Talk:Lone Survivor: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:29, 19 January 2014

	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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

FYI

US Navy SEALs are longer required to maintain their original ratings, ie: Hospitalman (HM) or Gummer's mate (GM) (if they went to an 'A' achool before joining NSW). They are now identified by their Special Warfare Operator (SO) rating. See: United_States_Navy_SEALs#Special_Warfare_Ratings - ^theWOLFchild 04:11, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is true however these men died in 2005 before SO was established so wouldn't it be more accurate to list their ratings at the time of the action? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.160.161.75 (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good point, as (SO) replacing other ratings didn't became standard until 2006. However, the navy is applying this retro-actively, to everyone, so it is appropriate to do so here as well. - ^theWOLFchild 19:47, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is Gunner's_mate not "Gummer's Mate". SunSw0rd (talk) 19:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BTW

Ref #5 is a dead link. - ^theWOLFchild 21:20, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Response

This section is too long. It needs to be cut back, a paragraph for positive reviews and one for negative reviews is sufficient. You don't need to list every single positive/negative review. 98.209.42.117 (talk) 19:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, putting all the reveiws is neccesassry74.104.208.31 (talk) 17:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References to use

Lone Survivor's Takeaway: Every War Movie Is a Pro-War Movie by The Atlantic

Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Plot?

It's baffling to me that this article has an abundance (too much?) detail about production aspects of this film and almost no information about the plot. The move has been out for 7 days and clearly is a top movie-going choice, some editors must have seen the film and can sum it up in a paragraph or two. It's just odd that this is 10X the level of detail on the making of this movie and little on the finished project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:34, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. As I have in the past, I've taken much of my time in expanding the article, mostly focusing on the production aspects. For anyone who is interested in making a plot synopsis for the article, maybe this site may help: http://www.themoviespoiler.com/Spoilers/LoneSurvivor.html SuperSonic2000 (talk) 05:52, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 This section is too long. It needs to be cut back, a paragraph for positive reviews and one for negative reviews is sufficient. You don't need to list every single positive/negative review. [[Special:Contributions/98.209.42.117|98.209.42.117]] ([[User talk:98.209.42.117|talk]]) 19:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
+*No, putting all the reveiws is neccesassry[[Special:Contributions/74.104.208.31|74.104.208.31]] ([[User talk:74.104.208.31|talk]]) 17:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 == References to use ==