1297:
all because of
Charles Lindberg supposedly being antisemitic as well. I do not believe this review even needs to be there due to the fact that it contains really nothing of description, praise or even criticism of any kind related to the third film and only bashes the movement. Whether what Michelle says is true or not is irrelevant, since it does not pertain to the actual content film in either praising, critical or descriptory manner it does not need to be mentioned. I would like anyone else's input before removing it in it's entirety, because after I had removed it previously, it appeared again the exact same day after I removed it.
1376:, a self-described "pro-am" journalism site. Our article on them notes concerns about reliability and fact-checking. The reviewer's bio doesn't show a whole lot that may be relevant to the field. I've got a MAJOR concern about using Michael Ruppert as a review source - he appears IN the movie and is apparently a member of the movement. I've found no reviews in major sources and IMDB/RottenTomato do not have links to any major reviews. EDIT: I've removed the Ruppert review for the reasons above.
329:
388:
585:
467:
957:
the article is mainly about summarizing the claims of the film, there is no need for sourcing a summation of the film. You can add citations for the claims as things go on, but to say that the article needs to be sources when its summation is just baffling. This makes the points you bring up in 3 and 4 completely moot. With number 5, your going to have be more specific. I view this mainly as an attempt of a troll.
204:
259:
235:
674:
269:
849:
is because when money comes into existence it is created by loans at interest. The existing money supply is only the principle. The interest to pay the loan that created the money does not exist in the money supply and must be borrowed repetitively in order to service the debt. Due to this exponential money supply growth, the value of money is eventually destroyed.
717:
1596:
378:
357:
2335:
released in theaters also already. The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. Probably best for you not to get too hot and bothered because you could end up having problems if you continue to edit war information. The article is fairly good now and presents a well rounded view of the subject.
2288:
Its already mentioned in the lead that it had a theater release also so really its already there. It does not need to be sourced for the lead anyway. It makes just about zero difference, but stop putting up Spam citations where some blogger basically wrote some glowing review of the movie and praises
956:
are on part 1 and are done by academics along with the skeptic community. No academic to my knowledge has commented on
Zeitgeist Moving Forward, the film just released and you expect academics to have written criticisms or appraisals of it? This kinda makes your point about number 3 being moot. Also
1296:
and how it is antisemitic based on two of the previous films which are completely separate and bear no actual standing on the third film itself. The issue I find with this reception being added is that it should not be here since it goes onto to loosely associate the movement with antisemitic views
848:
The other component is the monetary economy. The monetary system regulates the money supply and interest rates by buying/selling treasuries. More critical views of the monetary system are explained. In the final analysis the current monetary system can only result in default or hyperinflation. This
1397:
I don't understand how a person who is critical of the ideas, who obviously isn't a member of the
Movement, is allowed to be represented in this article, but a notable person, who agrees with the ideas cannot be represented as he was interviewed in the film in question. That is a double standard.
2307:
Sorry Earl, but a 350+ theater release that is validated across the internet is not properly noted and your interest to downplay this work is clear. The notability of this reality is clearly worth expressing as an accomplishment. Also there is no SPAM here at all. Only corroborating evidence to
1820:
It is not easy finding good sources of information for the article and this is a reliable source. Also another redirect to a
Zeitgeist link like their Youtube station is not needed. We can keep the information without giving more links to the primary source which is already linked with all their
1968:
If you are concerned about it, do that. Otherwise my plan is to put the information back in the article. The paper interviewed people involved. Its well written. It covers things well. It does not matter what their political beliefs are. Its a legit paper with a very long history. The
Christian
1736:
Redirection is a terrible idea. Moving
Forward is a movie. A movie on Netflix and other outlets giving it total independence from TZM or anything else. This is a move being conducted by anti-tzm folk who wish to downplay TZM's true work, which is ubiquitous in hundreds of hours of online media,
1234:
This article is sadly useless as a description of the movie, and instead seems to be merely a repeat or rehash of the verbal soup that is the movie. I had hoped that the article would be clearer than interviews with the documentarian. That said, I hope someone deals with the flags, as they're
2334:
Get thyself to a deprogrammed attitude. You can not be the resident
Zeitgeist promoter on the article or if you are a member of this group that does not give you the right to use primary sources from Peter Joseph to make statements like a Faq's report in the article. Its mentioned that it was
1860:
described the movie as featuring "a parade of “experts” — mostly academics — touting the supposed benefits of collectivism and the purported evils of private property, profit, and free markets. Using a barrage of pseudo-intellectual terms such as “Unified
Dynamically Updated Global Management
1026:
Do not continue to add flags that are inaccurate. It does not read like an advertisement. If you are going to continue to flag it as such, please provide citation as to where exactly the article reads like an advertisement. At this point in time, it does not, as it simply describes the films
1893:
but their paper has been around a long time, the group is presented on
Knowledge (XXG) and its a reliable source and that particular thing is well written. Left or right wing publications can not be judged if they are legitimate because someone is of the right or left as an editor here.
1763:
Could the person that recently edited the article to another of Peter
Josephs sites that highlights his begging for money to make another movie please not do that anymore? Its bad enough that almost the only citation in the article is the Zeitgeist Youtube channel without giving another
933:
Watch the film for yourself and come up with a description of its content, then. Everything described in the Content section is sourced straight from the film. None of the other Content sections in documentary film entries list the entire breadth of sources the documentary uses for its
1917:
here, I suggest you raise it at WP:RSN, for a start. And then explain why the opinion of far-right extremists merits inclusion anyway. Personally, I see no reason why their views are even relevant. Would we cite the views of TZM in the article on the John Birch Society?
2107:
I seriously doubt its a reliable source for anything. It looks like someones hobby site for their views. It does not mention what you are talking about either about footage. Try to find a good source from one of the other articles where it mentions 'Moving Forward'.
1069:
Sorry, Smalltalk12q, but your objections appear to be erroneous to me as well. The article appears to be a fairly accurate description of the film's content. There is no advertising here. There's no "fringe" content here as per definitions laid out in
617:, a collaborative effort to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
1647:
Those are more or less blogs where viewers probably can rate things a hundred times if they are in the mood. Its not like a real official poll by say Newsweek or USA today. Also as stats in general with little to no meaning its clutter
1123:) 22:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)) This article contains only the negative reception of the film, as though Knowledge (XXG) is trying to discourage people from seeing it. Knowledge (XXG) has done this with the previous two films as well.
2102:
Do you have any published information on that? Otherwise it can not be included. It has to come from a reliable source. The paper link you gave is some right wing zealous crazy Libertarian site that has anti global warming stories
166:
2382:
Your idea of honesty has nothing to do with how Knowledge (XXG) works. You have to have consensus for your edits and they have to be of reliable sourcing and pertinent. I warned you on your talk page about this already.
1150:
One study discussed, showed that newly born babies are more likely to die if they are not touched. Another study which was mentioned, claimed to show how stressed women were more likely to have children with addiction
1191:
The city structure will consist of concentric rings, every ring serving one critical function necessary for the function of a self-sufficient city: agriculture, energy production, residents, hospitals, schools,
555:
1163:
The "Dutch Famine Birth Cohort Study" is mentioned to have shown that obesity and other health complications became common problems later in life, due to prolonged starvation of their mother during pregnancy.
1787:
In anticipation of Earl accusing me of turning the OP into some sort of advertisement for the TZM YouTube channel, I simply added the reference in response to you adding the word "reportedly", contrary to
1983:
It is not a good source Earl, regardless of how "well written" you think it is. If you put it in the article you are going against the general consensus here. Take it to RSN if you insist on using it. --
727:
1027:
accolades, and its content. It also does not include personal research. If you watch the film itself you will realize that the content section is exactly what it describes, the film's content.
1932:
Not a real discourse, just your opinion. Its a legit magazine, and been around for a while and the article is very good. As to Zeitgeist comments on John Birch that is not the issue, is it?
1256:"Original research is research that is not exclusively based on a summary, review or synthesis of earlier publications on the subject of research." - regurgitating content of a movie does
2105:
Dr. Arthur Robinson, co-founder and president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, destroys the myth of scientific consensus on human-caused global warming in this interview
1106:'Personal essays state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the opinion of experts)' Where does this article express anyone's opinion? It is merely a summary of a film.
338:
245:
2087:(see the headline/subject) includes a lot of material from Zeitgeist: Moving Forward. The article should probably mention this. If nobody does it before me, I'll get to it next week.
1710:
There is no reason for you to personalize this by emphasizing what editor did what. Lets just stick with neutral editing and discussion. Mostly the conversation about this is on the
160:
1344:
I've readded the review, but only after removing most of the existing text which did refer to the movement, not the film. I added comments by the reviewer about the film itself.
652:
905:. It is the facts presented in the movie without opinion. These arguments against this article are aimed at the movie's message not and have nothing to do with this article.
1792:. It's an easily verifiable fact how many YouTube 'views' it has had. Quite what this number means, and whether such statistics should be included at all, is another matter.
2461:
2456:
642:
57:
2426:
1179:
Through the global application of existing revolutionary technologies in the manufacturing and distribution sectors, labor and money will eventually become obsolete;
2466:
606:
1056:
Is WikiPedia in the business of censoring information which explains what the subject that someone may be searching for is about because it is controversial.. ???
618:
2166:
830:...I am not "trolling" this article. Rather, I don't see why it should be held to different standards than other Knowledge (XXG) articles. To address your points:
92:
2431:
2122:
The reference below (at the bottom of the talk page) isn't mine. I have no clue what it applies to but it obviously has nothing to do with the music video.
694:. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them.
1627:
How are these not reliable sources? They are commonly cited on other films' Knowledge (XXG) pages, and other sites and media commonly reference them. Re:
1052:
If someone who has not watched the movie yet instead read this article first, would the article give an accurate summary of the content of the movie? Yes
2471:
613:
590:
1292:
The reception article by Michelle Goldberg does not in any way deal with the actual content of the film itself, instead it tries to go on a rant about
952:
Number 1 example is actually a description of the views versed in Addendum. Number 2 I am kinda wondering, because the criticisms expressed in about
681:
444:
1444:
article. As that seems the best candidate for an overarching article. Maybe with merging the articles something decent can finally come out of it.
98:
1398:
Doesn't matter if he was in the film, he publicly gave his opinion on it, and he is a notable figure. Meets the criteria of the Reception section.
1432:
Youtube views aren't a reason for inclusion or a separate article on Knowledge (XXG). What I think the best option is, is to merge this article,
2446:
973:
434:
1204:
Not directly mentioned, currently the gap between the rich and the poor is wider than at any time since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.
2421:
1465:
1578:
1097:* The notability of this article's subject is in question. If notability cannot be established, it may be listed for deletion or removed.
43:
913:
181:
2451:
2214:
1240:
1130:
1100:-A film motivated by a global movement consisting of 120 chapters and nearly 15,000 members, with over 5 million views, is not notable?
148:
1417:
Given that the film has over 4.5 million views on YouTube in roughly 2 months, I definitely don't think this article should be merged.
898:
410:
2436:
1399:
1267:
1028:
935:
812:
2144:
Zeitgeist Moving Forward was released in over 300 theaters and this data can be found all over the internet. What is this a problem?
1464:
The article is quite long. A merged article would be messy and long. And YouTube views are a factor; it gives an idea of notability.
1368:
I'm starting to get some RS concerns about the sources used in the reception section. First twinge was a review labeled as from the
697:
685:
513:
287:
112:
2404:
2160:
1854:
117:
33:
934:
material...There are already sources that don't belong in the article, as they are sources that the film itself doesn't reference.
2441:
87:
2226:
2167:
http://www.eventbrite.com/e/zeitgeist-moving-forward-film-screening-at-samsara-house-2023-friday-march-21st-tickets-10970076795
1088:
Until an individual can clearly identify how this article infringes upon the following, I am going to remove the accusations:
1054:
Is the movie controversial in its content which has created large Internet groups both in favor of and in opposition to it? Yes
2172:
479:
215:
1213:
And last but not least, in the Reception section the Examiner.com review and the Wessex scene review lack a proper citation.
519:
142:
1112:-Where? How is this summary poorly organized? Please identify particular passages in the article that supports this claim.
401:
362:
78:
299:
291:
775:* It is written like an advertisement and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view. Tagged since January 2011.
295:
282:
240:
2262:
2041:
1989:
1873:
1868:, which is not a reliable source; "Published in the United States as an educational tool for The John Birch Society" --
1422:
1173:
page. Which one in this collection is the study in question? If it's in there somewhere, it should be cited directly...
800:
138:
723:
1686:
811:
There is obviously no legitimate reason for a lot of these flags. I suspect trolling or personal motives behind this.
2154:
1565:
Here is the link for the article by Fouad Al-Noor by the wessex scene. Can you guys please update the citation list.
1566:
1302:
1048:
Is WikiPedia an Internet REFERENCE whose purpose is to provide free and factual information on a given subject? Yes
969:
188:
888:
703:
526:
122:
1839:
The 'reference' you cited has nothing to do with the American Spectator. It is a link to a Youtube parody video.
839:
37:
751:* It may be written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view. Tagged since January 2011.
1582:
1469:
1768:
to Joseph asking for further funding. Using his Youtube channel once maybe, but not twice. That is overkill.
221:
1134:
2388:
2366:
2340:
2317:
2294:
2278:
2210:
2113:
2037:
2012:
1985:
1974:
1969:
Science Monitor is a good paper in general though run by a special interest group, if you know what I mean.
1937:
1899:
1869:
1826:
1773:
1719:
1655:
1418:
1271:
1244:
203:
2202:
1636:
1574:
1298:
1263:
1126:
965:
961:
788:
2250:
2196:
2058:
2027:
1959:
1923:
1844:
1800:
1711:
1697:
1667:
1488:
1441:
1403:
1369:
1293:
1032:
939:
816:
1109:* It may require general cleanup to meet Knowledge (XXG)'s quality standards. Tagged since January 2011.
781:* It may require general cleanup to meet Knowledge (XXG)'s quality standards. Tagged since January 2011.
154:
68:
2362:
2313:
2274:
2206:
1017:
923:
540:
409:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
406:
1678:
83:
2256:
1632:
1220:
1120:
796:
1548:
1505:
1445:
1383:
1351:
1061:
1057:
953:
866:
1789:
716:
691:
492:
2127:
2092:
1738:
1433:
328:
174:
1629:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Zeitgeist:_Moving_Forward&diff=prev&oldid=591481528
1075:
1071:
1009:
485:
2405:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/10634-zeitgeist-and-the-venus-project
2384:
2336:
2290:
2161:
http://www.eventbrite.com/e/movie-night-at-the-orassy-zeitgeist-moving-forward-tickets-1080567005
2109:
2008:
1970:
1933:
1914:
1895:
1890:
1861:
Machine,” the movie essentially concludes that Fresco’s vision is the only way to move forward."
1857:
1822:
1814:
1769:
1742:
1715:
1674:
1651:
1541:
Not of much use though - extremely short and it's just a very, very brief overview of the film.
1449:
1216:
1116:
792:
502:
2232:
2007:
Two against one is not a general consensus. The burden is on you if you want to check the link.
2268:
2053:
2023:
1955:
1919:
1840:
1795:
1692:
1613:
1608:
http://www.wessexscene.co.uk/politics/2011/02/06/zeitgeist-moving-forward-review/</ref: -->
1531:
1484:
1198:
As before: If it will be so, that claim needs a source or it needs to be written differently.
1079:
536:
393:
64:
2178:
1913:- that doesn't make it a reliable source. And if you seriously think we should be citing the
870:
2249:
There are countless online reviews which source the data, with people seeing it in theaters
2227:
http://twilightearth.com/media/official-release-of-zeitgeist-moving-forward-by-peter-joseph/
1453:
1013:
919:
2173:
http://www.eventbrite.com/e/zeitgeist-moving-forward-screening-frankston-tickets-1128155343
902:
1542:
1499:
1377:
1345:
1332:
827:
498:
1523:
1324:
1050:
Is Zeitgeist: Moving Forward a movie made by Peter Joseph with the four parts listed? Yes
1005:
997:
989:
988:
remark...I am no troll. I am merely asking that the article provide reliable sources per
856:
745:* It needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged since January 2011.
2238:
2123:
2088:
605:
584:
466:
2392:
2370:
2344:
2321:
2298:
2282:
2244:
2218:
2190:
2131:
2117:
2096:
2065:
2045:
2031:
2016:
1993:
1978:
1963:
1941:
1927:
1903:
1877:
1848:
1830:
1807:
1777:
1746:
1723:
1704:
1659:
1641:
1616:
1586:
1554:
1535:
1511:
1492:
1473:
1457:
1426:
1407:
1389:
1357:
1335:
1306:
1275:
1248:
1224:
1185:
It will? The movie claims it will. To maintain the "it will" here, it needs a source.
1138:
1083:
1065:
1036:
1021:
977:
943:
927:
820:
804:
763:* It may contain original research or unverifiable claims. Tagged since January 2011.
2415:
2263:
http://www.exploringbliss.com/2011/01/an-independent-zeitgeist-moving-forward-review/
2076:
1853:
Whoops, must have grabbed the wrong link. Could you restore it with proper citation?
1157:
Which studies are those? If one decides to mention them, one should cite the source.
1210:
Is it? Source? And if it's not directly mentioned in the movie, how is it relevant?
2084:
1610:
1527:
1437:
1373:
2155:
http://www.movietickets.com/movie/mid/109709/n/Zeitgeist-Moving-Forward/language/3
863:
It may be written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view.
1567:
http://www.wessexscene.co.uk/politics/2011/02/06/zeitgeist-moving-forward-review/
1170:
286:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can
2184:
754:
It is neutral. Identify a point where we advocate the reader to watch the film.
274:
1813:
Please do not remove reliable sources in the article nagualdesign such as the
1328:
985:
532:
506:
383:
264:
258:
234:
2309:
2148:
1327:
why you made the edit. Otherwise it's almost certain it will be reverted. --
1910:
910:
It may require general cleanup to meet Knowledge (XXG)'s quality standards.
1103:* It reads like a personal reflection or essay. Tagged since January 2011.
838:
The various sections contain more than just a plot summary for example the
769:* It reads like a personal reflection or essay. Tagged since January 2011.
706:
when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
918:
I hope this clears up why this article has been tagged w/ Multiple issues.
303:
2251:
http://edinflames.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/reflections-on-zeitgeist-mf/
2197:
http://rathausartprojects.com/blog/2011/01/14/zeitgeist-moving-forward/
1480:
2255:
Michelle Goldberg, who hated it, saw it in a theater in New York City
748:
It is a true summary of a film, the movie is the reference you need.
2257:
http://tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/57732/brave-new-world
1144:* It needs additional references or sources for verification.
1091:* It needs additional references or sources for verification.
2361:
Far from it. Just trying to assure some level of honesty. Â :)
2140:
2011 Theatrical Release is Confirmed - This needs to be listed
711:
668:
377:
356:
197:
28:
15:
2147:
The official website still has the map with 300+ in listings
2233:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1781069/releaseinfo?ref_=tt_ql_9
1607:. Actually you don't need all those parameters; <ref: -->
1235:
pretty much right-on. Regurgitating the content of a movie
992:
to support its claims. Knowledge (XXG) is not the place for
327:
2269:
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1324744/pg1
1323:
when it's from a cited source, you should describe in your
836:
It needs additional references or sources for verification.
2179:
https://scotty707.ticketbud.com/http---tinyurl-com-2fefeml
757:* Its neutrality is disputed. Tagged since January 2011.
885:
It may contain original research or unverifiable claims.
1818:
1628:
1604:
1314:
rv unexplained deletion. Use edit summaries EVERY time!
897:
The style and tone of this article is not in line with
878:
Its neutrality is disputed. Tagged since January 2011.
173:
2239:
http://www.trueactivist.com/zeitgeist-moving-forward/
405:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2245:
http://www.realnews24.com/zeitgeist-moving-forward/
2191:
http://beloitfilmfest.org/zeitgeist-moving-forward/
1856:Thanks. here is the proper edit 'An article in the
840:
Zeitgeist:_Moving_Forward#Part_II:_Social_Pathology
187:
1372:(website sfexaminer.com), when it was really from
778:It is the facts of the movie, no advertisement.
46:for general discussion of the article's subject.
302:. To improve this article, please refer to the
214:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s
2185:http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/154684
1681:(ie, replacing the entire page contents with
895:It reads like a personal reflection or essay.
627:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Alternative Views
8:
1609:would work too. Welcome to Knowledge (XXG)!
865:The original movie has a criticism section (
1448:seems proper enough to stand on its own. --
2310:http://www.zeitgeistmovingforward.com/zmap
2149:http://www.zeitgeistmovingforward.com/zmap
579:
474:Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
452:
351:
298:. To use this banner, please refer to the
229:
2462:Low-importance Alternative Views articles
2457:Redirect-Class Alternative Views articles
2237:Truth Activist lists the global release:
1260:meet the criteria of original research.
1954:So are you going to raise it at WP:RSN?
1413:Merging with the article on Peter Joseph
2427:Redirect-Class American cinema articles
2397:
2261:Another review, citing the theatrical:
1821:information at the bottom of the page.
1319:When you delete content from articles,
914:Knowledge (XXG):Writing better articles
760:It clearly states the movie position.
581:
353:
231:
2467:WikiProject Alternative Views articles
1522:It has been mentioned on Russia Today
899:Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style (film)
867:Zeitgeist:_The_Movie#Critical_reaction
630:Template:WikiProject Alternative Views
2022:There is no consensus for inclusion.
1299:Reason and Logic shall always prevail
726:on 6 March 2011 (UTC). The result of
611:This redirect is within the scope of
399:This redirect is within the scope of
280:This redirect is within the scope of
201:
7:
2472:Knowledge (XXG) controversial topics
2231:IMDB references multiple countries:
1689:, which I encourage others to join.
2432:American cinema task force articles
2312:which shows all global screenings.
1479:This article should be merged with
220:It is of interest to the following
36:for discussing improvements to the
1685:). There is an ongoing discussion
1677:proposes to turn this page into a
766:It states what the movie states.
14:
2225:One reporters post ( Not a blog)
1623:Rotten Tomates & IMDb Ratings
419:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Media
336:This article is supported by the
63:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
1666:Should we redirect this page to
1594:
1169:This has a reference, leading to
715:
672:
647:This redirect has been rated as
604:
583:
465:
439:This redirect has been rated as
386:
376:
355:
312:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Film
296:regional and topical task forces
267:
257:
233:
202:
58:Click here to start a new topic.
2267:People talking about theateral
1483:. Then let's all dance a jig.
984:There's no need to refer to an
722:This article was nominated for
696:Content must be written from a
680:The subject of this article is
887:See response for #1. Also see
772:It is the facts in the movie.
520:Content (media and publishing)
1:
2447:Low-importance Media articles
2183:Another ticket site archive:
2177:Another ticket site archive:
2171:Another ticket site archive:
2165:Another ticket site archive:
2159:Another ticket site archive:
1276:23:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
1249:06:49, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
889:Knowledge (XXG):Systemic bias
855:This requires sourcing...see
741:Explain the "Multiple Issues"
614:WikiProject Alternative views
456:WikiProject Media To-do List:
413:and see a list of open tasks.
55:Put new text under old text.
2422:Redirect-Class film articles
2393:01:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
2371:23:57, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
2083:The music video directed by
1660:00:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
1642:23:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
1037:08:36, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
1022:14:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
978:04:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
944:01:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
928:00:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
821:15:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
805:20:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
2345:13:30, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
2322:09:50, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
2299:09:35, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
2283:19:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
2219:19:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
2195:Promo for Tickets, Archive
1617:17:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
1587:17:14, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
1512:02:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
1493:02:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
690:When updating the article,
2488:
2452:WikiProject Media articles
1737:lectures and in their Book
1555:14:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
1536:21:32, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
1458:01:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
1427:23:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
1408:19:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
1390:15:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
1358:15:18, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
1336:07:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
1307:02:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
1225:23:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
1139:15:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
1084:20:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
1066:03:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
1000:) which includes anything
653:project's importance scale
633:Alternative Views articles
445:project's importance scale
422:Template:WikiProject Media
339:American cinema task force
2437:WikiProject Film articles
2132:07:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
2118:01:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
2097:22:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
1312:The revert summary says "
692:be bold, but not reckless
646:
599:
451:
438:
371:
335:
315:Template:WikiProject Film
252:
228:
93:Be welcoming to newcomers
38:Zeitgeist: Moving Forward
22:Skip to table of contents
2273:THERE ARE 100S OF THESE
2153:UK ticket site archive:
2066:21:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
2046:17:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
2032:14:38, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
2017:11:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1994:09:27, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1979:08:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1964:05:28, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1942:05:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1928:02:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1904:01:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1878:00:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1849:00:09, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1831:00:06, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
1808:01:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
1778:23:15, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
1747:19:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
1724:23:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
1705:19:39, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
1474:09:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
21:
2442:NA-Class Media articles
1759:Recent edit as redirect
1909:We have an article on
1712:The Zeitgeist Movement
1668:The Zeitgeist Movement
1561:Wessex Scene citation?
1442:The Zeitgeist Movement
1370:San Francisco Examiner
1294:The Zeitgeist Movement
912:See above answers and
684:and content may be in
332:
88:avoid personal attacks
2189:Festival Theatrical:
1889:You may not like the
1864:Your citation is for
880:See response for #2.
698:neutral point of view
556:requests for comments
541:Alternative newspaper
331:
113:Neutral point of view
2289:it like an acolyte.
1446:Zeitgeist: The Movie
1239:original research.
954:Zeitgeist: The Movie
826:There is no need to
732:Nomination Withdrawn
118:No original research
2308:support this page:
1434:Zeitgeist: Addendum
288:join the discussion
2038:Somedifferentstuff
1986:Somedifferentstuff
1915:John Birch Society
1891:John Birch Society
1870:Somedifferentstuff
1858:American Spectator
1815:American Spectator
1419:Somedifferentstuff
503:Video game culture
333:
216:content assessment
99:dispute resolution
60:
2222:
2205:comment added by
1577:comment added by
1334:
1266:comment added by
1129:comment added by
994:original research
981:
964:comment added by
808:
791:comment added by
738:
737:
710:
709:
667:
666:
663:
662:
659:
658:
624:Alternative Views
591:Alternative Views
578:
577:
574:
573:
570:
569:
566:
565:
537:Alternative media
402:WikiProject Media
394:Journalism portal
350:
349:
346:
345:
290:and see lists of
196:
195:
79:Assume good faith
56:
27:
26:
2479:
2407:
2402:
2221:
2199:
2063:
2061:
2056:
1866:The New American
1817:as you did here
1805:
1803:
1798:
1702:
1700:
1695:
1640:
1602:
1598:
1597:
1589:
1551:
1508:
1386:
1354:
1331:
1278:
1141:
980:
966:Voiceofreason467
958:
842:section states:
807:
785:
719:
712:
676:
675:
669:
635:
634:
631:
628:
625:
608:
601:
600:
595:
587:
580:
480:Article requests
469:
462:
461:
453:
427:
426:
423:
420:
417:
396:
391:
390:
389:
380:
373:
372:
367:
359:
352:
320:
319:
316:
313:
310:
283:WikiProject Film
277:
272:
271:
270:
261:
254:
253:
248:
237:
230:
207:
206:
198:
192:
191:
177:
108:Article policies
29:
16:
2487:
2486:
2482:
2481:
2480:
2478:
2477:
2476:
2412:
2411:
2410:
2403:
2399:
2200:
2142:
2081:
2059:
2054:
2052:
1801:
1796:
1794:
1785:
1761:
1698:
1693:
1691:
1672:
1631:
1625:
1605:here to see how
1595:
1593:
1572:
1563:
1549:
1520:
1506:
1466:138.217.151.101
1415:
1384:
1352:
1290:
1261:
1232:
1145:
1124:
1110:
1104:
1098:
1092:
959:
869:). Please read
828:poison the well
786:
782:
776:
770:
764:
758:
752:
746:
743:
673:
632:
629:
626:
623:
622:
593:
562:
499:Media influence
424:
421:
418:
415:
414:
392:
387:
385:
365:
317:
314:
311:
308:
307:
273:
268:
266:
243:
134:
129:
128:
127:
104:
74:
12:
11:
5:
2485:
2483:
2475:
2474:
2469:
2464:
2459:
2454:
2449:
2444:
2439:
2434:
2429:
2424:
2414:
2413:
2409:
2408:
2396:
2380:
2379:
2378:
2377:
2376:
2375:
2374:
2373:
2352:
2351:
2350:
2349:
2348:
2347:
2327:
2326:
2325:
2324:
2302:
2301:
2141:
2138:
2137:
2136:
2135:
2134:
2080:
2074:
2073:
2072:
2071:
2070:
2069:
2068:
2005:
2004:
2003:
2002:
2001:
2000:
1999:
1998:
1997:
1996:
1947:
1946:
1945:
1944:
1887:
1886:
1885:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1834:
1833:
1784:
1781:
1760:
1757:
1756:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1727:
1726:
1684:
1671:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1624:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1579:90.208.227.221
1562:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1519:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1477:
1476:
1461:
1460:
1414:
1411:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1339:
1338:
1317:
1289:
1286:
1284:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1231:
1228:
1208:
1207:
1206:
1205:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1143:
1108:
1102:
1096:
1090:
1068:
1055:
1053:
1051:
1049:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1039:
947:
946:
853:
852:
851:
850:
832:
831:
780:
774:
768:
762:
756:
750:
744:
742:
739:
736:
735:
728:the discussion
720:
708:
707:
677:
665:
664:
661:
660:
657:
656:
649:Low-importance
645:
639:
638:
636:
609:
597:
596:
594:Low‑importance
588:
576:
575:
572:
571:
568:
567:
564:
563:
561:
560:
559:
558:
551:
543:
522:
509:
488:
473:
471:
470:
458:
457:
449:
448:
441:Low-importance
437:
431:
430:
428:
425:Media articles
411:the discussion
398:
397:
381:
369:
368:
366:Low‑importance
360:
348:
347:
344:
343:
334:
324:
323:
321:
279:
278:
262:
250:
249:
238:
226:
225:
219:
208:
194:
193:
131:
130:
126:
125:
120:
115:
106:
105:
103:
102:
95:
90:
81:
75:
73:
72:
61:
52:
51:
48:
47:
41:
25:
24:
19:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2484:
2473:
2470:
2468:
2465:
2463:
2460:
2458:
2455:
2453:
2450:
2448:
2445:
2443:
2440:
2438:
2435:
2433:
2430:
2428:
2425:
2423:
2420:
2419:
2417:
2406:
2401:
2398:
2395:
2394:
2390:
2386:
2385:Earl King Jr.
2372:
2368:
2364:
2363:SweetGirlLove
2360:
2359:
2358:
2357:
2356:
2355:
2354:
2353:
2346:
2342:
2338:
2337:Earl King Jr.
2333:
2332:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2328:
2323:
2319:
2315:
2314:SweetGirlLove
2311:
2306:
2305:
2304:
2303:
2300:
2296:
2292:
2291:Earl King Jr.
2287:
2286:
2285:
2284:
2280:
2276:
2275:SweetGirlLove
2271:
2270:
2265:
2264:
2259:
2258:
2253:
2252:
2247:
2246:
2241:
2240:
2235:
2234:
2229:
2228:
2223:
2220:
2216:
2212:
2208:
2207:SweetGirlLove
2204:
2198:
2193:
2192:
2187:
2186:
2181:
2180:
2175:
2174:
2169:
2168:
2163:
2162:
2157:
2156:
2151:
2150:
2145:
2139:
2133:
2129:
2125:
2121:
2120:
2119:
2115:
2111:
2110:Earl King Jr.
2106:
2101:
2100:
2099:
2098:
2094:
2090:
2086:
2079:- God Is Dead
2078:
2077:Black Sabbath
2075:
2067:
2064:
2062:
2057:
2049:
2048:
2047:
2043:
2039:
2035:
2034:
2033:
2029:
2025:
2021:
2020:
2019:
2018:
2014:
2010:
2009:Earl King Jr.
1995:
1991:
1987:
1982:
1981:
1980:
1976:
1972:
1971:Earl King Jr.
1967:
1966:
1965:
1961:
1957:
1953:
1952:
1951:
1950:
1949:
1948:
1943:
1939:
1935:
1934:Earl King Jr.
1931:
1930:
1929:
1925:
1921:
1916:
1912:
1908:
1907:
1906:
1905:
1901:
1897:
1896:Earl King Jr.
1892:
1879:
1875:
1871:
1867:
1863:
1862:
1859:
1855:
1852:
1851:
1850:
1846:
1842:
1838:
1837:
1836:
1835:
1832:
1828:
1824:
1823:Earl King Jr.
1819:
1816:
1812:
1811:
1810:
1809:
1806:
1804:
1799:
1791:
1782:
1780:
1779:
1775:
1771:
1770:Earl King Jr.
1767:
1758:
1748:
1744:
1740:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1716:Earl King Jr.
1713:
1709:
1708:
1707:
1706:
1703:
1701:
1696:
1688:
1682:
1680:
1676:
1675:Earl King Jr.
1669:
1665:
1661:
1657:
1653:
1652:Earl King Jr.
1649:
1646:
1645:
1644:
1643:
1638:
1634:
1630:
1622:
1618:
1615:
1612:
1606:
1601:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1588:
1584:
1580:
1576:
1569:
1568:
1560:
1556:
1552:
1546:
1545:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1517:
1513:
1509:
1503:
1502:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1482:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1463:
1462:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1435:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1424:
1420:
1412:
1410:
1409:
1405:
1401:
1391:
1387:
1381:
1380:
1375:
1371:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1359:
1355:
1349:
1348:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1337:
1333:
1330:
1326:
1322:
1318:
1315:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1304:
1300:
1295:
1287:
1285:
1277:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1259:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1241:67.180.92.188
1238:
1230:Argumentative
1229:
1227:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1211:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1172:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1158:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1142:
1140:
1136:
1132:
1131:41.132.117.80
1128:
1122:
1118:
1113:
1107:
1101:
1095:
1089:
1086:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
987:
983:
982:
979:
975:
971:
967:
963:
955:
951:
950:
949:
948:
945:
941:
937:
932:
931:
930:
929:
925:
921:
916:
915:
911:
906:
904:
900:
896:
891:
890:
886:
881:
879:
874:
872:
868:
864:
859:
858:
847:
846:
845:
844:
843:
841:
837:
829:
825:
824:
823:
822:
818:
814:
809:
806:
802:
798:
794:
790:
779:
773:
767:
761:
755:
749:
740:
733:
729:
725:
721:
718:
714:
713:
705:
701:
699:
693:
689:
687:
683:
682:controversial
678:
671:
670:
654:
650:
644:
641:
640:
637:
620:
616:
615:
610:
607:
603:
602:
598:
592:
589:
586:
582:
557:
553:
552:
550:
548:
544:
542:
538:
534:
531:
529:
528:
523:
521:
518:
516:
515:
510:
508:
504:
500:
497:
495:
494:
489:
487:
484:
482:
481:
476:
475:
472:
468:
464:
463:
460:
459:
455:
454:
450:
446:
442:
436:
433:
432:
429:
412:
408:
404:
403:
395:
384:
382:
379:
375:
374:
370:
364:
361:
358:
354:
341:
340:
330:
326:
325:
322:
318:film articles
305:
301:
300:documentation
297:
293:
289:
285:
284:
276:
265:
263:
260:
256:
255:
251:
247:
242:
239:
236:
232:
227:
223:
217:
213:
209:
205:
200:
199:
190:
186:
183:
180:
176:
172:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
140:
137:
136:Find sources:
133:
132:
124:
123:Verifiability
121:
119:
116:
114:
111:
110:
109:
100:
96:
94:
91:
89:
85:
82:
80:
77:
76:
70:
66:
65:Learn to edit
62:
59:
54:
53:
50:
49:
45:
39:
35:
31:
30:
23:
20:
18:
17:
2400:
2381:
2272:
2266:
2260:
2254:
2248:
2242:
2236:
2230:
2224:
2201:— Preceding
2194:
2188:
2182:
2176:
2170:
2164:
2158:
2152:
2146:
2143:
2104:
2085:Peter Joseph
2082:
2051:
2024:AndyTheGrump
2006:
1956:AndyTheGrump
1920:AndyTheGrump
1888:
1865:
1841:AndyTheGrump
1793:
1786:
1765:
1762:
1690:
1673:
1626:
1599:
1573:— Preceding
1570:
1564:
1543:
1524:Russia Today
1521:
1500:
1485:SpiralofHope
1478:
1438:Peter Joseph
1416:
1400:66.209.54.90
1396:
1378:
1374:Examiner.com
1346:
1325:edit summary
1320:
1313:
1291:
1283:
1268:96.53.92.230
1257:
1236:
1233:
1215:
1212:
1209:
1197:
1184:
1168:
1156:
1114:
1111:
1105:
1099:
1093:
1087:
1047:
1029:86.52.43.196
1001:
993:
960:— Preceding
936:86.52.43.196
917:
909:
907:
894:
892:
884:
882:
877:
875:
862:
860:
854:
835:
833:
813:86.52.43.196
810:
787:— Preceding
783:
777:
771:
765:
759:
753:
747:
731:
695:
679:
648:
612:
546:
545:
525:
524:
512:
511:
491:
490:
486:Mackay Radio
478:
477:
440:
400:
337:
281:
222:WikiProjects
211:
184:
178:
170:
163:
157:
151:
145:
135:
107:
32:This is the
2036:Agreed. --
1683:#REDIRECTÂ ]
1633:startswithj
1262:—Preceding
1125:—Preceding
1014:Smallman12q
1008:. See also
1004:covered by
920:Smallman12q
275:Film portal
161:free images
44:not a forum
2416:Categories
2243:RealNews:
1790:WP:ALLEGED
1544:Ravensfire
1518:Notability
1501:Ravensfire
1379:Ravensfire
1347:Ravensfire
1321:especially
1151:disorders.
1058:Gravitas73
986:ad hominem
619:discussion
533:Multimedia
507:Sound bite
304:guidelines
292:open tasks
2124:Khokkanen
2089:Khokkanen
1911:The Beano
1571:thanks.
1288:Reception
1094:-Where?
1072:WP:FRINGE
1010:WP:FRINGE
704:citations
101:if needed
84:Be polite
40:redirect.
34:talk page
2215:contribs
2203:unsigned
1766:citation
1739:JamesB17
1679:redirect
1603:. Click
1575:unsigned
1498:Um, no.
1264:unsigned
1127:unsigned
974:contribs
962:unsigned
801:contribs
789:unsigned
784:Where?
724:deletion
702:Include
246:American
212:redirect
69:get help
42:This is
2050:Ditto.
1783:YouTube
1611:jonkerz
1528:voodoom
1481:toy dog
1076:Majicko
871:WP:NPOV
686:dispute
651:on the
554:Answer
493:Cleanup
443:on the
167:WPÂ refs
155:scholar
2060:design
2055:nagual
1802:design
1797:nagual
1714:page.
1699:design
1694:nagual
1450:Sloane
1217:Wollff
1117:Stp52x
903:WP:MOS
793:Stp52x
527:Verify
218:scale.
139:Google
1440:into
1329:intgr
1006:WP:RS
998:WP:OR
990:WP:RS
857:WP:RS
547:Other
416:Media
407:Media
363:Media
210:This
182:JSTOR
143:books
97:Seek
2389:talk
2367:talk
2341:talk
2318:talk
2295:talk
2279:talk
2211:talk
2128:talk
2114:talk
2093:talk
2042:talk
2028:talk
2013:talk
1990:talk
1975:talk
1960:talk
1938:talk
1924:talk
1900:talk
1874:talk
1845:talk
1827:talk
1774:talk
1743:talk
1720:talk
1687:here
1656:talk
1637:talk
1600:Done
1583:talk
1550:talk
1532:talk
1507:talk
1489:talk
1470:talk
1454:talk
1436:and
1423:talk
1404:talk
1385:talk
1353:talk
1303:talk
1272:talk
1245:talk
1221:talk
1192:etc.
1171:this
1135:talk
1121:talk
1080:talk
1062:talk
1033:talk
1018:talk
970:talk
940:talk
924:talk
901:and
817:talk
797:talk
730:was
514:NPOV
309:Film
294:and
241:Film
175:FENS
149:news
86:and
1650:].
1258:not
1074:.--
1002:not
643:Low
435:Low
189:TWL
2418::
2391:)
2369:)
2343:)
2320:)
2297:)
2281:)
2217:)
2213:•
2130:)
2116:)
2095:)
2044:)
2030:)
2015:)
1992:)
1977:)
1962:)
1940:)
1926:)
1902:)
1876:)
1847:)
1829:)
1776:)
1745:)
1722:)
1658:)
1585:)
1553:)
1534:)
1526:--
1510:)
1491:)
1472:)
1456:)
1425:)
1406:)
1388:)
1356:)
1305:)
1274:)
1247:)
1237:is
1223:)
1137:)
1082:)
1064:)
1035:)
1020:)
976:)
972:•
942:)
926:)
908:6.
893:5.
883:4.
876:3.
873:.
861:2.
834:1.
819:)
803:)
799:•
539:,
535:,
505:,
501:,
244::
169:)
67:;
2387:(
2365:(
2339:(
2316:(
2293:(
2277:(
2209:(
2126:(
2112:(
2091:(
2040:(
2026:(
2011:(
1988:(
1973:(
1958:(
1936:(
1922:(
1898:(
1872:(
1843:(
1825:(
1772:(
1741:(
1718:(
1670:?
1654:(
1639:)
1635:(
1614:â™
1581:(
1547:(
1530:(
1504:(
1487:(
1468:(
1452:(
1421:(
1402:(
1382:(
1350:(
1316:"
1301:(
1270:(
1243:(
1219:(
1133:(
1119:(
1115:(
1078:(
1060:(
1031:(
1016:(
1012:.
996:(
968:(
938:(
922:(
815:(
795:(
734:.
700:.
688:.
655:.
621:.
549::
530::
517::
496::
483::
447:.
342:.
306:.
224::
185:·
179:·
171:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
141:(
71:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
