Talk:The Frozen Ground

	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.

United States: Cinema

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force.

Alaska

	Alaska portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Alaska 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.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Someone should redo the reception part of this article, it's currently listed at 2 locations with different views on how the film got received by critics. 178.249.123.209 (talk) 05:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an appropriate place to mention that an entire scene of this film (based on the murder of Sherry Morrow) is lifted from a TV Show, an FBI Files episode from 1999? The episode opens and closes with this scene. There is a reference on the Robert Hansen wiki page under media. 98.180.43.21 (talk) 02:38, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 June 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

TFG - WIKIPEDIA EDITS

Apologies - I was trying to update and correct this page and did not get the references to connect properly. Each time the editor reverts it they do so without realizing the old version info is not accurate. This article is currently written with several incorrect facts about the film and is not true and balanced as it does not include audience review data which is highly favorable about the film. This film has a huge fanbase that has bought and viewed and continues to, and is overwhelmingly positive. That fact needs to be included on the page. Whoever wrote this, appears to have an unbalanced view and focused overly on the negative which is inaccurate.

THE FROZEN GROUND “The film was released in very few theaters and directly to video on demand on August 23, 2013, and has received mixed reviews though Cage's performance was cited as a highlight.[5][6]“

Can you please change to…

“The film received a limited release in US theaters and simultaneously to video on demand on August 23, 2013, and has received very favorable audience reviews with Cage's performance cited as a highlight.[5][6]“

Reasons currently inaccurate and needs correcting… “Limited release” is the correct and standard term for what the industry calls this very common and increasingly popular type of release in less than 100 theaters. Please can you add a link to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_release The film was actually released in more than 23 countries worldwide. Many in theaters also. “Direct to VOD” is for films that have no theatrical release at all. This film was released in theaters in the US as well so that term is incorrect. Reasons not true and balanced… Reviews were better than “mixed” with greater than half (61%) on RottenTomatoes reviews being positive and… Audiences on Amazon Prime who paid to watch the film actually give it 4 out of 5 or 80% approval rating from 4,720 reviews which is “highly favorable” https://www.amazon.com/Frozen-Ground-Nicolas-Cage/dp/B00EQ1187S

RECEPTION The movie has received mixed reviews from critics. On Rotten Tomatoes it has a 61% rating based on 54 reviews, with a weighted average of 5.2/10. The site's consensus reads: "Though this by-the-numbers true procedural seems basic, The Frozen Ground presents a welcome return for Nicolas Cage in a solid performance."[5] Metacritic assigns the film an average score of 37 out of 100 based on 16 reviews from mainstream critics, indicating "generally unfavorable reviews.”[6]

Can you please also add the following sentences to the end of that paragraph…

“Audiences give the film more positive reviews. Metacritic users assign the film an average score of 6.3 out of 10 based on 62 ratings, indicating "generally favorable reviews.” https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-frozen-ground/user-reviews It currently holds a 4.0 out of 5 star rating on film streaming site Amazon Prime, based on 4,720 audience reviews, with a weighted average of 8/10. https://www.amazon.com/Frozen-Ground-Nicolas-Cage/dp/B00EQ1187S “

IMAGE The current included poster image is not the correct poster for the film and was not used anywhere in the world. Please can you change the poster image to the correct one that ran in many countries throughout the world… https://images.mymovies.net/images/film/cin/350x522/fid11119.jpg

Thanks in advance for correcting the above. Bethelight888 (talk) 15:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has been trying to whitewash the critical reception for this movie literally for years, using vatious IPs and throwaway accounts. Who is doing this and why is unknown, but it's easy to assume someone connected with the movie might be bitter about its critical reception. The exact wording has varied but the core issues this user is concerned with is claiming it received "positive" reviews (it did not: 60% on Rotten Tomatoes, and just 37% on Metacritic) and trying to give greater weight to audience votes, which we don't do per WP:MOSFILM, specifically the Audience response section, which reads in part: " Do not include user ratings submitted to websites such as the Internet Movie Database or Rotten Tomatoes, as they are vulnerable to vote stacking and demographic skew.". If you're trying to claim that this is a cult film in the vein of Rocky Horror which was initially rejected by critics but later found a second life due to a dedicated fan base, you'll have to come up with some very strong reliable sources showing that to be the case. Until that happens, please do not attempt to re-insert this content using IPs or other accounts. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of the repeated attempts to change this page and am not savvy enough to use other IP's or accounts as you accuse. But, maybe whoever those people are, have a point about the inaccuracies on this page and the way it describes the film in an unbalanced and overly critical way. Maybe whoever wrote and edited the page originally with that slant, doesn't like the film and wants to maintain their personal feelings and review of it in how wikipedia lists it. You say it did not receive "positive" reviews but in fact it did - according to rottentomatoes own guidelines it is actually rated positive / fresh (www.rottentomatoes.com/about reads "The Tomatometer score represents the percentage of professional critic reviews that are positive for a given film or television show. A Tomatometer score is calculated for a movie or TV show after it receives at least five reviews. When at least "60%" of reviews for a movie or TV show are "positive", a red tomato is displayed to indicate its "Fresh" status.") That is a fact and the current page should at least include that fact as it is inaccurate as is. I am a long term fan of wikipedia (donator) and user for research. I was researching this topic and saw this page and saw it had several wrong terms describing the release and at very least was wrong re rottentomatoes. At the very least, those edits I suggested above should be corrected. Not mentioning that audience liked the film is an inaccuracy also and makes me seriously question the neutrality, credibility and completeness of wikipedia as a resource. I still believe something to both edit concerns above need to be added to the page if the site is to be reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bethelight888 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Orville^talk 16:09, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PROPOSED CHANGES TO REACH CONSENSUS

THE FROZEN GROUND

Hi there - looking to reach a consensus here and update this page to correct a few facts. I understand what you are saying but I think the facts about the films release description and it actually getting a positive rating on rotten tomatoes should be included. Hopefully these suggested changes cover both sides…

Currently reads…

“The film was released in very few theaters and directly to video on demand on August 23, 2013, and has received mixed reviews though Cage's performance was cited as a highlight.[5][6]“

My suggested change is to…

“The film received a limited release in US theaters and simultaneously to video on demand on August 23, 2013, and has received mixed reviews though Cage's performance was cited as a highlight.[5][6]“

Reasons currently inaccurate and needs correcting… “Limited release” is the correct and standard term for what the industry calls this very common and increasingly popular type of release in less than 100 theaters. Please can you add a link to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_release “Direct to video on demand” is for films that have no theatrical release - at all. Although a limited release, this film was still released in theaters in the US as well so the term “direct to vod” is incorrect.

RECEPTION

Currently reads…

“The movie has received mixed reviews from critics. On Rotten Tomatoes it has a 61% rating based on 54 reviews, with a weighted average of 5.2/10. The site's consensus reads: "Though this by-the-numbers true procedural seems basic, The Frozen Ground presents a welcome return for Nicolas Cage in a solid performance."[5] Metacritic assigns the film an average score of 37 out of 100 based on 16 reviews from mainstream critics, indicating "generally unfavorable reviews.”[6]”

My suggested change is to…

“The movie has received mixed reviews from critics. However, on Rotten Tomatoes it has a 61% positive or Fresh rating based on 54 reviews, with a weighted average of 5.2/10. The site's consensus reads: "Though this by-the-numbers true procedural seems basic, The Frozen Ground presents a welcome return for Nicolas Cage in a solid performance."[5] Metacritic assigns the film an average score of 37 out of 100 based on 16 reviews from mainstream critics, indicating "generally unfavorable reviews.”[6]”

Reasons needs correcting… According to rottentomatoes and its own guidelines this film is actually rated “positive” or “Fresh” which should be mentioned here. www.rottentomatoes.com/about reads "The Tomatometer score represents the percentage of professional critic reviews that are positive for a given film or television show. A Tomatometer score is calculated for a movie or TV show after it receives at least five reviews. When at least "60%" of reviews for a movie or TV show are "positive", a red tomato is displayed to indicate its "Fresh" status.")

IMAGE The current included poster image is not the correct poster for the film and was not used anywhere in the world. Please can you change the poster image to the correct one that ran in many countries throughout the world… https://images.mymovies.net/images/film/cin/350x522/fid11119.jpg

Thanks.

Bethelight888 (talk) 15:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hi - I'm still waiting for someone to respond to these proposed changes above to be able to reach consensus and update this page. I was also going to suggest adding quotes from a range of critic reviews but have had no response yet to the above proposed edits. Can someone please respond and help to make these small edits. Thanks!Bethelight888 (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: The reason why you're not getting response is because you're not using the Edit Request template properly. Edit Request process should be used to implement either specific changes that are unlikely to be contested or to implement established consensus of the community. User:Starblind has quite clearly outlined ground for opposition, therefore, if you want to see these changes implemented the onus is on you to build consensus in support of your edit. Please see Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus-building to read about how you might want to go about doing it.

Please note that opening further Edit Requests without establishing consensus first is unlikely to help convince the community that you're acting in good faith. Melmann 15:26, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

James Maslow

James Maslow
James Maslow as Daniel O' Brian 82.2.224.18 (talk) 21:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:53, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

85.92.167.226 (talk) 13:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

James Maslow

James Maslow

James Maslow as Daniel O' Brian

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. (Assuming you wanted to add Mr. Maslow in the cast listing.) TGHL ↗ 14:09, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

2A04:4A43:4A7F:FFA1:D8E1:30E4:80F8:6AFC (talk) 18:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

James Maslow

James Maslow

James Maslow as Daniel O’ Brian

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

82.2.224.18 (talk) 17:22, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

James Maslow
James Maslow as Daniel O' Brian

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. MadGuy7023 (talk) 17:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]