Talk:Human Highway

Fair use rationale for Image:Neil humanhighway.jpg[edit]

Image:Neil humanhighway.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Synopsis[edit]

The plot description is pretty good; short, to-the-point, one paragraph long. It is followed by a lengthy synopsis that reads like a poor-quality fan essay (e.g. it praises "a particularly clever scene", and ends with a paragraph about the film's symbolism). It adds nothing to the plot description or the article or indeed the sum total of human knowledge, and cannot easily be edited without turning it into a duplicate of the plot description. I can understand the desire to cover a film that is not generally available, but the synopsis is completely out of place on an encyclopaedia. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to notice this. It is an actual fan essay... Still, must we edit in absolutes - as you are saying "completely"? There must be something salvageable; or would it be just so easy to delete the whole thing and be done with it? The suggestion in plot style guidelines is keeping the synopsis between 400 and 700 words and to start with a one paragraph overview. One example of possible re-editing discernment would regard the description of the tearful scene. It is an example of the film's plot style and could be written more objectively, whereas the terms "particularly clever" are obvious fluff. - Steve3849 ^talk 21:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the fan-essay quality and all direct references to symbolism. The plot summary is still too long. - Steve3849 ^talk 12:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag was placed in March regarding too much detail in the plot. So I've pared the synopsis down to only details that help with plot threads and removed the tag. - Steve3849 ^talk 22:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILM reassessment[edit]

I am reviewing this article per a request at WP:FILM's Assessment department. Looking over the article, I think this should remain at start class. To go further, I have a few suggestions on improving the article:

Take a look at WP:MOSFILM for guidelines on layout and ideas for further expansion.
The non-free images appear to be decorative in this article. Unless they are being used to support critical commentary within the prose of the article, they should be removed.
The plot could use a little trimming, try and get it under 700 words. Avoid phrasing such as "the film", "the opening scene", and "the story".
The article would benefit with more citations. Look to Google Books and News to see if you can find anything. Consider using Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Resources as well.
Is there anything about critical reception that could be included?

If you have any questions about the above, please let me know. Good work on the article so far. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ... I've have made some edits following your advice. - Steve3849 ^talk 10:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

spelling david myers[edit]

Spelling of "David Myers" (IMDB) found directly on VHS case. - Steve3849 ^talk 02:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Human Highway. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930201817/http://www.livedaily.com/news/2987.html to http://www.livedaily.com/news/2987.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:37, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]