Talk:Enigma (2001 film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Film (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the War films task force.
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.

The criticism section refers to the Hollywoodisation - is that part of the story different to the book ? -- Beardo 05:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Enigma film.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Enigma film.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 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 06:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Broken link[edit]

The Link #4 contains a slash the filename "http://...blah.html/" ^ The enigma of Alan Turing - The Guardian London, 19 June 2007 retrieved 2007-08-09. Removing the slash should fix the problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Alan Turing[edit]

I'm dismayed to see only a minimal reference (Alan Turing's name, with a link to a general article on Turing) to the fact that the real codebreaker Alan Turing doesn't get a mention. What is going on here is a classic case of 'de-gaying'. The real hero - who of course was gay and was imprisoned for it after the war by a scandalously ungrateful nation - is turned into a straight one, surely for no good reason other than fear of scaring off audiences. The 'Criticism' section of this article makes things worse by focusing entirely on the insult to Poland's role in and before the Second World War (the traitor just happened to be Polish). This is very fair criticism, of course, but it would surely be fairer if the insult to Turing's memory were mentioned and explained in the same section. While masquerading as a portrayal of historical fact, the film distorts it again and again. (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Following on from my previous comment, I now see that the Dutch version of this article mentions Turing at length, in a section entitled 'History and fiction'. It also adds a justification for making the traitor Polish (he supposedly lost a brother in the Katyn massacre), but emphasises that this element is equally fictitious - which to my mind just goes to show how far the filmmakers were prepared to depart from historical reality. For once the English version of a Wikipedia article - which unfortunately is the one everyone is guided to by Google (especially since the film is English-language) - is less detailed, and above all less accurate, than one in another language. In this case there's no particular reason why it should be the Dutch version, since the topic isn't related to Holland - the Dutch version simply provides more information. (talk) 14:33, 26 July 2015 (UTC)