Talk:Be My Cat: A Film for Anne

Edit request

I'm the movie's creator, my last edit has been reverted, and I was told to request it here since I have a conflict of interest. I want to further clarify that I always displayed publicly my conflict of interest with a disclaimer on my user profile. The edit that was reverted contained the following:

- two production insights added, which are objective, they mention what I have said publicly about why I picked Anne Hathaway and why I chose the horror genre for the movie, and I provided as references my public YouYube Q&As, but there are also many interviews in which I have explained the same

- a couple of production insights reordered to make more sense and respect the timeline of the production

- one IndieWire reference fixed because IndieWire deleted the article and now is only found via internet archive

Thank you! Adrian Tofei (talk) 15:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done YouTube is NOT a reliable source and interviews are not reliable or independent, you cannot promote your film here. Theroadislong (talk) 15:30, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand, then how do many movies have production insights if not from the actual cast and crew who worked on the movie and talked publicly in interviews about the way they worked on it? I mean, they are the only people who know the creative process. That's impossible to be verified by third parties. Adrian Tofei (talk) 15:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

See other stuff exists if there are no reliable independent sources reporting the creative process then, we can't include it. Theroadislong (talk) 15:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Here's an example from The Godfather wikipedia page: "Evans believed that the reason for its failure was its almost complete lack of cast members or creative personnel of Italian descent.". It's impossible to have an independent source to verify what Evans believed, as those were his thoughts about why a similar movie to The Godfather has failed, which were expressed in a book. And there are numerous examples of this kind on Wikipedia on top pages. Same with my reasons for choosing the horror genre for my movie. Adrian Tofei (talk) 16:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Again see other stuff exists the fact that poorly sourced content exists in another article is NOT an excuse to add it to this article. Actually the content in The Godfather is sourced to Phillips, Gene D. (2004). Godfather: The Intimate Francis Ford Coppola. Theroadislong (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

For future reference please request edits with the template {{edit request}}, see WP:Edit request for more details. Theroadislong (talk) 16:07, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I get the logic now. Although this seems excessive policing and counterproductive for Wikipedia. One of the most useful and interesting parts of movie pages on Wikipedia is reading how the movies were made. The vast majority of that info consists of the creative process which the creators expressed in interviews and books. Which is why I tried to add that on my movie as well because I know that's what I love to read on movie pages. Usually the people who have already seen a movie visit that section of Wikipedia to learn how it was made, so my intention was not self-promotion, but to be informative.

If what you say was to be applied, literally no movie on Wikipedia could have any info on how it was made, the Production sections would be almost entirely emptied, if not fully removed. Adrian Tofei (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Correct. Theroadislong (talk) 16:22, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

By the way, can I add reliable sources instead of the IMDb ones you just deleted? The sources exist in the news and on festivals' websites. Also, can I add a review that was marked as rotten on Rotten Tomatoes, in an attempt to make the review section more neutral? Or me adding these would again be a problem for neutrality?

Here's the rotten review by Laura Clifford: https://www.reelingreviews.com/reviews/be-my-cat-a-film-for-anne/ . And the RT preview says this: "This Romanian found-footage film may hold few surprises and drags through much of its run time, but it's worth checking out for the filmmaker's seriously deranged performance...suggests "Angst" by way of "My Date with Drew." Adrian Tofei (talk) 16:41, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

You can use the edit request format as detailed above. Theroadislong (talk) 16:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I will use that, I wasn't aware that possibility exists, thanks. Adrian Tofei (talk) 16:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Rotten review addition request

• What I think should be changed: Please add the following in the Critical Response section: However, Laura Clifford from Reeling Reviews wrote that "this Romanian found-footage film may hold few surprises and drags through much of its run time, but it's worth checking out for the filmmaker's seriously deranged performance... suggests Angst by way of My Date with Drew."
• Why it should be changed: For a more balanced review section, as this review has been marked as rotten on Rotten Tomatoes.
• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Adrian Tofei (talk) 17:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

References

Not done for now There are already a great deal of reviews listed in the Review section, so I'm not comfortable adding to it another review from what appears to be a non-notable reviewer (Laura Clifford). Additionally, I've limited the number of film festivals/awards in the table to only those which are independently notable in Wikipedia. If I've deleted ones which did have Wikipedia pages, then please propose having them re-applied to the list here on the talk page, taking care to include the WikiLink of the film festival in question with your request. Regards,  Spintendo  21:11, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, one of the festivals you deleted, Nightmares Film Festival, does have a wikipedia page which wasn't tagged to the festival's name in the table. Please add that one back. Thanks! Adrian Tofei (talk) 21:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)