Talk:Twins (1988 film)

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Film: Canadian / American

	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 Canadian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

This says they are fraternal twins, aren’t they actually identical twins? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.204.23.135 (talk) 20:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Twins Poster.jpg

Image:Twins Poster.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) 05:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

boo1210

I started the 1988 article on the movie. Hope you do not mind.boo1210 19:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

That was unecessary, this article already has a hatnote pointing to the 1925 film. --Closedmouth (talk) 02:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was move. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:33, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Twins (film) → Twins (1988 film) — to distinguish Twins (1925 film), Twins (1993 film), and Twins (1999 film) per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films)#Between films of the same name — Neo-Jay (talk) 17:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Contested: WP:PRIMARYUSAGE. I think a blockbuster that grossed $112m is more important than erotica. 87.113.103.202 (talk) 17:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion was moved from Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Move. The WP:PRIMARYUSAGE does not apply here because Twins (film) is already Not a primary page. The primary page is Twins. The rationale of WP:PRIMARYUSAGE is 1) to save users' time in searching and 2) to avoid articles' internal links going to a disambiguation page. However, Twins (film) already has brackets in its title and it cannot save any time for uses or editors. After the move, Twins (film) can be maintained as a redirect page to Twins (1988 film). --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move. I note that the disambig page already uses Twins (1988 film), and has since March 2008, apparently without dissent. Twins (film) is an ambiguous term between four different films and should point to Twin (disambiguation). Also agree WP:PRIMARYUSAGE does not apply here.--Rogerb67 (talk) 02:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per convention. 70.51.10.188 (talk) 03:54, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename and either redirect Twins (film) to Twin (disambiguation) or use as a seperate dab page. PC78 (talk) 11:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Redirecting Twins (film) to this page negates the point of the name change

Please can we revert it to either a redirect to Twin (disambiguation) or its own DAB page – I don't buy that disambig pages must use the disambig parenthetical qualifier. This page disambiguated films called "Twins"; seems perfect to me. --Rogerb67 (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK I fixed all the mainspace links to Twins (film) then pointed the link to Twin (disambiguation). --Rogerb67 (talk) 00:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel?

Was there really a sequel? I can't find any information on it...

A sequel to a 24 year old movie? They must really be out of ideas at Hollywood. (Unkown)