This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Doctor Sleep (2019 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Here I reverted the unnecessary addition of subsection headings per WP:OVERSECTION, "Very short or very long sections and subsections in an article look cluttered and inhibit the flow of the prose. Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading." It is possible that these headings will be acceptable, when the content exists to flesh out the given subsection. It is unnecessary and sloppy to implement a structure with the expectation that it will be filled out. The structure needs to be implemented as it is filled out. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
This is an example of oversectioning to avoid. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 16:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Per MOS:FILM#Production, "A production section should provide a clear and readable narrative of how the film was developed, setting out the key events that affected its production, without detailing all of the day-to-day operations or listing every piece of associated news and trivia. Try to maintain a production standpoint, referring to public announcements only when these were particularly noteworthy or revealing about the production process. Focus on information about how plot elements or settings were decided and realized, rather than simply repetitively listing their dates. Add detail about how the actors were found and what creative choices were made during casting, only including the casting date (month and year is normally sufficient) where it is notably relevant to the overall production history." We do not need to engage in proseline as seen here where we have one sentence after another saying this person and that person joined on this date and that date, which is against the aforementioned guidelines. It is simple enough to mention the starring actor joining and to indicate that the rest of the cast was filled out as typical. There is nothing unusual to warrant naming all the secondary roles being cast and when that was done. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 06:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
TheMovieGuy, ten citations at the end of one sentence is too many. I get what you were trying to do, but I can't see a good way to do a citation bundle since some of the citations are being used for other details too. How about we just have the earliest and the latest citations there instead? I'll change the latter one to reflect November. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
A couple of IP editors, likely the same person, are trying to add "Intrepid Pictures" as a production company. The only basis I can see for this is rooted in the producers involved, as it says here, "Flanagan's Intrepid Pictures partner Trevor Macy will produce along with Vertigo Entertainment's Jon Berg, and Goldsman is executive producer." I cannot find any mention of Intrepid Pictures on its own and am not finding that the aforementioned sentence means that the production companies are Intrepid Pictures and Vertigo Entertainment. It seems likely, but it seems more appropriate to simply list the producers now and see about the companies later. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 16:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
References to use. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 18:14, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
If someone wants to make an article for Roger Dale Floyd, this is a good source. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 20:06, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 02:11, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 19:16, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 18:16, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Since there may be some disputing about which names to show as starring and how to order them, we need to follow rules of thumb per WP:FILMCAST. Here are the rules of thumb that we have:
The "and Cliff Curtis" bit seen in the trailer, in billing-block terminology, means "such words tend to be used when a major star has a small but significant role". See breakdown. This is further confirmed by Cliff Curtis being at the end of the sentence in the YouTube page's description. The official site is not launched yet, so I think it is best to follow the YouTube page in listing McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran as starring, especially for infobox purposes. The rest of the names are grouped in their own sentence in the lead section. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 19:59, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
The official site is now up, and it repeats McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran together twice here:
Cliff Curtis is not mentioned as starring and is instead mentioned at the very end, which fits the billing-block terminology. So the trio of McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran is the appropriate rule of thumb to have when writing about who is starring. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 11:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
The final trailer here has the same billing-block information with McGregor, Ferguson, Curran, and Curtis and the same description that says the film stars McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran, with Curtis placed after six other actors' names. Notifying WT:FILM for additional opinions based on the sources. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 02:39, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
The {{
Infobox film}} template says: Insert the names of the actors as they are listed in the billing block of the poster for the film's original theatrical release."
The poster only includes McGregor, Ferguson, and Curtis, but not Curran. Would there be an objection to removing Curran from the infobox per the infobox template? The lead would be a separate issue and I don't see any issue there, since it often includes more cast names than the infobox.
– Wallyfromdilbert (
talk) 22:16, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
I recently removed extraneous information about Kyliegh Curran that was contained in a note in this article. Curran does not have an article on Wikipedia, and this seems like a clear case of WP:COATRACK. It is not appropriate to use an article with a non-notable actor to fill in biographical details that are not at all relevant to the article topic. I could understand discussing Curran's prior work in the production section, for example, if an article discussed a producer choosing her for the role because of a prior work they had seen her in. Without some relevance to the actual article topic (here, a film about a King novel), then any article about a film could have multiple notes about every non-notable person involved (or for that matter, notes about all the notable actors and their prior work). However, Wikipedia is not a repository of information. I am instead posting the material from Erik here to the talk page for reference when Curran becomes notable enough for her own page.
Curran played Young Nala in a Broadway production of The Lion King in 2016. She also appeared in the 2017 independent film I Can I Will I Did. [1] [2]
References
Following WP:ONUS, I think a consensus should be built that this information is significant and relevant to the article subject per WP:DUE before it is restored. – wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 00:36, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Doctor Sleep (upcoming film). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 04:18, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Doctor Sleep (2019 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Here I reverted the unnecessary addition of subsection headings per WP:OVERSECTION, "Very short or very long sections and subsections in an article look cluttered and inhibit the flow of the prose. Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading." It is possible that these headings will be acceptable, when the content exists to flesh out the given subsection. It is unnecessary and sloppy to implement a structure with the expectation that it will be filled out. The structure needs to be implemented as it is filled out. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 12:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
This is an example of oversectioning to avoid. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 16:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Per MOS:FILM#Production, "A production section should provide a clear and readable narrative of how the film was developed, setting out the key events that affected its production, without detailing all of the day-to-day operations or listing every piece of associated news and trivia. Try to maintain a production standpoint, referring to public announcements only when these were particularly noteworthy or revealing about the production process. Focus on information about how plot elements or settings were decided and realized, rather than simply repetitively listing their dates. Add detail about how the actors were found and what creative choices were made during casting, only including the casting date (month and year is normally sufficient) where it is notably relevant to the overall production history." We do not need to engage in proseline as seen here where we have one sentence after another saying this person and that person joined on this date and that date, which is against the aforementioned guidelines. It is simple enough to mention the starring actor joining and to indicate that the rest of the cast was filled out as typical. There is nothing unusual to warrant naming all the secondary roles being cast and when that was done. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 06:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
TheMovieGuy, ten citations at the end of one sentence is too many. I get what you were trying to do, but I can't see a good way to do a citation bundle since some of the citations are being used for other details too. How about we just have the earliest and the latest citations there instead? I'll change the latter one to reflect November. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 21:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
A couple of IP editors, likely the same person, are trying to add "Intrepid Pictures" as a production company. The only basis I can see for this is rooted in the producers involved, as it says here, "Flanagan's Intrepid Pictures partner Trevor Macy will produce along with Vertigo Entertainment's Jon Berg, and Goldsman is executive producer." I cannot find any mention of Intrepid Pictures on its own and am not finding that the aforementioned sentence means that the production companies are Intrepid Pictures and Vertigo Entertainment. It seems likely, but it seems more appropriate to simply list the producers now and see about the companies later. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 16:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
References to use. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 18:14, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
If someone wants to make an article for Roger Dale Floyd, this is a good source. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 20:06, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 02:11, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 19:16, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 18:16, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Since there may be some disputing about which names to show as starring and how to order them, we need to follow rules of thumb per WP:FILMCAST. Here are the rules of thumb that we have:
The "and Cliff Curtis" bit seen in the trailer, in billing-block terminology, means "such words tend to be used when a major star has a small but significant role". See breakdown. This is further confirmed by Cliff Curtis being at the end of the sentence in the YouTube page's description. The official site is not launched yet, so I think it is best to follow the YouTube page in listing McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran as starring, especially for infobox purposes. The rest of the names are grouped in their own sentence in the lead section. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 19:59, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
The official site is now up, and it repeats McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran together twice here:
Cliff Curtis is not mentioned as starring and is instead mentioned at the very end, which fits the billing-block terminology. So the trio of McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran is the appropriate rule of thumb to have when writing about who is starring. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 11:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
The final trailer here has the same billing-block information with McGregor, Ferguson, Curran, and Curtis and the same description that says the film stars McGregor, Ferguson, and Curran, with Curtis placed after six other actors' names. Notifying WT:FILM for additional opinions based on the sources. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 02:39, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
The {{
Infobox film}} template says: Insert the names of the actors as they are listed in the billing block of the poster for the film's original theatrical release."
The poster only includes McGregor, Ferguson, and Curtis, but not Curran. Would there be an objection to removing Curran from the infobox per the infobox template? The lead would be a separate issue and I don't see any issue there, since it often includes more cast names than the infobox.
– Wallyfromdilbert (
talk) 22:16, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
I recently removed extraneous information about Kyliegh Curran that was contained in a note in this article. Curran does not have an article on Wikipedia, and this seems like a clear case of WP:COATRACK. It is not appropriate to use an article with a non-notable actor to fill in biographical details that are not at all relevant to the article topic. I could understand discussing Curran's prior work in the production section, for example, if an article discussed a producer choosing her for the role because of a prior work they had seen her in. Without some relevance to the actual article topic (here, a film about a King novel), then any article about a film could have multiple notes about every non-notable person involved (or for that matter, notes about all the notable actors and their prior work). However, Wikipedia is not a repository of information. I am instead posting the material from Erik here to the talk page for reference when Curran becomes notable enough for her own page.
Curran played Young Nala in a Broadway production of The Lion King in 2016. She also appeared in the 2017 independent film I Can I Will I Did. [1] [2]
References
Following WP:ONUS, I think a consensus should be built that this information is significant and relevant to the article subject per WP:DUE before it is restored. – wallyfromdilbert ( talk) 00:36, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Doctor Sleep (upcoming film). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 04:18, 26 March 2020 (UTC)