Talk:Stop motion

message: I'm not a native english speaker, but I think the correct spelling is "stop motion" and not "stop-motion". Is that correct ? Anyway both are currently used in the article and ( it's a matter of unity and consistency) only one of them should be used in the article. Does anybody agree with me ? Regards. 343KKT Kintaro (talk) 12:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *The article title does not use the dash, so if we're going to be consistent, the whole article should not use it, or the article should be moved. I think no dash is the way to go, as a quick Google search seems to indicate this is how the vast majority of people use it. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like an earlier contributor to this article was just a little to into making connected words with a dash. I have undone every example of "stop-motion" I ran across, and several other unusual combinations as well, but feel free to double check if I got them all or not. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I just add a reference from an official and (I think) well respected English dictionary. Kintaro (talk) 04:04, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop motion versus stop-motion 

message: This is just a stub, and clearly closely related to this article. Should probably be merged, but since I'm not overly familiar with this topic I'd thought I'd bring it here before just shoving it in. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *No need for the blown gasket. It is certainly not a dictatorship, that is why we are discussing it. I haven't said or even implied that the content is unwanted, just that it might be more useful and accessible as part of this article. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, now I see that User:CorenSearchBot is also suggesting a merger, as the article duplicates content from Armature (sculpture). Beeblebrox (talk) 23:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

text: *I wonder if you would care to calm down and discuss the relative merits of either merging the article or keeping it separate, without resorting to self-aggrandizing rhetoric? Beeblebrox (talk) 23:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

text: *So you're unwilling to discuss the merger proposal? As I have repeatedly stated, I'm not trying to censor you. I have not suggested in any way that this content should be removed from Wikipedia, just that it might better serve our readers (the people we are doing this for) if it were included in this article instead of being a very brief stub on it's own. If you could explain your objections to this idea, without the hyperbole, it would be much appreciated. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger of [[Armature (stop motion animation)]] 

message: It seems odd that the introductory paragraph introduces frame-by-frame like it is a commonly used alternative term for 'stop motion' when it just isn't, and even emphasizes it by the 'frame-by-frame' text being bold.  My suggestion is to include 'frame-by-frame' in the discussion but not at the outset.  If anyone has any objections to this please state now or forever hold your peace.--Golferman72 (talk) 12:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emphasis of 'frame-by-frame' in bold at beginning of page  

message: I submit a notion to create a new wikipedia article entitled "Notable stop motion artists", and transfer info to this new page, and on this current page replacing the section with a summary of names and a sentence like "for the full list please refer to the main wikipedia article "Notable stop motion artists".  This would significantly improve this article and especially the introduction.  In fact, I may do it soon.--Farmer21…  20:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have completed this = Big improvement!  As above the link to the new page is within this article.  It can also be viewed here List of notable stop motion artists.--Farmer21…  09:20, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article looks rubbish  

message: I have just checked in after a few years. Did you even bother reading the entries for the notable section??? Someone vandalized the orignal descriptions and you used them without checking them!!! There were several omissions as well. How can you include a minor animator like selick and not include Sunn or Trinka??? Now the history section in the original looks like absolute crap!! I spent alot of time turning what was a stub into a world-class article. Much of the info I used was gathered on trips to Europe and from recollections of old filmmakers. All that is gone!!!
This is what happens when wiki "editors" and "admins" , and OTHER vandals, who DONT have a working knowledge of a subject, and/or rudimetary writing skills, seek to "improve" an article. This is exactly why folks think Wiki is a joke!!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.95.138.22 (talk) 05:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am no expert on the subject, but I thought Jan Švankmajer and the Brothers Quay were highly "notable". They have barely received mention even in the page on notable artists.Ankurtg (talk) 17:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Notable stop motion artists" looks like even worse rubbish! 

message: In my opinion, the cold war propaganda function of Sandmännchen is exaggerated. It's primary function was definitely to entertain children, not without teaching aspects. As stated in the Sandmännchen article, a certain amount of propaganda played its role, e.g. when showing Sandmännchen's futuristic vehicles, but this is, if any at all, a tertiary function of the programme, not its primary. --88.64.70.134 (talk) 21:19, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda function of ''Sandmännchen'' 

message: Should perhaps stop motion with live actors be mentioned under Variations of stop-motion? We have variants where live actors are wearing masks (Angry Kid) and when they don't (The Secret Adventures of Tom Thumb). // Liftarn (talk) 20:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop motion with live actors 

message: Stop motion is incomplete without mentioning George Pal, Ray Harryhausen, Jim Danforth, etc. or the stop motion technique called "replacement animation" where individual miniatures are used frame to frame (Pal Puppetoons), rather than the same miniature. Naaman Brown (talk) 14:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incomplete 

message: Under variations section, under go-motion the second last sentence about go-motion is followed by: "The 2009 film Fantastic Mr. Fox was also entirely filmed in stop motion." Should the "also" be there? then should "stop" be "go"? Otherwise, does this sentence belong in another section. Manytexts (talk) 00:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I think this sentence should be deleted entirely.  It is also mentioned in the "1980s to present" section (currently the last sentence of the final paragraph there).  That sentence should be given its own paragraph, as it has nothing to do with Nick Park, who is the subject of the rest of the paragraph; it erroneously implies that Nick Park was also responsible for those other films.  Old coot (talk) 13:10, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: agreed and done k kisses 19:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where does this belong? 

message: Dear Sirs, 
I would like to run this by y'all before I do anything. If ome of you have the the time it moght be good to look up Brotherhood Workshops on YouTube. I think that guy does fantastic work. After watching some of his videos tell me if you think he is worth being mentioned in an article please post your thoughts on my talk page. Just for the record I have absolutely no conection with Brotherhood. Hope to hear from you! TheMouthofSauron (talk) 15:57, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The simple test for all Wikipedia content is whether or not something has been mentioned in a reliable source. Are there any press interviews or profiles that put Brotherhood into context? --McGeddon (talk) 17:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Brotherhood Workshops

message: Maybe we should mention Alexander Shiryaev. http://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/nov/14/animation-ballet  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:75:CF3A:BA01:8CB2:AEEF:AAA0:5367 (talk) 20:11, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alexander Shiryaev 

message: Is Shaun the Sheep a stopmotion? --109.31.71.43 (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shaun the sheep 

message: This is an assignment for a class. There should be more citations for this article. It is not a very short article and there are a few things in the article, that should have citations. The citations that are there seem to be appropriate and reliable. In addition, it seems like a very neutral article and there does not seem to be any bias in it. Sa3730a (talk) 16:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop Motion 

message: There's quite enough citations, so I removed the 2013 (yes, 2013!) template. --Janke | Talk 11:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  RM citation template 

message: — Assignment last updated by StevenTJr (talk) 01:27, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Writing 1 TR

message: — Assignment last updated by WikiWeh (talk) 05:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Equitable Futures - Internet Cultures and Open Access