Talk:Road Movie trilogy

Fair use rationale for Image:Kings of the Road 3.jpg

Image:Kings of the Road 3.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 04:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move this page, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 14:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be renamed to Road (film series) to bring it inline with the naming convention pertaining to film series. Let's discuss. - LA @ 10:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Please state whether or not you support the renaming of this article.

Oppose - I know the nominator is well aware of the consensus of the debate over renaming Category:Road movies. It's an established term, and it appears to be the established name for this series of three films by Wim Wenders. — WiseKwai 12:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Kings of the Road 3.jpg

Image:Kings of the Road 3.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 20:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

Actually I created this article under an old name 9 years ago. In all that time it has no references. I regret starting it, and recommend deleting it. Dazedbythebell (talk) 23:35, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a legitimate topic as the trilogy has received significant coverage in reliable sources such as The Guardian and The New Yorker. If desired, the topic could be merged into the Wim Wenders article, but I oppose outright deletion. Pburka (talk) 23:49, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I support the merging idea. Dazedbythebell (talk) 10:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose merging, at least for now. I think it's come a long way since the prod, if I don't say so myself. Ribbet32 (talk) 03:42, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think the article is worth staying now, and I think we can close the merge discussion as it did not gain any consensus. Dazedbythebell (talk) 20:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]