Author Topic: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page  (Read 1908 times)

YoungestMonsterKid

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
"Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« on: September 15, 2020, 09:47:33 PM »
I feel like I'm probably getting too worked up about something that doesn't matter but.... what the hell happened to the Wikipedia page for "Universal Classic Monsters"? It used to basically be a well made list of every horror film made by Universal during the 20's through 50's. It was a real nice, comprehensive list of films (many I'd yet to even see). Now someone changed it to be the bare minimum. It basically just lists the 30 films that they put in the DVD set (plus the Lon Chaney Phantom). (Apparently This Island Earth doesn't even make the cut, anymore.) It's just really annoying. They cut out a lot of the history of the films being made to, I think. It's basically just "these movies were made and exist".
Just wondering if anyone can clue me in as to what happened. I assume it's some lame excuse like "it's too long". Would be great if someone made it a more useful list again.

Sir Masksalot

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 725
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2020, 10:07:38 PM »
I never saw this page but I love lists (I own all three volumes of The People's Almanac Book of Lists). I find these omissions as
annoying as you do, YMK. Fortunately there are lots of fine books chronicling the history of Universal horror, against which not even
Wikipedia can compete.

Mike Scott

  • Army General
  • *****
  • Posts: 26157
  • So terrifying only screams can describe it!
    • Monster Magazines
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2020, 10:38:42 PM »
CREATURE FAN

Visit My Monster Magazines Website

LaettnersLegacy

  • Corporal
  • ****
  • Posts: 323
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2020, 06:46:09 PM »
I noticed it changed. And it seems that the early 20ís films were cut last I looked. I think it was just edited by someone who prefers newer movies
"This is my left foot. This is my right foot. These are both my feet"

YoungestMonsterKid

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2020, 11:00:19 PM »
I noticed it changed. And it seems that the early 20ís films were cut last I looked. I think it was just edited by someone who prefers newer movies
So they think their preference is all there is?

aura of foreboding

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 4495
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #5 on: October 16, 2020, 01:28:36 AM »
So they think their preference is all there is?

Wikipedia is a struggle.  I fought over the vampire page when it first started.  Got tired of fighting and let the other person win out.  It's literally a small group of obsessive people who constantly change things to their perspective.  Ultimately, they get mowed down by even stronger personalities. 

BigShadow

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #6 on: October 23, 2020, 02:18:31 PM »
Best thing is to not use Wikipedia at all.  It's very unreliable and often biased toward the person editing it. 
I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity...

https://www.facebook.com/groups/767593183431720/?epa=SEARCH_BOX

YoungestMonsterKid

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #7 on: October 23, 2020, 02:51:25 PM »
Best thing is to not use Wikipedia at all.  It's very unreliable and often biased toward the person editing it.
Maybe 15 years ago. But the fact that so many people can edit it actually managed to make it more reliable over time. Pretty much everything on it now has multiple sources for information and opinions are regulated pretty well.

Monsters For Sale

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 10648
  • Aged 10 - 1957
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2020, 02:37:07 PM »
Maybe 15 years ago. But the fact that so many people can edit it actually managed to make it more reliable over time. Pretty much everything on it now has multiple sources for information and opinions are regulated pretty well.

I find that to be generally true.  It is at least a good starting place for research and often points the way to many other sources with more detailed information.
ADAM

YoungestMonsterKid

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #9 on: October 30, 2020, 11:39:10 AM »
If you need a list of titles, here's one.

http://www.universalmonsterarmy.com/forum/index.php?topic=20536.0

You know, I just noticed now that the list doesn't include Curucu, Beast of the Amazon. I mention this because it seems it even got a Universal Monsters trading card at one point.


Mike Scott

  • Army General
  • *****
  • Posts: 26157
  • So terrifying only screams can describe it!
    • Monster Magazines
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #10 on: October 30, 2020, 11:47:57 AM »
You know, I just noticed now that the list doesn't include Curucu, Beast of the Amazon

Is it even a horror/monster movie, though?
CREATURE FAN

Visit My Monster Magazines Website

YoungestMonsterKid

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #11 on: October 30, 2020, 10:43:56 PM »
Is it even a horror/monster movie, though?
I mean, that's debatable. But The Hunchback of Notre Dame certainly isn't, but we don't question its inclusion.
As far as I can tell, it's a film with a monster, though the monster is fake. (Same with London After Midnight, Mark of the Vampire, Cat and the Canary, etc).

I don't mind if it's not included in your list. I just thought it was worth noting that this movie apparently was counted as a Universal Monster film on a trading card.

Monsters For Sale

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 10648
  • Aged 10 - 1957
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #12 on: October 30, 2020, 11:24:43 PM »
I mean, that's debatable. But The Hunchback of Notre Dame certainly isn't, but we don't question its inclusion. ... 

For me, "Hunchback" is more like "Of Mice and Men" without a George.
ADAM

Mike Scott

  • Army General
  • *****
  • Posts: 26157
  • So terrifying only screams can describe it!
    • Monster Magazines
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #13 on: October 30, 2020, 11:44:38 PM »
I just thought it was worth noting that this movie apparently was counted as a Universal Monster film on a trading card.

Well, if it's on a trading card, I guess I'll have to include it!  ;D (It never got an Aurora kit, or a Sideshow toy like The Hunchback did, though.)
CREATURE FAN

Visit My Monster Magazines Website

tripperMM

  • New Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: "Universal Classic Monsters" Wikipedia Page
« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2021, 11:03:15 PM »
:o I just came from Wikipedia and was astonished at the sheer lack of information. The updated page (last edited on 23 February 2021, at 20:13 (UTC)) is for the video line, not the actual Classic Monster Universe. What happened to all th effort and time that was put into that page. And who gave the OK for Louis Feola's representatives/fans/whomever to take over the page without checking the content against what it's supposed to be? How do we get it back? I can't see anywhere that has a backup page of it. Not even archive.org. I do have the list of movies if anyone wants. I did  have it already, just was double chequing a film and saw what happened.
live the life you love, use the god you trust, and don't take it all too seriously

 

en iyi bahis siteleri

https://diziizle.wtf/

totobo