I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that Gene Kelly is an important figure in film history and a good filmography list should reflect his contribution to cinema. With the help and advise of others, I have contructed the list of Mr. Kelly's films in chronological order and annotated the list with significant information and also provided what i believe to be a good introductory section. I have also cited my sources for the information presented. I have submitted this list for peer reviews and, after some improvements had been made to the list as suggested from my peers, I was informed that the list should be considered ready to be submitted as a featured list candidate. Jimknut (talk) 05:25, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I peer reviewed this and felt all of my concerns were addressed their so that it meets the FLC criteria now, Ruhrfisch><>°° 11:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reread and am impressed by the improvement within FLC. I still support under the revised FLC criteria. My only quibble is a WP:ACCESS issue - the cream colored background for musicals is not something a blind person would pick up on. Could there be a symbol added, perhaps an asterisk after the film title, which would identify either the musicals, or if it would be easier, the non-musicals? Ruhrfisch><>°° 12:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about a clef to go along with the cream-coloring? Jimknut (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While I like the idea of a G clef, I am not sure an image file would work for WP:ACCESS issues. Anybody know? Ruhrfisch><>°° 16:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WT:ACCESS is the best place to ask, but I think as long as you use image alt text, it would be okay, because screenreaders will be able to read the alt text; nevertheless, isn't there a text-based symbol that can be used, just to be sure that there won't be any problems? Matthewedwards : Chat 02:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would be better to use plain symbols (e.g. * ^ #). Dabomb87 (talk) 02:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added this symbol to the musicals: § Jimknut (talk) 19:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fix the dabs (as found with the checker tool in the toolbox)
Sorry, but I don't know what you mean by "dabs." I need help with this
Look to your right, do you see the toolbox, the first tool finds disambiguation links.--Best, ₮RUCӨ 00:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
Gene Kelly (1912–1996) was an award-winning American motion picture actor, dancer, singer, director, and choreographer. -- Remove the bold from his name per WP:LEDE
Done.
Kelly was graduated from the University of Pittsburgh in 1933 with a degree in economics. -- Remove the was
Sorry Truco, "was graduated" is grammatically correct (if not the most common way to say it). See this please. Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Kept — it is gramatically correct.
Around the same time he was running a dancing school with his brother Fred. -- not the proper way to start off this sentence, either merge it with a comma or semi colon or reword it completely
I removed the sentence completely. It might be an significant point in Kelly's biography, but I now believe its not needed in an introduction to his filmography.
He made his Broadway debut as a chorus boy in the play Leave It to Me! (1938), starring William Gaxton, Victor Moore, and Sophie Tucker. -- (1)What is a chorus boy? A member of the chorus? (2)The people who starred in the film is not relevant to this list as this is about Kelly not the film or the other stars.
I changed this to read "small role" instead of "chorus boy" and also removed the names of the other actors. (By the way, it's a play, not a film).
After playing supporting roles in Two for the Show and The Time of Your Life he went on to create the title role in Rodgers and Hart's Pal Joey (1940). -- Add a comma before he went on
Done.
Then, after staging the dances for Best Foot Foward (1941),[3] Kelly made his Hollywood film debut opposite Judy Garland in Me and My Gal (1942). -- Opposite? You mean as?
Changed to: "Kelly made his Hollywood film debut in For Me and My Gal (1942), co-starring Judy Garland." (I'll leave in Garland's name, as she was significant to Kelly's career.)
From there Kelly went on to work as an actor, dancer and, subsequently, choreographer in a series of musical films that presented, among other innovations, experimenting with a combination of dance and animation (Anchors Aweigh and Invitation to the Dance) and special effects (including the "Alter Ego" number from Cover Girl[5] and the split-screen dance number from It's Always Fair Weather).[6] -- (1)Comma after there (2)The comma should be before and not after it, it should be , and subsequently a choreographer in as series...(3)The and before animation should be a comma, add a comma after the (Invitation to the Dance) parenthesis
This request I found confusing. I have reworded this sentence slightly so that it (hopefully) reads better.
Table
Uncredited as choreographer -- add a before choreographer (this applies to both instances)
I have removed some information, including some footnotes, that I felt was not needed. I believe, then, that what is left should give the article a better, more "streamlined" feel.
References
What makes Ref 7 reliable and what is the publisher?
All instances of refs to this source need the publisher.
Ref 18 needs to be properly formatted
This ref has been taken out. All the awards listed here (Academy Awards, Golden Globe, etc.) are now referenced to the web sites for those awards.
*IMDB is not reliable in sourcing information, see WP:RS--Best, ₮RUCӨ 02:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Only a general link to the IMDb has been kept.
Was this all done?--Best, ₮RUCӨ 22:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think so — except for the "dabs" (whatever the are) Jimknut (talk) 23:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--Best, ₮RUCӨ 02:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Despite the new FL criteria, this list is still up to those standards. Still support.--Truco 14:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Nehrams2020
I believe that the mention of the awards/nominations should be removed. Ideally, the actor should have his own awards and nominations list. Consider if a certain film he was in had him receive numerous nominations/wins; it would not work to list all of them. Also, by only choosing specific ones, it's not NPOV as its indicating one award is better than another. I'd recommend creating that list and removing the notes for the various films. By the way, I previously fixed the dabs for you, so don't worry about those. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 02:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The awards have been removed from the list, although I left in some infomration in the introduction. I hope this is better. I could create a awards page for Gene Kelly but, at present time, my sources are largely the IMDb and some Kelly fan sites —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimknut (talk • contribs) 18:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Kelly was graduated from the University of Pittsburgh in 1933 with a degree in economics." Is this relevant to the list's topic? After reading the lead, I don't see how the degree was related to his contributions to stage and film.
The line has been removed.
"After playing supporting roles in Two for the Show..." Two for the Show links to an album, make sure to fix this dab. Same goes for Pal Joey in the next sentence, and Invitation to the Dance a few sentences later. Also go through the tables and make sure that the links go to the correct pages.
All links have been corrected and should work now.
"From there, Kelly went on to work as an actor, dancer and subsequently, choreographer in a series of musical films that presented, among other innovations, experimenting with combinations of dance and animation (Anchors Aweigh and Invitation to the Dance) and dance scenes involving special effects (including the "Alter Ego" number from Cover Girl[5] and the split-screen dance number from It's Always Fair Weather)." I believe this sentence could be split into two, it's kind of hard to follow.
This is now in two sentences and also reworded a bit.
In the table, perhaps a wikilink should be added for Choreographer.
Support Issues resolved, and below issues seem to be addressed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 06:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Review by D7240
The statement in the introduction that "He was noted for his musical films that displayed his creative choreography which often fused tap and jazz" is in contrast with the opening statement in the main article which states "His many innovations transformed the Hollywood musical film, and he is credited with almost singlehandedly making the ballet form commercially acceptable to film audiences". The main article relies on the scholarship of Billman, and later on, Delamater, Hirschhorn and Thomas to justify this, yet the filmography cites an online source. This inconsistency is jarring. The statement about him fusing jazz and tap is a generic one which could be applied to almost any film dancer from 1929-1960 and says little or nothing about his original contributions to this film genre.D7240 (talk) 20:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have the Billman, Delamater, and Hirschorn material at present time. If you can add these sources and reword the intro that would be helpful. I'm not sure whether or not the exact wording from the main article would be considered plagiarism, as this is a "satellite" site and no one is getting credit for the writing.
The exact wording would be fine or anything consistent with it. Writing credits aren't an issue in Wikipedia as nobody owns any article. What's important is consistency between the articles.D7240 (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The information on his education and stage career is irrelevant to his film career, and in any case, far more detailed and better sourced information is contained in the main article on Kelly.
Just a general note, leads of FLs are encouraged to go beyond the list and provide context on the subject, albeit not in unnecessary detail. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the info about his stage career could be removed, but it can just as well remain as his stage work provided a foundation to his film career.
The information on Kelly's film career is also inadequately covered/summarised and would be better off left out altogether. Again, there is a wealth of properly sourced detail in the main article.
Once again I'll welcome any upgrading.
The filmography should clearly distinguish musical films from the mainly run-of-the-mill B-movies Kelly was obliged to do early on in his career.
We can present the the musicals with one colored background (I suggest a light yellow or cream color as that won't be too harsh on the eyes) while the non-musicals have a white or "blank" background. Does anyone second this. ("Run-of-the-mill"? Isn't that a matter of opinion?)
That's fine. I suppose run-of the mill is an opinion, but then the term B-movie is generally a term of disparagement as most were nothing more than program fillers for the main features in the olden days.D7240 (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The choreography credits are completely unsatisfactory. The main article's original filmography specified precisely where Kelly acted either as sole or co-choreographer, and without exception he acted as choreographer in every dance musical in which he performed, although in many cases he was not officially credited. He also contributed choreography for other dancers to many of the musical films in which he directed or produced. See Billman's Film Choreographers and Dance Directors for confirmation, or I'll be happy to supply info.
Yes please do so.
I see you've used those available from the article archive - that's fine.D7240 (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A suggestion for further enhancement would be to list the names of dance routines performed by Kelly in each of the films - after all, this is what most Kelly afficionados will be interested in. It would be great to be able to see at a glance, for example, where to find Kelly's famous dance with a newspaper, or his one with roller skates.
That's fine with me. Anyone else care to "weigh in" on this?
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like the use of "award-winning" in the opening sentence. It gives a positive spin on his work.
Removed.
Please don't link common terms such as United States. I'd also argue against "actor", "dancer" and "singer", but I'd understand if you wanted to keep them.
Link to United States removed. The others I'll keep.
"choreography which often"-->choreography, which often
Fixed.
"He began his acting career the theatre" Missing word.
Fixed.
"co-starring Judy Garland."-->co-starring with Judy Garland.
Changed, although I think the original wording was fine.
"From there, Kelly went on to work as an actor, dancer and subsequently, choreographer in a series of musical films."-->Afterward, Kelly worked as an actor, dancer and subsequently, choreographer, in a series of musical films.
Fixed.
"In these films his choreographic"-->In these films, his choreographic
Fixed.
"and also dance scenes involving special effects "-->and dance scenes that involved special effects
Fixed.
Can you redlink the unlinked films? The chance that the articles may be created one day outweigh the tiny effects on visual appeal.
Done.
"He was also voted the 15th most popular film"
Fixed.
Can you add em dashes to the blank cells in the roles and notes sections? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Added.
Please do not strike other's comments. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's all I can find for now. This film is not covered in the Thomas book since the film came after the book. Can anyone find a better source?
To determine the reliability of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliability that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. In short, if you can't prove that the above is reliable, the source may need to be removed. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please assure me that IMDb is only being used in conjunction with other sources.
Only an external link to the IMDb's main page on Kelly is featured. (But what's up with the animosity toward the IMDb? Has Wikipedia drawn a lot of heat for using them as a source?)
I added an "External links" header to distinguish it. IMBd generally does not have a reputation for fact checking. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the "features" section be called "filmography", or is there a reason why it isn't?
I changed it to "filmography," although I suppose there could be no section heading at all.
Is there a reason why the tables are split up? I don't think it's particularily long.
I put it back into one section.
If the tables aren't split, they should be reformatted so that the column widths in the three are equal. -- Scorpion0422 17:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The columns are the same width – or at least they're showing up that way on my computer screen. The trouble is that "choreographer" is a longer word than "director" and "actor" so it takes up more width on the page. I tried hyphenating it but that looks tacky and it's difficult to hyperlink that way. Any suggestons? Jimknut (talk) 19:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think a full stop is required in the image caption, not a complete sentence.
Full stop removed.
The first paragraph of the lead read (I'm sorry to say) like fancruft. While it's cited to Billman's book, it strikes me as a heavily one-sided review of Kelly's achievements, and written in overtly glowing terms. Anyway we can say (sort of) what is already said but without rose-tinted spectacles?
This has been reworded. It now reads "He is probably best known today for his performances in musicals, notably An American in Paris (1951) and Singin' in the Rain (1952)."
"notably the "Alter Ego" " - notable according to whom, and why notable? And I would move [3] and [4] to the other side of the period in that sentence.
Changed to "including the "Alter Ego" " - refs have been moved
"..was also successful..." in what sense? Box office? It's not clear to me I'm afraid.
Changed to "appeared in".
What makes The Gene Scene site a reliable source? How is it used in this list?
This ref has been removed.
Four red links, shame we can't get even stubs for these?
I was asked to put these in, so I did. It's possible that these films will get articles later on. After all, Wikipedia is constantly a work in progress, isn't it?
I've also added in the titles of Kelly's musical numbers and put the musicals against a colored background as per a request above. Jimknut (talk) 22:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the dab and most of the redirects (I didn't fix those that had no reason to be fixed). In addition, I fixed the logical punctuation issues; the commas are not part of song titles and should be outside the quotation marks. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:48, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the fixes and redirects. Jimknut (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
