Talk:Aquamarine (film)

This article was nominated for deletion on 4 August 2009. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Film: Australian / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Australian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Australia: Queensland Low‑importance

	Australia portal Aquamarine (film) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

stub

This article was sorted as a stb. It isn't. Just incase I added the expand tag to it.Thedjatclubrock :) 23:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

other

This happens to be a rather mediocre film according to Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB yet the reviews listed show the film in a very different light.

Yeah, the "production values" weren't very slick but after seeing it for the first time last night, I think it might become one of my top 10 favorite movies ever. It has everything: intimate friendship, realistic dialogue, beautiful scenery and actresses, unselfish devotion to "something greater than oneself", doddering villains. --Uncle Ed 14:51, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your concept of everything is sorely lacking. No offense. 65.33.59.183 (talk) 08:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article lacks awards and there should be more information that will move the page up atleast to the start class or higher. --Swilson23 :) This article is currently or was the subject of an 2009-11-17 educational assignment. Further details are available here. —Preceding undated comment added 08:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC).

Crediting JoJo

SnapSnap recently reverted an edit I made, correctly noting that the cast listing in the infobox should match the billing block. My edit had been made under the (apparently wrong) assumption that the billing block wording and order matched the primary poster text. In this, I think SnapSnap's edit was correct. However, the reversion also changed the lead sentence of the article, where I would expect the general philosophy behind WP:COMMONNAME to apply and JoJo to be more appropriate than Joanna "JoJo" Levesque. Thoughts? —jameslucas ^{▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄} 01:27, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]