Talk:Clockers (film): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:28, 21 January 2009

Books Stub‑class

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Film Stub‑class

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

this description does not do a good job of taking an objectional view Paskari 01:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be fixed

Why is the plot here? I suggest we delete the whole section, or at least cut it down to a short paragraph that doesn't give everything away. If I have time, I might do it.Dean Sayers 11:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It says spoilers. Don't like it, don't read it. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia and cutting out stuff that would be spoilers isn't encyclopedic. 74.139.197.26 06:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedic does not mean blow-by-blow he did this, he did that, we see this, just then that. A plot summary *summarizes* the story to the essentials. This is one of the worst-written plot summaries I've seen on Wikipedia. Most are too long by at least half -- this is just trying to recount visuals instead of exposition. --Dhartung | Talk 02:50, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 13:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Clockers.jpg

Image:Clockers.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) 20:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shot in New Mexico?

Someone tagged this movie as having been shot in new mexico. Is there any real fact behind this?

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 [[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 20:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
+== Shot in New Mexico? ==
+Someone tagged this movie as having been shot in new mexico. Is there any real fact behind this?