This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in
film,
literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Popular culture, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Popular cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Popular cultureTemplate:WikiProject Popular culturePopular culture articles
I have been making some extensive changes in the body of the article, clarifying the chronology and themes. The old version was 99% plagiarised from some film book, by the way...
Colin4C09:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)reply
And I've been adding a few of the weirder vampire movies. One thing: the lede suggests that Dracula is in more movies than any other character, and later on in the article he's second to Sherlock Holmes. Which is it, and who said so? I can't offer a reference or citation either way.
Accounting4Taste21:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Those are bits I retained from the old version of the page, which I can't verify either way...though I guess we might look at the Sherlock Holmes wikipedia page for further elucidation. As for adding weird vampire movies, good idea! And just to say to any doubters that The Vampire's Ghost (1945), which I added really does exist...It was a very low budget film by poverty row studios Republic Pictures, starring
John Abbott (actor) in the title role.
Colin4C21:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Move proposal
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I agree the article name needs to be broadened - how about vampires in visual media (which covers video games as well as film and TV). Comics can go in literature, though could go here if graphic I guess....cheers,
Casliber (
talk·contribs)
01:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Visual media would allow anime and manga to be grouped together, but would split video games from tabletop RPGs and LARPs. I think this would be acceptable, as, although there are exceptions (such as
Kindred: The Embraced and the
Buffyverse role-playing games), the tabletop RPGs generally only cross over into literature, and the video games generally cross over into anime and manga. --
Gordon Ecker03:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)reply
If you look at the history you will see that this article split off from
Vampire literature because that article was getting too big. It would be crazy to merge them again. Films are different from books.
Colin4C15:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The name of this article
It seems that those who proposed a change of name for this article have done nothing to change the head words to correlate to the new title or contributed anything further to this article. I am mystified why an inconclusive discussion by editors who hardly contribute to this article resulted in a name change which is both vague and inaccurate. What is 'Vampires in visual media' meant to mean? There are many books and encyclopedia entries on Vampire film or Vampire cinema. That has a clear and precise meaning. I propose changing it to 'Vampire Cinema' and putting the comic books etc in the Vampire literature article and the other stuff into a 'vampires in popular culture article' or getting rid of it entirely if it is, as a lot of it seems, just useless trivia.
Colin4C (
talk)
13:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Proposed Merger
I oppose merging this article with
Vampire movies. Vampire movies are a seperate subject with many books written about them. There is no reason whatsoever that an article on Vampire movies should be lumbered with the 'assorted vampire trivia' which this present article contains. Wikipedia articles should be encyclopediac - not dumping grounds for stupid trivia.
Colin4C (
talk)
22:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Image copyright problem with Image:Vampire lovers cap.jpg
The image
Image:Vampire lovers cap.jpg is used in this article under a claim of
fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the
requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an
explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
That there is a
non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.