Talk:Sridevi filmography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject India / Cinema (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (marked as Low-importance).
WikiProject Film (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

Copy edit tag removed[edit]

I have removed a {{copyedit}} tag to which was appended an HTML comment saying: "the "notes" are almost entirely unsourced trivia and need to be removed, but because of the ridiculous complexity of table markup, that will be an endeavor that takes dedicated and experienced editor". Cleanup of sourcing is not the same as copy editing. I have added a {{Refimprove}} tag instead. --Stfg (talk) 14:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

No need for tables[edit]

Per both the overriding manual of style and the filmography style guidelines say that tables are not necessary.

"[Tables] can be useful for a variety of content presentations on Wikipedia, though should be used only when appropriate; sometimes the information in a table may be better presented as prose paragraphs or as an embedded list." ... "If a list is simple, it is generally better to use one of the standard Wikipedia list formats instead of a table. Lists are easier to maintain than tables, and are often easier to read."

"Some filmographies are presented in a tabled format; however, you should make sure there is an obvious benefit to table format before creating a table for a filmography. Adding a table so that there can be "notes" column that pulls in trivial crap like "child artiste" is just WP:BEANS and instead of being an obvious benefit is an obvious detriment. ---- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

MOS/TABLE plays no role here, this is a filmography so we directly go to WP:FILMOGRAPHY. And there, we see a filmography table, yes, it says you can well use a filmography table please. "you should make sure there is an obvious benefit to table format", yes, according to me there is an obvious benefit, it is far clearer and you can sort it. Also I want to add more like a director column like seen here, Christian Bale filmography. Nothing speaks against it and Red Pen shall please stop removing it, because it's definitely not wrong! Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 18:26, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
WTF? Of COURSE MOSTABLE plays a role here - you are choosing whether or not to display content in a table form or not. Dont be ridiculous. It is not clearer, it is more cluttered, and most columns are empty so sorting is not a benefit, and adding the "NOTES" column just invites crappy trivia so there is not any OBVIOUS benefit, but there are obvious drawbacks. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:36, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Ridiculous, of course it's far clearer. Filmography is part of MOS/TABLE but more precise and more apt for a filmography as the name says. And a table is always clearer, and I repeat you can sort. We can discuss about the notes column, I'm ready to change that but the table will remain. As of now, they are empty but I said I'm working on it. What you did, borders on vandalism, you removed the tables in a hurry and it looked terrible. I'm quite appalled at your edits. Warnings will follow, and finally admins will look into it. You are definitely wrong here. Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 18:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
This edit in patricular was terrible. What you left behind was so ugly and unencyclopedic and I had to clean it up. In spite of WP:Filmography you are removing the tables. I don't know what makes you think that you're doing the right thing. But this page will have tables! Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
The page will have tables only if you show that WP:MOS/TABLE AND WP:FILMOGRAPHY are actually met. " And a table is always clearer," is obviously NOT VALID otherwise the guidelines would say "Table formats are always clearer" and not "use tables only when there is an obvious benefit". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Is that a joke? Am I talking to a wall? I have you shown you already! WP:Filmography is met,'s a filmography? And regarding WP:WHENTABLE: "they might also be used for presenting equivalent words in two or more languages; for awards by type and year; complex discographies", exactly that, it's a complex filmography! And now the most important part and after this you don't ever ask me again what's the benefit of having a table: "They allow for sortability, ease of editing, and accessibility for the vision impaired" (from WP:Filmography). That's why a table. "the information will be more clearly conveyed by virtue of having rows and columns" that's why a table (a director's column is planned too). This is such a huge list of films and it soo much needs a table. You should remove things that are definitely wrong or out of place, and not things that may or may not be wrong. Where is WP:Filmography not met? Your argument is very vague (and I have to say it's because the guideline is rather vague and not really precise) and just because YOU feel there is no benefit (according to me, there definitely IS! Why? Read above again!) doesn't mean you can remove it. This looks so much like disruptive editing for me and any new editor would get blocked for such edits. Go and remove personal comments, subjective claims, vandals etc. from articles, things which are obviously, clearly not welcome or allowed. I'm asking you back, since you feel there is no benefit, there is no benefit, when do you think a filmography table is needed then? (And don't be a smart alec and answer, if there's an obvious benefit!) Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 20:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
WP:Filmography is met when you meet the conditions in the first line "you should make sure there is an obvious benefit to table format before creating a table for a filmography. " You simply proclaiming that because its a filmography its obvious benefit in a table is nonsense. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

CommentVeera Dheera Sooran are you sure about the release dates (at least which film got released earlier) for each of the 200 odd films she has acted. Without that sorting would hardly be useful to any reader. Best to go with the list format. Vensatry (Ping me) 06:03, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

For most of them, I have the release date, yes and the chronological order of films should be no problem. In any case, sorting will be more useful as it's more easier to read, since another column is planned to be added as well. Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 16:46, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Even for her Malayalam films, which are relatively unknown. First of all, having separate tables for each language is a bad idea. Vensatry (Ping me) 17:24, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't like the idea of having separate table either and I would rather make one table with films from all languages. I said I will work on the page. I see you worked the most on Kamal Haasan filmography and I would like to ask you, do you know the release dates for all his films (which include many Malayalam films too)? If that page has tables, I don't see anything wrong if this one has tables too. Same rights for everyone (every article/page), no? Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 17:34, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Of course, I have the release dates of at least 90% of his films ( has that for some Tamil artists). But I seriously doubt that may not be available for Sridevi. Good luck! Vensatry (Ping me) 17:47, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
I see, so 90%, not 100% either, right? But it has tables. Means you have "guessed" some dates and arranged a few films randomly. So that again means I may remove the tables then, right? Would you object to that or not? Come on, Vensatry. I wish you would rather help me in getting the data. Because I know, you can! Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 18:12, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm not here to support anybody. I never make any guesses; when I said 90%, it includes all films in which he played lead roles. I'm not sure 100% sure about some films where he made special/guest appearances. For such films I did some kind of research. For Sridevi, data may be available for her Hindi films, but I bet you can't find them at least for some Malayalam, Tamil and Telugu movies that she did in her early part of the career. Vensatry (Ping me) 07:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Sridevi's all Malayalam movies release dates are available here . click on each film to get the release dates, its displayed there. And as for Kamalahasan see And may I ask why there is a table for Hindi in her fimography. Same rule for all isn't it? Jai98 (talk) 10:36, 11 August 2014 (UTC)