Talk:The Room

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleThe Room has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 12, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
November 4, 2017Good article nomineeListed
December 30, 2017Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Good article

Requested move 20 February 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. The opposes rely on "too many other topics", which is not a primary topic criterion. There can be many topics and still a primary, which lands consensus with the supports. -- JHunterJ (talk) 21:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

– This film has much more long-term significance than the other topics with this name, being an infamous cult classic that is still often shown in cinemas around the world today, and also spawned an unofficial video game adaptation as well as a book and film about its creation, plus Google mostly brings up results related to this film. However, when the all-time view counts are compared, this film only comes in fifth, though this may be due to this article being moved to its current title literally two weeks ago (not too sure how that gadget works in regard to recently moved articles), especially since the view counts for the past twenty days tell a different story. ⓋᎯ☧ǿᖇǥ@ℤε💬 14:59, 20 February 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 20:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. © Tbhotch™ (en-3). 19:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Unless the page views are somehow messed up, this page has barely any readers interested in it. --Gonnym (talk) 16:46, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok, I now see that the page was moved and using the previous title shows a different result. --Gonnym (talk) 16:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are too many other works of media called "The Room" to make the film the primary topic.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:11, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per ZXCVBNM. -- Netoholic @ 20:11, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I count 97% of pageviews for this movie, and it's the subject of an Oscar-nominated film itself. This is not even close; both facets of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC are filled easily here. Also, even if "too many things with this name" was a relevant argument, are we really going to say that nine other topics with articles is too much? Nine is barely a drop in the bucket. Nohomersryan (talk) 03:08, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Really?! The film "easily" meets WP:PRIMARYTOPIC #2?! There was no other meanings of "The Room" before the 2003 film?!! I beg to differ... which is why I'm [at] leaning oppose despite the page views. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:38, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just because "The Room" had other meanings pre-2003 doesn't mean this can't now be a primary topic. —Will(B) 14:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, yes, it does, as per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC #2 – did you read my original comment?! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support since the page views indicate that this is a primary topic. I would also argue that The Room is definitely seen as a cult classic in the "So bad it's good" vein. The film article would have a hat note to direct readers to the disambiguation page. Aoba47 (talk) 09:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This masterpiece is obviously WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Don't see any serious competition to this one on either count. The opposes seem so vague, they are tearing me apart. --Quiz shows 18:53, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per the page views. —Will(B) 18:16, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per the overwhelming difference in page views. --Jeanjung212 (talk) 20:25, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. A classic case of The Problem With Page Views. If there's a Primary Topic I'd suggest Harold Pinter's first play The Room. Andrewa (talk) 19:12, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Page views aren't the only consideration, I agree, but I still think, per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, that the 2003 film The Room has more long-term significance than anything else listed. (Plus, 97% of the page views is a lot of page views.) —Will(B) 14:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Even 97% isn't necessarily indicative of primary topic. I think we might need to agree to disagree on the signficance of Pinter's play. Pinter is studied in High School English in Australia, and his work is highly significant; On the other hand the 2003 film is regarded by many as forgetable. I think a case could even be made that the 2019 film by the same name is the more significant of the two, already winning several significant awards. Andrewa (talk) 08:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Too many well-known topics here for any to be a primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, a name this generic should unsurprisingly be held ambiguous. BD2412 T 04:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, pageviews make it seem like long term primary topic.--Ortizesp (talk) 23:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support seems to meet WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Quahog (talk • contribs) 14:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

There seems no doubt that the 2003 film has and will likely retain a cult following. It fascinates some just as being such a bad film, see List of films considered the worst#The Room (2003). And it did make a good subject for a book The Disaster Artist and even a film based on the book. It probably also gets some attention because of its "gratuitous, anatomically incorrect sex" (see this review of The Disaster Artist) and this post will just increase that fascination I guess, and result in still more screenings and, dare I say it, increase the page statistics.

But is it really even a candidate for being one of the worst films made? What about the many that never even get released or reviewed? Nobody gives serious prizes for the worst sculpture or portrait or short story, probably we'd have articles on many efforts by five year olds if they did. MOBA is a noteworthy joke. Let us not take any of this too seriously. Andrewa (talk) 15:50, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Oh hi mark" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Oh hi mark. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 15#Oh hi mark until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 00:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Musical spinoff[edit]

Could this section on a musical spinoff please be added to the "Other media" section under a new heading "Music" or anywhere else that it fits? On February 14, 2018, Irish Alt-Pop group Dr. Mindflip released 'Roominations: An Unauthorized Parody', a rock-opera concept LP inspired by the original film, and Sestero's book.[1] Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:bb6:1495:2700:c79:dbd0:b707:67a7 (talk) 10:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Dr. Mindflip's Roominations LP launch". The Journal of Music. Retrieved 2021-07-16.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Room&oldid=1209810654"