Talk:Witchblade (film)

	Film portal 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.

Comics: United States Bottom‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Bottom	This article has been rated as Bottom-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by United States comics work group.

Is this the tv series pilot episode?[edit]

In the article about the tv series it's mentioned there was a pilot episode in August of 2000. Is this the movie and the pilot the same thing? --31.45.79.44 (talk) 23:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this film is the series pilot. — WFinch (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Witchblade (TV series) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:45, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception section[edit]

Thank you to the editor who added a template to this section, requesting that it be converted to prose rather than use the present bulleted format. I created the article — including the "Reviews and commentary" (now "Critical reception") section — in 2009, when I was a less experienced Wikipedia contributor. Contrary to the comment in the last edit summary, these reviews were not "a lazy copy direct from a Metacritic page that has since died". They're the result of painstaking LexisNexis searches, and incorporate quotations from reviews that may no longer be available online — or never were. That does not negate their verifiability or their value to the article. Rather than "deleting chunks of it", the section should be converted to prose, with citations formatted without urls when they cannot be found online or at the Internet Archive. Even as it stands now, author, date and publication are present. — WFinch (talk) 17:00, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]