Talk:One-Eyed Jacks

	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.

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.

Westerns: Film Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Westerns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Western genre 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.WesternsWikipedia:WikiProject WesternsTemplate:WikiProject WesternsWesterns articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Film task force.

Disambiguation page required?

I've just add a link to the Spear of Destiny album entitled "One Eyed Jacks" bringing up the total of articles sharing the the same name to four, including the Marlon Brando film. Turfslaw 19:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:One Eyed Jacks poster.jpg

Image:One Eyed Jacks poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kiss my big fat derriere. I don't have a source or footnote to give you for that, but I'm sure it fits just fine. A bunch of pompous, self-congratulating, uptight, nerds. You are too lazy to fact check the proposed changes themselves. Determining without knowing the subject, that the proposed addition is "trivial"? If you haven't read the book, or seen the movie, which obviously you have not, then how dare you set yourselves up as judge and jury? All my reverted posts are accurate and all of interest to the limited, knowledgeable readers of a particular obscure "trivial" matter. You are at the end of the day, small- minded censors. My annual cash contributions which would have been $100 or more, hereby revert to me. Sincerely, Pat Brennan, is to a bunch of knuckleheads, who wouldn't know the source of this pseudonym without using their own play-toy minutiae.. Just because someone can source/reference to a book or article doesn't make their post accurate. As I have told you before, no doubt one could cite false and malicious comments by Donald Trump that wouldn't make the initial post accurate. Learn to use some discretion. Ask yourselves why would I dare post such "trivialities" if they weren't accurate? To say that the fact that Elmore Leonard film "3:10 to Yuma" was being watched by a character shown on the television episode being watched in a Justified (written by Elmore Leonard) episode is to show Wikipedia up as really being "Wickedpedia". So adios amigo. Can't say its been fun, for me, or thee. PatBrennan (talk) 10:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:5697-0004.jpg

Image:5697-0004.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarised text

Pretty much the entire text for this entry is identical to that in www.oneeyedjacks.bravehost.com/oneeyedjackshistory.html. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.55.91.66 (talk) 21:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The text and ideas you see here are original, by myself and others. The copy on the site you link was taken directly from this one. - Tremonius 63.249.105.251 (talk) 21:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Public domain

Can someone find information how how this relatively recent film has ended up in public domain? I was surprised when I learned of this, which is why apparently there are no good DVD releases of it. RoyBatty42 (talk) 23:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Director's Cut?

Just because Brando shot five hours of footage, I don't think that necessarily means his 'director's cut' was five hours long, as the infobox claims. All filmmakers shoot way more than they're ever going to use. I don't believe for a minute that Brando ever intended or expected a five-hour version to be released. Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 07:57, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Formin' a Posse to Tame Plot Summary

I appreciate that other contributors tried to do something different with plot summary, but the *tone* is somewhat jarring compared to most Wikipedia plot summaries. Hipster-ish words and phrases like 'booty" and "swag bag" seem especially out of place. Some parts of plot summary seem like they're trying to capture characters' motivations or describe landscape from their POV, which also contributes to odd tone. Some of plot summary is fairly straightforward and does not suffer from issues listed above. Is there a way to keep succinct parts of this section while improving the overall tone to help it align with other film entries? Or as Slim Pickens might say, "I'm a-fixin' to get me a posse to tame this lil philly of a Wikipeedie article. Who's with me? Saddle up!" Kinkyturnip (talk) 20:23, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Startling Reference

I see a quote from Karl Malden, in answer to a query of the sources of the script as it appeared. I myself wrote to both the credited screenwriters and to Karl Malden, who wrote in ink in my letter: "There is one answer to your question, Marlin Brando, a genius in our time." That quote is in the letter, which I still have, and I'm very curious as to how it found its way into this article. 24.6.201.33 (talk) 02:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]