Talk:Michael Jackson's Thriller (music video)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Michael Jackson's Thriller (music video) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Michael Jackson's Thriller (music video) was a Music 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 25, 2013	Good article nominee	Not listed

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

"Director: Funds for 'Thriller' were tough to raise". MSNBC. April 29, 2008.

The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to Michael Jackson, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Michael Jackson Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michael Jackson, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Michael Jackson on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Michael JacksonWikipedia:WikiProject Michael JacksonTemplate:WikiProject Michael JacksonMichael Jackson articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Start‑class Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

United States: Cinema / Music / Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Music portal This article is supported by WikiProject American music (assessed as Low-importance).
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Library of Congress Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Horror Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	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 American cinema task force.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2020 and 15 March 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jbdougherty1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus?

Is there any consensus for this edit? I disagree with mentioning all visual references to Thriller.-- Dewritech (talk) 12:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It should be avoided per WP:POPCULTURE. Popcornfud (talk) 14:38, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Um, Visual? Have you actually watched the video? Don't just pull random stuff from thin air. Apart from the visual, the storyline and the music is very similar to the original song.123.103.210.114 (talk) 09:58, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Werecat

Comment: The source states The look was created by Rick Baker, fresh from winning the first Oscar given out for Best Makeup for his work on Landis’s American Werewolf. “We made him into more of a werecat because I just didn’t want to do another werewolf,” Baker told Vulture in 2010. “At first I was thinking [it would be] almost like a black panther thing, but … I ended up putting a longer mane of hair on it and bigger ears.” I think "more" is an important word here which is key here which is left out here. Wikipedia just shortens without thinking. He didn't want it to look like the werewolf in the movue so he had to do some changes. The mane is longer and the ears are bigger. The Thriller 25 Book describes it as a monster. The monster behaves like a wserewolf. I think just describing it as a werecat is not correct. Quaffel (talk) 09:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Vox source given in the article says:

In the first scene, he transforms into what most people typically assume is a werewolf ... In fact, Jackson’s transformation isn’t into a werewolf, but into a were-cat.

Per Wikipedia:STICKTOTHESOURCE, we must reflect what reliable secondary sources say. Popcornfud (talk) 09:22, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Read carefully. That's what the author made of the quote. You can find it in the text if you read it. The mae up artist doesn't clearly say it's a werecat. He said MORE of a werecat. Jackson was insired by American WEREWOLF, Thriller's intro features wolves not cats. The monster howls like a wolf and lay the head back like a wolf. You can saysay the mask has features from a cat because the make up artist didn't want to do another werewolf. Interesting fact! No doubt about it. But you can't say it's a werecat. You can't take information just from one sentence. Most people assume it's a werewolf and they have good reasons. I did and I'm pretty sure you did before it was mentioned. I only waste my time with this because I'm shocked that the IP has been blocked for saying it's a werewolf. That's a shame! Wikipedians offend others and nothing happens. But if you disagree on a fact you get blocked. The IP had good reasons to say it's a werewolf. Wikipedia is just too arrogant to notice.Quaffel (talk)

That's what the author made of the quote. Correct. So that's what we report. Because we report what sources say.

The IP editor was blocked (not by me - I am not an admin) because they repeatedly reinstated their preferred version of the article without explanation or discussion, in edit messages or talk pages, even after repeatedly being asked to do that. That's disruptive editing, regardless of the content of the edit. Popcornfud (talk) 15:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. We are talking about two different IP's editing here on May, 31. The first IP restored "werewolf" and was immediately warned by Popcornfud. Only once. Not repeatedly. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:2601:541:8200:1370:A915:E9D3:D24B:8262 Maybe the IP thought it's obvious and didn't explain. If you read the source in question carefully you dion't need an explanation. Then Popcornfud restored werecat. Then a second IP restored werewolf and later that IP restored werecat and was blocked by a user (not Popcornfud). That IP was blocked witout warning. In fact, the Talk Page is empty. But the "werecat" problem is still there. By the way, the "werecat" problem is not solved yet.Quaffel (talk) 18:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All the IP editors - they're probably the same editor - were removing cited information without explanation. There is even a note in the article explaining that the werecat information comes from a cited source; this was repeatedly ignored. (In fact, it was not just ignored but deleted.) These unexplained edits date back until at least January 2021, by the way. Popcornfud (talk) 18:06, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The author's conclusion that you are clinging to is far beyond what the man said said Obviously you are unable to understand the quote itself.I don't blame the IP for not explaining or commenting. Waste of time. I won't take part anymore in this fruitless conversation. Probalbly most people won't believe it anyway. If you wan to stick to YOUR preferred version, do so. Maybe you'll be topic banned sometine.Quaffel (talk) 08:10, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious thing to do, which you have not suggested yet, is to track down some other reliable sources that support your position instead. Why don't you try doing that? Popcornfud (talk) 08:16, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have one source that you missinterpreted. It's obviuos you can't just say it's a werecat. Why would I do your dirty work? You are just trying to continue this discussion.Quaffel (talk) 09:23, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're misinterpreting me. I'm saying that if you can find some other high-quality reliable sources that say "werewolf", then we can amend the article with a note or something saying "according X source, it's a werewolf, but according to Y source, it's a werecat". Popcornfud (talk) 10:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox, gross/sales fields

What does "Sales: 900,000" in the gross field of the infobox represent? There is text in the Michael Jackson's Thriller (music video)#Development that reads "Landis and Jackson conceived a short film shot on 35mm film with the production values of a feature film, with a budget of $900,000, much larger than any previous music video." and a tagged reference to Griffin.

Is the 900k "Sales" referencing this budget? AldezD (talk) 02:35, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Werewolf films

This category needs removing likely, because a werewolf is a different creature to a werecat. Maybe a category for werecats instead.2A00:23C7:ED18:A301:15ED:C2A8:55CE:5636 (talk) 23:11, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]