Jump to content

Talk:Q Into the Storm

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Possible sources

[edit]

GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:45, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The missing colon

[edit]

I see nothing in naming conventions that precludes "Q: (etc)" as a title, and it appears that the article was initially created that way. Colons are problematic only in certain cases. --2601:444:380:8C00:8512:3992:73F9:FBE4 (talk) 00:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Try clicking Q: Into the Storm and you will see why it can't be done. It is explained at the naming conventions page: Article titles cannot begin with an interwiki or interlanguage prefix, or namespace alias. "Q:" is a prefix for Wikiquote. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:53, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(I have a COI.) @GorillaWarfare: FYI, Hoback told me in one of our conversations during production that the title of the film would be "Q". I'm wondering whether "Into the Storm" is a subtitle. If reliable sources are using it as part of the title, I guess this doesn't matter. But I thought I'd tell you. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 09:14, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know. I can certainly see why sources would include the subtitle to avoid confusion. GorillaWarfare (talk) 12:53, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What about naming it Q׃ Into the Storm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.213.148.106 (talk) 11:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No. Omitting the character we can't use, with a note as to why, is far preferable to using a similar-looking character with a totally different meaning. GorillaWarfare (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What about Q​: Into the Storm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.209.227.132 (talk) 02:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The title can't begin with "Q:" for the technical reasons mentioned above. GorillaWarfare (talk) 14:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the same as above. Try clicking Q​: Into the Storm and you will see why it can be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.209.227.132 (talk) 21:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I only looked at the colon and not the space. Again, convention is just to omit the colon, not use unusual characters in the title. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@GorillaWarfare: I suppose perhaps the convention could change. U+200B, the character used, is a ZWSP. Perhaps a ZWNJ would make more semantic sense, when the conventions were come up with Unicode was not yet universal. Those with more technical experience could perhaps give reasons for and against a convention change, but I think it's at least worth considering. I'll have to think about it more, before raising it at WT:TITLE. (If indeed further thought doesn't make me reject the idea as you have, it very well could do.) Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 15:13, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly would be interested to follow any discussion there, if you do decide to raise it. I don't think I have the technical expertise to give any input, but I'd be curious to see what those who do have to think. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Will this be more or less silly than somebody having to SSH into the server and use Bash to create a redirect at Gadget:Invention, Travel, & Adventure? jp×g 10:35, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"At the end of the series, Hoback concludes that Ron Watkins is Q."

[edit]

@Ktgriggs: Thank you for including an edit summary in your removal of this line. However the source cited inline does say that "What it locates in that gloom, among other things, is the apparent identity of Q himself: Ron Watkins." GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:42, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does the reception section accurately reflect actual reception?

[edit]

Because I'm heavily featured in this, I think I have a COI, so not making changes. However, GorillaWarfare wrote the section before the release of the article, and it's heavily based on early reviews. After the documentary got its public release, more positive ones followed. Several of the ones listed on Metacritic[1] aren't in the article. The documentary certainly didn't receive glowing reviews (and to be clear, I have no financial stake in its success or failure. I receive no royalties; didn't even get an appearance fee), but I think the article is overly harsh towards it based on its omission of CNN, Daily Beast, and Decider reviews. I can propose text if she doesn't want to write it. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 16:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ack, I meant to circle back to it after the full series was out but it totally slipped my mind. Thanks for the ping! GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just took a pass at adding in some new reviews. I did include both the CNN and Daily Beast reviews that you mention, though I omitted Decider (which is owned by the deprecated New York Post). GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@GorillaWarfare: That looks perfect to me. You're quite right about Decider, I didn't notice its ownership. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 15:14, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Q_Into_the_Storm&oldid=1195560852"