I see that you have updated the cast of the film Dr.Strange. (haven't seen it yet) However, I've read a couple of reviews that have stated that Mad's character dies when he turns into an ash skeleton after being reclaimed, by the films main villain. Just confirming with you as I see you didn't update his profile.
I wasn't sure how to take that, as it's mentioned in the film that the dark dimension, that Mads and his followers are sucked into at the end of the movie as they turn into ash, is a place without time and so technically they are immortal. I could be wrong, the ending is rather complicated, and I was being cautious by not adding it.
Interesting. I've also read it as Dormannu (sp) claiming his soal and that of his minions and in a way whisking him away to a form of eternal Hell. I'll probably update Mads next week once I'm able to see the film and chose my words carefully as it seems rather ambiguous, unless you may want to do so. Otherwise, I'll list it next week just in case and chose my words carefully to make sure it's understood that his fate is not very clear.
Hello Film Brain, a few points.The general style you refer to is a convention, not a must-do. Most of the time I follow it but sometimes I feel things are better described by doing them differently, giving them more impact if the drama/humour can be conveyed. I'm not the only one doing this. It is not the function of any of us to alter an entry unless we are doing what you have rightly stated - correcting the format, grammar etc or amending errors in detail or adding missing details (killer, method, motivation etc) . If we haven't seen the film/show then it should be taken as read that what the contributor has written is relevant to the death in the context of the plot. If a page has been visited by other people (notably when adding categories), and they have left the text intact, there is no reason for anyone else to later change it. Another thing that should not be done, don't think you are guilty of this, is changing words. I remember listing a death where the character's action was foolhardy. Someone changed it to stupid - not the same thing and completely altering the context of the character's action.
Just general points, not specifically directed at you.
Hi Film Brain, sorry, but there is no concise writing style for the Wiki, with so many contributors there can't be.
The Cleese entry is long but the clowns are integral to the plot - the slapstick style of the scene and the title of the episode should have told you that,. so the deatail was relevant.. As for Troughton, you appear to have a blind spot for irony as indicated below. Alter it if you wish but don't put the death at the beginning. You rightly say you try to keep the spirit but you are not always doing so. There are loads of very long entries with a wealth of detail, are you going to edit them because you don't think all the details are relevant ? Sometimes the edit ruins the spirit and flavour of the original. Will l have to change my opinion expressed in the nov 2013 comment ? I have been contributing to Cinemorgue for at least 12 years and know that readers want to see informative and interesting entries!
I was trying to keep in as much detail as possible on the submissions, but the general style on the original site is usually death first (i.e. '[method] by [x] when...') so I was trying to rephrase them as they do look noticeably different compared to other entries on their pages. I know we've had this debate before with Rowan Atkinson's page, but I do feel these kind of entries lean too much towards plot synopsises.
I know I've had some trouble before phrasing the full context of a death scene (for example, the 'Survivors' entry from Kevin McNally), but I'm aware that readers like information. This why I do expand entries that missing key points, especially for newer films, and correct formatting. I only edited Clesse and Troughton's pages because I'd already added new entries to them (Trolls and Survivors, respectively), so I wasn't going after your edits specifically.
Hi there, see you amended Paul McGann again but please note that where a death is ironic the best thing is to set down a timeline and leave the death part to the end of the entry. It's like a joke, the punchline comes at the end: remember Rowan Atkinson !
Hi there, thanks for editing Neil Mcdonough, although you have left out that he kills someone. Nonetheless, you and NDW seem to be more in tune with what makes this site interesting, there are far too many edits which make things bland and repetitive, such as short statements starting with shot/stabbed/poisoned/bludgeoned by so-and-so which eliminate motive, cut out the historical context or remove circumstances which enhance the entries and make them so much more enjoyable. I have looked back over your editing where you may have edited my submissions and you have done a neat job, leaving in those bits of information which you have felt add flavour to the death, just as Mr M himself has done over many years. Let's hope other editors will in future do the same for everybody's entries
Most of what I submit (such as McDonough) are slightly adapted e-mails to Mr M which he didn't manage to put on the original sites, so I expect them to be edited, hopefully in the right spirit. Be on the lookout for plenty more ! Keep up the good work !
If any other contributors read this, please feel free to put forward your own comments.