Talk:1917 (2019 film)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1917 (2019 film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Film: British / War / American B‑class

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

United States: Cinema B‑class 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
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Bramesco, Charles (November 26, 2019). "1917 writer Krysty Wilson-Cairns funneled WWI obsessions into the single-shot epic". Polygon.
Bramesco, Charles (January 5, 2020). "Sam Mendes on directing 1917: 'We were completely in the lap of the gods'". Polygon.
Chitwood, Adam (January 7, 2020). "'1917' Co-Writer Krysty Wilson-Cairns Explains How to Write a One-Shot Movie". Collider.
Chitwood, Adam (January 10, 2020). "'1917' Co-Writer Breaks Down That Ending". Collider.
Bramesco, Charles (January 11, 2020). "The legendary Roger Deakins on what shooting the 'single-shot' 1917 actually involved". Polygon.
Sneider, Jeff (January 16, 2020). "Watch '1917' Stars George Mackay and Dean-Charles Chapman's 'FYC' Q&A". Collider.
Chitwood, Adam (January 17, 2020). "'1917' Co-Writer Krysty Wilson-Cairns on How That [SPOILER] Changes the Rest of the Film". Collider.
Weintraub, Steve (January 23, 2020). "'1917's Roger Deakins, Sam Mendes and Editor Lee Smith Go In-Depth in 40-Minute Q&A". Collider.

Why no “critical acclaim”?

There is an invisible comment on the page telling editors not to use “critical acclaim” to describe the critical response, could somebody explain why this is the case? Many other film pages use this, I don’t see why this one can’t? Fobz12345 (talk) 02:40, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it’s awards season and competition for them is huge right now. I’d say just go ahead and use the phrase. Boscaswell talk 09:53, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reception section: undue weight to negative review

Rotten Tomatoes has 89% positive reviews, but 1 of the section’s 3 paras, taking up nearly 1/3rd of the section, is given over to a negative review. This is WP:UNDUE. Boscaswell talk 09:51, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've dealt with it.Boscaswell talk 00:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two editors added a whole new paragraph critical if the continuous takes. Criticism of that had already been given space and again following WP:UNDUE I deleted the whole paragraph. Boscaswell talk 20:38, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Quad Trench-CMYK-Jan-10-AW 1917-scaled.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

English or British

An editor today changed the lead from saying "British...film" to "English...film". I can understand the description English for places, and for individuals who identify explicitly as such, but for such a large cooperative project as this film, where the co-writer is clearly Scottish, and much filming was done in Scotland, British seems more appropriate. HiLo48 (talk) 06:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 February 2020

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

– Can "film" accurately describe a short film? I don't think so. Unreal7 (talk) 20:29, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support move of the Mendes film... is the short film even notable enough to have it's own article? There is very little content. Plus I don't recall any instances where films have been disambiguated by the director's name should at least be by year. Also support restoring original titles as outlined below. Spanneraol (talk) 21:25, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Restore previous titles which were moved by Crookesmoor without a discussion. --Gonnym (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The previous titles should be restored immediately. It’s outrageous that Crookesmoor changes them without any discussion, seemingly on a whim. Sorry, but I don’t know whether this is an oppose or a support. Boscaswell talk 21:48, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, revert to prior titles (1917 (2019 film) and 1917 (1970 film)), and speedy close - this was an undiscussed move. The current and proposed names fail WP:NCFILM which gives preference to year disambiguation above other methods. -- Netoholic @ 23:04, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]