Jump to content

The Suicide Squad (film): Revision history


For any version listed below, click on its date to view it. For more help, see Help:Page history and Help:Edit summary. (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

15 June 2024

11 June 2024

6 June 2024

4 June 2024

31 May 2024

27 May 2024

22 May 2024

11 May 2024

27 April 2024

24 April 2024

9 April 2024

2 April 2024

20 March 2024

18 March 2024

2 March 2024

1 March 2024

  • curprev 14:2814:28, 1 March 2024109.76.131.136 talk 217,465 bytes −11 Per talk page. How much this film does or does not standalone does not need to be highlighted. The year is the keyword that actually helps readers disambiguate. "standalone" is fancruft this encyclopedia should leave to the article body if it is mentioned at all. undo

20 February 2024

19 February 2024

18 February 2024

  • curprev 10:5710:57, 18 February 2024ChimaFan12 talk contribsm 217,486 bytes +5 clarifying who “Smith” is undo
  • curprev 08:0708:07, 18 February 2024ChimaFan12 talk contribs 217,481 bytes −94 Even better, the point is appropriately made and contextulaized at the end of the paragraph. To include it twice in the same paragraph is redundant, and the representation of the argument in the former edit is not an adequate representation of Mendelson's words. The final sentences in the paragraph are. undo
  • curprev 08:0108:01, 18 February 2024Trailblazer101 talk contribs 217,575 bytes +24 WP:BRD. Discuss on talk rather than reverting again. you were already banned for this on the MCU articles. // Undid revision 1208625676 by ChimaFan12 (talk) undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 08:0008:00, 18 February 2024ChimaFan12 talk contribs 217,551 bytes −24 those are separate arguments; the fictional character of Harley Quinn's popularity (supposedly) being overblown is not a matter of the bankability of the film's stars; the notion that Idris Elba is not a bankable star is also not a remark on the bankability of the film's ensemble cast. For clarity and honesty, and because this isn't the only source to say it, it is best that the absence of Will Smith is correctly attributed as the reason provided. please make an effort to comprehend sources. undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 07:1907:19, 18 February 2024Trailblazer101 talk contribs 217,575 bytes +24 The Forbes piece says Elba is not a bankable star and that Robbie's popularity is overstated, citing these and Smith being replaced as factors of its poor performance. WP:BRD applies. // Undid revision 1208617747 by ChimaFan12 (talk) undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 07:0807:08, 18 February 2024ChimaFan12 talk contribs 217,551 bytes −24 Poor interpretation; this credible source does not say the film lacks bankable stars. That particular reference should be struck. It is more accurate to say that Will Smith's absence is viewed by multiple sources as a reason for its underperformance undo Tag: Reverted
(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)