Talk:AllMovie

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 July 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Websites: Computing Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing. inactive .Reference worksWikipedia:WikiProject Reference worksTemplate:WikiProject Reference worksReference works articles

You can find the AMG template here:

Allmovie are definitely a spammer. They contain no extra info above IMDB. They have obviously used a bot to add a link to virtually every film listed on wikipedia. And probably use a bot to keep it there. How they can get away with this is beyond me. Wikipedia mods need to act and remove all these links automatically. 83.100.250.5 (talk) 15:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allmovie, like Allmusic, provides high quality, professional-quality information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.222.46.151 (talk) 20:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot to add that they provided genres for movies that haven't been released yet based on just how they think the movie will be. 187.35.32.69 (talk) 20:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the material is very dubious. I read a bio of an actor/director which talked about him like a combination Brando and Hitchcock. It was absurdly off-base. Who provides the bios? BashBrannigan (talk) 03:33, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allmovie is one of the most overrated source sites in wikipedia, they are not reliable, list Heat as a Thriller (instead of Crime), Cohen and Tate as Action and Drama (instead of Crime or Thriller). They list nglourious Basterds as War Adventure when it is nothing like Rambo or Dirty Dozen. 187.35.32.69 (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that Rovi/allmovie/music are poor sources. While I'm wary of crew details, I find the synopsis on the whole better than IMDB. And let's face it IMDB is far from accurate. Almost daily I cross-reference these two sites, since I do not fully trust either. On the issue of prescribing genre to films in production, well let's say I look forward to the day Spiderman 6 is a western. wha? (talk) 19:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are unreliable, they list Leon as an action thriller, when there is nothing action about it, and when they list action as a genre, it goes like this "crime, action" and not alphabetically like "action, crime", they must think that crime, thriller or science fiction genres are more important than action. BusSDriver (talk) 20:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recent discussion on

WP:FILM has state that it's a reliable source. Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:15, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Not sure what you're saying here. Why is this subject not notable enough for it's own article? Dayewalker (talk) 03:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Allmusic. Allrovi is more or less a front-end search portal for the main content provided the primary sites. 71.125.131.122 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC).[reply

]

There's no mention on the AMG or allmusic pages of allrovi. If you are correct then it might be appropriate to redirect eventually... but only after the content from this page has been incorporated in to one of those pages.

talk) 08:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

There's no mention because this is the newer portal branding. AMG and allmusic are the parent brands and they simply haven't been updated to reflect the "modernization" of the whole company. We should redirect now, and concerned editors can merge the content from history if and when they please. This is truly a minor site, I'm not sure why it has an article at all. 71.125.131.122 (talk) 01:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Repeatedly edit warring without gaining consensus is simply going to result in blocks for edit warring and/or page protection. If the portal is notable on its own, then it can remain its own article and no need for it to be a redirect. Do you have a

reliable source that supports changing this to a redirect? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, you might consider renaming this article to « AllRovi » as this is the case used everywhere on their website. Od1n (talk) 20:26, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you appear to be correct, moved

talk) 09:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Does this article really need all of the reviewers personally listed? Seems like link-juicing SEO to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manys (talk • contribs) 19:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how many editors still have this page on their watchlist but any that do may want to consider moving the page. From what I can find tonight it looks like they have abandoned the Allrovi designation and have gone to Allmovie.

1. All google searches lead me to this title.
2. The link in the Allrovi infobox no longer works
3. This edit, done a few weeks ago, updated the template.

If any of you can confirm this one way or the other please feel free to move ahead (or not) with the move. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 05:35, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I thnk it was in 2011 that allmovie.com (and allmusic.com etc) was replaced by allrovi.com with very similar content but fewer search possibilties, now it seems allmovie.com is back and allrovi.com dead. Hope it's back to the way it was, it used to be a good alternative to IMDB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.211.158.203 (talk) 15:56, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am merging this content with