Talk:Emak Bakia

	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
	This article is supported by the French cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Lemma[edit]

Why the hyphen? I've never seen it written that way except here. I propose a move to Emak Bakia (film), unless someone has better evidence to the contrary. --BjKa (talk) 10:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right@BjKa. Let me check again and I'll move it. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Larousse, Britannica, Tate, Centre Pompidou do NOT hyphenate, but the hyphen has spread, so I'll leave a note. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:03, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a copy of the film which bears a title card with the hyphen. Considering it's marked as being from Raymond Rohauer (an American distributor notorious for making unauthorized copies and adding his own title cards), it's very possible he added the misspelling and that version ended up making the rounds. hinnk (talk) 03:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]