Template talk:CinemaoftheUS

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Templates for deletion This template was considered for deletion on 2007 March 13. The result of the discussion was keep.
Film Portal
This non-article page is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Template
This article has been rated as Template-Class on the quality scale.
NA
This article has been rated as NA-importance on the priority scale.

[edit] Tagging

This template is not going to be on the article of every American film and people working on American films is it? Like it was recently added to The Silence of the Lambs (film). Garion96 (talk) 21:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have the same question. What is the point in this template? Usually templates are used for articles that have quite a bit to do with each other. It would be similar to adding {{NBA}} to every basketball player article which doesn't seem to make much sense. I suggest the addition of this template to articles be stopped until there is a clearer definition of where it should be used. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 22:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I had a feeling this issue should arise - it is to provide a better link between American cinema articles. I won't add it to any more footers until we decide then th criteria. My idea is to place it in the footer of the most important actors and film articles -iconic actors and films - OK then how about the film or actor must be connected with an award win or nomination? THis way the elite articles get the template ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "I've been expecting you" 22:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Defining the use of this template

When this article was nominated for deletion (actually along with many others that shouldn't have been nominated), the "keep" was under the condition that we would define where it should be used. Since people have expressed disagreement that it appears as a footer in American film articles, its use should be restricted by what we decide here. We'd better do it now, before more trouble arises from inserting it in articles. As I have suggested in the AfD [1] (and I suggest it here again), this template should be used only in general film articles about the American Cinema (or American film industry, if the term is more common in the USA) and not in films, as is done in other countries with smaller film industries. Hoverfish Talk 19:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

This seems like a good idea. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" "S.P.E.C.T.R.E" 20:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I, too, am quite confused over where this might be appropriate, if it's not appropriate for individual films. For instance, today it was added to THX. Is that appropriate (what's US about it?)? Is it appropriate for everything in WikiProject FilmMaking? I would think not, but I don't quite understand the point. Are there some clear examples of what this template is for? jhawkinson 02:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I must apologize for using this template in a few places recently without knowing about this debate and discussion. I make the suggestion that it go into sites for American production companies and sites related to the Ameican "factory" of the Hollwood industry, such as major US studios. However, I can see that even this is complicated since Japanese companies sometimes own so-called American production companies. I have no stake in the debate and am glad to go along with whatever people decide. If someone likes they can remove it from the places I put it such as DreamWorks, Lucasfilm, etc. Cott12 Talk 19:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

THX was also my doing and again I apologize for not knowing this was undecided. It might be inappropriate since THX sound is likely found in theater systems throughout the world. So it might be as silly as calling "Walkman" part of Japanese music industry. I removed it. Cott12 Talk 19:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strike 2008

I had added a link for 2008 Hollywood strike to the template and it was removed on the grounds that it was "too soon". I don't think it's too soon at all, as the story is touched on constantly in entertainment industry news. The strike might not be for close to another year, but the impact is being felt in a big way right now in the film industry. There are over 78,000 Google results for "hollywood wga film strike 2008" and over a million if you take out the "wga". It's something real, probable, and whether or not it actually happens, it is having a major effect right now -- take a look at some of the references in the article for proof of that. So in conclusion I don't think it's too soon at all to include this link in the template. It shouldn't be considered a predicted event as much as it is an actual event that's happening right now.

Equazcion • argue/improves • 22:01, 09/30/2007
Besides the fact it is too soon (IMO of course) it also is too specific for this template. This links on this template are links to generic articles. For instance there is a link to film composers, but not a link to John Williams. Garion96 (talk) 22:06, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Well this is pretty general too, as it has to do with all films produced in America. I don't see how it's specific at all. In fact I think it's even less specific than film composers...
Equazcion • argue/improves • 22:18, 09/30/2007
History of cinama strikes (if an article like this exists) is general. 2008 Hollywood strike is specific. Garion96 (talk) 22:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
That's a better argument, but I still disagree. The template is named "Cinema of the United States", and this is something very important right now to cinema in the US. It's at the very forefront of the industry, and it's critical enough that people researching the US film industry will want to know about it. I realize you probably won't change your mind though so let's wait and see if anyone else comments. I may also post an RfC about this.
Equazcion • argue/improves • 22:26, 09/30/2007
No, I guess we agree to disagree. :) Perhaps you could leave a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films for more input. (I don't know how watched this template is). Garion96 (talk) 22:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion, done.
Equazcion • argue/improves • 23:24, 09/30/2007
The strike is not notable in the context of the entire history of American film production unless it comes to fruition. The question isn't whether it has the potential to be deserving of a place on the template; but it is manifestly clear that as of today, the strike is merely a possibility - and one of many threatened and actual ones in the history of the Hollywood unions. Frankly, if any labor action deserves a place in the template, surely it would be Hollywood Black Friday, a six month strike which involved two competing unions, got the CIO involved, and was "decided" by SAG, leading to the losing union dissolving. Oh, and actual blood being shed in front of the studio during riots. That is a worthy template link. Girolamo Savonarola 01:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree that I don't think that the strike should be listed in the template per the argument that general topics are supposed to go into it. I'd suggest instead making sure that the article is categorized appropriately and added to List of strikes. It doesn't work for the template in question. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)