User talk:Cott12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
Archive 1	Archive 2

		The Barnstar of High Culture
		For high quality contributions and especially the Gabriel Pascal article Tyrenius 23:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I, Nemo Noman, award this constantly turning barnstar to Cott12, who is constantly turning out better and better articles about Meher Baba. Nemonoman 20:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Steve MacKay 2 Infobox actor 3 Image:Mast_mohammed.jpg listed for deletion 4 Image:Mehera3.jpg 5 Fred Ott 6 Shastra 7 Article for Deletion/The Lama Foundation 8 WP:Films Welcome 9 March WP:FILMS Newsletter 10 Stubbing 11 Moving cinematic genre 12 Film Templates 13 Fair use rationale for Image:Nashik8.jpg

[edit] Steve MacKay

I've removed the speedy deletion tag from the above article. While the subject might not be notable, the article does assert notability in a reasonable way. You may wish to list it at WP:AFD instead, to get a broader consensus on the article. Thanks for your time and your hard work reporting these articles - even though I'm not deleting this particular one, your efforts are very much appreciated. Kafziel ^Talk 16:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox actor

Well, you are in WP Biographies territory there. I don't see any imdb in Template:Infobox actor except from official site, nor in the generic Template:Infobox Biography. Check in the archives of Template talk:Infobox actor, they seem to have gone through the issue at times. That's the only start I can think of. Cheers! Hoverfish Talk 13:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I put a query at Template:talk:infobox actor. Cott12 Talk 13:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Mast_mohammed.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Mast_mohammed.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 02:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Recommended for speedy deletion. Cott12 Talk 12:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Mehera3.jpg

Could you please send the permission you have for this photo to permissions@wikimedia.org so Wikimedia can keep a copy of it for legal purposes? Please also include the following link in the e-mail:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mehera3.jpg

Thanks, Yonatan (contribs/talk) 16:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Cott12 Talk 19:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fred Ott

Hi, I just bumped into your edit in Fred Ott and had to revert it as the film article was just created (Fred Ott's Sneeze). Any relation to Fred by the way? Hoverfish Talk 22:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I might be related to him. I only know as far back as my great grandfather George Ott who came from Germany. Cott12 Talk 00:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shastra

Hi, do you know when the Shastras were written? THis article doesn't state it and I think it should be written there. Krystian 08:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I don't know. Cott12 Talk 19:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article for Deletion/The Lama Foundation

I am providing this notice because you have created or contributed to the article The Lama Foundation. This article is being considered for deletion. You can participate in this discussion here. Edivorce 21:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:Films Welcome

[edit] March WP:FILMS Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated notice by BrownBot 00:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stubbing

Normally yes, although the way we arranged the {{film|class=stub}}template, it displays the film stub upgrading info. I have already brought up the issue but it got set aside. I will try to get our techs to include a parameter about the type of film article it is, so in awards and other general film topics the upgrading info doesn't appear. When this is taken care of, I do plan to make a big round in all award article and check their categorization etc. Also some awards needs lists of awarded films, like the one you did. We'll get there some day. By the way it's amazing how many editors have edited the one paragraph Locarno article and it's still one paragraph! Hoverfish Talk 23:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I will just wait then til things catch up. I am surprised Wikipedia only has 20,000 films and IMDB a million. About Lacarno, I guess there are only so many ways to say 'beautiful.' Apparently people love it enough to work on it, but can't think of what to say. Cott12 Talk 23:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moving cinematic genre

Cut and paste moves are frowned upon. If you'd like to move the article there are instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Doctor Sunshine talk 00:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Technically you move an article by pressing on tab "move" at the top of the page, entering the new name plus a reason for the move and pressing "Move". This way the edit history and its talk page get moved along. Else they get lost in a redirect page somewhere. However, since this is not a simple misspelling or naming convention error, it needs to go by the book (proposal in requested moves + discussion in its talk page). First I would test if it is contested by posting a note in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films. When this is clear, you can decide what procedure to follow. I've been through this procedure once when a list had to be renamed. I will drop the word in the project and you can take it from there. Hoverfish Talk 05:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I will take those steps.Cott12 Talk 13:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

No worries. In keeping with the teach a man to fish principle, I'll walk you though it:

1. Click here: Wikipedia:Requested moves (WP:RM for short)
2. Once there, scroll down to Step 1 and copy this: {{subst:WP:RM|PageName|NewName|reason for move}}
3. Edit the section under today's date and paste the above at the bottom of the list.
4. Replace "PageName" with "Cinematic genre", replaced "NewName" with "Film genre" and put what you'd told me in place of "reason for move"
5. In the edit summary box, type "added [[Cinematic genre]]" and click Save page
6. Under step 2, copy {{move|NewName}}
7. Go to Talk:Cinematic genre, edit the page, paste that at the very top (save the page if you'd like)
8. Back at step 3, copy {{subst:WP:RMtalk|PageName|NewName|reason for move}}
9. Again to Talk:Cinematic genre, paste that at the bottom, replace PageName, NewName and reason for move with the same information as previously and save the page
10. Finally, you can edit the new "Support" subsection and type "# '''Support''' As nominator. ~~~~" and you're done.
    

That's two steps easier than quiting drinking. If you have any troubles I'll put everything in place but it's pretty simple once you get the hang of it. Move requests last about a week usually, I doubt there'll be any opposition but keep the page on your watch list. Cheers, Doctor Sunshine talk 07:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Yes, it is better to teach a person how to fish than do it for him. I followed your steps, and will follow Hoverfish's advice also. Cott12 Talk 13:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually I will copy somewhere Doc's step by step instructions, as I may need them some day. Instead of further advice, a request: can you please take a look at World cinema and see if the definition of the term "cinema" agrees with what you have learned in USC? Is it really so connected to foreign films? (see also talk page) Hoverfish Talk 15:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say that the article on World cinema is generally well written and true. Use of the word "cinema" within the Hollywood industry, on the whole, is more common in discussing international films. Also the word "cinema" is generally seen from within the industry as slightly pretentious and alluding especially to French and German films, denoting films that are more artistically than commercially motivated. Even Jarmusch's films (which are very artitically ambitious and rarely very commercial) are referred to here as "films" and rarely "cinema" so I think the word carries connotations of non-Ameican ventures. The word cinema is so rarely used in the states that the non-English section of most video rental stores remains labeled the "Foreign film section." However, my degree reads "USC school of cinema-television." Interestingly, in England people go to the Cinema; in the U.S. we go to the movie theater. I think the feeling that "cinema" is intellectual is not just a perception limited to the U.S. Cahiers du cinéma always seemed to carry that feeling, but I can't be sure. The words "cinema" and "film" in California are sometimes used to demarcate two whole other worlds with mutually exclusive intentions. For instance I heard an associate producer working in a studio who had higher artistic aspirations say, "I'm not interested in films; I'm interested in cinema." Another important thing to point out is that in film theory in the U.S. (like is bandied about at USC) the word "cinematic" (especially relevant to the name change I suggested) will more often refer to the photography or cinematography, but not necessarily the sound, acting, etc. If we say a film is very "cinematic" we usually mean we were impressed by the images, or it had great sets and locations, etc. It refers in Hollywood to the atmosphere, but not necessarily the film as a whole. So some of Spielberg's films as commercial as Jaws might be called extremely "cinematic" but not referred to as an example of "cinema." It remains just a film. So even a crass commercial producer might refer to Jaws as "a very cinematic film" and mean it approvingly, but in the next instant want to throw up if you use the word "cinema." He makes "films" after all. Or so the talk goes. Cott12 Talk 17:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

My personal experience is that most filmmakers I have known and been around only use the word "film" even to describe favorite foreign films. For instance we talk about Wenders' or Jarmusch's latest film. And we talk about German film and French film and foreign films and art films. It is more the people who want to make a sort of intellectual divide between forms of art that seem to like to emphasize the word "cinema" as something different. Personally I love Pirates of the Carribean and Night on Earth equally. But it annoys my artsy friends who feel you need to choose a side, like there is a war going on. Most open-minded film lovers in the US use the word "film" because it's less exclusive, and that's what bothers them about the word "cinema." It is so often used to create a divide as if there are two art forms. Cott12 Talk 18:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed explanation! I have been using it as per American Heritage Dictionary, in the sence of "film industry", and so has my British colleague Blofeld. This explains also why there was an immediate reaction when he placed Template:CinemaoftheUS in some notable films. We'll have to give it an American reconsideration. Hoverfish Talk 21:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Film Templates

As far as the templates go the word "cinema" may be fine. It is technically right. And for the sake of continuity with similar templates you might consider leaving it as it is. Cott12 Talk 23:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Here is an example of the "standardized" format we are talking about adapting for all:

Films directed by Wim Wenders

Summer in the City • The Goalkeeper's Fear of the Penalty • The Scarlet Letter • Alice in the Cities • The Wrong Move • Kings of the Road • The American Friend • Lightning Over Water  • Hammett • The State of Things • Paris, Texas • Tokyo-Ga • Wings of Desire • Until the End of the World • Faraway, So Close! • Lisbon Story • The End of Violence • Buena Vista Social Club • The Million Dollar Hotel • Ten Minutes Older • The Soul of a Man • Land of Plenty • Don't Come Knocking •

Your opinion is most welcome. Hoverfish Talk 05:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I kind of liked the blue ones, but I can see benefits of the white one. It might work better along with other templates by not taking too much attention. Are you planning on allowing more than one template per page. For instance in Wim Wenders I created and put a director navigation template at the bottom and it might get gaudy to have a similarly eye catching national one. So that might be an argument for making them smaller and less consuming. But I do like the blue. Cott12 Talk 10:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It would be cool if there was a way to combine bottom templates, so that one stripe could say 'films directed by..." and the next stripe down say "cinema of Thailand" and it not appear stacked up..

The way the Japanese templating is used it should be altered as above. One template if we must have one for that major Japanese director (but it must be modified rmeoving the red like the direcotr plate above and the general Japanese plate -I don't want to see more than a maximum of two templates at the bottom of anypage so this would be fine ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" "S.P.E.C.T.R.E"} 10:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Blofeld, Not sure what you mean by "removing the red." I like your suggestion of limiting to two templates at the bottom. Perhaps you are referring to this:

Japanese Cinema
Films directed by Seijun Suzuki
1950s	Victory Is Mine | Pure Emotions of the Sea | Satan's Town | Inn of the Floating Weeds | Eight Hours of Terror | The Naked Woman and the Gun | Underworld Beauty | Spring Never Came | Young Breasts | Voice Without a Shadow | Love Letter | Passport to Darkness | Age of Nudity
1960s	Take Aim at the Police Van | Sleep of the Beast | Clandestine Zero Line | Everything Goes Wrong | Fighting Delinquents | Tokyo Knights | The Big Boss Who Needs No Gun | Man with a Shotgun | A New Wind Over the Mountain Pass | Blood Red Water in the Channel | Million Dollar Smash and Grab | Teen Yakuza | The Guys Who Put Money on Me | Detective Bureau 23: Go to Hell, Bastards! | Youth of the Beast | The Bastard | Kanto Wanderer | The Flower and the Angry Waves | Gate of Flesh | Our Blood Will Not Forgive | Story of a Prostitute | Story of a Bastard: Born Under a Bad Star | Tattooed Life | Carmen of Kawachi | Tokyo Drifter | Fighting Elegy | Branded to Kill
1970s	A Tale of Sorrow and Sadness
1980s	Zigeunerweisen |Kagero-za | Capone Cries a Lot | Lupin III: Legend of the Gold of Babylon
1990s	Yumeji | Marriage
2000s	Pistol Opera | Princess Raccoon

Also, on the subject of cinema vs. film, I may have overstated my case. I think Cinema, as the American Heritage Dictionary states, technically applies to the medium itself or the industry. So World cinema, Cinema of the US, Cinema of Japan, etc. are good and consistent with the way Wikipedia applies terms. But a film is a film and definitely a film genre is a film genre. A film projector is a film projector (not a cinematic projector) and a filmmaker is not a cinematic maker, and so forth. In short, if we had to define these terms for Wikipedia, I'd suggest that 'cinema' applies to the industry as Hoverfish said, and 'film' applies nominally to works of that medium. Cott12 Talk 11:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Nashik8.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nashik8.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)