Talk:The Hive (2008 film)

Brazil... or Thailand?

I note that Chang, Ying and Zhing are pretty unusual names for Brazilians, and that "Ban Tao" is not only a non-Brazilian name but is actually a region of Thailand. Thailand coincidentally is also a place where army ants can be found. Not sure that it matters for the purpose of this article, but strange nonetheless. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

This is Sci Fi...geographical accuracy isn't really high on their list :P -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 03:18, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Lol. I actually found this series through a link on your talk page; I'm amused and entertained by their existence. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Found the answer; the film has nothing to do with Brazil, that's apparently a miscommunication from some promotional material. It's actually set on the "Southeast Asian island of Ban Tao". - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The sources you added are extremely unreliable. We do not use random people's blogs as sources. I have reverted their insertion. I also change the sentence to just simply state scientists deal with the ants, as the where is not particularly relevant nor necessary there. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 03:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

We don't use random blogs as reliable sources; however reliable sources are only required for material which is controversial or likely to be challenged (see WP:V). Citing an unreliable source to show "where you got it" for uncontroversial information is valuable as it creates a jumping-off point for other editors to weigh up your information later if they find a conflicting source, or to start their own enquiries and research in the course of expanding the article. But I'll defer to your judgement. I will, however, add the sources to the talk page so that they're not lost. (It took me nearly half an hour to work out the explanation for the Brazil/Thailand thing, and it's going to be the first mistake that a new editor makes jumping in in future, so no reason to repeat that effort.) - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

We don't cite unreliable sources, not for any info (controversial or not). It doesn't provide any kind of jumping off point as the source is unreliable. It only wastes time, and Wikipedia is not here to provide free traffic to personal blogs by advertising them in such a fashion. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 04:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

It would further my education to be pointed to the policy explaining that relevant external links provided for the good faith purpose of improving Wikipedia should be unilaterally deleted on talk pages. Such a policy undoubtedly exists as you're an experienced editor but I'm not immediately able to call it to mind. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

They were not relevant links and not potential sources. As such do not aid in improving the article, so listing them on the talk page is not an appropriate use of WP:TALK. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 04:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's not my reading of WP:EL, which appears to relate to "external links" sections on the article itself, or WP:TALK, which specifically encourages the use of talk pages for iffy sources so that their reliability and content can be assessed by a range of editors, and suggests that no editor should delete content from talk pages except under very limited circumstances, none of which are "removing unreliable sources". But given the article is about such a ridiculous movie, it seems to me in itself ridiculous to have a sustained argument about it. Besides, I'm aware of your work elsewhere and even if you were glaringly wrong three times a day you'd still on average be a huge asset to Wikipedia. I'm sorry the development of the article could not benefit more extensively from both our contributions and I hope you'll add more entries to this hilarious series of movies as their details are announced. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The sources are not "iffy", they are completely unreliable, unless you really intend to argue that some random blogspot blogs are good sources? I did not get that impression, and as such they really need no preservation. And yes, I do intend to continue working on this series. Though they are heavily panned by critics, most of the films are hilarious (if only for their bad acting and plots). I somehow have missed getting to see this particular one yet. Need to watch out for its next airing on Syfy, or grab the DVD. Wish they would release more of the DVD sets with 3 films in one. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 05:13, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Explanation of Brazil/Thailand conflict

The cover art to The Hive's DVD release states that the film takes place in Brazil. However in the film itself there is no mention of Brazil, with the plot instead taking place on "a south-east Asian island". - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

To note, this was removed as it purely trivial information. Typos happen on DVD covers all the time. The source itself, which is reliable, was moved to the EL section. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 04:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

References

Origin?

Does anyone know the background of this film? The title suggests a (nonexistent?) connection to the Frank Herbert's Hellstrom's Hive. The plot, however, seems to have been based on Frank Herbert's The Green Brain. --StainlessSteelDoctor (talk) 23:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)