57:
32:
103:
314:
I don't see that as vandalism as much as a content dispute. Simply start a thread stating "materials used for these need to be cited as the films themselves unlikely state what materials the costumes are made of, if the films do, for instance, in dialog or in DVD commentary, etc. please provide that
431:
I would say the same thing - a lyric, for instance could explain the material and there certainly are instances where people talk about the clothes they wear in videos. My hunch is tag it for refs for a month, then if nothing happens remove them to talk page and say please provide a ref before
384:
Only as far as the color of the catsuit goes, the films and videos are good as sources. But the vinyl/leather/latex/etc. can't possibly be established from the footage without some OR involved. Therefore my suggestion/agreement that mention of the material/fabric may be removed if necessary.
155:
are allowed under the condition that - "only make descriptive claims about the information found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive,
419:
Hmmmmmmmm... good point. But, even if that's possible (the films I have seen does nothing like that, but it's entirely possible), would the music videos do the same? And, even if they did, it may be safer to have them removed unless someone can cite the video credibly.
361:
asserting something that may or may not be true. I'm generally opposed to voluminous tagging of any kind as it detracts from our readers experience - many of whom could care less about such matters - when a dozen fact tags could be replaced with a section tag.
319:." Spreading fact tags around seems more confrontational to others than it does to you; the goal is to improve the article so your approach may be more successful in this way. Another option would be to use <!--- these around text ---: -->
175:
220:
Actually your use of fact tags, IMHO, is disruptive. We certainly can cite the movies themselves to assert that a catsuit or bodysuit played a part in the costuming and i see assuming otherwise as a leap of bad faith.
396:
I believe you are mistaken. For instance a character may reference what material an outfit is made of and we can then reference that. Likewise, DVD commentary or added features could easily include such information.
243:
But the reversion of my good faith tags is an acceptable lack of good faith. And I still haven't gotten an answer to my question as to what reliable source indicates the material the catsuits are made form.
113:
193:
The lack of references in this article shows that all of this is nothing more than original research and an attempt to bomb
Knowledge (XXG) with nonsense. Besides which, even
623:
619:
605:
197:
we accepted the acceptance of a film as its own evidence, where is the proof that a particular catsuit was made of the material that is claimed in this article?
501:
491:
583:
342:
I support
Benjiboi. The fabric/material can be removed if someone feels like it. The current sources can't possibly support information of that kind.
288:
There are claims that certain actors wore pleather, others wore latex, others wore leather. But there is no proof for those claims. That violates
63:
37:
555:
518:
292:. WhenI tagged this article for a citation for each of those claims, I was reverted without a citation being provided. That's vandalism.
533:
357:
reference that material, Corvus cornix does have a point that it would be better to have source that asserts that rather than
166:
tags put in to the article couldn't be justified by the policies, and there's reason to believe that is was an example of an
584:
https://web.archive.org/20080708013413/http://www.rollingstone.com:80/reviews/movie/5948895/review/5948896/batman_forever
109:
587:
622:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
156:
explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source." Since, the profusion of
537:
301:
253:
206:
68:
42:
669:
661:
641:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
629:
541:
522:
449:
426:
414:
391:
379:
348:
337:
309:
283:
261:
238:
214:
188:
179:
132:
102:
479:
433:
398:
363:
321:
320:
these handy tools to comment out content like the materials used, until it a source is supplied.
294:
267:
246:
222:
199:
171:
626:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
167:
17:
642:
565:
421:
386:
343:
183:
487:
148:
136:
657:
532:
I've watched
Barbarella more than once and I do not recall seeing the heroine in a catsuit.
140:
649:
483:
266:
You have a concern that the material of a costume is somehow being misrepresented? Really?
178:), I took the liberty of removing them. If someone decides to add back such a tag, please,
573:
514:
494:
linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
608:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
648:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
615:
316:
289:
160:
490:
when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an
147:. Films, and video games and music videos are sources on their own according to the
588:
http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/movie/5948895/review/5948896/batman_forever
56:
31:
614:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
570:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
131:
The practice of asking for a citation can easily become an example of
486:, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the
578:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
507:
That this article is linked to from the image description page.
97:
593:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
504:
on the image's description page for the use in this article.
554:
I have just added archive links to one external link on
559:
144:
353:
Just to be clear I think the films, or original items
618:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
66:, a project which is currently considered to be
474:Image copyright problem with File:CathyGale.jpg
604:This message was posted before February 2018.
517:. For assistance on the image use policy, see
8:
78:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Popular culture
168:unacceptable attempt to illustrate a point
26:
519:Knowledge (XXG):Media copyright questions
482:is used in this article under a claim of
556:Catsuits and bodysuits in popular media
170:according to Wikiepdia guidelines (the
28:
7:
81:Template:WikiProject Popular culture
62:This article is within the scope of
25:
558:. Please take a moment to review
112:on 19 August 2008. The result of
101:
55:
30:
18:Talk:Catsuits in popular culture
513:This is an automated notice by
149:relevant Knowledge (XXG) policy
108:This article was nominated for
1:
670:22:47, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
488:requirements for such images
523:11:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
450:00:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
427:11:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
415:23:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
392:14:59, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
380:23:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
349:18:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
338:08:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
310:07:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
284:07:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
262:07:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
239:07:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
215:06:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
189:11:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
64:WikiProject Popular culture
685:
635:(last update: 5 June 2024)
576:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
551:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
542:13:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
50:
84:Popular culture articles
547:External links modified
176:get the article deleted
528:Catsuit in Barbarella?
502:non-free use rationale
151:, and the use of the
127:Asking for a citation
616:regular verification
601:to let others know.
562:. If necessary, add
606:After February 2018
597:parameter below to
174:has been trying to
611:InternetArchiveBot
480:File:CathyGale.jpg
182:and explain here.
668:
636:
441:
432:re-adding these.
406:
371:
329:
275:
230:
180:play by the rules
137:gaming the system
124:
123:
96:
95:
92:
91:
16:(Redirected from
676:
664:
663:Talk to my owner
659:
634:
633:
612:
577:
569:
500:That there is a
446:
439:
434:
424:
411:
404:
399:
389:
376:
369:
364:
346:
334:
327:
322:
315:information per
308:
304:
297:
280:
273:
268:
260:
256:
249:
235:
228:
223:
213:
209:
202:
186:
165:
159:
141:abuse of process
105:
98:
86:
85:
82:
79:
76:
59:
52:
51:
46:
34:
27:
21:
684:
683:
679:
678:
677:
675:
674:
673:
667:
662:
627:
620:have permission
610:
571:
563:
549:
530:
476:
444:
437:
422:
409:
402:
387:
374:
367:
344:
332:
325:
307:
302:
295:
293:
278:
271:
259:
254:
247:
245:
233:
226:
212:
207:
200:
198:
184:
163:
157:
153:primary sources
129:
83:
80:
77:
75:Popular culture
74:
73:
40:
38:Popular culture
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
682:
680:
660:
654:
653:
646:
591:
590:
582:Added archive
548:
545:
529:
526:
511:
510:
509:
508:
505:
475:
472:
471:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
452:
340:
299:
251:
204:
128:
125:
122:
121:
114:the discussion
106:
94:
93:
90:
89:
87:
60:
48:
47:
35:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
681:
672:
671:
665:
658:
651:
647:
644:
640:
639:
638:
631:
625:
621:
617:
613:
607:
602:
600:
596:
589:
585:
581:
580:
579:
575:
567:
561:
557:
552:
546:
544:
543:
539:
535:
534:78.147.11.227
527:
525:
524:
520:
516:
506:
503:
499:
498:
497:
496:
495:
493:
489:
485:
481:
473:
451:
448:
447:
440:
430:
429:
428:
425:
418:
417:
416:
413:
412:
405:
395:
394:
393:
390:
383:
382:
381:
378:
377:
370:
360:
356:
352:
351:
350:
347:
341:
339:
336:
335:
328:
318:
313:
312:
311:
306:
305:
298:
296:Corvus cornix
291:
287:
286:
285:
282:
281:
274:
265:
264:
263:
258:
257:
250:
248:Corvus cornix
242:
241:
240:
237:
236:
229:
219:
218:
217:
216:
211:
210:
203:
201:Corvus cornix
196:
191:
190:
187:
181:
177:
173:
169:
162:
154:
150:
146:
145:this instance
142:
138:
134:
126:
119:
115:
111:
107:
104:
100:
99:
88:
71:
70:
65:
61:
58:
54:
53:
49:
44:
39:
36:
33:
29:
19:
655:
630:source check
609:
603:
598:
594:
592:
553:
550:
531:
512:
477:
442:
435:
407:
400:
372:
365:
358:
354:
330:
323:
300:
276:
269:
252:
231:
224:
205:
194:
192:
152:
130:
118:no consensus
117:
67:
492:explanation
133:tag bombing
515:FairuseBot
478:The image
650:this tool
643:this tool
656:Cheers.—
566:cbignore
484:fair use
110:deletion
69:inactive
43:inactive
666::Online
595:checked
560:my edit
143:, like
574:nobots
423:Aditya
388:Aditya
345:Aditya
185:Aditya
172:tagger
355:could
599:true
538:talk
521:. --
436:Banj
401:Banj
366:Banj
324:Banj
317:WP:V
303:talk
290:WP:V
270:Banj
255:talk
225:Banj
208:talk
161:fact
139:and
116:was
624:RfC
586:to
637:.
632:}}
628:{{
572:{{
568:}}
564:{{
540:)
445:oi
410:oi
375:oi
359:we
333:oi
279:oi
234:oi
195:if
164:}}
158:{{
135:,
652:.
645:.
536:(
443:b
438:e
408:b
403:e
373:b
368:e
331:b
326:e
277:b
272:e
232:b
227:e
120:.
72:.
45:)
41:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
