Talk:Who the Fuck Is Jackson Pollock?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film. Article upgrading needed: You can help! WP:IA   Stub to Start-Class Upgrading Instructions for Films Note that instructions for articles on other types of film topics within the scope of WikiProject Films are currently under development. To contribute in upgrading this stub article to Start class, the following requirements must be met: Significant intro (list the title, alternate titles, year released, director, actors starring in the film, summary of headings, etc.) Film infobox ({{infobox film}}) Picture: Consult WikiProject Free Images for freely released images from a film shoot, opening, or other relevant free image. Non-free and unlicensed images are to be avoided if at all possible, but if used should include a detailed fair use rationale. (An image is not required for start class if unavailable.) Plot summary Include cast and crew information. At least two other developed sections of information (production, reception (including box office figures), awards and honors, themes, differences from novel or TV show, soundtrack, sequels, DVD release, etc.) Categories (by year, country, language, and genre(s))  Helpful links: WP:BETTER, WP:LEAD, WP:REF, WP:WAF Once this article has fulfilled these requirements, the film can be reassessed to Start class and this template will be removed automatically.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

[edit] The Ring of Truth

Veridicality of the Fingerprint

Currently text refers to a "claim of a partial fingerprint". I believe this dramatically understates the case and that the film is important because it contrasts with exceptional clarity the scientific approach to truth vs. the other thing. The text "claim of " is of the other thing. Since this is virtually a current event, the current value of the object in question will be the determinant and if it sells for more than a certain amount (say $25 million USD, half it's valuation if it had accepted provenance) then the "claim", while it will then be no more factual than it is now, will have become an established fact. Lycurgus (talk) 17:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Title

I think the title of thise page should be changed to an edited version, but show up in searches for the original name. And, the name should be used within the article for the sake of full disclosure. Any suggestions? --InvisibleDiplomat₆⁶₆ 21:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

No, because this is against policy, as we've already notified you on your talk page. —  scetoaux (T|C) 21:27, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Even the title on the poster is edited. It seems to be a weak dilusion of what the original author of the cited work intended. Great debating skills btw. --InvisibleDiplomat₆⁶₆ 21:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

IMDb lists it as fuck. It would help to know what the title screen of the movie itself says. Also, do not insult people by calling their opinions "dilusions" or calling into question their debating skills. For someone who claims to know policy, you seem to be quite adept at ignoring it. The359 (talk) 22:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I think Twaz might have meant to say "weak dilution", in the sense that using the alternative title is only a slight deviation from the filmmaker's intent. Wikipedia is not a debating club. We're here to build an encyclopedia. Bovlb (talk) 07:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)