Talk:The Saint (1997 film)

	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 Australian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Novelization section moved

In keeping with the current style for such things, I have moved the section on the novelization (along with its infobox) to The Saint (novel). 23skidoo 22:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A person cannot be canonized until they are deceased. Dead saints is redundant.Es330td 20:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A saint is not a person who has "witnessed three miracles." The actual explanation of the canonization process is too complex to fit into one or two sentences in a movie plot summary so I removed it and linked to the article.Es330td 20:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good call to change the reference. The definition of "saint" really has no place in an article about an action movie, and I think it can be safely assumed most people reading the article are familiar with the term. The very few who aren't can go check out the article and be enlightened. 23skidoo 22:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is 60 trillion dollars too much?

The text in the trivia section seems to insinuate that the total economic potentail of functional cold fusion would be much less than 60 trillion dollars. But is that actually true? Or was it written by some science-iliterate gimp, with no clue how the real world currently works, and how much functional fusion energy (cold or othrewise) would change things? --Peter Knutsen (talk) 17:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:The Saint Poster.jpg

Image:The Saint 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 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) 02:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Script link a copyvio?

Does anyone know if the Daily Script website posts scripts with permission? If it doesn't, the link to the script will probably have to be removed as we aren't supposed to provide links to copyvios. 23skidoo (talk) 13:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you think that it's a copyright violation? Have we been appraised of such? Does the website that's hosting it or any other website mention that it's a copyright violation? We act in good faith and Assume good faith in the actions of others. If we know that it's a copyright violation, of course we remove it, but as far as any of us know, the website has permission to host it -- it's not our job to police the internet. :) Banaticus (talk) 04:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but I've seen hundreds of similar links deleted, from YouTube clips to, well, script websites. It's not our job to police the Internet but there are still hard and fast wiki-policies regarding what links we are and are not allowed to link to. And more often than not links that lead to apparent copyvio -- and note the word apparent -- have been deleted. A related case in point - go to the Simon Templar page and take a look at the discussion over whether or not to include a link to a website that hosts recordings of old-time Saint radio shows. The argument was that it shouldn't be allowed because the shows were believed to be in copyright. The link was saved in that instance because a case was made that, in some jurisdictions, the radio shows are public domain. A 1997 script is in no way going to be public domain. 23skidoo (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why refer to him as Templar instead of Simon?

I know it's more formal to refer to someone by their last name instead of their first name, but the character is virtually always referred to as Simon, not Templar -- it's like referring to Ritchie (a last name) instead of her far more common first name, Madonna. I think the article should be rewritten to reference the character by the first name instead of the last name (well, the article also needs to be rewritten to eliminate stilted summations, but that's a different matter). ;) Banaticus (talk) 04:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not considered encyclopedic to refer to characters by their first names (unless referring to more than one character with the same last name). The fact he's referred to as Simon in the film is irrelevant. James Bond is referred to as James quite frequently, too, but is still to be referred to as "Bond" (or "007") in encyclopedia articles. The only acceptable alternative in this case is to use "The Saint". 23skidoo (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not entirely accurate. While encyclopedia articles regarding real life people will use the last name (or in the case of Madonna or Cher the more common stage name), plot summaries will typical use the name most commonly referenced in the material itself. Your Bond example, whild valid, only works because in the movies he's typically referred to as Bond or 007. However, if you watch a film such as Batman Begins or The Dark Knight: Rachel Dawes is commonly referred to as "Rachel", which is reflected in movie reviews and articles regarding the film. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 14:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

Will someone please tell me who plays the girl at the start, the one who gets killed when she falls off the ledge? I've been looking everywhere and I really need to know to settle an argument! Thank you!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Diveinme (talk • contribs) 11:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0213187/ Seaphoto^Talk 07:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cold fusion is nuclear power

The sentence that cold fusion would be much cheaper and safer than nuclear power doesn't make much sense, since fusion is nuclear power aswell. it should rather be fusion is cheaper and safer than fission. Or fusion is safer than common nuclear power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.96.115 (talk) 08:24, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One Night Stand in Plot Summary

The plot summary mentions that Val Kilmer's character and Elizabeth Shue's character have a "one night stand." This would imply that the two had sex when they in fact only slept naked in the same bed as was made clear in the movie.Wayweary (talk) 10:43, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Download as PDF" puts incorrect links for many of the artists in the Soundtrack section

When downloading the article as PDF, the links for Fluke, Luscious Jackson, The Chemical Brothers, Underworld, Daft Punk, David Bowie, Dreadzone, Duncan Sheik are all the same: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Duncan_Sheik.

The other links in this section seem to be alright.

Does someone know how that can be corrected? Where to report such an issue with the PDF creator?

Thanks, BernieM (talk) 22:29, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]