Jump to content

User talk:Pegship/ArchiveDec2006

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives
2005
Jan-Apr 2006
May-Jun 2006
Jul-Aug 2006 (1)
Jul-Aug 2006 (2)
Sep-Oct 2006
Oct 2006 Oct-Nov 2006


IMDB

IMDB is a user-added and user-edited database. It's been considered a useful source, but NEVER a particularly reliable one -- and certainly never a reliable SOLE source. That's reality. Inconvenient, but reality. --Calton | Talk 02:17, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Father and Son

Are Autobiographies Novels WikiProject, or WPBiography? - I will watch how you tag Father and Son. Hoverfish 16:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC) -- Ok, but as autobiography, to which WP-project do I mark it (I mean the big template we put in the talk pages). Hoverfish 06:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

databases

The article, List of bibliographic databases, has just been turned into a redirect, and simultaneously the Academic databases and search engines article has had all the links changed--all of this in the last few days--alll of it at the rate of several hundred edits a day. See discussion on http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Academic_databases_and_search_engines#links DGG 03:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Finnish films

I have decided to map out the entire List of Finnish films with a different page for each letter of the alphabet. As you can see I started with the letter A films. Most films are notable but some won't have articles if they are not notable enough. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 09:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

THis way you can review my progress and set out the framework for starting the films on wikipedia. Good idea?

Hi can you propose a new stub category: Template:Finland-film-director-stub as soon I will have started many. Also if it doesn't already how about the broader category Template:European-film-director? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have also decided it is best to start list of films by country and year. With countries a navigation box can be drawn up for all of the couuntries where the lists can be accessed from. Also by year a box can be drawn up. e.g 1888 1889 1890 etc. Although because tyhere are so many years it is probably best by decade then branched out by year. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 09:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you see now how User:Calton is trying to delete everythin I do. I have redirected 80 years of films now to categories the navigation is never going to be deleted. It serves to view all films. However please tell them to let me do lists from 1896 to at least 1910 as there are practically no films in the categories. Believe it or not I would rather not have to create the lists as i said they were purely to view all the missing films and start them. Using the lengthy categories in all the later years I can compare with imdb and other sources which films that are notable are missing. Then soon once films are covered in those years redirect the lists to the categories. These do everything lists will but that navigation box is staying I won't let anyone delete that or the country navigation box. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

If I may, your Pegship, and E.S.Blofeld, couldn't the films come in the years in film? I know they are empty in these years, and even if separate lists are created as "Films in year", I will update the "Years in film" from them... Hoverfish 18:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry for being so vague. It's about the new navigation that just appeared in the Lists of films, between "Years in film" and "Lists by letter and number". I have clicked on some of the buttons. Some lead to Years in film and some to categories. Also I have been trying to avoid such a mishappening by trying to reason with E.S.Blofeld. I was of the impression he had got this point and tried to help out with some alternative for the countries and spent several hours trying to find general guidelines and policies (i.e. learn about them, as I'm just a few months deep in the maze). But now I see this... Hoverfish 18:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Update: Nehrams2020, as more neutral to the issue, has volunteered to present it in Film Project discussion. Sorry for invading here with my concerns. Hoverfish 19:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

See the main film talk discussion for my proposals. Plus i only created the redirects for thousands of new visiotrs to the site who may not be aware of Category: in the search engine. If templates are drawn up e.g of films by genre and list of actors by nationality etc they will go directly now to them if redirects strain the system. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Also see my List of Bulgarian films. Films:A has been narrowed down to a notable list of films which can be started later. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC). My first film is A byahme mladi. I aim to create the notable country and year lists and start the entries on wikipedia. Hopefully they can be expanded into great articles. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Commonscat family

T'wuld have been better to have had an example, but if it's a specific single instance, the answer is {{Commonscat1Ra}}, which iirc, should link the same 'matching' (not 'equals') category as do the '2' variants. (I wasn't... use the following, but there are only two or three maps qualifying as 'equalized', so which cat is your itch?)
   Otherwise, do the same but use Commonscat4Ra instead, same syntax should work, but if explicit arguments are given, then it's possible they may need swapped in order.
   The distinction is whether the category tree is 'equalized' as much as sensible, including moving pics and such (so a work in progress, thus the 'matching' cat is a TO-DO list of additional work needed), or whether the task is reasonably complete. I need to revisit and reconcile the versions here with the commons versions and clean up an publish usage notes for all. Consistency in application, particularly the way the arguement order is envoked is part of that, as well as being able to eliminate circa half of the family. I just need to have a big block of time to do it all at once. But I've been away off-wiki, and am now just getting time again. I'll que it up.

If that doesn't fix your itch, give me a link. That particular message may have outlived it's usefulness as well, so I should take a look at that aspect. The maps project lead to the set, but it's use has become generalized and ubiquitous, so the message can go as part of the simplification of all.
    'Back when, that message was sort of a guarantee so people wouldn't delete unpopulated Maps cats here out of hand, most of which were new names in the new scheme and so showed up empty. (Hmmmm- I never did figure out why they sometimes show commons image galleries and sometimes such vanish... thanks for the reminder! <G>).

ttfn -- Oops! The Steelers are on Thursday Night Football! Gotta go! (<G> Just kidding. I'll be here if you need me.) Cheers! // FrankB 01:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

1.) You should know that to an engineer, there are differences between design features and 'problems' (which weren't <g>)... usually one of picking a different tool in this case! (And not breaking a provisional future feature, not yet put into place--that redlink is on some one of my temp pages in user:fabartus) <G>
   In any event, the change is fine, as that template will likely be subsumed by one of the others per the above. The text as I note, DID have a political reason, at the time. You may recall me fighting to keep some of the system from being deleted. If not, no worries mate... that was back in June, iirc, so the design feature can even withstand irate lady librarians.
Ah yes, the age-old "Is it a bug, or is it a feature?!" question...Her Pegship 02:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Fer Conrad

2.) The sisterlinks template should look like this analog in/on Category:Music, so may have been' vandalized. If not, some admin didn't follow the what links here assuming the set was deleted.
   It is really being limited to commons applications, and is really a competing and imho, impractical (too fragile, too cumbersome, too large, too time intensive, too labor intensive) system to mine, and I've yelled some at Jimbo by email to get some software coding in place to use the interwiki's via an auxiliary database to do the task and translation they tried to do. (It's presence in a few categories here was so I could evaluate it technically versus mine own system.) The suggested scheme really wouldn't slow down the server processing much, as it's equivalent to looking up an template. Not much processing time involved, simple string swapping during a pre-processing pass before assembling the output HTML.
   I'll have Conrad Dunkerson look into the breakage, as he's the most template savvy admin I know, and one will be needed to look into the deletion logs, or whatever.
3) Anything else tonight? // FrankB 02:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Nope, go back to the Steelers. Thanks - Cheers! Her Pegship 02:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Never left them! But I hate laptop keyboards versus my ergonomic one up in the office. Hey! You need help with your sig. I was getting ALL KIND of excited that you'd added a talkpage link, AND am I disappointed that it's only a printing effect! Harumph! Like email, youse gots to get wid it gal! <G> I left a note for CBD on the Music mess. We'll just delete those once he figures out what the hell is going on, 'cause it may be breaking other templates too. Sometimes some parts of the database get corrupted or something... least that's what was what last time I saw anything like this before. (And that memories very fuzzy now) ttfn // FrankB 03:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Hi. The problem is Template:Void3 itself. That is called by various components of the sisterlinks template, but was deleted (again) on 12/07 by AmiDaniel. People keep deleting this as a copy of Template:Void, which it is, but not fixing all the links to use that template instead. So the solution should just be to go through what links here for 'Void3' and change all calls to 'Void' instead. Which I will start now. --CBD 10:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Novels 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 delivery by grafikbot 23:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Dekada '70

Hi! I made the move of Dekada 70 to Dekada '70 which is the correct title of both novel and film. Somehow, my browser took me to the old Dekada 70 when I made a new edit, etc. which explains the edit conflict. I am the only author of the article, and I ASK that the move or merge be made with Dekada '70. Thanks. --Pinay06 talk 23:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea: Submarine Voyage, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the nobots template on your user talk page

I hope this Bot doesn't deliver for every article we go gnoming through or we will have to start subpages for it :) Hoverfish 19:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

To tag or not to tag

I just came across The Strawberry Statement, which, as a film, had a big international impact in its time. Yet events have bypassed it and now it's not so well known. Should I mark this as a film stub (for the mention of the film) or should I include The Strawberry Statement (film) in missing articles? Hoverfish 23:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I just noticed noticed the film exists, as I saved this message :) Hoverfish 23:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Argentine films

I have started Template:Argentina-film-stub in relation to Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Argentine Films. I will eventually have a refined list of notable Argentine films each with there own article which can hopefully be written into full detailed articles later. Please can you adjust it so that the flag is inside the box and notify that this is being done in coordination with Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Argentine Films. I would rather not waste time in debating (look what happened with the user Calton business) something when it is inevitable that this stub category will be needed soon and rather than waste time having to adjust the stub cats on the new articles later. If you could let other members of the project my progress and that this stub cat and soon Argentina-actor-stub will exist I would be very grateful. I am also now keeping a personal log of my contributions (see User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld/Completed missing films) in this new giant global film project I am creating. You may find this useful if adjusting or reviwing or keeoing track of my work or whatever. At a later date I will use my Spanish to turn them into detailed articles. All the best Ernst Stavro Blofeld 17:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Contrary to some criticisms in the recent past by user:Calton I would sincerely hope I am contributing something of very high value to wikipedia and hope others users are pleased with my work. I will try to make each new article a super-stub if you like providing quick relevant info so they can be written into full and detailed articles later. E.g People like Román Viñoly Barreto and Mecha Ortiz should be written into ful articles asap but I am just laying them all out. Alos if you have any concerns about every film being started I have researched each film to assess notability or suitability for wikipedia and if you compare my list of Argentine films A and B which i have sorted so far with imdb list you will see that the majority or not used because they are not notable enough.Ernst Stavro Blofeld 17:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok its just it won't be long before there are 60 articles which are not yet full articles. I thought it was just saving trouble in the long run. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok thankyou Her Pegship.What a great name obviously you know Ernst Stavro Blofeld but might I ask where Pegship or Her Pegship comes from? I have just opened pages Hong Kong to Philippines on Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article. I aim to fill all of these asap with missing films. Each national category will be connected eventually to each country wikiproject and hoefully I can build can army of contributors from each country!!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 19:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone object if I duplicate Template:Filmsbycountry and create another one named Template:Missingfilmsbycountry for navigation purposes on wikiproject missing films? It would be exactly the same but just wikiprject and the name changed to Missing Ernst Stavro Blofeld 20:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

about your copypaste tag

Hi, I just discovered the reason you have placed the copypaste template in The Favour, the Watch and the Very Big Fish. Till now I had been wondering if the grammar was wrong. Today I found the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) and finally get your point. It's doesn't sound easy for me, but I am curious to see if I can turn this little universe inside-out. Hoverfish 22:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Bad Idea?

I could use an assist (maybe two). I have a pet peeve, and thought I'd come up with a good concept for making chides to editors who leave incomplete documentation trails by creating sort of a wet diaper award. It seems to be drawing some adverse reactions, and even before I'd spammed a request to some others like this for brainstorming on how to shorten same and evolve it, as I'm not happy with it either. Subsequently, it's already drawn fire (here) before I could ask in help and get suggestions. Can you take a look and comment here. There has to be some way to let people know 'shallow edit actions' that reflect poorly on our pages need a talk note justification, no exceptions, thankyou. Much appreciated // FrankB 23:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Deep Water (film)

Nice work, thanks. --Dweller 09:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

LOL yep

YourRadiant!'s sneaky sneaker graphic brought to mind this quote from Stargate: "We can only hope that this is the final footwear to descend." Cheers!Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Hmmmm - have you ever read Footfall by Niven and Pournelle? Good tale! Highly recommended. Is there a reason you don't allow email for these less than businesslike mess{egesings) <g>? T'would be nice, being friends and all. Also still have the ident protection if go strictly through the wiki-email facility, so enabling is no risk. Think on it.
       Hmmmm2- Who waz it that said: 'Of course I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?' Don't recall, but I likee the quote. // FrankB 18:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

From behind the curtain...

Yes, I count 105 in that stub cat and in/under Category:Children's novels: here's a list: User:Alai/childnovel. I looked at the non-fiction books a while ago, and magic 8-ball say, "people need to add more permcats to those". The top numbers were: 

Cultural_studies_books           |   69 |
Nonviolence                      |   57 |
Popular_culture_books            |   53 |
Philosophy_books                 |   51 |
Travel_books                     |   46 |

All of which sound so vague that I'd think they'd need to be seriously screened for false-positives. (I haven't look at those cat-trees "up close", though.)

Might be a while before I get back to this in any detail: my net access will be very intermittent for the next two weeks, and even moreso for shell access, which I need for my db dump. Alai 05:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Works by artist debate

Thanks for raising this again, although I might have sounded negative in my contribution. I also took the liberty of trying to point all to one place to hold the debate. :Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(categories)#The_Return_of_Works_by_Artist... should be the single place to debate this. I could see the debate being fragmented with all the crossposts which would be a bit self defeating. As I might have implied by my comments I think "some" of the problem is lack of enthusiasm for doing the individual category changes via cat delete proposals. Which is soooo long winded and open to people hopping on and getting in the way of the agreed process, although I know that is their privilege it does get "very" demotivating. Anyway I hope we get there this time. "once a cataloguer, always a cataloguer" ! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

A NEW WIKILANGUAGE SISTER PROJECT

Hi Pegship I have created the main film template Template:Worldcinema to attempt to connect all areas of film.

But this following is not really related to film but I have come up with a new idea for the wikipedia foundation a major new project to exist alongside Wikipedia and the Commons. Tell me what you think. I sent this to the leaders of the WIkipedia Foundation:

I propose a new major sister project of wikipedia WikiLanguages or WikiLinguistics which specializes in the teaching of all languages. I have looked over the internet and have found some sites which do have several of the major languages giving knowledge of learning them but this wuould be huge and would provide all the information for learning languages such as most of the 250 languages that already have wikipedias. Learning a language is a major infomration source but wikipedia does not have this in detail. I beleive this wikipedia sister project would be developed into an extremwely valuable resoruce not only for achieving knowledge of major languages but also other world languages which are not always readily available to learn. Also many of the existing webistes which do atempt to provide some learning of language often involve a subscription and are not free.

If it is created I would hope that say five years down the line we should have the ultimate language learning resource in the world. If everybody contributes from their respective countris and knowledge of their languages we could see a resource which could allow you to potentially become fluent in hundreds of languages. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly beleive this is what providing free easily accessible information is what wikipedia is all about and think this is an extrmely valuable component missing from the Wikipedia Foundation. E.g if I wanted to learn Norwegian or Czech or FInnish at the highest possible level or whatever this resource would be there to provide this knowledge. WikiLanguages would be divided into 250 or whatever massive sub projects e.g WikiFrench WikiSpanish WikiNorwegian WikiFinnish WikiDutch WIkiItalian WIkiPortuguese WIkiThai WikiJapanese etc etc dedicated to providing an English encylopedia of languagesErnst Stavro Blofeld 12:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC).

Imagine if this major sister project could incorporate translation technology - imagine the immese benefit for learning but also for tranlsation from foreign wikipedias. This would be a highly useful tool for Wikipedia itself. The site could also incorpate audio technology so the resoruce would not only provide you with the detail to reading and writing a language fluently but provide you with the knoe how to pronouncre and speak a language well. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly beleive that this is the next step for the Wikipedia Media series. The series attempts to connect the world up entirely providing 'the sum of all human knowedge freely' but I think a key to commuinication is language- a vital part of the project.

Please let me know if you think this is a good idea. I would like to organize a proposal petition with the top wikipedia foundation administrators to decide to start this. WikiLanguages would also provide specializes knowledge of localized dialects or whatever -the ultimate global language resource. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Categorizing Film

Hi, I just had a day learning about categories. I talked about it with Nehrams briefly and Cbrown suggested I start this Categorization section which appears red in the Film Sidebar. The thing is I feel a bit ignorant, although I do have a (self-)developed sense of organizing. The other thing is that you, as derived from your userboxes, have studied the branch and are the most appropriate for such a venture. So, not meaning to put all the load on you, I would be most grateful to know if you would help me start on it. Maybe we need a new project subpage for it. -/- Myst 1-4 are my best adventures, by the way. Hoverfish 23:26, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, for one we need to clear out the category tree that branches down Category:Film. I could make a nice graphic diagram for clear display. Then we need to come up with guidelines on what categories are needed for a film article. In other words we need to make clear to all concerned how to give all needed categoreies, avoiding unnecessary ones. But there may be a lot more to it. It will be a guideline article on categorizing films. Hoverfish 23:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I've started a very rudimentary tree effort in User:Hoverfish/Sandbox. I'm still on top level items. I think we don't have to expand on all of them. Some like Genre will need to go one level down, as they may be very complex. We should mostly clear out a set of standard cats for all films (year -language -country -genre). Some are often doubled by another template: for example, if a director's filmography template is present, it's a repetition to add By director in the cats. Yet apart from a general outline and guidelines, Dept Categorization should be where categorizing tasks are coordinated. For example we could ask for an AWB user to run through a particular list and seed some categories. Or we can decide how to organize best the tree. Happy Holidays. Hoverfish Talk 09:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree about not going by actor. I can imagine it would get at least unmanageable and be a consistent source of disputes. It's just that I found Fang Wong in Category:Films and then discovered "it" was an actor. The idea of having a Categorization Department, is quite good. The points you mentioned, plus many others you may have (I have some too, after some extensive visits into film categories), can be set there and given consensus, we could clean up some messy points and make the structure clear. Sometimes I also need technical help. In the sorting of duologies, trilogies, etc, which are sorted via a common template, there is a whole complex (for me) field. They need to be sorted in S after this strange and tagworthy List of film series (which happens to be a copy of hexo/ to dodecalogies). So, discussed the department, things like this tick of a to-do list much faster and any complaining party has a more populated place to complain in. That's why I accepted Cbrown's prompting to start it. Wikipedia:Categorization sais we shouldn't make a tree in subcategorizing, so next I will try to clear out some main parenting lines. If I can clear it out for myself, I could make a clear diagram to save newcomers lots of time searching and wondering. So the department can decide if that's the best way or how. As for my native English box, it's as proximate as I could find. My written Greek is as lousy. Maybe I'll fashion my own babelbox. Hoverfish Talk 20:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I got somewhat bold for Christmas and started rearranging Category:Lists of films. I have created and populated subcategories _by genre and _by technical issue (I avoided "technology" so we can include more issues). One thing: in general film cats I see animation as genre. I don't think it should be under film genre, neither technology. It would be most useful to be itself a subcat of Films. In the List of films cat, I think it would be best to create a subcat List of animated films. By the way, Lady Aleena hasn't been active since mid September, so I went ahead and sorted the series right. I guess all this is my way of trying to start the categorization department: scratch a bit here poke a bit there and maybe the big inspiration will surface soon. Hoverfish Talk 15:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

This is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Categorization has started. Any contributions in further developing it are warmly welcome. Hoverfish Talk 15:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Newsletter

The December 2006 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. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2006/November

Your recent edit to Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2006/November (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 18:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Splitting Category:American films

I beleive that every American film should be categorized as American films but as there are so many tens of thousands how about the category is split by decade.

E.g my The Lawless Nineties would become Category:American films of the 1930s.

Category:American films would be neatly organized by decade rather than the giant giant main category. It could look like this:

etc What do you think? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 13:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the corrections and welcome anywhere anytime (like in The Favour-Watch-VBFish). Hoverfish Talk 20:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I won't start (sub)Category:Lists of films by content unless we get your (humble) blessings. Hoverfish Talk 20:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy new year!

Hi Eagle! Looks like you're busy. I was just checking the films that are also novels list subpage & wondering whether I should revive that...is anyone else interested? If not, feel free to delete the page & I will focus my efforts elsewhere. Cheers! Her Pegship (tis herself) 23:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

If you want me to, I am more then willing to do so. —— Eagle 101 (Need help?) 18:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

2007

We need an admin to update {{cfd}} and {{cfr}} ... I've already done {{cfm}} -- ProveIt (talk) 01:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New year Her Pegship. I think you have noticed but Category:American films is ridiculously out of control so I have reformatted it appropriately creating a new navigation box for the American films. I just need lots and lots of help to make the minor category adjustments to the articles. You see also part of the clogging on the e.g Category:2006 films is caused by the greatest film producersd America and India. I figure if each is sub categorized off by year it would house these masses of films more effectively. E.g on Category:1990 films all American films should become one category Category:1990 American films which is accessed both from American films and 1990 films. THis may we seperate the American films from the rest killing two birds with one stone. If American films are defined strongly like this all of the categories should be more sensible Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thousands of films are produced in the US every year and it is inevitable to categorize them by year of release, - you will see my work is again another great ideaErnst Stavro Blofeld 21:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I have created that American film box to Cstegorize the AMerican films more effectively. I beleive sorting out all American films first should be the way to go. American films that are categorized e.g Category:American films and Category:1948 films for example should now become Category:1948 American filmsErnst Stavro Blofeld 21:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou your Pegship. Yes I have learnt my lesson about waiting. Strangely It seems people will show you more repsect by waiting and discussing rather than your actual great ideas and contribution to wikipedia. I stated my intentions its just I thought it common sense that you cannot attempt to categorize over 100 years of Amwericsn films in one category. Each year should have an A-Z category of its own. I have noticed than about 9/10 of American films already on wikipedia are not categorized as American - imagine how this category will be in a years time when all these are categorized properly and all the missing films are added!

I would have hoped people would have learnt by now that anything i do is actually useful - but I do apologise for starting it for you all if you want to discuss it heavily. Its just I see a problem so I have to change it. All the best and I won't be bothering with recategorizing yet. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 08:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

My efforts at creating the new sub categories was precisely to maintain what we have here. To sort out ten page categories which have the potential to be over 50 pages long. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 11:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

To diffuse appropriately to effectively manage what we have. There was even a template on the American films page even beofee I visisted it telling visitors to create sub categories as the main category is becoming unmanagable. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 11:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes decades is what I started with see. I doesn't matter if we have two or three pages but I thought years might be better because there are 10,000 films produced every year from America. I'll of course wait to see!! You can give your opinion on the categorization film talk page. Some guy on there thinks we should forgot even country categories and have one main category for every film on wikipedia!!!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pegship/ArchiveDec2006&oldid=1036765013"