Talk:New York International Independent Film and Video Festival

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Festivals,
a WikiProject devoted to increasing and improving Wikipedia's coverage of festivals.

Contents

[edit] Comment

Is it larger than Cannes - which gets more media attention? -- SGBailey 07:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cannes wins in that department

No, I'm pretty sure Cannes gets more media attention. Tri-color 04:24, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

EDIT: HA-HA, I see my mistake. Thanks for pointing it out, I ment to say; "one of the largest film festivals" sorry about that my mistake. Thanks. Tri-color 11:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Is Not The Place To Rant About Your Bad Experiences

...probably the title of my upcoming essay on What Wikipedia Isn't. Anyway, here's the deal: The current article is billion kilometers of essay on how much the festival stinks. Wikipedia is not the place for detailed, essay-like criticisms. This is an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias don't elaborate. If there's a problem, state the fact in a manner as concise as it can be said, and provide a source for more information. If you want to rant on how evil someone is, set up a (thatthing)reallysucks.org and collect material there. On these grounds, this article needs massive cleanup. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 21:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rant

Here is the rant that I just removed from the article. I have put it here to see if anyone finds anything that warrants a "Criticisms" section or if this is just a rant of a filmmaker scorned.


Even though the festival has been functioning for several years, it has failed to capture mainstream media recognition and acceptance as a serious event. The IMDB ( Internet Movie Data Base ) has "blacklisted" the festival, labeling it as an event that "doesn't meet the criteria" for addition to the database.


Also, among the independent film community there seems to be some recentment against the festival itself, citing incidents of "scam" like methods to process submissions to enter the festival. Other incidents describe overpriced packages to "promote" the film to potential buyers who will assist the opening night party, when in reality the crowd assisting the opening night are just the filmmakers themselves and D-List "has-been" celebrities.


Message boards and blog spots across the internet have started to warn potential filmmaker entries into the festival about what to expect if they get involved. In particular these accusations cite the complete lack of promotion by the festival itself to gain any momentum throughout the media and local scenes. There is virtually no marketing strategy to atract an audience to the festival. Even worse, the festival staff encourages the participating filmmakers to bring their relatives and friends into the screenings so they have some sort of an audience.


The IMDB in their submissions page also points out that the festival screens films to near empty theatres, which is also another accusation made by blog spots and anonimous sources. This is the link to their submissions guidelines page where they make the comments about the festival.


As of May 2006 the submission fee to apply to the festival is of $400 dollars U.S. which might make it the most expensive festival entry fee in the world. Mainstream festivals like Sundance, Berlin, Cannes, Toronto and others never go above the $60 U.S. Dollar line.

During the May 2006 closing night party, it was rumored among the filmmakers assisting at the event, that several Canadian film production companies that had assisted the festival, had spent over 10'000 U.S. Dollars in so-called packages and had gained absolutely nothing from it. No promotion, no exposure, no media references, no potential buyer interaction and at their screening also no audience.

The next are links to message boards at FilmFestivals.com where some of the controversy is taking place over this event.

Title: It nearly happened to me...

Title: Cronology of a scam

Title: Worse festival! , Avoid!!

Title: Filmmakers..stay away..

Title: May not be worth the price


There's one incident that stands out from the others and it's still talked about to date. It involves an organizer from the festival sending e-mails back and forth with an inquiring filmmaker that felt strong-armed from the telemarketing-like and overpriced entry fee. However, what made this incident stand out from the others was the way the festival organizer reffered to it's participants, labeling their work as something a "15 year old" could do. Here is an unedited portion of such e-mail:

It is definitely a big waste of my time explaining to you who we are and what we do, but I find it extremely interesting how sometimes film makers can be so ignorant and think they are submitting the best film in the world, while 60% of the time, the submissions we get are literally the work that even a 15 yr old kid can do. I love dealing with film makers, and most of them I speak to every day are of pure kindness , thats who I like to deal with. I think you are better off submitting your film to some unknown festival, pay your 50$ fee and see how far it gets you.

The festival itself also uses threats against people who criticize them on the internet, citing the fact that they can get their IP addresses, track them back and sue them for slander. The festival organization unsuccessfully sued Chris Gore for slander.

All this talk about removing rants is all well and good, but the current version is a total propaganda job. Not to mention factually incorrect.

[edit] Current version

Reads like an over-the-top press release, is painfully gushing and not neutral, and generally a hot mess. As much as rants do not belong, this is no better. Magichands 00:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

In addition to the above comments, an anon keeps removing the short "Criticism" section that's fully referenced. They've got to explain a good and convincing reason to do that, especially if they're chosing the keep the totally unreferenced press-release-looking section. --Oakshade 09:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Needs references by reliable sources

The anon editor who seems to be involved with the management of this festival should understand that any grandiose or negative material needs to be refrerenced by reliable sources. A press release in the Wall Street Journal or a link to the festival website don't count. You can learn more about sourcing at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. --Oakshade 21:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page protection

Template:Edit-protectedI've protected the page in light of an ongoing edit war regarding the criticism section. This is not an endorsement of the protected version, but rather an attempt to stop the edit war and generate discussion on the talk page about how to present this information. To request that the page be unprotected so that editing can resume, please go to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and place a request under the "Request unprotection" section; alternately, you can ask me on my talk page. Please take this opportunity to discuss the contentious issues here. MastCell Talk 23:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help on edit

Hello, I would like to ask if possible if the first pragraph could be changed from:

The New York International Independent Film and Video Festival (NYIIFVF) is a film screening event in various American cities. It was founded in 1993, and its website claims it has been recognized by the film and entertainment industry as one of the leading film events on the independent festival circuit. The festival hosts film, music and art events in Las Vegas, New York and Los Angeles.


To:

{{editprotected}}The New York International Independent Film and Video Festival (NYIIFVF) is a film festival held in various American cities founded in 1993. Currently the festivals host film, music and art events in New York and Los Angeles. There were editions in Las Vegas and Miami.


Thanks!

Stellatomailing 18:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] unprotecting

I'm going to unprotect the page. Per policy, editors who engage in edit warring may be blocked regradless of the number of reverts they make; compromise should be worked out on the talk page. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sourced material removed

I noticed again that the only sourced material by reliable sources has been removed and only the completely unsourced section remains. --Oakshade 00:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Revert War

Oakshade, I am not a part of this revert war. I just wikified the page and tried to find a middle ground. This page should read like all of the other film festival pages. Just some info about it and what goes on there. The criticism is fine as long as it is sourced. I spent a lot of time trying to sort out the differences between you two. Please take time before you knee-jerk revert upon noticing a change. - Heath007 06:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Oakshade, what is your interest in this article? Will you please provide more information to why you are trying to emphasize the negative aspects of this organization? - Heath007 06:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Avoiding blatant advertising and relying on sourced information to present a balanced article. You might remember Brad Patrick's office request to "act in a much more draconian fashion in response to corporate self-editing and vanity page creation." There is very strong evidence that the organization is heavily involved with editing this article. The user who tried to erase all referenced material by relilable sources and replaced it with a completely uncourced vanity piece [1] itentifies themself as a publicist and a publicity event Producer film consultant [2] and that person's name is also identified as a "NYIIFVF Seminar Coordinator" here. We're trying to be consistent with office policy and WP:Spam and proper implementation of WP:Neutral point of view and WP:Reliable sources. --Oakshade 16:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
My edit properly wikified the article, and it only included information about where the festival was located, types of films they catered to, a couple of awards associated with the festival, and the criticism surrounding the event coordinators. I read the other users post, and it did resemble an ad; however, my edit was indisputably NPOV yet you immediately reverted without going to the talk page. What is really going on here? - Heath007 18:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Nothing else than what I explained above. While I believe you are not associated with this festival, that one source you added, this one, really just looks like a press release and doesn't seem to follow the guidelines of reliable sources per WP:CORP and it still looked like a gloss piece. Yes, that's my opinion and others might differ. Don't know what this assuming bad faith is, but writing a balanced article strictly based on reliable sources is what's "really going on here." --Oakshade 18:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
That source is just as "reliable" as the other two sources. Like I said before, this article needs to be similar to the other film festival articles. Don't turn Wikipedia into some childish game. - Heath007 19:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
"Childish game"??? That's quite a personal attack. Reverting what appears to be an advertisement based on what appears to be a press release is in no way a "childish game." You might want to bursh up on the Wikipedia guideline WP:Reliable Sources. You'll noitice that the only source quoted in article you supplied is actually the festival's publicist Briege McGarrity, a publicist who in fact is identified as the VERY SAME USER [3] who wrote this bladant advertising version and deleted the small Criticism section and erased its references [4], hardly Wikipedia's definition of a reliable or independent source. This article should be without the gigantic anti-NYIIVF rant above in this talk page, but it still should be un-biased and not referenced by sources based on statements of publicists or press releases. --Oakshade 21:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IMDB "blacklisting" should be included in the article

I believe it's fairly important to include the IMDB page where the festival fails to be considered a part of their database as a submission tool since the IMDB is one of the most notorious film databases in existence , thus potential filmmakers should be informed that this festival will not be useful as a possible medium to get exposure in IMDB. This is the link to the page.( requires login )

[edit] Stub sorting

Can an admin change it from stub to festival-stub and film-stub? Thanks. Postcard Cathy 12:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} actually the correct stub is {{film-festival-stub}}. SkierRMH 19:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. - auburnpilot talk 20:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)