Talk:The Case for Christ

Fair use rationale for Image:ChristII.jpg

Image:ChristII.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Plot edits

A User recently (on April 2) tried to change the plot description of this movie to reflect an incorrect storyline.

The user edited the plot to say "A Christian interviews other Christians to attempt to prove Jesus is indeed the Christ." without providing any sources to confirm the legitimacy of the edit, while claiming that he was correcting an error by removing nearly a paragraph of fairly well-sourced text and keeping the citations to give an air of credibility to his edit that would have evaporated on any closer and intellectually honest inspection

The purpose of this edit held a very likely political motivation to attempt to discredit the film by painting it as nothing more than Christian backscratching. In reality, the film portrays the events in the life of Lee Strobel which brought him from a position of atheism to a position of Christianity through a sincere investigation. Any future edits to the plot should portray this accurately. I recommend that this user's IP address be prohibited from editing this article. The contributor's previous contributions can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FB90:97B:1873:3411:9A11:39FF:5419 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.255.76 (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Why be so harsh on the previous editor? Is it because you're worried that the edit was correct? From an analysis of Strobel's life and work, we only have his personal word to go on for being a "former" atheist, and from his gross mischaracterisation of what atheism is as a philosophy, expounded in his books, we can be very doubtful as to the veracity of his claim. My guess that the former description of this film as "A Christian interviews other Christians to attempt to prove Jesus is indeed the Christ." will indeed be far more accurate a description as what currently is on the page (it is, after all, a description of everything he has written).83.136.45.62 (talk) 23:10, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

When summarising a movie plot, whether ficticious or not, we give a synopsis of the storyline of the film, not a witty comment of what we think actually happened. Your suggestion that the previous line was more accurate is wildly incorrect, seeing as it is not what happened in the film.

Moreover, your opinion that the events of the film are a lie or exagerated are not only irrelevent to the article, but wrong. The characters in the film existed, and they were not all Christian. And your insinuation that Strobel was not an atheist because the movies depiction doesn't portray what you think it should feels a lot like you're leaning on a "no true Scotsman" argument.2600:1:921E:7448:D02C:221D:168E:9574 (talk) 05:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)