Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Remember (talk | contribs) at 14:40, 21 November 2022 (add comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject Film announcements and open tasks []

Article alerts • Articles needing attention • Assessment • Cleanup listing • Deletion sorting • New articles • Popular pages • Requests • Reviews


Today's featured articles

Did you know

Featured article candidates

Good article nominees

(6 more...)

Featured article reviews

Good article reassessments

Peer reviews

View full version with task force lists
WikiProject Film
General information ()
Main project page + talk
Discussion archives
Style guidelines talk
Multimedia talk
Naming conventions talk
Copy-editing essentials talk
Notability guidelines talk
Announcements and open tasks talk
Article alerts
Cleanup listing
New articles talk
Nominations for deletion talk
Popular pages
Requests talk
Spotlight talk
Film portal talk
Fiction noticeboard talk
Project organization
Coordinators talk
Participants talk
Project banner talk
Project category talk
Departments
Assessment talk
B-Class
Instructions
Categorization talk
Core talk
Outreach talk
Resources talk
Review talk
Spotlight talk
Spotlight cleanup listing
Topic workshop talk
Task forces
General topics
Film awards talk
Film festivals talk
Film finance talk
Filmmaking talk
Silent films talk
Genre
Animated films talk
Christian films talk
Comic book films talk
Documentary films talk
Marvel Cinematic Universe talk
Skydance Media talk
War films talk
Avant-garde and experimental films talk
National and regional
American cinema talk
Argentine cinema talk
Australian cinema talk
Baltic cinema talk
British cinema talk
Canadian cinema talk
Chinese cinema talk
French cinema talk
German cinema talk
Indian cinema talk
Italian cinema talk
Japanese cinema talk
Korean cinema talk
Mexican cinema talk
New Zealand cinema talk
Nordic cinema talk
Pakistani cinema talk
Persian cinema talk
Southeast Asian cinema talk
Soviet and post-Soviet cinema talk
Spanish cinema talk
Uruguayan cinema talk
Venezuelan cinema talk
Templates
banner
DVD citation
DVD liner notes citation
infobox
invite
plot cleanup
stub
userbox

Lead paragraphs omit film's plot summary

Many films' lead paragraphs don't say what the movie is about. The film style guide specifies that it should. When viewing the page for a specific film, I think I'm far from the only one who wants to refresh my memory with a quick sentence or half sentence. Also, I don't know whether we consider that web searches for titles sometimes display the first paragraph in the found results, and it would be nice to have that info there. For examples of some that do and some that don't, check out the films in List of Tony Award- and Olivier Award-winning plays.

Is there already a task about this? (If so, I might be interested in helping with that specifically. Sadly I don't have much time for Wikipedia these days.) Elf | Talk 19:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you about this! MOS:FILMLEAD says at the end of the second paragraph, "In terms of plot, the general premise of the film should be briefly summarized, and any actors' roles in the premise can also be identified." I think what may happen is that new film articles start out with a "Synopsis" section that gets replaced with a fuller "Plot" section. What really should happen is for the synopsis to migrate to the lead section as a high-level super-summary of the plot summary. As for tasks, I find WikiProject Films to be pretty decentralized other than the Marvel Cinematic Universe task force. I would recommend adding the premise as you go. One thing I like to do is Google <film title> movie synopsis, which can usually show the synopsis at the top and a source for it. That can be referenced and paraphrased in the lead paragraph. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 19:31, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just be sure to avoid WP:COPYVIO and WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE when adapting a summary to our articles. The summary should be rewritten in an editor's own words as much as possible (obviously some parts like names etc have to be used that are the same). But yes, as Erik pointed out, for newer films about to release, even when it still has a "Premise" or "Synopsis" section, part of that should be in the lead as well. That way when those who come by to add the plot, you're already ahead of the game with the summary in the lead. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:05, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree about paraphrasing! I think what's tricky about new and short articles is that same sentence(s) can be in both the short lead section and the "Synopsis" section, which to me feels redundant. I've generally preferred not worrying about the premise in the lead section when the "Synopsis" section exists as a short read, hence why I mention migrating the content to the lead section once "Synopsis" becomes "Plot". Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 20:09, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. "Milage may vary" as it were with each article and how filled out the lead and articles are. If you have a short lead and go right to the synopsis, then it's redundant to have that in the lead as well immediately before. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that if there's a brief synopsis section, repeating it in the lead is generally unnecessary. Once there's a detailed plot, then summarizing it concisely in the lead is helpful, though it may not be appropriate for every film. --Lapadite (talk) 00:20, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, all. Good input. Yep, I spent many entertaining hours trying to fix plagiarized text here ages ago. Not sure why I put a link to the list of plays instead of movies, oops, but Academy Award for Best Picture goes the same way. I don't think that the 1st-paragraph synopsis needs to be long at all. Some examples to show what I'm thinking:
  • Wings: Shows time period but not really a plot hint:
"Wings is a 1927 and 1929 American silent war film set during World War I"
  • Shows the type of film but nothing to distinguish it from any other silent romantic drama:
"7th Heaven (also known as Seventh Heaven) is a 1927 American silent romantic drama"
  • This is more helpful:
"The Hollywood Revue of 1929, or simply The Hollywood Revue,[4] is a 1929 American pre-Code musical comedy film ... that features nearly all of MGM's stars in a two-hour revue"
  • *This is what I'm talkin' about! Doesn't have to be any longer than this (and actually I think the first part could be left out)
"The Patriot is a 1928 semi-biographical film ... a biographical story of Emperor Paul I of Russia"
Elf | Talk 23:01, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, these make sense. I updated Wings (1927 film) just now, for what it's worth. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 23:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It may be that if a film has no particularly noteworthy context when it comes to the cast and crew and source material, the premise could go in the first sentence. For example, Prey for the Devil has nothing particularly noteworthy about it, and seeing the premise upfront may be the best way to identify the topic at hand. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 22:29, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Grave of the Fireflies

There's a discussion regarding the plot summary of Grave of the Fireflies at Talk:Grave of the Fireflies#Plot summary format. Input from project members would be appreciated. Thanks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editor adding cast names to plot summaries

Editors may want to keep an eye on Kimaleec (talk · contribs), who as recently as this afternoon was adding cast names to plot summaries for multiple articles despite being asked to stop three days ago. I've left two additional warnings today, the second after they did not apparently heed the first. It looks like they're editing from a mobile device, so they may not be seeing their Talk page notifications, but that's not a blank check to continue editing disruptively. I'll try to catch up on things when I'm back. DonIago (talk) 17:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the “Premiere” location

I found in an old video that the film seemed to premiere at Grauman’s Chinese Theater, so I may I change the word, “Premiere” to Grauman’s Chinese Theater please? DrkWebber (talk) 05:44, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've left this note at the wrong Talk page? DonIago (talk) 14:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're referring to Bolt (2008 film), this mentions El Capitan Theatre for the world premiere. Not sure what film you are referring to for Grauman's Chinese Theater? Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 14:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am very sorry I meant to put El Capitan Theatre for Bolt and not Grauman’s Chinese Theatre. DrkWebber (talk) 23:01, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! I've added the content with the above reference. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 22:24, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Confusion? I already added the November 17, 2008 El Capitan Theatre premiere to the Bolt page. DrkWebber (talk) 02:49, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Roman Polanski § Second sentence of the lede paragraph. The discussion is about whether to mention the sexual abuse case in the lede paragraph. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 00:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC) Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 00:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Incredibles

Hello. There's an ongoing discussion at the talk page of The Incredibles, which might be of interest to the members of this WikiProject. The discussion is at Talk:The Incredibles#Syndrome's Death. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Coco (2017 film) § Plot summary revamp. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:07, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sony's unusual distribution naming.

So I realized after editing Starship Troopers (film) that despite Sony Pictures Releasing is known on the Wiki for being THE distributor for all Sony Pictures Entertainment films, they always "hide" under a different label, as seen in the end credits of every movie (ex. "A Columbia Pictures Release"). Here are further examples:

  • For Hotel Transylvania: Transformania, the Sony and Columbia logo appeared in promo material when it was set to be in theaters, but was replaced altogether with the Amazon Studios logo when it went to Prime Video; this implies Columbia was NOT a production company, and Sony was only using the banner. This also begs the question of whether any Sony Pictures Animation were even produced by Columbia since they're both Sony owned, and logically it would be unusual for them to have two of their production companies producing together.
  • For Missing (2023 film), Screen Gems was never mentioned in sources during production, but appeared after and is seen recently in the trailer; this implies Sony is simply releasing under the Screen Gems name. Stage 6 Films produced, and like the last example, both Sony owned producing should've given this away that one was only a label.
  • Films where Sony only has distribution rights are also labeled after one of their banners; Tristar Pictures for Planet 51, and Screen Gems for Hostel (film).

I just wanted to make this notice to make sure editors to double check whether a Sony Pictures company is actually a production company or just a distributor. For the upcoming Dumb Money, I predict Sony will eventually label it under one of their banners, so put it as a distributor unless sources say otherwise. IAmNMFlores (talk) 19:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, this says, "SPE's Motion Picture Group production organizations include Columbia Pictures, Screen Gems, TriStar Pictures, 3000 Pictures, Sony Pictures Animation, Stage 6 Films, AFFIRM Films, Sony Pictures International Productions, and Sony Pictures Classics." As for Hotel Transylvania: Transformania, the Variety review here states, "An Amazon Studios release of a Sony Pictures Animation, Columbia Pictures, Media Rights Capital (MRC) production." However, for The Hollywood Reporter here, distributor is Amazon Prime Video and production company is Sony Pictures Animation, with no mention of Columbia or MRC. Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 19:39, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Murder in Reverse#Requested move 12 November 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ( ) 15:36, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Random question - notability

I randomly came across the fact that Jeremy Konner's article was removed for lack of notability. See [1]. This guy seems pretty notable to me (but what do I know). Do you know where to go in wikipedia to have the issue looked at by people to assess notability? I had a tough time figuring out whether there is a place (besides once an article is being chosen for deletion. Can anyone else take a look at this guy and see whether he is notable or not? Remember (talk) 14:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]