Talk:Day of the Dead 2: Contagium

Fair use rationale for Image:Dayofthedead2DVDcoverscan.jpg
Image:Dayofthedead2DVDcoverscan.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


 * more info ::

shouldn't there be information on how this movie got to be a sequel to day of the dead? George Romaro approved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.251.190 (talk) 06:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

It's Romero, not 'Romaro' and it "got" to be a sequel because Taurus paid Richard Rubinstein for the rights to do this. Romero does not possess the rights to this film.(67.234.185.110 (talk) 15:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC))

I´ve seen Romero´s Zombie movies and this movie recently, and i do not see any reasons why this movie should be an "unofficial sequel" to Romeros movies. When unofficial movies means "they paid for the rights", then ok. But there is no analogy besides all are zombie movies. When peolpe read "It is an unofficial sequel to 1985's Day of the Dead", they get a wrong information. No similar characters, very different content, different zombie-types (very different zombie types). In Romero´s movies i have never seen a thinking intelligent zombie eating human flesh. So if there is no proof, that this is an sequel, please delete this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.56.75.11 (talk) 10:39, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Day of the Dead 2: Contagium. 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/20160304001613/http://twitchfilm.com/2005/09/frightfest-diary-day-four-day-of-the-dead-2-p-antibodies-wolf-creek.html to http://twitchfilm.com/2005/09/frightfest-diary-day-four-day-of-the-dead-2-p-antibodies-wolf-creek.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150701010625/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/daydead2.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/daydead2.php

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:31, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Wow
Nothing much how do I become to be a writer Leahavila (talk) 14:42, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Unofficial sequel
What makes something an "unofficial sequel"? If they have the rights to produce a sequel, that seems "official" to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)