User:Hoverfish/Archive 2

AWB

Thanks for the heads up on AWB, I'll look into it more later this month. I'm in my final two weeks of this semester, and will increase my Wikipedia attention as soon as school's over, as I'll have a month off from school (no stress!). I think I have looked at AWB before, but have not spent too much time looking at. Let me know how it works for you, and if you think it works well, I'll apply later. Good night/Good morning. --Nehrams2020 09:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

1983 in film

Don't you think it would be more relevant for the popups of '19XX in film' to show more information? Thanks.--Gkklein 19:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Which popups do you mean? Hoverfish 19:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC) - Oh, you're the one who put Events under Top Grossing. I am not in Events. I have been doing general work in the lists and adding to several other sections. I just let Events there, even if empty, for the Event gnomes. Hoverfish 19:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Just a quick note to say thanks for looking at the Up Series page. As you saw User:BillyH already took care of the problem but I appreciate your looking at it too. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 20:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Father and Son

Hi Hoverfish! I must admit, I usually make a beeline for the Library of Congress catalog to check how they classify titles. This one is definitely an autobiography and not a novel. Cheers! Her Pegship 23:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Newsletter (Years in film)

It is definately an importance issue. We could put it in "Current proposals and discussions" or "Project news". If you do a quick (or detailed) write-up and we post it in the newsletter, then you'll get a byline. Cbrown1023 22:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi yes. But from what I have seen a detailed full list of films by year is missing from wikipedia. On every page e.g 1894 in film that already exist for the films it will direct to the list, e.g main:List of 1894 films. I strongly believe that the list is extremely helpful particularly with the navigation box so every film that ever existed is accessible in front of thenm Obviously is is a tremendous task though but I genuinely believe that once the index of films is complete then I can start going through them systematically added them to wikipedia. I still have 112 years of film to cover!!! Also in due course I will be starting a navigation box full of films by country. e.g Albania Australia etc. I wil leave out the countries that have had less than 500 films they can go on another list. If you have seen how capable I am in my work e.g I mapped out the entire country of Slovakia and am half way throguh Hungary you will take comfort that I will be doing a great job. It would be great if people would work with me on this one. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Um, don't you think that it is a little rude that you are just disregarding all of their tons of hard work and making them a redirect and starting from scatch. This is the type of project that needs to be discussed first (it is huge). You will just be replacing all other work, your lists of country also replace the World cinema pages (Cinema of Australia, Cinema of the United Kingdom....) Cbrown1023 22:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but wouldn't it be better to just leave it to the category, because in your example, List of Albanian films, there were very few (3) films with articles (notable ones) and the rest were red links... I think this wouldn't be good in the long run. Cbrown1023 22:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Good job keeping an eye on this. I read all of the messages on his page and Cbrown1023's page as well. I think the lists were fine and didn't have to be created in a new format. This definitely should have been discussed first, especially for how significant it is to WP:Films. We could easily just move the index box Ernst discussed above to the pre-existing lists. However, the list of films by country could be a significant improvement to the lists, since mainly U.S./U.K. films are included. Let me know if you need me to discuss this elsewhere or help with the newsletter response since I would be happy to help you take care of this. By the way, (I have to brag), I spent the last week completely revamping the Samuel L. Jackson page and helped it to achieve Good Article status. Even though this is not part of WP:Films, but WP:Bio, I still think that actors, directors, and other film-related articles should also be listed in the newsletter when they become good articles (since they help to develop the films). Perhaps I'll bring it up to Cbrown1023 and maybe include all of these film-related articles each month for the newsletter (I should find a way to contribute to the newsletter in some way!). Anyway, again let me know if you need my opinion when the discussion arises. --Nehrams2020 22:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly beleive that these full year lists and the country lists are really worth it. However to start with I will just set out the page like List of 1896 films bevcause from now there are over 500 films + so won't fit on one page. Once all the pages are started I will go through from 1896 onwards and list all of the films. I have completed from 1888-1895. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 11:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I have now set up the Template:Filmsbycountry so you can help now by listing these. There a some 120 odd countries not included in the box which I have listed on that page. I don't know whether to include them in the box (box will maybe be too big at the end) or list them on a seperate page entitled List of countries that have produced fewer than 500 films and then branch out from each of them? It is a star anyway. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 11:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)