Talk:Spellbound (2002 film)

Untitled
why is Sean Welch aka Marley not mentioned at all in the article he financed, co produced, did the music, etc wondering ...........this omission seems to make the thing less accurate 75.6.237.31 23:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Festus Christopher King aka Pythagoras fcking2000@yahoo.com

I just added the Angela entry with Angela sitting right here. Thought someone might find that interesting. I do. Notthe9 04:48, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Ted was not sponsored by the Lebanon Daily Record. Instead, he was sponsored by the Rolla Daily News.

This is part of Harry's life here. If you would deny it to him then you would deny all that is Harry.

The Esteemed Harry Altman Esquire
Please leave this poor lad alone and do not alter his entry.

He is a god among us men and I understand how many of you may be jealous. But we cannot let our jealousy cloud our judgement. Was not Jesus sacraficed because we could not understand his love, promethius tortured by Zeus out of jealousy for his cleverness, and Socratese killed because the Athenians coveted his widsom?

Must Harry befall the same fate because of your simple minded pettiness?

I know my collegues have not been fair to this page, and I have punished those responsible. But let me ask you, as the head of the Seceret Brotherhood of the Musical Robots, to leave our lord in peace.

High Lord of Banns

"And then the lord god Altman sent his angles forth to play on their trumpet, and the time was heard from all over the land, and it was right and 3 OClock"

Book of Spellbound Chapter 6, Verse 12

-Were the great Harry Altman himself reading this, he'd most surely rattle the earth and incense the heavens at your mispelling of Socrates.

"Who the hell are you, that you think you're better than Harry Altman?"
 * Chapter 5, Verse 15

Fair use rationale for Image:Spellbound (movie).jpg
Image:Spellbound (movie).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 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 08:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Merge of Nupur Lala

 * merge- The information between the individual page and the character biography is almost identical. Minor alterations could be added to her character biography in an adequate merge.  The page has a lack of information, distinction and significance.  66.109.248.114 21:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The Nupur Lala article was sent to AfD here, and the result was keep. I will remove the merge tags and add  tags pointing to her article and the article for Harry Altman. Bry9000 (talk) 02:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

different list formats?
why are the words spelled presented in 2 different formats? some of them are done as comma seperated lists, others as bullet points, it looks messy & is inconsistent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.107.74 (talk) 22:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Ted Brigham's death
The article currently says Ted Brigham killed himself, but I'm suspicious of this claim. The linked reference is behind a paywall, but I suspect that if it really said that, someone would have noted that earlier. A quick search on Google suggests that it's not really known if this is actually the case. Should I just go ahead and revert that? Sniffnoy (talk) 14:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)