Talk:British Film Institute

Libraries Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: British

	Film portal This article 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.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.

Television: British High‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as High-importance).

United Kingdom Mid‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

The Save The Children Fund Film

This was a very popular release by Ken Loach and should be listed on this wikipedia page. I've also created a separate page for this film here: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/The_Save_the_Children_Fund_Film — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twillisjr (talk • contribs) 16:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes

Re "mind-boggling inaccuracies":

My quote was a direct quote from paragraph two of their Royal Charter, so it is not inaccurate, whether it boggles your mind or not. Where are you quoting from? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 08:30, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Actually those weren't the inaccuracies to which I was referring, although I did think the original Charter quote excised too much content to give a rounded impression of their activities, excluding the "promotion of greater understanding and appreciation" which is such a key part of their remit. The material I was quoting from was the statement printed in every BFI publication, on the copyright page (in the case of books) or packaging (in the case of DVDs or videotapes). The inaccuracies I actually had in mind were contained in the sentence "The BFI is the United Kingdom's chief custodian of the "high art" end of the British movie industry." 1: This again elides mention of their exhbition wing, the phrase "movie industry" suggesting production, and 2: The NFT, contrary to your comment on the History page, have programmed commercial films, in addition to television programmes, documentary and news material, and assorted cult interest stuff (they're currently running a Diana Dors season!), none of which can be comfortably bracketed as "high art". In fact, tommorrow evening they are showing Hable con ella, funnily enough (according to the schedule available at www.bfi.org.uk). You were, I understand, dealing with it primarily as a film production entity rather than as an exhibition entity, and if we're talking about production, then of course your statement is correct (though less so than it used to be). However, as the BFI (to my knowledge, at least) no longer produces films "off it's own bat" (i.e., without associate producers) the statement is potentially misleading as to their real significance. The uninformed reader might well think that the BFI is, like the AFI, a production entity with only tangental involvment in exhibition.

I'm not moaning: those problems have been resolved by your current edit. As it stands, with a much longer Charter quote, and without the "high art" comment the article is now accurately representative of their activities. The only alteration I've made is the removal of "promote" from just before the Charter quote, simply because it seemed grammatically awkward. On reflection, the "mind-boggling" comment was unduly provocative, and I apologise if it was offensive. --Chips Critic 11:40, 25 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

BFI template

Just wondering if we have a BFI template for links to the BFI website along the lines of the used for the IMDB. If we don't there should be one as it would be very useful. Paul Largo (talk) 13:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found a series of {{Bfidb}} for this site, but not before I'd started to create some of my own at {{Bfi}} (what a chump!) Anyway I've redirected mine to the existing ones and created a main template page for bfidb templates as there wasn't one. I've also created a couple of /doc pages. The main bfidb one is just a page with a series of links though so will need some details adding to it. I think I've managed to fix any confusion I might have caused. Paul Largo (talk) 19:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MOMI section neutrality

To me this sounds like advertising: 'MOMI was acclaimed internationally and set new standards for education through entertainment ...'

And this isn't substantiated: 'it did not receive the high levels of continuing investment that might have enabled it to keep pace with technological developments and ever-rising audience expectations'.

Does it matter? Maybe this section should be re-written for NPOV.

Sam Dutton (talk) 12:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Film Institute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081003104623/http://www.bfi.org.uk/about/pdf/charter.pdf to http://www.bfi.org.uk/about/pdf/charter.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]