Talk:Stanley Kubrick - Wikipedia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | Stanley Kubrick 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. | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Current quote: "Despite the notoriety this provoked among actors, many of Kubrick's films broke new cinematic ground are now considered landmarks." Possibilities: "Despite the notoriety this provoked among actors, many of Kubrick's films [that|which] broke new cinematic ground are now considered landmarks." or "Despite the notoriety this provoked among actors, many of Kubrick's films broke new cinematic ground [and] are now considered landmarks." or something else! 213.120.28.36 (talk) 20:25, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I vote for the [and] option. I think that sounds great! Georgelazenby (talk) 21:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The second sentence says "Widely considered one of the...". It should say "Widely considered as one of the..." BillyShearsss (talk) 05:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: The use of "as" would be redundant here - the current phrasing works fine. EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them)talk 01:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The source doesn't support the claim that this lens was intended for satellite photography. 202.190.25.42 (talk) 05:13, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add in as source: Kubrick: An Odyssey (February 2024), by Robert P. Kolker and Nathan Abrams; Pegasus Books, Ltd.; ISBN: 978-1-63936-624-8; https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Kubrick/Robert-P-Kolker/9781639366248 Andyamo72 (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done '''[[User:CanonNi]]'''(talk|contribs) 13:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done. What do you want this to be used as a source for? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
About The Shining, the article states "and the American Film Institute has ranked it as the 27th greatest thriller film of all time". I'm pretty sure it's at #29 and not #27. Also, I suggest adding "in 2001", since the ranking is from that year. And maybe include an internal link to AFI's 100 Years...100 Thrills, for instance the text "has ranked it". --62.166.252.25 (talk) 11:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Done I confirmed that 29 is correct with the existing source and also made these other changes, thanks. Jamedeus (talk) 15:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. --62.166.252.25 (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Current sentence: The scientific realism and innovative special effects in his science fiction epic 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) was a first in cinema history, and the film earned him his only Academy Award (for Best Visual Effects).
Corrected sentence: The scientific realism and innovative special effects in his science fiction epic 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) were a first in cinema history, and the film earned him his only Academy Award (for Best Visual Effects).
Explanation: The subject is plural: "The scientific realism and innovative special effects," so the verb should be "were" instead of "was." 71.167.230.104 (talk) 15:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Done, thank you! Jip Orlando (talk) 15:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]