![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Similar to my request in List of James Bond films, the ToC as it currently is, makes finding a specific film entry incredbily difficult. It assumes the reader knows what producers produced the film or what year the film came out. As most readers come to search for a film, without them knowing this, limiting the ToC with {{ TOC limit}} is completely unhelpful.
If there isn't any objection, I'd like to remove this template as it currently ruins a GA article readability. -- Gonnym ( talk) 07:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
You don't understand edit warring. It can consist of just one reversion. The issue of the TOC was edit warred over. I put it back to the very long-standing stable version that went through the GAN. I stand by what I have said. – SchroCat ( talk) 08:13, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Despite your assurances that you lost your cool, you
continue the same lie as before, while indulging in canvassing too. Nice. Please see
WP:PA and learn very quickly how not to make personal attacks on other editors (especially accusations of ownership toward those who have only made one previous edit to this article this year). Having a different opinion to your does not mean someone has any feelings of ownership. (And "GAN nonsense was brought up to late to be sincere"
? It was raised in my second comment of the thread. –
SchroCat (
talk)
09:55, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, could I suggest that you both take a time out? Throwing serious insults around and edit warring over a minor issue isn't helpful. Seeking broader input per WP:DR would also be helpful. Nick-D ( talk) 10:11, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
The big table of key crew for each Bond film would really be improved if it also added the actor who paid Bond. I came to this page knowing Daniel Craig was in the last four Bond films, but before that I have no idea - and the article doesn't set it out clearly in visual form anywhere. Could the font on the table be reduced to allow the main actor to be added? It seems a weird omission. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.100.71 ( talk) 18:33, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Someone must clean this up: "From 1984 to 1989 Broccoli was joined by his stepson Michael G. Wilson as producer until 1995, when Albert Broccol stepped aside from Eon and was replaced by his daughter Barbara, who has co-produced with Wilson since." What on earth is this even supposed to mean? How could someone be employed from 84 to 89 only to be replaced *six years later*? I have no experience with this topic and yet I still must assert that this is garbage! Someone knowledgeable, please fix it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalamookoofoo ( talk • contribs) 11:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Why are all the monetary figures in dollars? Chaosdruid ( talk) 18:56, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on James Bond in film. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James Bond in film. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:38, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Should a column for the Bond actor (Connery, Lazenby, Moore etc) be added to the table at James_Bond_in_film#Core_crew? Hungarian Phrasebook ( talk) 19:32, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bond 25 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bond 25 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BilCat ( talk) 15:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Stolengood has twice converted the layout of the "Crew" table in the article. You can compare the two versions below:
Personally I think the new version looks like a dog's dinner. It is boxy and makes the rows discontinuous, making it ugly and harder to read. The original version is aesthetically superior IMO; it is much cleaner and the continuous nature of the rows makes it much easier to scan across the rows to pertinent information. The new table is quite possibly the worst table design I have ever seen on Wikipedia.
Stolengood overhauled the table design of the article without even raising the issue first on the talk page, and after I restored the original version he immediately reverted and couldn't even be bothered to leave an edit summary or to start a discussion. Before the table is changed again I think we should get a few more opinions; I would also be interested in hearing what SchroCat has to say, since he was the editor who guided the article through its GA review. Betty Logan ( talk) 16:36, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
This page appears as though the crew/production chart has been discussed before. Part of the problem is there are so many films that it becomes bloated and extraneous. I started updating my suggested format (with a chart detailing title, release, director, screenwriter(s), and producers) towards the top of the page - and a chart breaking down other details (composer, cinematographer, editor, title design, title song, etc....) further down the page. This would help the chart to feel less like an overload of information and is similar to what's been done on other film series' articles. My work was however reverted prior to finishing, so in order to see what I'm talking about you'll have to compare the edits. Otherwise I can post the chart here for visual purposes.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 22:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
@ Betty Logan: & @ SchroCat: - My argument goes right along with what has been stated. Yes it's important to show who was involved in making the film. However, it's current format is bloated. With repeated contributions (i.e.: a director who filmed multiple movies), listed on every single individual line is poor form and looks goppy. To illustrate their overall involvement and overarching roles, 'rowspan'-ing to consolidate their many chart cells into one cell gets the point across, and doesn't overwhelm the reader with information overload. Aesthetically it looks better. Further more, a chart showing the film series in such a format has been used on other articles' pages. No screenreader simulator is necessary, when the same formatting has been used on additional pages. The argument that it is biased - just remove the heading that said "Official films" then.... that's an easy adjustment. Those other two films are not canon and are not considered official James Bond film series movies.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 13:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Comment Aesthetics are always a matter of opinion, but the bottom line is that you still have 25 entries because you've still got 25 films. Accessibility is not a matter of opinion though, and we have a moral duty to ensure that we make our articles as accessible as we can within the confines of the software. So let's consider a basic screenreader that reads out the first five rows in each table. We will take the original table first with its approximate screenreader output:
Film | Title | Year | Director | Producer(s) | Writer(s) | Composer | Production or art designer | Editor or supervising editor | Cinemato- grapher(s) |
Title designer |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Dr. No | 1962 | Terence Young | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather | Monty Norman | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Maurice Binder |
2 | From Russia with Love | 1963 | Terence Young | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Richard Maibaum & Johanna Harwood | John Barry | Syd Cain | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Robert Brownjohn |
3 | Goldfinger | 1964 | Guy Hamilton | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Richard Maibaum & Paul Dehn | John Barry | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Robert Brownjohn |
4 | Thunderball | 1965 | Terence Young | Kevin McClory | Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins | John Barry | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Maurice Binder |
5 | You Only Live Twice | 1967 | Lewis Gilbert | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Roald Dahl | John Barry | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Freddie Young | Maurice Binder |
Film; Title; Year; Director; Producer(s); Writer(s); Composer; Production or art designer; Editor or supervising editor; Cinemato-
grapher(s); Title designer
1; Dr. No; 1962; Terence Young; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather; Monty Norman; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Maurice Binder;
2; From Russia with Love; 1963; Terence Young; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Richard Maibaum & Johanna Harwood; John Barry; Syd Cain; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Robert Brownjohn
3; Goldfinger; 1964; Guy Hamilton; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Richard Maibaum & Paul Dehn; John Barry; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Robert Brownjohn;
4; Thunderball; 1965; Terence Young; Kevin McClory; Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins; John Barry; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Maurice Binder
5; You Only Live Twice; 1967; Lewis Gilbert; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Roald Dahl; John Barry; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Freddie Young; Maurice Binder
Since the reader takes the table one row at a time, column by column it is easy for somebody using a screenreader to digest. Now let's take the same table but this time with rowspans:
Film | U.S. release date | Director | Screenwriter(s) | Story by | Producer(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dr. No | October 5, 1962 | Terence Young | Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | |
From Russia with Love | October 11, 1963 | Richard Maibaum & Berkely Mather | Johanna Harwood | ||
Goldfinger | November 18, 1964 | Guy Hamilton | Richard Maibaum, Paul Dehn & Berkely Mather | Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather | |
Thunderball | December 29, 1965 | Terence Young | Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins | Kevin McClory & Jack Whittingham and Ian Fleming | Kevin McClory |
You Only Live Twice | June 13, 1967 | Lewis Gilbert | Roald Dahl | Roald Dahl and Harold Jack Bloom | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli |
Film; U.S. release date; Director; Screenwriter(s) Story by; Producer(s)
Dr. No; October 5, 1962; Terence Young ( 2 rows); Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather (2 columns); Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli (3 rows)
From Russia with Love; October 11, 1963; Richard Maibaum & Berkely Mather; Johanna Harwood
Goldfinger; November 18, 1964; Guy Hamilton; Richard Maibaum, Paul Dehn & Berkely Mather; Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather
Thunderball; December 29, 1965; Terence Young; Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins; Kevin McClory & Jack Whittingham and Ian Fleming; Kevin McClory
You Only Live Twice; June 13, 1967; Lewis Gilbert; Roald Dahl; Roald Dahl and Harold Jack Bloom;
Now, the Dr No row isn't actually a problem, because it contains all the information. The column spans are never a problem because the screenreader traverses the table one row at a time so it can process column spans correctly. We first hit a problem when we come across From Russia with Love. The screenreader completely skips Terence Young (the director) and the producers, because they are only defined in the first row. The screenreader also omits the producers from the Goldfinger entry for the same reason. The Thunderball entry would read fine. The problem though is that using rowspans causes a reader to omit information on later rows. By omitting rowspans screenreaders gain a lot and we lose very little (IMO we lose nothing at all because a full table looks better IMO). Betty Logan ( talk) 11:35, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Similar to my request in List of James Bond films, the ToC as it currently is, makes finding a specific film entry incredbily difficult. It assumes the reader knows what producers produced the film or what year the film came out. As most readers come to search for a film, without them knowing this, limiting the ToC with {{ TOC limit}} is completely unhelpful.
If there isn't any objection, I'd like to remove this template as it currently ruins a GA article readability. -- Gonnym ( talk) 07:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
You don't understand edit warring. It can consist of just one reversion. The issue of the TOC was edit warred over. I put it back to the very long-standing stable version that went through the GAN. I stand by what I have said. – SchroCat ( talk) 08:13, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Despite your assurances that you lost your cool, you
continue the same lie as before, while indulging in canvassing too. Nice. Please see
WP:PA and learn very quickly how not to make personal attacks on other editors (especially accusations of ownership toward those who have only made one previous edit to this article this year). Having a different opinion to your does not mean someone has any feelings of ownership. (And "GAN nonsense was brought up to late to be sincere"
? It was raised in my second comment of the thread. –
SchroCat (
talk)
09:55, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, could I suggest that you both take a time out? Throwing serious insults around and edit warring over a minor issue isn't helpful. Seeking broader input per WP:DR would also be helpful. Nick-D ( talk) 10:11, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
The big table of key crew for each Bond film would really be improved if it also added the actor who paid Bond. I came to this page knowing Daniel Craig was in the last four Bond films, but before that I have no idea - and the article doesn't set it out clearly in visual form anywhere. Could the font on the table be reduced to allow the main actor to be added? It seems a weird omission. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.100.71 ( talk) 18:33, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Someone must clean this up: "From 1984 to 1989 Broccoli was joined by his stepson Michael G. Wilson as producer until 1995, when Albert Broccol stepped aside from Eon and was replaced by his daughter Barbara, who has co-produced with Wilson since." What on earth is this even supposed to mean? How could someone be employed from 84 to 89 only to be replaced *six years later*? I have no experience with this topic and yet I still must assert that this is garbage! Someone knowledgeable, please fix it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalamookoofoo ( talk • contribs) 11:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Why are all the monetary figures in dollars? Chaosdruid ( talk) 18:56, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on James Bond in film. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James Bond in film. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:38, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Should a column for the Bond actor (Connery, Lazenby, Moore etc) be added to the table at James_Bond_in_film#Core_crew? Hungarian Phrasebook ( talk) 19:32, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bond 25 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bond 25 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BilCat ( talk) 15:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Stolengood has twice converted the layout of the "Crew" table in the article. You can compare the two versions below:
Personally I think the new version looks like a dog's dinner. It is boxy and makes the rows discontinuous, making it ugly and harder to read. The original version is aesthetically superior IMO; it is much cleaner and the continuous nature of the rows makes it much easier to scan across the rows to pertinent information. The new table is quite possibly the worst table design I have ever seen on Wikipedia.
Stolengood overhauled the table design of the article without even raising the issue first on the talk page, and after I restored the original version he immediately reverted and couldn't even be bothered to leave an edit summary or to start a discussion. Before the table is changed again I think we should get a few more opinions; I would also be interested in hearing what SchroCat has to say, since he was the editor who guided the article through its GA review. Betty Logan ( talk) 16:36, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
This page appears as though the crew/production chart has been discussed before. Part of the problem is there are so many films that it becomes bloated and extraneous. I started updating my suggested format (with a chart detailing title, release, director, screenwriter(s), and producers) towards the top of the page - and a chart breaking down other details (composer, cinematographer, editor, title design, title song, etc....) further down the page. This would help the chart to feel less like an overload of information and is similar to what's been done on other film series' articles. My work was however reverted prior to finishing, so in order to see what I'm talking about you'll have to compare the edits. Otherwise I can post the chart here for visual purposes.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 22:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
@ Betty Logan: & @ SchroCat: - My argument goes right along with what has been stated. Yes it's important to show who was involved in making the film. However, it's current format is bloated. With repeated contributions (i.e.: a director who filmed multiple movies), listed on every single individual line is poor form and looks goppy. To illustrate their overall involvement and overarching roles, 'rowspan'-ing to consolidate their many chart cells into one cell gets the point across, and doesn't overwhelm the reader with information overload. Aesthetically it looks better. Further more, a chart showing the film series in such a format has been used on other articles' pages. No screenreader simulator is necessary, when the same formatting has been used on additional pages. The argument that it is biased - just remove the heading that said "Official films" then.... that's an easy adjustment. Those other two films are not canon and are not considered official James Bond film series movies.-- DisneyMetalhead ( talk) 13:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Comment Aesthetics are always a matter of opinion, but the bottom line is that you still have 25 entries because you've still got 25 films. Accessibility is not a matter of opinion though, and we have a moral duty to ensure that we make our articles as accessible as we can within the confines of the software. So let's consider a basic screenreader that reads out the first five rows in each table. We will take the original table first with its approximate screenreader output:
Film | Title | Year | Director | Producer(s) | Writer(s) | Composer | Production or art designer | Editor or supervising editor | Cinemato- grapher(s) |
Title designer |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Dr. No | 1962 | Terence Young | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather | Monty Norman | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Maurice Binder |
2 | From Russia with Love | 1963 | Terence Young | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Richard Maibaum & Johanna Harwood | John Barry | Syd Cain | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Robert Brownjohn |
3 | Goldfinger | 1964 | Guy Hamilton | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Richard Maibaum & Paul Dehn | John Barry | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Robert Brownjohn |
4 | Thunderball | 1965 | Terence Young | Kevin McClory | Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins | John Barry | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Ted Moore | Maurice Binder |
5 | You Only Live Twice | 1967 | Lewis Gilbert | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | Roald Dahl | John Barry | Ken Adam | Peter R. Hunt | Freddie Young | Maurice Binder |
Film; Title; Year; Director; Producer(s); Writer(s); Composer; Production or art designer; Editor or supervising editor; Cinemato-
grapher(s); Title designer
1; Dr. No; 1962; Terence Young; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather; Monty Norman; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Maurice Binder;
2; From Russia with Love; 1963; Terence Young; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Richard Maibaum & Johanna Harwood; John Barry; Syd Cain; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Robert Brownjohn
3; Goldfinger; 1964; Guy Hamilton; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Richard Maibaum & Paul Dehn; John Barry; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Robert Brownjohn;
4; Thunderball; 1965; Terence Young; Kevin McClory; Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins; John Barry; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Ted Moore; Maurice Binder
5; You Only Live Twice; 1967; Lewis Gilbert; Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli; Roald Dahl; John Barry; Ken Adam; Peter R. Hunt; Freddie Young; Maurice Binder
Since the reader takes the table one row at a time, column by column it is easy for somebody using a screenreader to digest. Now let's take the same table but this time with rowspans:
Film | U.S. release date | Director | Screenwriter(s) | Story by | Producer(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dr. No | October 5, 1962 | Terence Young | Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli | |
From Russia with Love | October 11, 1963 | Richard Maibaum & Berkely Mather | Johanna Harwood | ||
Goldfinger | November 18, 1964 | Guy Hamilton | Richard Maibaum, Paul Dehn & Berkely Mather | Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather | |
Thunderball | December 29, 1965 | Terence Young | Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins | Kevin McClory & Jack Whittingham and Ian Fleming | Kevin McClory |
You Only Live Twice | June 13, 1967 | Lewis Gilbert | Roald Dahl | Roald Dahl and Harold Jack Bloom | Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli |
Film; U.S. release date; Director; Screenwriter(s) Story by; Producer(s)
Dr. No; October 5, 1962; Terence Young ( 2 rows); Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather (2 columns); Harry Saltzman & Albert R. Broccoli (3 rows)
From Russia with Love; October 11, 1963; Richard Maibaum & Berkely Mather; Johanna Harwood
Goldfinger; November 18, 1964; Guy Hamilton; Richard Maibaum, Paul Dehn & Berkely Mather; Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather
Thunderball; December 29, 1965; Terence Young; Richard Maibaum & John Hopkins; Kevin McClory & Jack Whittingham and Ian Fleming; Kevin McClory
You Only Live Twice; June 13, 1967; Lewis Gilbert; Roald Dahl; Roald Dahl and Harold Jack Bloom;
Now, the Dr No row isn't actually a problem, because it contains all the information. The column spans are never a problem because the screenreader traverses the table one row at a time so it can process column spans correctly. We first hit a problem when we come across From Russia with Love. The screenreader completely skips Terence Young (the director) and the producers, because they are only defined in the first row. The screenreader also omits the producers from the Goldfinger entry for the same reason. The Thunderball entry would read fine. The problem though is that using rowspans causes a reader to omit information on later rows. By omitting rowspans screenreaders gain a lot and we lose very little (IMO we lose nothing at all because a full table looks better IMO). Betty Logan ( talk) 11:35, 21 June 2018 (UTC)