Talk:The Secret (2006 film)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Secret (2006 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 31 days  |
 | The Secret (2006 film) was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
This article is a typical hit-job...
edit...by the usual left-wing mob. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.162.240.241 (talk) 14:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Is editorial coverage unfocused?
editDircha in the "Criticism unfocused, conciliatory" section above finds the Criticism section unfocused. I have been somewhat concerned myself about the focus of the "Editorial coverage" section in Criticism. The rest of the Criticism section seems fine to me. As a follow-up I am asking editors how the "Editorial coverage" reads — does it lack focus?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Len Raymond (talk • contribs) 06:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on The Secret (2006 film). 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/20070221030456/http://www.latimes.com:80/news/opinion/la-oe-klein13feb13,0,3953992.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail to http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-klein13feb13,0,3953992.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070929170308/http://www.nypost.com/seven/03042007/news/regionalnews/a_secret_oprah_craze_hits_new_yorkers_regionalnews_jill_culora.htm?page=0 to http://www.nypost.com/seven/03042007/news/regionalnews/a_secret_oprah_craze_hits_new_yorkers_regionalnews_jill_culora.htm?page=0
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 IITalk to my owner:Online 01:19, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on The Secret (2006 film). 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/20090705224817/http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21824989-5005941,00.html?from=public_rss to http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21824989-5005941,00.html?from=public_rss
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 IITalk to my owner:Online 20:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Censored version
editThe intro refers to a "censored version" of the film, yet the article contains no explanation of what was censored. I put a citation-needed tag, but a bit of detail explaining what was cut and why a censored version got attention would probably suffice. (I have no stake on any controversy related to this production - I'm just pointing out a "plot hole" in the article that renders the use of the word "censored" without explanation a possible WP:NPOV issue. 136.159.160.8 (talk) 22:13, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
What a heap of gibberish
editIf the Law of Attraction is supposed to attract good writing to this article, it's not working. Hopeless mess. EEng 01:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
- I agree your comment is hilarious. I tried to add some tidbits there and there. I do not think it was written by fans though.Filmman3000 (talk) 15:39, 28 July 2018 (UTC)