Talk:Sherlock Holmes (2010 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 American cinema task force.

Media franchises: Sherlock Holmes Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media franchises, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to media franchises 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.Media franchisesWikipedia:WikiProject Media franchisesTemplate:WikiProject Media franchisesmedia franchise articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sherlock Holmes.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sherlock Holmes (Asylum film) → Sherlock Holmes (2010 film) — As this is presumably the only film called Sherlock Holmes to come out in 2010, the film starring Robert Downey, Jr. of the same name having come out in 2009, it makes sense to disambiguate by year, rather than studio. In any case, the studio is The Asylum, not just "Asylum". —84.92.117.93 (talk) 21:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Standard policy is to disambiguate by year. No issue with incoming links crossing with the 2009 movie. The visitor statistics are low on the 2010 redirect so I don't think a change will cause any issue. This one might be a candidate for a quick close, I don't see much reason to hold it back.--Labattblueboy (talk) 00:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The proposal is fine but why not Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes? — AjaxSmack 05:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I innitially wondered the same thing. However IMDb lists it as Sherlock Holmes, so I jsut went with that.--Labattblueboy (talk) 14:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, the Asylum website also calls it that. — AjaxSmack 03:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support i agree with the proposed rationale

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Line in reception makes no sense

"Reviews of the film have been mixed, with the majority being positive" Mixed is close to a 50/50 split. Majority being positive is something over 75%. This is being used in extreme error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.195.173 (talk) 05:43, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]