User talk:Cgivillains

Superman II
You keep getting reverted because you are adding speculation with no source to back any of it up. Bignole 21:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I have stated that it is uncertain. I have not said it is or is not happening. How exactly is that "speculation"?

Because wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and placing your personal opinions in articles is not a valid source. It is your duty as a wikipedia editor to provide a source to back up what you write, not the the responsibility of others to find it. Wikipedian editors reserve the right to remove any content that cannot be verified, that includes editor opinions (which do not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View), and just forum chit chat. If you continue to place your opinion in the article, after this, you will be reported for vandalism. It is considered YOUR opinion because you have yet to provide a reliable source that actually backs up that "assumption". Bignole 23:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Listen to me very carefully.

Fact #1: That scene where the villains take over the world was in the Donner shooting script from 1977. Do you want a link to one of several websites where you can see it?

Fact #2: Fans from all over the world have asked Thau to use CGI to restore it in the Donner cut.

Fact #3: No official announcement has yet been made from Thau or WB about whether they will include the scene or not.

Therefore please explain to me where you are reading "personal opinion" and "assumption." I'm calling you out to back up your actions. Or do you just delete people's contributions for fun?


 * Fact #1 Be Civil. Fact #2, the only thing I need to say is "where is your source". It is your responsibility to provide a source that backs that up, otherwise it is your opinion. Fact #3, you cannot say "fans from all over the world.." of anything, because you cannot accurately measure that. If you have a source that can prove that, a source that is reliable, then ok. Otherwise the discussion is moot. Please look up Wikipedia's stand on sources, and adding information that needs a source but one wasn't provided for.Bignole 22:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

"Be civil"???? Huh??? You were the one who deleted my contributions repeatedly without any consultation. How is that being civil? I was minding my business when you decided to start vandalising my work. Vandalism is not acceptable on Wikipedia.

Regarding the fans from all over the world: what if I show you open letters that have been sent to Mr Thau and Warner Bros with hundreds of signatures. Would that be considered a source?

You are being very pedantic about stuff that is already well known and easily checked. For example the scene that was written in the 1977 shooting script. That is there for everyone to see. Look here: http://www.capedwonder.com/scripts/superman_2-mankiewicz.pdf, paying attention to scenes 394-398

Have you not read the guideline that says "Wikipedia is Not a Bureaucracy"?


 * First, reverting your work because it has no source is not vandalism. Secondy, provided a "script" is not a source because the authenticity of that script cannot be verified. If that is among the scenes that Indo77 wanted to include, where he actually provided a reliable source to back it up, then cool. As for the fans, it's highly unlikely YOU have letters addressed to Thau, since they would be his. Unless Warner Brothers or Thau have actually discussed the fact that fans have petitioned him to create the scenes, or even acknowledge it then it's moot. You still are not providing any sources, just rambling on about how YOU are so right, without proving it. Bureaucracy has nothing to do with providing sources. Please read Wiki's stand on sources, and where it says that YOU are responsible for providing them and if your information is removed, no matter how TRUE it is, because you don't have sources then that is not the fault of the remover but of the person that added the information. Also, be sure to sign your comments with 4 tildes. Bignole 22:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't have to have the letters addressed to Mr Thau. They are what is known as open letters. That means that they are made public on websites.

Secondly, Thau and Donner both commented about the petitions at the recent ComicCon. Thau even joked about stalkers! It's not in writing, but I can provide a link to a video someone took. Is that acceptable evidence?

Secondly, you dispute that a pdf of the original script cannot be verified as authentic. By that logic, you can point to virtually ANY document that is linked to on Wikipedia and say that it may not be authentic. How can you prove that the document Indo77 provided is authentic?

If you have a link, to where it can be confirmed that Thau and Donner discussed the footage to be shot, then yes that is acceptable. But, I would suggest writing it better than "No on knows if Thau will...", and simply write was is said. You are writing YOUR assumption based on something you witnessed when you should just write the facts, which would be exactly what is said. As for the script, it can't be verified because it's just an adobe file that anyone could have written. What Indo provided was a website that documented the differences in Donner's version with Lester's version. It's a reliable website because Entertainment Weekly has featured it, and that is a reliable magazine. Bignole 23:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC) --- Everything that I have spoken about has actually been discussed on that SupermanCinema website that Indo provided. For example, here is a page discussing the scripted scene where the villains take over the world: http://www.supermancinema.co.uk/daily_planet/dvd2006/s2-recon-spec/dvd2006-s2-recon-8.asp Is that adequate? This is the same site that is featured by Entertainment Weekly.

I have also found references to that scene on Wikipedia itself! Look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_II:_The_Richard_Donner_Cut. It's in the section called "The Mankiewicz script/original Donner shoot" Is a Wikipedia page a good enough source? ;-)

Finally, regarding the petition from fans. On that same Supermancinema site (the one featured in Entertainment Weekly), there is a copy of one letter sent to Michael Thau. It's here: http://www.thecinemaforums.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1098&highlight=open+letter+thau There are 340 names on this letter alone.

I'm also not sure how I can prove that no official word has yet been released on whether the scene will be on the DVD or not. How can one prove a negative? CGIvillains

As I said, his/her source is reliable because EW is willing to cite it. As for Wiki, you cannot cite Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia itself. That's like creating two pages that support each other but have no support outside of wikipedia. You might as well get a credit card to pay off your credit card, because it's the same cycle. I don't know "thecinemaforums.com" reliable, but the shear fact that it's a forum makes it questionable in Wikipedia's standards. Bignole 23:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, I take your point about using Wikipedia as a source. But I don't need to use it; the first link I gave was part of the site that Entertainment Weekly cited. http://www.supermancinema.co.uk/daily_planet/dvd2006/s2-recon-spec/dvd2006-s2-recon-8.asp

Also, I agree about forums in general. BUT, this particular forum is also part of the SupermanCinema site. Yes, the same one that was cited by EW.
 * Yes, but a forum is a forum and just because the site itself is reliable doesn't mean that they regulate their forums to nothing but fact, it defeats the purpose of a forum. Bignole 23:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, well here is a videoclip of Thau himself. In the first few seconds he talks about the fans bombarding the studios with the requests! It's taken from IESB.net (Independent Entertainment News) http://iesb.net/mambots/content/mgmediabot/players.php?params=standalone,true|type,wmv|path,http://host143.ipowerweb.com/~inlandem/newvideo/ccmichaelthau.wmv|width,400|height,400


 * Well I can't access that video, it won't actually play..so I'll just have to take your word on it. What I would suggest is creating a section about the Donner version. In the opening, discuss the fact that there were differences in his version and Lester's; discuss how there were things that Thau was supposed to film, and discuss how, according to Thau, fans had petitioned him to finish those scenes. Include cites where appropriate (i'll help with those if you aren't sure how). Then I would list the differences in a bullet format. Since we have a reliable site that catalogs the differences, it will be ok, especially since it was the subject of a heated debate regarding the Salkinds and the crew. Bignole 01:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)