Talk:Jurassic World

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 May 2013. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Jurassic World. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Jurassic World at the Reference desk.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: American 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. United States: Cinema Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance). Science Fiction Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by Baffle gab1978, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on August 06, 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles 2010s Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s 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.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2015, when it received 14,283,010 views.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 9 times. The weeks in which this happened: November 23 to 29, 2014 (8th) May 31 to June 6, 2015 (16th) June 7 to 13, 2015 (2nd) June 14 to 20, 2015 (1st) June 21 to 27, 2015 (2nd) June 28 to July 4, 2015 (4th) July 5 to 11, 2015 (14th) July 12 to 18, 2015 (21st) July 19 to 25, 2015 (13th)

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[List of highest-grossing openings for films#Biggest opening day in U.S. and Canada|fifth-biggest opening day and the fifth-biggest single-day gross]] The anchor (#Biggest opening day in U.S. and Canada) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before. [[List of biggest opening weekends#Biggest opening weekends in U.S. and Canada|opening-weekend record]] The anchor (#Biggest opening weekends in U.S. and Canada) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Undoubtedly, this is a great film with outstanding performance in many aspects but I think we should delete all the other films and their revenue cited in the reception section since such info. is completely irrelevant to Jurassic World itself and not that meaningful. It's well enough to know that it has broken numerous records. Full lists are available on their main pages or references. ^{In dialogue with} Biomedicinal 13:55, 30 July 2015‎ (UTC)[reply]

Include. kleinster 03:44, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

What product placements? Have reliable sources provided any significant coverage of them? DonIago (talk) 13:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One car brand got way to much screen time. Nobody wants to mention it one more time. --87.141.16.6 (talk) 21:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Jurassic World Indominus Rex.webp

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Pratts and rap.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing the edit history for this article, I see that multiple IPs have removed the categorization of this film as a horror film, and have consistently been reverted. My question is: why? The lead doesn't describe JW as being a horror film, nor does the body of the article in its current form appear to describe it as such, and I didn't see that the edit summaries provided by the reverting editors ever included a rationale for reinstating the category.

As such, I've taken it upon myself to remove the 'horror film' category. Editors who believe JW should be classified as such are welcome to provide their reasoning here. DonIago (talk) 12:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Turner Classic Movie database classifies it as "horror," which was why editors were categorizing it as horror here. Mr Fink (talk) 16:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I don't have any objection to that, but it should be added to the article before the category is re-added, as categories are required to be supported by the article's verifiable content. DonIago (talk) 16:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]