Talk:He Died with a Felafel in His Hand (film)

	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.

Australia: Cinema Low‑importance

	Australia portal He Died with a Felafel in His Hand (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 the Australian cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Neopaganism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neopaganism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neopaganism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeopaganismWikipedia:WikiProject NeopaganismTemplate:WikiProject NeopaganismNeopaganism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Restoring section on differences between the book and the film

I have restored the section on the differences between the book and the film based on [explanation of what is not "original research" according to Wikipedia policy]:

A book, short story, film, or other work of fiction is a primary source for any article or topic regarding that work. Anything that can be observed by a reasonable person simply by reading the work itself, without interpretation, is not original research, but is reliance upon a primary source. This would include direct quotes or non interpretative summaries, publication dates, and any other patent information that can be observed from the work. For example, if there are multiple versions of a particular story, and one version does not have a particular character, or has extra characters, that is clear simply by reading or watching the work. The fact that one would have to read or watch the whole thing does not make the matter original research. The work is verifiable, even if it takes more time than flipping to a single page.

The same is true for non-fiction works: You may use a book like The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks as a primary source for a description of what the book is about.

'Review Wikipedia:NOR#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources.

Please discuss before removing again. Acsenray (talk) 15:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

This article is #2 in longest plot summaries for a movie on Wikipedia! http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2014/06/what_is_the_most_detailed_wikipedia_movie_plot_summary_of_all_time.html

Probably not a good thing, length means it is not concise per guidelines on writing a plot summary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_write_a_plot_summary . Let's see where the article is simply recreating the work or being wordy rather than providing relevant information. Jabba in the pit (talk) 06:02, 28 June 2014 (UTC) jabba in the pit[reply]