Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 ← Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 → Archive 18

Proposed deletion of Ihsan Daadouch

The article Ihsan Daadouch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Incomprehensible gibberish.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Note: Article was created by a banned sockpuppet who uses other accounts to remove {{Prod}} notices. Mathglot (talk) 18:19, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion (2nd nomination) of Adrian Țofei

Hello! Can we have some help here to decide whether actor and filmmaker Adrian Țofei should stay or not? Thank you! 86.120.254.110 (talk) 13:09, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Lars von Trier, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 8 May 2017 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Ben Affleck peer review

Hello, I recently submitted the Ben Affleck article for Peer Review. Hopefully a few members of this project might take the time to look over it and offer some feedback. Thanks, Popeye191 (talk) 19:26, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

RfC on citing significant relationships in BLP

A Request for Comment has been created on this talk page. Input is appreciated. Lapadite (talk) 01:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers/Archive 14/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Annett Renneberg

The article Annett Renneberg has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathglot (talk • contribs) 09:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Melvyn Morrow -- trimming needed?

Can anyone from this project take a look at this playwright's page? It contains an awful lot of uncited and rambling material, it seems to me, including listing uncited amateur productions of his works. All the best! -- 65.78.11.228 (talk) 17:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Tim Wilson (filmmaker)

Would someone mind assessing Tim Wilson (filmmaker)? It was AfD'd a few years back but the result was "no consensus". I tried doing a bit of cleanup, but the article probbaly needs much more work. I'm not sure if Wilson meets WP:BIO or WP:FILMMAKER, butlots of the unsourced CV-ish info probably could be removed to make the article more readable if he does. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:47, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

FAR for Miranda Otto

I have nominated Miranda Otto for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Artoasis (talk) 02:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Actors heights

Should actors heights be listed in their articles infoboxes? I've seen it listed in some articles (Tom Cruise, Al Pacino) but they are absent from most (Will Ferrel, Dolph Lundgren, Chris Hemsworth). It seem to me to be a violation of the NPOV doctrine to list heights only for some, mostly short, actors. ImTheIP (talk) 13:54, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

It should probably only be used when the person is notable for their height, like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, André the Giant, or Hervé Villechaize. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:45, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
I concur with NinjaRobotPirate; only include if it is a prominent trait. Many people don't even have their height published in any credible citations, and it's too superfluous in most cases to mention anyway. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
What about actors like Dustin Hoffman and Jack Black then? ImTheIP (talk) 00:22, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Definitely not worth listing in their infoboxes as neither is really noted for their height. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:13, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
My issue is, where does it end after that? Shall we update the weight of any star who reveals it? How about the inseam? I know a few women, who were known for their curvaceous figures, have their bust sizes documented. (Marilyn Monroe, of course.) But it's a Pandora's Box of trivial information.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 01:30, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Same rationale for generally leaving out height applies to weight. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:37, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
I know that. My question was rhetorical and facetious. And my input was only to support said rationale. I hope you knew that and didn't think I was actually inquiring such a thing, Snuggums.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 01:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
  • IMO another pressing problem is that the height in infoboxes is generally not cited to a reliable source. Softlavender (talk) 01:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk show appearance

Just wanted to clarify - am I correct that talk show appearances by actors/musicians (on shows such as Conan or Jimmy Kimmel Live!) shouldn't be added to a filmography table? Many thanks! AutumnKing (talk) 11:29, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

You are 100% correct. Of course not! That would essentially bloat actors' filmography tables to ridiculous proportions. It would look downright ridiculous. At that rate, one could argue, "Let's add each Academy Awards appearance!" Actors have such an abundance of talk shows to make an appearance on these days, too. A filmography is called a filmography because it's goal is to list the FILMS the actor either appeared in or worked on off-camera. (And we usually separate cinema filmographies from television filmographies.) .... Talk shows are only notable in an article if there was some sort of controversy, they made some profound statement or revelation, something they said or did affected something else, and so forth. And if so, NOT in a filmography table. Somewhere in their career or personal life article, depending on the context.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 01:40, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
IMO it is WP:INDISCRIMINATE info and should not be inserted into WikiP articles. As Cinemaniac86 points out actors make numerous talk show appearances. The sourcing is another problem - I know that IMDb lists these but they cannot be used as a source. MarnetteD|Talk 02:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Absolutely correct. Filmography (and Theater credits) is for performances only. Softlavender (talk) 02:58, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Definitely should be left out because such appearances aren't performing roles. I could understand including within a host and/or producer's filmography, though, since those are actual credited roles one has for the shows. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:20, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the confirmation - I had noticed them being added to a particular actress' filmography table, will now edit them out. AutumnKing (talk) 06:32, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

If an actress stars

If you are the main character in a notable film like Peaches Does Herself. I ask this because I wanna know if Danni Daniels would qualify even though its her only film. Dwanyewest (talk) 15:58, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Not necessarily; it depends on how much individual attention the actual performer receives. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:43, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

What about sources like these Snuggums (talk / edits)[1][2][3]. Dwanyewest (talk) 20:17, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Try to find pieces that focus on Daniels herself instead of using film reviews; it'll be easier to judge that way. Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Terrayne Crawford

The article Terrayne Crawford has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 09:51, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Article was deprodded. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Eva Lovia

Could someone from this WikiProject take a look at Eva Lovia and assess it? It's recently created and filled with puffery and other POV content. I've tried to do a bit of general technical cleanup, but really am not very failiar with the style typically used in article about adult film actors. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:00, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Looks like it's been deleted. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:12, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
That's for checking AngusWOOF. The article was deleted a while back per WP:A7. My bad for not updating this thread with that info. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Tony Alcantar

Would someone mind taking a look at Tony Alcantar and assessing it? It's not very well-sourced and I stumbled upon it based upon this IP's user talk page post. Alcantar appears to have used slightly different names throughout his career, so searching those as well might find better sourcing. It probably would be better if someone without a COI tried to improve the article (assuming that Alcantar satisfies WP:BIO of WP:NACTOR). -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

It seems as if the IP has acknowledged their COI and is using the article's talk page to suggest changes. Another editor, who is an admin, has been helping the IP make the requested changes, so this should be OK now. Of course, the IP would probably appreciate any feedback received from others. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:12, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

TFAR for Jennifer Lawrence

There is a request for Jennifer Lawrence to be featured on the main page for her upcoming birthday on August 15th. See Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Jennifer Lawrence for more. Would prefer responses sooner rather than later. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:15, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion of "additional voices" in voice actor articles

Please come participate in the discussion at WT:ANIME#Inclusion of additional voices in anime voice actor articles. Thank you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:15, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Elijah Daniel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elijah Daniel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elijah Daniel (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sagecandor (talk) 04:19, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

RfC about White House petition to make Party in the USA the national anthem

There is an ongoing Request for Comment about whether to include a petition started by Elijah Daniel in the article about him, which was a White House petition to make Party in the U.S.A. the national anthem.

You may comment, if you wish, at: Talk:Elijah_Daniel#RfC_about_White_House_petition_to_make_Party_in_the_USA_the_national_anthem. Sagecandor (talk) 18:52, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Personal info of Mike Doyle (actor) and Andrew Rannells

Editors repeatedly asserted the breakup of Mike Doyle (actor) and Andrew Rannells; YouTube video (the primary source) is used as confirmation to the info. The content dispute is discussed at Talk:Mike Doyle (actor)#Mike Doyle and Andrew Rannells, where I invite you there. Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 05:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red's new initiative: #1day1woman

Women in Red is pleased to introduce...
A new initiative for worldwide online coverage: #1day1woman
  • Create articles on any day of any month
  • Cover women and their works in any field of interest
  • Feel free to add articles in other languages, too
  • Social media hashtag campaign: #1day1woman

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 11:08, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

FA review of Abbas Kiarostami

I have nominated Abbas Kiarostami for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Gertanis (talk) 19:41, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Shawna Della-Ricca

Would someone mind taking a look at Shawna Della-Ricca and assessing. It's wa created a few weeks ago, but it's not supported by an citations to reliable sources. I tried Googling , but only found social meadia pages and other trivial mentions, so I think this might be a case of WP:TOOSOON. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:22, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

If you think the person isn't notable, add a prod. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:24, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
I thought about WP:BLPPROD, but there are external links in the article so I'm not sure that applies. I did not consider a regular prod, so I will take a look at it again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:20, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

RFC about a Filmography/Television credits section

RFC at "Talk:Carol Burnett" asking if Burnett's multiple appearances as a particular character in a TV show should be described in her Filmography-Television credits list as "Recurring" or as "Recurred. Shearonink (talk) 14:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Uma Thurman stalking case

Hi, all. Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Uma Thurman#Request for comment. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:40, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Bridgette Andersen

I see that Bridgette Andersen is largely uncited and was probably written by her internet cult following. I'm asking around about what to do. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 08:10, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Ebonie Smith

Please see Talk:Ebonie_Smith#Data_discrepencies. Her date of birth and name at birth on Wikipedia are both quite different from other sources. This is a WP:BLP. The article uses category:African-American actresses, but the sources provided do not state that. Some of this data has been slurped onto Wikidata, and I have reverted this because I wasnt confident in that ethnicity being made based on the color of skin only. John Vandenberg (chat) 09:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Cannabis in South Africa#David Carradine, dagga, racism and the Apartheid State

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cannabis in South Africa#David Carradine, dagga, racism and the Apartheid State. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that George Lazenby, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

RFC on Film MOS

I would like to invite you to comment on what we could do to change the production section wording over on the MOS. The discussion can be found here --Deathawk (talk) 06:04, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Is the word filmography a good word to use for an actor's body of work.

So far I have seen things such as film, television, theater, video games voice work, radio voices, sound books and web shows included in these kinds of sections. There seems to be a consensus to not actually include theater acting under such sections because it's a different "medium" but in articles like Robert Bathurst filmography (which is a featured article) it is still included under another section in the article. I guess one could aruge that since voice work for film (such as animated ones) is included so should video games, but video games are also a very different "medium". What about documenataries (which usually aren't acting) or televised plays, music videos, or pro wrestling shows?★Trekker (talk) 01:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

From what I've gathered, documentaries tend to be included when they are feature-length productions in the same way that other feature films do. Music videos are sometimes included as well (but with their own section). Not sure what to say about the other things, though. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:23, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
There are plenty of stand-alone "filmography" articles that contain just filmed and broadcast (i.e. film & TV) works, and no "stage" works, and thus the name "[so-and-so] filmography" is fine as an article title – e.g. Adam Sandler filmography or Eric Roberts filmography. But as I said at my talk page, when "Stage" or "Theater" work is also included in such an article, as it is at Robert Bathurst filmography, then an alternate title should be preferred, such as Jessica Chastain on screen and stage, Morgan Freeman on screen and stage or List of Colin Firth performances. IOW, Robert Bathurst filmography should probably be moved to List of Robert Bathurst performances or Robert Bathurst on screen and stage or something like that... As to the other part of your question, I don't have a good answer. Anything that is either "filmed" and/or "broadcast" is probably legitimate to include in a "filmography" section – so that should cover: film, TV, radio, film/TV voice acting, music videos, documentaries, and even filmed plays. But I have no idea what to do about video games – I guess sometimes the prep. work for actors in video games involves "filming" them, but this getting pretty far away from the "filmed and/or broadcast" idea... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I'd group video games with filmography as the acting is primarily voice acting as done with the cartoons, there are plenty of cut scenes that are like short film segments, and there is even motion capture which can involve live-action acting. Music videos are treated as short films, as with notable commercials. Documentaries are also grouped with films whether they go with television or traditional film. Theater should have its own section separate from filmography unless the show is a special television broadcast. Sound books, audio dramas and radio programs such as podcasts should go under Discography. As for pro wrestling, the wrestlers and regular staff don't need to have their wrestling appearances on television or direct-to-videos listed in their filmography, as with Dwayne Johnson filmography. As for Hulk Hogan#Filmography, it focuses mainly on his feature films, with other sections covering his involvement in television and video games. The thousands of YouTube videos by YouTubers shouldn't be listed in filmography, as the infobox showing years_active covers that. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I don't get the motivation for pro wrestling or youtube videos. I mean pro wrestling is pretty much theater which is regularly televised.★Trekker (talk) 17:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Oh, for music videos, if the person's part of the music group, then those videos don't go in the filmography for the individual person. The entries are more for prominent starring in other people's videos like with Alicia_Silverstone#Other credits which I notice is under Other credits anyway along with her theater work. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:33, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Couldn't we use a more general "credits" section or something instead for "filmography" since it seems to be a bit vaguely specific?★Trekker (talk) 19:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Anyone got any ideas?★Trekker (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Harvey Weinstein

There is a discussion regarding Harvey Weinstein and whether or not a separate article about the allegations is warranted. The discussion can be found here: Talk:Harvey Weinstein#A separate main article regarding the Harvey Weinstein sexual allegation controversy. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 14:26, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest

Hi. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on actresses/women filmmakers etc during this month please sign up in the participants section. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Help would also be appreciated in drawing up the lists of missing articles. If you think of any missing articles for your project please add them to the sub lists by continent at Missing articles. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Umberto Lenzi filmography

How should we apply WP:FILMOGRAPHY to Umberto Lenzi#Select filmography? Please comment at Talk:Umberto Lenzi#Filmography. --woodensuperman 15:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Anyone? We're at an impasse over there! --woodensuperman 14:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Stephen Chow

In the opening paragraph the last sentence says his net worth. However the problem I have is there is no accuracy to the statement of his net worth. Of the four citations not one of them seems to have any real accurate information, should this sentence and citations be removed then? Also doesn't it violate WP:GOSSIP? Govvy (talk) 11:25, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, I removed the sentence, but I get an IP reverting it back even know I am pretty sure, it violates WP:GOSSIP and WP:NOTATABLOID. Can someone else have a look, I hope I haven't broken the 3RR rule, and the IP doesn't reply why it should be kept or any reason, it just reverts. Govvy (talk) 12:01, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Ongoing FAC

Members of this WikiProject might be interested in leaving comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lady Gaga/archive2. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:12, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

10-year-old biographical entry nominated for deletion

It may be of interest that an article for actress Cathy Shim, created almost exactly ten years ago, on November 6, 2007, has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cathy Shim. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 18:15, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Editing image height in Africa Movie Academy Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role

Please I am finding it difficult making the images for the 2017 and 2005 winners be of the same height. Could someone kindly assist? Darreg (talk) 12:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Terminology

It would be helpful to establish some consistent terminology for identifying the kinds of roles that actors have in TV series. For example, it's common in TV filmographies to indicate that an actor had a recurring role one season and became a series regular in another season, or that they had a lead role or a supporting role.

I bring this up because it's handled inconsistently, and recently I've seen some confusing terms introduced, such as "main role". It sounds like it means they were the lead actor or star of the show (i.e. they played "the main role"), but that isn't how it's being used. It's being applied – sometimes aggressively – to actors who are simply members of the regular cast (credited on every episode), regardless of whether they are the leads or supporting.[4][5][6][7] While the meaning of "main" in the context of "main cast" is somewhat clear, the meaning of "main" referring to a specific role is confusing.... especially when there are clearer ways of saying it.

What I'd suggest is that, when it's helpful to include such notes, we use simply "Lead" or "Supporting" to identify the stature of a role, and "Regular"/"Recurring"/"Guest" to identify how often they appear or are credited. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 04:29, 24 November 2017 (UTC) Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

Whilst I agree that there should be more consistency between the use of "main role" or "main cast", I think either term fits the context of a member of the principal cast of a show. If there is a specific lead, then the term "lead role" indicates that. I actually think the terms "regular" and "recurring" are more confusing for many readers. AutumnKing (talk) 07:50, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
But they mean something specific in the context of series television. "Main" is is like "good" or "nice": a vague grammar-school word that people fall back on when they don't have the vocabulary to express the idea more clearly and specfically. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:43, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
As much as I can understand calling a work's heroes the "main role", it also applies for prominent antagonists. The term really should be used for anyone who is part of the primary cast (if being implemented at all). Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:50, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Actor vs. actress at Hong Chau

There is a discussion at Hong Chau about using actor vs. actress. Please see the discussion here. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 13:33, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

RfC on the inclusion of an infobox on Talk:Cary Grant

You are invited to comment at Talk:Cary Grant where there's an ongoing RfC on the inclusion of an infobox. jcc (tea and biscuits) 18:43, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Credibility for actors

Is there any requirements on Wikipedia for someone to be considered a credible actor JMichael22 (talk) 20:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

@JMichael22: Wikipedia's inclusion criteria is based on coverage in reliable sources. This would include, for example, articles written in newspapers and trade magazines. This article is an example of the kind of coverage that we might expect. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate: An article such as this one? Rollingstone JMichael22 (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate: the problem I Am having is I requested a name change for the Edge (wrestler) page for it to be changed to Adam Copeland as he retired from wrestling in 2011 and has since become an actor but the argument people are having with me is that they are saying he isn't a credible enough actor to have the name changed regardless of how many sources I provide so I'm just wondering what the criteria is for someone to be considered a credible actor on Wikipedia JMichael22 (talk) 21:31, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:COMMONNAME, we generally go by what the majority of sources call someone. Articles like that would be useful in determining it. Still, it's up to consensus. If you can't convince people this time, you could always try again when there's more evidence. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
@NinjaRobotPirate: Would you agree tho that when deciding someone's credibility as an actor on Wikipedia it's just a matter of opinion for those discussing the topic. it isn't either right or wrong it's just the ones who happen to agree with eachother's opinions JMichael22 (talk) 22:04, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Please, stop this game. JMichael22 has proposed a rename for Edge (wrestler). He thinks he is best known as Adam Copeland since he is acting since 2011 (even his most notable work is Haven). However, some other members of the pro wrestling project think he is best know for his pro wrestling career, since he has won more accomplishments and has performed in national and worldwide television since 1998 until 2015. He is making these question without context for the discussion. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:15, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Professional Wrestling accomplishments / Actors & Actresses accomplishments

Does anyone here feel being crowned a predetermined pro wrestling champion should be compared to winning or being nominated for a Golden Globe Award or any acting awards. JMichael22 (talk) 20:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

No, it's more like being given the main role on a tv series.★Trekker (talk) 20:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Sooo. you're looking for help or something? Have you tried to make the same question to the pro wrestling project? This questions doesn't look neutral to me. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:10, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Are you replying to me or OP?★Trekker (talk) 22:30, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

User:HHH Pedrigree looks like you spoke to soon eh? I had brought it to both pages if you look carefully they were added around the same time. JMichael22 (talk) 22:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Also User:*Treker your reply was exactly the way I was feeling towards the situation JMichael22 (talk) 22:34, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Responses should go to the thread posted on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Professional_wrestling#Wrestling_accomplishments_/_Actors_and_Actresses_accomplishments AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

A Category for Nollywood actors that are alumni of New York Film Academy

Happy new year. A number of Nigerian actors schooled at NYFA, and that information will be of interest to individuals familiar with the industry (like myself) in evaluating their progress. It will be nice to create a category for them. There are close to 100 articles in the parent category and it is difficult to always filter the actors based in Nigeria from the list. The reason I am here is because it is not a norm to segregate alumni of an institution based on nationality, however, because of the uniqueness of this case and the broadness of the Nigerian film industry, I was thinking if it could be allowed. What do you think? HandsomeBoy (talk) 20:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion

I would like you to know that there is this discussion taking place at an actor's page. If you have opinions please join the discussion. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 07:17, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

RFC on Additional Voices, and on self-published announcements of works and roles

We have two RFCs going on WT:ANIME:

Thanks in advance for your input. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:02, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Trimming episode counts in filmography

I would like to add a sentence in the filmography's Notes section about not listing episode counts for starring, major recurring, or hosting roles in a television series per MOS:TVCAST. For a handful of recurring appearances, it's not a big deal, but it's rather silly to have like Ellen Degeneres be listed for Ellen (TV series) with 109 episodes. What about her talk show, where she has thousands of episodes? Or Jay Leno#Filmography showing 4610 episodes. It's more useful to say how many "starring role, x seasons" or just "x seasons", and it's also original research to physically count appearances, and better left for the user-generated IMDb to figure out. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:00, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Are there reliable sources that count appearances? That's one area where I never know what to do – some IP editor changes "56 episodes" to "62 episodes", and I have no clue if it's true or not. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
No, there aren't, other than watching and counting the episodes themselves and taking attendance of whether they appeared or were absent in an episode, which is the problem WikiProject TV had with listing such counts. They aren't simple WP:CALC issues. I suppose some series might end up having a fan guide physically published for such attendance records. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:18, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
I would heartily support this... the inclusion of episode counts when an actor has a main or recurring role is minutiae that is not useful. I think listing which seasons the actor appeared would be useful but anything more than that is WP:INDISCRIMINATE and difficult to verify in that you generally rely on primary sources and do WP:SYNTHESIS. —Joeyconnick (talk) 20:32, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
It isn't original research to count appearances, it's rather objective. It would be like saying 2 + 2 = 4. We know that, we can verify that if we wanted to. That said, I thought this was discussed awhile ago at the TV project to move away from episode counts in filmographies. I do remember discussing it before. They don't belong. Maybe for a recurring guest that has like 4 appearances or something like that, but a series regular doesn't need the list of episodes present. It's their show. I guess I would be fine to say "3 seasons" versus 66 episodes, or something like that. No one is going to watch every episode to verify that they appear, but at the same time, we don't need to list that type of minutia. Let IMDb keep it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
I am also all for this. I have definitely come up against editors who insist on including excessive episode counts, but MOS:TVCAST only talks about cast lists in show articles. I've found it's often editors who (unconsciously or not) mimic content and layout from IMDb. Sometimes it's also pretty obvious that they're actually getting the counts from IMDb. I did some research at one point to see what the trend might be for contract roles in filmography FLs. It's inconsistent. Priyanka Chopra filmography does not count episodes for Quantico and Peter Dinklage on screen and stage does not count for Game of Thrones, but Bradley Cooper on screen and stage does count for Alias. Shannen Doherty filmography does both, noting "Series regular (XX episodes)", for Beverly Hills, 90210 and Charmed.— TAnthonyTalk 21:52, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Kalki Koechlin

A discussion is taking place at the talk page of Indian actress Kalki Koechlin with regards to a long standing debate on her nationality. The lack of sources on it is the major issue. Help from editors on reaching a consensus is appreciated. Thanks, MT TrainDiscuss 05:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Lyndsy Fonseca

I just like to point out that @Tenebrae: is trying to instigate consensus and policy without regard for this project. Govvy (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Wow! That's untrue, insulting and highly uncivl. I have been a responsible Wikipedian for over 12 years, and I have fought tirelessly for accuracy in birth dates, place of birth and other WP:BLP details. To say I have no regard for this project is an outright lie. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Govvy: I have no opinion either way on the discussion over there and won't be participating, however, I do feel a need to comment on your demeanor. Tenebrae is a longtime editor, and a well-respected one at that. Having a discussion pertinent to the article on the article's talk page, and having an RfC to expand when the natural conversation there isn't covering it, is not an attempt to slide past any projects. That's just a good way to have a debate here. The conversation seems to have snowballed into a question of policy, but it's not like that was the intent, and there's clearly no intentional foul play. And hell, even assuming that Tenebrae was deliberately "disregard[ing]" any projects, any posts to discussions outside of the same talk page should remain civil and neutral, which you didn't do at all. Sock (tock talk) 18:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
I also want to add that I don't think discussing policy in this way is meant to ignore any specific project and I doubt that Tenebrae meant in any way to maliciously do that.★Trekker (talk) 19:03, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Umm, the consensus he wants to discuss will effect every BIO regardlesss, simply starting a general aspect on one biography talk page isn't helpful to other editors who support WP:BIO or WP:Actors and Filmmakers and have no idea that a consensus has been started simply because that one article might not be on their watchlist. What about ethics for the whole of wikipedia, I personally think it's selfish to start a general consensus on one biography page. Not bringing up the discussion on a project talk page first? I consider this an oversight! For a vetran editor such as Tenebrae, I am disapointed and you call me uncivil! Govvy (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
An RFC on some random talk page can't really make new site-wide policy; see WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. I sometimes get a bit worked up about stuff like this, too, but try to remember that someone like Tenebrae isn't going to try to destroy Wikipedia from within. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:31, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
well it feels like he wants to establish site-wide policy from a few random talk pages about the same issue, I never said anything about destroying wikipedia! Project pages are around for a reason, this also helps to bring editors together to establish what type of protocals, formats, MoS to use, throwing out an RFC of this nature on a random talkpage?? Govvy (talk) 22:48, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Well, you need to assume good faith and avoid casting aspersions. Those are site-wide policy. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words. And you are correct: "instigate consensus and policy without regard for this project" does indeed sound like "destroying Wikipedia from within." Actually, I like how trying to create consensus is a way of destroying Wikipedia! : )  --Tenebrae (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

TFAR notice

Members of this WikiProject might be interested in Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Lady Gaga. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:43, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion at C. C. H. Pounder

Please come participate in the move discussion at Talk:C. C. H. Pounder#Requested move 20 February 2018, Thank you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:38, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Formatting of "Awards"

Hi, I'm working on the article for Juraj Jakubisko.. could someone point me to a good example (table or otherwise) of how to present the list of awards he has received, as so far what I've got looks horrible. Thanks! Jdcooper (talk) 13:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

If he's got a ton of awards, you can spin off the list, and pick any of those featured lists, like List of awards and nominations received by Laurence Olivier or maybe List of awards and nominations received by Steven Spielberg. I would separate them by major national and international awards, film festival awards, and the other random organization awards. The flag icons have got to go. This isn't the Olympics. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:02, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Wow those guys are decorated! I don't think Jakubisko has enough (or a long enough article otherwise) to justify a breakout article. And as there are almost no awards he's won twice I feel like chronological is the way to go, mostly. I will have a play tomorrow and try to sort it out. Thanks for your help! Jdcooper (talk) 22:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
User:AngusWOOF, would you mind having a glance at my new version and tell me if there's anything glaringly wrong? Jdcooper (talk) 23:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@Jdcooper: The first 'Awards' table violates WP:ACCESS, by having the 'Film' column have a wider 'rowspan' than the 'Year' column before that – the 'Film' cell cannot be wider than any single 'Year' cell. The second 'Awards' table looks to be fine, and does not have this issue. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry IJ, I'm not sure quite what you mean and couldn't find any reference to rowspan at WP:ACCESS.. if you are referring to the films winning awards over multiple years, what's the problem and how should one present it? Jdcooper (talk) 23:33, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
@Jdcooper: I have reedited that table to remove the WP:ACCESS violations. That table could still be improved – e.g. to fill in the empty cells in the table. But it no longer violates WP:ACCESS. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:15, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
It looks better. I'm assuming he doesn't need to have a list of nominations. Also the table entries are now easily transferrable to the individual film articles. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Neutral notice

A move request regarding Deadline.com / Deadline Hollywood, a website often cited by this Project, is taking place at Talk:Deadline Hollywood#Requested move 11 March 2018. It is scheduled to end in seven days.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Kristen Bell

These Mac addresses, I assume it's the same person keeps going on about what should be in Occupation in the infobox, saying it's on the talk page, but there is nothing there that I see what ever this person is going on about, I've reverted enough, but the person continues to be disruptive, maybe another user can have a look and decided. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 21:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Ensemble cast award navboxes

Any opinions welcome at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 March 8#Template:Satellite Award for Best Cast – Motion Picture. --woodensuperman 16:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Pre-production films in filmographies

WP:NFF indicates we're not supposed to create articles for films said to be in pre-production, for WP:CRYSTAL reasons: "...[B]udget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. The assumption should also not be made that because a film is likely to be a high-profile release it will be immune to setbacks—there is no 'sure thing' production."

I guess based on that, because the same logic would apply, WikiProject Film hasn't been listing purportedly pre-production films in actor/filmmaker filmography sections. (FILMMOS does allow pre-production sections in articles about films that have gone into production.) Mostly this hasn't been an issue, but one editor, perfectly politely, has been suggesting that perhaps we should include pre-production films in filmographies. I don't agree, for the NFF reasons above, but perhaps in the spirit of collegiality we should discuss it. Because if it's our practice not to, we might want to clarify that in the MOS. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:42, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah we're not supposed to list movies that haven't begun filming yet for the reasons you've mentioned. Your instinct was right on that. Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:31, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I think two additions should be made to WP:FILMOGRAPHY – 1) the "no pre-productions roles as per WP:CRYSTAL" thing, and 2) "list all roles as credited". Just these two additions to the guideline will cut down on a lot of problematic editing in Filmographies. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:48, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Concur with both my colleagues. Do you think we should give it one week to see if anyone raises objections, and if not, do we have consensus to update WP:FILMOGRAPHY and WP:MOSFILM? --Tenebrae (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, to the first – if no one objects, add that language to WP:FILMOGRAPHY. I've already added language on the second ("all names as credited") to WP:FILMCAST – I don't think the "no pre-prod. films in Filmographies" even needs to be added to MOS:FILM: adding it to WP:FILMOGRAPHY is sufficient. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:10, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
@Tenebrae:  Done – The suggested text has been added to WP:FILMOGRAPHY. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:24, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Sienna Guillory

Sienna Guillory, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 23:18, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Roseanne Barr GAR

I've started WP:Good article reassessment/Roseanne Barr/1 and welcome input from others. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:16, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

David Belasco

David Belasco was a playwright, stage producer and stage director. The IP ‎87.122.135.49 has been creating a filmography in his article. Included are works that are based on his plays but for which he had no direct contribution. In some cases, the films are of operas for which he wrote the underlying work - making the resulting film "2 generations" removed from Belasco's original play. Is this an appropriate use of a filmography section? My feeling is that, since he had no direct participation in any film, there should no filmograpy section, but a section on adaptations. I look forward to responses. - kosboot (talk) 15:34, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree he should only be credited for works that he participated in, even if it is crew credits. If he merely receives "based on a story by" credits, then those don't really count. But I agree that a Legacy section could be created for his works that have received adaptations, but those adaptations probably already have their own "franchise" articles. You can look at L. Frank Baum bibliography as an example. The listings there only cover his works, not all the works and adaptations inspired by his writing. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:01, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Evan Rachel Wood

Evan Rachel Wood, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 22:07, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

RfC Notification

There is an RfC at the Kate Mara article talk page members of this project might interested in taking part in here. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 02:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Actor categories at CfD

Please see the discussion here. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Whether certain awards should, or should not, be included in relevant biographies

I'd like further input on the discussion here. This is not a discussion of the notability of either the article subject or the awards themselves.

Rather, I am wondering whether awards given by an employer to their employees (in this specific case, the Singaporean Star Awards) should be included or not. My honest opinion is that they are not significant because they are equivalent to any other "employee of the month [or year, or whatever]" award. There seems to have been prior discussion regarding this, but it failed to gain traction because there was insufficient consensus as to whether it should be a separate guideline or not.

Given that, per above reasoning, such awards are non-significant, I think it is safe to consider that they should be treated like any other fan-site trivia and be properly left to fan-sites.

Whether you agree with the above, or not, your opinion would be appreciated, either here or at the above-linked talk page. Thanks! 198.84.253.202 (talk) 21:02, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

On the film-specific side of the project, we did agree to only include awards to film articles where the award has its own article. This hints at some sort of notability for that award, and if there is any grey area, the individual award can be taken to AfD to form a consensus. The MOS for films gives some more info. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:34, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Trying to get promotion for Lana Turner article

Hello all, I've been working on the Lana Turner article on and off for a couple of years now; I got it to GA status about a year ago, and am now in the process of trying to get it promoted to FA status. I've done a lot of work recently on it, and was wondering if anyone would be willing to give feedback and potentially provide support for FA status if they see fit. There is already a nomination page and one user has done some checking on references, but so far that is all that's been looked at. Many thanks. --Drown Soda (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

RfC at Roseanne Barr

There is an RfC at the Roseanne Barr talk page found here that members of this project might be interested in taking part in. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 01:53, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Jane Seymour (actress)#Nationality in lede

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jane Seymour (actress)#Nationality in lede. 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 05:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Featured Article review

I have nominated KaDee Strickland for a Wikipedia:Featured article review/KaDee Strickland/archive1 as the article has not been properly updated since its promotion as a featured article back in 2005. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Aoba47 (talk) 22:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Cleanup

The edit by Musdan77 merely removed unnecessary capitalization and replaced a period with a semicolon. There is nothing controversial about that. If a RFC is needed I support the changes. MarnetteD|Talk 15:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Um, no, he did more that that: he changed "Television film" to "Movie" in the table. That one change is a significant change that does not have consensus. This is what there needs to be a discussion about. "Movie", even "Television movie", is considered to be a non-standard term in MOS:FILM – "film" is the preferred term. If "film" is to be used, then it likely needs to be "Television film" in Filmography tables, to differentiate from (theatrical) "films", esp. in single "Film and television roles" Filmography tables. Musdan77 has very strong feelings about this issue that he has expressed to me before, but the problem is that I am not sure that anyone else agrees with him on the issue. Incidentally, this began because of this posting to my Talk page, so I'm going to specifically loop Autumnking2012 in on this discussion. Ebyabe is another editor who I know edits Filmography tables quite a bit, so I'm letting him know too... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
+1 - The changing of Television film to Movie is certainly something that too had caught my eye and is certainly something I object too, The caps thing I object too aswell but not sure if technically the de-capping is correct . –Davey2010Talk 15:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Gadzooks IJBall I missed that entirely. Many apologes. The term "movie" should not be used for those. Fading memory is that "film" was settled on over a decade ago but I have no idea where to find the thread about that. It was tied in some way to the filmproject deprecating the use of the word "movie" both in its naming conventions and in its use in articles. Again my apologies for missing the important part of your edit summaries. I do think the semi-colon could be reinstated though :-) MarnetteD|Talk 15:31, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
FTR, I have fewer objections to Musdan77's changes to the text itself, though I personally think the last "television" in that text should be capitalized, as it refers to a section header. But a secondary issue here is that Musdan77 also has certain views on the use of both semicolons and parentheticals (in Filmography 'Notes' columns) that I also believe are not universally held – that's a lesser issue to me, but it is also a factor in this discussion. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, I wouldn't have made those changes (without a discussion first) if I thought that it would be such an issue. And I was going to talk about (what I was first binged for) how IJBall just completely reverted it – something I've had problems with him doing before – but then I see on the history page that it was worked out, thanks to MarnetteD.
Now, I can't understand how anyone could not think that putting "television" in the notes of a table with the heading "Television" or "Television appearances/performances/roles" is redundant. When the changes were made to the "example" tables years ago (adding "television film"), I wish I had discussed it then, but I'm sure I wasn't even aware of it until much later. And as I mentioned in my ES, the reason I made the changes now is that I see new editors adding "Television" multiple times to the notes column of the TV table and then putting in their ES "per WP:FILMOGRAPHY" – as if that is THE rule that must be followed (which, if you're new, you're likely to think that). --Musdan77 (talk) 18:49, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
A couple of quick points: As I said on my Talk page recently, "redundancy" is not a bad thing per se, and on project like this it's sometimes preferable. (Also, "redundancy" tends to be one of those things that's in the eye of the beholder...) But, the second point, is what I'm referring to upthread – in single 'Film and television' combined Filmography tables, it has to be "Television film" to differentiate from regular (theatrical) "Film" entries – e.g. Ryan McCartan --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:26, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
It can be shortened to TV for the Notes, if it's in the television section. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:51, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Meh. "TV" is one of those things that's like fingernails on a blackboard for me – I find its use to be relatively "unencyclopedic", and prefer that "television" be spelled out, at least on this project... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:03, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you IJBall for addressing this issue. I agree with you that the word television (or maybe TV) is particualry important in combined filmography tables, and that the formatting should be standardised. I would also agree with you and others that film is a better term than movie. I was a little confused by some of Musdan77's comments - if there is an example listed as best practice, is it not appropriate to edit pages to follow that style, and cite the reason as such? Because they seem to be saying it isn't. AutumnKing (talk) 19:59, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
I didn't say not to use it as a reference, but a "guideline" is just that and an "example" is just that. Unless it's policy, it depends on the consensus on the article. But, yes, it would be helpful to find general consensus on the project page. No one has said that the word "television" should not be used in a combined filmography table. It's only in the television tables that we're talking about. AngusWOOF, I was thinking the same thing. At least "TV" wouldn't be a repetition of the same word. But, I still don't know why it would have to be "film" rather than "movie". IJBall gives a reference to MOS:FILM, so I go there and can't find anything having to do with that. The term "TV movie" is used a lot in WP articles. (btw, the word is "non-encyclopedic"; "unencyclopedic" is not a word.) --Musdan77 (talk) 02:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
User:MarnetteD referenced the discussion above – it sounds like it took place about a decade ago in WP:FILM. I just know that "film" (including "television film") has been the preferred terminology for a long time. "Movie" seems to be similar to "TV show" in that it's considered popular "vernacular" rather than a technical term. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Just to clarify, given that most contributors to this discussion agree the term 'television film' is preferable to 'movie', and that the example filmography table has been changed as such, is it appropriate for me to change any filmography table to reflect this, or do I need to raise a RFC to gain consensus? Many thanks. AutumnKing (talk) 12:25, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Input requested

Project members input is requested at the antisemitism thread at Talk:Vincent Price. MarnetteD|Talk 17:37, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Filmography content

User:Pyxis Solitary reverted my edit of Zoie Palmer, in which I split off TV episodes from actual films, citing this project page's example #1, which shows both in the same section. Filmography defines itself as "a list of films", as does pretty much every dictionary. So is Wikipedia going to be a rebel without cause? Clarityfiend (talk) 05:10, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

@Clarityfiend: Television definitely belongs under 'Filmography' with 'Film', along with 'Web series', and arguably 'Music videos'. 'Theater' or 'Stage', OTOH, belongs in a separate section. The one issue at Zoie Palmer is that the subhead should be "Film", not "Films". The other issue is that the short films should probably be removed, as we only list notable roles in Filmographies. (The 'Television' section also needs some cleanup as well, but it's more minor...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
There's a wee fact that has been omitted from Clarityfiend's statement. The Zoie Palmer page had a Filmography section wherein *Films* and *Television* had their own table.
An editor's personal preference is not a good reason for changing the layout of a page. If a decision has been made by consensus to change the format across-the-board from how it originally appeared in the Zoie Palmer article and how it appears in other actor articles (for example: Tatiana Maslany, Melissa McCarthy, Ellen Page, Dan Aykroyd, Michael C. Hall, etc.) ... then the new version needs to be included in the WP:FILMOGRAPHY guideline. Otherwise, the Zoie Palmer filmography section should remain the same as before (with, of course, Films > Film). Pyxis Solitary 09:08, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Is it "personal preference" to not disregard the very definition of "filmography"? An encyclopedia should strive to be accurate, and this falls far short IMO. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:49, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
I've asked for more opinions at the main film project. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:55, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
If there's one thing you definitely should do is also include links to the edit history (in this instance, Zoie Palmer history – done by me) and topics (thread started in WikiProject Film) involved in your mission. Pyxis Solitary 10:14, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Again, 'Television' belongs under 'Filmography', and it always has. Now the "one unified table" vs. separate 'Film' and 'Television' tables is a different question, and depends on whether there are enough separate film and television roles to justify separate tables, but that is not the issue here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Also, if you want to argue that 'Filmography' in general should be retitled to something new, like 'Credits' or 'List of works', that too is a separate and much larger question, that would probably require a full site-wide RfC. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:32, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes, we group these under "Filmography". It's understood to be interpreted broadly. Especially since nearly zero "films" these days are shot on actual film. Everything is digital video today, and it's increasingly being repurposed to different media (e.g. a show doesn't get green-lit for television but is done as an download/stream show, or "The Day of the Doctor" which was shot as a special TV episode between seasons, also shown theatrically (I was there! >;-), and out-takes from which were used for three Web and TV mini-episodes. A "films versus television" distinction isn't really viable today, and hasn't been for most of my life; theatrical films were regularly telecined after there initial theatrical run, and there have been television movies for generations. Numerous films are explicitly shot in multiple versions, with a theatrical and censored TV version being made at the same time (since at very least the early 1980s, probably longer).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:47, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Can more people put Shirley MacLaine on their watchlists?

Can more people put Shirley MacLaine on their watchlists? Apparently nobody is watching it, or at least not closely, and weird things happen without getting fixed or reverted. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 08:41, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

John Fiore (actor)

Would someone from WP:FILMBIO take a look at this article? It's only got one source, but it's not available online. It's also not clear if this person meets WP:NACTOR and there may have been some COI edits made to the article over the years by various editors, including the subject of the article himself. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:38, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I looked in my hard copy of Total Television by Alex McNeil (3rd edition, Penguin Books, 1996). John Fiore is not mentioned in the Law & Order entry, nor is the Profaci character listed. My copy of The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network and Cable TV Shows ... is an older edition, which does not include Law & Order, so that did not help. I did, however, find the following articles online, which someone could use to enhance the existing article.
Eddie Blick (talk) 18:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Probably not enough (looks to be mostly "local coverage" of a local actor) – the only thing that looks like it might get him past WP:NACTOR is his Guiding Light role, and I can't tell if that's a recurring role or a contract role. Basically, this guy looks like a hard-working journeyman actor, who's had recurring roles on multiple series. Unfortunately, that's not enough to qualify you for a Wikipedia article (and I've had articles very much like this one on other journeyman actors deleted in the past...). I suggest taking this one to WP:AfD. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:46, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Eddie Blick and IJBall for taking a look at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:20, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
I've started an AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Fiore (actor). -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:40, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Notability Tag

Can someone please take a look at the article I created on Jon Jashni? Its been tagged as a biography that may not meet notability guidelines. I'd like to have a review of the article by someone in this group, possibly someone knowledgable on film producers. Based on the criteria listed in Wikipedia:Notability (people) under creative professionals, wouldn't the article meet this requirement: "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work." --Xxxx7291 (talk) 23:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Dana Plato#Son's death

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Dana Plato#Son's death. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:18, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Ameliasxyand my page Akeem Mair

Hi there, I'd like to include my page in this Wikiproject. Do you you think if my page meet the requirement or not? I'd really appreciate.Thanks. --Ameliasxy (talk) 03:58, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Dai Sil Kim-Gibson

Hello, I hope this is an appropriate place to post this comment. Apologies and please delete if not. I have been working on an article for the Korean-American documentary filmmaker Dai Sil Kim-Gibson that I think is worthy for approval and validation. Would anyone here be interested or willing to check out my draft and provide feedback to help it get approved? Draft:Dai_Sil_Kim-Gibson Thank you much! Casey.ha (talk) 18:04, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Community reassessment: Emily Ratajkowski

Emily Ratajkowski, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Trillfendi (talk) 00:47, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Featured quality source review RFC

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Desmond Dube

Was wondering if some others might take a look at this to assess whether Dube meets WP:ENTERTAINER. Article was created back in 2008 and has been tagged for sourcing issues since 2009. There only seems to be have been mainly cleanup edits made since it was created, and there's quite a lot of red links in the article content. Thought about prodding this since the only source cited is basically a DVD extra. Anyone have any other opinions? -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Looks to have be in the main cast of the 1-season TV series No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency and the film Hotel Rwanda, so plausibly meets WP:NACTOR. However, NACTOR doesn't absolve from the need to meet WP:BASIC, which an unsourced article clearly does not. I see only a couple of passing mentions in Variety, so that's a warning sign. There probably needs to be a "deeper dive" made here to see if other, perhaps more non-traditional sourcing, can be found. But, as things stand now, this looks like a plausible "delete" candidate at WP:AfD. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:49, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Florian Munteanu Creed II actor

Hello.. I need your guys help. I made this page a few days ago Florian Munteanu (actor) and was deleted today. So I talked to the guy who deleted the page (Athaenara) and he send me here. Here is my discussion with him and the reason why it was deleted.

This guy Florian needs a wiki page. Thousands of people saw Creed II and many don't know who played Viktor the son of Ivan Drago. About 12,000 people saw his wiki page yesterday (checked via toollabs:pageviews analysis). It's important people need to know the person who portrays the character Viktor Drago in the film. Florian Munteanu is a newcomer actor, and according to his manager Eduard Irimia, Florian will be starring in three Hollywood production films in 2019: source, which is in Romanian.

Please restore his page. Thank you. Legendfootballers (talk) · 22:48, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

People need food and air, but nobody needs a Wikipedia article. Unfortunately, there isn't much we can do for you except point you elsewhere. If you want to submit a new article without the fear of it being immediately deleted, you can use articles for creation. If you want to contest the original deletion discussion, you can do that at deletion review. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:12, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
I actually refered Legendfootballers here because I thought project members would be better able than either he or I to assess Florian Munteanu's notability. – Athaenara ✉ 05:36, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Looking at the sequence of events with the deletion, the article was deleted through an AfD discussion because he did not (yet) meet WP:NBOX, WP:NACTOR, or WP:GNG. The question to call in the experts for is whether the comments from his manager get him over the NACTOR hurdle. My instinct is to wait until those films are further along the production line, so there are firmer sources to go on for him appearing in multiple films. Alternatively, we wait until his performance in Creed II garners enough in-depth coverage of him to meet GNG. —C.Fred (talk) 18:03, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

"Complete filmography"

I occasionally see "Complete filmography", rather than "Filmography", in articles (such as Frank McHugh#Complete filmography). Should any documentation be provided to support saying that the list is complete? Eddie Blick (talk) 00:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Personally, I think 'Select[ed] filmography' and 'Filmography' are correct headings. If any say 'Complete filmography', I would change the header to simply say 'Filmography'. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Agreed with IJBall. No filmography should be listed as complete, otherwise you'd have to deal with those extras, additional voices, and unsourced uncredited cameos. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:03, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback, IJBall and AngusWOOF. I will try to be alert to revise any that I see using "Complete" in the heading. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:52, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
@Teblick: @AngusWOOF: @IJBall: I'm the one adding "Complete", based primarily on IMDb. "Filmography" by itself is ambiguous, as many with that title are incomplete. I am also in the habit of replacing "Select[ed]" with the more neutral "Partial", as the former begs the question as to what the selection criteria are. I often find less notable entries in these so-call "Select" sections. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
We are "not IMDb" (as per WP:INDISCRIMINATE) – i.e. in general, we should not be listing things like non-notable short films (which is most of them) or "talk show" appearances. As such, we will almost never have "complete filmography" listings for most of our subjects. "Filmography" by itself isn't ambiguous, any more than section headers like "Episodes" or "Career" are, and is absolutely fine for a section head. If a filmography's listings are particularly brief and less-than-inclusive, then a heading of "Select filmography" is appropriate. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Full filmography in navbox

Further input requested at Template talk:Busby Berkeley#Full filmography. Thanks. --woodensuperman 09:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Bryan Becker

Hello everyone, I'm looking for support and guidance regarding my first page creation. The subject page was moved from main space to draft space due to "unreliable" citations. How can I improve my sources to help improve the article? I can't think of a better source for a filmography than IMDB, and Its quite obvious that the subject meets notabilty based on the body of work section 1 of WP:ENTERTAINER. --Celluloid Film Fan (talk) 03:00, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

@Celluloid Film Fan: Looking at Draft:Bryan Becker, issue #1 is that nearly all of your sources are from IMDb, which is a WP:NOTRS, especially for WP:BLPs, as per WP:RS/IMDb and WP:Citing IMDb. Your first order of business is to find strong Secondary sources that discuss your subject, in more than a passing manner – sources like Variety (magazine), The Hollywood Reporter, Los Angeles Times, etc. If you can show that your subject has been discussed in sources like that, then there's a decent chance that it might be accepted as an article in mainspace via WP:AfC. Good luck! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
This is exactly the information I was hoping for. Thank you. Correct me if I'm wrong but there's no rush to edit the article correct? I believe it will be in draft for 6 months.--Celluloid Film Fan (talk) 06:15, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
@Celluloid Film Fan: Correct – a draft remains for 6 months after its last edit by a human editor. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:20, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

New WikiProject

I have suggested that a new WikiProject that may be of relevance to this one, be created. If you are interested in viewing the proposal or taking part in the discussion, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Fuller_House.  mrwoogi010  Talk 23:53, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Gunn Kansara

I am still learning about the policies on notability of actors so I didn't thought of directly nominating this to AfD.

Can others tell if this person is really notable that a standalone article is justified? I really don't observe any significant coverage in multiple reliable references about this person. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Fred Murphy (cinematographer)

IMDb has pages about Fred Murphy, born 1942 and Fred V. Murphy (1943-2013). The Wikipedia article says "Fred Murphy" in the title and "Fred V. Murphy II" in the first line. But on the IMDb page of Fred V. Murphy are also entries "director of photography - as Fred V. Murphy II". Somebody should clarify if these 2 persons are identical or not and either contact IMDb to merge the 2 pages or add a prominent note to the Wikipedia article that there is another cinematographer with the same name and almost same year of birth. --84.62.84.239 (talk) 15:24, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers/Archive_14&oldid=1088081443"