Talk:The Lego Movie

LEGO in Caps

It appears this way in most publications. The brick itself is capitalized per the official name of the product. The movie itself capitalizes LEGO. While Wikipedia-style norms do not place it in caps for general guidelines, a reference to the film's actual title, in a means similar to a number of films with stylized titles should be present somewhere in the article. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 23:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I thought this was understood and agreed and had consensus over many edits. It was changed without discussion, the edit summary claimed that Wikipedia does not acknowledge the trademark capitalization but a specific rule or guideline was not linked. -- 109.77.247.231 (talk) 18:50, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:04, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Sets of Lego Movie

Can I add the list of the sets in this page? Oon835 (talk) 13:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Many films have extensive tie-in toy sets, Star Wars being an early example, the Transformers being another. This is an article about a film, I do not think long exhaustive lists of toys are appropriate or relevant to this encyclopedia article. It might possible to put these lists elsewhere a different article but I do not think they are appropriate here or in any of the other Lego film articles. Long lists of things that exist are verifiable WP:V but there is nothing to show they are notable WP:N. Also please follow the rules and provide edit summaries when making changes to articles.

A few lines of prose saying that there were tie-in sets and a reference might be appropriate. I hope others will add their opinions, but a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS for these kinds of lists seems unlikely. -- 109.79.67.131 (talk) 19:42, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Oon835: I would say per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, random exhaustive lists of anything should be considered questionable if it is not about the main subject (in this case, the topic is the film, not the toys). For the topic of a line of toys to be considered notable as a stand-alone list, it needs to meet WP:LISTN via the WP:GNG to indicate notability with independent reliable sources that are not simply product announcements. Specifically for Lego themes, they should probably have WP:SUSTAINED coverage from independent sources, which most of the one-off licensed tie-in lines do not. Yosemiter (talk) 02:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Yosemiter: The early, I when to ask a permission to add the list of the sets in this page but no one give me some answers for so long. But the problems is that I'm afraid of that if I create a new page and the administrator will delete it without give me any reason. Oon835 (talk) 05:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

@109.79.67.131: The early, I when to ask a permission to add the list of the sets in this page but no one send a reply to me for so long. But the problems is that I'm afraid of that if I create a new page and the administrator will delete it without give me any reason. Oon835 (talk) 06:51, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Create your pages in draft space first then move them to main space later. That way if they are deleted you will still have your own copy and will be able to improve and try again. I would hope that administrators would give reasons before deleting pages but I can understand they sometimes might not or might give unclear reasons.

You seem to have done decent job sourcing and properly verifying what you added, but that doesn't make it notable. Wikipedia does not try to include everything, it can be difficult but you need to think from a different direction and ask yourself would I expect to find this in an encyclopedia? -- 109.78.235.236 (talk) 02:54, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@Yosemiter: Since my 5 pages were deleted by Onel earlier because they are not notable. Can you show me the example which pages are notable? I did talk to Onel earlier but never give me some answers for so long and I thought he ignore me. Can you contact which person who is expert in Lego-related topics? Oon835 (talk) 06:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

"LEGO ムービー" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect LEGO ムービー. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Non-COI Edit Request (I am unable to do it myself for some reason)

Not a COI edit, but can someone move reference 11 (the only reference in the plot) to somewhere appropriate outside the plot? Plots never have citations within themselves and I am unable to cut and paste it elsewhere for some reason. An appropriate place to move that citation could be to the first mention of the term "Master Builders" outside the plot. 45.251.33.90 (talk) 10:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Middle Zealand

Middle Zealand redirects here, but there is nothing in the article about it. Koro Neil (talk) 11:31, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Middle Zealand refers to the medieval themed area shown in the movie. You can nominate the Middle Zealand redirect for deletion if you do not think it is appropriate. -- 109.76.136.61 (talk) 21:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

The lead section should summarize

The lead section is supposed to summarize the article. At the moment the intro includes the text "Although it did not receive an Academy Award nomination for Best Animated Feature". It seems strange (and WP:UNDUE) to highlight something that did not happen and that the article does not discuss. This non-event might be appropriate to include if the accolades section included reliable sources pointing out that the film failed to be nominated or was considered to have been somehow snubbed, but as it is not in the article body it shouldn't be given unnecessary emphasis in the lead section. -- 109.76.136.61 (talk) 21:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)