Template talk:Metacritic film

	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Film

{{

 Done [1]. Mr.Z-man 00:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{

Can {{documentation}} be added to the page so a documentation page can be created for it, similar to what has already been done for its new sister template {{

No objection, but please create the Documentation page before we transclude it. Otherwise, we'll have a Template Documentation header with no content. Thanks! UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 16:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought,  Done, as the template itself adds a "create" link if there is no documentation - which is just what you need. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 16:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Created, so now its all good :) --

talk · contribs) 16:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

[https://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/{{{1|{{{id}}}}}} ''{{{2|{{{title|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}''] at [[Metacritic]]<noinclude>
[[Category:Film external link templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]
</noinclude>
<noinclude>{{Documentation}}</noinclude>

[https://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/{{{1|{{{id}}}}}} ''{{{2|{{{title|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}}}''] at [[Metacritic]]<noinclude>
[[Category:Film external link templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]
{{Documentation}}</noinclude>

which removes the line break. Thanks. --Zimbabweed (talk) 03:04, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody going to tackle this fix? ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 19:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just came here to make the same request and found that it's been pending for four months, then was seconded by Thirt3en. I now third it. JamesMLane t c 05:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just added the editprotected template, that should get someone's attention. LA (T) @ 08:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. That's the template you need to get someone's attention! I also removed the category because it's already in the transcluded documentation so not needed on the actual template.

msgj 09:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was fast - thanks! Dylan620 ^{(t • c)} 18:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a minute. I notice this change was attempted in October 2010 but then reverted. I'll ask what the problem was ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think one of the reasons I reverted was that

Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope don't work with either URL style and will also need their id param updating as well. Probably should be updated to the new format now though since it has been a while since the metacritic site change. Really needs someone to go though all the 1350 links and check/update the id's but that's a big job. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Not too big for me! :) I'll get right on it. Dylan620 ^{(t • c)} 23:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WOSlinker: the new URL style includes the "the", so it's located at https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-terminator. Dylan620 ^{(t • c)} 04:45, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to do a major project for An American Crime and I noticed that the link produced for that film does not actually go to the relevant page. The URL for the target page is slightly different (substitute tv for film) than what the template produces. I'm going to just enter the url manually for now but I thought I'd ask. Millahnna (talk) 04:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, it's {{

stoned 08:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

See for example Kim Ki-duk profile: average career score 68 out of 100. --79.23.167.183 (talk) 03:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the addition of the corporate owner, CBS Interactive, is unnecessary and should be reverted. It's clutter and people who want to know who owns Metacritic can find out by checking out the Metacritic article. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:23, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it does not warrant inclusion. Hyacinth, please revert yourself, since we non-admins cannot revert this contested edit. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 19:37, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please revert these bold edits that have been disputed by two editors (myself and Joeyconnick). We cannot revert them, being non-admins. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 20:22, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:41, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please change http://www.metacritic.com/ -> https://www.metacritic.com/ Thanks!--Bcxfu75k (talk) 04:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Values from instances of this template have been copied to Wikidata. A bot may begin removing the values no sooner than seven days after the date on this template, providing that there are no objections, or once there is consensus to do so. This operation will only effect external links sections so as to not change general references or inline citations (<ref>...</ref>). No changes to visible article text will be made. If the template has a name parameter, that may also be removed, making use of {{PAGENAMEBASE}} instead. (24 April 2022)

Indagate (talk) 14:18, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]