Talk:When Harry Met Sally...

Saif Ali Khan?

"It stars Saif Ali Khan"....what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.14.2 (talk) 20:59, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on When Harry Met Sally.... Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090106134641/http://themoviepage.net/bravo100funnyfilms1.html to http://themoviepage.net/bravo100funnyfilms1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:19, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Susan Dey, Elizabeth Perkins, Elizabeth McGovern, Molly Ringwald for the role of Sally Albright

As far as I can tell, the claim that these actresses were considered for the role is unverifiable. The edit which added this information was made by an IP user in 2009. This user made similar, and similarly uncited, additions to Pretty Woman and Gangs of New York (, and respectively). Our anonymous friend may have been listening to some reliable but obscure radio interview and added this information as they heard it, but I think it is at least equally likely that these were purely vandalism.

At this point there are many sources which will confirm the claim about alternate casting choices (even the Independent), but I fear citogenesis is too great a risk, and we should avoid including this information without a reliable source predating 2009. — HTGS (talk) 03:12, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Superbowl ad

It is wrong to take a single word out of context, "recreated", to give the false impression that the scene from the movie was actually recreated in the mayo advertisement. The ad was a sequel, not a recreation. This is obvious from the ad itself,from the article that mistakenly does use the word "recreate", and from the second more detailed reference I have supplied. Using the word recreate, without the context of the article cited, suggests it is a line by line imitation, and that is clearly false. Bob Gollum (talk) 16:48, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

In addition, the ad did not just run at the Super Bowl; as per the reference given, it ran in other forums until at least May of that year. Writing as if the ad only aired at the Super Bowl is very inaccurate. Bob Gollum (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Daniels, Colin (January 29, 2025). "Hellmann's Takes Harry and Sally Back to Katz's Deli for Super Bowl Ad". Adweek. Retrieved February 14, 2025. states:

• "Hellmann’s wanted to do something bigger and bolder to celebrate its fifth consecutive year running a Super Bowl ad."
• "Hellmann’s 30-second Super Bowl ad recreates the iconic diner scene..."

The unnecessary, added ref, Hicks, Katie. "How Hellmann's brought Harry and Sally back together". Marketing Brew. Retrieved 2026-05-10., states:

• "...condiment brand Hellmann’s brought Meg Ryan and Billy Crystal together again for its 2025 Super Bowl ad."
• "...this time for a somewhat toned-down re-creation of the film’s iconic fake orgasm scene."

The added external link is inappropriate, even if it wasn't a duplicate of what's available in both references. --Hipal (talk) 16:55, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

You are not addressing the point. The word "recreation", in the context of an article that talks about how the new scene is different from the old, is not misleading. The word "recreation", without that context, is misleading, as it implies the scene is the same as the old. If you want to use that word, you have to go into more detail about what is in the ad - something you edited out of an earlier version.

Placing a link in the article to the item being discussed in the article is not inappropriate. Bob Gollum (talk) 17:04, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:EL:"With rare exceptions, external links should not be used in the body of an article." --Hipal (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

"An article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a legally distributed copy of the work, so long as none of the Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided criteria apply." Bob Gollum (talk) 17:42, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

This is an article about the movie, not the ad. --Hipal (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Of course. And the paragraph is about the ad. It makes sense, and is in accordance with the guidelines, to link to the piece that is being talked about in the paragraph. If you prefer, it can be done as a footnote cite rather than as a link. Bob Gollum (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

No, per reasons given. --Hipal (talk) 18:43, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

You have not addressed the reasons given for including it. Is it not helpful to the reader to see the source? The wikipedia guideline seems to think it is. Bob Gollum (talk) 11:25, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

You appear to be using a LLM to comment here. Perhaps you could be clearer on what you are a commenting on and what policies support the content that you prefer. --Hipal (talk) 16:07, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

No LLM involved. As I have indicated, a discussion of a particular film clip should link to a site hosting a legally distributed copy of the work. Think of it from the reader's point of view - it is helpful for him or her to be able to follow a link to the original, not just to a description of the original. Bob Gollum (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

The added external link is inappropriate, even if it wasn't a duplicate of what's available in both references. --Hipal (talk) 21:57, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Given the quotes above, it's noteworthy for being a Super Bowl ad, and that should be prominent in the article content per the first version.

−

In February 2025, Ryan and Crystal recreated the scene as part of an advertisement for [[Super Bowl LIX]] for [[Hellmann's and Best Foods|Hellmann's]] [[mayonnaise]]. The "I'll have what she's having" line was delivered by [[Sydney Sweeney]].

+

In February 2025, Ryan and Crystal returned to the Deli in an advertisement for [[Hellmann's and Best Foods|Hellmann's]] brand [[mayonnaise]] that was evocative of the original scene and that first ran as part of the [[Super Bowl LIX]] broadcast. The "I'll have what she's having" line was delivered by [[Sydney Sweeney]].

The second version appears driven by OR against the POV of the sources. --Hipal (talk) 19:23, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

I'll revert if there are no attempts to address the policies. --Hipal (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

It is not OR; it is properly summarizing the sources rather than taking a single word out of context and distorting the meaning. Bob Gollum (talk) 21:23, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

The other problem with the earlier version is that it suggests the ad was specifically meant as a Super Bowl ad. That is a false message; the ad kept on airing for months after the Super Bowl. Bob Gollum (talk) 22:23, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Avoid repeating your posts: Your fellow editors can read your prior posts, so repeating them wastes time and space and may be considered bludgeoning the discussion. - WP:EXHAUST --Hipal (talk) 22:34, 14 May 2026 (UTC)