Talk:Spark Media

Wiki People

Hey Wiki people I believe this entry fits into the universe of articles found in the Film Production Companies of the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Film_production_companies_of_the_United_States). There are numerous independent and non-profit companies listed with no high-profile film credits to their name. Spark Media has produced three high-profile documentaries aired on PBS about important, serious American subject matter. I don't understand the distinction being made here. Eerfdog (talk) 18:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

notability

I am removing the notability template from the main page, Spark has won several national/internatinoal awards for their documentaries, which have been shown at numerous festivals, on PBS, and HBO etc, seems notable enough to me... Gaijin42 (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

neutrality

There is no discussion from whoever added the neutrality template. I could see the advert template possibly, but everything stated is factual. The references could be improved since they point directly to the company website in 2 cases, but I still am not sure the neutrality item is appropriate. Ift there is not a response or more specific complaint in the next few days, I will be removing this template. Gaijin42 (talk) 01:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

It's the peacock words that made me tag it. See WP:NOTINHERITED: just because you work with "award-winning" [1] people, are dedicated to "creating socially-conscious media used to raise public awareness in America and throughout the world" and produce films that are "critically acclaimed" doesn't make you notable as a company. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree the peacock words can be tones down. I will work on it. However, the second half of your complaint is non-sequetor imo, Their movies have won multiple emmys, the actors in their shows have won numerous awards (and not just in general, awards for the role they performed). If you are going to raise the bar for notability higher than that, then 99% of wikipedia needs to be deleted. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:23, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

See our guidance on notability of companies. The company itself in and of itself must be notable in order for us to host an article about it. If there is not coverage of the company itself, then it fails our tests, however good the films or skillful the performers. That's what WP:NOTINHERITED means. Mars Incorporated is not famous just because people eat M&M's, since most people don't know who makes M&M's, nor do they care. The company's notability had to be established entirely separately; and that's what we're seeking here. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Your arguments above seem to all be in reference to the notability of the subject, but my original question was regarding the neutrality. I have added numerous references that should help prove notability. I also cleaned up some of the peacock words. lemme know what you think and if you have more suggestions/issues Gaijin42 (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

As there has been no further response, I am removing the templates. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Spark Media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110221054116/http://www.sparkmedia.org:80/ht/d/sp/i/1330/pid/1330 to http://www.sparkmedia.org/ht/d/sp/i/1330/pid/1330
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120206052241/http://www.oah.org:80/awards/awards.barnouw.winners.html to http://www.oah.org/awards/awards.barnouw.winners.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100218182740/http://www.cine.org:80/archives/winner-archives/index.php to http://www.cine.org/archives/winner-archives/index.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100505083736/http://www.thegracies.org:80/past-award-winners.php to http://www.thegracies.org/past-award-winners.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110203033414/http://www.tivadc.org/index.php?/Peer-Awards/ to http://www.tivadc.org/index.php?/Peer-Awards/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110221054116/http://www.sparkmedia.org:80/ht/d/sp/i/1330/pid/1330 to http://www.sparkmedia.org/ht/d/sp/i/1330/pid/1330
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110710164418/http://easterniowalife.com/2010/12/09/cedar-rapids-native-to-be-showcased-in-documentary/ to http://easterniowalife.com/2010/12/09/cedar-rapids-native-to-be-showcased-in-documentary/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110505041043/http://www.sparkmedia.org:80/ht/d/sp/i/4720/pid/4720 to http://www.sparkmedia.org/ht/d/sp/i/4720/pid/4720

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)