Talk:Never Back Down

message: OK, I went in and reduced the Plot section to about 60% of its previous length.
Was I too severe, or does more need to be removed? Signed responses considered. (yes I'm a snob)Lincoln muadib (talk) 05:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering the length of various other "Plot" sections on other film pages, I think it would be fine to expand it back to its original length.  I did not get to read the original text, so I honestly can't say for sure.  I would mind seeing more detail.Kp.murphy (talk) 21:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Edited Plot section

message: Honestly this is so obviously a fight club knock off it had to have been sued.
It only serves to get a legitimate sport a bad rap. It is glorified street brawling dressed as MMA.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.109.7.82 (talk) 11:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This film had to have been sued

message: Instead of going through a huge fight for his honor, why doesn;t he just call the police, and have this guy arrested for repeat beatings, attempted murder, etcetera? I mean he almost got killed, and the generic girl eh tries to win from the bad guyh says he hurts her. they'll probably make some excuse like they pay off the police...awful.....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.246.246 (talk) 04:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it's a work of fiction, not an accurate depiction of life (see monomyth). Although I agree it seems like a very poorly strung together plot. I also agree that the talk page is for the discussion of how to improve the article, and not for discussing the subject of the article itself. Thank you. Calgary (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ridiculous plot idea

message: Stop with 'Headstrong' by Trapt.  It all started with '...To Be Loved' by Papa Roach.  Now many songs are being used in the film's advertisements. 'Headstrong' is not the sole song usage for the film. MeanChe (talk) 17:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple Songs in Advertisements

message: Seems to me we have a user review in the middle of the article. I posted a POV. Matthew Glennon (talk) 21:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC
==Vandalism==.,n.,
vandalmalism
Im deleting this from the critical reception becouse it is obviosly a vandalism
"This movie was great Critics do nothing but try to act like they actually know shit and the do nothing but sit in the offices and masturbate to horrible movies that only people that have alzheimers like because they can't remember how bad they really are fucking douchebags."
Please say this in forums.
Hakwam (talk) 04:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: User Review in Article

message: OK, I asked the question here if I went too far or not far enough in reducing the "Plot" section to smaller size (see the top paragraph). The same unsigned user, however, ignored this and just went right in 5 times and readded what I consider unnecessary, clogging information. So I went in to revert.
 
I am happy to discuss changes, but unsigned, unexplained reverts to quagmired, overlong Plot sections I will revert- then explain my actions here. If this seems a touch macho It is not meant to. Lincoln muadib (talk) 23:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I responded above.  Don't know if my view of it is acceptable or not, and I didn't add anything into the article itself.  But for what it's worth, see above posted comment.Kp.murphy (talk) 21:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: If you don't explain it, I'll revert it

message: Seems like a 14 year old boy wrote this awful movie.
a dont tink so lad dis iz an amazing film showing da arts ufc/mma and shows dat u rr all rong an i am right .
This is Actually written by some schmo who's only other writing credit was Homeward Bound 2 (he only converted the book into a screenplay, didn't come up with the story)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by VerdolfOctane (talk • contribs) 05:01, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not without a source. Please see WP:OR.--SidiLemine 13:19, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Who wrote this?

message: I removed a section titled "Filming" from the page because that term is, in the film industry, identical to the term "Production," which was included earlier in the article.  Also, the information written in the aforementioned "Filming" section didn't add any relevant OR sourced material that wasn't already a part of the "Production" section.Kp.murphy (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed "Filming" Section

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Never Back Down. 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://archive.is/20130122124039/http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080315/ENT02/803150306/1035/LIFE to http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20080315%2FENT02%2F803150306%2F1035%2FLIFE
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080318092823/http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/movies/ny-etnever5611537mar14,0,6903373.story to http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/movies/ny-etnever5611537mar14,0,6903373.story
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: Why is amber heard not listed as a cast member. She is the female lead actress of the film 71.167.77.4 (talk) 11:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: She got edited out by someone. (see history: 02:27, 10 May 2022‎ by 2001:56a:f4b0:fb00:db0:34cb:9d1:944) I reverted that edit. 109.14.189.11 (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amber heard not listed as a cast member