Talk:The Finest Hours (2016 film)

A fact from The Finest Hours (2016 film) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 September 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that The Finest Hours, currently in production, is a film based on the US Coast Guard's 1952 rescue of the crews of two oil tankers which had broken apart during a storm?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/September.

Wikipedia

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	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 American cinema task force.

Disney Low‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies 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.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Blatant overlinking of the cast and Company.

~~Even after I cut out a section and the cast from the lead paragraph, l~~Looks to me like they are still linked four ~~two~~ times each! Wow! Same thing is true of Walt Disney Pictures and studio. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:46, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The chronology is still a bit over the top - way too much info. It doesn't matter who was cast when. The Dissident Aggressor 14:43, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that too, and had left it on the cutting room floor, but one of our other editors strongly disagreed and thought it indispensable. So it is there, but I for one an not wedded to it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a very short summary version. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I support the summary version. I tend to state the month and year when an actor is cast to show the unfolding of the project. I'd actually be fine with a little more detail, stating that Pine joined in April 2014 and that the rest of the cast joined in August-September 2014. It shows that he was added early on and that the ball finally got rolling in the past two months. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:25, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a better way, have at it. Please. We want a good article that will adequately do the job! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What about casting chronology? Is that not a better way for a good article? --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 02:51, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the conclusion is about linking, each cast member should have the source provided, by which we know they were in the film. The fact that they are not in most film cast sections is a violation of WP:VERIFY. This article is off to a good start, and its quality should be maintained. Cite non IMDB new sources for all cast, and in general for all facts added. 50.179.252.14 (talk) 01:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See my response to "gung-ho" IP editor below - thanks, Garchy (talk) 17:45, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edits of this day

This article is en route to being a very good article, if its theatrical opening does not result in the usual editorializing and WP:OR and text dumping that often ensues. I thank editors to date for strong ethic of "every fact sourced," per WP:VERIFY, and ask/encourage that this high standard and quality be maintained. Le Prof 50.179.252.14 (talk) 01:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's great that you're spending the time critiquing the article, but that's only half the battle - if you really want to help out it would be great to "contribute" by adding in these references you're looking for. WP:BEBOLD is probably a place for you to start - you won't get much respect about these notes unless you're actively contributing to your points. No one likes a teacher with a red pen unless they are helping out themselves. I did reach out to you on your talk page about this but heard no response. Garchy (talk) 17:43, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

I don't edit english viki. But I did notice the broken infobox. It'd be nice if somebody fixed it, thanx! --OskarsC (talk) 15:47, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]