Talk:Sea Beast

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Horror

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Why it should stay.[edit]

I think it is a notabe film, and it has notable stars such as Miriam McDonald, Daniel Wisler and known actor Corin Nemec. I just got a note on my talk page saying I cannot add blatantly copyrighted information to wikipedia, which the plot is. I am sorry for this and will rewrite the plot in my own words, as it says you should if you want to get information from a site to wikipedia. I just rewrited the plot into my own words.PeterGriffin11298 (talk) 23:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Forthcoming films are not notable without substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. The only source cited in this article is videoeta.com, which claims that its info comes "directly from the studios". As such, it is certainly not an independent reliable source. I'll let this ride for a few days, then come back to send it to AfD. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VideoETA bills itself as "The best source for DVD release dates". Granted it's not a secondary source, but as far as release dates go what better source is there than the studio itself? I'd much rather trust information on release dates straight from the studio rather than an independent source. -- œ ^™ 02:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you follow the link? The videoeta.com link given goes to a 1936 movie called Forbidden Heaven, and no, a single video site listing that it was released does NOT indicate any kind of notability. The movie was released, it was aired, but that does not mean this article in any way demonstrates that it was notable nor a notable entry in the Maneater series. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm, are we talking about the same link here? http://videoeta.com/movie/113701 is the one I added. Note the six digit number.. 113701, Forbidden Heaven is 11370. s'ok you must've just made a typo. As far as its notability is concerned.. first of all I wasn't trying to assert notability by adding the VideoETA link, I just added it because it had a boxcover pic of the actual "Sea Beast" title, whereas the IMDb link is for Troglodyte. Second.. admittedly, any straight-to-DVD movie's notability is negligible, but I think we can use a little dose of IAR here in order to fill out the Maneater navbox (why have a navbox if it can't be complete?) Or you may as well just put it up for AfD rather than keep a big ugly tag on such a small stub, but then that would just leave an uglier redlink in the navbox.. anyways.. who cares? let it go. :) -- œ ^™ 05:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RV again - sorry, but aesthetics is not a valid reason to remove the notability tag nor does its having a navbox have anything to do with it. Per proper procedures, the article has been tagged for notability first to give people time to actually try to establish it rather than taking it straight to DVD. Leave the tag alone or fix the issue. As for the link, it is removed again. Even with the correct link it is still not an appropriate EL. It isn't a reliable source nor a valid WP:EL. Be no different from adding the link to Amazon which also has the same DVD cover as does any other retailer. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stubborn aren't you? ;) -- œ ^™ 19:12, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot?[edit]

Is there some way that any of you could get parts of the plot and/or the cast listing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.167.89.172 (talk) 01:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If someone watches it and added it...sure. DVD is a fairly recent release. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Originally a TV movie[edit]

This film appears to have been originally a 2008 TV movie called Troglodyte and released as either The Sea Beast or Sea Beast 2009 on DVD. IMDb has full credits and some additional information that may be useful for the article for anyone who wishes to fill out this stub. --NrDg 15:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've undone the move of this article. Please remember that IMDB is not a reliable source. Sea Beast is the more commonly used name of this film, and what the article should remained titled as. This is the title it aired under (and is still aired as), what it was released to on DVD, what its own producers call it, and what reliable sources call it. I'm not sure Troglodyte was ever actually used except as a working title or maybe the first airing. Per WP:NAME, it is Sea Beast. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 15:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb is generally reliable for credits on released films as they are a copy from the film itself - presumption is that the filmed credits are a primary source and the info entered into IMDb is verifiable from that primary source. IMDb is unreliable for most other stuff. I have no problem with whatever the film is named on wiki - I just added some stuff to fill out the stub a bit. --NrDg 15:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is sometimes reliably for credits, but it is not reliable for titles nor are credits copied from the film. IMDB is user edited, hence its not being a reliable source. They frequently have errors, particularly when dealing with B movies like this. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 15:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand this issue is contentious per WP:Citing IMDb#Disputed uses and WT:Citing IMDb. I choose to accept released credits as they are verifiable and are as accurate as some wiki editor watching the film and adding credits and using the film itself as the primary source. Your call what you want to do with this article. --NrDg 16:24, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]