Talk:Flatliners (2017 film)

Flatliners 2017

There was a comment on this page that the addition of Madison Brydges was viewed as vandalism however this is incorrect. Madison Brydges is the actress in the film playing Young Tessa. Her Wikipedia page is currently under construction and should be completed shortly. You can find information on this young girl on Google. You will see updates on the film as they are released however as for now, she is in the film and started shooting July 2016. Hopee this helps Madison Brydges (talk) 01:34, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I was not the one that marked this as vandalism but you need a source that states Madison Brydges is playing this character. (Chizzy-chan (talk) 07:00, 28 December 2016 (UTC))

Production companies and distributor

In this edit, I added an explicit source for the production companies and distributor. The article cites this article for the distributor, which says Sony will distribute the film. It does not say anything about Screen Gems. However, Chizzy-chan reverted me in this edit, removing the sourced production companies and changing the distributor back to Screen Gems, which fails verification. We have two sources that say Sony is going to distribute the film, so I think we should go with what they say, instead of this unsourced claim that Screen Gems will distribute it. Also, Village Roadshow is completely unsourced. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:57, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Screen Gems is owned by Sony. You stated comingsoon.net and I checked and their site and it said Screen Gems. Clearly stated here http://www.comingsoon.net/movie/flatliners-2017 (Chizzy-chan (talk) 06:58, 28 December 2016 (UTC))

I should add that whatever the majority of people want to put (Sony or SG) is cool with me. (Chizzy-chan (talk) 07:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC))

@Chizzy-chan: we can keep Screen Gems based on that source, but the rest of the sourced changes need to come back. I don't understand why you reverted the addition of Variety Insight, which is a reliable source. Can you explain that? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:22, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Must have missed that. Just revert my edit and add SG back. (Chizzy-chan (talk) 10:24, 28 December 2016 (UTC))

Well, it all worked out in the end, since we found sources for everything. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Need for some kind of protection on page?

NinjaRobotPirate (talk · contribs) Can we get some kind of protection on the page to stop the same consistent edits back and forth between Village and Columbia? It has gone beyond silly now (Chizzy-chan (talk) 11:34, 4 January 2017 (UTC))

I agree that it's been very disruptive. If it happens again, we can request page protection at WP:RFPP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:12, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Reboot? Surely it's a remake or sequel.

Anyone care to explain what qualifies this as a reboot instead of a mere remake, or worse, a sequel?

The original was a one-off film (until now), and one of the actors is returning to play the exact same (but now older) character he played in the original.

If it was the "exact same character" wouldn't the characters name be the same? I don't have any foreign language fonts installed but "Nelson Wright" (1990) and "Dr. Barry Wolfson" (2017) appear different on my screen.

This has sequel written all over it. 2.24.59.23 (talk) 23:05, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

The terms "reboot" and "sequel" are mutually exclusive. It's one or the other. 208.119.72.162 (talk) 19:28, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Focussed vandalism

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, I came across your list of socks the other day, and had a glance through. The person currently trying to change the production company of the film seems to have similar vandalism interests to Jason Like; is it possible these are his IPs? If so, what course of action do we take? Thanks — Quasar G. 20:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, if it's a UK editor who uses Talk Talk and blanks production companies, it's usually an IP sock of Jason like (talk · contribs). I usually block them as WP:DUCKs, but sometimes I'm not 100% sure, and I give them the benefit of the doubt. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:21, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Looking further, I see a few TalkTalk IPs that have blanked production companies in the article – I think I blocked a few of them as Jason like socks. The others are a little more perplexing. According to my notes, I've blocked 2601:185:c100:2b50::/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) before for adding unsourced content. That IP geolocates to Connecticut, US. I don't know who that is, though my notes indicate that it was for similar disruption to Jason like. It could be a copycat. There's also a Hungarian IP editor, 84.2.118.91 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), who's making some questionable changes today. I don't know who that is, and I don't think I've ever encountered a Hungarian IP editor who changes production companies. I just blocked a Hungarian sock puppet yesterday, but it was for something completely different. I don't think it's related to that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Maybe Jason Like goes on holiday to Connecticut every once in a while? I don't know. IPs are confusing things.

With cases like this, I suppose not much can be done except playing whack-a-mole with the IPs and protecting pages every now and then. I'll keep an eye on this article, to see if anything else crops up. — Quasar G. 20:56, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

It's possible to use open proxies to hide where your edits come from. Nate Speed (talk · contribs) does that, and I guess the Hungarian IP editor could conceivably be him. Usually, Nate Speed starts screaming violent threats in edit summaries, though. He's usually not too difficult to recognize. If random IP editors keep changing the content without sources, we can request page protection at WP:RFPP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:35, 13 June 2017 (UTC)