Talk:The Last Dragon (2004 film)

message: I'm working on merging the two articles, does anyone know when this aired in hte UK?--NeilEvans 02:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Air date

message: No, this is a Fictional Docudrama, labeling it as a mockumentary implies that it is done with comedic intent.
Razielsr
:Isn't this more of a mockumentary than a docudrama? Pentagram16 02:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Si. A page move is probably in order. Kuru talk 03:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Docu/Mock 

message: :Image:TheLastDragon.PNG 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:TheLastDragon.PNG

message: The article is written in a primarily in-universe manner.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.164.178 (talk) 07:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: In Universe Manner

message: This article has been identified as containing an excessive quantity of non-free content. Per the Foundation's requirement to keep non-free media use minimal, and per Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria #3, the non-free images on this article have been removed. Please note:
*The presence of a fair use rationale for this article on an image description page does not make it acceptable for a given use. 
*Blanket restoration of the non-free images that have been removed can and most likely will be reverted, with subsequent reporting action possible. 
*If some restoration is desired, careful consideration of exactly what non-free media to use must be made, paying special attention to WP:NFCC #1 and #8. In most cases non-free media needs to be tied directly to the prose of the article, most preferably with inline citations tying the discussion to secondary sources regarding the image per Wikipedia:Verifiability. 
If this is a list type article, please read the WP:NFLISTS guideline. If you wish to dispute this removal, it may be helpful to read WP:OVERUSE, as it answers a number of typical questions and responses to removals such as this. If after reading these, you still feel there is grounds for restoration of most or all of the media that have been removed, please post to Wikipedia talk:Non-free content.  ΔT The only constant 13:41, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of non-free images on this article 

message: This article has no third-party sources (except the rather unreliable IMDb reference), and the sections 'synopsis', 'dragon biology and behaviour' and 'dragon species' may not pass the undue rule and read a lot like fancruft. The first and second sections cite no sources at all (since May 2014), the third section cites primary sources that actually don't show what they say (namely, the different "dragon species"; instead one just sees general trailers of the film), so those don't even count as references. I propose that all three sections be removed, or seriously abridged with at least one reliable source per section. Since the first and second section have already had unreferenced templates since May, and the references of the third section don't count either, I will remove all three sections if no other user tries to improve the situation within three days. Greetings, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 18:34, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing that in 9 days time no one has taken the effort of improving the references, I will now start the cleanup and remove all unsourced material. I'll leave only an essential summary based on the NY Times review I found about it. Greetings, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:25, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's an awful long synopsis. Sgerbic (talk) 03:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Copypaste of almost entire article removed
50.121.161.89 (talk) 18:44, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Note:  WP:FILMPLOT states "Plot summaries for feature films should be between 400 and 700 words" - Currently the synopsis is 2615 words - so about 3/4 of the synopsis needs to be removed. - Arjayay (talk) 19:06, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2015 

message: I have reverted the page move to Dragons: A Fantasy Made Real  as The Last Dragon was the original title.The article has been under several titles:- 
*The Last Dragon (docudrama) - As created in September 2006 
*The Last Dragon (Mockumentary) - Moved there in November 2007  
*The Last Dragon (Docudrama/Fantasy) - Moved there in January 2008
*The Last Dragon (2004 TV series) - Moved there in July 2009
*The Last Dragon (2004 film) - Moved there in April 2013 
Other than the slight change from "TV series" to "film", it has, therefore, been stable under the current title for well over 5 years.Any further move will need consensus before being implemented - Arjayay (talk) 13:17, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Move