Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:44, 9 January 2007

File:Ankaracat.jpg S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Archives
Aug 2006 Sept 2006 Oct 2006 Nov 2006 Dec 2006

I'm a little confused as to why left me that message on my talk page, considering that I was the one who added the information about intersection categories to the department page. Anyway, obviously that means that I concur. I should also note, however, that you should consult with the rest of us before going about a major amount of work. There's bold and then there's BOLD. The whole point of the department is to coordinate efforts so as to minimize the amount of work we have to do, so implementation before consensus is a bad idea, even if the idea is justified. Girolamo Savonarola 16:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not a race. The point is to not have to do the work twice, or worse, undo work someone put a lot of time into, however misguided. I'm not trying to be patronizing here, but the world's information has spent centuries not being contained on Misplaced Pages - I fail to see how another few days matter in the scheme of things. Your intentions are in the right place, but I've seen all of the harumph that happened involving the world cinema lists, and quite frankly I think that if you aren't going to at least learn something from that, it's a bad sign. Tant pis. Girolamo Savonarola 16:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

There's two ways to react to criticism. One is to take it personally and decide that the other person has something against you. The other is to listen, consider that what is being said is trying to advise you towards the right direction, and try to at least analyze the arguments without regard for either yourself or the other person, with the goal of coming to some sort of agreement or compromise. But if you'd rather attack me for trying to help you work more effectively, that's your issue. What have I done? I've done nothing but make substantial edits to the department, the project, and Misplaced Pages at large. You can check my contributions list any day if you need evidence. That being said, I don't think that any of that is important in and of itself - that's why I don't feel the need to place userboxes on my user page. That's what this is all about - quality vs. quantity. I'm suggesting that you spend the time to work this out together with the rest of us who've started this department in the first place, in order to get it right the first time around. The current guidelines already have clear directives for several other categorization criteria; if you want to quickly start some work, I'd suggest the Films by studio category probably needs some expansion. Girolamo Savonarola 17:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you've been overly concerned about the potential size of these categories. Look at Category:2002 albums or Category:2002 computer and video games - a category can easily sustain a couple of pages without there being much bother. I agree that for a few, such as American films or Drama films, there may be an excess of films, but we need to define a) how big a category needs to be to require subcategorization and b) how much cross-linking there needs to be. Linking the same article to Category:1979 drama films and Category: 1979 American films should be suficient - there is no need to create Category: 1979 American drama films - it's simply too many intersections. I highly doubt that 1979 drama films and 1979 American films will each exceed more than a couple hundred films at most - that's well within the range of acceptable size. Girolamo Savonarola 17:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

But you see the other problem is that then an article can potentially have two or three categories that it belongs to which begin with 1979, then. 1979 English-language films, 1979 American drama films, 1979 Paramount films. I think that to a certain extent some of this can be left alone. For example, 1979 films is a limited set - while there may be more articles yet to be included in that category, there will be no more films which can join it in the future. On the other hand, categories by genre, language, and (usually) country or studio are open-ended by nature and can continue to expand as more films are made. So the question is how can we effectively intersection those categories without creating redundancies with films by year? As I've mentioned above, it seems that most of the other media's categories by year are simply non-subcat'd fully inclusive lists for that year. That makes sense due to the exclusive nature of delimiting by a year, as well as the fact that the cats rarely exceed 1000 articles. So this is only going to be an issue for 1000+ categories with open-endedness. In other words, countries, genres, studios, and languages, not years. So what's the best way to combine them? Girolamo Savonarola 17:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC) PS - I'm heading out for a few hours. Will try to give further thoughts when I return.

PLEASE STOP RECAT'ING. If you can't wait even a few hours in the middle of a discussion...quite frankly it shows a clear lack of respect for a consensus we're still discussing both here and in the department page. Now I'm going to have to go through the work of requesting these new cats be deleted (at least for the meantime). And reverting your edits. This is exactly what I am talking about. Please do not make major structural changes like this without getting consensus. This means discussing it in full - not just posting your thoughts and acting on them regardless of their reception. I'm very disappointed in this turn of events. Girolamo Savonarola 21:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

You may have good ideas, but if you don't go at project speed and wait for things to be planned out and decided, and instead keep changing things at whim, not only you create a mess (for others to clean), but also you disregard all others concenred. Yes, you talk (a lot), but then you act as you think anyway. I have tried to help you with what I feel is useful in what you contribute. I do not like the way you take hasty initiative in categorizing. I do not see this as help, even though you may have useful ideas to propose. Please, either participate at others' pace in building up a good plan for categorizing without rushing changes, or concentrate on something else for a while, until we have time to decide properly about it. You can continue to do what you like and face reverts, deletions, etc. I will not be happy to start reverting and tagging for deletion, but I will do it if I see you keep disregarding the common effort (and yes you do). Hoverfish Talk 21:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

For the moment I am reporting all the new categories you made. Hoverfish Talk 22:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I have to pitch in here and say to Mr. Blofeld, please, no matter how good your ideas seem, think of this before you act: Before new categories are created (or new stub types or new projects, or anything), we must maintain what is already here. There are many issues of film categorization already which should be addressed, before new categories and sub-categories can be structured. There is plenty to do - let's clean up what we have before we start creating more stuff which might need cleaning up itself... (I have 2 toddlers and I preach the same thing to them...) My second point is that if you get a reputation as a guy who acts quickly with little discussion, no one will want to take you seriously in the future. So please, find some work to do while the discussion continues, and listen to the good advice others are giving you. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 00:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Your idea of categories by decade, without the additional by-year and cross-categorizing, seems sufficient for the present and should be enough to work on for now, don't you think? Her Pegship (tis herself) 15:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Tag

A tag has been placed on Image:Kojak.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Misplaced Pages. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on ] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Pilotguy (ptt) 20:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Dryandra

They're fairly dense stubs: they list common name (if one exists), subgenus, series, authority, habit, and a high quality link. This genus is a very closely related to Banksia, which has a WikiProject that has taken two species articles to featured status in the last year. I don't think you have to worry about these stubs being abandoned. ;-) Hesperian 11:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry if I'm making new pages patrol difficult for you. Hesperian 11:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LuisInduni.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:LuisInduni.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 14:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Project work vs. individual decisions

As said before, I don't attach any "fool" or "idiot" labels on you or other users. Your haste and your solutions will have to wait. The reason haste is not welcome is that we need to have as much feedback as we can get. Such a massive change has to have behind it as thorough a discussion as possible. If not, it won't be long before someone else thinks of another "better" way and starts categorizing by his/her own logic. The delay will pay off in a steady and widely backed system. Then several coordinated members, with special semiautomatic editors, are going to work at speeds much higher than you or I can achieve. What I or you could do in a month, will be done in hours only. Your opinion and good ideas are still welcome, but only if given without pressure and excessive insistence, because under such circumstances collective work becomes very hard and frustrating. I have no resentment for your contributions, so long as you go with the project's pace and methodology in matters that concern the whole project very seriously. Hoverfish Talk 14:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Werner Abrolat.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Werner Abrolat.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 19:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, there are other screenshots that you uploaded for the new films you created that also need fair use rationales. Try to add them soon, before some administrator goes through and deletes them. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 06:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Chronological order in countries

Stressing the point that this is only my opinion, I agree with chronological ordering in countries' films. It is surely more enlightening and informative than an A-Z listing. I will also support you with my opinion if you run in oposition in some country. Hoverfish Talk 12:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Films

You have made several errors in your statistics. First, I would like to see a source for your statement that America released 10k films in 2005. Second, you assume that 30% of those are notable, which appears to be an arbitrary number you made up, but it is an order of magnitude higher than equivalent numbers in similar fields. And third, you assume that those same numbers hold for years prior to 2005, which is obviously false since the movie industry grows. I don't think it's a good idea to preemptively split categories on an assumption that they might grow too large at some point in the future. We should split them if and when they actually do become too large. >Radiant< 12:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• A far easier solution: use Category:Films by studio. Most of the studios listed there are American. So if we remove the films from Category:American films and subcategorize them by the appropriate studio, the tree becomes easily manageable. >Radiant< 13:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Did you know you could make a List of films and that our software allows that to be sortable by any column, such as director, production year, budget and media rating? >Radiant< 13:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • But neither do people generally know what year a film was made in. However, people who already know a film's title can find it by using that title. Categories are not intended as an index, they're intended to find related entries. >Radiant< 13:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Indeed. Please see m:help:sorting. >Radiant< 13:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
        • I wholeheartedly agree that it's a good idea to organize many of the more notable films released in America into a timeline by year and date of release. Note that if such a timeline were a list article, it could contain the actors, directors and release dates involved there; if the timeline were a category, it could not. That's why I object to the cat: not because the information is inappropriate, but because it's more comprehensive as a list. >Radiant< 13:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I wanna give you a prize

Hi, I'm Javitomad, a Spanish user of English wikipedia.

I've seen you've created some articles about Spanish municipalities. Some of them have been improved by me, but the important is that you created them.

Because of that, I want to give you a Barnstar, the Spanish Barnstar.

• I, Javitomad, give you this Barnstar for contributin to a better Spanish-English Misplaced Pages.

(copy and paste this in your user page.)

Faithfully. Javitomad (...tell me...)

• • Sí, soy de España, de Madrid y de Salamanca. Tu español es muy bueno, se puede mejorar, pero es muy bueno.
    • Yes, I'm from Spain, I live in Madrid, but my mother is from Salamanca. You speak Spanish very well, you still can improve it, but it's quite good.

• • He visto el artículo sobre Jonathen Cornelius y creo que podrías traducirlo al español (más o menos). en la Wiki:Es. ¿Qué me dices?
    • I've seen the article Jonathen Cornelius and I think you could translate it into Spanish languaje (more or less). What do you think?

PS:Victoria Beckham is not liked in Spain very much... because she said something about "Spain smells like a garlic" or something like that... and, of course, people didn't liked that.

Avoid huge tables

This is a technical thing that's good to discuss before you start planning for huge tables. Huge tables may have delays to display. Don't forget the 32KB per page recommendation. You can exceed it, but don't go too far. I wouldn't worry to go up to 50KB per page, if necessary. So for anything huge (and tables add some code), try to break it down. With Nehrams we had to break down the Lists by Letters and now each one is less or around 40KB. Hoverfish Talk 15:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Filmography of country"? Something sounds wrong. Also filmography limits an article to a list mostly, whereas Cinema of country leaves it open to become a very informative article. If you must split the list of films from the cinema article, I think "List of country films" sounds right. It wouldn't hurt to get second opinions however, Hoverfish Talk 17:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It can also be named "by region and country". You created Americas, I have to look at it later. Right now I am into a lot. Hoverfish Talk 19:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm back and took a look. It's quite decent but the region positioning is a bit unusual. Why is North America so far from the South? Shouldn't the order be like in the World navigation? Hoverfish Talk 22:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Did you check Category:Stub categories? You may create "1920s comedy (or drama or horror) film stubs" but don't intersect country and decade. Go by what you find already there or on these lines. If you start new intesections there are thousands of additional combinations that could be created following this line, so you will run again into problems. For stub ideas you should refer to the stub sorting project, but I think you will get a NO from them too. As for the table sorting, it works. I have a simple example in User:Hoverfish/Notebook and you can read full instructions in m:help:sorting. Hoverfish Talk 14:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's good you proposed it. Although looking in stubs has another function than looking in all film articles, it will be interesting to know if this is welcome in stub sorting. Hoverfish Talk 15:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I never knew the ghost series, so I enjoyed reading about them. Monty Python and Faulty Towers are my favorite too. What do you mean if I don't object? I'm just the piano player. Hoverfish Talk 18:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ernst

I have a question. Where have you found these babels where you've written that your favourite language is Spanish and so on? Morris Munroe 20:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Why didn't you answer my question? Morris Munroe 14:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, but thanks for your answer. Greetings! Morris Munroe 14:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Stub proposal

Hi Blofeld! Per you suggestion on the WP:WSS/P page, if you want to know which articles in Category:American films are stubs, your best method is to use CatScan and search Category:American films for stub-sized articles, or for articles that are already film-stubs of some kind. I can generate a list for you if you like. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Me again - I created a list of all articles in Category:American films which are marked as some kind of stub; it's currently in my sandbox if you want to take a look. If you think you'll use it, I can move it to a Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Films/Categorization subpage. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 00:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I do remember the Randall & Hopkirk series - it was called My Partner the Ghost here in the U.S. I think. Wow, a blast from the past! I am mostly recovered now, and thanks for your message. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 16:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Lists of Canadian films

I think the most important in the tables you create is to have a column for awards or anything that makes them notable. What do you say? Hoverfish Talk 21:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

To put it in a general way, what about a column for "Notability". There one could enter protagonist or director or award or boxoffice or whatever it is. Hoverfish Talk 19:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Here is an example of how it could work. Hoverfish Talk 19:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Shambala

Thanks for adding a category to Shambala (song). After writing an article like that, it always makes me smile to see someone besides a bot has paid a visit. But did you really have to act so horrified that I forgot to categorize it? If that's the worst thing you encountered on Misplaced Pages this weekend you aren't looking hard enough! House of Scandal 11:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hey mate sorry I didn't mean to sound harsh. Good article by the way its just I was surprised that it wasn't categorized. It may also be under Category:1973 singles you may want to check. Keep up the good work and happy editing. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 13:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No offense taken; I was just kidding with you. Can't you see the bright yellow smiley face? House of Scandal 13:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Removing messages from other users

Do not remove messages from other users or be banned!!!

Who removed a message you asshole?Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC) I have the right to remove any message from my page

The American films by year "project"

I noticed that the Category you created, "American films by year and by decade", is likely headed for deletion. I understand that categories like this take quite some time to develop and flesh out, yet this particular one appears to be unwelcome at Misplaced Pages, unless I'm misunderstanding the argument. I hope that you will continue your work here at Misplaced Pages. However, just so you know, there are also other wikis out there that might very well welcome such a Category project as yours. You might start by looking at Wikia.com, Centiare.com, or PBwiki.com. If you feel that this message is too spammy, you are welcome to delete it from your discussion page. --JossBuckle Swami 02:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Terrorism in country categories

I saw you created the Terrorism in Spain category a while back. A new user is upset by the use of the word terrorism and is removing categories from pages at random. I would appreciate it if you would take a look at, and consider reverting the user's edits to, East Turkestan Islamic Movement, Grey Wolves, and Kurdistan Workers Party. Thanks, KazakhPol 02:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)