Talk:Motion Picture Association/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Motion Picture Association of America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

How can MPAA "rate" older movies?

How can a movie that was produced before the alpha-numeric MPAA rating system of 1968, be so rated? There are grandfather laws in the U.S.

Specifically: Movie produced in 1959, released to general audiences, a Steve Reeve "Hercules" flick, be rated: "PG" when released on video in the '90's? Or, for that matter, give a : "G" to an Abbott and Costello of 1952?184.99.150.138 (talk) 17:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

They will rate anything that is submitted to them. If an old film is submitted to them for a new rating then they will rate it. Betty Logan (talk) 10:49, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

"Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America" vs "Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association"

An anonymous editor changed the founding name of the MPAA from Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America to Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association. This edit was subsequently reverted by Jim1138. The IP attempted to reinstate their edit but I have removed it once again.

From what I can gather the MPAA was indeed called the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America. According to The Dame in the Kimono (p. 139) the name was changed from Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America to Motion Picture Association of America at the end of 1945. There are also contemporary references to Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America dating to May, 1922. However, transcripts of a Congress sub-committe hearing in 1936 make references to both Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America and Motion Picture Producers and Distributors' Association, along with another organization, Association of Motion Picture Producers.

It would appear that "Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America", "Motion Picture Producers and Distributors' Association" and "Association of Motion Picture Producers" co-existed in 1930. Does anybody know the background to the other two organizations and what the relationship was between all three? Betty Logan (talk) 12:22, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Your Wouldn't Steal a Car

An editor has repeatedly made the claim that the advert at the center of MPAA's 2004 anti-piracy campaign was called "You Wouldn't Steal a Car": [1]. As has been made clear by two editors now, the advert did not have a title, or at least a ttitle is not given by the accompanying source. This is what the source actually says:

Featuring scenes of everyday lives, the trailer aims to send out the following message:

You wouldn't steal a Car. You wouldn't steal a Handbag. You wouldn't steal a Mobile Phone. You wouldn't steal a Movie. Movie Piracy is Stealing. Stealing is Against the Law.

Piracy. It's A Crime.

The source does not give the trailer a title. If the trailer is going to be identified by a title then a source must be provided that explicitly identifies the trailer by the title. Per WP:BURDEN it is up to the editor who restores the information to provide the necessary source. Betty Logan (talk) 07:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

The article name is You Wouldn't Steal a Car so yes that is the name used. If you have a better name it would be better to discuss the article naming per Wikipedia:Article titles instead of blindly revering. // Liftarn (talk) 08:27, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
It would actually be a whole lot better if you observed WP:Verifiability which is a policy that you are required to observe rather than edit-warring. The page name is the title somebody has created an article under, which is not necessarily the same as the title "used" for the work itself. The article could have just as easily have been created under "You Wouldn't Steal a Movie" or "Piracy. It's a Crime." Betty Logan (talk) 08:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes, you are free to discuss the naming of the article, but that you don't like it is no excuse to delete all links to it. // Liftarn (talk) 13:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Please don't misrepresent my edits Liftarn. I have only removed the unsourced title, but I have never removed a single link to the advert page, let alone "all links". Here is the first time I removed the title: [2] (no link was removed); second time: [3] (no link); third time: [4] (again, no link). In fact, you only added a link to the article earlier today, and as you can see here I only removed the unsourced title, I did not remove the link. Betty Logan (talk) 18:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Motion Picture Association of America. 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:

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) 10:55, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

50000th film

when an movie ends, the credits rolls and appears the MPAA logo and above that says "Approved NO. 48546 (or like that)". anybody knows what name of 50000th movie? (because it's interesting milestone) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.54.93.35 (talk) 20:07, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Please dont revert the merge

@Mgasparin: Hi. I noticed that you reverted my merge within one minute of the merge taking place. I think you will see I did everything correctly. It took a long time, I followed the steps exactly, and this is a non-controversial merge. When you reverted there were then two articles with identical content. Please check and see that the merge is appropriate, and done correctly. If there is a problem, please let me know and I hope we can work something out. Thanks so much. FetalFlaw (talk) 07:19, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

FetalFlaw I was not aware of the name change so it appeared to be disruptive editing at first. Thank you for pointing this out to me. Mgasparin (talk) 07:57, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment While there is a legitimate argument for the merge I don't believe this is the optimal way to carry it out. This article has an extensive edit history while Motion Picture Association is practically a stub. By merging Motion Picture Association of America into Motion Picture Association you break the edit history. A better way would be to merge Motion Picture Association into this article and then perform a rename. That way we can keep all the edit history. Betty Logan (talk) 14:13, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
@Betty Logan: So, I thought about doing the merge in the more logical way, but I am not sure how to change the name of the MPAA article to MPA, if there already is an article called Motion Picture Association? Do I change the name of both articles? And create a redirect from the newly renamed MPAA article to the newly renamed MPA article? Please advise? FetalFlaw (talk) 06:06, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Merge reverted

Since the merge was reverted, I took off the tag. I am going to perform the merge in the other direction now, from MPA to MPAA. And then request to move the page to the name Motion Picture Association, as was suggested above. FetalFlaw (talk) 09:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 6 October 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 14:41, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Motion Picture Association of America → Motion Picture Association – The Motion Picture Association of America is now known as the Motion Picture Association. Here are some sources for this[1] [2][3] The request also included a move for the MPA page to MPAA, to maintain the redirect to this page with its new name. However, if it is more efficient to delete the source page, then that would also make sense

References

  1. ^ "Motion Picture Association Rebrands With Unified Name And Updated Logo". Retrieved 6 October 2019.
  2. ^ "The MPAA Has Rebranded… As The MPA". Retrieved 6 October 2019.
  3. ^ "Motion Picture Association unifies global brand". Retrieved 6 October 2019.

FetalFlaw (talk) 10:58, 6 October 2019 (UTC) --Relisted. P. I. Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 15:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Relist note: A redirect as a current title in a requested move results in a malformed request, so as of this date, the redirect and its suggested title has been moved directly below this note. The redirect and its significant history should be taken into account if consensus is garnered to grant this request. P. I. Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 15:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Motion Picture Association → Motion Picture Association of America
  • Comment I support renaming this article to Motion Picture Association; however I don't see the point in renaming the second article to Motion Picture Association of America (in effect swapping the pages over). In fact it would just make attribution more confusing. My suggestion would to rename this article and then perform a history merge. This would mean that the attribution history would all be preserved on just the one page making the merge and move seemless and retaining all of the edit history of both articles. So the action I am advocating: rename Motion Picture Association of America to Motion Picture Association and then merge the edit history of the two pages. A redirect will be left at Motion Picture Association of America. Betty Logan (talk) 14:29, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment The MPAA is known as an American organization. It tried to groom a distinct international version of itself, which Wikipedia documents in the history of Motion Picture Association. I think that the Wikipedia article on that international version failed to meet Wikipedia's criteria on notability so could be either deleted or archived as history. If that is the case, there should be a deletion discussion to decide what to do with that content. Now it seems that the organization is rebranding itself as one international entity, not an American version and an international version. If the branch version is not notable then it seems fine to keep the American version and merge whatever historical international content there is into the one article. I fail to understand the rationale for moving the current international branch history to where the American history currently sits. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:29, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose as too soon to see if this WP:NAMECHANGES is/will become the WP:COMMONNAME. Yes we give extra weight to recent sources, but not this soon. -- Netoholic @ 18:10, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support The rebranding/renaming (i.e. dropping "of America") seems to be at least partially intended to reflect the increasing international nature of the MPA. brad. (talk) 23:04, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
    • It's an alliance of six U.S. companies. How does that indicate increasing international nature? —BarrelProof (talk) 05:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Netoholic. The fact that the WP:OFFICIALNAME has changed is not sufficient grounds to justify the move. No attempt has been made to show that MPA is the new WP:COMMONNAME (and it may be too soon to tell, if the rename just happened within the last week or two). Colin M (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Motion_Picture_Association/Archive_2&oldid=1152399075"