Talk:List of American films of 2019

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	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 American cinema task force.

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force.

Years

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years 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.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Invitation to talk pages about the format of 2019 in film

Everyone seeing this is invited to the sections on WP:FILM and MOS:FILM about the format change on 2019 in film. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:09, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Genre columns

I've started going through the trouble of removing the genre columns from the articles for American films of 2019, as well as 2020, 2018, and 2017. More than one of these edits have been recently undone by My7thsecret, who offered the following explanation: "GENRE IS NECESSARY so people would know right then and there what they are gonna watch".

As I already briefly explained in my edit summaries, I feel that genre columns are unnecessary for these articles. There are numerous inconsistencies that are present and questions that arise in regards to what should be counted as a genre (the article for 2017 American films in particular stood out to me, which has The Girl with All the Gifts listed as "Post-apocalyptic, Zombie"), what genres are/should be linked (many instances on the aforementioned articles and others like them include the use of the genre "Family", which is otherwise a very uncommon classification on Wikipedia), and how the text is/should be formatted (should a given film's genres be listed as "Science fiction, horror", "Horror, science fiction", "Science fiction and horror", "Science Fiction, Horror", etc.?).

Genres are a tricky enough subject as it is. They should already be verifiably sourced in article leads (see WP:FILMLEAD), and sometimes there isn't consensus on what genres a film should be classified as. Take Fight Club for example. The first sentence in the article for Fight Club doesn't provide a genre, since no primary genre has been established despite much discussion. Should the article for List of American films of 1999 just leave Fight Club's genre box empty? Keeping genre columns in articles for lists of films by country and year adds unnecessary clutter, opens the door for superfluous arguments regarding genre classifications, and creates a need for further sourcing (even though these articles have references that reach into the hundreds as it is). Finally, if people want to "know right then and there what they are gonna watch", they can just click on the films' titles for more information. –Matthew - (talk) 00:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For me, genre is necessary. Many would agree that it is. You see, some people would always look for the genre first before clicking on the title. For people who doesn't like horror, they would ignore those title and proceed to the next, because it's already written in the table. Without the genre, they would have to click each title to know what the genre is.

I am talking about user experience here. As an IT, it is important that we remove processes so that users don't have to click as many links. We want them to have everything on the table so it would be easier for them to browse what they wanted to see. -My7thsecret (talk) 01:55, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with My7thSecret RigorImpossible (talk) 01:59, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remove genre column Genres are problematic at the best of times given their subjectivity. Just take the first entry Escape Room as an example: The genre is given as "psychological horror" at the article but "Horror, thriller, mystery" here. The mismatch between the list and the article is confusing. Also, genre bloat seems to be a particular problem in this table:The Lego Movie 2 entry on this list has eight genres listed in total. How is this helpful to readers? Wikipedia does have genre specific lists for common genres such as List of horror films of 2019 and List of science fiction films of the 2010s which allow readers to search for films of a particular genre and this is a much better way of providing the information IMO. Even if the genre information here was sourced, consistent and not indiscriminate then I still think the existence of genre-specific lists makes including the information here largely redundant. Betty Logan (talk) 10:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can always correct those information. Genre needs to be there. You need to think of others who would like to browse for movies that they wanted to watch. Having a single page for everything gives them less of a burden of clicking those titles one by one.

Take grandpa for example, he's on this page looking for films suitable for young audiences to watch together with his grandkids. By just scrolling through the page, he is able to find the movie that they'll watch together. Removing the genre, you're giving grandpa a headache. This is about user experience.

My7thsecret (talk) 02:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a film recommendation guide, it is an encyclopedia. Wikipedia articles are not automatically improved by stuffing as much information as possible into them. Genres are already well served in a far more economical and effective way by dedicated lists and also the categories if that is the information you seek. Betty Logan (talk) 08:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly why genres should be there. Encyclopedia about films without classification of genres is just a non-classified list of films.195.147.206.144 (talk) 09:32, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is a convincing point whatsoever. Without genres, the list would still feature "classification". The films are ordered by release date, and further identified with titles, production companies, and principal members of the cast and crew (all of which are, unlike genres, objective and almost always indisputable). —Matthew - (talk) 21:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove genre column: Per nom. DeluxeVegan (talk) 08:32, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Betty Logan: This discussion has been inactive for about three weeks now. How should we carry on from here? Should more users be invited to weigh in? –Matthew - (talk) 20:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would try posting another message at the Film project page because there isn't a consensus either way as yet. If that doesn't raise sufficient responses then you will need to elevate the discussion to an RFC. If you go down the RFC route I recommend you wait until January because if you start one now it will die over the xmas period. Betty Logan (talk) 22:20, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Genre columns

The consensus is yes, the genre column should be removed. I will do this, for this article, with my next few edits.—S Marshall T/C 12:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should genre columns be removed from the articles from lists of films by country and year (e.g. List of American films of 2020, List of Japanese films of 2019, List of British films of 2018, etc.)? —Matthew - (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove genre columns: As I stated in a previous discussion, I feel that genre columns are unnecessary for such lists. There are numerous inconsistencies already present, as well as questions that arise in regards to what should be counted as a genre, what genres are/should be linked, and how the text is/should be formatted. Genres are already a tricky, subjective matter as is. They have to be verifiably sourced in article leads (per WP:FILMLEAD), and sometimes there isn't consensus on what genres a film should be classified as (see Fight Club for an example). Keeping genre columns in such lists like these is not only redundant due to the existence of genre-specific list articles, but it means keeping unnecessary clutter, and leaving the door open for superfluous arguments over what genres should be listed and why. —Matthew - (talk) 04:07, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Remove. Genre listings are rarely encyclopaedic, often squabbled over, and never cited as frequently or clearly as we should require them to be. If a given film's article wants to discuss its genre it has plenty of room in prose to do so but tables are not a good place for them. GRAPPLE ^X 10:15, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Agree with the above. For a listing where you're trying to reduce ambiguities and only cite the minimal information, films genres clash with that goal. The amount of edit-warring and back-and-forth I see over film genres is something no article should deal with if we can remove that trigger for disagreement. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 17:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Genres are notorious for being subjective and controversial, and they do not belong on a list like this. --Secundus Zephyrus (talk) 19:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that there were related conversations happening on Talk:List of American films of 2020, so I am pinging the users who participated: DAC8190, Draco9904, Abskiee. --Secundus Zephyrus (talk) 19:42, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove per my stated rationale in the above section. This is secondary information and its subjectivity can created inconsistencies. It is largely redundant too because dedicated genre lists already exist on Wikipedia. Betty Logan (talk) 00:09, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All the discussion about the genre being too difficult to make perfect seems to be missing the point that many find it meeting a real need, even in its imperfect state. I strongly urge you all to reconsider your positions!

§--DAC8190 (talk) 03:14, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove per (talk) Idealigic (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gloria Bell

Is there any particular reason why Gloria Bell is not on this page? After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]