Talk:The Cruise (1970 film)

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Film

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

Untitled

I've cleaned this list ... but who or what is Rejs? -- Tarquin 09:14 Aug 20, 2002 (PDT)

Rejs is Polish for the cruise. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 03:20, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived debate 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.

The result of the debate was PAGE NOT MOVED -- as there was no consensus for the move per discussion below. --Philip Baird Shearer 11:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested that this article be moved back over to Rejs. As I stated in the request:

The film is better known by it's native title, it is referred to this way at IMDB, All Movie Guide (which does not mention English translated title) in several places within Wikipedia, and this avoids ambiguity with the English language film also titled "The Cruise" which is likely to be more familiar to English readers. Even the graphic art provided in the article does not refer to the title "The Cruise."

In addition there are other alternative English titles besides "The Cruise," so "The Cruise" is by no means the definitive title of the film. zadignose 07:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. See WP:UE. IMDB house style is to base the article at its native title. They have their house style, we have ours. Chris cheese whine 16:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Yet the film articles below are listed under their native titles:

rather than use such titles as:

for the simple fact that they're better known, even to English speakers, by their native titles. Rejs is not really well known to English speakers by any title. However, whether or not the title can be best translated as "The Cruise," the film is not currently available to an English audience under such a title. Polart apparently once released a VHS version titled "Rejs - A Trip Down the River." There's just not much basis for establishing an English translation as the standard. zadignose 18:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would make sense, however, it has on teeny-tiny, ever so insignificant flaw. None of those films even has an English title, with the possible exception of Mon Oncle, where some scenes were contemporaenously re-shot with English signs in the background. Chris cheese whine 21:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~Neutral Agree with Zadignose: "Don't default to English if a film is not conventionally referred to by translated title". I'm used to it being refered to as "Rejs". Stefán 19:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation please? That's not in WP:UE or WP:NC(F). Chris cheese whine 21:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, It seems I was not too clear: The statement in quotes was made by Zadignose in an edit summary on this page and I agree with it. I was not aware of WP:NC(F) but there I see the statement "Use the title more commonly recognized by English readers." My feeling is that for this film, that title would be "Rejs". Before I found this article I knew of the film under the title Rejs. (I'm not a native English speaker but I don't speak Polish at all.) Did you know this film under the title "The Cruise" before you saw this article? Stefán 00:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was previously not aware of this film under any title, however, I am not the one proposing to move this article. A cursory bit of googling seems to show that the title "The Cruise" seems to appear quite a bit in English-language sources relating directly to this, though usually alongside the Polish title. Since I can't pick a winner either way, I am endorsing the status quo. Chris cheese whine 02:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change my opinion to neutral following Benzamin's comments. Stefán 18:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. First of all, I second the above comment on IMDB - all films on IMDB are listed by their native titles. Besides, IMDB does list The Cruise as the film's English-language title (someone wasn't looking very hard, Zadignose). Secondly, films like Rashomon and Amarcord, not to mention Les Miserables, are widely known outside of their native lands by their native tiles. This is not the case with Rejs, which is hardly known outside of its native land at all. As a native English speaker who lived in Poland for several years, I can tell you that the standard way to refer to this film in English is The Cruise, a title used by Poles repeatedly. The 2006 Seatle Film Festival showed the film under its English title, for instance (see: http://www.polishfilms.org/2006/cruise.html). The Polish Express Film Festival, held in London, refers to the film as The Cruise (see: http://www.polishculture.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=123&Itemid=30). There are plenty more examples of this. To me, as native Enlish speaker living in the U.S., niestety, it would be absurd to refer to this fim as Rejs... Benzamin 20:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If a standard exists, then we'll embrace it. I'll just point out that I did look exactly where I should, and did clearly see that IMDB lists Rejs as "also known as The Cruise" and made no suggestion to the contrary. I also saw the absence of any such alternate title at All Movie Guide, which is why I explicitly said so above. Now, I don't doubt that the film has been exhibited somewhere at some time under the title "The Cruise." Your experience living in Poland is significant, as it suggests that "The Cruise" is often used as a transation for English speakers. Whether or not it exists as a standard remains debatable, as another English title has also been used, and any search for this film under the title "the cruise" is likely to yield no results, or misleading results as they tend to point to a better known and entirely different film of the same title. zadignose 21:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support. I would like to see proof that 'Rejs' is more popular in English than 'Cruise', but as there are at least 2 English titles it may be a good idea to use the single Polish one. ~~Also, consider following proper WP:RM procedures (list the move there, add the template to this talk page)~~.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 17:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This proposal is listed at WP:RM and the move template is on the top of this talk page. It is not a big deal how this discussion section is laid out, it doesn't seem to be getting overly complicated. Stefán 18:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, missed that. OK.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this request had been to move the page from Rejs to The Cruise (film) there does not seem to have been a consensus for that move either. As this was a request to move it back again within 24 hours of the first move, I have deleted the history on the Rejs page (because it was only a cut and past move back. Cut and past moves are very harmful because it destroys the history needed for proof of copyright), so that in future, after further debate there is a consensus to move the page back it can be done without admin intervention. However it is customary for pages not to be moved back for at least six months after a WP:RM in which no consensus was reached to reduce the chances of move wars. Feel free to contact me on my talk page if there are any further issues over this --Philip Baird Shearer 11:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]