Talk:Film memorabilia collecting community

How does this sound like an "advert?" And, what exactly is being advertised?User:phishman 26 June 2006

Again - someone places an Advert Tag with NO DISCUSSION. Please REMOVE this Tag or explain whay you think it reads like an Advert. User:phishman 28 June 2006
 * There's no rule that says you have to discuss anything to place an advert tag. Ideally you should say why the tag was placed on the talk page or in an edit summary, but there's no rule. No one needs to discuss anything to place an advert tag, just like no one needs to discuss anything to create an article here. --Jtalledo (talk) 15:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, you are correct - it is absolutely BAD netiquette, and the Wiki guidelines discourage this to avoid unnecessary disputes. But, yeah, "technically" you are correct. I still want to know WHY this "reads like an advert" how can i fix it if I am told what the issue is. Duh. User:phishman 28 June 2006


 * I wouldn't say this sounds like an "advert" for any one company (though even a cursory glance through it shows it does name-drop at least two commercial sites, only one of which - eBay - that I'm aware of it being notable), but it DOES seem a little POVish somehow. It seems more like a magazine article than it does a Wikipedia article, to be frank. It does need a rewrite to sound 100% neutral and "encyclopedic", in my opinion. Plus, it suffers from Self-Importance Implied By Semi-Random Capitilization Syndrome; as this does not appear to be an article on a specific community or organization, "Community" should not be capitilized, for instance. A careful rewrite and some minor corrections should bring this article back on track, and I'll gladly take a crack at it in the next few days, I think. Although, I'm not sure it's worth it, since there does not appear to be much of much worth here already that couldn't easily be integrated into movie memorabilia. You could label it "History of movie memorabilia" (although personally, I'd prefer it if the article were titled "film memorabilia", with "movie memorabilia" as a redirect to it, but oh well). We'll see, I suppose. In any case, this article needs at very least a rename, since it's talking about basically a fandom, not an Organization That You'd Use Capitalized Words For. ;) Runa27 23:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * CORRECTION: Read the last paragraph, the intro, and the External Links section. It's about an organization after all; but I'm not entirely sure it's notable. The article does not make any of this clear, but DOES clearly romanticize the "Community" and movie memorabilia collecting - as well as absolutely outright demonizing eBay (are there shady dealers on it? Yes. Doesn't mean half of THIS article needs to sound like an anti-eBay rant when a simple "However, the existence shady dealers on popular auction sites such as eBay eventually prompted them to create..."), while in the same breath mentioning the "Community"'s website as alternative commercial site. All of which, especially combined, is a big fat no-no on Wikipedia. Too POV - fix or delete the thing. The first priorities should be to trim the eBay rant (or at very least, quote the organization's comments as such about eBay, and format it thusly, with a mention that the organization "claims that..."), NPOV it, and of course prove notability. I probably won't put it up for deletion if notability isn't proved, myself, but I know a lot of people are antsy about that kind of thing, so you're going to want to do that before almost anything else, I'd say. And reword that damn intro, for goodness sakes - since when do we say things like "[blah blah blah] = [yatta yatta yatta]"? On Wikipedia? Hell no! What do you take us for, a teenager's link archive!? There has absolutely got to be a way to word the intro that does not use mathematical symbols as shorthand for "is a" and which actually sounds professional. I find it almost offensive that whoever's worked on this article didn't even put that much effort into the intro, considering all the needlessly florid prose surrounding the organization's intent and the needlessly ranty bit about eBay that probably took a good 15 minutes to compose. Runa27 23:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)