User talk:Hoverfish

Archives • Discussion on Meher Baba • Discussion /December 22, 2006 • Discussion /February 12, 2007 • Discussion w/ E.S.Blofeld

Raye Makhfi

Hi! Thanks for expanding this horrible stub I created. Its a great film, and if you haven't already, you should see it :) - Francis Tyers · 08:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your helps on Raye makhfi. Take care. Sangak 19:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

WP Films talk

No problem! Next time, just click on the dates in the history section to see when exactly something you didn't want was put, then fix it. --Crzycheetah 09:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Query about Infoboxes

Hi Hoverfish, Do you know where I would start if I wanted to suggest adding IMDB links to actor infoboxes? It seems like it would be a lot of help. I don't know how to do it myself. Cott12 Talk 13:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Category ordering

Is there a guideline about how cats should be ordered? I thought it was alphabetical. Feel free to respond here, if you want. — WiseKwai 01:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate your work, too. — WiseKwai 09:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Film-editor-stub category

User:Luigi Bob has recently been creating articles on some notable film editors and has brought it to my attention that a stub category doesn't exist for film editors. As film editors are a part of film and help to rid of red links in films please lend your support or opposition at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. There are hundreds not stub categoirzed as editors and there are many many missing from wikipedia and I beleive they are an important part of the film making process. Thanks Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. What do you mean? Template:Film-producer-stub Template:Cinematographer-stub already exist. I think US screenwriter does as well. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 13:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:Film-director-stub definately exists!! . Template:US-screen-writer-stub exists too! but strangely not Template:Screen-writer-stub also? There are thousands of screenwriters across the world also although of course the US dominates. I figure the main components of film biographies are actor, director, producer, screenwriter, cinematographer and editor and maybe score-composer . I know it falls under the biography project but they are very important parts of film articles! I of course wanted to propose it first to respect other peoples views on this!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 14:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Cheers mate. Wow I have to say I'm really noticing your work all over!!! It seems nearly every film and even talk page I visit I see your work on info boxes and tagging. Super wikiknome!! Congrats and keep up the good work!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 14:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Film/novel cats

Hi there Fish! My opinion is that the article should not have a book category if it's only about the film. Only the Category:Films based on books sub-cat should be used if a book is the source (and one hopes the book has its own article in that case). If the article does describe both the book and film, it seems logical to either split it, or if it's not big enough, go ahead and use both film and book cats. HTH, Her Pegship (tis herself) 00:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Muhammad/Mediation#Suggestion_.28untainted.29

You voiced your opinion in the original straw poll which has caused some confusion. Please do the same in a new version, Talk:Muhammad/Mediation#Suggestion_.28untainted.29, which should be clear and allow us to better assess consensus. gren グレン 22:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Poll on every little issue

Please sign if any of these things applies to your understanding of this issue. Please put you name under all of the options you think would be acceptable. You can sign all or none of these, I'm hoping this will give us a more-fine grained understanding of the issue. [1] futurebird 23:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:MusicLovers.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MusicLovers.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 14:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

CfD

Thanks for pointing it out to me, I would have never known. I don't think the category should be kept, it doesn't seem to link the lists well. Plus, that's what lists of films is for. For the lists, I'm half and half on which ones should be deleted and which ones should be kept. Should be deleted:

• List of films involving amputees - convert to cat
• List of films in which an attempt is made to guess a password
• List of films featuring automobile racing - should be converted into cats based on type of car race
• List of films featuring blind characters - what a mess!
• List of films involving food - too broad
• List of films featuring independent body parts
• List of films which end in protagonist's death
• List of films with TV shows and other films in them
• List of films with a twist ending

Should be kept:

• List of athletes in film
• List of biker films
• List of computer-related films - needs cleanup
• List of films with disabled protagonists - needs cleanup
• List of films that most frequently use the word "f**k" (I censor) - good references, interesting, wonder if it could ever reach FA?
• List of films featuring May-December romances
• List of films featuring mental illness
• List of films featuring Mini cars
• Skyscrapers in film
• The Statue of Liberty in popular culture - don't even see why this was put up for deletion
• List of films featuring trains

Split into more defined lists:

• List of films by gory death scene
• List of films by crash scene

Sorry for clogging up your page, but what do you think of the lists? I'm going off to vote in favor of the ones listed here, I'm sure the ones that will be deleted will have enough non-film users against them. --Nehrams2020 05:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Yes, I abhor the use of infoboxes - they are the equivalent of CliffsNotes [2] for those who are too lazy to read a book. However, you will note I did not remove the one you added to my article about Track the Man Down, as I accept them as an unfortunate evil, although I never will include them in an article I create.

However, if an infobox is going to contain links to other sites, then why include them in an "External links" section as well? What purpose is served by having these redundancies?

I don't understand your statement "the alphabetical sorting of categories happens automacally [sic] as the title reads. The only use for the sortkey in categories is when the title starts with an article (English or other)." Could you please clarify what you're trying to say?

Thanks for your feedback. SFTVLGUY2 15:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed explanation re: sorting! SFTVLGUY2 16:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Sortkey

Thanks for explaining the Sortkey. I did not understand it. I didn't realize in La Cage that the foreign word La would be set after the comma like "The" or "A". I'll try to remember! Best regards, -- Ssilvers 23:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

RE:USMC Film list

You have commented on the AFD discussion for List of films featuring United States Marines, the discussion can be viewed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films featuring United States Marines.

Following support for my suggestion, I have done a userspace rewrite of the article at User:Saberwyn/Films featuring the United States Marine Corps, with the rewritten article in the top half and the current article with annotations as to their inclusion or non-inclusion in the rewritten list.

I would like to request that you review the rewritten article, and if you think it is appropriate, amend your stance at the AFD discussion. -- saberwyn 12:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

• That's cool. Feel welcome to mess with it. -- saberwyn 20:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Kiarostami: FAC

Hi, I would like to invite all those who reviewed "Abbas Kiarostami" during last two months to comment on the article at this "final" stage. The article is now featured article candidate. In case you have any comment, please let me know on the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Abbas Kiarostami page. Thanks.Sangak 16:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Cool - hey isn't the film news paper out some time? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to thankyou for you support. We have just about rid of all the red links from Abbas's article and the next task in between my Argentine film work will be to develop his major Iranian films such as Taste of Cherry to a good article status. The last red link I just rid of on Abbas's page was Richard Pena - who incidentally is himself interested in Argentine film!! Any idea what category he should go in? Such as Film fiestival organizers or something. Unfortunately I think the main bio picture of Pena will have to go as it has been tagged despite the rationale given . Ah well.

Idon't know if you have noticed but check out the contributions of User:LuigiBob -my collaborator on the cinema of Argentina . Quality or what?! His new film and actor entries are terrific. I don't know whether he is a film project member or not -you may want to welcome him perhaps? All the best Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiKnome diligence award for Hoverfish

I feel you deserve it. Hey looks like I did a good job on Abbas Kiarostami!! It is now a featured article candidate! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 17:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes unfortunately many of those images of the silent actors have those unsightly borders on. I had almost forgotten I had ever done work on the silent films and actors. William Garwood, Louise Lester and Charlotte Burton I think still have similar borders but I don't know how do do it. I'll try to have a go from your suggestions. Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I had a go but I am unable to do it on my PC. Isn't there a category for films based on a novel? I can't seem to locate it. I just added a missing film from the 1930s missing list: The Bad Sister which is novel based. There are also a number of other films started on the 1930s missing page- when I have time I aim to add those Roy Rogers films and complete the filmography of John Wayne- . Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I know I was sure I had seen a film novel cat. too - I know there is one for plays but every time I try to word it in the category in different ways it stays red linked. Thanks. Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

ALso have you noticed some of the changes to the world cinema template? Does west asia sound right? I won't quabble with it but I thought the "Middle-east" fitted in with the standard article Middle eastern cinema? I am also aazed about the Cinema of Somalia !! -they were one of the last countries I was expecting an article on. I didn't even know they had ever produced a film! Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I just noticed that Her PegShip was wondering about the film/book category too -it does seem too many sub divisions. Wouldn't it be easier to have more of a main category Films based on a novel? Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree totally. I'm sure if it is proposed then it will be okay. It is better to keep categories as simple as possible judging from past discussions. Also people starting films are more likely to add the Category:Films based on a novel rather than all those mystery etc cats. Plus that category page is a very good idea for counciling ideas. P.S I am experimenting with a new signature at the moment!! Dr. Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I have just been googling for info on Argentine films. I have found a site in spanish for a handful of the 1930s films I am currently working on with the lists but it doesn't cover any of the other decades. - but I know somehwere there should be a site I can develop each stub into full articles-I prefer to write detailed articles but they need at least to be established on wikipedia even if stubbed. I have also found a site http://www.mchanan.dial.pipex.com/latin%20american%20cinema%201.pdf for Latin American cinema and aim to add the info from the link into that stub article later. But the template on that page has made the world cinema box go off line. How did you say to correct this again? Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 15:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping earlier. Sorry to bother you again but I think I may have found a solution to the red links and stubs on the Argentine films. I have been working on List of Argentine films:1939 today. I have stubbed most of the films and soon enough I will go back and hopefully find info to write them into articles. However do you think it respectable enough and better if for the films which I know are notable but don't yet have much info on them to redirect to the lists where I can fill as much info on the directors, actors and cast details as possible. A stub should look like Margarita, Armando y su padre minuimum I think but for the films which don't have info on the plot etc and full cast details I think I should redirect to the lists which often provide the equivalent info to lots of the stubs.

This also helps to set up the films in the index of wikipedia and also regulates the small stubs. This way as I find info I can create the article equivalent and hopefully create better articles. I have found that I can categorize the redirect pages as Argentine films or whatever. So if you were looking through the Argentine film index such a film would be there and redirect temporarily to the brief info in the list. This would probaly be only needed for earlier films as later films have much information. Do you have any objection to this? -this way it serves a number of functions until better articles can be written? Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 16:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Well any of the smaller stubs have an info box now anyway. As I said any article set up now will always have an info box anyway however small so you needn't be concerned with that - so even if I started 20 small stubs they would definately have 20 info boxes!! I thought it might be better instead of creating smaller stubs to redirect to the lists which show the same info to start with - It seems easier to set out a basis first using the lists and then write the articles afterwards. -this also means that the lists will become fuller and complete more quickly. How about I continue and you'll see what I mean -if you see any problems let me know . Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 17:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

What I'll do I think is start as many of the films as I can which have a bit of info and/or an image like Buenas noches, Buenos Aires with the info boxes -setting up the pages and redirect others which have little info to the lists until they can be written out. Either way we are now hitting the 400 film mark for Argentine films -not bad since that category was so tiny at Christmas!! -70 or these are not stubs they have been written many of them into B-class articles. Buenas noches, Buenos Aires now links together many started actors such as Hugo del Carril, Tito Lusiardo, Roberto Escalada etc -so as long as everything is connecting increasingly it can only get better. Ps I added some images to the CInema of Hong Kong page . See ya!. Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Silent films

OK thanks I'll stick to 200px then. Adapting those images would be great help. Unfortunately I created tons of stubs on the silent films of the 1910s when cleaning out Wiliam Garwoods, Charlotte Burtons and Harry von Meter's filmogrpahies back in about September or October before I had ever joined films or knew about the info boxes!! However they fill in important gaps -silent films had very little coverage and the more you study that period the more interested you get!. I know I also created many directors and actors such as Albert MacQuarrie, George Field, J. Warren Kerrigan, Eugenie Forde, Lamar Johnstone etc -I don't know if you want to alter the pics for them? A good way to do it might be to go through the fimographies of those I mentioned in the third line and see the actors stemming from those films. I used the images of the actors liberally in the films as they are public domin and could'nt find any screenshots - they are very rare almost extinct films -there age mkes them even more interesting. Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey I wasn't aware I was well known before that!!! I think as I was adding the geo articles I realised how vast the missing films were at that time which prompted me to try to help out. As a witness over the last five or six months I have seen an amazing progress in film since early October -amazing from everyone involved- the coverage and improvement has been phenonomal (I can never spell that word) from all countries of the world and time periods It brings a smile to my face when I see some great work by many people in film often many thousands of miles who are building this into something so great even like in Korea and China. AMazing. Anyway I have got as far as Woman's Honor for Charlotte Burton -half through 1913. You may want to go through her filmography first-its a good way to do it. I'll leave you now -I've bothered you enough today! Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I know of it well I couldn't remember the company - I remember reading about it in ALlen Dwan article or something that the company moved to southern Ireland and back!! Crazy! Ernst Stavro Blofeld ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I have been categorizing the American silent films as both American films and American silent film. Do you think both are needed? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 17:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

OK thats fine. I am surprised that the Category:American silent films wasn't deleted when the others were -I figured it was because it shows the silent films from the sound films. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Alphabetizing Articles

Hi. I don't know of any WP rule regarding foreign articles, but in most style guides, foreign articles are not treated like articles for purposes of alphabetizing. But if the film project folks agree, that's fine with me! -- Ssilvers 15:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February Newsletter

The February 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 talk 23:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Lists and alternatives

You thanked me for some (unsuccessful) help at AfD: I think the problem with the lists at AfD was that the lists were some of them over-broad, but all of them hard to define. A great many films include something about (for example) childhood, if only as a flashback, and it is somewhat subjective which ones are featuring it. The term "featuring" was perhaps a little too ambiguous--it could mean either the main point of the film or a subsidiary theme. I think there would be less trouble with a wording like "primarily about" if that is what is meant. Probably there will continue to be problems if a definition includes ones with a subsidiary theme.

To illlustrate: List of films about mathematicians and the Category:Mathematical films, it seems to my inexpert eye--and without having seen all the films--that the Category is the more selective, while the List includes films where the main character is a mathematician, but this is not crucial to the story. (e.g. To Sir with Love). I just looked at one other category, Films featuring museums, and it seemed mostly right--though of course there's always an exception or two: The "museum" in The Fly is first of all not a museum, and second the object the name refers to is not important to the story.

Naturally, the results for ones kept at AfD do not necessarily reflect any particular logic. Best of luck with the categories. I don't always check CsD, so let me know if there are problems.DGG 05:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Text for the WPFilms award

I've decided to give a certain member this award for his valuable contributions to film articles over the past few months, only to find out that he isn't a member of WikiProject Films. It seems that almost all of the other WikiProject Awards say that they can be given to any wikipedian who contributes to the area of the wikiproject, not only to members. Is there a particular reason that the WPFilms award is limited to members (ie. was there a discussion somewhere?), or can I change the text over here? Esn 07:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes!!! Mission accomplished- Kiarostami is now a featured article!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 22:23, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

missing films to check

Thanks for the note, as you might have noticed I've been pretty quiet with the missing films lists for a fair while now. My problem with lists and compiling all this information, even in a working area is that I find it hard to start deleting things, I'm an information hoarder. So once articles exist I can't bare to get rid of them so I move them to a check category. I guess I just have to let it go and remove the films. The main thing is to just check individually for disambiguation, that the film is listed on the director's filmography and other key people, as well as listings on the main film lists (eg. Australian films, list of horror films or what have you). Other than that, I guess there's not really much else that needs checking. Maybe there could be a list somewhere to store newly created film articles from the missing articles lists because people can check through those titles, knowing they are pretty new articles and could do with some work. Peter 01:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

list of country films and other

Thanks for the wikiproject films award, not that I have any idea what I'm supposed to do with it or what it means :) I did see the work on the Canadian film list a while back when it was first being penned up and I'm a little on the fence with it... It's great to have more information about key actors, director, release date etc, but I'm not sure about the messy table layout and column widths etc, I feel it needs some work but I'm not sure how yet I'll think about it. I am very busy at the moment so can't really make further contribution for a fair while but I hope to get back into it when I'm finally free. I feel the list of missing articles, particularly the Australian list I've been working on could act as a basis for the construction of the list of Australian films article, they could both reflect each other to make crossing over easier. Again I just don't know about the tables and the breakup for each year and decade into separate articles, it seems a little overdone, particularly with earlier decades as you mention. And is there some statement on each of the country pages mentioning what makes a Canadian film Canadian for example? eg. I know an Australian director who directed an Irish film, does it make it Australian because of the origin of the director or some of the films actors? Is it the location, the director, the key actors, the premiere country - I'm not sure and I think this should be pointed out to keep the list clear of doubling up so much. Peter 13:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

The organizing of film information

Hi Hoverfish,

Thank you for writing.

I think that films in chronological order, and in alphabetical order, are both very useful types of lists for films, and both are worthy of equal representation.

The alphabetical listing is good for people who want to be able to access the film titles (as a kind of index), while the chronological listing is good to show which films were made in which year.

All the best. Figaro 23:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

CFD notices

I'm not sure I'll be that much help. I usually only read CFD to close discussions. That said, I'll certainly leave a note (at the announcements bit of WP:FILMS?) if I see anything at all relevant. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Russian Empire films

How many film articles would I have to translate in order for there to be "enough" films for a category? Translating isn't a problem, nor is finding enough films - I'd just like some rough idea... Esn 23:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I was speaking with User:ESN yesterday and he tells me that [[:Category:Russian empire films has been deleted. From what I understand shouldn't Russian films politically be divided up into 3 categories

• Pre 1917 Russian Empire film
• 1917-1990 Soviet films
• 1990-present in (Russia) Russian films?

I do prefer simply categories but isn't this politically correct? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Cinema templates

Just to let you know that I finally got around to setting up some of the main film producer cinema templates and already many users have begun using them to go at the foot of pages for coordination. See the Cinema of.. templates in Category:WikiProject Films templates. If you have any suggestion sabout how to improve them (I am considering adding the tiny edit toolbar in the corner as with the world template for one) please let me know. A number of users have said they are a great idea, incl. members of WikiProject Film. All of the templates have the same naming e.g just CinemaofHongKong , CinemaofChina, CinemaofDenmark with a {{ }} around it. THis way it'll be easier to add to the footer of pages e.g

♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 22:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Hoverfish. They are blanked for a reason -I couldn't find the icons in the commons I looked! I may have to wait for her Pegship to return -we need one for Germany in particular ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 09:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I will ensure that all the templates are standardized. Your kidding you didn't know who my user name is? The "volcano" and the cat and the diamonds? You must have thought me weird!!! See article Ernst Stavro Blofeld !! It is a send up of Mr Blofeld from Bond in Doctor Evil style! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 09:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The ridiculous idea of world domination in the Cold War ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 09:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It is based on You Only Live Twice (film) based in a volcano in Japan and an attempt to start World War III - the ultimate stereotype of this genre - my father doesn't care too much about the Bond films either -they are a bit silly but good fun. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 09:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

OK I think its time for a little challenge. I am going to absolutely devour The Maltese Falcon (1941 film) and make it into the great article it deserves. In between my Argentine cinema I am going to write this into a super article! There is all the info there I need to achive this ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 11:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I am engrossed in the world of The Maltese Falcon (1941 film) at present check out the progess !!!! I aim to make this pretty good but I need to do the whole copy editing thing afterwards. I am trying to rewrite it and aviod direct copywright ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I agree each film flag icon should be identical and consistent. When her Pegship returns I'll kindly present her with a "to-do" list of icon creating for the rrspective cinemas -this includes the Italy icon to a white rather than black background. -standardized. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

trasparent film icon to commons

excuse but I do not know the English language well therefore I entrust to a translator automatic rifle. My intensity was that one to make the background transparent but with paint not there are successful, I do not have an editor png but by now the upload it was made, I have hoped then that someone rendered it transparent.

You have my same problem with GIMP :)... I wanted to say thanks to you for the job... and for the translation. If it serves an aid (help), you know to you where to find to me ;)--Wim b ^Talk you also answer to me here

Hi Hovefish. If Wisekwai could create those missing film icons Germany. Iran, etc that would be great - I beleeive there is already a category in the commons for film icons. Also what would you like me to add to the film talk discussion? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 10:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The category is here:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Film_icons

♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 10:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Whatchadoin

Hi Mr. Hoverfish. Thanks for contacting me, it's very much appreciated! I apologize for not getting back to you, I meant to but time slipped away. As to your question, please give me a until Monday for a complete responce re red links (yuk!). I'll also start the dialogue about caps in Spanish films ASAP. I realize you are a friend of my bud Blofeld and are also a good contact to have insofar films on Wiki is concerned. Have a great week-end. And expect to hear from me on Monday, at the latest. Best regards, Luigibob 00:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Images

I think that's funny that you're using GIMP 2 (sounds like Pulp Fiction!), but I haven't done too many reuploading of images. I guess what you can do is go to the image and there's a link you can click that says "Upload a new version of this file". Then, once you reupload it in its place, you can ask Cbrown1023 to delete the original file if you don't think that it will ever be reverted to the original file again. If you think it might ever be switched back, then just leave the original file. Let me know if that makes sense. Which Nintendo are you playing? --Nehrams2020 21:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I was about to say, if you would have had a Wii, I would have been really jealous. I haven't done that many infoboxes in a while, I've mostly just been continuing to assess articles, GA reviews, and fulfilling more image requests. I found this new script that lets you assess articles from the article page, rather than the talk page, so it cuts down the assessing time in half (you can see it at User talk:Outriggr/metadatatest.js). --Nehrams2020 21:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I still haven't used commons yet, so I guess you would just have to update a new image under a new name. I also prefer only to deal with stubs-starts, but I guess with more practice I can be able to rate B classes. --Nehrams2020 21:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Film template

I think with the new script that I added that I described above, it tells me what each article is rated on the actual article page itself, plus if its a GA candidate, importance, etc. An example could be seen at this image: Image:Outriggr-script-demo.PNG. This is helping me to determine if an article is really a start class or if a stub needs to be upgraded. My only problem with it is that I did not have this months ago when we were assessing all of the thousands of unassessed articles. Perhaps you should consider adding the script and see if you like it or not. --Nehrams2020 00:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have created most of the templates now but one country was particularly tricky-India. It may still need moderation -I tried to condense it as much as possible - The films from each industry direct to the categories where I have fixed them so the List of films appear at the top of the categories. I think its very useful for navigation but it definately at amaximum size -India is unique from all the other cinemas. I hope you approve -its a start anyway

♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 12:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Screenwriter/editor stubs

After consensus I closed the case on the long awaited stub categories and set them up Category:Screenwriter stubs and Category:Film editor stubs now exists. Sceen-writer-stub and film-editor-stub is the mode. If you could spread the word I would be grateful. I'll categorize the American-screenwriter tubs in the main cat above now ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 11:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Film flag icons

Well, even when I scale images down, I notice a difference. For instance, the crescent on the flag of Turkey took on a jagged appearance as a PNG file. But by the time it hits the page at 35px, I can't really tell the difference. So I'm moving ahead. — WiseKwai 14:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah I absolutely agree with you. See my discussion with User:Prolog (who is finnish and from film) - this is why I reduced the title font size to 3. I wasn't aware the other text needed changing -definately it should be as you just said. Wise Kwais done a good job adding a category to house them in. I also plan to remove some of the red links from some of the starter templates -this is agoo dstep to ridding of red links in the info boxes of articles -I just did the Icelandic ones ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I of course have one problem with Yugoslavia and Russia. We have Cinema of Yuglosavia yet all the cinema people are divided into Serbs, Croats, Slovenes etc. Maybe I should link them all if I can condense it. ALso what about Cinema of the Soviet Union? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I know that . What I mean is there is no category Yugoslavian actors Category:Yugoslavian directors etc. Only Yugoslavian films!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Actors and Directors

I don't know whether you agree or not butI have always beleived that actors and directors and cinema characters are tied to our Film Project. Nobody can dispute the fact that they are part of cinema and films and I beleive we have at least some responsibility to upkeep them if they are directly linked from our film articles. However rather than setting up a seperate project what about Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Actors and Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Directors. THis way they are a part (or at least tied) to our film project. Each page would highlight the articles that require most attention, missing articles etc for better project coordination. WikiProject Biography is so enormoous and I see hundreds of actor and director articles in very poor shape and neglect -Biogrpahy cannot work to effectively concentrate on hundreds of thousands of articles at once!!. The cinema characters would be a part of both projects. Ther is no obligation but it would certianly help to organize it all better, However if nobody wants it as part of films then of course they can be set up independently. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes perhaps- I know eventually there will be a legion of contributors its just i really want to tie it to the film project without giving us a forced obligation to take care of an extra 50,000 articles!!!!! We have enough work to do (myself included) on films solely!! but when i have time i'll definately make the offical proposal and scouting for members -I beleive wikiproject films began this way and look how far we have come!! Even if it begins with some kind of organization about high importance actor article in attnetion or something it is a start.

American cinema template

I know it is a biggy task but any ideas for improvement? I was going to consider leaving the US out because of the sheer size but if it was adapted accordingly it might look quite good - I would prefer though the actual flag image which is a darker red

♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Also very nice to see Aussie Pete has finally standardized the Aussie lists looking great - I thought I might have to do it myself. I see he has added a column for links -good idea I should do that in future ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S I have been in contact with Indian cinema today and they are extremely pleased with the template (which I've now altered as you suggsted). I have also asked them to intergrate the missing Indian film list as an important part of their work schedule ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

For American films it should go in the general articles only -the most important, award winning films -good articles etc and perhaps "iconic" film actors and direcotrs which have full articles. However the skinny foreign templates are intended for all indlividual articles related to their individual cinemas. From all people I have encountred so far they are happy with the templates on all related pages -as long as the tmeplates are at the very foot of the page it is fine. Indian cinema has proposed to use it in all film and acotr/direcotr articles If I get serious complaints then that is my problem but I doubt it but if it is at the footer it looks fine - it is no different thatn the many director and actor templates that keep popping up. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Also of course it depends on the size of an article. If it is a two line stub the template will look way out of place - howver if it is a developed article then the template will not look even slightly cluttered. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

For instance see Allegro non troppo. I can't really see an outroar at the template at the footer -it just looks-well fine but more importantly useful for browsing through Italian cinema (except background needs to be white). If the template looks inappropriate or out of place then it can be removed. Has someone vandalised 1930 in film? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah you mean American cinema! I would suggest that the article has to be at a start stage at the very least for America if it is decided it is to go in other articles. That US template will create complaints if it is put in stub articles definately but if the article is more developed it will look fine. But that isn't the fault of the template -it is the article!! There needn't be offical ruling but it does need a warning , a "no include" to say please do not use in stub-class-articles perhaps? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 22:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

But for instance take two George Lucas films. In 1:42:08 -template would look ridiculous but Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope at the footer would look absolutely fine. I would hope people would go by common sense but maybe a message may be needed to stop it being used in basic stubs. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 22:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

archiving Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Films

The page is getting a bit long, and I'm really leery of screwing it up (I'm not sure if a standard cut & past to archive 10 will be compatible with the index - or even how to put it in the index), can you advise me on the right way to archive that talk page so it will appear on the index! Thanks much. SkierRMH 00:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Linking all names in infoboxes

Good day! Finally, getting back to you for an answer.

Generally, I'm against linking "all" names in the infoboxes. First of all, a whole slew of them can be considered "not notable" names and this is especially true of producers, possibly editors, and many actors. Now I realize the Wiki project is unending, but will we ever find information on the so many editor and producers, cinematographers, and even actors with a full article. Where will this information be found. But that's is getting ahead of the game.

I don't like the red links because it gives the appearance that something is missing from reading the article. And I don't like the aesthetics of the red links. I do not mind at all red links in stubs, but do in Start and B articles. Now, this is partly of how I work. 95% of my time on Wiki is devoted to films: I take a film to B if I can find the information, this is true of all the films I take a serious interest in, and then list them on my Userpage. I also check if any names should be linked. And if the major stars and director do not have an article I leave a red link and then afterward start an article on them. I have started many stubs on actors, editors, cinematographers and such. Every now and then, someone tags the stub as "non notable" (see earlier) and then the hassle begins.

As to wiki policy: I can't believe there is a hard and fast rule to red link every name. Some examples:

Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography: See #8, to wit, "Post an article request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for each broken (red) interwiki link in your article OR remove the double brackets around the broken interwiki link (these are your only two choices)." I like the remove the double backets past if warrented.

Template:Infobox Film: throughout the article this is mentioned, "In addition, link each director [etc] to his/her appropriate article if possible." If possible: I take to mean it's acceptable that if there is no internal wiki article it can be left without linking.

Now for the argument that the red link will let wikipedians know that an article needs to be build. I do not think a red link is a "motivator."

For, all these reasons, I do not use that red link at will. Wikipedians, including many editors, who have come across my pages, seem to leave the links as they are. I hope that continues.

So, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Again, I appreciate you contacting me, very thoughful of you and my apologies for the long delay. Luigibob 18:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Silent films

Just wondering but do you feel the need to put Category:American silent films up for deletion? Its just I've seen you can skier remove this category from the articles. If you want to thats fine by me its just I thought it initally was quite important in American films ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 19:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you think is best? It may be best I think to split Silent films maybe? I know it definately worth having the divide as the contrast between silent and sound is one of the biggest landmarks in cinema history. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 19:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I do think then that category Silent films should remain intact -after for expamle Action films and Drama films remain action films despite the number. I do beleive its best to have both Silent films and American silent films this way in the American film category you can browse through soley silent films from America. I would rather not have too much repetition in the categories but I feel this is a one-off. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Its a niggly one that. If like 90% of the Silent films were American I would'nt bother but you say only about 50% are American? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I know. Mmmmm. The thing is if lesser experienced editors are looking through films they are more likely to Categorize it Silent films. Silent films are causing problems!!! On many of them there is also tragically little info to expand them beyond stubs. I would think it best to reach a consensus -get the views of a number of people on the issue ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

OK well if you are continuing with my batch of silent stubs best leave both cats intact for now -I also don't want to get too involved with categories! WiseKwai did a great job with those icons by the way. They are looking much smarter now ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 21:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

infobox film

The instructions are the same as they were in the old Syntax Guide:

• Release date (Variable: released)

When was the film released? Or when will the film be released?

Use: if possible, the exact release date. ("May 18, 2008") Use the first public non-festival release in any country. This means any limited releases or openings before opening wide should go by the limited release date. If multi-country entries are necessary, you can put the flag icon before the release date for each country (see the 2nd Wiki).

Wiki: [[May 18]], [[2008]]

Wiki: {{Flagicon|United Kingdom}} [[May 18]], [[2008]]

--PhantomS 20:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

CinemaofAustralia template

I was thinking that the CinemaofAustralia (and all other countries for that matter) should be on all lists of films for each country rather than just one. What's your thoughts on this? Peter 09:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Ahh!!! A two users who know nothing about films have proposed all of my work for deletion. I am willing to limit the use of the American template in the cinema article only (after all many of the key American film and actors have templates related to their work anyway) but in world film they are very useful and I have had much support. I attempted to try to discuss it and come to some agreementand compromise but he went ahead anyway and put them all up after I told him about the support. I really feel like leaving wikipedia if my time and effort is wasted like this. At a last resort I would be willing to use the templates only at the bottom of the cinema articles to save them being deleted -but this will totally undermine their purpose of article connection. Please leave your view at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_March_13 THanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 12:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC)