Wikipedia:Cinema Collaboration of the Week/Removed

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page contains nominations from the main Cinema Collaboration of the week page which have been removed due to lack of votes or because they're unsuitable nominations. If you are adding new nominations, be sure to delete any {{Cinema COTW candidate}} tags on said page's talk page. Successful nominations are listed at the history page. If no reason is given for the removal of a nominated article, assume that there was not a sufficient amount of votes for it to proceed. Removed articles may be renominated.

This page tracks nominations for the past three months only.

Clockwise (film)[edit]

Nominated November 4; needs 3 votes by November 11

Support:

  1. Hoverfish 20:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • It's an excellent comedy. John Cleese won the Peter Sellers award for it.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb[edit]

Nominated November 9; needs 3 votes by November 25

Support:

  1. AdamSmithee 11:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Hoverfish 16:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. TheMadBaron
  4. þħɥʂıɕıʄʈʝɘɖı 22:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • That is, I propose keeping it for another week :-). It is going very well, improved a lot as COTW, and I think that we can get it to featured status soon AdamSmithee 15:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no sources to keep up with you, but I am very interested to keep working on it for another week. We could push the other nominations a week ahead. Hoverfish 16:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll support the nomination, because I can't fault Smithee's reasoning, but I will also point out that if we do move on to another project, it doesn't mean that work on Strangelove has to cease. TheMadBaron 09:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Blues Brothers is now the COTW, but we can always choose Strangelove again, if necessary.... TheMadBaron 07:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking through Dr. Stangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb I honestly think it's pretty comprehensive. 210.49.63.177 09:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pulp Fiction (film)[edit]

Nominated {November 10; needs 3 votes by November 25

Support:

  1. ~ Feureau 14:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. D43M0N 06:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Australian Matt 15:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • First of all, great movie. This article was once nominated for FA, although it failed. After so many speculations surrounding the film hacked out, it's still tagged with speculation. And last week, they were creeping back into the article. Actually, this article has good ground work. With a little collaboration, this could go up to GA. ~ Feureau 14:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, the film is popular and would be held in much higher esteem if we could elevate it to a GA level. Here's hoping!

D43M0N 06:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • If any film deserves GA status which it doesn't have it's....hm....The Conformist, or Le Cercle rouge....maybe i'll get to them myself...anyways Pulp Fiction rules.

Double Indemnity[edit]

Nominated November 11; needs 3 votes by November 25

Support:

  1. --GHcool 07:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. ~ Feureau 04:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • A great film. This is one of the first (if not the very first) film noir and contains virtually all of the elements associated with films noir. Its already a B class article. I would like to see more information on the making of the film. --GHcool 07:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm a sucker for lost causes... Anyway, I think a more "Famous" film would get more attention on COTWs. And I think-a that's-a no good. This is a Billy Wilder film and lately, he's not getting enough attention from the general public as compared to other fine "oldies" directors. And it would be a shame if these kinds of films would get sidelined in the name of fame. There has to be some sort of an initiative on WP:Film to get these "lesser" great films up to the surface. ~ Feureau 04:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • We will... eventually... Cbrown1023 17:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • To the extent that Double Indemnity virtually started a movement in Hollywood filmmaking, I would argue that its anything but a "lesser great film." It is certainly a more important film than, say, The Blues Brothers. --GHcool 04:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, but that's the problem with these types of Collaborations; only the well-liked articles get chosen. Not necessarily the most influential or important. Really... who ever thought Dr. Strangelove?... Cbrown1023 17:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Invisible Man (1933 film)[edit]

Nominated November 26; needs 3 votes by December 9

Support:

  1. GHcool 02:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Its one of the better Universal Horror movies and a groundbreaking film in terms of its visual effects. There was recently a DVD box set released for The Invisible Man and its sequels. There's also a ton of Invisible Man ripoffs, sequels, and remakes. Its director, James Whale, has gained increased attention after Ian McKellen portrayed him in Gods and Monsters. --GHcool 02:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apocalypse Now[edit]

Nominated November 29; needs 3 votes by December 9

Support:

  1. Supernumerary 02:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. — WiseKwai 21:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Apocalypse Now is Francis Ford Coppola's oeuvre on the Vietnam war. It pervades our current culture, and I feel it deserves to be a FA. Currently the article has tons of info but no references, and I think the collaboration would be able to bring it to FA status in a fortnight.
  • An important film that deserves a closer look from the editors on this project. It's also one of my favorite films. — WiseKwai 21:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flightplan[edit]

Nominated December 3; needs 3 votes by December 9

Support:

  1. --SunStar Net 02:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • I saw this film recently, and it was a very good film. It's fairly recent too, and one of my recent favourite films. I would like it to attain FA status (or GA status) at some point in the future. --SunStar Net 02:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Being John Malkovich[edit]

Nominated December 9; needs 3 votes by December 23

Support:

  1. Karatehamster202 04;15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Breed Zona 05:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • First of all, a breakout film in modern cinema. And the article is rather small, it could certainly be improved. With such a diverse plot I'm surprised it's not very, very long already. Why should Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind get a huge page full of information while Being John Malkovich gets little to no coverage?

Karatehamster202 04:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I concur (and not just because it's one of my favorite films, although Eternal Sunshine gets the top spot). The article only has a plot and trivia section, which probably needs some trimming down, and needs additional information behind the scenes or on themes, influences, etc. Besides, while it's not exactly "mainstream," it's still an inventive and complex work that warrants further attention. Breed Zona 05:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jumanji (film)[edit]

Nominated December 9; needs 3 votes by December 23

Support:

  1. Joiz A. Shmo 00:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • The the plot section needs trimming and general clean-ups need to be made. Joiz A. Shmo 00:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jurassic Park (film)[edit]

Nominated December 17; needs 3 votes by December 23

Support:

  1. 'Wiki-newbie 19:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)'[reply]

Comments:

  • Spielberg's most successful film, the most realistic depiction of dinosaurs to date and the most pivotal film in the digital effects revolution of the 1990s. I hope to expose more people to this popular favourite as I have not read the book, and it has an expansion tag in that area. Wiki-newbie 19:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alien (film)[edit]

Nominated December 12; needs 3 votes by January 6

Support:

  1. Zepheus <ツィフィアス> 05:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. AdamSmithee 10:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

M[edit]

Nominated December 23; needs 3 votes by January 6

Support:

  1. Andman8 04:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Supernumerary 16:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • A very influential "talkie" by a very influential director Fritz Lang staring a very influential actor Peter Lorre. The article already has a lot of good info, with a little more tweaking it could easily be a GA (unlike pulp which is a mess currently).

Jurassic Park (film)[edit]

Nominated December 24; needs 3 votes by December 30

Support:

  1. Wiki-newbie 17:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Second nomination. Jurassic Park became the most successful film of all time in 1993 and revolutionised special effects. The Production section is fully developed, and a collaboration could help this become GA. Wiki-newbie 17:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiddler on the Roof (film)[edit]

Nominated January 2; needs 3 votes by January 6

Support:

  1. kralahome 03:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • An important part of the Hollywood musical genre, it received many Academy Award nominations. A worthwhile movie that deserves more than it has. At least as much on the film as on the play itself.

Rent (film)[edit]

Nominated January 8; needs 3 votes by January 20

Support:

  1. Kid12

Comments:

  • It shows us the meaning of love through rock songs the best musical anyone I know has ever sceen that can touch even the darkest hearts

K-PAX (film)[edit]

Nominated January 21; needs 3 votes by February 3

Support:

  1. Whilding87 12:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Very limited and poor article when such insightful information is readily available in other encyclopedias and other websites. Whilding87 12:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Director's cut[edit]

Nominated January 23; needs 3 votes by February 3

Support:

  1. Brz7 18:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. BiancaOfHell 05:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • To raise awareness on the existence of (un)released director's cuts (also by starting a List of director's cuts, cf. my comment on the talk page of the director's cut article). Brz7 18:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • How 'bout da one for Until the End of the World by Wim Wenders? When dat comin' out? Iz been talked 'bout for at least a decade. Pr'bably not that good, but one of 'em crazy director's cuts at over 5 hours long.-BiancaOfHell 05:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giallo[edit]

Nominated February 2; needs 3 votes by February 17

Support:

  1. BiancaOfHell 05:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 18:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • If you haven't seen Deep Red then you must. One of the best slasher films out there. Great soundtrack, as most Giallo films have. Dario Argento is the most well known of the Giallo auteurs, but there are others. The article is pretty good, (needs Google Books references for the stuff), but it could be better and would really be a fantastic read if it ever amounted to an FA. Needs more length though for that. I want to know more about it. I'm sure others must too. Help bring this obscure film genre into the mainstream consciousness. -BiancaOfHell 05:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JFK (film)[edit]

Nominated February 2; needs 3 votes by February 17

Support:

  1. Count Ringworm 14:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Wiki-newbie 18:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • This is an important film in that it opened up debate on our government's involvement in one of the most tragic days in United States history. It is also a top notch thriller and one of Oliver Stone's signature films. The film needs a lot of work and could be cleaned up but I think would be a great read if it made to the FA level. I would love any help to bring this entry up to a higher standard. - Count Ringworm 14:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

African cinema[edit]

Nominated February 5; needs 3 votes by February 17

Support:

  1. AKeen 19:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Sluzzelin 02:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Hugely important topic with a terrible article. There is only patchy and disjointed information with huge gaps (for example, anything past the 1970s). The article was originally translated from the German Wikipedia article a few years ago and little has been added since. Hopefully, with a lot of eyes, this article can improve. Better history and more contemporary information are needed. - AKeen 19:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fiddler on the Roof (film)[edit]

Nominated March 3; needs 3 votes by March 10

Support:

  1. kralahome 02:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. PhantomS 04:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • This film is a notable movie musical, it is consistently listed among the best of its genre. It was nominated for several Oscars. Is currently only a paragraph. It deserves to be much larger and comprehensive than it is now.
    • It was split off from the play article at the end of December and has been mostly ignored since. --PhantomS 04:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Although I agree that this is a notable film, I don't think a whole lot could be written about it that wouldn't belong in the Fiddler on the Roof page except perhaps comparisons to the play, casting decisions, and maybe location scouting or research notes taken by Jewison and his crew. I just added a request to merge the article with the play. --GHcool 06:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • But there is so much more that can go into the article about the movie, i.e. reception, how it helped the career of its stars, or production notes. It is significant enough in itself to be deemed appropriate for its own article.--kralahome 18:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The Little Shop of Horrors[edit]

Nominated March 10; needs 3 votes by March 24

Support:

  1. Ibaranoff24 02:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. DorisHノート 16:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Notable and important comedy film. One of the most famous cult films. (Ibaranoff24 02:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Notorious[edit]

Nominated March 10; needs 3 votes by March 24

Support:

  1. PhantomS 02:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Ibaranoff24 06:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Both an important film noir and an important Hitchcock film that needs extensive work. --PhantomS 02:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bootmen[edit]

Nominated March 16; needs 3 votes by March 24

Support:

  1. Peter 14:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Wonder Boys[edit]

Nominated March 23; needs 3 votes by April 7

Support:

  1. María: (habla conmigo) 12:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Count Ringworm 16:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • It's both a favorite with the critics and audiences; it has won multiple awards, including an Oscar for Best Original Song. It also currently has more than fifty articles linked to it. The article is a fairly good Start, and I recently split it from the novel (Wonder Boys) so that both can improve separately, so it needs help with refs, copy-edit, etc.

Los olvidados[edit]

Nominated March 24; needs 6 votes by April 21

Support:

  1. --GHcool 02:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. María: (habla conmigo) 02:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. AKeen 14:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • We just did improved the article on "Un Chien Andalou," so I thought it would be nice to go on to another classic Luis Bunuel film. This film is often considered to be among the greatest Spanish language films of all time and most certainly inspired Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu. The film won the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival. The Los Olvidados article needs considerably more work than the "Un Chien Andalou" article did. --GHcool 02:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fantastic movie, a true landmark in early Mexican cinema.

12 Angry Men[edit]

Nominated April 8; needs 3 votes by April 21

Support:

  1. Crzycheetah 08:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • No one can argue about the importance of the film in cinematography. The article is poorly written, structured, and cited. So, I thought that with the help of this collaboration it could be improved.

Schindler's List[edit]

Nominated April 14; needs 3 votes by April 21

Support:

  1. Alientraveller 09:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Ibaranoff24 06:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Ananthabhadram[edit]

Nominated April 17; needs 3 votes by May 5

Support:

  1. Aditya Kabir 17:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • The film is a milestone in its use of Indian cultural references like Raj era painting, traditional dance forms, traditional martial arts and classical magic spells. It already has much interesting referenced material and is laid out according to the suggested format. It is possible that even a little effort put will take it to a good article status. Aditya Kabir 17:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Layer Cake[edit]

Nominated April 22; needs 3 votes by May 5

Support:

  1. --Taufiq2u 22:56, April 22 (UTC)
  2. --Zerorules677 10:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • This is posssibly the best British film noir released since Dead Man's Shoes and Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.
  • More information needed on the film
  • A better plot section
  • This film helped Daniel Craig become what he was today: James Bond
  • It needs more work and did not have enough information on the film.
  • The edge of the film is GREAT.

Fiddler on the Roof (film)[edit]

Nominated April 27; needs 3 votes by May 5

Support:

  1. kralahome 01:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • This is my third time nominating this film for this collaboration. Currently it is two chsort paragraphs and an unwiedly cast list. It has been classified as a stub. It is one of the more famous movie musicals and should be kept seperate from the orginal stage production as they are two completely different things. The film was nominated for numerous Academy Awards and deserves much better than it has. Just a good start would do it worlds of good. --kralahome 01:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Popular Science (film series)[edit]

Nominated May 10; needs 3 votes by May 12

Support:

  1. CCBear 22:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • This film series was produced by Jerry Fairbanks and is historic and unique and deserving of an article. These film shorts were released by Paramount Pictures from 1935 to 1950 and produced with the cooperation of the editors of Popular Science Monthly Magazine. They also ran on American Movie Classics channel from 1994 to 2002.

The "Popular Science" film series was nominated for 5 Academy Award and was the first to profile (in 35mm color film) the ‘Mechanical Brain’ Computer at UCLA (1948), Philo T. Farnsworth (father of television) in (1939), Frank Lloyd Wright and his Architectural School (1942), Birth of Cosmetic Surgery (1937), Telephone Answering Machine (1936), Contact Lenses (1936), etc. etc. This series also won a Special Commendation from the U.S. Department of War for its unparalleled coverage of military technology involved WW II.

I am nominating this series because I was unsuccessful at keeping it from being taken down - I inadvertently stepped on some toes by jumping in to the world of Wiki before I knew all the rules. I was always polite and got a lot of help (I was even adopted by a Wiki pro ) but everything I put up would be deleted by mostly the same people, and generally for a new reason. I have given up trying to add the Popular Science film series to the Popular Science page. I have also given up trying to create articles for the two sister film libraries (Oscar winners) produced by Jerry Fairbanks and released by Paramount Pictures -"Unusual Occupations" and Tex Avery's "Speaking of Animals" they were repeatedly removed as well. The current owners of these film libraries has agreed to GFDL. If the Cinema Collaboration group is interested in creating articles for these deserving historic film series I would be glad to help (a lot of the basic research/work is done)... I think that this group would have a much better chance of creating articles that would pass muster and not be deleted. ~ CCBear 22:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oldboy[edit]

Nominated May 26; needs three votes by June 9

Support:

  1. Taufiq2u 07:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • An great film which plays an important role in Korean culture as well as in international filmaking. Directed by Park Chan Wook, this neo-noir tragedy has won best director and grand jury prize at Cannes in 2004. I'd like to see some info on production and pre-production precesses, as well as more info on the film's release and more info on the film's critic reaction.

Final Destination[edit]

Nominated June 12; needs 3 votes by June 23

Support:

  1. per nominator. Francisco Tevez 15:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • We need this notable film up to GA, but there's a hell lot of work to be done in terms of cleanup and trivia moving. I've done some work on it, but I need some other users helping.

The Departed[edit]

Nominated June 16; needs 3 votes by June 23

Support:

  1.  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Cliff smith 04:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

The Lost World: Jurassic Park[edit]

Nominated July 7; needs 3 votes by July 14

Support:

  1. ColdFusion650 02:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • This article just got Good Article status and with an expanded Production and Release section, it could be a Featured Article. It's the sequel to a very important film in the history of cinema. It also briefly held the record for top opening weekend gross, top single day gross, and fastest to $100 million. In short, it's a very important film. ColdFusion650 02:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Terminator (film)[edit]

Nominated July 9; needs 3 votes by July 14

Support:

  1. DurinsBane87 03:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Andman8 16:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • This article is about an extremely important movie in film history, and it's in pretty bad shape. This article should be high priority for a film based project, i feel. DurinsBane87 03:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The format is good but It lacks sources. A fortnight of work could bring it to GA class. Andman8 16:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Cinema_Collaboration_of_the_Week/Removed&oldid=1138416641"