Jump to content

User talk:Shawn à Montréal: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 142: Line 142:


I have listed all the Canadian films in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Canada Films]]. However i din't realise how many pornos canada produces!!! I don't really think that films such as F**k my ass 5 are suitable for our list do you? All of those can be removed in bulk and I bet many of the other more "innocent" films are probably not feature films or suitable. Feel free to sort it out [[User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld|Ernst Stavro Blofeld]] 17:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I have listed all the Canadian films in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Canada Films]]. However i din't realise how many pornos canada produces!!! I don't really think that films such as F**k my ass 5 are suitable for our list do you? All of those can be removed in bulk and I bet many of the other more "innocent" films are probably not feature films or suitable. Feel free to sort it out [[User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld|Ernst Stavro Blofeld]] 17:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


I have an idea. Why not kill two birds with one stone (so to speak - not that this has anything to do with birds!) and have the column labelled Notability/Release. You see as the list develops and more films are added by year I would like them to be in order of release to get an indication of film historyy -kind of like a document. Notability should be given first then underneath the date released I'll give you an exaple for the 1960s you have started work on [[User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld|Ernst Stavro Blofeld]] 11:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:50, 23 January 2007

Welcome!

Hello Shawn à Montréal, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia

How to edit a page

Help pages

Tutorial

How to write a great article

Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Solar

NFB WW2 propaganda films

Well, I meant that NFB allows for people to view (and download?) complete films, over 600 in fact, through Cineroute on their website, but only if one joins the NFB Film Club, and one can only join that if one is Canadian. I was wondering if, if t is legal of course, that you could download one of their WW2 vids from them and possibly e-mail it to myself? I don't want to sell it or anything, just curious what a full length Canadian WW2 film would be like, since I've seen so many of the other countries. The NFB site itself only has clips.--Dudeman5685 21:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Well thanks anyway for letting me know. I'll be satisfied with the clips at NFB Cineroute. I'm just always trying to get a larger perspective on history. And, BTW, there are a few of the NFB war titles availble on VHS for Intnl. Historic Films, a private company.--Dudeman5685 02:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


7 Wise Dwarfs, ACK ACK and ATS in the Canadian section

Hi again. I found no mention of 7 Wise Dwarfs, ACK ACK, nor ATS in the NFB's online collection. Are you sure about them? Shawn in Montreal 15:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I beleive they are animated films made in conjunction with Walt Disney. In fact I've seen 7 Wise Dwarfs on the Disney WWII DVD. There was also a Canadian artillery training film on the same collection, which might be one of the others your refering too.
You're right however. I've already set a princle that this list excludes animation. (I'm planning on making yet another page "Cartoons of World War II" when I'm done with this. Or satisfactorilly done with this.--Dudeman5685 23:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As for ACK ACK, it was the english title for Défense contre avions directed by Peter Baylis in 1941, according to |IMDB. Not sure yet how "ATS" got in there, but I'll look.--Dudeman5685 00:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ATS, which stood for Auxiliary Territorial Service, has a page on the NFB website, here, but I looked closer and the producer listed is the UK Ministry of Information, so thats probably why its not in the other list. I'll put in it the british section.--Dudeman5685 04:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: vandalism

Since the last user_talk warning he got was from a long time ago, I gave him a starter-warning and thats that. He hasn't vandalized other pages in a while. It is possible it is also a different user using an IP that changes dynamically depending on who the ISP gives it to. This is why after about 48 hours since the last vandalism we give the starter-warning again. Sorry I can't do anything more. JoeSmack Talk 19:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Of Mice and Men vandal

Thanks for catching that one. I usually leave a tab open and refresh vandal IP's contributions occasionally for about 15 minutes, to know if they make any more edits or whether they've gone away; I must have just missed this one. I should have caught it later next time I checked my own contributions list for missing (top) marks, but thanks for getting it earlier :) --Firien § 10:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • PS I find it unlikely that they'll be blocked quite yet; there usually needs to be an escalation of warnings from {{test1}} through {{test5}} skipping stages as appropriate. There should probably be a final warning (test5 or something similar) before blocking; 4 vandal edits in a row is tiresome, but they were pretty minor so probably not technically worth a full block yet. If it escalates, then WP:VIP is the next port of call, to alert an admin about it. --Firien § 10:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Warnings

Hi, I spotted your message on WP:AIAV, I just wanted to tell you that you don't need to be an admin to issue a warning on a user talk page. I personally have put thousands of warnings without being an administrator myself ;) If you want to learn more about our most used templates, you can check Template:TestTemplates. Happy Editing! -- lucasbfr talk 22:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SharedIP tag

Hi Shawn. I tend to evaluate whether to use the {{sharedIP}} tag on a case by case basis. If, after looking up the IP, it's clear that it is probably being used by multiple users or is registered to a school or corporation, I typically place the tag. Not only does it (hopefully) discourage further vandalism, but it also serves as a message to an innocent editor who just so happens to use the same IP in the future that vandalism warnings may not be directed at them. · j e r s y k o talk · 18:43, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In re "subst", Wikipedia:Template substitution is helpful. Note that there are some templates that you should not use "subst" with and there are some you always use "subst" with. The template page itself should tell you, however. I probably should not have used subst with the sharedIP template, but it's not forbidden either. · j e r s y k o talk · 20:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shawn,

This article looks good to me. --YUL89YYZ 18:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Best Animated Short

Hmm, I was sure they were different awards.

Merge and create a redirect?

ShakespeareFan00 00:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCast

Hello - It's me again

I noted from your webpage that you work in the film industry.

I figured you might thus be interested in WikiCast an attempt to get 'free' content programmes made. The WikiCast project has a wiki at http://www.bitshuffle.org/wikicast/Main_Page

Thanks.

ShakespeareFan00 00:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List(s) of winners

Hi Shawn, Montreal World Film Festival has no lists of winners. Not all awards have lists, in the List of film awards, but the Montreal scene might be of interest to develop and you seem to be right in the middle of it. So I dropped you this note just in case. Hoverfish Talk 21:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Before you continue note I have got as far as putting films from [[:Category:Canadian films] up to letter I so if you could put the remaining I-Z in the tables that would be terrific. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree. For the larger film producers it is important that a column of notability is there. I would like to see most film documented but not e.g short doucmentary film, short animation or one off indepeenent feature films etc. However I would strongly like to keep the release dates as eventually I plan that each year has the list of films in order of date of release. Maybe Date of release column should go next to year? and then award column on the end?Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note though that there are many films featuring major actors that were never nominated for awards if this is so and the film is still of moderate note you could write none or N/A. You see I am really trtying to grap the cinema history of each country of the world by the scruff of the neck (so to speak) and document the film history which I beleive is extrmeely useful. It also hels to understand the period and directors and actors. As the list develops maybe the more fuller years will be split off by year all listed in the right navigation box.Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Films Welcome

Welcome!
File:Transparent film reel and film.png

Hey, welcome to the Films WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

  • Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

  • Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
  • Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Film Tasks template to see how you can help.
  • Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!
  • Want to collaborate on articles? The Cinema Collaboration of the Week picks an article every week to work on together.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 01:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slippery thing notability

As you probably saw in village pump, notability is nothing to go by in an effort to limit film articles. "Famous" is also undefinable. So how do we go about it? If you take a look at missing Australian films, Ausiepete is doing an effort to limit his compilation. For me the priorities are: Awarded and nominated films, top grossing and wide release (but I know little about this group), important directors' filmographies, important (starring) actors' filmographies, but again anyone could interpret importance in one's own opinion. Then there is the cult scene, of which I know very little. Some people adore B-movies and make detailed compilations of their favorite genres. And the story goes on and on. What Blofeld is doing, is he copies from imdb many thousands of titles (see here*) and then by some criteria that I ignore "filters them down" to less than many thousands. You are not talking to a deletionist, so I keep this kind of utopic hope that out of all this something encyclopedically useful will come out. It's sort of and Ed Wood feeling, finding myself in the middle of editors who do as they feel inclined to. I simply step in when their actions complicate collective work, like when Blofeld tried to create all kinds of cross-categories and there was a general outcry and so I nominated a whole series for deletion. From what you write, I am positive that your contributions are in the right direction. Actually it would help me a lot if you share your thoughts on how we could establish that missing column on (notabilty? - importance? - ?). I encourage you to go about the Canadian list as you feel inclined. If you think Blofeld started right, keep it going. If you feel he missed some or included films you wouldn't, say so. I do try to follow as many threads as I can, especially on the issue of lists of films and film awards (not only the giant ones). That's the very reason I keep encouraging every editor working on awards to make lists of winners and (if possible and practical nominees). IMO it's a good place to start. Hoverfish Talk 18:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite with you on non-confrontation, although that's not always the most constructive way. What I am adamant, however, is that it's very good for one interested user to undertake one country at a time. Please, go ahead with the Canadian lists, take over and do as you deem best. If it comes to confrontation because of your way of doing it, I will interfere. I am more concerned about coming up with something useful AND manageable, than letting everything open-ended with a cloud-hidden future. I'll be closely watching progress on the Canadian lists of the main namespace (not so interested in the huge "missing films by country", although for some it may be a useful tool indeed). Hoverfish Talk 19:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

Hi I haven't got around to adding the Canadian missing lists or filtering them yet. As I have told certain users time and time again I spent a great deal of time and effort in quickly checking each one for notability - it is a list of missing feature films. In the filtering I remove for example short documentaries or really low films from the list leaving a list of feature films to add to wikipedia which I beleive will be expanded fully later. Often I leave out one off films or independent films unless they have some notability for awards etc. I only start articles that I beleive can be fully expanded later. I think it is a great idea to add a few more columns for awards/nominations , genre etc.

However despite my efforts and help to other users - being highly praised by many many users outside of film (including many admin), for some reason a handful of users like hoverfish and C Brown are highly critical and cynical of my efforts beleiveing I am too bold, and even after many thousands of contributions whatever I do I cannot convince them I am of value! I noticed that in his message to you, you can see he is still very dubious of my work - it really annoys me that they continue to disrespect me like this. They haven't got the foggiest about my potential and I guarantee you if they met me they would regard me very very differently. I have noticed that they have not offically welcomed me into the film project with the green box like they have to you and all the others -but they don't own anything more than you or I do. I feel I am doing a good job which will be highly useful soon, so rather than waste my time in trying to prove to them what I can do (and still not getting any good reaction) I have given up on speaking to them.

Do you speak French by any chance? - I have begun on the missing French lists. All the best Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll complete I and J now if you like for the canadian list. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find it incredible though that despite my work, that some users in film think my new articles derived from the missing lists like Aa Ab Laut Chalen are not of encyclopedic value to wikipedia. I personally think it is a very good move at establishing global film on wikipdia. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You see the idea with the date of release was to not only order the films by year of release but eventually put them in date order so we eventually havea timeline of Canadian cinema releases through history. I do beleive that a column for awards is more important than this. But how about adding both but moving the date of release to the beginning next to the year? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent actually I am tiring of the idea of date order now it is not really important. Although change the header from notability to AwardsErnst Stavro Blofeld 15:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The header Notability though does cover other aspects apart from awards such as last films of actors etc so its good. I'm sure than even for the non super films there will be some useful notes to add even if it didn't win an award. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, let's leave it as Notability and see what gathers under it. It's just a header, so if a more successful term is found we can change it any time. About release dates within a year, they would be practical only if we turn all these tables to sortable ones, in which case however we have to standardise what we enter in other columns, so sorting by column would make sense. Again, that's something that could wait till we get Notability completed. Ok? Hoverfish Talk 16:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I feel it is very imortant for cultural issues such as this etc. Looking good i added a note to the 1984 film. And I was adding a notability and genre column before I started but I found it wouldn't fit on the page!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed all the Canadian films in Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Canada Films. However i din't realise how many pornos canada produces!!! I don't really think that films such as F**k my ass 5 are suitable for our list do you? All of those can be removed in bulk and I bet many of the other more "innocent" films are probably not feature films or suitable. Feel free to sort it out Ernst Stavro Blofeld 17:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I have an idea. Why not kill two birds with one stone (so to speak - not that this has anything to do with birds!) and have the column labelled Notability/Release. You see as the list develops and more films are added by year I would like them to be in order of release to get an indication of film historyy -kind of like a document. Notability should be given first then underneath the date released I'll give you an exaple for the 1960s you have started work on Ernst Stavro Blofeld 11:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]