lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:The Reivers

message: I put up this "clean up" tag. What I meant was this article seemed to be discussing the novel and movie at once, I changed the WikiProject tag above from:  to:  and removed the IMDb link on the article page. I've only seen the movie, so if someone who has read the novel (the expert) could fix the plot section, it would be great. Chipmunk01 00:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up tag
Talk:The Hunter (1980 film)

message: Sadly, McQueen died of mesothelioma later the same year this picture was filmed. Kathryn Harrold, who had a run of everything coming down the pike for a few years, was a fine actress and extremely beautiful, and had the largest role apart from McQueen in this picture. I tend to remember her most for her work on The Rockford Files in a two-part episode titled "Black Mirror" but she was also Albert Brooks' leading lady in an extremely intelligent theatrical film titled Modern Romance the year after The Hunter as well, among others. As for McQueen, of course he was a phenomenon and the highest paid actor in the world for several years. This movie is unusual in that McQueen plays a more ordinary guy as opposed to a practically a super hero, with believable fight scenes and stunts really taxing him, which could have something to do with the cancer that soon killed him. I think it's easily one of his best performances, which is saying a lot. The stills from the movie running under the credits at the end sort of retroactively made the film seem like an episode from a television series than a movie, at least while you watch the credits, but the film itself is quite under-rated. The veteran supporting cast members are excellent. The biggest question, though, is how did the producers find a baby that looked so much like Steve McQueen?  Racing Forward (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: McQueen's under-rated last picture
Talk:The Four Musketeers (tennis)

message: I believe the statement about the French championships only being open to French nationals until 1925 is incorrect.  They were only open to members of French tennis clubs, which is not quite the same thing; and indeed the Briton H. Briggs, being such a member, won in 1891, defeating P. Baigneres.
One Fassit (given name unknown) was runner-up the next year, and F. Wardan in 1897.  See:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?menuId=47&menuItemId=6144&view=DISPLAYCONTENT&grid=A1&targetRule=
http://scoreboards.canoe.ca/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=canoe&page=tennis-m/stat/french-winners-men.htm
Paul Magnussen (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error?
Talk:Eyes of Laura Mars

message: In the second paragraph it says It was reported that Peters and Dunaway had a tense relationship while making the film, and that Streisand visited the set on a few occasions.
What has Peters and Dunaway having a tense relationship to do with Streisand visiting the set?  Whay have they been put in the same sentance this (very bad) way?  Unless there was something to it, that's not begin said here, then the fact that Streisand may have visited the set is not even worth mentioning.
Dannman (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've got around to removing the bit about Streisand visiting the set. I don't see that it's needed at all.  If it goes back in, maybe put it further up her involvement in the film is mentioned. Dannman (talk) 09:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Streisand visiting the set 

message: When the detective is speculating about the killers past, he goes from 'he' (third person) to saying 'I' (first person), refering to himself.  In the DVD comatary it points this out and says this is when Laura Mars realises it's the detective.
I don't know wheather the bit about ("Her knowledge of here colleague Tommy") is actually wronge so don't want to take it out at the moment.
I'll get round a doing the edit.  Just got a couple of things on at the moment. (More bothered about good writing for the artical than for the talk page!)
Dannman (talk) 09:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detective calls killer I (capital i, first person singlar) 

message: Did Anyone notice that this movie lifts it's plot from an episode of Night Gallery called "The Eyes That Wouldn't Die".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:14C5:8762:219:E3FF:FED3:9BF8 (talk) 06:51, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Eyes That Wouldn't Die - Night Gallery
Talk:The Wicked Lady

message: Two characteristics of Margaret Lockwood's cosmetic make–up spoiled The Wicked Lady. Both were typical and wide–spread during the 1940s. The first was her exaggeratedly arched eyebrows. The second was her peculiarly painted upper lip. In the 1940s and early 1950s, actresses had their upper lips painted so that the curve spread out across the lip, instead of the more natural Cupid's bow that was popular in earlier films.Lestrade (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Anachronistic characteristics

message: This film reflects the perennial interest in evil aristocrats. For centuries this has been the theme of many books and, in the Twentieth Century, films. It is only very recently that public interest in criminal aristocrats has waned.Lestrade (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad nobles
Talk:Ordeal by Innocence

message: I've edited the plot summary today, generally clarifying the focus of the plot and removing the name of the accomplice. I'm never sure how much detail should go into these summaries but I would be grateful if later editors would provide comment here on their approach.
--Sordel 13:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why have you removed the name of the accomplice?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 07:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Summary

message: A "leitmotiv" in this novel is the song "The dove on the mast", sung by Kirsten Lindstrom, expressing her longing for love, and deemed to be a Norwegian folksong. This is erroneous, in fact the text is part of a Victorian English poem: Jean Ingelow, Sailing beyond seas Rheinvolk (talk) 22:12, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Song
Talk:Arizona Dream

message: It is just a blow-by-blow yet confusing retelling, providing no insight into the value or meaning of the piece. I do not mean to be harsh, I would improve it if I could but have never even heard of it before. I found it via a misspelling of "halibut" as "hallibut" when I googled the latter. Sorry to just be negative, but this really could use improvement. If I didn't live in an igloo with no power and just hal[l]ibut to eat (can't even burn dem dam bones to keep warm!) I'd at least rent it and try. I use the local library's computer to search things like hallibut/halibut, hoping to find SOME new way of serving it (since it is always raw due to lack of fire), and the library tends to float away on its own iceberg much of the year... don't count on me to do much more than complain uselessly so please fix it yourself if you cared enough to read the comments page here. Gotta go, the feather indicates a seal is surfacing to breathe and I gotta spear the damn thing if I don't want to starve this winter. Or is it summer? All I know is it is cold. Oh, I can see, must be summer.
It is indeed extremely uninformative and poorly written.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TRIALNERRA (talk • contribs) 08:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a very poor article 

message: Who do you think is the (uncredited) actor seen several times, around the nineteenth minute of the film, sitting in a gray suit and hat, sleeping in an armchair opposite the one Jerry Lewis is sitting in? 37.67.96.116 (talk) 16:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  An uncredited (and famous?) actor
Talk:The Chamber (novel)

message: Trying to establish a connection between the fictional character Sam Cayhall created by John Grisham and the true story of Robert Edward Chambliss. Their stories are very similar. Both were involved in a bombing spurred by racism and were caught. Both were not convicted at first but after at least ten years, were retried in court and convicted. Is there a connection between these two stories?
* * Robert Edward Chambliss at Wikipedia.com  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.239.171.11 (talk • contribs) . and moved from the article to the talk page by Mr Stephen 15:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: I haven't read the book, but have seen the movie, and the ending is hardly gory – Sam is executed in the gas chamber. Is it different in the book? If not, that word should be changed or taken out. Darguz Parsilvan 00:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken it out. Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 07:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sam is indeed executed which is kind of an anticlimax because while I was reading teh book that's what I expected. I was hoping for a twist. There is no gore. Nadquilp7 (talk) 21:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gory? 

message: Perhaps a section referring to the general reception of the novel is needed? there are a few critical reviews listed if you search for them (from NYT and such) Scradzie (talk) 03:01, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception Section?
Talk:The Thomas Crown Affair (1999 film)

message: This article is exceptionally flat and could use character backgrounds to make it more interesting, in addition to the existing plot summary.Shannon bohle (talk) 01:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Story Consists of Both Characters and Plot

message: "Noon: Rest From Work (After Millet)" by Vincent van Gogh - The painting Crown admires and calls "his haystacks," the original is owned by Musée d'Orsay in Paris, France
I have the movie on DVD and there was not a haystack. At what point is the picture? I have not seen it! --88.69.225.63 (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: At 3:33-34 there's a direct shot of the painting, and it's in the background at various times for the next 30 seconds or so.  --Ktoktok (talk) 06:41, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vincent Van Gogh??? 

message: The San_Giorgio_Maggiore_at_dusk says that the painting is owned by National Museum and Art Gallery in Cardiff, Wales. While this article says it's owned by Bridgestone Museum of Art in Tokyo, Japan.
So which one is right? Wikihonduras (talk) 09:59, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Both own it, there is more than one version of the painting. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:50, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who really owns the painting? 

message: No mention of the rights stuff-up that meant Russo's likeness was replaced by a manequin? Misterandersen (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dummy? 

message: This article previously identified, under plot, the final painting stolen in the film as Banks of the Seine at Argenteuil by Claude Monet, and linked to that page.
But the painting in the film doesn't match the photo of that painting at all. 
The painting in the film shows a woman and a boat.
I've removed that reference from the article.
What painting was stolen?
It appears to match this painting with the same name by Edouard Manet (not Monet): http://www.artandarchitecture.org.uk/images/gallery/8a192e9f.html. That's the painting identified here: http://paintingsinmovies.com/m/view/id/71 Pop quizzed (talk) 04:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which painting was stolen at the end of the film?
Talk:The Yards

message: This article has had its infobox tag removed by a cleanup using AWB.
Any concerns please leave me a message at my talk page. RWardy 17:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "needs infobox" tag
Talk:The Gene Generation

message: It's clearly biopunk, a post-cyberpunk subgenre.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.134.160.231 (talk) 16:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Biopunk vs. Cyberpunk

message: Infobox tag has been removed as article already has one.  If you have any problems with this please post a message on my talk page. RWardy 09:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox Tag

message: Why is this considered a "2007" film when it's being released in 2008? 67.241.72.20 (talk) 13:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 2007 films?

message: Strangely, this is making new rounds as "Killer's Creed", said to be released in 2013 (see e.g. 1 and 2.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.65.192.87 (talk) 21:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 2013
Talk:This Property Is Condemned

message: There's plenty of analysis we could add here.... symbolism, etc. But I'm out of time right now.
Your out of time are you? No wonder... Im quite sure the "analysis" you already beat to death on the 'plot summary' section!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballerinassoluta (talk • contribs) 09:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analysis 

message: Does anyone else think this movie was quite sultry for the time it was released? 2600:6C48:7E00:12FC:D4F0:93FC:C08F:712 (talk) 04:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sultry
Talk:Red Sun

message: This should come up when "red sun" is typed in search.  Instead, it goes to the article on stellar classification! 121.208.181.37 05:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: link = coll. german, adj., meaning: not trustworthy, dubious, derived from german word links = left, also german adj. "linkisch" is gauche in english and french... 91.40.84.172 (talk) 10:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: character names link & gauche
Talk:St. Ives (1998 film)

message: This film was on television and tried to find out how it was reviewed. On Rotten Tomatoes the film has two reviews, both negative. I tried to search the website of emanuellevy.com but I was not able to find his review. The other review was from Christopher Null, the website FilmCritic.com has been dead for years but sometimes it is possible to find those reviews using the Web Archive but I was not able to find it this time. Perhaps someone else might have better luck digging up those two old reviews. 
I was able to find one review from DVD Talk so I included that. -- 109.79.76.133 (talk) 20:16, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Eventually found some british reviews from Radio Times and the Guardian. I'm done. -- 109.79.76.133 (talk) 20:34, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for doing that! Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 23:22, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception
Talk:Death Hunt

message: The opening scene is a shameless copy of Weedon Scott taking White Fang from Beauty Smith at a dogfight. (Part IV, Chapter IV - The Clinging Death, White Fang - Jack London). ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 02:07, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: One of many shameless thieveries in the film. Sensei48 (talk) 06:18, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening scene 
Talk:Wild in the Country

message: This has always been my favorite Elvis movie (the screenplay was by Clifford Odets--great dialog) and the very unique actress Tuesday Weld was in it, but does anyone know the actual "university" in the movie that Elvis can be seen walking up the steps of?  It seems like a minor point but I always wonder where they actually shot it every time I see the movie.  71.148.52.34 (talk) 10:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What Was The University?
Talk:Follow That Dream

message: Why does the title of this page have a tagline written as a subtitle?  72.187.69.245 (talk) 17:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subtitle
Talk:Fun in Acapulco

message: The beginning of this page was several paragraphs about some kind of controversy about the making of the film and Presley being banned from Mexico.  I couldn't really follow what the controversy was and the section is not referenced.  I don't know enough about Presley to know if any of this is true but I wanted to flag this for somebody else to maybe look at.  I'm sorry if this is not the appropriate format.  Never communicated with Wikipedia before so I am a newbie.  Thanks for all your great pages!
Gatorlily (talk) 22:13, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy section not references and confusing. 

message: That term does not exist in 1957 when a Southern boy, Presley, supposedly used it. 99.238.178.241 (talk) 21:51, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "African Americans" 
Talk:Stygofauna

message: I'm a geologist. I know SFA about these critters except that they are a 'hot button' issue for conservationists in Australia at the moment. For instance, you'll get a mining company which will drill a hole, and the government-sponsored guys who first described the stygofauna now run the whole show. So. You drill a hole into an aquifer and of course you find critters living in the aqifer and of course they are unique and of course you have to then pay these guys $60,000 to do a full-blown stygofauna survey and inevitably the recommendation is that you can't do anything because you have 5 species of rock shrimp which can't be disturbed or they'll choke and die. 
So now we have Greenpeace, the Wilderness Society and everyone up in arms about stygofauna you can and do find everywhere (not just in Australia, but in Italy, China, etc). 
Personally, I think it's crazy that we are out making the tiger extinct, and diging up farmland world over, putting houses down in urban sprawls, and no one is saying that every species of worm, skeeter, silverfish or ant should be preserved, and here we have rock shrimp being used as ultra-important emergency poster-children for conservation, when most conservationists couldn't even see them (lack of microscopes) and never visit their desert habitats. And then I think: of course they are endemic to their aquifers. Its hard for a stygofauna to travel far, share its genes, when its living in a fricking rock for effs sakes. 
Anyway. I've put the article up, said my bit in the discussion part, and now its over to the biologists to make this a pretty article. 
Rolinator 03:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Conservation

message: Obviously this article would much appreciate some nice pictures. Nothing on commons by that name. ~ R.T.G 08:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: This article is biased beyond belief, it is purely anti-environmental advocacy with no references. 213.112.199.156 (talk) 16:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: Now this article starts out:  “Stygofauna are any fauna that live within groundwater systems, such as caves and aquifers.”  It seems to go too far in calling a cave a groundwater system.  There are lots of things that live in caves that aren't stygofauna I think.  Maybe “such as in (some?) caves and aquifers”? or perhaps “Stygofauna are any fauna that can live within the small pores of groundwater systems”? Bob Burkhardt (talk) 19:37, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the focus is on cave water, rather than groundwater. Blind salamanders and cave fish certainly don't live in minute soil pores. Indiscriminate usage of "groundwater" in this article obscures the meaning, and its usage and wikilinks should probably be altered or removed. --Animalparty-- (talk) 18:56, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The focus is on both cave water and groundwater. Why do you think the link to groundwater obscures the meaning? Re: minute soil pores and large stygal animals, I have slightly reworked the sentence, have a look. michaelomorph (talk) 00:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description too inclusive
Talk:Viva Las Vegas

message: I find "Ms. Rusty Martin (Ann-Margret)", but isn't 1964 too early to be using "Ms."? Perhaps use "Miss"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 20:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ms." turns up in plot description!? 

message: Where is the source for this information?  The Speed Racer page has the same info but asks for a reference too.  I believe this may be folklore and should be considered for removal unless  it has a reliable reference Mconwell (talk) 00:27, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elvis is the model for Speed Racer? 

message: Chandler's dad's burlesque show is Viva Las Gaygas. A clear pun on the movie or song. Should it be cited in the "In Pop Culture?"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.98.54.161 (talk) 06:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Friends reference? 

message: I don't think Viva Las Vegas is a romance movie because IMDb insists it's a musical comedy film. Agree or disagree? --TMProofreader (talk) 21:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: IMDb is a not reliable source. What do reliable sources say? Canterbury Tail talk 21:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film genre
Talk:Harum Scarum (film)

message: The external link that supposedly leads to the Plambeck review, actually leads to a site called badmovieplanet.com. From that site you are redirected to different popups, some of which are deceptive. Somebody should take a look at this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4646:B0DD:0:F0F0:29CF:5413:92E (talk) 14:49, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to deceptive site
Talk:Frankie and Johnny (1966 film)

message: I just discovered that someone created a separate article for the 1976 reissue of the album. Since there's no need to have repeated information and the 1976 version is the exact same record, just with a couple of songs removed and a 1970s era photo of Presley on the cover, I have basically merged it into the Soundtrack section. I don't even know if we need the infobox for this, but I moved it over as well. It would be nice if someone had any sources that might explain exactly why Pickwick reissued the soundtrack album in this way and none of the others. 23skidoo 13:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1976 reissue
Talk:Easy Come, Easy Go (1967 film)

message: Wikipedia is not censored, so the use of the word "shit" in the Soundtrack section is allowed. I know there's at least one additional source that used this quote (or variation thereof) and I'll try and find it. I wouldn't have added it if I didn't have a source, though. What I have yet to confirm, though, is whether Elvis actually recorded "Leave My Woman Alone". Reportedly only the backing track exists for this... can anyone confirm? 23skidoo 18:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of language in the soundtrack section
Talk:Charro!

message: I need to check whether this was in fact recorded for Charro. I thought this track was recorded for Change of Habit. 68.146.41.232 17:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Let's Forget About the Stars
Talk:Change of Habit

message: I've seen speculation that Rubberneckin' wasn't originally intended for the film but was added in order to capitalize on Presley's successful Memphis recording sessions. Obviously we need a source if we're going to include this bit of information. Anyone know of a source that confirms this? 23skidoo 18:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Was Rubberneckin' written for the film or not?

message: I have put a "citation needed" tag on the unsourced claim that this was originally made for TV. The fact NBC was connected with it doesn't mean anything, but it is highly doubtful that the Colonel would have allowed Presley to make a TV movie. It was hard enough convincing him to allow his boy to make the TV special for NBC. I went hunting but couldn't find a source to back up the claim. Perhaps it was conceived as a made for TV film before Elvis was attached to it? 68.146.70.124 (talk) 05:46, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Made for TV?