Talk:Django (1966 film)

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Lobo151 in topic Separate Release and Reception sections

Cultural reference

edit

In one of the terminator movies there is a coffin full of weapons. Does that apply to the cultural reference section in the article? --216.67.2.211 07:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes it does What about this

The video game and anime series Gungrave features the main character carrying a coffin full of weapons.

Any coffin full of guns is inspired by Django —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.51.44.173 (talk) 17:50, 20 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

What about Jango Fett from the Star Wars movies? http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Jango_Fett#Behind_the_scenes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.24.62.111 (talk) 09:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Django.jpg

edit
 

Image:Django.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) 20:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Django (1966 film). 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 17:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Django (1966 film). 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 07:09, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Maria as mixed-race

edit

Mexicans are not a race, nor were they considered a race in the west - many of the original "Mexican" settlers of the west were people of full or predominate Spanish ancestry (mind you a couple of the Anglo characters in the movie are actors from Spain themselves coincidentally). Mexicans were generally as a whole accepted as white (even if a lesser white) or those who looked white were considered white, and those who looked more Indigenous (or black) were considered non-white. To use the term mixed-race isn't accurate, if anything she was interethnic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.163.172 (talk) 07:05, 18 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Sub-djangos

edit

The SWMDB mentions that some Django films are sometimes referred to as 'sub-Djangos' (the site says Under Django) (in Italian, Sotto Django). I have never seen the term myself (except on that site, obviously). Is it really in use? — MY, OH, MY! 00:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Separate Release and Reception sections

edit

The previous version of the article did not separate the Release and Reception sections, which are usually separated in dozens and dozens of Wikipedia film articles. Another editor Lobo151 has reverted the article to keep the article without separate Release and Reception sections, without any comment to explain his reverts. The standard Wikipedia approach of separate sections for Release and Reception looks like the preferred way to make useful sections in the article, and would look better restored. Does anyone agree/disagree? (@Valddlac and FMSky:). HenryRoan (talk) 20:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to not include a reason for my reverts. I thought I include them. I think the page as it is now is clear enough. But if the standard is to seperate them, then it should be split. Again my appologise for my rough reverts.Lobo151 (talk) 11:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply