Talk:Home Alone 2: Lost in New York

Budget and takings

Could someone please write about the budget of this film and how much money was taken in at the box office? Home Alone has this information and its sequel should too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy Eddy (talk • contribs)

Songs included in the movie

Could someone please provide some song information. The piano melody was nice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.240.234.212 (talk • contribs)

Synopsis

could someone add more detail in the [sypnosis!] JJ 01:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Quotes

I do think that the quotes section should be copied to Wikiquote, but that's just my one vote. Vote here! - dogman15 04:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

• Took care of this a few weeks ago. --Goldrushcavi 22:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Fatality

based on the injuries sustained, wouldn't they have died. I can't find anything on this subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.176.172.119 (talk • contribs)

• Probably so. But that's why it's a movie and not real life... --Goldrushcavi 22:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed! Haven't you ever seen movies?Dshibshm (talk) 00:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Booby traps

Someone write down the booby traps the robbers suffered --Micoolio101 (talk)

• There has been a list of injuries the two burglars suffered up for some time; unfortunately it has been repeatedly vandalized, deleted and re-added in a reversion war (watch out for WP:3RR, by the way), and most recently replaced by a few paragraphs, which were very sloppy as well as too detailed for a plot summary. I've just replaced the original list - if the majority wants it down bad enough, it can be removed later... vote here with your thoughts and opinions. --Goldrushcavi 22:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

-pearls on the sidewalk during chase (very wiley-e-coyote) - both fall

-pinching the butt of a woman in front of them - both slapped

-plank seasaw outside broken window - harry vaulted onto car roof

-bricks from the roof - harry gets hit approx. 5 times in head

-doorknob connected to nailgun/staple gun (inconsistent) - harry gets nail/staple in butt, croch and face

-greased ladder rungs - marv slips and falls approx. one floor

-missing first floor - harry falls two floors

-scrap metal over door - marv gets pummeled with scrap metal

-greased floor - harry falls, paint cans fall on him

-electrified faucet handles - harry gets electrocuted by arc-welder

-hanging bulb attached to flame thrower - marv gets top of his head burned

--kerosene in toilet - marv gets the rest of him burned

-rope attached to bag of cement - harry gets hit with falling bag of cement, approx. 3 stories

-ladder sabotaged with saw - marv falls 1/2 floor

-paint cains on ropes above stairs - miss, miss, success with enormous metal pipe, fall two story, metal pipe fallso on them

-toolchest at top of stairs attached to doorknob - both (noses) smashed between door and wall

-escape rope from roof doused in kerosene "now why would anyone soak a rope in kerosene?" - both fall 4 stories, followed by paint cans

-icy sidewalk - kevin slips and falls

-pigeon lady in park; covered with birdseed (already covered in grease) - both ravaged by pigeons

-fireworks call cops to scene in park - both ... arrested.

-"bad guys saying they'll kill me" tape; waiving right to remain silent

• The list of traps has Harry and Marv mixed up. Marv was the one who got hit by the bricks and electrocuted; Harry was the one who stuck his head in the toilet bowl with kerosene, vaulted up into the air, and slipped off the rungs on the outdoor ladder. Andrea Parton (talk) 05:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Plot summary

At an absolutely massive 2600 words, the plot summary had been marked as overlong. I've replaced it with a rewrite based substantially on an earlier revision [1]. --Tony Sidaway 21:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Faulty Article

For having such high standards, the grammar here is horrible! Many wrong punctuations and spelling.Dshibshm (talk) 06:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

credits should be changed to match the movie

the credits at the end of the movie have the names of the roles first followed by the actor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk) 23:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Plot summary issues

Someone has bloated up the plot to 1,080 words. This exceeds the guidelines at WP:FILMPLOT, where it states that plot summaries should be 400-700 words. Per the WP:BRD cycle, I have decided to take the discussion here to see if anyone can voice their opinions on the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjones23 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 4 March 2012‎

it was released on blu-ray

i have it on blu-ray myself but when it was released i dont know.

"President-elect Donald Trump"

Sure. And it was directed by long dead John Hughes and stars 36 year old Macaulay Culkin. - SummerPhD^v2.0 19:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Inconsistency

A reader (ticket:2016111210006975) noted that Home Alone 2: Lost in New York claims:

The Talkboy cassette recorder used by Kevin in the film was originally a non-working prop during shooting. It was later released due to a popular letter writing campaign by fans along with the film by Tiger Electronics (currently under Hasbro).

While Talkboy claims:

An urban legend has been propagated online claiming that the Talkboy movie prop was developed into a retail product a year after the release of Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, solely in response to a letter-writing campaign by young fans of the film who wanted to see the fictional movie prop become reality. However, this legend is completely untrue and has never been properly sourced.

Neither claim is sourced, but at least one is incorrect.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Plot length

Unfortunately, while I agree with most of the recent changes, WP:FILMPLOT states that summaries should be between 400 to 700 words. The word count at the moment is at least 800 words in its current state and I'm doing my best to cut it down to that word length at the moment. As such, what should we do to approach this with regards to the length and also to explain unfamiliar readers? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 11:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

I can't access word counter at work so I don't know how long it is but the 30 separate paragraph version wasn't acceptable at all and from just a cursory pass it was full of unnecessary information. I don't think the current version is incomprehensible, it's perfectly sensible for a straight forward plot. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:59, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Himself or Donald Trump

The credits as seen at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VORFd6_PmI4&t=2m36s read:

Security Guard JAMES COLE

Donald Trump DONALD TRUMP

Doorman WARREN RICK

"Himself" is not the phrase the credits use so I'm not sure we should do that. He technically portrayed a character named Donald Trump, who may not necessarily be intended as "himself" despite sharing the same name. ScratchMarshall (talk) 19:29, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Who, among anyone in this discussion, is granted the license to determine "irrelevence"? Did the fact that Hitler painted some nice paintings make his perverted demagoguery irrelevant to the entire world?

This is bizarre. The fact of his impeachment, AND his status as a credited cast member of this production are both relevant, and important, as a matter of history. I am disheartened by the dismissal of actual, factual information, that may be of use to future generations, as "gossip", by so many contributing editors. Stop being gatekeepers, please, and allow the people who count on Wikipedia as a source of truth, to get that truth delivered to them. I am genuinely appalled at this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.159.22 (talk) 09:29, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

No mention of the World Trade Center scene?

   Nixinova  T  C  03:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Should Trump impeachment be included?

Donald Trump being the first cast member from Home Alone 2 to be impeached, while true, is not a relevant factoid to the article.

Resolved There has been edit warring over inclusion of the silly meme "Donald Trump became the first cast member from Home Alone 2 to be impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives." Several references have been cited to support this claim, but none mention Home Alone 2, and Trump's cameo had nothing to do with his being impeached. This is merely a transparent attempt to further embarrass the president, but succeeds only in discrediting Wikipedia. NedFausa (talk) 21:29, 20 December 2019 (UTC) No, Donald Trump wasn't even President back then, so his impeachment is completely irrelevant to Home Alone 2. 9March2019 (talk) 23:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC) I think that, if at least one more former cast member is impeached, then it should be noted in a new section, perhaps "Cultural Impact" or similar. — Supuhstar * — 01:40, 21 December 2019 (UTC) Of course not lmao  Nixinova   T   C   02:30, 21 December 2019 (UTC) That edit was objectively hilarious, but absolutely not, no. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC) Trump's cameo is worth adding somewhere in the "Plot" section as well as being mentioned in the "Cast" section because it's definitely a cameo that's become discussed independently/on its own from the rest of the movie. In terms of adding a whole sentence about his impeachment to the lede? Irrelevant and borderline vandalism. We're not talking about Macaulay Culkin being convicted on drug-related crimes for the same reason why Trump's impeachment on high crimes and misdemeanors isn't relevant. It's also worth mentioning that User:Telecomtom's edit was posted on Reddit almost immediately after he made it so this might be a little more highly trafficked than usual. Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying 03:51, 21 December 2019 (UTC) Mr. Trump is a minor character in the film. I see that Mr. Trump already has a separate article about him (Donald Trump), as he also made other notable media appearances more recently. I think this bit of information about Mr. Trump certainly belongs in the article about Mr. Trump. However it happened to Mr. Trump more than a quarter century after the film, and as far as I can determine was not directly linked to his appearance in the film. It therefore belongs in the article about Mr Trump, but not the article about the film. -- Infrogmation (talk) 04:05, 21 December 2019 (UTC) No. Trump made a cameo appearance in Home Alone 2 decades before his presidency; his impeachment is irrelevant to the article. To be blunt, this felt far more like a joke than a serious edit. Its certainly earned a place on BJAODN, but not in the actual article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 21:30, 22 December 2019 (UTC) Why are we even talking about this? Wikipedia is not a soapbox for political fancruft. This is right up there with the WP:Vandalism I had to revert on lie during the 2016 election, where I observed someone replace Pinocchio with a picture of Hillary Clinton; I laughed, but it had to go. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Have a blessed day. 03:16, 23 December 2019 (UTC) No. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a gossip site or a forum, etc. Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 04:03, 23 December 2019 (UTC) Agree, the consensus is clear, details about Mr. Trump not directly relevant to the film don't belong in the article about the film. Let's call this discussion CLOSED. -- Infrogmation (talk) 04:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC) Reopened. This edit "should" be allowed to remain, with caveats. Assertions that this is "gossip", related to Wikipedia, generally, are undefined. Please define "gossip". Arguments that this is a "meme", designed to discredit the President, are unfounded - it is a factual statement. He was, in the course of history, the first Home Alone 2 cast member to ever be impeached by the United States House of Representatives. This is neither "gossip", nor "defamatory" - it is factual, U.S. Government history. It is both related, and relevant. An earlier comment about Hilter, and his penchant for painting nice paintings, makes this relevant. As just a potential plea to future generations that may learn from this entry: perhaps we will not elect, in the U.S., reality television stars, who's main credit is being anti-American, corrupt, greedy, and failed at all business-related relations, if this edit is allowed to stand. I assert that relevance has been proven, and that any claim otherwise must be proven. Any editors who continue to claim irrelevance MUST step and prove their claim. Otherwise, the default position is truth, and this is a true statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.159.22 (talk) 01:50, 7 January 2020 (UTC) I will not idly sit by and let this happen to Wikipedia: An entry that references, even critically, "Trump derangement syndrome" - which is not a real thing, is allowed to be included, yet, reality is censored, by not including factual information? This is anti-logic, and is delusional, and unsupported by facts. The gatekeepers of this page need to be replaced, post-haste. They are an embarrassment to factual history, and deserve censure. This is insane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.159.22 (talk) 02:56, 7 January 2020 (UTC) This discussion made the news FYI RAHMAN, KHALEDA (2019-12-21). "HOME ALONE 2' WIKIPEDIA PAGE CHANGED TO SAY DONALD TRUMP IS THE FIRST CAST MEMBER TO BE IMPEACHED". Newsweek. --evrik (talk) 18:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2019

Extended content

Donald Trump's impeachment and his credited involvement in this production are all factual, historical truths. Not including them in this article is antithetical to everything that Wikipedia stands for. Excluding on the grounds that are somehow "hurtful" to one, or another, political ideology is tantamount to abject cencorship. That this discussion is even happening is, frankly, disgusting. This is a place of facts. Not opinions. This must be allowed to be part of this article. 24.22.159.22 (talk) 09:16, 27 December 2019 (UTC)  Not done: Trump had one cameo for a period of less than 10 seconds because he let the producers film in the Plaza Hotel. Donald Trump is not a major part of this movie. It's undue weight to include every true statement about Trump in the article. And he's not even the only person who was indicted on high crimes and misdemeanors, Macaulay Culkin was convicted on misdemeanor drug possession a while back but we don't include that in the article because it's not relevant to the film even though he starred in it. There's also an existing consensus NOT to include Donald Trump's impeachment in the article which is why I've marked this edit request as not done. Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying 09:29, 27 December 2019 (UTC) Mr. Culkin's foibles could be included, and I would still argue that they are relevant, but using that as a comparison is idiotic. Mr. Culkin is not a sitting President of the United States of America. This is important, not just for current "touchy-feely" reasons, but for the history of a nation. Wow. When facts aren't publishable on Wikipedia, it's a truly sad day, indeed. Sorry. I'm done. With all of it. This is just too bizarre.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.159.22 (talk • contribs) 09:36, 27 December 2019 (UTC) The fact of Trump's impeachment is certainly publishable on Wikipedia. It's in the article about Trump. Should the article about this movie include the impeachment, and also say that he was the first cast member to become President by winning the electoral vote while losing the popular vote, and also say that he was the first cast member to nominate anyone to the Supreme Court, etc.? Of course not. All these facts about Trump are publishable, but they aren't publishable in this article, because their connection to the movie is so remote. JamesMLane t c 03:13, 28 December 2019 (UTC) Don't feed the troll. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 03:31, 28 December 2019 (UTC) I respectfully disagree that Wikipedia should include his impeachment b/c it's not relevant to this movie entry, nor are Mr. Culkin's unfortunately earlier troubles with drugs/alcohol. However, the nonsense alternative facts tweeted and propagated by Fox News, and the triggered trump family are quite relevant, in this article under the heading, "Controversies"; I feel ridiculous mentioning the two people in the same paragraph, and this entire thread. What strange times we live in. The current state of this Wikipedia article is almost good enough. I suggest the following edits: Add heading, Controversies, include additional facts, such as: trump first learned about this non-event via trump jr., who learned about this non-event via Fox News. Honestly, this b.s. is incredibly nauseating and I don't care enough to make these edits. I wish my American friends much luck. I hope 2020 is a good year for you all. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisconnelly (talk • contribs) 21:41, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Timeline

Given the recent IPs flip flopping between writing in the lead that the this film takes place one/two years after the first film, there should be a discussion. Without having looked into sourcing yet, I do remember Kevin saying in the first film that he was eight years old, and then in the second film that he was 10 years old when talking to the bellman about the hotel TV. This would imply the film taking place two years after the first. However, when Kevin's parents talk to the Miami policeman, they say the fiasco with forgetting Kevin did happen once before - saying it was last Christmas. This would mean the film took place one year after the first. Perhaps this is a plot gap because even if we take into consideration that we don't know when Kevin's actual birth date is in the film, we can presume that his age would be only a year more than in the first film given both films took place during the exact same time period - Christmas. It is perhaps more obvious that the events took place one year after the first film given what Kevin's parents say regardless of Kevin's age. @Thatoneweirdwikier: thoughts? Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 18:09, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Why not sidestep the issue and not mention it? As a sequel, we know that it comes after the first film and that he's still a kid. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:17, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Sure, we could do that. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 18:41, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Erik. If we don't know/don't have a reliable source, we don't include it. If someone does find a reliable source, then add it. User:Thatoneweirdwikier | Oh, Toodles! 19:34, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Removed. Also cut too much of the plot in the lead modelling after the first film. Feel free to change up the wording. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 20:13, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Bellman's name.

The Bellman (played by Rob Scheider) does have a first name, even though it is not specifically stated in the end credits. It is Cedric. It is referenced twice in the movie by Tim Curry's concierge character in 2 different scenes. One is where Bellman is counting his tips, the other is as he's being dragged away (by Curry) on the hotel lobby floor after the collision between himself, the desk clerk, & the concierge. The source for this is the film itself. If you put the close captioning on for those scenes, the name "Cedric" will appear. SummeRStorM79 (talk) 14:49, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

WP:FILMCAST is clear "All names should be referred to as credited, or by common name supported by a reliable source." Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Alright. I guess you're gonna revert my edit again? I have no other source than the actual film itself. Also, I'm not trying to be argumentative or angry, incase you may have been getting that implication. I only wish to add more detail & improve Wikipedia pages, that's all. SummeRStorM79 (talk) 15:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I support including it with a secondary source. This shows Schneider as Cedric (Bellman), presumably saying the character was Cedric, credited as "Bellman". Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:10, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

It looks like this could also be used for Curry and Ivey's roles. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, I do not have a secondary source, & don't wouldn't know how to go about getting one? I don't possess that technical knowledge. I DO know that I'm right, though, source or no source. The Bellman's first name is Cedric. It's frustrating trying to prove this when no one will believe you. It's right there in the movie, for anyone to see (& hear). I will leave it be, though. I have less than 420 edits, & I'm being corrected by someone with over 75,000. I just know that I'm right. Maybe someone else could provide a source? SummeRStorM79 (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

SummeRStorM79, I linked to one in my comment. See the link here. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 01:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Erik. I appreciate that, but don't underestimate how to connect or attach that link to an edit? I'm not gonna re-edit Bellman without that because Vaselineeeeeeee will just revert back to how it was. I appreciate you finding that, though. Very cool of you. =) SummeRStorM79 (talk) 04:18, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

God, I should've proofread my reply. Underestimate = understand. Oy, I despise auto-correct! SummeRStorM79 (talk) 04:20, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Not knowing how to cite is a real problem if you want to keep editing this encyclopedia. It’s not hard at all. I urge you to read WP:Inline citations. I will try and find more sources tomorrow. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 04:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

"Not knowing how to cite is a real problem..." No need for that tone. You could have simply pointed them to WP:IC. Now, what is the issue with using Screen World, since it can cover three otherwise-unnamed roles? Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 11:24, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The fact that he has been here since 2017 and still does not know how to cite is a real problem, period. This encyclopedia runs on WP:Reliable sources—being the second pillar. Everyone knows the bellman is referred to as Cedric and the Concierge as Mr. Hector, but we need reliable sources—that especially shouldn't be hard to find given the status of this film—in order to proceed. I still do not think it is entirely necessary to include these names since they were not credited as such, but if it is sourced, there is no problem, at least on its face. The source you brought is fine, although I do take issue that there is no preview of the material, but know that WP:Access is not a problem. I will use that source along with the ones I found. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 13:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Erik, I appreciate you defending me. To Vaselineeeeeeee, yes I have been an editor since '17. However, that doesn't mean I automatically know how to cite sources (or @ least provide links). Your feeling that that is a "real problem" is an overreaction, I feel. I correct grammar mistakes, typos, etc. Occasionally I will add content to articles, but having a source(s) isn't always requested by whoever else views what I've added (admins., other editors, etc.). In some cases, things I've added have been erased because of this, whether I was aware of it or not. I guess I'll have to be more mindful of this in the future. Your tone seemed a little abrasive & condescending. As I said, just because I've been an editor for a few years does not mean I know/am aware of every aspect of Wikipedia. But, I can learn. I'm always willing to expand my knowledge. SummeRStorM79 (talk) 14:29, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry if it came off that way, but that was not my intention. Citing is one of the most, if not the most, integral and basic part of this encyclopedia, and even if you do not add content much, you should know how to do it for when you do add content. I hope you read the inline citation link above and learn how to do it because it really isn't difficult. This will go a long way in helping avoid further content disputes. The WP:BURDEN is on the content adder to find sources for the content, not other editors like what happened here. Regards, Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:39, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Some editors are simply WP:GNOMEs. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:41, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I get that, but I would find it hard to believe that the vast majority of them also do not know how to cite. Just learn it—it'll take less than 10 minutes and is undoubtedly worth while for any long-term editor regardless of their specialty. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Marv's and Harry's last names

"As in the novelization of the first film, the McCallisters live in Oak Park, Illinois and the crooks are named as Harry Lime and Marv Merchants." Is this true? I have a German version of the first novel and the names are given as Harry Lyme and Marv Murchens. In the newspaper reporting their prison break in the movie Home Alone 2, their names are given as Harry Lyme and Marv Murchins. --RabbitFromMars (talk) 13:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

This article is about the movie, not the novelization.

Whatever their last names are or might be is trivial. In the film, it is only found in a prop. Wikipedia, by convention, uses the names used in the film and in the credits. - SummerPhD^v2.0 23:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Actors who are credited in IMDB, but not on this cast list

IMDB lists nearly three dozen actors who did not appear in the first film, appear in one scene in this film, and have one line. None of them are credited in this Wikipedia cast list, except Donald Trump. Like all of those uncredited actors, his scene (and his one line) are entirely arbitrary, doing nothing to advance the plot in any way. Much like the scene with the two street walkers who taunt Kevin after he flees the Plaza, Mr. Trump’s scene could be deleted from the film entirely, and not be missed. Since so many of the other actors with inconsequential roles do not appear on the Wikipedia cast list, why does he? Like them, he contributed very little to the finished product. Unless we add to this list every other actor with a nonessential role (who appear in one scene, speak one line, and have no direct bearing on the plot) I don’t think he should be credited here either. I deleted him and he was added back less than two hours later, so clearly other editors disagree. I do not wish to engage in an editing war, but I fail to see why crediting him here is necessary, so I figured I’d start a discussion. Thoughts? Andrew Rick2017 (talk) 08:15, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Credited in the film's credits, and also has a Wikipedia article, so there is no reason not to include him. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 17:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Mention of Donald Trump's Cameo

Due to a number of news media sites putting forward stories about this, and social media users commenting on the cameo scene, should Donald Trump's appearance in the film be highlighted in the article, including the relevant desire by people and the lead actor, Macaulay Culkin, for it to be changed or cut from the film in future showings?

• YES There is sufficient reason for this to be included in the article.
• NO There is not enough grounds for this to be included in the article.

GUtt01 (talk) 16:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@GUtt01: What is your reasoning for going right to a WP:RfC when there has not been any prior dispute on this talk page about the matter? Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't want to add it in, until I can be certain of what others think. Just not sure about it, even when its becoming notable in news stories. GUtt01 (talk) 16:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

So you post it on the talk page—an RfC is not warranted at this time, unless a dispute was had in an original talk page discussion, therefore I'd encourage you to withdraw the RfC banner for now. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC) Thanks, GUtt01. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 17:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Anyway, this should not be included per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:RECENTISM, WP:UNDUE because there has been no action or result. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:53, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

No If it results in a new release, that should be mentioned. But a lot of media outlets covering twitter outrage is trivial at this point. I think Andrew Rick2017's question above about why the cameo is even worth mentioning is a reasonable one. Schazjmd (talk) 17:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Box office mojo

The international figure has either been removed or was never there. Either way, another source should be found that incorporates this. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 21:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Lack of character surnames...

Unlike most articles, this one does not provide surnames for the characters (that do have them). Why should this one be any different? Going by end credits alone does not really justify this. DawgDeputy (talk) 13:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Having McAllister for dozens of people is redundant, which is probably the reason they didn’t include it in the credits so we should follow suit. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 17:40, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

I find that inexcusable, especially at the expense of the non-McCallisters. Look at Blue Bloods. DawgDeputy (talk) 22:46, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Because none of them are credited (at the end credits) as having a surname. Per WP:FILMCAST they should go by the official credits. There are cast descriptions next to each name, that should be sufficient. Mike Allen 04:35, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Quote: "All names should be referred to as credited, or by common name supported by a reliable source". The film itself is the most reliable source. DawgDeputy (talk) 23:56, 28 February 2023 (UTC)