Talk:A Trip Down Market Street

	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
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.

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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Film: Documentary / Silent / 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
	This article is supported by the Documentary films task force.
	This article is supported by the Silent films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Game

@Fedoit: Can you explain why you keep adding your game to the article without engaging in discussion? First, as I noted on your talk page, you possess a conflict of interest, of course to you your game seems much appropriate to the article but because it is your creation your judgment is influenced. Second, Wikipedia is not a means of promotion, only notable mentions should be included and your edit summary shows that you mainly came to the article to promote your game. Note that it is still advertising even if the game is non-commercial. Can you prove that the game is a notable mention by linking to multiple, independent and reliable sources? Do not add the content back without discussion and forming consensus. Opencooper (talk) 12:58, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Opencooper: It's a normal practice on wiki to write infromation about representation of old pieces of art in morden culture. Look for example at https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/The_Scream#In_popular_culture

Yes, I changed my note a lot to make it less promotional as you asked. But no, I don't think that deleting it at all is a good idea. There is only one modern derivative work to this film and it should be said at the article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fedoit (talk • contribs)

@Fedoit: thank you for your reply. While you are correct that we do sometimes include the influence that something has had on popular culture, there is a distinction that you'll notice in the article about The Scream: every mention in the article already has its own article, meaning that it is notable, and is also referenced by an independent and reliable source. This essay says it well: "There is no encyclopedic interest in a famous historical figure being featured prominently in someone's self-published webcomic. The source of an in-depth popular culture reference does not necessarily have to be notable by Wikipedia's definition, but the more notable the source is, the less likely that its inclusion in a popular culture section is trivial." I could go an create an imitation of The Scream right now, put it on a website and link it on the article. Would you disagree that it doesn't belong in the article? Wikipedia only includes notable mentions. Again, like I said: provide a reference that your game has been mentioned in a reliable source and it is more than welcome to stay. Otherwise it is being given undue weight in the article and is only a trivial mention. Do not misconstrue this as a personal judgement on your game itself, I have looked at its site and it is well-presented and looks fun with the music, it's just not appropriate for Wikipedia and there are much better places for your to advertise it. Opencooper (talk) 16:45, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Opencooper: Hello. I have added a reference to the article on appadvice.com. It's very popular and reliable source - http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/appadvice.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fedoit (talk • contribs)

@Fedoit: I'm no expert on reliable sources, but AppAdvice does seem like one. Thank you for adding it and I apologize for missing it in my own search. I've removed the external link though because it doesn't follow our policies which don't allow links in the body. (Readers can still find the game through the reference and Wikipedia uses nofollow links anyway so it wouldn't affect your site's search engine ranking) Opencooper (talk) 23:18, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on A Trip Down Market Street. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130526095455/http://www.silentfilm.org/pages/detail/2082 to http://www.silentfilm.org/pages/detail/2082

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:37, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image from this article to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:A Trip Down Market Street (High Res).webm will be appearing as picture of the day on 19 January 2019. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2019-01-19. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 23:09, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

A Trip Down Market Street is a 13-minute actuality film recorded by placing a movie camera on the front of a cable car as it traveled down San Francisco’s Market Street in the spring of 1906. A virtual time capsule from over 100 years ago, the film shows many details of daily life in a major American city, including the transportation, fashions and architecture of the era. The film begins at 8th Street and continues eastward to the cable car turntable, at The Embarcadero, in front of the Ferry Building. Landmarks passed include the Call Building and the Palace Hotel. It was produced by the four Miles Brothers: Harry, Herbert, Earle and Joe. Harry J. Miles cranked the Bell & Howell camera during the filming. The film is notable for capturing San Francisco just before the city's devastating earthquake and fire.Film: Miles Brothers

Archive – More featured pictures...

Running time

The article claims the film's running time is 13 minutes, but gives no source for that claim. Meanwhile, the embedded video (labelled as the "full film") is only 8 and a half minutes long, and a different video (which is a featured picture) is 11 and a half minutes long. What is the actual running time, and how do we know? NoriMori (ノリモリ) 06:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The online versions referred to were all scanned from the same physical roll of film, but are played back at different framerates. The best estimate of the framerate at which the film was actually shot is 16 frames per second, which yields a running time for the film (less titles) at about 11:36. Given that this version (the most complete known) is incomplete, it might well be that the original version ran 13 minutes. Rickprelinger (talk) 01:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's good to know, but that means we don't actually know the running time, and so it shouldn't be listed in the article so authoritatively as "13 minutes", with no qualifiers and no sources. NoriMori (ノリモリ) 05:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]