Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Jacques Rivette filmography/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 23:30, 9 February 2017 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Jacques Rivette filmography

[edit]

Jacques Rivette filmography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Deoliveirafan (talk) 04:06, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it is accurate, complete and fully cited, but I would love to work with any editors on necessary improvements if needed. Deoliveirafan (talk) 04:06, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:15, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments sorry that you've had to wait a month for any comments, hopefully the following will kick-start the process!
  • " a three-part television documentary and was an interviewer on another three-part television documentary" repetitive.
  • "He also acted in small roles or was interviewed in a few films" surely "and" rather than "or"? And "a few films" doesn't sound encyclopedic.
  • " on a few mainstream films" similar.
  • La Religieuse is a dab link.
  • L'amour fou check capitalisation.
  • "political turmoil of May 68" firstly I'd say 1968 and secondly I'd probably link the whole phrase rather than just the date.
  • Note [a] could be included in the lead rather than appended to a section heading.
  • Table is sortable so link all linked items every time.
  • Ref column doesn't need to be sortable.
  • Table needs to have row and col scopes (see WP:ACCESS / MOS:TABLE)
  • Around a Small Mountain doesn't sort properly by duration. It's probably because you have "minutes" each entry and that makes the table sort purely alphanumerically rather than by the actual duration.
  • Notes don't really need to be sortable either, since it's free text.
  • All previous comments regarding table structure and column sortability apply to all tables, by the way.
  • Andre S. Labarthe missing his accent.
  • See also needs a bullet point.

That's a start for you, hopefully useful. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the tips The Rambling Man. I have done everything on your list except for figuring out the Around a Small Mountain duration problem. I will try to figure it out.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 06:00, 7 December 2016 (UTC) Also, how do I sort name this: Jean-Marie Straub and Danièle Huillet ?--Deoliveirafan (talk) 06:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I "fixed" the issues of the Lengths not sorting properly, but I don't really like it and think I need some help fixing it.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 06:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I modified the header of the table to suit it better I think. As for sorting Jean-Marie Straub and Daniele Huillet, I'd do it on the Straub. Is that what you meant? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:50, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I just changed it, but now it is a redirect. Their joint page is Straub–Huillet.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 16:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Incidentally, I changed the format of one of the tables, here, to see if you prefer it to the bold italic titles which come in when you introduce row and col scopes. If you prefer it, add plainrowheaders to the wikitable class description, if you don't like it, simply undo my revision. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think its looking good now and all of your comments/suggestions have been addressed.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 05:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 15:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from —Vensatry (talk) 08:24, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Vensatry
Do you mean that you don't think I should have references in the middle of a sentence?--Deoliveirafan (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not exactly, but you may do so after punctuation marks (say comma/semicolon). —Vensatry (talk) 06:12, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Think I have covered all of your comments now.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 07:38, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider linking 'extra' appropriately.
  • "personal assistant to Jean Renoir and Jacques Becker their films" - Not clear
  • Add WP:ALT for the image.
  • What is Gazette du Cinéma? A description might be helpful.
  • "distinguishing himself as one of the most respected writers of his peers" - Part of me feels, this needs to be slightly rephrased to maintain WP:NPOV.
  • I'd suggest you to pipe 'film version of La Religieuse' to The Nun (1966 film).
  • 'hit film' is frowned upon in WP. Something on the lines of 'commercially/financially successful' would be helpful.
  • 'theatrical' or 'theatreical'?
  • Remove the periods at the end of each points in 'Awards' and 'Notes' columns.

The lead is engaging and the lists look in great shape. Nice work! —Vensatry (talk) 12:05, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Vensatry, I took care of most of this. I couldn't find any punctuation after references.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 16:10, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Director note – Deoliveirafan, we need a source review at this point. It's already been listed on the top of FLC as needing one, so hopefully somebody will take it up. Vensatry has done some good source reviews for us; perhaps you can ask them for another look. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:23, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, been very busy lately. Thanks to all for helping out on this.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 23:13, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

  • "He also worked as an extra ..." This bit isn't verified in either of the sources
I changed it to small role, but I think extra is better. All the sources I am finding say (translation) "a passerby", which is basically an extra but I guess that specific term doesn't translate. I think its a question of translation and extra should be reinstated.
What I'm saying is that, the 'extra' claim isn't verified by either of the sources used. —Vensatry (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I just used a new source.
  • Ref #9: Material faithful to the source
Again, it seems to be a question of translation and previous interpretations of translations, but I changed it to what the source says
I changed this to Assistant Director. --Deoliveirafan (talk) 01:39, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did La Belle Noiseuse win Special Mention Prize of the Ecumenical Jury? Ref #34 doesn't say so. Our article doesn't mention the film either.
It is referenced in Ref # 35. Took me forever to find that as I recall
It still doesn't. The Cannes FF site doesn't mention it either. —Vensatry (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is currently reference # 34. The MUBI reference.
Unless I'm missing something, the film did not win the said award. The official source lists only the Grand Prix. —Vensatry (talk) 14:38, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, ;User:Vensatry sorry for the delay and I do appreciate your help. Basically as I recall the Official Cannes page originally did have the award listed. At some point in the past few months them seem to have purged their website and now only include the most basic awards for each year. At that point (when I noticed it) I found the MUBI source. Is MUBI unreliable? I always thought it was.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 01:38, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, alright —Vensatry (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref #29: Years are inconsistent with the source. You need to clarify the same in the table.
I just eliminated most of this source. One date was wrong on the wiki page.
You haven't. It's now numbered at [28] —Vensatry (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean, currently the reference in question is # 41.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 19:30, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by 'eliminated' then? —Vensatry (talk) 14:38, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I mean I took out that specific source for most titles in the filmography charts except for those not listed in the AllMovie source. Initially I intended to only use All Movie as the source for all of the titles, but found that some of the films were not included in that reliable source. So I found the French Ciné-Ressources (the source in question) and added it to ALL titles that it supported, both those already supported by All Movie and those not. Admittedly I overlooked the fact that some dates were wrong, which was sloppy of me. So by 'eliminate', I mean that now the Ciné-Ressources source is only used for titles not supported by All Movie.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 01:39, 3 February 2017 (UTC) Also to be clear, Reference number 28 is the All Movie reference. Reference number 40 is the Ciné-Ressources reference. The beginning of this conversation referred to Ciné-Ressources when it was still reference 29. Have you been referring to the All Movie reference?--Deoliveirafan (talk) 01:45, 3 February 2017 (UTC) I apologize, a few of the dates from All Movie are inconsistent. Fixing now.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 01:54, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You link some publishers but not others
Fixed
  • In publishers, you use Festival del film Locarno, berlinale.de and Cannes Film Festival - Be consistent
Fixed
  • Is cinema1987.org a RS?
I hate this source. Lots of unreliable sources on the web, but this was the best I could find. It is very hard to google translate search in Japanese. I'll keep trying.
I added a better ref for the 1992 Kinema Junpo award. Hope that helps! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:19, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Titles and publisher names should abide by WP:SHOUT
Fixed
Refs. #36 and #37 are still left. Also, add language in the former. —Vensatry (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I overlooked those. Fixed.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing this. I'll keep looking for a better source for the Kinema Jumpo award.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vensatry would you be prepared to indicate whether your concerns have now been addressed? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vensatry sorry to nag, but can you respond here? Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
TRM, I have responded. A few points are still unaddressed. —Vensatry (talk) 19:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Vensatry, appreciate it. Deoliveirafan if you could let me know you're continuing to address Vensatry's issues, that'd be great. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: I'm done with the SR. This one is good to go! —Vensatry (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Jacques_Rivette_filmography/archive1&oldid=1138480580"