Talk:Chronophotographic gun

	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 Filmmaking task force.

Photography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography 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.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Substance and sources

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Much of this article seemed to misunderstand much of the use and legacy of the chronophotographic gun. As indicated by the "unreliable sources" banner, it needs better sources (citations included an old version of a wikipedia page and popular websites rather than academic publications, several with dead links, or in foreign languages and thus harder to factcheck).

I therefore rewrote quite a lot, but mainly used information from bluelinked pages, wp:commonsense and my own knowledge of the subject. I'm not sure if I'll get around to look up wp:rs, so hopefully others will have a look on jstor, academia, wikipidialibrary and the like for useful citations (and add info + correct whatever mistakes I may have made).

Sorry if I've been a bit bold in deleting and rewriting somebody's well-intended work, but I'm quite sure about how misinformed many of the elements were. I did my best to merely correct mistakes and rewrite in the same vain, rather than just delete all of it and put my own thoughts instead, but in the end the results may have been somewhat the same if I had approached it like that. Joortje1 (talk) 06:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic