Talk:The 47 Ronin (1941 film)

Untitled
This page needs translated into English. 67.169.145.35 (talk) 12:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Undid Elvenscout42's move of this article per a request at WP:RM/TR
I acted on a technical move request by Mysterious Island, since Elvenscout42's original move was not discussed. However my personal opinion is that Elvenscout42's idea might be the best. If he still wants to proceed with that I suggest opening a formal move discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 00:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Material copied from the technical move request

 * The 47 Ronin (1941 film) → The 47 Ronin ([...]) – revert unfinished move - the page was renamed, then the redirect changed to redirect to a different page, however the editor forgot about incoming links. Mysterious Island (talk) 16:57, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand this point, but this rationale is not valid to revert an entire move. I would recommend going to this page to find all of the links that currently link to The 47 Ronin that need to be fixed, and fix them personally. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, there is no bot in existence that fixes this type of issue (due to a redirect such as this possibly still having validity in some cases), and no bot is capable of fixing an issue on every article such as this. Steel1943 (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Elvenscout742 has been informed of the discussion here. He is the person who [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_47_Ronin&diff=536474763&oldid=536474626 originally wanted] The 47 Ronin to redirect to Forty-seven ronin. His argument has a certain logic. He states "The previous title OBVIOUSLY refers principally to the historical event, so this article should have been moved." Giving a *film* about the 18th-century event the status of *primary meaning* of Forty-seven ronin seems peculiar. We also have 47 ronin which continues to redirect to Forty-seven ronin, as you would expect. I'm aware the issue could be shunted off to a regular move discussion, but perhaps there will be a miracle and everyone will come to an agreement here. EdJohnston (talk) 19:28, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Regardless of what names should be used, the correct way to do this is (a) move the film page (b) redirect all the links which point to The 47 Ronin to The 47 Ronin (1941 film) (c) only then change the redirect on The 47 Ronin. The way it was done was that the pages listed under Special:WhatLinksHere/The 47 Ronin were sending people to the wrong page. If one does not want to do the work involved in (b), actions (a) and (c) only create confusion, e.g. for people who click the link from Daisuke_Katō. Mysterious Island (talk) 23:30, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, the advice given at requested moves is that if a move is made without discussion, then we should, as part of WP:BRD, make a request for a technical move to undo the change, and then discuss it. The reaction here is contradictory, people seem not to want to undo the move but rather start a requested move discussion about the undoing. Should this move not simply be undone and then discussed? Mysterious Island (talk) 00:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I apologize for my failure to check incoming links. I am always sure to check double redirects, but on this occasion, after I moved the page and I was reminded to check for any double redirects, I clicked on "What links here" and was told that nothing links here. It didn't occur to me that "What links here" in this case meant "What redirects here" only. I will start working on finishing my move now. I do not, however, consent to my move being reverted solely based on technical grounds. Someone has apparently been going around English Wikipedia in the last couple of years insisting that since Japanese films are "more famous" in the English-speaking world than the rest of Japanese culture, then if a film shares the same title as a major literary work or historical event, the film is the primary topic. Even if, like this wartime piece that was probably banned even in Japan until the mid-1950s, the film has never received a wide release outside Japan. I intend to work to undo this ridiculous trend over time. Help me or leave me to work. :) elvenscout742 (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to me. The original point made this move sound more like an attempt to have the original mover fix all piping that previous linked to the other article. Now that I better understand that this was more or less a [WP:BRD dispute, sounds like a clean move. Steel1943 (talk) 05:36, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Plot
There is little to no information in this article, it needs to be expanded. Plot, production, everything.--Paleface Jack (talk) 03:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)