Talk:Ian McKellen on screen and stage/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Having 3 separate articles for his bio, filmography and awards

Right now, the filmography and awards are combined into Ian McKellen, roles and awards, which looks incredibly sloppy as the awards are in the filmography table AND there is an entire awards section below it. The filmography table itself needs to be cleaned up, remove the rowspans, etc. But the filmography is also on the main article page. I think it should all be separate and cleaned up to be Ian McKellen, Ian McKellen filmography and List of awards and nominations received by Ian McKellen. I had separated them, tidied them up, but then was reverted by SchroCat, who said I needed to discuss this properly when he chose to combine the two previously (without discussion). Thoughts, for or against, then why if necessary. LADY LOTUS • TALK 19:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

When an actor has such a list of awards and a long filmography, it's more common to them separate rather than combined. Examples of actors who have 3:

LADY LOTUS • TALK 19:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding text originally posted on Talk:Ian McKellen

Showing a series of pages with only a couple of sources in total isn't something I think we ought to be copying (those are some fairly crappy pages, to be brutally honest about it). If I wanted to be pointy I could strike out nearly all those lists on BLP grounds because of the lack of sources. I started looking through these and only managed to do the top three before I lost the will to live based on the lack of reliable sources on these pages:

Hanks filmography: 0 sources; awards: 3 sources
Downey Jr filmography: 6 sources; awards: 0 sources
Washington awards: 1 source; filmography: 2 sources

Anyone for BLP?

I could also strike them out bcause they fork content: why list all the awards in the filmography listing, and yet duplicate those same awards in a separate article? That's sloppy. Yes, the McKellen list is woeful at the moment, but it is a work in progress (albeit slow progress) and I hope to turn it into something decent, aiming for an FLC and using a similar format to other lists, including:

Peter Sellers → Peter Sellers on stage, radio, screen and record (FLC) (with 92 sources)
John Gielgud → John Gielgud, roles and awards (FLC) (117 sources)
Ralph Richardson → Ralph Richardson, roles and awards

The logic behind keeping the roles and the awards for those roles in one place, while still not pointlessly forking off pages, is strong: I'm much less sure about the logic in splitting the two, and forking what we do have. - SchroCat (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm in favour of separate pages. The point about lack of sources is a fair one and I agree that the same information should not be on both pages, that's why I would not have awards on the filmography pages. Many actors have separate pages without duplicate information such as Meryl Streep, Judi Dench, Jack Nicholson etc, and the Streep awards page has 60 sources. A complete Filmography page for McKellen should also include his stage work (which is vast) and if and when that is all added, I think it would be better to have the awards separate. If it stays as one page I would take out the awards in the filmography table. I'm also not that keen on the page title as I think it should include the word filmography. L1975p (talk) 11:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I really don't see your logic here. Perhaps if I explain a bit more about what I want to do it may become slightly clearer: I would like to make this page in the same style as the Gielgud list and include all film, stage and TV work. The page is still manageable: Gielgud did far more on the stage than McKellan has done, and yet that is happily sitting as an FL at the moment. As it will be in the same style as above, I intend to strip out the awards from the list of films, and only have them in a separate section (Having the information duplicated on both a filmography page AND an awards page seems like a big content fork to me). As to the name, we have a couple of others as the same name, and as those pages contain a full list of roles in all media, calling it a "filmography" is somewhat misleading. - SchroCat (talk) 11:52, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I can compromise as you do in fact do very good work, and we seemingly agree on the the awards being out of the filmography table, as you said you plan to "strip out the awards from the list of films, and only have them in a separate section". I like the style of the awards section now, not the way it is on Gielgud's page. I like them all separate, I think it looks nicer. I do have a thing about the title as well, and granted it's not just filmography so could we maybe compromise on a title of: "Ian McKellen credits and awards" without the comma in the title? LADY LOTUS • TALK 12:30, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I understand your thinking Lady, but I think it's OK and convenient for the reader so long as this isn't a huge amount of material and things don't overlap and become confused. With John Gielgud, roles and awards for instance though I think you could get away with two separate articles John Gielgud on stage, screen and television and List of awards and nominations received by John Gielgud given the amount of material (115kb) but that's only if Tim is happy to split it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:34, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure we need (or should) split featured content in two, especially when there is a very strong reason to keep it together. John Gielgud, roles and awards has only just been made into an FL, which shows there is a recent consensus (as part of the FLN process) that there is some benefit in this approach. As to the name, "Ian McKellen, roles and awards" is grammatically correct in BrEng: "Ian McKellen credits and awards" just isn't. It either needs the condensed comma or a possessive of some form to be correct formal BrEnglish.

I must admit I'm not blown away by the current filmography section and prefer the Gielgud style of putting it all into a chronological run through in a sortable table, so people can manipulate the data into whichever oder is most useful to them. - SchroCat (talk) 12:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't realise it was a list candidate. As I say it is more convenient to have it on one page but I can see some editors like Lady think it looks too much all together. In terms of naming I do prefer xx on stage and screen type approach. Agreed on roles and awards being better than "credits".♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

In response to SchroCat, my logic is one page for his film/TV & stage work and another page for his awards & nominations. On the subject of duplicate information, I was agreeing with you. My preference is for the awards to be listed in separate tables (Oscar, BAFTA, Emmy etc), with links to the award categories, rather than listing them in one table (as it is on the Gielgud page). L1975p (talk) 13:11, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I would much prefer to see two articles; one dealing with McKellen, and the other with his roles. I see no reason why the awards can't go in the filmography seeing as it relates to the films and plays within the list. It is totally nonsensical to force the reader off the filmography list to go and seek out the awards elsewhere. Cassianto ^talk 14:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Adding theatre work?

What about adding the section of his theatre work on his main article page to this since it's his roles? LADY LOTUS • TALK 19:30, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll sort out the table properly soon: the Barratt book has more of his work—starting back with his work in Coventry in 1961–62, so there's a fair amount more to add. - SchroCat (talk) 19:53, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

List of roles and awards of...

There is a proposal to rename another article in the form "[Name], roles and awards" to "List of roles and awards of [name]" which would affect this article. Please see the discussion at Talk:John Gielgud, roles and awards#Requested move and particularly under Talk:John Gielgud, roles and awards#List of roles and awards of John Gielgud. —sroc 💬 02:13, 12 April 2014 (UTC)