Talk:O Lucky Man!

Fair use rationale for Image:O Lucky Man!.jpg
Image:O Lucky Man!.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 ensure 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) 15:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Plot Summary leaves much to be desired
Having watched the movie and read the summary, I can firmly say that the summary provided does nothing to help me understand what I just watched. I'd modify the summary myself, but I don't understand the movie at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terabiel (talk • contribs) 06:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

I have written a plot synopsis that refers more closely to the actual plot, rather than patchy descriptions of the mise-en-scene, as appears in the current plot summary section. I wrote it the day after I watched the film for the first time, and I am quite proud of I was asked to merge it with the existing summary, but I found it highly unsatisfactory and tried to substitute my summary in full. Wikipedia rejected it, although they may have done so for valid editorial reasons. I have put it on my user page, if anyone wants to see it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quovadisdaddy (talk • contribs) 09:51, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

- I am pleasantly surprised by the quality of this article, which in my opinion well exceeds "start class". Just popping in to say I have enjoyed the quality of the article so far, and thanks to all those who contributed. Excalibur (talk) 21:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)