply rearrange the templates. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 13:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  White space 

message: New table looks nice, but I believe there are too many members included.  Einstein, Marlene, Beauregard, etc. I'd remove those. -- Lyverbe (talk) 23:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New cast section 

message: New category "Children's film series" has been added.  I don't believe I'd categorize BTTF as a film made for children and I went to check the current list of movies in that category.  Apart from Ghostbusters which is somewhat in the same range as BTTF, the other movies are clearly for a younger age range than BTTF.  Still, I'm not sure.  Anyone else agree? -- Lyverbe (talk) 21:46, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children's film series 

message: I admit hating red links too.  WP:REDDEAL states "An existing red link can indicate one or more of the following things: A new article is needed".  Is it needed?  and, seriously, will there ever be an article for Owen Thomas?  I doubt it. -- Lyverbe (talk) 22:04, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there ever will be Lyverbe and you should tell JustAGal that. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  You mean this Owen Thomas? An actively working voice actor with 50 acting credits to his name? I am not so doubtful that this subject could merit an article at some point. bd2412 T 20:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: So how long should a red link stay?  If nobody cares to make an article about something/someone, does that mean that the red link should stay there forever?  To me, a red link doesn't look like "Hey! look here! an article should be created about this!", it looks like an error in the article.  Errors are ugly. -- Lyverbe (talk) 22:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's no active article, why link it? Strip the redlinks. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:55, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red links 

message: A new "Cast List" section has recently been added to the individual Back to the Future articles.  Some editors have seen this new section has been helpful, some have seen it as being useless and some are indifferent.
For the good health of the articles, please express your opinion about this section by using the following list as examples.
* Keep - Complete: Every actor deserves to be treated equally.  For that reason, all should be listed as in IDMB.
* Keep - Medium: Only those who had any impact to the story should be listed.  In short, if the actor spoke, he/she deserves a spot in the cast list.
* Keep - Short: No need to keep a huge list in the article.  Only major roles (i.e. written on movie posters) are to be mentioned whereas bit parts and cameos should not be listed.
* Delete: The list is useless since we already have important cast members mentioned in the franchise article.
* Delete - Complete: Delete all of them, including the one in the franchise article.
The majority of votes will decide the faith of the sections in all "Back to the Future" articles.  This poll will end on 27 October 2013. -- Lyverbe (talk) 15:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast list poll 

message: "November 12, 1955 (twice; once by 2015 Biff ..." - Really?  If I remember correctly, we just see Biff stealing the DeLorean.  How are we so sure that he traveled to this date? - Lyverbe (talk) 11:38, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: We do see Old Biff pass Young Biff the almanac, but I don't remember the sequence well enough to say for certain whether we know when he arrived/left. DonIago (talk) 13:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked.  Biff gives the date when Marty confronts him at the hotel (45 seconds from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9c1k_m6POA) - Lyverbe (talk) 12:39, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't have any objection. I didn't see this section before making the revision to the previous edits. --Musdan77 (talk) 02:11, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traveled dates 

message: To my fellow "Back to the Future" fans here on Wikipedia, I would just like to make you all aware of the following user template which I have recently created: Template:User Back to the Future. I hereby would like to dedicate it to the greatest fans of the greatest film ever made. You are all welcomed to use it on your user pages. From me to you with love. :-) --Omer Toledano (talk) 11:34, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There is documentary coming. Not sure where to include it. TGCP (talk) 20:01, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Template: User Back to the Future 

message: A section should be added about Back to the Future's impact on 2015, especially October 21, 2015 (the date  Marty and Doc travel to in BTTF2).  It has become a date of some significance, earning the name Back to the Future Day and the hashtag #BTTF2015 (on both Facebook and Twitter).  Pepsi is realeasing a Pepsi Perfect limited-edition bottle (It has Pepsi Made With Real Sugar in it, though.), and Universal has released a Jaws 19 trailer.  Nike is still working on the self-tying shoes for limited release.  It is also the franchise's (and the original film's) 30th Anniversary, so it is getting a Blu-ray release with many new special features, as well as a Blu-ray release of Back to the Future: The Original Animated Series.  Again, BTTF2 has made 2015 a year of some significance. --Super3588 (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: So add one? DonIago (talk) 13:39, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  October 21, 2015 

message: No indication of unique notability to warrant its own article. This is apparently a short film not a proper feature. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:02, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections from me but I suggest that the entire article be written in a single paragraph.  I believe it's already small enough for that. -- Lyverbe (talk) 15:55, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I delightfully agree to that suggestion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:28, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

text: Agree with merge proposal by above reasons. -rayukk | talk 11:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

text: I also Agree with merge proposal by above reasons. -User:Alex79uk | talk 13:57, 29 February 2016 (GMT)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.165.149 (talk)  
You suggested this merger more than a year ago, Cyphoidbomb, and there are no objections.  Are you actually going to perform it?  Let's get that merge template off the front page, ok? ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 21:55, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

text: If you want to take the reigns on this, please feel free. I have my hands full at present. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:59, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I hate performing mergers.  I just wanted to remind you.  I've seen merger tags sit for years and never get done.  Sorry if I took a tone. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 22:02, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I dislike them as well, but I actually think I can get this one nailed out in a few minutes. No biggie. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:04, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

text:  Okay, I think I got it all done. The plot section still needs trimming, but most of the useful content is there. Source and destination talk pages have been flagged with  and , source page redirected... I think that's all. Thanks for the reminder. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:15, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  That was quick. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 22:34, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Doc Brown Saves the World]] 

message: This article suggests that the Universal Studios theme park in Florida is closed. That article does not indicate any such thing.--Mfwills (talk) 09:45, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know why you are asking this here instead of the Universal Studios theme park article, but anyway, WP:NOTAFORUM. -- Lyverbe (talk) 11:54, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Universal Studios Closed? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Back to the Future (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050122054639/http://www.boxofficemojo.com:80/alltime/trilogyadj.htm to http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/trilogyadj.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708090253/http://secure.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/trilogy.htm to http://secure.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/trilogy.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708090303/http://secure.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/trilogyww.htm to http://secure.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/trilogyww.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bttf.com/forums/blogs/timetraveller/19-bttf-2-disc-special-edition-dvd-coming-february.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713004356/http://bluraymovies.ign.com/bluray/document/article/112/1128134/BTTF%20Blu-ray%20Packaging%20--%20InstructionGuide.pdf to http://bluraymovies.ign.com/bluray/document/article/112/1128134/BTTF%20Blu-ray%20Packaging%20--%20InstructionGuide.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130720100740/http://bttf.com/hasslein-books-unauthorized-back-to-the-future-lexicon-now-available-for-pre-order.php to http://www.bttf.com/hasslein-books-unauthorized-back-to-the-future-lexicon-now-available-for-pre-order.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150701212948/https://www.telltalegames.com/backtothefuture/ to https://www.telltalegames.com/backtothefuture/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:45, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The correct spelling of the past tense of the verb to lead is "led". This article confuses the two.😃
Crickettopo Crickettopo (talk) 12:18, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SOFIXIT? Not seeing why this needs a Talk page item... DonIago (talk) 15:06, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typos/grammar 

message: A few days ago, the full names for Marty (Marty "Martin" Seamus McFly) and Doc (Dr. Emmett "Lathorope" Brown) were removed the cast and character table. Using the full/real names of fictional characters is useful can help provide more information about them for articles. I want to re-add there full names to the tables. If I don't get any response in 10 days, I will re-add it myself. If anyone has any objections, please leave your thoughts. Zucat (talk) 18:09, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: As the table is just providing a data summary and the characters have their own articles which provide their full names, and their full names aren't particularly relevant to an understanding of the films (i.e. trivia), I can't support adding their full names to the table at this time. DonIago (talk) 19:30, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

text: I agree with Doniago. -- Lyverbe (talk) 20:59, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Full names for Doc and Marty

message: My changes to the cast table consisted mainly of format, using common characteristics I've seen in other cast tables and found useful here. Mostly using the  template instead of just writing clarifications in parentheses, which clutters the table. Plus, given the section is called "Principal cast", I removed many clearly minor characters. To which of these changes do you particularly object? —El Millo (talk) 02:46, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The addition of the cast indicator also avoids the pictures compressing the table. —El Millo (talk) 02:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

text: If all those characters are going to stay then the title of the section should be changed. —El Millo (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Which of the ones I removed do you think should be added back and which were correctly removed? —El Millo (talk) 19:32, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

text: That can't possibly be true. Characters like 3-D, Match, Skinhead, and Marvin Berry aren't even close to being "Principal cast". Plus, this is a summary of the cast for the franchise, if someone wants to see more comprehensive cast information, they can head to each individual article, we shouldn't have a table for principal cast and a table for supporting cast. Copernicus and Einstein obviously shouldn't be included either. I don't know many of the other characters, so I have no choice but to take your word that they are relevant enough to be included here, but of the ones I do know, many don't fit here. —El Millo (talk) 20:34, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Marty's brother and sister Dave and Linda clearly aren't principal cast either. Marty's daughter Marlene appears in just one scene in Part II, so clearly not principal cast. —El Millo (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

text: should I move ahead with it? See the table at my sandbox. —El Millo (talk) 17:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've already made the table. The format is what's most important for me. I'm just asking about the characters removed, if you have clear reasons to re-include some of those characters. —El Millo (talk) 20:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

text: All done. Changed the format as I had, with all the characters you re-added kept, except for the two dogs. —El Millo (talk) 21:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

text: what a good way to be civil, just changing stuff randomly instead of doing what was agreed upon. You added things that look even worse now and put the cast indicator in the wrong place. —El Millo (talk) 02:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Principal cast table 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion