Revision as of 11:01, 9 December 2020 editSabinal17 (talk | contribs)11 edits →Just political gibberish overall: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:02, 9 December 2020 edit undoSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,318 editsm Signing comment by Sabinal17 - "→Just political gibberish overall: new section"Next edit → | ||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
== Just political gibberish overall == | == Just political gibberish overall == | ||
I do agree that it is leftist gibberish because the articles mentioned come from leftist sources. However, since the advent of Obama, people on the right have been using Idiocracy in their opinions for years. | I do agree that it is leftist gibberish because the articles mentioned come from leftist sources. However, since the advent of Obama, people on the right have been using Idiocracy in their opinions for years. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 11:01, 9 December 2020 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Revision as of 11:02, 9 December 2020
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Idiocracy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
To-do list for Idiocracy: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2007-04-12
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Idiocracy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
Table to prose
I'm just going to note here that the article would be greatly improved by changing the table in the Box office section to WP:PROSE. I'm not ready to do it myself yet, and I don't want to slap a big ugly Template:Table to prose tag on it, so I mention it here in case anyone is feeling enthusiastic and might do it before I eventually get around to it. -- 109.78.218.56 (talk) 13:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Legacy
The whole Legacy section is leftist gibberish and a good example of the POV problem that plagues Misplaced Pages. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:98A:503:1C20:89C1:A2AA:1650:8EE6 (talk) 23:50, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- You can have your own opinions but you can't have your own facts. The fact is it happened, many leftist commentators and the director and writer of the film made comparisons between this film and Trump and this was all reported in reputable publications. Take a look at Air Force One (film) and enjoy the Trump references in that article instead. -- 109.76.198.1 (talk) 04:43, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- So yes, it is a "fact" that some Hollywood people and leftist commentators have political opinions. This is a common journalistic technique in use today—reporting someone's political narrative (i.e., opinion) and claiming it as a fact in the sense that the person actually said it. Is it really surprising or notable that leftist commentators and the director and writer of the film (i.e., Hollywood types) made comparisons between this film and Trump? I don't think so. IMHO, the Legacy section is merely promoting a political narrative that Trump and his supporters are idiots, and I don't think the section is appropriate for this Misplaced Pages article. —hulmem (talk) 12:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- It received substantial coverage and was picked up by various publications which Misplaced Pages considers notable. There are more than enough reasons to justify it being there.
- The section even includes a commentator who took the point and chastised leftists for being so simplistic about it. You can criticize the comparison but when various commentators including the filmmakers have made such comparisons you can't ignore it or exclude it.
- Perhaps the section title "Legacy" sounds too serious but it is not meant to be and that section title is used across various film articles (other potential section titles like "Influence" end up not sounding serious enough)
- There's room for improvement and I'd prefer if the section had other references, and think the film was mentioned in politics in other contexts too, but unfortunately I haven't found sources that might allow me to broaden the scope of the section. -- 109.79.82.182 (talk) 22:35, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Just political gibberish overall
I do agree that it is leftist gibberish because the articles mentioned come from leftist sources. However, since the advent of Obama, people on the right have been using Idiocracy in their opinions for years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabinal17 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- C-Class film articles
- C-Class American cinema articles
- American cinema task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- C-Class science fiction articles
- Low-importance science fiction articles
- WikiProject Science Fiction articles
- C-Class Comedy articles
- Mid-importance Comedy articles
- WikiProject Comedy articles
- Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists