Talk:The Adventures of Prince Achmed

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Title[edit]

Shouldn't the english title be used (The Adventures of Prince Achmed)? At the very least, when someone types that into the search box it should redirect to this page! It is impossible to find this film on wikipedia right now unless you speak German, and this is not appropriate. Esn 06:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Adventures of Prince Achmed already redirects here. I created it when I added the infobox.
What I'm curious about is where Die Geschichte des Prinzen Achmed ("The History of Prince Achmed") comes from. I've never seen it called that anywhere else. I know the film as Die Abenteuer des Prinzen Achmed. --Franz 07:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah... I searched with lowercase letters ("adventures of prince achmed") and it didn't redirect here... is this a common problem on Wikipedia? Esn 10:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the built-in search is very poor. The case has to match exactly for it to work. I recommend using Google instead and appending "site:en.wikipedia.org" after your search term. You'll have a better chance of finding what you're looking for. --Franz 10:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've finally learned how to make a redirect page, so it should all be fine now, even if someone searches for the film in lowercase letters. :) But I'm also curious about the name of this article and where it comes from... anyone? I really do think that the title of this article should be the English name of the film - nearly all other silent films are called by their English names (just click on the "Silent films" category box at the bottom of the article), and I see no reason why one shouldn't be as well. Am I allowed, as a non-admin, to move this article?Esn 03:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, anyone can move articles. There doesn't seem to be much convention in place as to what language the title should be in. I tend to agree with you, the English title should be used here (as the German should be used on the German Wikipedia, French on the French, etc.) but many people seem to want to stick with the original title.
I don't edit much, and when I do I mostly try to leave things alone, but I always use the English title in articles I've started. --Franz 04:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the thing is that someone might look for it through the categories and be looking for in the "A" section for "Adventures" instead of "Die Geschichte". So I think that it's better if I change it if only for that reason - in the English-speaking world, this film is mostly known by its English title, and Germans would presumably use the German Wiki anyway.
So how do I learn how to move an article? Could you point me in the right direction? :) Esn 09:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Click the "Move" tab. It's not available on all skins I don't think, so if you don't see it, try a different one. MonoBook is default, it's definitely on it.
On the "Move" page, enter the new title and the reason why you're moving it, and click the "Move" button. The article will be renamed and the old name made into a redirect to it.
Here's the help page on it. --Franz 15:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move[edit]

Rationale: Adventures" is the name of the film that most English-speakers know it by - if they search for it through the "silent films" category, they'll never be able to find it because the current title of the article is not a widely used name for the film, even within Germany (the usual German name is "Die Abenteuer des Prinzen Achmed" according to IMDB). So that's why I think it should be moved.

Well, nearly nobody visits this page, so I don't know how much "discussion" there's going to be. :P Still, we must go through this process, so if you support the move say Support, if you oppose it say Oppose, etc. Esn 23:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Support - as I said below, I agree that the English title should be used. Franz

Support - Seems fine with me if people feel it should be moved to the English title. --Cab88 16:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming. Well, we now have everybody who ever worked on this page in agreement on the move. ;) Esn 22:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support That's the title I saw it under.Septentrionalis 05:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:RM is only for controversial moves, or obstructed ones, so it sounds like it's time to be bold; but the target already exists. Septentrionalis 05:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Exactly, the target is a redirect page that's been edited twice. Esn 06:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--Shanel § 21:46, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please remove the move-template the next time you fulfill a WP:RM. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 07:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery[edit]

I uploaded some more screenshots from the film because I didn't think that just one was enough, but consequently I decided that 6 was a bit too many, so I cut them down to 4 (which looks nicer, at least in 800x600 resolution, and they now show us a scene in every different colour). Here are the other two; Princess Scheherazade on the left and the Witch of the Mountain (with Aladdin's lamp) on the right:

I thought I'd post them here because good screenshots from the film are a bit hard to find on the internet right now; the website that had the ones that I posted is gone now. Esn 22:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMG incorrect?[edit]

is the fact their time limit doesn't match the only thing incorrect? Being a film from a pre-talkie era couldn't it have numerous time lengths due it to being sped up or slowed down depending on what version of the film you are watching? Andrzejbanas 06:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly... but, after all, there was an orchestral score written to match the film, the same orchestral score that's on the DVD. On the DVD (which is how the vast majority of people will see it), the film is 65 minutes. Frankly, I don't see how you would get the film to be 50 minutes. It would be so sped up that many of the movements would look far too fast, for one thing. Esn 06:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The film is 5942 feet. At 24fps, that comes out to almost exactly 65 minutes. To get 50 minutes, the film would have to be run at 32fps. That's only 8fps difference--it would be noticable, but not too terribly so. I don't know why anyone would run it that fast, though. For a 19th century film, speeds like that were common, but for one made in the latter half of the '20s, it was surely not intended to be projected at that rate.
I would say realistic running times would be between 65 and 75 minutes, no shorter. --Franz 07:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Adventures of Prince Achmed. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Adventures_of_Prince_Achmed&oldid=1210666258"