Talk:American Sniper

"Accuracy" section draft
''Please comment. Some guy (talk) 18:26, 6 August 2015 (UTC)''

Several major news sources commented on the accuracy of the film and how it differs from Chris Kyle's written accounts. The enemy sniper Mustafa is a major character in the film, but receives only a small mention in the memoir, with Kyle noting "I never saw him, but other snipers later killed an Iraqi sniper we think was him." According to the memoir, Kyle's 2100-yard shot was taken against an insurgent holding a rocket launcher, not Mustafa. Time notes that according to screenwriter Jason Hall, Kyle said of Mustafa: "He shot my friend. I'm not going to put his name in my book." The first combat scene in the film has Kyle killing a boy and mother who try to attack U.S. troops with a grenade; the boy was added for the film. The film depicts Ryan "Biggles" Job as dying shortly after he is shot by Mustafa; in reality, Job survived for several years after the incident but passed away after surgical complications from an operation on his face. The character "the Butcher" was created for the film, although this character may have been based on the real-life Abu Deraa.

Genre (part deux)
I read the comments at Talk:American Sniper/Archive 1, and I agree that we should keep it simple and label the film as a "biographical war film" as supported by sources cited within the article. This seems to be the conclusion reached in the previous discussion, so I modified the opening line to reflect that. If anyone objects, feel free to discuss further here. --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:57, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed kills
The long established "confirmed kills" is being challenged again. I added a source that interviewed the co-author where the DoD agreed on a number they could publish. Some missions and kills are still classified, apparently. --DHeyward (talk) 04:41, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The source is fine and supports the content. -- WV ● ✉ ✓  04:43, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

The source is a gossip rag failing WP:RS, and an "interview" fails on WP:SPS grounds as well. Please stop inserting complete nonsense with bogus "sources." Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 04:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hollywood reporter is considered a reliable source, hardly a rag, unless you consider other reliable sources, like the New York Times, to be toilet paper. Also I don't think you read WP:SPS. You are edit warring to removed sourced content. Stop.108.34.150.59 (talk) 05:05, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The source is reliable, uses journalistic oversight, and is not equivalent to the National Enquirer or TMZ (which are "gossip rags"). The interview has no relation to the Wikipedia policy on self published sources.  -- WV ● ✉ ✓  05:08, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Nope. It's first person claims by the interviewee. No oversight, no fact checking - and you are dishonestly misrepresenting it. Please stop ignoring and making false claims about policy. Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 05:10, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey look - one of them brought a sockpuppet or recruited a meatpuppet. Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 05:06, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Comment – The source is more than just an interview. The introduction before the actual interview suggests that the recent controversy is not based on solid "conclusive" evidence. The article then links to another source where actual analysis of the evidence is presented. I don't see the justification for having this tossed out, especially in the absence of a better source. Oh, and WP:SPS doesn't apply here. The interview is a primary source, but the analysis is secondary. Neither violates the policy on self-published. --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:12, 4 June 2016 (UTC)