Talk:Extra (acting)/Archives/2013

Untitled

Can someone please help me: how many registered extras/ background actors are there in the us? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.149.12.114 (talk) 18:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Extra (acting) (non-admin closure) Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:11, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

---

Extra (actor) → ? – I was misled into assuming that the current title refers to one specific person. The title turns out to be referring to the definition of the term. Should the title be background actor or something? George Ho (talk) 18:25, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• That's a pretty obscure reason for a move since I can't really imagine anyone getting confused. Pretty sure Extra is the more common term, so oppose. GDallimore (Talk) 18:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Neutral over change to Extra (acting). Still don't think it's necessary, but not against the change. GDallimore (Talk) 09:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose as "extra" is well established term in this context, also I'm not too happy with these move requests to a question mark. PatGallacher (talk) 19:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. What, you're saying you thought the article was about an actor named "Extra"? I can't imagine that being a common problem. The lede gives various synonyms for "extra" ("background performer", "background artist", etc), and there are of course redirects from (for example) Extra (drama) and Movie extra, but I can't see any good reason for changing the present title. GrindtXX (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
• Comment have to say I can't imagine anyone thinking "an actor called Extra Jones" or something. However I take it on good faith that you did find it misleading. Extra (drama) and Movie extra, or Extra (filmmaking) would be an alternative, since (filmmaking) is used as a dab, or even (acting). In ictu oculi (talk) 04:21, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Correction - I've just realised that Movie extra is a better title by natural disambiguation. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

"Extra" is not limited to movie extras. But thanks for your faith. --George Ho (talk) 04:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Perhaps Extra (acting) instead? -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 06:29, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
• If I became an actor, I'd change my name to Extra (actor), so my WP article would be titled Extra (actor) (actor)... Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

• Then you'd have an extra actor! Best smile of the day. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

• The article body seems to use the term "background actor". Perhaps this would be a more suitable title. Failing that, I would prefer "Extra (acting)" just to make it totally clear that this is not about an individual actor known as Extra. — This, that and the other (talk) 01:30, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
• Unsure. A rename to background actor would clearly conform to what is used in the industry at the current time. Extra (acting) is in common use with the public. So which way to go? Add in that we try to avoid parenthetical disambiguation, and maybe the rename is more correct. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:08, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

The more common industry term is probably just "background". GDallimore (Talk) 08:58, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support Extra (acting). That seems a sensible compromise. --BDD (talk) 22:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support Extra (acting) as well. I can see why "(actor)" would be confusing since it is also the disambiguation term for people. Considering people out there like McG, it's not impossible for this to happen. :) Erik (talk | contribs) 22:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support Extra (acting) as common outside the industry. Wikipedia tries to avoid jargon. Abductive (reasoning) 04:54, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support Extra (acting) as a clarifying small modification. Extra (actor) could be read as an actor named "Extra", if one is not thinking, or is an algorithm, I suppose. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:49, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.