Category talk:Propaganda films

message: "If we made such a category and included this in it, I think we could largely put this matter to rest (though I am skeptical that this would be evenly applied to similar films with a different political agenda)." If we did that, we would have to make sure that the criteria is enforced, and that it is done evenly.
"Oh, and to put your worries to rest, Deamon, it was not you I was referring to when I mentioned editors who referred to every negative review as a verification of the propaganda label." That's alright then!
"I think that the statements that several sources have used the word "propaganda" to describe the film is appropriate, and maybe necessary" Yes maybe instead of my criteria of using one source calling a film propaganda, we could use "several" sources calling it propaganda to be the criteria. This would be less lax I guess. Though what number could we use as "several"?
"mainly when there is consensus among historians that a given film is propaganda" I don't necessarily think that a film has to be historically treated to be propaganda. Take Expelled for instance. It is my own view (OR I know!) that, although I haven't seen it, from the information on that article, and from frequenting Scienceblogs, that Expelled is propaganda. Things like I believe images of Stalinism/Nazism were used with the voice of some Evolutionary biologists over the top or something. That to me stinks of propaganda. Of course, my opinion means squat, but since notable reviewers and scientists etc have agreed that it is propaganda, then films don't necessarily have to be historical to be propaganda.
"I think some unambiguous criteria for inclusion in the category would help......(possibly accompanied by renaming the category, although that may not be necessary depending on what set of criteria is agreed upon)." I think even if we establish NPOV criteria, the title of this category is inherently POV. It is like it is Wikipedia describing these films as propaganda, as I said above, when obviously it shouldn't even appear that way. Quoting WP:CATEGORY:
"Generally, the relationship between an article and its categories should be definable as "(Article) is (category)": John Goodman is an American actor, Copenhagen is a city in Denmark, Jane Austen is an English writer"
So with our current title, we are basically saying, "Prelude to War is a propaganda film" or even "Expelled is a propaganda film". That isn't NPOV unfortunately. Deamon138 (talk) 22:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it can be NPOV if "propaganda" is used as a clearly defined technical term. However, the word "propaganda" has so much baggage and such a negative connotation that a more neutral term would be preferable, or the category being replaced by a list of films described as propaganda, or something less prone to misinterpretation. skeptical scientist (talk) 23:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think for us editors "in the know" so to speak, we know that there are/will be criteria that remove the criteria, but someone not "in the know" may misinterpret as you said. Deamon138 (talk) 01:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems there is agreement here that the category is problematical for films which are merely described on occasion by reviewers as propaganda, and therefore should probably be removed from Expelled at least. However, those not in agreement are not participating in this discussion at the moment. I'm sure if I were to remove the category now it would be back in seconds. I think this discussion needs more input from the other perspective. -R. fiend (talk) 21:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm well I think the most important thing would be to change the name of the category, personally. Deamon138 (talk) 22:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm adding to categories for renaming. skeptical scientist (talk) 22:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay cool. Btw, can you provide a link, I'm not familiar with that region of Wikipedia. Thanks in advance. Deamon138 (talk) 23:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitrary break