I really need you to stop changing the wording of this basic concept every time you see it to the above specific phrase. it's unnecessary and pointless.
Topic on User talk:Daimajin1966
From Wikizilla, the kaiju encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
I second this. Your insistence on this phraseology is bizarre and unneeded.
Actually, if you look at any Wikipedia page about a 1950s film that was paired with another one, you'll see that the page says "...as a double feature...," not "...on a double feature...," and I didn't put it there in any of them. That's where I got it from.
"On", as well as "double bill", are a perfectly accepted terminologies used in industry journalism and internal use throughout the 20th century: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/double+bill
I think if you actually researched film exhibition and had a passion for it, you would know that there is a wide diversity of terminology as Space Hunter M said, and you'd know that prescribing "as a double feature" as a standard would simplify more complex concepts, such as studio or territorial packages. And you would know better than to cause avoidable edit conflicts and edit wars over completely pointless revisions like this, which is a kind of thing you have been warned about before.
I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to stir up trouble, just telling you where I got the phrase from.
