Talk:Tower Heist

Plot Synopsis

The movie hasn't been out in theaters for an entire week yet we have the entire breakdown of the film's plot posted here. Why would anyone, after reading this want to bother seeing the film? Can we consider possibly making the synopsis less revealing and detailed and instead make it more general, at least until the film has been out for a while? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.98.13.51 (talk) 19:26, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

See WP:SPOILER. I don't believe readers would just start reading a full blown plot summary before seeing the film. —Mike Allen 19:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

not yet notable

looking at this is just a shadow of an article, until we know more about the movie, we don't have WP:V in about 6 months we will have it, but now there is just not enought to support it as an article kthxbai Keastes ^know _thyself 09:24, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Zachary Levi?

I am sorry, it might just be me, but I cannot seem to actually find any documentation that Zachary Levi has a role in this movie on IMDB. How come he is listed both here and in the Zachary Levi article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.49.129.84 (talk) 19:12, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Seizure boycott

Is it worth mentioning this? I know it got alot of attention even though it was a fairly minor incident. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 11:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Actor's fees

Does how much the actor gets paid really matter to why they are in the cast? This is just a concern. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 2:13 4 November 2011 (UTC)

It's not why they're in the cast it's just a part of their casting information. I personally like it as it is information first and second it creates an image of how big an chunk of the budget was just spent on the actors. THere was an article on American Reunion that gave cast pay rundowns (though it wasn't accuirate enough to use) which showed some of the actors getting much, much more than the others, which was useful information because it spoke to how much value the actors had to the franchise, some a lot less than others.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 02:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 2:20 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Great to be able to include the pay information in a rare case where it is available but I think it would be better if it was presented in the Production section, as you say it relates not so much to the cast or characters but to how the budget was spent. -- 109.76.130.88 (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

References

I just wanted to thank whoever put all of the reference details together and only referred to their names in the article's text. It makes editing much easier. --Kitsunegami (talk) 05:20, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes it does. It's called list-defined references. —Mike Allen 05:48, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome, I can't stand it the other way, it is impossible to read the editable text in any kind of efficient manner. And it hurts my eyes. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Good Article

This looks like an excellent candidate for GA status. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 17:42 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Usually we wait until the film is out of theaters to review for GA, since information will be changing frequently. —Mike Allen 03:55, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 26 November 2011

Dear admin, cameo movie appearance credits appear frequently throughout Wikipedia, as do references to people in movies who passed away shortly after production. For some reason, one editor has a problem with those standards on this page. When it comes to contributions, I understand it to be a page that is open to everyone - not a page where ONE editor picks and chooses which actors merit being listed (indeed, there are some currently listed actors in the section who didn't say a single line and/or aren't otherwise well-known enough that they have their own Wikipedia pages). Please add the following at the very end of the paragraph at the end of the "Cast" section:

Heavy D, with a cameo appearance as a guard at a courthouse, makes his last movie appearance before sadly passing away four days later at the age of 44.

Thank you!  :)

98.242.190.11 (talk) 04:55, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Again, his death has no association with the film. The cameo was a bit, and though sad, not everyone would recognize him. If it were Johnny Depp making a suprise appearance, that's different. But this cameo isn't needed to be mentioned. RAP (talk) 16:11 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:48, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

First of all, his last full credited appearance was in an episode of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (episode "Personal Fouls"). Secondly, why would you think it would be correct to write "before sadly passing away". Encyclopedia's write in a neutral point of view and Wikipedia does not write "passed away" we just write "died". (see WP:EUPHEMISM). Other than that I do not have a problem listing his cameo appearance in the cast section (that is, just describing his role). Thank you. —Mike Allen 02:21, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tower Heist/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Matthew R Dunn (talk · contribs) 17:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I will review the article. -- Matthew RD 17:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Criteria

1. Well written: See notes below
2. Sources: General pass, but there is one issue in the comments list below.
3. Broadness in coverage: ✓ Pass
4. Neutral: ✓ Pass
5. Stability: General ✓ Pass, no major edit conflict issues.
6. Images: ✓ Pass

Comments

• The lead section should mention the general view by critics (was it positively received? Mixed? Negative?) and how much the film grossed in the box office.
• "Josh responds by destroying the windows of Shaw's Ferrari 250 getting them fired." I don't understant this sentence. Was it Josh who gets fired? In this case it would be him, not them.
• Link bellhop.
• There is one instance that Slide is referred to as Slides.
• Mazin accepts but Josh, being the primary conspirator, must serve a two-year sentence.
• In the cast section when it is mentioned the actors get paid x amount of money say "million" not "M".

• Same again at the end of the filming section.
• And the are a few more instances in the box office section.

• Unlink Bernard Madoff in writing section, it is already linked in cast section.
• Ref #6 is a PDF file, which is 34 pages long. Elaborate which page the comments are in.

I'll place the review on hold for seven days. I probably might not respond on the 25th, being Christmas Day and all (food and presents!). -- Matthew RD 13:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

I didn't nominate it for GA but I was the main contributor so I've done some of these, except the plot related ones as I haven't seen it yet and don't want to spoil myself. I think the only thing I've missed and I'm going to do now is read through REf #6 to sort that out.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 14:27, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Dealt with ref 6 which is now ref 1.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:29, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll deal with the plot-related issues. RAP (talk) 18:50 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to say sorry about the plot stuff, I haven't even seen the film but the plot was around 1200 words and it really needed to get cut down before this review. That sentence about the ferrari was extremely confusing. --Peppage^ಠ_ಠ 01:28, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

That's OK. I see the plot issues, as well as the other issues, have been addressed. I will pass the article. -- Matthew RD 14:32, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to do this Matthew, much appreciated. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:52, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tower Heist. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://itn.co.uk/entertainment/showbiz/32079.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20518605,00.html
• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6G16kTTaX?url=http://www.varesesarabande.com/servlet/the-947/Tower-Heist/Detail to http://www.varesesarabande.com/servlet/the-947/Tower-Heist/Detail

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:16, 14 January 2018 (UTC)