Talk:Back to the Future Part II

Stop the revert war on my Cubs-Marlins edits!

I made several edits yesterday (mostly via hidden notes to minimize impact) to point out, using the history & structure of Major League Baseball as well as a name conflict with the Florida Gators, why anything resembling this movie's predicted 2015 World Series between the Chicago Cubs and the "Miami Gators" was all but impossible, whether in 1989 when there were no MLB teams in Florida, or in real-life 2015 when there were two such teams but the Miami Marlins (not "Gators") were in the National League together with the Cubs while only the Tampa Bay Rays (neither "Miami" nor "Gators") were in the American League as the World Series' own structure requires in order to face the Cubs -- or ever as it's extremely unlikely that either the Cubs or Marlins will ever move to the AL (or that the World Series itself will be restructured to permit a single-league match-up like NL Cubs vs. NL Marlins).

Instead of accepting my points it seems a revert war has been started against my edits (as well as some edits before mine), even though my edits were acknowledged as "good faith" by one of my opponents, because they’re seen by some as "trivial" (though they disprove the very premise behind its seemingly eerie prediction as to when the Cubs would finally win the World Series) and now "unsourced" (even though they are self-referenced by the facts I cited in my edits). First, User:Doniago claimed they were "(a) whole lot of trivia about one minor point"; I reverted that (with a minor fix to my earlier Texas Rangers link which was flagged by a bot as pointing to a disambig page instead of the baseball team) using basic undo, stating his explanation was even more trivial. Right after that, User:Masem started their multiple attacks on BOTH my edit AND earlier edits I had nothing to do with that, expanding on the earlier "trivia" claim by demanding "sources" that are "'specific' to BTTF Part II" even though that is absurd in ACTUAL context. (The only reason I didn't revert the last one was WP:3RR; I technically may have exceeded that as my attempt to rollback Masem's first revert was redirected to the intervening second one by RedWarn.)

My edits, in whole, are NOT trivial and do NOT require references (specific to BTTF II or otherwise) as they are backed by COLD, HARD FACTS about both MLB and sports in general. I won't argue if others agree that the other edits (some of which probably ARE trivial, such as the movie not catching more recent changes in the AT&T logo) should be removed, but I insist on MY edits. I need to back off anyway for unrelated reasons, but after any 24-hour period expires (due to 3RR or any 24-hour ban that might result from my technically exceeding it), I intend to restore my edits unless you can provide MORE SPECIFIC reasons WHY they're inappropriate that do NOT require unnecessary BTTF II-specific references. --RBBrittain (talk) 16:25, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Given that the article is about the film, and not about the Cubs or Marlins for more than about ten seconds, I don't think it's ridiculous or unnecessary to ask that you provide sources to indicate that this element of the film has received the kind of coverage that would merit the amount of discussion you'd like to devote to it, in accordance with WP:UNDUE.

As an aside, I personally become very skeptical when anyone claims that sourcing isn't necessary. The easiest and least wasteful way to resolve such scenarios is typically to provide a source rather than argue about the need for one.

In any case, you've added your edits and now been reverted by both myself and other editors, so continuing to push for them without a consensus would be edit-warring and might result in you being blocked from editing, so I would encourage you not to go that route. DonIago (talk) 16:37, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

It is original research and trivia, not so much in terms of the facts that are true and verifiable to baseball sources (I don't question that), but their relevance to BTTF2, per WP:TRIVIA and WP:OR. We do talk about the 2015 MLB season and how by coincidence certain things lined up with the film because that coincidence was noted by multiple reliable sources. Other facets that you are trying to add, however, while true, are not notable by other sources. It is original research on the order of synthesis, as well as in line with UNDUE, to include this, unless you have actual sources that discuss these facets in context of the film. This is why I also removed the unsourced paragraphs about the changed logos or the car design changes. We're not TV Tropes or a fan wiki where such content would be fine. And it should be unstated that if you can find reliable sourcing that places these MLB factors in context of the film, hey great, its no longer OR or trivia. --Masem (t) 16:44, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Just as a warning note to RBBrittain, I'll point out that WP:EDITWAR states in the lede that "[a]ny appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside of the 24-hour slot may also be considered edit warring" - so I would consider very carefully your statement that "after any 24-hour period expires (due to 3RR or any 24-hour ban that might result from my technically exceeding it), I intend to restore my edits".

For the record, I'm on the side of DonIago and Masem - this is clearly OR trivia, and would probably be considered trivia on the Cubs, Marlins, or any respective team article as well. Chaheel Riens (talk) 18:11, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Just for the record, I didn't restore it because I gave up on it shortly thereafter; I only mentioned any of that in case you used that technicality to drop a 24-hour ban hammer on me. I still consider your "trivia" claims inappropriate in the broader context, especially since (a) the Cubs' real-life World Series win was within a year of BTTF II's prediction, yet (b) BTTF II's predicted 2015 World Series match-up was never possible due to both team name (the University of Florida owns the trademark on "Gators") and league alignment (the Marlins were & still are in the National League like the Cubs, not the American League like ANY World Series opponent of either team under the format used for well over a century), much less the Marlins' poor record at that time. Nonetheless, I have much more important fish to fry than your petty revert war. --RBBrittain (talk) 17:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Biff and Trump?

Is this worth adding to the article? After rewatching, one of the most striking ‘predictions’ for me in Back to the Future Part 2 was the movie’s villain. Biff Tannen is directly inspired by Donald Trump, as outlined by the movie’s writer:

> Asked if Trump was on his mind during the writing process, he replied: “We thought about it when we made the movie! Are you kidding?”

> “You watch Part II again and there’s a scene where Marty confronts Biff in his office and there’s a huge portrait of Biff on the wall behind Biff, and there’s one moment where Biff kind of stands up and he takes exactly the same pose as the portrait? Yeah.”

The movie effectively predicted the rise of a corrupt gambling magnate to become the most powerful man in America - in the same year when it happened, considering President Trump launched his campaign for president in 2015. For me, this is one of the movie’s most impressive predictions, and well worth mentioning in the article. 109.38.132.213 (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Let it go.

Trump derangement syndrome Jack Meihoffer (talk) 02:14, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• Nike Mag Side View.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Plot question

So, about the recent expansion to the plot summary, I have a few questions.

Since Marty being easily goaded is a major theme in this film and Part III, is it relevant to mention Marty being called "chicken" in the summary? Also, what should we do regarding the climax (in this case, it's Marty retrieving the almanac from Biff)? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)