Talk:Alien: Romulus

Alien: Romulus
The article should be renamed to Alien: Romulus as quoted by all the latest sources.--88.14.69.241 (talk) 13:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * For readers curious, the article from "Untitled Alien film" to its current "Alien: Romulus" on 17 October 2023. --82.101.249.36 (talk) 04:55, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Because there was a new source confirming the title that is actually reliable. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Premise
I know it's not the usual premise we are used to seeing. However, I don't see an issue with how it is presented since this is all the information we have on any kind of storyline.  Mike  Allen   21:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I just located this official looking poster released for the film if its useful and if you know how to load it for the Wikipedia article here: . HenryRoan (talk) 16:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It must have been deleted. I would keep an eye out on IMP Awards for official posters.  Mike   Allen   14:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Hatnoting for the "Alien 5" incoming redirect
What is the problem? was created in 2008, and was created in 2017. pointed here back in January. Obviously, there have been other uses of Alien 5, with content on Wikipedia, that is not covered in this article, The way Wikipedia handles these things is with a hatnote. Where is the controversy in pointing out that Alien 5 (disambiguation) can show you to say, Blomkamp's version, or Whedon's version? If your problem is having Alien 5 redirect here at all, then removing the hatnote is not the solution, repointing the redirects to the diambiguation page is the solution, then removing the hatnote. Per WP:DISAMBIGUATION shows that there should be a hatnote if the redirect point here, which "Alien 5" does; or we need to repoint it to the disambiguation page. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 18:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Because this film is not called Alien 5.  Mike  Allen   22:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)


 * That's not the point and not the purpose of hatnotes. Hatnotes are for navigation only, and are not meant to be content of aritcles. Deleting the hatnote is pointless in misdirecting readers. As long as  and  redirect here, there should be a hatnote. If you disagree with those redirecting here, then repoint them to the disambiguation page. If you think they should redirect here, then there should be a hatnote. You have not done anything to the incoming redirect, seemingly agreeing with it pointing here. If so, there needs to be a hatnote per WP:HATNOTE  . It is the way Wikipedia is supposed to work, according to the relevant editing guidelines and policies. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

What we should say distributor is, rather *how*
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures distributes all 20th Century films under the 20th Century Studios label. Avatar: The Way of Water, The Creator, etc., see here. Each other article concerned with this method shows 20th Century Studios as the distributor on the sidebar, and "Released by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures under the 20th Century Studios label" under subsection "Release". I wish to keep continuity with every other 20th Century branded film, and, seeing as how this works in every other context, I propose we write it like this in this article. ToNeverFindTheMets (talk) 23:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Re-evaluate standalone status
According to the director of this film via The Hollywood Reporter here the film is not standalone but does have connections to the other films. So should this be referenced? 0Detail-Attention215 (talk) 18:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Release Date in Infobox
Lately, other users have been removing this film's release date from the infobox. So, when has it been a thing not to put future release dates in the infobox? Why just this film when some others (like Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga, Twisters and Wicked) still have theirs in their infoboxes?CRBoyer 17:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You may want to ping since they removed it in this edit.  It's been my understanding for years that any sourced release date can be added into the infobox.  Mike   Allen   13:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Film dates are very fluid and even if sourced can and do change a lot. I personally find it a very bad idea to place information that can become false pretty quickly in very prominent place, but feel free to re-add it. It's funny how to similar templates, film and television have very different thoughts on this parameter. Gonnym (talk) 08:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)