Talk:Whirlpool (1950 film)

Requested move 31 October 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Closing as no consensus per WP:Naming conventions (films). Redirect created (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whirlpool (1949 film) → Whirlpool (1950 film) – This movie is listed as a 1949 film in some places and a 1950 film in others. A recent edit changed this to a 1950 release based on how AFI lists it, which leaves the title currently contradicting the rest of the article. Either that change needs to be reverted or this article needs to be moved. Parkfly20 (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support Unless someone digs up a great source to show otherwise. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 18:53, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose. Deference is due to the authoritative AFI Catalog which indicates that the filming occurred during June–July 1949, but the official release was in January 1950. However, AFI also lists film reviews in trade publications Variety and Hollywood Reporter (November 23, 1949), Motion Picture Herald (November 26, 1949), Motion Picture Daily and Film Daily (November 28, 1949) and Box Office (December 3, 1949), indicating that it had a brief unofficial release in Los Angeles on November 28, 1949 to qualify for Academy Awards nominations (it ultimately received none). Although IMDb also lists it as a 1950 release, all other sources (TCMDb, AllMovie, TVGuide, Motion Picture Guide, Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide, Steven H. Scheuer's Movies on TV, TimeOut Film Guide and Halliwell's Film Guide) list it as a 1949 film. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 04:13, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. WP:Naming conventions (films) recommends disambiguating a film with "the year of its first verifiable release (including film festival screenings)". In this case, the film had a release in 1949, making the current setup the appropriate one per the guidelines. The issue of the release dates should be covered in the article body.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. 20th Century Fox, the studio behind the movie, considers this a 1949 film. Just look at the DVD they released. Thismightbezach (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Release date[edit]

The posts above actually bring no proofs regarding the Nov date, just conjectures. The AFI guys used those 1949 magazines just to trace a kind of "chronology", as usual. The fact that those Nov magazines were consulted doesn't mean it had a release; moreover, there were plenty of in-advance reviews. Like this one. They used to write these to inform/help theatremen. Besides, on the same magazine issue, there is ACTUAL proof this was released in January 1950, as the AFI confirms. This is a Dec 31 article, and it's among the January titles. And this is the Harrison's Reports listing it under "Beginning of 1950 Season". Further proof is this January article reading "dual world premiere on January 13". This will be changed back to 1950. Regards.KenjiMizoguchi (talk) 11:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]