Talk:The Reluctant Astronaut
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Am beginning a talk page for The Reluctant Astronaut.
This page definitely needs work. I do not know anything about this subject, so someone who knows something; please write!
WikiProject class rating[edit]
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 01:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Soundtrack section is TRIVIA[edit]
I note in the history that someone attempted to remove the soundtrack section a few months ago on the grounds that it is trivia. This revision was reverted a few days later. The soundtrack, however, is completely insignificant deserving at most a few words. Unless someone can provide a compelling argument for "significance" (in the Wikipedia sense), then the section should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.192.1.233 (talk) 06:53, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- No counter-argument; section removed.70.215.25.134 (talk) 17:56, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Film soundtracks are not a trivial part of a film and this soundtrack section is not a trivial part of this article. I am going to add the section back in since there is a specific Wikipedia terminology for trivia and this does not fall under it. Aspects (talk) 22:27, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- User:Aspects (and the various IPs) It has been removed again (not by me). The soundtrack section is (was) unsourced but that could have been fixed. The applicable guideline as to whether this should be included is MOS:FILM#Soundtrack. The guideline states that "Track listings for film scores are generally discouraged since the score is usually composed by one person and the score's tracks are generic descriptions of scenes from the film." The removal of the material seems justified by the MOS. Is there something particularly important about this soundtrack that would justify ignoring the MOS? Meters (talk) 22:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for your contribution. The section was first removed without any edit summary and I reverted. Then the reason stated was the soundtrack was trivial, not that the section was trivial or unsourced, which I could understand. I think we are all using the wrong terminology, since this is a score and not a soundtrack. The quote you provided is about using the Template:Tracklisting for soundtracks that have different composers versus a score that should be presented how it was in the article. The appropriate part of the section is "If the film score is a key aspect of production, it can be covered in a "Music" subsection of the article's "Production" section." The score from this film is not a key aspect of the production given that it only has the infobox and track listing. If there was sourced information about it, then there could be an argument to keep it, as such I now agree that the section is not needed. Aspects (talk) 04:13, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
- User:Aspects (and the various IPs) It has been removed again (not by me). The soundtrack section is (was) unsourced but that could have been fixed. The applicable guideline as to whether this should be included is MOS:FILM#Soundtrack. The guideline states that "Track listings for film scores are generally discouraged since the score is usually composed by one person and the score's tracks are generic descriptions of scenes from the film." The removal of the material seems justified by the MOS. Is there something particularly important about this soundtrack that would justify ignoring the MOS? Meters (talk) 22:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- Film soundtracks are not a trivial part of a film and this soundtrack section is not a trivial part of this article. I am going to add the section back in since there is a specific Wikipedia terminology for trivia and this does not fall under it. Aspects (talk) 22:27, 14 August 2016 (UTC)