Jump to content

Talk:Monty Python's Life of Brian

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Andrewa (talk | contribs) at 17:13, 29 October 2021 (I'm not: primary sources and logic). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former good article nomineeMonty Python's Life of Brian was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 21, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed


I'm not

Brian: "Look, you’ve got it all wrong. You don't need to follow me. You don't need to follow anybody. You've got to think for yourselves. You're all individuals."
Crowd in unison: "YES. WE'RE ALL INDIVIDUALS."
Voice at the back: "I'm not."

There's a quote in the article in the section Individuality and meaninglessness that I think should be extended, adding the voice at the back. Comments? Andrewa (talk) 10:52, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you've got reliable sources discussing individuality and meaninglessness in Life of Brian, then it might be worth including. If not, not. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 12:52, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly the same sources that justify putting the quote in at all justify putting in the whole quote, don't you think? Andrewa (talk) 21:27, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How the Hell should I know? You're the one who wants to add something about a voice at the back. Where did you get that? Slowik? Shilbrack? Which of them—or do you have some other source?—makes mention of the importance of this voice? Personally, I thought the "I'm not" was just a typical Pythonesque note of absurdity. It's humor in the middle of social commentary in the middle of satire. But of course, that's just my opinion. And who am I? — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 22:04, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good questions! I got it from the ultimate primary source, the film itself. And that source is verifiable, and some use of primary sources is permissible.
How the hell would you know? Well, I think it is simple logic. But you don't, evidently. I certainly can't claim any sort of consensus here to add the last line to the quote. Pity, but that's what talk pages are for. Andrewa (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]