Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Films based on books

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconFilm Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page 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.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Suggested categories[edit]

Use this space to suggest subcategories to Category:Films based on books.

Move question[edit]

Should this heading be moved to the talk page? Lady Aleena 09:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here. I suggest keeping this at the top. Now please comment. AdamSmithee 08:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! - LA

Films based on war books[edit]

Category:Films based on war books under fiction e.g. Apocalypse Now or A Farewell to Arms (this would also fall under romance) would fall under this category. Any thoughts?AdamSmithee 08:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

War books would either be non-fiction or fiction. It depends on which book the film was based. So, place war films in either fiction or non-fiction for now depending on their content. - LA
Most of them are based on fiction, I think. Maybe it would be more useful to make a cat. now, at least for fiction (if other people agree to its utility), than to go through these movies two times. I mean, I can find 20 films for this category at a superficial look AdamSmithee 09:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My preference is to not have a sub-cat for war books. There is a War Films category, which should suffice, and frankly, there are enough war books in both fiction and non-fiction to make this too convoluted. Her Pegship 16:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My preference is to have a sub-cat for war books. Not sure why "War Films" should suffice, given that not all war films are based on books. Personally, and I realize this isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I like reading and watching war movies. Not sure what the "both fiction and non-fiction" meant. Wouldn't both fit in a "films based on war books"? But if people don't want the sub-category . . . MikeBriggs 19:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, I was thinking that assigning a War films category and a Films based on (whatever kind of) books category to an article would be adequate to help users find the article. As for the second question, if you take a look at the way the categories are arranged, the parent category is Films based on books, then the sub-cats are Films based on fiction books or Films based on non-fiction books. So we would have to create a sub-sub-cat for both those sub-cats, i.e. Films based on war fiction books and Films based on war non-fiction books. If you feel we have enough items to fit into the cats mentioned above, please feel free to renew the discussion. Cheers, Her Pegship 20:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, there are more than enough books->Films out there to create either category, both fiction (The Bridge on the River Kwai, Hart's War, 633 Squadron, Catch-22, The Dirty Dozen, Empire of the Sun, Enigma, The English Patient, Enemy at the Gates, The Guns of Navarone, Force 10 from Navarone, Schindler's List, The Sea Wolves, Slaughterhouse-Five, Twelve O'Clock High, Von Ryan's Express) and non-fiction (Jarhead, Black Hawk Down (though neither the book nor the movie are on Wiki), 5 Fingers, A Bridge Too Far, The Longest Day), etc. Granted, it would be easier if there was just one "War Films" category, but there is more than enough material for the creation of both non-fiction and fiction. The books and the movies are quite a distinctive genre and placing them in something like "Mystery", or "Thriller" or just in "Fiction movies" seems somehow inadequate. That's my four cents. MikeBriggs 20:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okey dokey; anyone for Category:Films based on war novels and Category:Films based on military books (under Films based on non-fiction books), to correspond to Category:War novels and Category:Military books? Or, for the latter type, should we create a Category:Films based on military history books? Her Pegship

List of films based on war books created. MikeBriggs 16:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Films based on historical fiction books[edit]

Actually, the list at Literary genre can be usefull for designing sub-categories. From the list, I think there is a need for a Category:Films based on historical fiction books and a Category:Films based on thriller books (which is different from mystery and would have lots of films) AdamSmithee 09:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Political thrillers can go into Mystery, which is where you would find them in a book store. Other thrillers would go into Horror. - LA
I'm not sure what political thriller means. For instance, what kind of thrillers are the ones based on Frederick Forsyth or Robert Ludlum? Or were should I put spy films based on John Le Carre? AdamSmithee 09:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
They would all be in Mystery. - LA
Well, I recategorised The Spy Who Came in from the Cold into Mystery and someone reverted the change saying that it is not Mystery, it's based on a spy book. I tend to agree with the revert as Mystery seems to be more about detective and crime stories. So this doesn't work. AdamSmithee 15:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Films based on thriller books[edit]

I think Category:Films based on thriller books is sufficient. Getting specific about what type of thriller is way too refined, even for Wikipedia. Also, having cataloged many, I know that there is a distinct difference between "thrillers" and "mysteries". Agatha Christie's works can hardly be called thrillers, and Tom Clancy doesn't write mysteries. So I'm with AdamSmithee on this one - Mystery is too broad, and political thriller is too narrow. Cheers, Her Pegship 16:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Clancy and the like are all placed in the Mystery section of book stores. That is why they belong in that category...if necessary notate that fact when they are categorized in Mystery. All political thrillers go into the Mystery section and other thrillers would go into Horror. Lady Aleena 09:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that those are bookstore placements, but that's entirely for the convenience of the retailer. The bookstore wants to streamline the customer's browsing experience, so they don't break up their collection into too many-sub-categories; that would frustrate people who aren't sure where to look. Plus, that way they might lure you into getting hooked on a different author/genre by lumping mysteries, thrillers, war books all together.
Even in a library, most fiction is in one section, with mysteries, westerns, romance, and science fic/fantasy being the mainstream separate collections; but their subject headings, descriptors which can be searched in a catalog, are what direct people to a particular sub-genre, author, or fiction type (thriller, horror, etc.). So I'm for the library model, within reason: Group under a broad category (fiction) with one sub-category that is reasonably specific (thriller OR horror OR romance OR...).
So I respectfully disagree with grouping thrillers with mysteries for the sake of reducing categories. I know, my lady, that you are all for fewer sub-cats and that it makes the article content less crowded, but to me the issue is access and accuracy. Her Pegship 16:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Films based on books by author[edit]

While I was clearing out the novels category, I saw that a lot of films were based on books by a small group of authors. Stephen King and Kurt Vonnegut have their own categories, but how about these:

Also, rename the current two to:

  • Category:Stephen King films -> Category:Films based on Stephen King's books
  • Category:Films adapted from Kurt Vonnegut -> Category:Films based on Kurt Vonnegut's books
I have requested renaming for these. Her Pegship 21:05, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And...

  • James Bond films -> Category:Films based on Ian Fleming's books
This won't work because not all the James Bond films are based on Ian Fleming's books. You can create the latter category, but imho it would be redundant. Her Pegship 21:05, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Aleena 12:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did we create the Stephen King films etc. sub-cats? If they were created by another project we should submit them as CfR. If they're ours I guess we can change them with impunity. My 2c... Her Pegship 14:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No we didn't, we would need to cfr them. I just hope that there isn't too much of an outcry against. You want to do that while I start setting up the ones that I have listed above? Lady Aleena 17:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Peg, when are you usually around?
It really varies. I'm in California; I work 8-4 and do a little editing as a break during the day off & on; then after the kids are in bed I can do a little more (8-11 pm). Please don't set up any new sub-cats until we cfr, which I'll take care of today some time. Cheers, Her Pegship 20:46, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multi category articles[edit]

Re adding an article to only one category: I would suggest that in cases where a book is considered cross-genre, more than one category may be assigned. For example, many of Ursula K. LeGuin's works are considered both fantasy and children's books. Her Pegship 17:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support In fact, there is a WP guideline (which I am to lazy to look for) which says that articles should be under more than one category, if appropriate AdamSmithee 07:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Conditionally Support This should not be done on too many films. I find over categorization a problem for some films as the category listing at the bottom can get confusing with too many. (Added a heading to this section.) Lady Aleena 08:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction other than books[edit]

The category "Films based on fiction books" should be renamed "Films based on fiction" or "Films based on works of fiction". There are many that are based on short stories or novellas, or even poems, which are technically not entire books. Her Pegship 00:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about replacing the word "books" with "literature"? The word "works" is just too broad. That could include statues, pictures, etc.
Do you know anyone else who would be interested in this project that could be approached?
Lady Aleena 03:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe the word "fiction" is used in conjunction with art. "Works" and literature seem equally broad to me, but I prefer "works" as a less lofty, more straightforward term than "literature". A compromise might be "Films based on fiction writings"? Or, we could just create "Films based on short fiction" which would include short stories and novellas, and just not worry about those based on poems (which are few anyway). Hm? Her Pegship 05:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect!!! I will add it to the list. Of course there is a however...If an author is listed in a category already, such as Stephen King or Ian Fleming, the author's short fiction will be placed in that category. Okay?
Lady Aleena 07:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okey dokey, and remember we can always put it in both "Films based on short fiction" and "Stephen King films". I'm a librarian and nuts about "access points". Cheers, Her Pegship 15:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red link categories[edit]

What's up with the red link sub-categories?AdamSmithee 08:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't categorized a film in either category yet, so they haven't been created. Lady Aleena 10:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to create them (and don't plan to start learning right now :-)), so could you create romance please, so that I can put some films in there? AdamSmithee 09:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Her Pegship 19:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project user box proposal[edit]

Looks good! (I tweaked the spelling...) Her Pegship 19:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]



Films based on novels clean out[edit]

Hasn't anyone else worked on cleaning out Category:Films based on novels? I had to take a break and still have a few other projects in which I have delved which are calling my attention away from this project at the moment, so I don't have the time to work on the clean-up effort. That category needs clearing so that we can get it deleted so as to avoid and future confusion on where films based on books go. I had also gotten to the point where I don't know which categories to use in most of the ones left. That category started off with almost 1,000 articles in it. If someone would be so kind as to go in there and recategorize some of them, it would really help the project.

Lady Aleena 07:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO one problem is that the sub-categories are too restrictive and many films do not really fit in any of these. There are lots of sub-cats for scifi&horror&stuff and not enough for other types. The thing is that I don't feel comfortable creating new sub-cats on my own. So, I would appreciate some comments for my sub-cat proposals (see top of page) AdamSmithee 09:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Any film that doesn't fit into a sub-category, place in the more general one. Ask yourself where in the bookstore you would find the book. If you were trying to figure out where Bridges of Madison County, it would go into Category:Films based on fiction books category, since that is where you would normally find it in a book store. Lady Aleena 09:04, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: I got it down to 3 pages! - LA
I'll do some work on it. Great job - take a break!! Her Pegship 15:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2 pages and counting down! Thanks Peg! Lady Aleena 08:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
1 page to go and I am sick of looking at it. I am losing my enthusiasm for this project. Would one of you just do a dump of the rest into the general fiction category for the last 200, and then we can work on subcategorizing them. Please. Lady Aleena 22:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll hack away at it. Cheers, Her Pegship 23:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category creation test[edit]

Before you create a category, ask yourself this question... 

Where in a mall bookstore would I find this book?

That means very few sub-categories, but we really don't want all that many do we?

Lady Aleena 09:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my reasoning above. We don't want too many sub-cats, but what we have should be accurate. Cheers, Her Pegship 16:46, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with sub-cat[edit]

Howdy all - When I go to Category:Films based on fiction books I can't see Category:Films based on science fiction books as a sub-cat; I only see Category:Films based on fantasy books. Yet when I go to Category:Films based on science fiction books I can see that Category:Films based on fiction books is its parent category. Am I missing something? I want to be sure all those new sub-cats show up under Category:Films based on fiction books. Cheers, Her Pegship 10:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at it now and let me know what you think. :) The way it was before, science fiction and short fiction were listed on the same page with the films that started with the letter "s". Lady Aleena 21:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fabulous! Thank you so much. Her Pegship 22:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome... Lady Aleena 23:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I can see that The Lion King and Hamlet 2 are in category Category:Films_based_on_Hamlet, which in turn is in categories Category:Films_set_in_Denmark and Category:Films_set_in_the_Middle_Ages. Is it intended? The Lion King does not take place in Denmark, and Hamlet 2 is not set in Middle Ages. Thanks, User:Pwiecz 16:35, 23 February 2015

Comics and comic books[edit]

Do you think that the comic and comic books community on here would mind if we categorized Category:Films based on comics in our project? Lady Aleena 12:10, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess they wouldn't mind. Many hands make light work. Cheers, Her Pegship 18:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder of CFD process[edit]

Recently your project emptied Category:Films based on novels based on your new categorization scheme (placing the films in the new structure, I hope). While Wikiprojects that cover areas are given quite a lot of leeway, I want to remind you that process is important. I'd request that when you have similar changes to make based on consensus here, list the category for deletion at WP:CFD and cite your discussions here...but don't begin emptying it until the discussion is closed. I'm reminding the project instead of a specific user because its hard to track down those who empty categories, and to provide a general guideline. Thanks! --Syrthiss 13:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New proposal[edit]

Here is a new proposal for the structure of the categories:

  • Category:Films based on written works - All films based on written works.
    • Category:Film based on written works by writer - This is where all the writers and authors would be placed.
      • Category:Stephen King films - All films based on Stephen King's books.
    • Category:Films based on books - All films based on a book would have this category.
      • Category:Films based on children's books - All films based on a children's book would have this category. Some, like Harry Potter, would cross over to the above listed categories.
      • Category:Films based on fiction books - All films based on a work of fiction would have this category.
        • Category:Films based on fantasy books - All films based on fantasy novels would have this category.
        • Category:Films based on horror books - All films based on horror novels would have this category.
        • Category:Films based on mystery books - All films based on mystery novels would have this category.
          • Category:James Bond films - All films based on the James Bond series of books.
        • Category:Films based on science fiction books - All films based on science fiction novels would have this category.
        • Category:Films based on thriller books - All films based on thriller novels would have this category.
        • Category:Films based on romance books - All films based on romance novels would have this category.
      • Category:Films based on non-fiction books - All films based on a work of non-fiction would have this category.
        • Category:Films based on the Bible - All films based on the Bible would have this category.
        • Category:Films based on biographies - All films based on biographies would have this category.
    • Category:Films based on comics - All films based on comics and comic books.
      • Category:Films based on comic strips - All films based on comic strips.
    • Category:Films based on poems and songs - Any film based on a poem or song.
    • Category:Films based on short fiction - All films based on short fiction such as short stories and novellas.

I also propose that we rename this project to Films based on written works.

Lady Aleena

I second the proposal to change the project name. I do want to re-iterate that not all Ian Fleming's books were about James Bond, and not all the James Bond books were written by Ian Fleming. Also, let's call the Stephen King category Films based on Stephen King works (or written works, although again I don't think the distinction is necessary at this time). Cheers, Her Pegship 17:57, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RE: James Bond: We can remove it from the project. Let it just stay a film series category.
RE: Naming writer categories - (here goes) I have checked three grammatical reference books, and none of them mention any instances where it is appropriate to drop the 's from a possesive noun. As we are building a category based on written work, we should at least follow proper grammatical usage. I know it is a pain, but we should try to be grammatically correct.
Lady Aleena

Films based on books, that in turn have been novelized?[edit]

I don't know if this would be worth adding a category or information for, but what about Films based on books that were subsequently novelized? For example, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein by Leonore Fleischer, and Bram Stoker's Dracula by Fred Saberhagen and James Hart. See http://www.salon.com/books/letters/2001/08/10/novelization_fathers/index.html for more on this peculiar phenomenon.Schizombie 23:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peculiar indeed! I see what you mean. Something to keep in mind for the next film project. Thanks - Her Pegship 06:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen King & Kurt Vonnegut[edit]

Per a week-long discussion, I have created the categories Category: Films based on Stephen King's works and Category: Films based on Kurt Vonnegut's works. Populate away. Her Pegship 01:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: Do not populate until the discussion at CFD is closed by an admin. Her Pegship 06:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin EurekaLott says:

Apostrophes are not typically used in this sort of category name. See Category:Novels by author and Category:Albums by artist for lots of examples. - EurekaLott 12:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC).

I renew my request to use Category: Films based on (author name) works, no apostrophe, in keeping with the naming conventions and with overall consistency. Her Pegship 14:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am still solidly FOR the apostrophe since this IS an encyclopedia which is supposed to be educational. With that in mind we should scrupulously avoid bad grammar at all costs. As this may be the only encyclopedia a chld may read through the program Wikipedia has for distributing its articles to poor areas, the editors should do all they can to insure that the children read the proper way the language should be used. - Lady Aleena

For the record: "The result of the debate was rename to Category: Films based on Kurt Vonnegut's works." So feel free to populate. Cheers, Her Pegship 19:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New FBOBBA sub-cat[edit]

I propose another sub-cat: Category:Films based on Agatha Christie books, as it seem nearly all her works have been adapted, some more than once. Her Pegship 23:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Chart/List created[edit]

I've created a new chart/list for films/tv series (or episodes) based on Philip K. Dick's work. Not sure if anyone working on this project would find a use for it or the idea of such a list/chart. List of Films or TV series based on Philip K. Dick material is the list, and the list is also included (for now) in the Philip K. Dick author page (in the film adaptations section). I hope to create something similar for war books->films, if at all possible. Currently, Dick's films are not in a separate "Films adapted from Philip K. Dick work" category. MikeBriggs 18:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of films based on spy books created. MikeBriggs 19:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-fiction categories more noticable[edit]

I put a second category on the three non-fiction categories of our:

Hopefully this will help get us a little more notice and get more films added to those categories.

And yes, I am still working around here on the edges. :) --Lady Aleena 15:22, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fabulous. ♥ Her Pegship♥ 02:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Broaden the scope[edit]

I have been doing some thinking lately, and since we now have films based on books pretty well established, we may want to consider broadening the scope of this project. We are a crossover project of both the Films and Books WikiProjects, so why not change this project to Films with books tie-in project or something similarly named. There is a whole classification of books called TV/Movie tie-ins that may be given short shrift in our parents projects, so why don't we look into it? If a film had a book written for it after it was out in the theater, we could give the film a new infobox with the book's information in it, a combined film/book infobox, since the tie-in book may not be notable enough on its own. What do you think?
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 17:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds sensible. Book/film tie-in project sounds reasonable, as long as it's clear that it's for books derived from the film and not books as sources for film. But I have faith you'll come up with something suitably specific. <g> ♥ Her Pegship♥ 19:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have been cudgelling my brain on ways to broaden this project, however, I need to know from the participants what aspect I can broaden. Do we want to stay with films and broaden to Films based on other media? Do we want to stay with books and broaden to Media based on books? This will help me determine into which direction we will go. We could get really ambitious and be Media based on other media, but that is a bit much for now in my opinion. - LA @ 05:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I vote for sticking with one prodigious project at a time...<g> I think your initial idea of media based on books/written material is best for now, until we see just how broad that really is. Cheers! ♥ Her Pegship♥ 15:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project Directory[edit]

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 23:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Films based on books[edit]

For your consideration, there's a discussion of the consistency of Category:Films based on books by author over at cfd. Her Pegship 02:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent! The Godfather ... again![edit]

Take a look at The Godfather. A new editor has made 187 uninterrupted edits over the past two days, and is still doing so. No edit summaries.

Thank you. Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film/Films_based_on_books&oldid=1131906291"