Talk:War film

War film has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 23, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Military history: War films

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	War films task force

Film: War

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the War films task force.

Pritzker Military Library Low‑importance

	This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Archives

1

Jet Pilot?

I'm surprised to see Jet Pilot listed as a WWII film made after the war. It's not set in WWII (or during any war except the Cold War), and no combat is depicted. Janet Leigh does look great in that white leather flying suit. User:Stedder

Yeah, it's a Cold War film. Not sure how it got in there; I've removed it from the list, there are enough other examples there already. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:52, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"20th century"

Clearly the genre has to date been strongly associated with the 20th century, as many of the cited sources attest. Articles must state the case at the time of writing based on the sources available: nobody doubts that things may change in future, but until reliable sources say otherwise, the association is correctly stated. The article already discusses a 19th century war, the 1898 Spanish–American War, but this does not change the overall picture, which has been to focus on the 20th century to the exclusion of all others. There could have been "war films" about the wars of Roman times, or the Wars of the Roses, but these have been thought of differently by filmmakers, audiences, and critics. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Undue material

Rjensen, I'm sorry to have had to remove some of your additions. Your new cited text is welcome, but the breaking of existing citations, the addition of unneeded "further reading", and the repeated insertion against consensus of material about one particular university course (your own? that'd be WP:COI or WP:ADV) is wholly inappropriate. Please stop; if you have valid reasons, you should have presented them here per WP:BRD rather than reinserting them without discussion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:37, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK -- I read about the U Maine course in a good article in a teaching journal that I though deserves the attention of teachers looking for ideas on how to use war films. I rephrased the text. Rjensen (talk) 09:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for discussing. I think we'd have a job to fit a section about the academics who study and write about the subject here, it's getting a bit "meta"; it'd make more sense in an article on Film scholarship or something of that sort. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:55, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Original name of a film

Well, this one does surprise me. I have no idea why anyone should think that we should not include a film's original name in the caption in the lead image; among other things, it's the film's actual name, and it's desirable also that the article should be seen to be even-handed across languages, nationalities, "sides", and cultures. No reason has been given for the repeated removal of the name (i.e. this was slowed-down edit-warring, not great), so it's hard to say if this was a thought-out edit or something worse. Anyway, I've reverted it with a proper explanation, and am open to rational discussion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:31, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

NguyenVanBe.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]