Talk:Star Wars: Revelations

message: RfC/poll – Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker: one article or two?
What do you think? E Pluribus Anthony 19:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What the heck's that gotta do with this Fan Film?!?!?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.25.70 (talk) 04:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''RfC/poll''' – Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker: one article or two? 

message: :Image:Revelation-first-poster.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) 04:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Revelation-first-poster.jpg 

message: :Image:Revelation-second-poster.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) 04:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Revelation-second-poster.jpg 

message: Why does that extra-long "cast list" have to be in the article?
It includes a tediously-long "cast" listing when real motion picture stubs and articles don't have a lengthy cast list mentioned.
It is also a list of folks whom are NOT real actors,and way beyond the three major players in this "fan film". I suggest the cast list falls under "trivial" and should be edited out of this article altogether in my opinion. Just a thought for improvement.
MaxButterchuck (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast list too long? 

message: WHY is this "fan film" even on Wikipedia? It is a walking copyright-violation and is not a motion picture in the truest sense. If Wikipedia put every garage-set "fan film" up like this one then the servers would crash for the sheer numbers of these out there!
I recommend it's speedy removal from Wikipedia for what it is, a personal home-video of potential copyright/trademark violation.
MaxButterchuck (talk) 13:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you honestly feel that way, then please take the time to actually nominate it for deletion - but bear in mind that the film has already survived an AfD, which will limit your chances of success. And while the film's story is not part of the official Star Wars continuity, the film IS officially part of the Lucasfilm sanctioned and sponsored fan film network on Atomfilms - and the filmmaker was personally named by George Lucas for an award on his follow-up film. The notabilty for inclusion is there. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 23:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: AfD? Where?  I can not see any notice in this talk page. --Meridiana solare (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this on Wikipedia?