Talk:Stanley Kubrick#RfC: Should an infobox be added to this page.3F
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{American English}}
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}}
{{Article history
|action1=FAC
|action1date=12:17, 19 July 2006
|action1link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Stanley Kubrick/archive1
|action1result=not promoted
|action1oldid=64607685
|action2=FAC
|action2date=00:11, 12 May 2007
|action2link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Stanley Kubrick/archive2
|action2result=not promoted
|action2oldid=129711796
|action3=GAN
|action3date=00:55, 15 June 2011
|action3link=Talk:Stanley Kubrick/GA1
|action3result=not listed
|action3oldid=434318505
|action4=GAN
|action4date=22:45, 24 April 2014
|action4link=Talk:Stanley Kubrick/GA2
|action4result=not listed
|action4oldid=605598932
|action5=GAN
|action5date=19:05, 24 August 2015
|action5link=Talk:Stanley Kubrick/GA3
|action5result=listed
|action5oldid=677624975
|currentstatus=GA
|topic=film
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|listas=Kubrick, Stanley|blp=no|1=
{{WikiProject Screenwriters|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Biography|filmbio-priority=Top |filmbio-work-group=yes }}
{{WikiProject Chess|importance=Bottom}}
{{WikiProject New York City|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Hertfordshire|importance=High}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 15
|minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(180d)
|archive = Talk:Stanley Kubrick/Archive %(counter)d
}}{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes
}}
{{Press
|collapsed=no
| subject = article
| author = Corinne Ramey
| title = The 15 People Who Keep Wikipedia’s Editors From Killing Each Other
| org = The Wall Street Journal
| url = https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-wikipedias-bickering-editors-go-to-war-its-supreme-court-steps-in-1525708429
| date = 7 May 2018
| accessdate = 18 August 2020
| subject2 = article
| author2 = Omer Benjakob
| title2 = How Crazy Was Last Year? The 15 Most Controversial Wikipedia Articles Paint a Dark Picture
| org2 = Haaretz
| url2 = https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/.premium-the-15-most-controversial-wikipedia-pages-of-2017-1.5730022
| date2 = 1 October 2018
| accessdate2 = 18 August 2020
}}
{{annual readership}}
potential missing word
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)
:I vote for the [and] option. I think that sounds great! Georgelazenby (talk) 21:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2024
{{Edit semi-protected|Stanley Kubrick|answered=yes}}
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)
:File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg 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)
Barry Lyndon: Zeiss 50mm F/0.7 lens
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)
Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2024
{{Edit semi-protected|Stanley Kubrick|answered=yes}}
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)
:{{done}}
::Not done. What do you want this to be used as a source for? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
AFI
{{Edit semi-protected|Stanley Kubrick|answered=yes}}
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)
:{{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)
::Thanks. --62.166.252.25 (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Subject-verb agreement
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)
:{{done}}, thank you! Jip Orlando (talk) 15:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)