Talk:AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies

This article is the subject of a request emailed to the Volunteer Response Team (VRT).

Issues identified are: Confirming the lists are public domain; requesting accurate attribution.
The VRTS ticket number is 2007041310002766.

Please discuss these issues here, being mindful of the policies on biographies of living persons.

Archives

Archive 1

Include the list[edit]

I don't know much about copyright law, so I can't say whether or not the inclusion of the entire list in this article violates any copyright, but if the list on this page is to be removed the list should also be removed from each of the other articles in the AFI 100 Years... series. NoIdeaNick 14:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a lawyer, but this strikes me as fair use. I don't have to be a member of the Associated Press to refer to the Top 25 college football poll. If I started to get into what was said about each film by the contributors, etc., that would be very problematic. By the way, lots of critics suggested that another Native American film type, the Western, is also at least as badly underrepresented as is noir.

Why is the list frequently removed?[edit]

I frequently visit this page for movie selections and find the list pretty helpful. It not only gives me the list, but also the links to the movie pages, and I could check on the story and the characters. This way it is much more helpful than the list in the AFI page. But, a bunch of jerks don't think so and keep harping on some vague copyright idea and reverting the edits. So, if you say a movie won Academy awards, are you violating the copyright of the Academy? This is simply stupid and I guess the only thing these editors try to do is to show off that they know something about copyright. I don't think any organization enforces copyrights on a ranking list, and AFI list is all over the internet. The main reason why the list should be put here in Wikipedia is that, the list could be used to cross reference the page about the movie. But, I believe there are some people who want to turn every interesting article in Wikipedia empty just to show off their vanity and arrogance. Sorry, I can't help but vent my feelings at those idiots who spoil my Wikipedia experience. 71.231.178.238 07:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answered at user's talk, at least for now. If others have opinions, feel free to chime in. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous contributor: Please remain civil. Your comments of "jerks", "stupid", "vanity", and "arrogance", are unacceptable. Sancho 08:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please act civilly. As long as the article exists, you can see the list simply clicking on the history tab. Millancad 08:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good news. The lists are in public domain[edit]

Here is the mail from them. I could forward it to Wikipedia if you want

Dear Balaji Viswanathan,

Thank you for contacting AFI. The lists are public domain. You can use them as long as you credit us with the correct title of the list , however you are NOT allowed to use the AFI LOGO. You can say "AFI's 100 Years...100 Thrills" but can't print the actual logo. If you do want to print the logo we need to license it. Thank you for your interest in AFI.

AFI does offer many exclusive benefits through membership, such as unlimited access to the online AFI Catalog of Feature Films, invitations to AFI events and special screenings, film-related magazine subscriptions.

Please visit AFI.com to learn more about the valuable and exciting benefits of membership with AFI!

Thank you for your interest in AFI. Best Regards, AFI Web Team

Balajiviswanathan 19:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please forward the mail with complete headers to permissions@wikimedia.org. Thanks. --Gmaxwell 02:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still haven't seen the forward. :( --Gmaxwell 01:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seemed I missed it, thanks!--Gmaxwell 01:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS Ticket 2007041310002766 . Mak (talk) 01:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compared List[edit]

When the list is finished, we should work on a tabulated list which shows the original list, compared with the new list, with for movies that rose, for movies that fell, for those that stayed the same, and some sort of star (*) for newcomers to the list. --Kitch ^{(Talk : Contrib)} 02:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this belongs in the 10th anniversary file. --Kitch ^{(Talk : Contrib)} 02:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger[edit]

Please see discussion of proposed merger of both articles on here Jvsett 18:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Airdates[edit]

Can someone add the airdate of the television special which unveiled this list to the public? -ErinHowarth (talk) 18:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merger with the 10th anniversary list[edit]

It's been almost four years ago since the last person spoke about merger. But looking at the 10th anniversary article, I have to say it turned out pretty damn good. I can't see any reason not to merge them two together. That 10th anniversary list really pays respect to the first (original) list, for that list is mentioned first, after which the 10th anniversary list is mentioned, and inbetween the difference in places/rank. Robster1983 (talk) 15:14, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate list?[edit]

This list does NOT match the current list on AFI's site. Boo! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.236.222.78 (talk) 21:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific about how it does not match? Which movies are in error? Gamaliel (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The list has been falsified to include some superhero movies such as The Dark Knight Trilogy and The Avengers, it needs some repairing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.49.221.51 (talk) 11:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Name of the Film is Star Wars...[edit]

I am changing the edit back so that it reads Star Wars, not A New Hope. The film was released as Star Wars, was nominated for Best Picture as Star Wars, and should be called Star Wars. For evidence, in case anyone tries to revert back to A New Hope, here is the two lists on AFI's site. 1998 and the 10th Anniversary List from 2007. Notice that both of them use the correct title "Star Wars." I think in accordance with the creators of the list we should use the titles that they use. I wish Wikipedia would stop using the New Hope subtitle and use the original title, but that is a pipe dream. If Gone with the Wind was renamed to Gone with the Wind: Rhett and Scarlett what would you refer to it as?1906cubs (talk) 05:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DVD[edit]

Don't respond with the "original research" bullshit, okay. Here's the deal: I own a copy of the 1998 special on DVD. It's a yellow disc, and the box itself is yellow, with the AFI design. I bought it at Suncoast, a Musicland-owned store. I also remember seeing in on VHS, too. I have a friend who has a wife who bought the VHS version. Also, here's Amazon's listing for the 10-part black box version: http://www.amazon.com/AFIs-100-Years-Movies-Institute/dp/B00004U12V Bye all. 70.180.188.238 (talk) 01:14, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer of table columns to 2007 article[edit]

It really doesn't make much sense to have the 2007 rank and Change columns here rather than in the other list. Any objections to my transferring the 1998 ranks and Change there? Clarityfiend (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]