Talk:Do You Believe? (film)/Archive 1

Plot Summary

OK, while I WILL admit that the plot summary that I put down wasn't necessarily the BEST one in the world, I would still like one anyway? Why? Because without it, Wikipedia readers have absolutely ZERO clues about the plot, period. They would just be left in the dark wondering "What the heck is going on? Why hasn't someone put down a plot yet? Surely at least SOMEONE should've at least TRIED to summarize the film's plot by now". Even Wikipedia put a notice on this EXACT SAME PAGE noting that there was NO plot, period and that someone needed to add one right away, which I did. Now, I'm not saying I'm necessarily that upset about the removal of that particular plot. If anything, I'm almost (emphasis on "almost") elated that its gone because even I have to admit that's a pretty dumb summary. Even so, it was the only one I could really turn up, so I unfortunately had to go with that one.

I would like to see at least a BRIEF plot summary come out on this otherwise great Wikipedia page, whether it's from me, you, or anyone else reading this.

Sincerely, --Neateditor123 (talk) 14:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)Neateditor123

There's been a few different plot summaries in this article, all of them problematic for different reasons. Yours was certainly not the most problematic one, but wording like "...a series of events neither of them will ever forget" doesn't tell the reader anything. Who are the main characters and their relationships to each other? What happens to them? How does the movie end? A couple of sentences summarising those things would be a plot summary, but it can't sound like a promotional blurb (if you would see it on a movie poster then it's unlikely to be useful here). I haven't seen the film so I can't provide a summary myself, but I do encourage you to try to put a better one there. Just remember that you're not doing it to make the movie sound appealing, just mention the dry facts. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 14:38, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

@Bonadea: OK, thanks a lot!

Before I go, you might notice that I put that you were replying to me in particular (Neateditor123). Make sure you always do that. That way, I'll know you're talking to me, not some other person.

Oh, and as you can see, I put my own plot summary on the Wikipedia page. Let me know if it's a good one.

Sincerely, --Neateditor123 (talk) 17:58, 3 February 2018 (UTC)Neatedtior123

@Neateditor123: I'm sorry I omitted the ping - I took it for granted that you would check the talk page since you had written the initial post, but since it matters to you I will make sure to ping you each time. Different editors have different preferences. It is unnecessary to add the addressee to each reply, since that's almost always clear from the context and the indentation of the post. In any case, there is never any reason to add a ping to yourself, and please don't edit other people's talk page posts. See WP:TPO for more info. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 18:05, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

@Bonadea: No problem. ;)

By the way, what do you think of my new plot summary? Is it good? Is it bad? Should it stay on there? Should it not stay on there? Please let me know your thoughts.

Warmest regards, --Neateditor123 (talk) 18:09, 3 February 2018 (UTC)Neateditor123

Dove Foundation...

Ok, it's Neateditor123 here (again) with some questions about the inclusion of a review from The Dove Foundation. See, The Dove Foundation is a website that solely gives content-based reviews for parents, much like Common Sense Media or Focus on the Family's Plugged In. In fact, it even says right here that the mission of the company is solely "to encourage and promote the creation, production, distribution and consumption of wholesome family entertainment." While that might be good for parents, a source like that certainly does not belong on a Wikipedia page. Hopefully, that will clear things up. For now, I'll just take that review off that page unless some of you can come up with a good reason to keep it on there.

Warmest Regards, --Neateditor123 (talk) 16:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Neateditor123

@Neateditor123: That's not a reason to exclude it, and until there's a discussion about it a WP:RSN, you shouldn't be applying your own preference against it. For now, I'll just add it back, again, until there is a community consensus that it should not be used. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

All right, fine, you can do that, but even so, when I tried to do that with Focus On The Family's Plugged In on the God's Not Dead 2 page, it immediately got taken off, so I figured that all content-based sites' reviews were off-limits for Wikipedia, which is why I removed The Dove Foundation's review from this one as well.

I hope this all gets cleaned up soon one way or another.

Sincerely, --Neateditor123 (talk) 17:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Neateditor123

Are you sure. I see three edits made by you on that article and none of them include FotF. I seem to recall seeing that on one film article. Could it have been that there were other, better reviews of the film that contributed to its removal there? Regardless, a bit of context would be helpful as well. Feel free to ask at RSN or at the film project. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:18, 22 March 2018 (UTC)