Talk:Top Gun: Maverick

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by DimensionalFusion talk 13:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Lewis Hamilton was offered a role as a fighter pilot in Top Gun: Maverick?

• Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20220809090610/https://cnalifestyle.channelnewsasia.com/entertainment/lewis-hamilton-movie-role-tom-gun-maverick-tom-cruise-325561

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Befrienders Template:Did you know nominations/Music from the Merch Desk (2016–2023)

Improved to Good Article status by Lankyant (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 7 past nominations.

Lankyant (talk) 09:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC).

• Looks good to me. QPQ checks out, Article is recently promoted GA, hooks is interesting and source checks out fine there. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 22:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Is there anything else that can work as a hook? The current hook relies on people already knowing who Lewis Hamilton is. SL93 (talk) 01:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Pinging Lankyant. SL93 (talk) 23:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

*... that Top Gun: Maverick "saved the entire theatrical industry” according to Steven Speilberg?

• @Lankyant: Per WP:QPQ, the QPQ must be done in full; all you did at the one you linked was comment on the source(s) and hook intriguingness. (I know, because I was the one who did the full QPQ there.) This nom may be closed without warning if it's not done in 24 hours. ミラP@Miraclepine 00:00, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Miraclepine I think the nom can be closed if there is no viable hook in 24 hours as well. The new hook relies on readers knowing who Steven Spielberg is. SL93 (talk) 01:52, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

@SL93: Well, this page is a very long GA, so there may be a lot of hook options. But then again, 24 hours is enough to give the nom time to take care of everything. ミラP@Miraclepine 02:21, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

@Miraclepine: I have a few ideas in mind, posting this so it doesn't get archived:

• ALT1: ... that Top Gun: Maverick got a rare "A+" ranking in an audience poll?
• ALT2: ... that the film Top Gun: Maverick was the last Royal Film Performance of Queen Elizabeth II's reign?
• ALT3:: ... that the U.S. military supported Top Gun: Maverick, using it to aid in recruitment and retention?

I can come up with more later, but you gave only 24 hours, so here are some hooks to prevent the nom from being closed. I can also donate a QPQ as well if you give me 24 hours. Epicgenius (talk) 05:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC) (Edit: I have donated a QPQ. Epicgenius (talk) 15:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC))

• ALT4: ... that in the filming of Top Gun: Maverick, actors rode in real fighter planes for over $11,000 per hour? (Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-26/tom-cruise-s-fighter-jet-rides-paid-us-navy-up-to-11-374-hourly)
• ALT5: ... that in the filming of Top Gun: Maverick, actors rode in real fighter planes? (Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-26/tom-cruise-s-fighter-jet-rides-paid-us-navy-up-to-11-374-hourly) Wildfireupdateman (talk) 05:25, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

• @Epicgenius and Wildfireupdateman: ALT2 > ALT3 > ALT4 > ALT5 > ALT1. ミラP@Miraclepine 15:36, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oh, and the QPQ is done in full, so yes to that. ミラP@Miraclepine 16:14, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

• For what it's worth, Hamilton is perhaps the most famous racer in the world at the moment, so the hook arguably has broader appeal than one might think. He's as well-known as many footballers. However, given the concerns about specialist knowledge, would the original hook work better if "Formula One driver" or "race car driver" were placed before his name, or is a totally different hook here needed? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:59, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Either is fine, but we already got five hooks more centered on the DYK topic. ミラP@Miraclepine 15:33, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

• @Miraclepine: I just noticed that Lankyant hasn't edited since the 1st, so that's another complication regardless of whether or not the above hooks are suitable. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:06, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on June 6, 2025

X: Good article icon Y: Beside a good article icon is the semi-protected icon, missing and not noticed by Musik Bot II ArtopiaBoy (talk) 12:34, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

 Done The missing padlock has now been added. Day Creature (talk) 15:54, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Legacy?

Isn't this time for a legacy section, since we already have a loaded one for Everything Everywhere All at Once and that one only has MovieWeb, CBR, ScreenRant, and Collider like sites placing it on their lists? Not to mention, Rotten Tomatoes named it one of the greatest movies of all time?

How about a legacy section calling it one of the best sequels and action movies of all time, attributing to the aforementioned sites, and then ending on the industry response subsection, where Spielberg called it saved Hollywood, and other filmmakers' responses?

Or a legacy section is only limited to queer movies like EEATO, and Wikipedia is biased? 103.185.242.254 (talk) 15:01, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

There is certainly a case to be made that the "Legacy" section of the Everything Everywhere All at Once article should be removed (I have cleaned it up a bit, at least). In general, it seems rather dubious for a movie that is only a few years old to have such a section in its article. Let's not compound the issue by adding a similar garbage-quality section here. TompaDompa (talk) 17:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)