Talk:Renaissance Man (film)

	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.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shakespeare Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

ok, so i somehow managed to revert the vandalism out of existence... it doesn't even show up on the history anymore.... but it was there! YggdrasilRoot 14:23, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to polymath, make this Renaissance Man (movie)

I think this should be a redirect to polymath, as that is by far the most common use of the word. Titanium Dragon 02:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:RenaissanceMan.jpg

Image:RenaissanceMan.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 this Wikipedia article 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 07:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:RenaissanceMan.jpg

Image:RenaissanceMan.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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Audience reception

The "Audience reception" for describing the ratings for this film on Amazon prime looks a lot like original research WP:OR. It may also fail WP:UGC. It should probably be removed. Not sure. -- 109.76.132.77 (talk) 05:15, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than claiming something should PROBABLY (but "not sure") be removed, how do you suggest that this be imrproved, 109.76.132.77? Taram (talk) 17:53, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would normally have removed something like that without any discussion, based on the policies already mentioned. If someone else has ideas about how to improve it or a good excuse for keeping it then I would welcome discussion. Otherwise I will come back around soon and delete it. -- 109.76.140.181 (talk) 01:34, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than claiming you will unilaterally remove anything without discussion, how do you suggest that this be improved? Taram (talk) 07:18, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After taking some time to think about it, I decided to go ahead and removed the unreliable sources, as the guidelines already allow me to do, and try to improve the article. I've have tried to improve the article by adding more sources for the Production section and more reviews from critics. Audiences scores are largely irrelevant anyway, the more important point is that what parts of the film critics liked and what parts they didn't. In general there seemed to be praise for the likable cast but various complaints about tone and that the story didn't really work and that the film was overlong. -- 109.78.204.188 (talk) 16:41, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]