Talk:You've Been Trumped

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the You've Been Trumped article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 4 September 2012 by reviewer Ritchie333 (talk · contribs).

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Presidents Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Low-importance).

Film: British / Documentary

	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 British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Documentary films task force.

Golf Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Golf, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Golf-related articles 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.GolfWikipedia:WikiProject GolfTemplate:WikiProject GolfGolf articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Highest rated film of all time"

"The film was briefly ranked as the highest rated British film of all time on the Internet Movie Database"... this sentence is bullshit (and so is the sensationalist article "justifying" it). If I release a movie (or anything rateable) and the first few reviews are, for the sake of argument, 100%, then I too would be able to claim that my product was "briefly" the highest ranking product of its class of all time. It's a simply vacuous accolade! Does this pseudo-fact really belong in an encyclopaedic article, even if some dubious journalistic source did report it? Edward Grefenstette (talk) 11:01, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree—removed. 80.189.182.55 (talk) 20:30, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't split, rename

It has been suggested that section "A Dangerous Game (2014)" be split into a new article. (Discuss) Proposed since August 2015. Oppose. Keep it together, and instead rename the article to be about his extensive and controversial golf course development, which is obviously the point of these two films, and fill out the facts on that topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.158.151 (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Split

In response to the request to split: Someone looking for the other movie would expect information in a separate article. I say split it.

Tardisengineer (talk) 23:56, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trumph sucks

he really does - last week tonight — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:147:8100:C9AE:BD53:8AB8:4025:ADF0 (talk) 22:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Review of You've Been Trumped Too in The Guardian

The Guardian film critic Peter Bradshaw reviewed You've Been Trumped Too.^[1] There is information in there possibly worth adding. I guess this new film should have its own article. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 23:32, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Bradshaw, Peter (3 November 2016). "You've Been Trumped Too review – this is what a Trump win would look like". The Guardian. London, United Kingdom. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2016-11-03.

Interview

The film-maker gave a long interview about YBT and YBTT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWewfG3dS8E Kdammers (talk) 16:27, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[bradshaw-2016-1] Bradshaw, Peter (3 November 2016). "You've Been Trumped Too review – this is what a Trump win would look like". The Guardian. London, United Kingdom. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2016-11-03.

[1]