Talk:Tremors 3: Back to Perfection

Fair use rationale for Image:Tremors3DVDscan.jpg
Image:Tremors3DVDscan.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 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 05:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Why
what happend to Tremors: The Thunder From Down Under page why dose it redirect here? 82.21.192.131 (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I myself am also woundering what as happend to that page KCDavis (talk) 12:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

is anyone gonna answer me? 82.21.192.131 (talk) 17:23, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

It's been near on 2 months since you asked i would just leave it at that for now. Stop editing the Tremors 3 page it's vanderlisem. KCDavis (talk) 18:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I would answer you but i don't have an answer, i think we should start a new Tremors 5 page and then people can get the info they need on it 82.21.192.131 (talk) 12:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

'Best of the series'
How can you support the claim that this film is considered to be the best of the series when it has a lower Rotton Tomatoes score than the original?

Either way, without a reference it is original research and should not be allowed. I've removed the offending phrase until appropriate references can be provided. 170.170.59.138 (talk) 19:13, 11 December 2010 (UTC)