Talk:The Adventures of Tintin (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Writers on strike?[edit]

The writers strike is named as the reason Steven Moffat couldn't complete the second script. Sure about that? First of all: He's not an american! Second: He's not a member of the guild. Third: I'm fairly sure they mean second draft instead of second script, that's why they brought in the other two writers. Fourth: He couldn't finish the new draft because of his commitment to Doctor Who Series 5, which started fimling around juli, just a few months after he stopped working on Tintin. Fifth: The strike happened in late 2007- early 2008, SM wrote Tintin in 2008. Sixth: Is there ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that he stopped because of the writers strike?! If there is, I'd like to see it. Stop blaming the writers strike!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.242.208.138 (talk) 23:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Just saw the article, so never mind. Still baffled as to why a british writer would be affected by the writers strike, though...

Opening Paragraph : Writers[edit]

The opening paragraph only mentions Edgar Wright, not Joe Cornish or Stephen Moffat. As this article is protected i cant change that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.102.212 (talk) 16:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Concerns[edit]

First of all, this article should be at Tintin (film), considering that there is no other film named Tintin. Secondly, is it really appropriate to have an article for this film so early? There is only talk about it at the moment, and we saw what happened with talks stalling with The Hobbit. The planning stage seems more appropriate in a broader article until the film actually enters production, such as what's being done for future Spider-Man films at Spider-Man film series#Future. I'm not advocating the removal of information; the content seems fine, but it should be housed under somewhere like The Adventures of Tintin until there is actual production. Lots of films usually get announced and explored, but don't always pan out. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 16:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I am willing only to answer the first question, because I don't see myself knowledgeable enough to answer your other questions. There is already been an other Tintin film. It was called "Tintin et les oranges bleus."ArvinT. (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

There is also a Tintin and the lake of the sharks (animation) (Tintin et le lac au requins). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.147.92 (talk) 15:16, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

There is also a live action Tintin movie : Tintin and the Blue Oranges. --Simon Huet-- 21:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

There have been six Tintin films prior to the latest, and none of which is called simply Tintin. The Crab With the Golden Claws, stop-motion animation 1948; Tintin and the Mystery of the Golden Fleece, live-action 1961; Tintin and the Blue Oranges, live-action 1964; The Calculus Case (a.k.a. The Calculus Affair), limited cel animation 1966; The Temple of the Sun, cel animation 1969; Tintin and the Lake of Sharks (a.k.a. The Mystery of Shark Lake), cel animation 1972. Jock123 (talk) 22:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

IMDb indicates that there are no other films solely titled Tintin. I am requesting a move to Tintin (film). —Erik (talkcontrib) - 16:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

This article has been renamed from Tintin (2009 film) to Tintin (film) as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 07:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Citations for use[edit]

Pointless[edit]

"Spielberg had decreed in 2002 he was searching for a 16 or 17-year old for the part, rather than a 13-year old."

Just wondering what the point of that is. No where in the books does it say Tintin is 13...or 16 or 17 for that matter, so why mention this. I'm thinking of removing this.

WHLfan (talk) 06:05, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Be bold. ;) Alientraveller (talk) 10:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

In the very early days when Titin was "made", it was taking one page of a neewspaper and Tintin has been since then a very young reporter, younger than 20, possibly as young as 17, even if it is today not mentioned anywhere explicitly, this is really his age, if I may say. People have interviewed Herge countless times and if one search one can find an age (I think 17) in some documented original prints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.147.92 (talk) 15:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Peter Jackson template[edit]

The template {{Peter Jackson}} covers the films that are directed by him, and Tintin is not (going to be) one of those. I am not sure if the template belongs in this film article. —Erik (talkcontrib) 17:04, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

The template can cover the films he produces as well. Alientraveller (talk) 17:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Nevermind, when I looked at the revision, I only saw "Films directed by Peter Jackson". I didn't realize there were some changes going on with the template. —Erik (talkcontrib) 17:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Let's talk about it at Template talk:Peter Jackson#Fine-tuning the template. —Erik (talkcontrib) 17:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Film coverage[edit]

The Economist had an article about Tintin and touched the film:

Full citation: "A very European hero". The Economist. 389 (8611): 82. December 20th 2008 – January 2nd 2009. Check date values in: |date= (help)Erik (talkcontrib) 22:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

This is sourced via The Washington Times. Do you think it's worth adding the offline cite? Alientraveller (talk) 23:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Nevermind. :P I looked at the first paragraph which was up to Hegre's death and didn't see it. This must be the sixth time I've offered material already included in an article that you already take good care of, AT. —Erik (talkcontrib) 23:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


Plot[edit]

Are we absolutely sure that the story will be an amalgamation of The Secret of the Unicorn and The Crab with the Golden Claws? It seems very odd to have the former without Red Rackham's Treasure, especially as Claws doesn't link up with either of them. The reference to this info can't be accessed online, so I'd like to vote for deleting this until a more easily verifiable source can be found. Marthiemoo (talk) 19:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

There's a contradictions: is THE SHOOTING STAR WILL BE IN THE MOVIE? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.230.150.82 (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Well, "The Shooting Star"'s storyline does differ from The Secret of the Unicorn (by default, I'd say), but is that reason enough to assume the film makers won't use it at all? The article's most recent edit stipulates (in a rather sloppy manner, by the way) it won't be used, but I'd like to see that referenced... Jellevc (talk) 13:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the modern "story writers" can use any part of any Tintin books as a source for information that might be needed in addition to the above mentioned books in that series. In fact for most people like me who grew up with Tintin when watching the movie it will part of the life of Tintin rather than a "stand alone" movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.147.92 (talk) 15:26, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Just went to the premiere here in France. It's mostly The Crab with the Golden Claws and The Secret of the Unicorn. Nothing from the Red Rackham's Treasure is used and it will be the story for the second movie. --Simon Huet-- 21:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Refimprove tag[edit]

I have removed this, as far as I can see the article is very well sourced. The lead lacks sources but sources are not required here. Anything still lacking sources can be tagged with citation needed tags. Rehevkor 01:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 86.161.80.10, 23 January 2011[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}} how pout Nickelodeon will co-produce the film instead of DreamWorks

86.161.80.10 (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

There's no mentions of DreamWorks being involved in this. Only Paramount and Sony seem to be involved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.220.176.213 (talk)
Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Logan Talk Contributions 00:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Maybe remove DreamWorks from the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.156.105.186 (talk) 22:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Annapbell, 18 May 2011[edit]

Please add -- Writing duo Doug Miro and Carlo Bernard were hired in 2002 and penned the original along with a script for a sequel. At the time Stephen Daldry was on board as director. Stephen Moffat later rewrote the earlier scripts by Miro and Bernard.

Annapbell (talk) 01:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Not done Provide a reliable source and a more specific edit, like where you want it added. CTJF83 16:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

to Precede ^ 25. Carly Mayberry (October 2, 2007). "Scribe Moffat on 'Tintin' case". The Hollywood Reporter. Archived from the original on October 18, 2007. Please add -- Writing duo Doug Miro and Carlo Bernard were hired in 2002 and penned the original along with a script for a sequel. At the time Stephen Daldry was on board as director. Stephen Moffat later rewrote the earlier scripts by Miro and Bernard. Source- http://collider.com/doug-miro-carlo-bernard-interview-national-treasure-3-tintin/27870/ Annapbell (talk) 00:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Not done not a reliable source. See identifying reliable sources. —James (TalkContribs)10:53am 00:53, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Movie Title[edit]

Okay, so we all know "The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn" was the movie's official title, however all publicity material (trailers, even the poster used in this article's infobox) only use the title "The Adventures of Tintin". Perhaps the name's been officially changed to not include "Secret of the Unicrorn"? Does anyone know more?207.237.208.153 (talk) 15:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed that, too. I'd been going to add a section to this discussion page about this, but you beat me to it. Due to the amount of material that simply calls the film "The Adventures of Tintin," I think the article should be moved to "The Adventures of Tintin (film)" (unless someone finds enough evidence that the name of the movie has NOT changed). Alphius (talk) 03:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Even the movie's official website simply calls the film "The Adventures of Tintin." Alphius (talk) 03:15, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Here in the The Netherlands the official title ís "The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn". I think this is also true for some other countries. I guess in the US the movie is named The Adventures of Tintin. I think this should be mentioned in the introduction, right? Podex (talk) 10:32, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
It is officially called THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN - THE SECRET OF THE UNICORN according to the BBFC certificate.[1] It is purely for marketing purposes it is referred to as "The Adventures of Titin" as a shorthand. This shouldn't really be debated: many movies have shorthand titles used during marketing (like Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 = HP7), it doesn't matter. The Wikipedia entry should always use the full official title, and per the BBFC, it is THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN - THE SECRET OF THE UNICORN. Dizagaox (talk) 1:28, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Spielberg-written article on the film[edit]

A Spielberg-written article on the film, published 5 Oct 2011, appears here. Might be of use for the page.81.156.126.158 (talk) 10:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 18 October 2011[edit]

The current score on Rotten Tomatoes is 83% (as per 18-10), and not 75% as stated in the page

Gauche unie (talk) 12:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Updated --Jnorton7558 (talk) 13:19, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

UK Release Dates[edit]

The article says the film will be released in the UK on the 26th when its out already. FM talk to me | show contributions ]  15:32, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Budget?[edit]

I actually find that an interesting piece of info to have. Anyone care to add? Jørgen88 (talk) 16:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 83.70.252.145 , 30 October 2011[edit]

In the "Plot" section, spelling errors need to be corrected: model for "modle"; Karaboudjan for 'Krarabujan'.

83.70.252.145 (talk) 19:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for the suggestions. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Haddoque[edit]

What's the source for the weird spelling of Sir Francis haddock's name? In the books, it's the same as the fish. If its really "que" in the film, perhaps that itself is worth noting. Cormullion (talk) 20:19, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The source is Hergé's original book: 'Haddoque' is meant to be the old French spelling of the name Haddock, as used by his ancestor.--Stelmaris (talk) 23:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

page 6 of the Secret of the Unicorn gives "haddock". That's the original for the purposes of this article, surely.? Page 14 gives an " olde englishe" spelling, signed on a manucript by Sir Francis himself, but it's "haddocke". Next you'll be calling snowy struppi :) Cormullion (talk) 23:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry - I was actually referring to the original French edition where Haddock's ancestor is the Chevalier de Hadoque. (Snowy, of course, has always been Milou....) Since this an article in English, perhaps it should adopt the old English spelling of Haddocke when referring to Sir Francis?--Stelmaris (talk) 05:33, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I think all the Tintin pages on the English wiki use the translated names, rather than the originals. Interesting though that in the French version Haddock was a French sailor - working for King Charles II, I suppose it's possible... (Yes, Struppi was the German version of Milou, my mistake...:) I"ve changed the main page to Haddocke, which may be the best. Cormullion (talk) 07:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The best solution, I agree. And, by the way, the chevalier de Hadoque didn't work for Charles II in the French edition, but for Louis XIV of France - who both reigned at the same time in the 17th century. Interesting that even the kings were 'translated', so to speak! No wonder no-one can agree on Haddock's nationality...--Stelmaris (talk) 14:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Plot rewrite needed[edit]

Can someone who has seen this film - I haven't - please rewrite the plot section urgently? The current version has atrocious grammar and doesn't even make much sense. Mezigue (talk) 09:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

had a go. Not sure whether one's supposed to avoid including spoilers, or describe the whole thing, though. Cormullion (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Nice one. There is no need to avoid spoilers in a plot section as it contains them by definition so you can go ahead with the end. Mezigue (talk) 22:15, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I think you've done a very good job! No point in painstakingingly describing every scene or plot line, and the actual ending isn't spoilt. No doubt though there will be plenty of fans who will want to add every detail, however trivial... --Stelmaris (talk) 18:33, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

thanks! I'd like to see the film again and take notes... :) Cormullion (talk) 19:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
  • The plot may need to be made NPOV. A couple adjectives don't seem to fall under the guidelines... (sinister, mysterious...) Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:31, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
That would be POV when describing real life stuff, but a film presents a point of view which it is fair to reflect in the summary. Mezigue (talk) 13:46, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I'd probably leave commentary like that for a referenced characters section, as how the film intends to present a character and how a character is actually received can be quite different. Jar-Jar Binks being a glaring example. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

External reference #18 ("Tintin and the Movie Moguls?") points to an obsolete link (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article1830463.ece). Should be updated to http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/culture/film_and_tv/film/article65122.ece Penoovindos (talk) 13:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

I would like to see some reference to the level of violence in this film for the information of people wishing to take young children to see it. chrismccoll (chrismccoll) 07:17, 02 November 2011 (CET)

I think the IMDB does this for films, not Wikipedia, although IMDB hasn't done it yet, I think. When I saw the film, there were a few 4-year olds who shouldn't have been there: they got bored/confused, and started shouting :) Cormullion (talk) 11:01, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Plot[edit]

I've removed the plot. Why print it so soon when only Belgium has been able to watch it? RAP (talk) 18:26 9 November 2011 (UTC)

i think most of Europe has seen it, it's no longer in the cinemas much. I suppose the US hasn't, seen it though. Perhaps that's unusual - normally, we can read the spoilers if we want to before the film's out. I think the plot should go back, since it's interesting for people who know the books. Cormullion (talk) 20:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
RAP, don't be silly; your personal preference does not trump content guidelines. WP:SPOILER states: "Spoilers are no different from any other content and should not be deleted solely because they are spoilers." Improve the plot summary if you're familiar with the film, but don't remove it simply because it might spoil readers. María (yllosubmarine) 20:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 23 November 2011[edit]

Please change the names of the characters played by Mackenzie Cook and Daniel Mays from "Ernie and Allan" to "Tom and Allan" as these are the names of the characters in the source material book and also in the film. And also the actress/opera singer Kim Stengel, plays a character called Bianca Castafiore, a recurring character in the series of books, who is a much larger character than some of the character/actors on the page. I have found this information from IMDB and my information is supported by the book "The Art of The Adventures of Tintin". Thank you.

Chicken360700 (talk) 18:45, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Not done. IMDB isn't generally regarded as a good source. I looked at the official us movie site and the US comic site but neither of them listed these characters. The movie site listed the actors, but didn't give their character names for this movie. Just let it go for another week and we'll have the official cast list from the movie itself that we can use as a reference. If you'd like any further help, contact me on my user talk page. You might instead want to put a {{help me}} template up on your own user talk, or put the {{edit semi-protected}} template back up on this page and either way someone will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 05:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Not sure how you managed to miss Mackenzie Crook as Tom on the official us movie site; it states, One of British comedy's best known faces, MACKENZIE CROOK (Tom), ..... The US comic site you refer to isn't a particularly useful reference for film portrayals however, there is a Tom (and an Allan Thompson) listed as minor criminal characters, albeit from different stories - there's no Ernie though. "The Art of The Adventures of Tintin" also has Crook as Tom (page 74) - and Stengel as Castafiore (page 80).FanRed XN | talk 03:06, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Cast[edit]

please add Kim Stengel as cast for Bianca Castafiore. the role is an important part of the plot and also a well known recurring character in the tintin books.--46.4.240.197 (talk) 19:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Puffin Let's talk! 20:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

But Renee Fleming is the voice of Bianca Castafiore, not Stengel.

<r> http://www.reneefleming.com/buzz/ <r>

Edit request on 26 December 2011[edit]

In the plot-summary section, several critical omissions are made: please add reference to Tintin's coming home to find his apartment ransacked, to the appearance and shooting death of Barnaby, and to his pointing out letters on the newspaper he's carrying. Mention should be made of the detective's visit, after ward, in which Tintin explains this, toMr. Silk's taking of Tintin's wallet just after, and to Tintin's being questioned about the matter aboard the Karaboudjan. Also remember, at the end, to mention that Barnaby is revealed posthumously as an Interpol agent. Nicholas Ivan Hentschel (talk) 23:27, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Sorry, but the plot summary is long enough and the suggested additions are not that critical. Alandeus (talk) 10:51, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Hergé's cameo appearance and in-jokes throughout movie[edit]

The artist who does Tintin's portrait is Hergé! Rather unique tip to the creator of the stories. Image of Hergé can be found here. It is also obvious the movie is an endless stream of reference to other stories in the Tintin world, In-joke's. It needs a note in synopsis or plot (may add something later) --Flightsoffancy (talk) 15:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

a good image of Herge is here,, and this site lists a history of Herge appearances! Many done himself in his books. Seems to be sufficient support. Flightsoffancy (talk) 20:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 December 2011[edit]

At the beginning of the film, there is a small tribute to Herge. His likeness is reflected as the artist who is in the park drawing a portrait of Tintin. What he hands to 3D animated Tintin is the drawing of what he traditionally looks like in the books. A nice touch worth noting in the article.

Marcusewertjohns (talk) 04:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Bility (talk) 22:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Note the entry above this one already pointed out this fact. Flightsoffancy (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Source[edit]

I found a source discussing Tintin fans' reactions:

WhisperToMe (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Renee Flemming is the voice of Bianca Castafiore[edit]

Opera Star Renee Flemming is the voice of Bianca Castafiore, not to be confused with Kim Stengel. Why this is noted late in the credits is totally inexcusable. You can check out Ms. Flemming's webpage to read more. Greenbuddy (talk) 18:37, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

[2]

Edit request on 3 March 2012[edit]

Please change the part "performance capture 3D film" into "3D motion capture adventure film" because it is the genre of the film.

96.236.73.26 (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Not done needs a source. Also, see WP:GWAR gwickwire | Leave a message 19:47, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Is It Spielberg??[edit]

Has anyone mentioned that the character Sakharine looks an awful lot like Spielberg?? --Paul E Musselman 96.236.73.26 (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmmn (talkcontribs) 22:04, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The character is based on the character with the same name in The Secret of the Unicorn. --Oddeivind (talk) 19:04, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Is It Spielberg?[edit]

Has anyone else noticed that the character Sakharine looks an awful lot like Spielberg?? --Paul E Musselman 96.236.73.26 (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmmn (talkcontribs) 22:10, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The Uncanny valley[edit]

I find it interesting that this article seems to make no mention of the Uncanny valley. Most of the people I've talked to thought the animation was "creepy". Since neither myself o r my friends can count as verified sources, perhaps someone with more experience can so some searching and find articles that discuss this movie and that phenomenon?

The Uncanny valley[edit]

I find it interesting that this article seems to make no mention of the Uncanny valley. Most of the people I've talked to thought the animation was "creepy". Since neither myself o r my friends can count as verified sources, perhaps someone with more experience can so some searching and find articles that discuss this movie and that phenomenon? 96.236.73.26 (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.228.6.104 (talk) 06:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request: Sequel info…[edit]

There is a citation (footnote 118) which is used to justify the information that Crystal Balls/ Prisoners would be the sequel, which is based on an assertion in an MTv Article from November last year that Anthony Horowitz had written a script based on these books. That article just isn’t right - no script by Anthony Horowitz was written at that time, he has been publicly saying that he wrote his first draft this year, after completing work on the latest series of Foyle’s War; also, in spite of speculation that those would be the stories used, the producers have yet to confirm any story line. I therefore suggest that the MTV piece is purely speculative, shouldn’t therefore be relied on for corroboration, and ask that those elements be removed. 96.236.73.26 (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jock123 (talkcontribs) 22:36, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection no longer appropriate[edit]

The semi-protection of this article appears to have been in place as "indefinite" since the early pre-production days of the movie (2010?). This appears to be in violation of Wikipedia's "Determining the duration for semi-protection" guidelines, and unnecessarily impedes the efforts of casual users in the global community to make meaningful contributions to Wikipedia. Certainly a movie released in the past should be more stable than a yet-to-be-released film (subject to rumor and speculation); as such, current semi-protection would appear to be unnecessary. I propose that semi-protection be removed from this article. --96.236.73.26 (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.236.73.26 (talk) 18:47, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Not done. Please request at WP:RPP under Un-protection.

Article name[edit]

I believe this article should be renamed The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn, as it is known by this name in most of the world, including New Zealand where it was produced. When other film are released, which will have subtitles, it will also make it clearer on a film series article to differentiate between the films. Frogkermit (talk) 22:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Anyone have any view on this? Frogkermit (talk) 23:53, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Not supported – The movie is primarily American and the displayed poster also says just "The Adventures of Tintin". And the addition "The Secret of the Unicorn" does get mentioned in the first line of the lede, so not problem there. Don't understand the problem though concerning subtitles. Alandeus (talk) 14:02, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Requested move notification[edit]

Hi, people may be interested to comment at the requested move discussion at Talk:Tintin. Thanks, Matty.007 15:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Propose article renamed to The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn[edit]

Even though this has been proposed before, I propose the article be renamed to The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn from it's current name The Adventures of Tintin (film). Not only is the longer name the correct title outside the U.S., the longer name is the only practical way Wikipedia should handle a trilogy of The Adventures of Tintin films, as each article will need a unique and meaningful name. If we prepare now, each of the three articles will ultimately be named "The Adventures of Tintin: [subtitle name here]", while the article named The Adventures of Tintin (film) will be a disambiguation page to the three articles. What are everyone's thoughts? Prhartcom (talk) 05:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 30 January 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved No clear consensus to make this move at this time. Mike Cline (talk) 14:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)



The Adventures of Tintin (film)The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn – This movie started as as single film but performed well so now a trilogy has been planned. Each title in the trilogy will be The Adventures of Tintin: [subtitle name here], for example, The Adventures of Tintin: Prisoners of the Sun. The producers of the second film in the trilogy have stated that this second film will come out this year. I simply propose this rename of the article of the first film to prepare for this imminent release, as we know now that this article's current name The Adventures of Tintin is not descriptive enough. Besides, the movie title of the first film (in everywhere except the US) actually is the full name; the name of the proposed new article name including subtitle: The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn The current existing article would then become a disambiguation page, referring the reader to each of the three articles. So, after I ensured a redirect existed for the proposed new title, and believing the move to be uncontroversial, and after getting some support (see Talk page section immediately above), I used AWB to modify the articles that link to this first film article, changing the first movie's title and its link in those articles to the anticipated new name. After finishing this, a single editor began objecting and reverting these edits, however their reason was strange: They said they wished to preserve what they thought was an American title. As I explained above, American vs. European is not the reason for requesting this title rename. Please express your support for this rename below. Prhartcom (talk) 05:59, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


  • This move was first called for in Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests, and then moved to here (not by me). Here I have copied the discussion that started there:- (Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC))
    • Change to European title to avoid confusion with the upcoming second and third Tintin films. The redirect is preventing me from doing this myself. All pages linking to this article have already been changed (to point to the existing redirect). See article Talk page. – Prhartcom (talk) 04:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    • There is opposition to this move. It is controversial. The user needs to do a Move Request.--JOJ Hutton 04:10, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Apologies, I didn't think this move was controversial. I will do the Move Request. Will the other editor please stop their reverts. Prhartcom (talk) 05:25, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Support by nominator. Prhartcom (talk) 06:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support (nominator doesn't need to support). But straightorward. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support: The subtitle is used throughout the world (except US), and will help differentiate the film from future sequels. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:42, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support: a sensible proposal. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:11, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. We don't preemptively disambiguate. As soon as The Adventures of Tintin: Blah Blah Blah is created, the page should be moved and The Adventures of Tintin (film) should become a disambiguation page. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support: Although risking the wrath of those who take WP:Other stuff exists very seriously, here at Wikipedia we go for Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, not Pirates of the Caribbean (2003 film). Surely the parallels are fairly obvious ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose And I'll tell you why. The proposer wants to use the European title of the film as the title of this article, yet this film was not made by any European film company. There are five production companies listed in the infobox. I'm assuming that the infobox is correct in that. Four of the production companies are from the United States. The lead production company is Stephen Spielberg's Amblin Entertainment. Nickelodeon Movies and The Kennedy/Marshall Company are also listed as production companies and they are both American. I couldn't find much information about "Hemisphere Media Capital", but I did find that it is registered in California and that is also American. WingNut Films is Peter Jacksons production company and that company is registered out of New Zealand. Wikipedia article always use the titles tat are chosen by the production companies in their home country. In the United States, this title is "The Adventures of Tin Tin". The title used for the Marshall/Kennedy production company web site is The Adventures of Tintin. I couldn't find a website for WingNut Films, but Jackson's Special effects company Weta Digital also uses The Adventures of Tintin, not the UK title.
[I clicked on both links you supplied in the previous two sentences, and both images show The Adventures of Tintin, with 'Tintin' in one word, as created by Hergé.] ツ Pdebee.(talk) 21:50, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
I fixed it, but that wasn't the proposal anyway. That was a just a formatting mistake on my part.--JOJ Hutton 22:11, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • The proposer has also given no clear indication that the current title does not conform to Wikipedia's policies and Guidelines. Wikipedia uses the most common name used in reliable English Language sources. Nor has the proposer shown that the current title will be a problem when the next sequel film article is created. This just looks like an attempt to solve a problem that does not exist.
  • In addition, I have no idea why the proposer feels the need to preemptively change every single link on every single article. This IS NOT standard Wikipedia practice. Don't put the cart before the horse. Gain a clear consensus before making disruptive and controversial edits. Edits I must point out are currently being discussed at the edit warring notice board.--JOJ Hutton 21:23, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:CRYSTAL since I see no evidence that a sequel will be produced. The start of filming is a threshold that we use to determine stand-alone articles, and that should be used here to show that a sequel is not guaranteed. The latest news is that Jackson said a sequel would be produced "at some point soon", which does not sound very concrete. We should not re-title this article based on the assumption that there will be a trilogy. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Qualified support: I would have preferred retaining the '(film)' qualifier, in addition to the requested move, in order to differentiate the title of the WP article about the film from the titles of the WP articles about the album [The Secret of the Unicorn] and the video game [The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn (video game)]. Although the title of the WP article about the album was not created with the prefix The Adventures of Tintin, it should have been, because this appellation was always printed on the cover of all albums. The reader familiar with the albums would therefore recognize The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn as the title of the album, which has existed for decades, and not as the title of the recent film.
    So, my qualified vote goes for The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn (film).
    Pdebee.(talk) 22:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. WP:COMMONNAME, and the article name should match the title it uses in its country of production, which in this case is primarily the US. Country is determined by the production companies, not where the film is set or its source material. - Gothicfilm (talk) 22:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment and question (from the nominator) I admit to taking preemptive steps to change the title, in other words, action before the filming takes place, and I am happy to follow guidelines if they say that I should instead have waited (I honestly didn't that know I should). The most I feel that I can be accused of here is trying to be organised. I didn't know this was going to be controversial. I haven't taken any forward steps since this controversy began and don't intend to. Would everyone be comfortable putting everything on hold until the filming starts? Thank-you everyone for weighing in above. Cheers all. Prhartcom (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    But your preemptive mass changes you made yesterday and then abused your rollback tool to edit war over must be reverted back to their pre-dispute status. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that this would not be controversial. US films use the US title of their films as article names, even when there is an English language title hat differs, we always use the titles that the production companies use. This has been a standard for quite a while now. That also goes for the date formats. You mentioned below that the DMY was 'Long established' in the article, but that is false. MDY has been the format that has been used for several years now. Its not a UK film so there is no reason to use DMY in the article and the date formats should be reverted back per WP:DATERET.--JOJ Hutton 22:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    I would like to tell the group that the editor above is busy reverting my original changes, despite the fact that this discussion is ongoing. I would like to ask this editor, once again, to please stop their disruptive reverts. Prhartcom (talk) 23:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    I am truly in favor of seeking consensus here. I would like to ask for calm. I have admitted that I apparently acted rashly. I understand now what Curly Turkey says below about WP:TIES. It probably means, for example, that the Tintin books each have a tie to Belgium. However, I can see that there are no strong ties here: The movie takes place in Europe and Asia while the production company is predominantly U.S.; this movie probably has no tie to any place, I see that now. What are other's thoughts on this? Prhartcom (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    Per WP:BRD. You made a bold edit. I reverted it. Then you misused your rollback tool as a weapon to edit war. You even taunted me in your edit summery, that you were willing to use your Rollback tool to edit war. Just because you are discussing does not mean that the articles shouldn't be reverted back to their pre-dispute status. That is all that I am doing at this time.--JOJ Hutton 23:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    • @Prhartcom: IMHO, your intent was clearly positive and motivated by a desire to improve our encyclopaedia. I will continue to support your effort as I qualified it: it's an article about a film based on an album [The Secret of the Unicorn] that is part of a series of albums [The Adventures of Tintin]. The title of the film uses both the name of the series, followed by the title of the album (as a kind of subtitle in a smaller font) and it would make sense therefore that it be fully qualified as such, and with '(film)' to differentiate it from other WP articles with which it could be confused.
      Keep up the good work you're doing here at the wiki. Face-smile.svg
      With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk) 23:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support some move due to the ambiguous title. This isn't the first Tintin film adaptation by a long shot. It's true that none of the earlier films was titled "The Adventures of Tintin", but that's the common name in English of the comics series, and a casual reader using the search function isn't going to know or care about the details of Wikipedia's title standards where they conflict with natural usage. At the least, it should be The Adventures of Tintin (2011 film). Please note that this comment does not constitute any opinion relating to the open sewer of a so-called discussion of "ties" currently occurring in multiple places on this page. If you're tempted to respond to this comment with some nonsense about "ties", please be further tempted not to do so after all. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 15:11, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I believe we are starting to see consensus that the article title "The Adventures of Tintin (film)" inadequately describes this movie and that a better title must be decided. The suggestion above is reasonable, as is my suggestion and also the suggestion of Pdebee further above. As has been established, we don't have to rename the article right now. Prhartcom (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
But its not a British film, its an American film. Every production company that worked on the film calls the film "The Adventures of Tintin". That is the common name for the film. Wikipedia uses the most common name used in the majority of English language sources. There is no reason to make a change based on any alleged confusion with a sequel that may or may not happen. By the looks of it, it looks as if the sequel is in Development hell anyway, so there can't be any confusion with a film that does to exist, at least by Wikipedia standards.
And I will remind everyone that consensus is not a vote. Consensus is based on the arguments. Since there is no film sequel or even an article that this current title would or could be confused with, there is no reason to change the title.--JOJ Hutton 16:50, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment (from the nominator) I think we are starting to see consensus that predominantly American-made movies should use the American title. That's fine, but as I said in the nomination, American vs. European is not the reason for requesting this title rename. My apologies for making anyone think that. The reason for the request was just an attempt to be organized and neat, as well as to avoid future confusion, when they come out with the two other Tintin movies in the Adventures of Tintin franchise. When they do, this article is going to have a title that is the name of the entire franchise. Fortunately, as has been explained to me, we don't have to rename anything right now, as it's too early, we leave everything the way it is until we're forced to think about it again. I am finished discussing this at this time. Thanks to everyone for their comments! Cheers all. Prhartcom (talk) 22:12, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
    • @Prhartcom: Good move. I sympathize with the subtle challenge we all face here at the English language wiki: the same film was given one title in the USA (a misnomer, as it happens, to those familiar with the works of Hergé) and another (more meaningful) everywhere else in the world. In any case, the prose in our article highlights the different titles across English-speaking countries; so, that's alright. And since the equivalent article at the French wiki has the meaningful title anyway, the francophone readers of Tintin probably couldn't care less about the present debate here at the anglophone wiki. I will continue to support your initiative to have clear article titles when the next films are released; let's just hope the studios' marketing department(s) get it right next time! Face-wink.svg Thank you once again for caring so much. With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk) 21:29, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Eirk. The proposal would be a reasonable one if other articles existed, in which case I would support it as a sensible solution. At the moment though it is not necessary. Betty Logan (talk) 00:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Jojhutton's and Erik's sound analysis. Cavarrone 11:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. Sequels are planned but we don't even have working titles for them let alone articles. For now they will just be covered at The Adventures of Tintin (film)#Sequels, so in that sense this article includes them in its scope. When we have at least a good stub on at least one of them we can consider a move. Andrewa (talk) 19:16, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

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

The article uses European date formats.[edit]

An editor attempted to change the date formats long established in this article to the American format. Every Tintin article on Wikipedia uses European format. This film is not set in America, nor could Tintin's mythology ever be said to be American. I reverted the change. If needed, please discuss the matter here. Prhartcom (talk) 18:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

...and because the film is a British/NZ production, the usage of DMY seems valid. Kailash29792 (talk) 18:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
The editor has now engaged me in an edit war over this issue. I have made a second revert to their attempt. Will the editor please discuss the matter here rather than revert further. Prhartcom (talk) 18:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
If US was the sole producing country, then MDY could have been used. But it's a co-American production, that does not necessarily mean the article must use MDY (I actually hate that format). In fact, two DMY following countries (UK and NZ) have produced the film, so majority wins. Kailash29792 (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
I think that the case for DMY is clear, and if the editor in question proceeds to edit war without discussion then the appropriate disciplinary action should be taken against them. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
The film does not have a UK production company. There are several listed production companies. Most of them are American, only one is from NZ, and that was in a minor role. The 'Long standing' format has been MDY and per WP:DATERET that is how it should stay. JOJ Hutton 19:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • No case can be made for MOS:TIES—if there is any room for arguing what country has "closer ties" to an article, then there are no ties. TIES can only be claimed when those "ties" are more or less absolute (New York in AmEng, Harry Potter in BrEng, etc). The argument that "every Tintin article on Wikipedia uses European format" also holds no weight—the only requirement is internal consistency. A single Tintin article "going against the flow" would not be a violation of anything. The only argument that holds any weight here is WP:DATERET—which means the dates cannot be changed from DMY to MDY without talk page consensus. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:31, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Film Articles tend to use the date formats of the country in which the film was produced. 4 of the 5 production companies are American and only WinNut is non American. Yet WingNut was only a minor production company, gaining production credit through its use of its Special Effects department.--JOJ Hutton 22:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
      • MOS:TIES calls explicitly for strong ties. A film based on a Belgian comic strip shot in New Zealand cannot make any claim for strong ties to the US. The whole spirit of MOS:TIES is to prevent contentious editors from writing about Winston Churchill in AmEng "because more people speak American English". TIES is entirely inapplicable here and should never be brought up in cases like this. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Thank-you, Curly Turkey, for your wisdom, as hard as it may for me (and probably others) to hear. I mentioned you in the discussion above, perhaps you can weigh in again there. Prhartcom (talk) 23:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support dmy format per MOS:TIES. Tintin is a Belgian comic-strip and therefore a Belgian topic, so it is perfectly logical that the dating across Tintin articles adopt the Belgian dating format. Just because an American studio has leased the rights to make a film does not alter the fact that the underlying topic is intrinsically Belgian. Betty Logan (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
    • Betty Logan: Belgium is not a coutry where English is an offical language, so MOS:TIES cannot be applied on those grounds. Otherwise we'd end up with articles on Far East topics with the date format YMD (which I'd prefer, but I know it'll never be accepted). Your second point also falls out of the realm of what MOS:TIES applies to—the fact that it's an English-language movie made outside of Belgium trumps the idea that it could have strong ties to Belgium (which is nevertheless irrelevant, as MOS:TIES applies only to English-speaking countries). Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 01:50, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
With respect I disagree with your interpretation. English is widely spoken in Belgium and the date format is consistent regardless of dialect i.e. English or any of the three official languages. They don't use the American date format. I would not expect Tintin based articles to carry the American date format any more than I would expect Superman articles to carry the British format, despite the fact that the first three Superman films were British productions. Both underlying topics have strong national ties. Betty Logan (talk) 02:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
With respect, I'm not trying to convince you of my interpretation of MOS:TIES, I am informing you that MOS:TIES does not apply to countries n which English is not an official language. The number of second-language speakers is not taken into consideration. Ever. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 09:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
But the film is an American made production, not a Belgium production. The long standing date format in this article has always been MDY. Imagine the chaos across Wikipedia if we decided to change all the date formats on every article based on something as trivial as setting. Given that the main production companies in the film are American, its clear that MDY is the format supported by the guidelines. And I didn't even mention WP:DATERET.--JOJ Hutton 02:08, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Which is irrelevant. Tintin is a Belgian topic, just like Superman is an American topic, but it would be absurd to have some Superman film articles written in British English and some in American English. Betty Logan (talk) 02:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
You mean like Supergirl (film) which uses DMY? The Superman films in which you are referring to are also American productions according the sources, so MDY is appropriate when applicable on these articles, but DMY is not appropriate here because Belgium is not involved in this film. The comic book is from Belgium, but the film was made through American production companies. Its considered a separate intellectual property.--JOJ Hutton 02:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Since I did not write the Supergirl article then its current state obviously does not reflect my views on the form it should take. MOSTIES relates to the topic, not the perceived nationality of the film (which seems a rather spurious claim anyway for what is essentially an intenrational co-production based on a foreign property). The topic is Tintin, and the article is about a US/NZ film which comes under that topic. Anyway, I am done debating this, but my support for the dmy date format stands, and it is for whoever closes this discussion to either take on board or dismiss my argument. Betty Logan (talk) 02:30, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Just as I did not write the Superman articles. Those four articles had at one point used DMY. I did not change those dates either. But you mentioned the articles so I was only referencing them per your original reference.
In addition, by your logic, just about every Disney film from 1937 until today would use DMY because most of the stories they use are from other countries, starting with Snow white which was a German story. But those films, just like this Tintin film are considered separate intellectual properties which are made and produced by non Belgium countries. Thats pretty clear cut.--JOJ Hutton 02:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
  • THis is beyond ridulous. MOS:TIES is a guidline meant to Solve silly disputes, not as a battering ram to argue over which nationality's ties are stronger. Arguing about which nationality has the stronger ties is all the evidence you need that MOS:TIES cannot possibly apply. With MOS:TIES there are only strong ties, not stronger ties. The only applicable guideline is MOS:DATERET. Now get over it and stop wasting everyone's time. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 09:08, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
    @Curly Turkey: I fully agree. Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk) 16:03, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I've now de-linked "United States" in the infobox. You know where to send the hate mail. Be warned though, I issue death threats on members of Boko Harram in my spare time. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 11:32, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure why that was necessary but, okay. JOJ Hutton 16:28, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
WP:OVERLINK. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:24, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Adventures of Tintin (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☑Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Adventures of Tintin (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☑Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Adventures of Tintin (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☑Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:20, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on The Adventures of Tintin (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on The Adventures of Tintin (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:32, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on The Adventures of Tintin (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)