Talk:Foolproof (film)

Fair use rationale for Image:Foolproof.jpg
Image:Foolproof.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 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) 06:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Move?

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:28, 6 August 2013 (UTC)


 * And Foolproof (disambiguation) to Foolproof.


 * The primary topic for foolproof is idiot proof and not this obscure 2003 film. However, the destination title was once a duplicate article on the film, and will need to move to a new title, possibly Foolproof (movie) Ego White Tray (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Most incoming links are about the movie. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but only because the film has been at this title. If you google search and exclude Wikipedia, you get a hodgepodge of results, but the movie doesn't show up until halfway through the second page. As far as wiki links, the fact that someone has been careful to link to the correct article doesn't in any way make this movie primary. Also, most of the wikilinks to this film are as parts of lists - filmographies, films shot in Toronto, films made in 2003, etc, so all trivial mentions. Also, the disambiguation page Fool proof (disambiguation) lists idiot proof before the other two uses, which tells us that the editor of that page considered it obvious that idiot proof is the primary topic. Ego White Tray (talk) 01:10, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.