Jump to content

Talk:Friday the 13th (franchise)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Freddy and Jason: A new template

Please see:

Talk:Horror film#Freddy and Jason: A new template
Wikipedia:Peer review/FreddyJason/archive1

Lady Aleena | Talk 20:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Box Office Take Table

Something is seriously wrong with the header formatting at the top.

You might want to be a bit more specific, because it looks fine for me. Bignole 22:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Although not the original poster, I too see an issue. Look at http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/jpurdham/TableIssue.png for an example. -- Balcerzak 19:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I found this out when I made one for Indiana Jones franchise. Apparently, this auto correction FireFox and some browsers have that will get rid of that "gap" when you put in an picture in the middle of a section, does the same for the box above the table (when it shouldn't). This isn't a problem for IE users, because we, in essence, get all those gaps on the page. I believe the issue is not corrected.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Film site crash

I took the liberty and changed the link because the server crashed. They claim to have a backup, but so far, the site is not important enough to be included. If anyone has any objections, feel free to reinclude the links.--216.249.145.232 23:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Nope. good catch. I wonder if all sources that cited that place are not done for as well. Hmmm...lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Article name

Okay, I can understand the reason for taking out the "film" part because the article's area has spilt out of that field, but simply using the qualifier "series" puts it too close to Friday the 13th (TV series) to me. Anyone thinking "franchise" would be more appropriate? --Bacteria 00:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

That's fine.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I concur! Mindman1 00:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


Video Game

Shouldn't there be a mention of the infamous NES game somewhere?

You mean this -- Friday the 13th (video game)? I don't know how infamous it is, but it should probably be mentioned briefly, though I don't know how much can be said about that isn't on that page. Maybe we should just merge all that onto this page?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
As film, television and literature is mentioned, I think other media should be represented aswell. -- Kirjapan 04:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Sequal

I believe that on Fridaythe13thfilms.com they have a report that their will be another Friday the 13th sequel scheduled for release in 2009. Shouldn't this be added to the article?

No, because they are not considered reliable when it comes to that type of subject matter. Especially when Crystal Lake Memories explicitely has Sean Cunningham state that they are more focused on a sequel to Freddy vs. Jason than another F13 right now.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually i added that its coming next february

Merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
--Closed as merge.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm suggesting that Friday the 13th (2009 film) be merged to this location, along with any information that is reliably sourced. Per WP:NOTFILM, since production has not started, and no one knows when it will start, let alone when the film will be released, the information does not warrant a separate article.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree with this. The movie has only been announced and basicly all the official information about the film is virtually non-existing. Besides the article is full of rumors and wrong information (e.g. link to an "official website" which I now have changed. UPDATE: I have contacted the webmasters to get a confirmation of this information). -- Kirjapan 06:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - as per WP:NF. EDIT: Notability guidelines for films state it shouldn't have an article, and while exceptions can be (and have been) made as per WP:IAR, this particular case seems pretty clear-cut to me; nothing is really known, and outstanding notability has not been asserted (i.e. not enough to release it from the shackles of WP:NF). Best regards, Liquidfinale (Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ) 09:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:NF and similar precedent found with projects like Spider-Man 4 and Jurassic Park IV. The future film information belongs perfectly at Friday the 13th (franchise), and if the project enters production, the film article can be recreated. The content can then be moved from the franchise article to the film article and then fleshed out as a proper film article. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support Sure. — Enter Movie 21:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The website fridaythe13thfilms.com is no way official. I got a reply from the owners: "Not really, no. It was official for production company Crystal Lake Entertainment for a time in for a few years back in the late 90's/early 00's, but they dropped the tag when the company disappeared." -- Kirjapan 22:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge 2

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
--Closed as merge.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm proposing a merger of Friday the 13th (comics) to this article. The literature section here already takes care of the comics, and the current comics article is only about 7kb large--which wouldn't be a significant impact in size on this article. I think there are a few comics not mentioned here, but that is easily corrected...we just need sources. The only thing that will truly be lost will be images, and they probably didn't meet WP:FU in the first place.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've put in the 4 Avatar Press comics that were missing--with sources. So there really isn't anything different, except for a little less plot and no unnecessary images.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - I can't see the Friday the 13th (comics) article serving much purpose if the information exists here. It makes sense to merge it rather than have a redundant article. Paul730 22:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support as there is adequate coverage in the literature section. The article is redundant, and redirecting here sans non-free images is the best approach. If there can be some fair use rationale attached to any of them, I'd suggest that if possible. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge 3

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I'm proposing the merging of Friday the 13th (video game) to this location. There is nothing there but unsourced information, and a game walkthrough. Wikipedia is not a walkthrough for one thing, and everything relevant in the page is already listed on this page. The user that reverted the merge appears to only have done so because the image they uploaded wouldn't cut it on this page, as they immediately placed that image here when they first realized the merge had taken place. When it was removed, they opted to undo the merge.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Merge - No relevant information on the video game page which can't be included more tidily on the franchise page, except the images, which are no big loss. Paul730 21:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge, but try not to lose valid information. // Liftarn

I went ahead and performed the merge, since there are no opposes and nobody else has joined the discussion. Paul730 06:20, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Video game image

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Consensus was to leave for now.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

There currently a debate as to include an image of the Friday the 13th video game cover or not. I think it's better we discuss it here to avoid an edit war. Paul730 15:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

There's no critical commentary. The only excuse for its existence seems to be "other sections have an image". First, the other sections are far more expansive in their discussions. Second, the other images all have critical commentary. A caption of "video game cover" is not critical commentary in anyway way. It clearly states at WP:FU that cover art must have critical commentary. This page is trying to work its way up the status ladder, so please provide a good reason as to why we need to see the cover of the computer game in that section.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The civer show how the video game was packaged, as far a alenght goes there was a rather lenght article about the video game over at Friday the 13th (video game). // Liftarn

EDIT CONFLICT: Personally, I'm not that bothered about the image. It doesn't really help or hinder the page, IMO. I agree with Bignole that we need much better critical commentary to justify it's inclusion in the article. My question is, can't we come up with some critical commentary? If we included critical commentary, would you be fine with including it Bignole? Or is it just completely unnecessary? Paul730 16:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it hinders the page's ability to ever by GA or FA, because there's no critical commentary. Simply saying "here's the packaging" is nothing. There needs to be a reason. As for the length of the article that was redirected, all the length was in a walkthrough, which shouldn't have been there in the first place. I think the image is completely unnecessary because the games themselves were not that special to begin with. There have been what, 3 games, 1 of them seems to just be an updated version of the first one. None appear to have anything notable about them. I mean, at least Michael Avallone's book had something notable about it, being that it chose to deviate quite a bit in the beginning and ending of the book, compared to the other novels that were shot-for-shot adaptations. We cannot make-up critical commentary for the image, it has to be there.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh right, I thought you meant the caption didn't contain critical commentary. :/ I see your point, the video games are one of the least notable aspects of the franchise. I'm not going to agree with the inclusion of this image in the article, it's just kind of window dressing. Paul730 17:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Isn't the video game cover for the Commodore 64 game based off the original poster for Friday the 13: The Final Chapter? Lord Crayak 17:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, why? Paul730 17:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Couldn't that be used as the caption or is it notable enough? Lord Crayak 17:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I think its notable as the first video game cover, it adds to the article and illustrates the whole line of computer games. And FYI, No critical commentary exists to support inclusion of Image:Fridaythe13thseries.jpg. The Ultimate edition DVD version is not even mentioned in this article. --Dual Freq 17:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

First bit, stating what it is is not "critical commentary". That means about nothing. We don't need an image of the "first video game" when there's nothing about the first video in the section besides that very fact. As for the DVD image, it's the only image ath technically encompasses the vast majority of the article, which is the films. A movie poster generally never has "critical commentary" for a film article, but it's accepted because the entire article is devoted to film. The majority of this article is devoted to the films, as they play the most significant role in establishing this franchise. You said in your edit summary "as much as the comic image". No it isn't. The reason being, the "comic image" is used to show where New Line first excercised their right to use the "Friday the 13th" title, which had previously been the property of Paramount for over a decade. New Line didn't use it for Jason Goes to Hell or Jason X, they used it years afterward for a special issue comic. So, what is so special about the video game cover art?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
It complies with fair use in just as many ways as the other images here. If adds to the video game section representing the first release of a computer version for the franchise. This is no different than the comic book art representing the first use by New Line. The DVD image does not represent the computer versions since no games are included on it, as far as I know. And at least the C64 version is mentioned here, the article doesn't even say an ultimate version was released yet it uses its art to illustrate the whole article. If the computer game box art fails this than so does the DVD art and I suggest it be removed as well. --Dual Freq 18:01, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
No critical commentary. Simple as that. The DVD image encompass all of Paramounts films, which were the whole reason that game even existed. You might as well petition to have all movie posters removed, because they aren't talked about in film articles, yet the articles are about the film. The section itself cannot even support the image in question. But fine, I'm game for removing the DVD cover art if the game cover art goes. I think the Variety ad, and novel and the comic are much more solid in their meeting of criteria than any other image anyway.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Here's the article with both removed, doesn't seem to be that much the worse for wear.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the images are all fine. It is okay per fair use law, and there is a longstanding and broad consensus, though some opposition, that is okay per guidelines and policy (WP:NONFREE), to use cover art for a book, album, game, etc., to identify the product in the context of commentary about the product, without necessarily having commentary about the cover art. There is a longish paragraph of discussion about the video game, so there's your commentary. If you're going for FA, there may be stylistic and editorial concerns about the images, heading, organization, etc., that go well beyond the scope of the policy. This looks like several articles in one - some discussion of the franchise as an entertainment product, and several mini articles about the various media lines. Some of those mini-articles have their own images, which begins to push the limit for use of non-free images people feel comfortable about including in a single article. Beyond the question of whether any given image is acceptable in isolation, there's a more general issue about reducing the overall number in each article. Wikidemo 18:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

But there isn't critical commentary on the game in that section. Saying the game was released in 1986 and this is what you did is not critical commentary. There's nothing but a brief description of what the game is, not about the notability of the game.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
As for the comic book, I can't even tell from the text which cover it represents, issue / date, etc. There are about two sentences about the comic, which is similar to the amount dedicated to the computer game the image represents. The comic being a first for new line and the game being a first franchise game. I see no difference here in the amount or significance of commentary for the two. If the comic is justifiable then so is the computer game art. All three images have adequate rationale's and I don't see a problem keeping them, but if you want to over analyze it and want to play it safe, then remove all three. --Dual Freq 18:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
What part of "special issue" was hard? There's only one issue, that one. It clearly states on the cover "special 1". Look above where it says "AVATAR". There is also commentary in the caption which details why the comic is special. There is no reason to repeat ourselves in the text verbatim. That's just it, there were no "fanchise games". There was one game, and it was readapted for NES some 2 or 3 years later. There wasn't a sequel to the game created, there wasn't anything that continued the gaming series. They tried the game with the computer, they tried with NES, then 15 years later they tried on the mobile phone. That's hardly continuing a franchise. You are the one trying to nitpick and say "well this isn't enough". Well, it's more than the game. The game says "it's a game". Wow, I was blown away by the caption. The comic explains its importance, again, something the game does not do. Being the first game isn't that special. The comic wasn't the first comic, the first comic was a Jason Goes to Hell comic. What makes it special is the fact that New Line did not use the F13 title until 10 years after they acquired the rights to the franchise, and they used it for a special issue comic book. Can your game say that?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Please calm down Bignole, your comment is coming across rather accusatory and sarcastic. Paul730 18:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not "my" video game, and frankly the comic book is just as much cruft as the video game. I don't understand what the problem is with the box art and I still see no more significance in the few sentences describing the comic, vs the paragraph talking about the computer games for the movie franchise. There's even have an outside party saying that they can all be kept. If you want to nitpick the FU rules then you should remove all three. Otherwise just keep them and move on, this is not a big problem. --Dual Freq 18:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's the difference, the comic image has text describing what you see in relation to why that is relevant. In other words, it explains when New Line first used the title they had owned for a decade. The game image does not do that. In fact, the game image has no text discussing it period. There's nothing special about the image in question, The Final Chapter had just come out a couple years prior, and at the time was the last film to actually feature Jason, as Jason Lives had not yet been released. So, currently, there isn't a reason to have any image in a section that discusses the release of 3 games, none of which have anything notable about them.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Dont know if Im reviving an old debate, but I actually want to see the image. It was a fairly important game or games and it seems strange not to be included. My 0.02c. Its certainly significant. 121.221.103.28 (talk) 10:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Good Article Review

I've gone over the article and implemented some minor changes. Overall, everything looks great. My only concern are the images under Literature and Merchandise. I understand the intended rationales, but I'm not sure if the rationales are concrete enough to be received by editors who have a strict interpretation of WP:NFC. I think the implementation is OK for now, but I would suggest thinking of other ways to provide visual aid, such as using quote boxes instead. I did have one question -- why did Paramount sell the rights to New Line Cinema? The lead section mentioned this, but the article doesn't go into any detail about the reasoning behind this, nor does it seem to cover New Line's approach to the franchise's films. Can this be explained? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, my image concern was the video game, as it really wasn't anything other than the "first" game that wasn't all that notable to begin with. I'll see if I can find some quotes for the literature section, and if I need to get rid of the comic and book, then at least that video game image will finally go. As for New Line, I just haven't finished the development section yet. I've only gotten as far as part 6. New Line didn't acquire the rights till Jason Goes to Hell.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I just added a bit about New Line acquiring the rights, so that it would be more reflective of the lead.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, the David Grove book I have, which is the one used less often in this article, actually contains some detailed information on Avallone's work for the Part 3 adaptation. I'm sure I could probably find some quotes in there that could be put in a quotebox, and used to replace the book image.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
The Avallone book has been cut--no pun intended.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Comic and game image are gone as well. Quote box for the comic section.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

The changes look good! But you mentioned that the Development section was incomplete. Does it need more time to address more information about New Line, or does everything that can be found already exist in the article? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

It's incomplete as far as mentioning every single movie, at least in passing. But I've added information on how New Line acquired the rights to the franchise. In essence, it's broad, just not completely comprehensive yet.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I've performed some copy-editing for the article, but everything looks superb so far. Another item came to mind, though -- is there no commentary about the impact of this franchise on society, how it may have influenced adolescents or started trends in horror? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:20, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

First, let me say that I appreciate all the copy editing. The article isn't comprehensive, yet. That's one thing that I've been waiting till the end to do, as well as spruce up the merchandise section. I have a couple of books waiting in the wings that discuss the slasher film genre, so I'm hoping that will help out. Plus, I haven't tapped the universities resources yet. That section just seemed to be the hardest one to crack, so I'm saving it for last.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

GA Pass

The article currently meets GA criteria after reviewing it and discussing it with the primary editors. As Bignole noted above, there will be room for expansion. However, at the present, there is sufficiently broad coverage about the franchise. For comprehensive coverage, a criteria of a FA, more content may be needed in the thematic and societal sense. Good work! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Freddy and Jason: A new template Part 2

Over two years ago I made a template for the macroseries created by Freddy vs. Jason. I put it up for peer review and at the time it was too big. Back then there weren't collapsible templates, so yes, it was too big. Now that the collapse functionality is here, I added it. I would like to know what you all think of it before I put it into the main template space. So, here it is for your inspection. Please leave notes on its talk page. Thanks! - LA @ 07:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

New Film is NOT a remake

9:32 am on Turs 4/3/08 -- The new Friday the 13th film keeps being listed as a remake. IT IS NOT. According to the studio and the guys writing it, it will be a sequel to the original, set sometime between Friday the 13th Part 3 and Friday the 13th: The Fin al Chapter. I have corrected this several times, but someone keeps changing it back.

However is changing it: PLEASE STOP. You are reverting it to incorrect information. It is not a remake, so please stop labeling it as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.99.90.254 (talk) 16:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Nothing has been set because they haven't even finished the script. The "remake" title is based on the reliable sources we have that consistently refer to it as a "remake".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
did you even read the scource well??? yes it is a remake... they are planing on creating a remake, but adding a whole different story from the older ones due to not having the rights of the character... don't you see that they want to explain well in this new movie jason's past and explain cristal lake and the hockey mask better??? if this isn't a remake then TCM isn't either... and don't come saying that it isn't because we witness the birth of leatherface in it... the same goes for Halloween... THIS NEW MOVIE IS A REMAKE!!!!213.13.226.202 (talk) 13:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Added tidbits on more soundtrack releases

As there was no mention of the soundtrack releases for the TV series, Fred Mollin's 2005 CD, or every film since Jason Goes to Hell, I worked mentionings into the "Music" section of the article. If you think there's a better way to place the info, do so. Also, the coding for the references needs more details I didn't know how to put. 69.23.212.206 (talk) 07:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

All soundtrack releases are best placed in the merchandise section, which is where I will move them. I'll also clean up the reference templates for you as well.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

New Page for "Friday the 13th" Remake

The film has already started production since April as confirmed here: [1] So I think it's safe to make a new article for that film. — Enter Movie (talk) 00:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

We need something a little more reliable than a Bloody-Disgusting scooper report. Regardless, it states in WP:NFF that the production itself needs to be notable. Right now, all we have is some cast listings (and if the production start date can be found reliably, we have that). Single mentionings are trivial. For the production itself to be notable (i.e. to warrant separation) we are going to need sources discussing the production so that we actually have something to report on. Otherwise, we'd have a page that basically mirrors what's already in a neat little paragraph on this one.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The remake it's currently filming, visit the Imdb.--82.54.217.185 (talk) 18:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

First, IMDb is not a reliable source. Second, please read WP:NFF, unless the production is notable (i.e. unless someone is reporting on what is being done to make the film) then the page should not be created till the film is released.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, how about now? The production is almost wrapping up. By the way, I don't think it's a remake. One of the producers said, "We tried to take elements from all three [of the first] movies to create one reboot of Friday the 13th." [2] — Enter Movie (talk) 17:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
There isn't enough to support a page. From what I hear, the DVD for this film will be awesome (have lots of behind-the-scenes info), but as far as notable production it's a wash. The above link is the only bit of production info they've really released, and there isn't that much there. Some decent "what we were trying to do" stuff, but nothing specific in regards to what they are doing. No where close to what something like The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film) has, and that film probably has less publicity as far as people know it even exists. Unless a significant amount of production information comes out that forces us to split the article early, I don't see this page getting created until maybe January 2009 (in prep for all the Rotten Tomato reviews and the Box Office Mojo statistics that will inevitably follow and would be too much for this page). At least, that is the way it is appearing right now. I mean, we don't even have a picture of Jason yet, and we know they have filmed scenes with Mears.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The production have been pretty notable from what I've seen. Jason's mask can be seen here. [3] Filming began on April 21st in Austin, Texas. [4] Here's some other updates on the film. [5] (<<<Brad Fuller said the production would wrap today back in June 2). I mean, that Platinum Dunes website tells a lot of information. Look at the Saw 5 article. It isn't any less notable and barely tells anything about production news. — Enter Movie (talk) 19:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I never said the Saw 5 article should be in existence either. I don't watch every horror related page. I've seen Fuller's blog, but it doesn't really give details on what they are specifically doing. A start and finish date is a single sentence. Upcominghorrormovies.com has a timeline of when things occurred. Most of Fuller's statements are about the cast, and some reasons why they decided to make the film, but not a lot about what they are doing in production itself.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposal for a reformatting of the franchise's template

What do you think?

I don't think it's necessary. Freddy vs. Jason isn't directly part of any continuity, so why would it be in the "original" section? It's easier to just list the films as they come out together. They're all part of the same film series, just not the same continuity. Otherwise, how would you do Halloween, which has like 3 continuities.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I have to agree with Bignole. I know other series templates like Template:The Texas Chainsaw Massacre break up classic and remake movies but I'm not sure I agree with it. I guess it depends on what you believe constitutes a "series", which was the subject of some debate at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films regarding the Batman movies. Since Wikipedia doesn't promote an in-universe approach to fiction (giving canon precedence for example) I think lumping all the F13 movies together regardless of continuity is the way to go.  Paul  730 21:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Jason Featured.

"Jason is featured in all of the films, either as the killer or as the motivation for the killings." This quote from the Wikipedia page is false. As most viewers know, the original features Jason's mother, and Part 5 doesnt feature Jason at all, the killer in Part 5 is a fake Jason trying to make the main character think Jason has returned. Kav2001c (talk) 02:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC) kav2001c 02/10/09

Those films are covered by the "motivation for the killings". Roy used Jason as his fixation when he avenged his son's death. Pamela murdered all of those people because she felt they were all responsible for Jason's drowning as a boy. Thus, he's been a part of every film in some capacity, whether he was a motivation for the character or an imagery another could use to inflict fear.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

2009 film

I would like to add the cast list to the film, the Variety news turned out to be true, J. Padalecki is starring in the film.FashVic (talk) 01:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Subsection title

There has been some recent issue with whether the "Crew" secion should be titled "Films and crew". IMO, it's redundant to list the section as "Films and crew", because the entire overall section is called "Films". We already know these crew members are for the films. We don't later list the box office section "Films and box office", because it's unnecessarily redundant of section headings. Other thoughts on this?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, it's redundant to repeat titles in subsections.  Paul  730 23:09, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

New Friday the 13th sequel (2010?)

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) – Don't look now, but Jason's coming back.

The villain who has defied death more often than Evel Knievel is making another appearance on the big screen. Sources say that New Line and Platinum Dunes are moving forward on a new "Friday the 13th" and that Damian Shannon and Mark Swift, who wrote the recently released reboot, are beginning work on a script for a new picture.

There's a catch, though.

Unlike the sophomore efforts of other film franchises, the new "Friday" is expected to be not a sequel so much as a follow-up, those familiar with the project say. Jason Voorhees would still be the villain, but the new picture is expected to use elements of the original franchise more as a jumping-off point than as a template. The recently released "Friday" relaunch drew from the first four pictures in the series, and producers are said not to be keen on the plot elements of the half-dozen movies that followed.

Insiders caution that there is no green light and that Platinum Dunes and New Line are working together on another franchise reboot, "A Nightmare on Elm Street," which is set to start shooting in two months.

Still, the "Friday" property is a desirable one, and in a best-case scenario the next film could be ready as early as the second half of 2010.

The first reboot, which brought a group of attractive young victims nack to get slashed at Camp Crystal Lake, has been one of the surprise hits of the winter, earning $70 million worldwide since opening in mid-February.

Source. Just thought this might interest the regular editors of this page. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 12:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Appreciate it. I'm not sure if we should include this, for two reasons. One, they're using a scooper report (thus this isn't an official confirmation), and then they throw the "but the movie has not been greenlit" bit in here. On a personal standpoint, I say, "Hell yes". On a Wiki standpoint, I say, "Let's wait on this".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I thought of adding it myself but it seems too early for the time being. So I agree on the waiting thing. Besides until the films start rolling, the project can be dropped at anytime for any reason, despite being green-lighted. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 01:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is true. The only thing we know for sure is that Nightmare is their priority right now, and not a Friday sequel. I'm sure they probably just asked Shannon and Swift sketch out a possible sequel to see if they would be interested in the story. Nothing real to report at the moment.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Reliable sources for the music

I have removed this information:

In 1993, the musical score for Jason Goes to Hell was released featuring seventeen tracks from the film.[1] Between May and August 2002, the Jason X soundtrack saw release in Germany, Japan, and the United States. All releases contained eighteen tracks from Harry Manfredini's composition.[2] The Freddy vs. Jason soundtrack was released in Germany and the United States in 2003, containing the twenty tracks composed by Graeme Revell. A second soundtrack was released for the film containing tracks from various musical artists who had lent their work to the film.[3] Two years later, a new soundtrack was released comprising of music from The New Blood and Jason Takes Manhattan, all composed by Fred Mollin. Unlike the previous three soundtracks that had been released alongside the release of their respective films, this soundtrack was released seventeen years after The New Blood and Jason Takes Manhattan were in theaters.[4] The television series produced by Mancuso Jr. released its own soundtrack in 1992 as well, which consists of songs composed and performed by Fred Mollin.[5]

A concern was brought up on the use of "Soundtrack Collector" as a source, because they take their information from users (ala IMDb). I was having trouble finding sources to back all of this up, so I removed it so that the FAC could continue and when we find RSs we can just reinstate it. So, help from anyone is really really welcomed.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Post-FAC read through

Though the FAC didn't succeed this time don't give up Bignole. Here's some suggestions as promised, but please take them for what they are; opinions of someone who doesn't have the skill to create FA articles and who concentrates almost solely on video game articles. So: --Lead--

  • Perhaps slasher films should be wikilinked? IMO it's more likely that someone would need to check up on what a slasher film is rather than what horror is (horror is wikilinked).
  • "who drowned at Camp Crystal Lake as a boy due to the negligence of the teenage counselors." This 'Summer Camp' thing is very USA-y, to someone from outside (for instance a brit like me) this is something which could do with some sort of explanation or wikilinking. "teenage counselors" sound like mental health specialists rather than supervisors at a facility for teenagers if you're not familiar with the whole thing.

--Films--

  • In overview (Jason X) - "Jason breaks out of captivity and manages to rupture the cryo-chamber, freezing him and the only survivor, Rowan (Lexa Doig). " Although it's not much of a mental leap, it's gone from Jason breaking out to freezing himself with the 'only' survivor without any explanation of what else happened, or more to the point: who did he kill?
  • In development: "but Cunningham believed in his "Friday the 13th" moniker and rushed to place an ad in International Variety." Why shorten advert/advertisement to ad then do the exact opposite by wikilinking ad to advertising? Since International Variety doesn't have an article, can you explain what it is? Like the original concept for Friday the 13th, it's currently just a name.

I've read up to and including the television series, will take another look at the rest soon. There are certainly redundancies in there which could be removed with screening. Someoneanother 00:41, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I originally had the link, but removed it as Steve mentioned some overlinking in the lead (specifically that list of products). Maybe I should have left the "slasher films" link, as you make a good point that most people probably are not aware of the differences between slasher films and general horror films.
Um...I'll link to "Camp Crystal Lake" to "summer camp" (as I don't really no how, know if I should spend the time, explaining what a "summer campe" is). Thanks for pointing out the confusions, a lot of this stuff I wouldn't think about because I'm not aware of the cultural differences with respect to some of this stuff. Oh, I changed "teenage counselors" to just "staff". Do you think that would work better at removing confusion over the title of "counselor" given that there isn't a page for "camp counselor"?
I there was more originally, but I cut it. I see now how it's confusing with the terminology. I've rewritten it as this: "Jason X (2002) takes place in the future, where Jason has again been inexplicably resurrected. A scientist, Rowan (Lexa Doig), decides that cryonic suspension is the only solution for stopping him, but Jason breaks free from capitivity and kills the army personnel guarding him before he can be imprisoned. Rowan manages to lure Jason into the cryo-chamber, but he rupters the tank and freezes himself and Rowan in the process." - Let me know if you think it clears up the confusion.
I fully spelled out "ad". As for International Variety...I have no idea what it was (magazine or newspaper). The source just says, "placed in the July 4, 1979 issue of International Variety". I've tried googling that name but I cannot find anything for it. I'm not sure if "International Variety" was the early name for Variety (magazine), because that's been around since 1905 and it has a Daily Variety and Daily Variety Gotham version. I don't really know how to explain it, and I don't want to say "magazine" if it's not a magazine..if you know what I mean.
Yeah, Steve mentioned the redundant, or unnecessary words (I'm a terribly wordy writer at times), I just haven't had a chance to go back through the article yet (I've been slowly reading the Changeling article for Steve's FAC).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:05, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Good changes :) (except it still reads teenage councellor, or however it's spelt). As the summer camp article shows it's not just a USA thing but the terminology used changes from country to country. Likewise, here in the UK the terms counsellor (psychotherapist) and councillor (member of local government, IE parish/district/county council) are in regular usage but to my knowledge counselor isn't. It may well be used in some sectors but it's not the sort of term the man in the street would use, or he'd think you were referring to one of those other two meanings. Someoneanother 06:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I've finished reading it through, apart from a couple of tweaks I saw nothing else, except that the model kit info could perhaps be shortened (in terms of having to build it yourself, by specifying that it's a kit that much is already stated), and misc. things which could be tweaked or shortened. I think what Steve's suggested to you would work well here, I don't want to fiddle with the text myself since copy-editing at this level is beyond me. Someoneanother 08:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I must have forgot to do the actual changing of "counselor" when I was in there. I've fixed that. You can see all the changes here. Thanks for going through and looking for any confusing text.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Future film

One section for new film[6]?--82.50.163.8 (talk) 17:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

What are you talking about?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

A new film was announced after the good box office result.Imbd articleSlashfilm--82.54.217.4 (talk) 10:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

First, IMDb is not a reliable source. They'll post just about anything. Second, there is no new film. Fuller and Form have said that the Nightmare remake is their priority, not a F13 sequel. IMDb has a lot of inaccurate info on that supposed film.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Jason X continuity

Should'nt someone put how Jason Voorhees was resurrected by Freddy Krueger in the Freddy vs.Jason film instead of saying "he has been once again been unexplainaby resurrected````` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.161.120.18 (talk) 02:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

No, because it's not mentioned in Jason X that Jason was resurrected by Freddy, he's just up and about with no explanation. Therefore "he has been once again been unexplainaby resurrected" is entirely accurate because Jason X doesn't offer any explanation. We're covering the films as they were released, not in-universe continuity and retcons. Besides, if you go by the expanded universe, Jason is killed and resurrected half a dozen times between the time period of Jason Goes to Hell and Jason X, so the whole thing is a moot point; he's Jason Voorhees, he dies and comes back all the time.  Paul  730 04:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
That's because the Jason X film was released by before Freddy vs.Jason even came out and the events of Jason X was set after Freddy vs. Jason.Also,on any Friday the 13th website timeline,it says the events in correct timeline.Go to any of those sites if you think I'm just making it up--24.161.120.18 (talk) 01:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Look, I'm well-versed in Friday continuity, but we don't write from an in-universe perspective. We're covering the films themselves as they were released, not writing a chronological timeline. The fact is, Jason X doesn't explain how Jason is alive after being sent to hell. The article is merely reflecting that, the fact that a later film retroactively explains things is irrelevant.  Paul  730 02:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Have you heard a word I've said?Freddy Krueger.Freddy Krueger!He's the one who brought Jason out of hell.His glove was shown in the end of Jason Goes To Hell: The Final Friday dragging Jason's mask into Hell and then he ressurected Jason in Freddy vs.Jason.It's just putting easy pieces together just like a puzzle--24.161.120.18 (talk) 02:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Paul730 as above, Wikipedia isn't for "putting easy pieces together." If something isn't reliably sourced, it shouldn't be included. Dayewalker (talk) 02:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Anon, you obviously haven't heard a word I've said. I don't dispute that Freddy resurrected Jason between Jason Goes to Hell and Jason X. I'm not saying it didn't happen in the fictional universe, I'm saying it doesn't warrant mentioning in the article because it's not relevant. For the last time, we are covering the films as they were released, not piecing together continuity in retrospect.  Paul  730 03:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's an example.Take a look at the two Godzilla movies named Destroy All Monsters,and Godzilla vs. Gigan of the Showa series.Even though King Ghidorah,the main villain of Destroy All Monsters,was killed in that film,he later reappeared alive and well in Godzilla vs Gigan,which was released after that film because the events of Godzilla vs. Gigan was chronologically set before the Destroys All Monsters film's time events. Another example is fellow Godzilla movieTerror of Mechagodzilla,which widely believed to be the final film as it was released in 1975 while the Godzilla vs.Gigan is chronologically set in the 1970s and was released on 1972 while Destroy All Monsters was set in the year 1999 and released on film in 1968.So,chronologically,Destroy All Monster is the final film in the Showa Series instead of the Terror of Mechagodzilla film.Also like the Freddy vs.Jason and Jason X film,wouldn't you say?--24.161.125.222 (talk) 05:05, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about those pages, but Wikipedia is not supposed to be written in an in-universe style. By the contrary per WP:WAF, we write in an out-of-universe style. In addition, it is original research to suggest that Freddy resurrects Jason in Jason X, because it's never explicitely stated in that film how he is resurrected. To suggest that the events of Jason X follow directly after Freddy vs. Jason, which follow directly after Jason Goes to Hell would be original research. For all anyone knows, Jason could have had a dozen more "deaths" and "resurrections" between JGtH and JX.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:36, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmmmm..That much I can believe in.Besides we only know how Jason got out of Hell and it doesn't state what happened to Jason after he took down Freddy.Like you said,Jason might have somehow died and came back as he usually does in his films.Maybe your right--24.161.125.222 (talk) 06:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

the theme music

it really should be mentioned that the kis and mas sound exactly like the sounds on black sabbaths children of the grave. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.196.253.195 (talk) 22:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion pertaining to non-free image(s) used in article

A cleanup page has been created for WP:FILMS' spotlight articles. One element that is being checked in ensuring the quality of the articles is the non-free images. Currently, one or more non-free images being used in this article are under discussion to determine if they should be removed from the article for not complying with non-free and fair use requirements. Please comment at the corresponding section within the image cleanup listing. Before contributing the discussion, please first read WP:FILMNFI concerning non-free images. Ideally the discussions pertaining to the spotlight articles will be concluded by the end of June, so please comment soon to ensure there is clear consensus. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Error About Jason being in all films.

Hello, I noticed in this article that it said Jason Vorhees was in all the Friday The 13th movies. actually he was not in the first one. In the first movie his mother, Pamela, was doing the killings. See Friday The 13th for reference. -- Peter Van Kauwenbergh — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.192.170.39 (talk) 05:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually, he still appeared in the film, and that's all the statement is saying.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Merging?

It seems to me that the "Friday the 13th" article should be completely merged with this article.

Keeping it simple, stupid. (talk) 15:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I really don't think that this is less than "simple." The other page summarizes the first movie. Should that information be part of this article? If so, why not merge them? Keeping it simple, stupid. (talk) 15:05, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

This doesn't make any sense. --Rob Sinden (talk) 15:17, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Retrospective

There's a retrospective of the entire series at The Week. It starts at this article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:57, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

This is a good article, but probably better for the original's page than here, as it's focus is the original film.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
There's an article for each film, I think. I didn't read all of them. But you're probably right that they may be best suited to the individual articles. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Where are the others, I didn't notice any links when I read that one?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 10:56, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Upcoming game

There is a new video game in the franchise entitled Friday the 13th: The Game. The early release will be in mid-November of this year. The Kickstarter page is here. I don't know that it warrants a page of it own just yet, but I thought I'd toss the information out there so that it can be tracked for some later inclusion, in some form or fashion. Cheers. --Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 04:55, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I've added an article here. Cheers.--Surv1v4l1st ▌Talk|Contribs▌ 20:11, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
The games fails the notability guidelines. It's already mentioned on this page. Not the mention that the name of the article you created would not be appropriate.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Could you direct me to the discussion on this game? I see some old discussion of the 1989 title, but not this one. There was already a number of third party coverage added to the article and I was working on adding more. Friday the 13th: The Game is the actual title of the game, but article title can be renamed as need be.--Surv1v4l1st ▌Talk|Contribs▌ 20:35, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
I mean the game is already discussed on the main page here. It's in the merchandise section with the other games. The third party coverage just talks about the game using kickstarter. The game doesn't actually exist and there are no reviews for it, so it doesn't have significant coverage enough to justify an article. Multiple sources reporting the same basic facts does not equate to significant coverage.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Friday the 13th (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:51, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Friday the 13th (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:08, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Page for Friday the 13th: The Game

Do you think there should be a page for the upcoming Friday the 13th: The Game, instead of having it in the franchise section and being a standalone page?

Tell me what you think. :)

--DawnGuardWolf (talk) 13:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday Cancelled Sega CD Video Game

Is there any information regarding this? I recall reading about it years ago around the time the movie came out that there was going to be a game based off of the movie for the then Sega CD game system and was going to be set up as a Full-Motion game like Sewer Shark, Night Trap, etc. using footage from the actual film. There was a small article about it in a game mag at the time, possibly EGM or GamePro. Not sure if it was true and how far along the game got. It may never have let the concept stage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.192.170 (talk) 22:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

If there was, it would probably be here. Cancelled games like F13 don't usually get a lot of press.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:27, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Friday the 13th (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:42, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Error About Jason being in all films.

Hello, I noticed in this article that it said

Jason Vorhees was in all the Friday The 13th movies. actually he was not in the first one. In the first movie his mother, Pamela, was doing the killings. See Friday The 13th for reference. 

                           Peter Van Kauwenbergh

Jason is in fact in the first film, but is not the killer. He is seen in dream/flashback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.224.149.110 (talk) 18:59, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Friday the 13th (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:13, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Boilerplate "compared to high grossing horror franchises"

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Boilerplate "compared to high grossing horror franchises" jnestorius(talk) 11:23, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Friday the 13th (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:04, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Friday the 13th (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:00, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

There was a recent inclusion of the Nightmare on Elm Street navigation template to this page, and to this one to that page. Per WP:MOSFILM#Navigation, "Articles should be substantially related to the subject of the navigation template." These franchises share a single film. They are not "substantially related" to each other. Additionally, each template already has a link to their respective franchise pages, which seems sufficient. The entirety of the F13 franchise and the Nightmare franchises are not relevant on each other's pages. Yes, I'm aware that some other franchise pages have done this. Whether or not they should is a matter of case by case basis, which is what the Navigation Template guideline says should be the case. Some franchise have an intricate history with other franchises, but that's not always the case. There's a difference between say "Alien vs. Predator" which have created an substantial connection to each other over the course of multiple decades, versus say Batman vs. The Terminator or Batman vs. Alien or Batman vs. the Predator. Notice how Terminator (franchise) doesn't have Batman, Alien, or Predator templates on its page. It's because they are not substantially connected.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

“Future” still going nowhere

Hi, Bignole. The intent was to try and help the random reader avoid having to go through 1,000 words, spread over five paragraphs, which say that many different people have gone through many different ideas over the past 11 years and have been unable to get a new film out the door. This isn’t the plot section, where the full story needs to be read out to understand what the outcome means. Give the reader the summary (something like, but admittedly should be better than: “there has been a long and diverse journey over 11 years, with many ups and downs and still ongoing”), and they can choose to go on to read every-last-word, including multiple bits of information regarding who said what on which specific date many years ago during this fruitless journey. The fact that so many different peop hle have continued to try to produce something is a testament to the continued interest in the franchise, maybe add that to a short opening summary as the lead to this long section. Thoughts? Jmg38 (talk) 20:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you were trying to change, but the only change I could see in the differences was the separation of the opening statement (single sentences are not paragraphs), and adding words that were unneeded (ex., "Shortly after the 2009 reboot's theatrical release" to "Since shortly after the 2009 reboot's theatrical release" --- "since" does not add anything and you generally don't start a sentence with "Sence"). You don't add summaries to section that don't have subsections, and this section doesn't need subsections. It probably just needs to be trimmed to remove the things that ultimately were just talk and never moved forward. The section contains a lot of conjecture and "I want to make this movie" which means nothing ultimately.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Friday the 13th: Vengeance and other recent films

Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but I can find no reference to the 2019 film "Friday the 13th: Vengeance" Is this an oversight on my part? If not, would someone take on the job of bringing the franchise up to date? Thanks.

@Saukkomies: - What film are you talking about? There is not Friday the 13th film called "Vengeance".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:41, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
@Saukkomies: You must research properly. All this information is publicly available. I added a section about this to the article. George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 14:48, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
It was removed. Wikipedia doesn't promote other people's work that are fan made videos. If they are relevant then they will have a Wiki page and it would get in a "See also" section.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

"Friday the 13th Part 2 (2016 film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Friday the 13th Part 2 (2016 film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 28 § Friday the 13th Part 2 (2016 film) until a consensus is reached. ★Trekker (talk) 04:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

"Friday the 13th Part 2 (2010 film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Friday the 13th Part 2 (2010 film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 28 § Friday the 13th Part 2 (2010 film) until a consensus is reached. ★Trekker (talk) 05:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

"Friday the 13th Part XI" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Friday the 13th Part XI has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 28 § Friday the 13th Part XI until a consensus is reached. ★Trekker (talk) 05:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

"Friday the 13th 2 (2010 film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Friday the 13th 2 (2010 film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 28 § Friday the 13th 2 (2010 film) until a consensus is reached. ★Trekker (talk) 05:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

"Friday the 13th Part 2 (2011)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Friday the 13th Part 2 (2011) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 28 § Friday the 13th Part 2 (2011) until a consensus is reached. ★Trekker (talk) 05:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Jason Goes to Hell soundtrack". Soundtrack Collector. Retrieved 2008-04-27. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  2. ^ "Jason X soundtrack". Soundtrack Collector. Retrieved 2008-04-27. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  3. ^ "Freddy vs. Jason soundtracks". Soundtrack Collector. Retrieved 2008-04-27. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  4. ^ "Soundtrack release for Friday the 13th VII and VIII". Soundtrack Collector. Retrieved 2008-04-27. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  5. ^ "Friday the 13th: The Series". Soundtrack Collector. Retrieved 2008-04-27. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Friday_the_13th_(franchise)/Archive_1&oldid=1221494612"