Jump to content

Talk:Dolph Lundgren

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former good articleDolph Lundgren was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 1, 2011Good article nomineeListed
July 11, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Dolph Lundgren. 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) 10:14, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page archived

Cheers. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 20:13, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Belt timelines

Under 'early life', The article states that Dolph received a 2nd Dan black belt in 1978. It then says he won a tournament in 1979 as a green belt. From my understandiong of the grading system I do not believe that can be possible. Can someone help?Barmarron (talk) 16:06, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

I am unfamiliar with English wikipedia articles, but find it strange that "Swedish: [ˈdɔlːf ˈlɵ̌nːdɡreːn]" is placed after "Hans Lundgren". Could it be moved further on after "better known as Dolph Lundgren", or would that break with the standard article layout? --2A02:587:B946:8D35:5466:98F9:6250:9171 (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Dolph Lundgren

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: Delisted per consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA from 2011. Done as a personal request for User:Filmman3000. He states

  • "Hi @Onegreatjoke, I noticed a while back that you delisted David Carradine from the good article list. I totally agree. When I got serious with Wikipedia I looked up to good articles as a model to construct a page, not knowing there was such a thing as "Featured articles".
  • Anyways one of these article was Dolph Lundgren. Which was vastly intricate to the point that in his lede it was mentionned that he worked 4 times with a character actor named Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa, that one of Quentin Tarantino's early credit was in a project starring Lundgren, and a full on description of the family life of a composer in a film where he co-stars.
  • Lundgren's page seen too intricate, as was a bad model to follow for me. I am wondering if you could evaluate it. Filmman3000 (talk) 22:49, 16 June 2023 (UTC)"

I'm making this nomination to see if it's actually worth reevaluating. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delist. I mean also look at year 1995. For the film Johnny Mnemonic "The film was shot on location in Toronto and Montreal in 12 weeks, filling in for the film's Newark, New Jersey and Beijing settings." How does this affect Lundgren in how he chose the role, approached it, its critical reception, or if the locations have any subsequent consequences aside from the film being shot there.
Another example in 1998 and they are endless.
He also featured in the TV pilot Blackjack (directed by John Woo) as a former US Marshal who has a phobia of the color white, who becomes the bodyguard and detective of a young supermodel (Kam Heskin) who is the target of a psychotic assassin (Phillip MacKenzie).
This should be.
He also played the lead in John Woo's TV pilot Blackjack as a former US Marshal who becomes the bodyguard of a supermodel.
I salute the person who did put this page together but a serious trim needs to happen for it to maintain its status. Filmman3000 (talk) 05:17, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been overedited and degraded. It was a fully sourced good article when I promoted it. Suggest restoring it and just updating with the more recent films.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:02, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld I will look into it. Filmman3000 (talk) 11:02, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld, your article was promoted on August 1, 2011. I am adding a link to your last edit that day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dolph_Lundgren&diff=prev&oldid=442575580
Again, by scrolling down I found way too bloated.
By scrolling down to 2006, I re-stumbled upon overly intricate stuff. This sentence.
The film, shot on location in Tunisia and Bulgaria, featured a score from Andrea Morricone, the son of the acclaimed film score composer Ennio Morricone.
Why is the composer mentioned there with his family history? Does Lundgren has anything to do with the hiring of this man, guided him in his composing, or composed based on Lundgren's acting?
Furthermore, the source used comes from Lundgren's personal website, while it may have been updated since, it doesn't hold that information anymore. Also using a source from the subject's website is not recommended.
You go way too deep into the plot of the films. One brief sentence is enough. Sorry but it stays a Delist. This article got me in trouble with many other editors by copying its model, because it is listed as a good article. Filmman3000 (talk) 11:33, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind that I have written 200 GAs, nearly 40 FAs, reviewed over 250 Good and Featured articles, founded the Actors and Filmmakers project itself, been here since 2006, you'd think I would know a thing or two by now on what meets GA criteria!... You would probably have the same problem with Rod Steiger, which is a featured article. The reason why it goes into more detail is that there wasn't a lot of production information about Lundgren, it was used to flesh out the article. I don't disagree that it would benefit from a cut and needs to be updated to 2023 standards and finding sources for the sentences tagged, you are right that it currently doesn't meet standards, but you seem dead set on wanting to delist this rather than helping it retain its status which is why I'm relunctant to make the effort to save this. I haven't seen many films of Lundgren's since the early 2010s and haven't visited the article in many years, in fact I only saw he has cancer just now! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:22, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A trim of certain details and a few citations needed, there's nothing massively wrong with the sections I wrote. The film coverage since 2010 which I didn't write certainly is way off GA standard. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:31, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i am not dead set into delisting it, I would have changed my mind if the 2011 version of it would have been up to par, they are just details that baffles me which are not in your Rod Steiger article upon first glance. Also, I have trimmed it substantially since I noticed it's problem. It's not my first time asking feedback about this specific article.
To be honest that article frustrates me a lot because I got into some war edits trying to copy the format. So there's a part of me that worries that someone else will come around see that
My understanding is that if an actor just acts in a film and does nothing regarding the production then nothing regarding the production should be on his page. If he participates to the script writing or anything of the sort then it needs to be mentioned. Otherwise it needs to strictly focus on the type of acting he does or training and diet since he is an athletic action star.
You found a lot of detail regarding the productions of his film and I suggest you use them in the page regarding these projects. Your research is excellent. Your work is good. Sorry if I left you there wrong impression. Let's work to have it maintain its status. Filmman3000 (talk) 05:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've given it a trim and chased up some missing sources. I didn't see any section which was particularly bloated, but I think you were right on some of the location filming info. I don't think there's much wrong with it except the 2010s- present section which will need some work. I've placed that section in my sandbox and will work on it gradually this week if you can hold off with the delisting. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Blofeld the GAR will be kept open as long as improvements are being made. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:28, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld of course I missed this reply I believe I fixed some elements already, see the history of the page. Also the person who promoted it for you should have pointed out these issues.
Aside from Lundgren's weight in 1987 pretty much everything is cited. 1991 is also fine. Rocky 4 is fine.
I have to disagree with you a lot is wrong when covering his early years. Mostly, un-cited stuff and production elements from the film that are not related to him.
I would also suggest to avoid books that are overly analytic of his works, unless no citation prevails.
Do your thing in the sandbox and let's do a follow-up when you are ready. Filmman3000 (talk) 04:16, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is uncited?? Mark what you can see as uncited and I'll look into it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:43, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I resolved it those I spotted, see history, but these were the big ones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dolph_Lundgren&diff=prev&oldid=1163211185
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dolph_Lundgren&diff=prev&oldid=1163301235
citation 26 is a dead link by the way, hence for year 1987 it is not completely cited. If the links are dead how would you like me to notify you? Filmman3000 (talk) 09:24, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can use inline citation templates such as {{citation needed}} and {{dead link}} in the article Filmman3000. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:04, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29 thank you Filmman3000 (talk) 14:57, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really want to spend my summer chasing up all of his films since 2011. He's been in a lot of films. Plus I'm also having work done on my house which is distracting me. I think it's probably best you delist this unless somebody is willing to do the work needed. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:09, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dolph_Lundgren&oldid=1264172115"