Talk:Supercross (film)

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 August 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

A ficticious film? It looks like it's an actual one! Hoverfish 16:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever wrote this worded it terribly. A fictitious film would be, for example, something of the author's imagination. Which would make it too irrelevant for Wikipedia.--Surfaced 09:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Corporate team work created for the movie some of the best imagery that Clear Channel has to offer.'"

Who wrote this, Lowry Mays? Clear Channel has never created the best in anything, much less "imagery" for a movie. Jack Meihoffer 00:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, whose relative wrote this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.165.188.30 (talk) 02:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Supercross film.jpg

Image:Supercross film.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]