Film Project‑class | |||||||
|
BTW, now that I've seen the list it'll be easier to get started. Cheers, Shir-El too 14:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Are the core articles for the regional task forces included in the list, or have they yet to be determined? As a member of the Korean task force, I have to question the inclusion of some of these films. Feathers in the Wind and Marathon appear to be on the list (and correct me if I'm wrong) because of a few hundred user votes on IMDb. But The Host and The King and the Clown don't make the list, despite being the two most successful films at the South Korean box office. PC78 ( talk) 11:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
1000
500
1000
500
1000
500
1000
500
1000
500
The core list is to be updated once a year (so it says on the project page - note that I said regular, not frequent). Having thought about it some more, I'm not sure that even 1000 votes is enough; let's be honest, in the grand scheme of things, 1000 is not a lot of people. Also, you seem to be going by the average vote given to each film, but wouldn't a greater test of popularity be the total number of votes received? I'm still adamant that box office results need to be factored in, though. Perhaps have the top five from the box office, and top five from IMDb? PC78 ( talk) 02:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure where to comment here, but I'm in the Japan-Korea film projects. About Korea: At first glance, I'm not sure what criteria is being used for inclusion, but it seems extremely recent/blockbuster-centric. True, Korean film has really taken off since the late '90s, but that's because the '70s and '80s were relatively bad decades. There was a "Golden Age" in the 1950s and '60s, which the west barely knows about, and a mini-Golden Age during the silent era. By far the most important Korean film of all time, I would think-- picture Citizen Kane and Birth of a Nation rolled into one-- would have to be Arirang (1926 film). It's a lost film, but almost all pre-Korean War films are lost, as are many before 1970. About the removal of Feathers in the Wind-- Sure, it's a small little film, and I'm not claiming it belongs here either, but Korean critics have claimed it is the best romance filmed in the country. The book 1,000 Films You Must See Before You Die lists only two Korean films-- The Housemaid (1961) which I think definitely belongs on any list of important Korean films, and Attack the Gas Station (1999), which I don't know much about. Every text I've read on "important" Korean films also includes Yu Hyun-mok's Obaltan (1960). HERE is a site which lists 100 important pre-1996 films. Dekkappai ( talk) 18:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I've revised the list to bring the IMDb minimum votes threshold up to 1000, and have added the New Zealand task force slots as per the current schemata. Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 04:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
From the discussions above, it is obvious that there is still much debate regarding some of the methodology, particular with regards to both the top box office slots and the task force allocations. From the comments that have been made - as well as what has not been said by anyone - I'd like to propose the following actions for the meantime which appear to have consensus.
This will at least allow us to transition towards commencing the Core department and thus also begin focusing on setting up the core contest. Thoughts? Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 08:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Would it be okay if I added The Texas Chain Saw Massacre to the list, because it seems to be a pretty important film to me, in terms of it's influence on modern horror films. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 12:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I couldn't help but notice that Oldboy and The Host have been added to the core list. I assume they've been taken from this list? PC78 ( talk) 09:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
As mch of a huge fan of TSPDT as I am (I added every film in the top 100 to my Netflix list, among others on the list), I think it shouldn't be the ONLY factor in deciding whether a film is core or not. For example, Jurassic Park and Titanic were each the best-selling films ever at one point or another, which is arguably enough reason to give them core status. Additionally, because of TSPDT's formuas, films from this millenium are excluded from the top 250 listing for the next few years. Therefore, I suggest some changes be made so that films that are excluded from TSPDTs top 250 be given special exceptions if they meet other requirements:
This is merely to ensure that highly notable ad praised films that are excluded from the TSPDT list be recognized as important as well. 174.130.11.116 ( talk) 20:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The 2008 version of the 1,000 greatest films is here. Entering the top 250 are The Great Dictator, Zero for Conduct, La Samourai, Johnny Guitar, Shoot the Piano Player, and West Side Story. Falling out of the top 250 are To Kill a Mockingbird, Meshes of the Afternoon, The Life of Oharu, Floating Clouds, and Crimes and Misdemeanors. Also, in case you want to know, the detailed listing of the top 250 on the website has been expanded to include numbers 251-300, and TSPDT plans to bring the entire list under the same format throughout 2009. 71.61.225.71 ( talk) 00:45, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay, so I've updated most of the list now to reflect the new December 2008 list. One notable thing I'm waiting on, though, is the imminent release of the 21st century list, which I started using to fill up task forces' allocation when they couldn't do so with the TSPDT 1000 list. Anything still left hanging is currently commented out at the bottom of the list, but still is temporarily retaining a core=yes
parameter on its talk page. Once the new 21C list is released, most of these will resolve one way or the other. Any remaining blank spaces can be allocated to films formerly on the TSPDT lists, perhaps...
Girolamo Savonarola (
talk) 23:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I would like to know if there was any particular reason why The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was removed from the list without so much as notifying the appropriate article and/or editors in question. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 19:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps this is a question asked by many authors, and I'm bothering you with this, but I still wonder why Airplane! and Trainspotting are absent from the list. Is there a way to include these films, maybe people could vote?-- Music 26/ 11 14:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 03:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
...has been completed. Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 22:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
The current inclusion formula uses They Shoot Pictures as the key resource for identifying core topics. It lists the Top 250 from that website's list of 1,000 films, and based on the existing national cinema task forces, it also lists core topics that were not in the Top 250. Based on genre task forces (e.g., war films), the formula uses IMDb.
The website's list was updated in January 2011, but WikiProject Film's list was not updated accordingly. Here is what I suggest. I do not think we should list core articles just based on the existence of national cinema task forces. In most cases, a task force is started but never actually used, and we shouldn't list articles in expectancy of that DOA task force to improve them. We should also avoid using IMDb for genre additions; IMDb voters are not exactly the finest purveyors of films, and such lists may suffer from recentism (e.g., Inglourious Basterds being at the top of a list of all possible war films). I think we should reference the They Shoot Pictures list more fully. Should we do the Top 500 instead of the Top 250? Perhaps Top 1,000? Let's figure out a new inclusion formula before we update our list. Erik ( talk | contribs) 16:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
It seems like we're keen on the Top 500 of the meta-list. Let's give this discussion a few more days of exposure (basically a week's worth) before going ahead with the list update. Erik ( talk | contribs) 17:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Why is History of film not a core article?-- Cattus talk 10:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I have 5 suggestions for films to add to the core list, all of which come from the earliest years of film. This era, or pre-era, to film history is barely covered in the current core list and I think that it should be. Chronologically: 1) Sallie Gardner at a Gallop 2) Roundhay Garden Scene 3) Monkeyshines 4) L'Arrivée d'un train en gare de La Ciotat 5) The Great Train Robbery (film) I doubt that any of these films would make it on a list of the Greatest Films Ever Made and most of them are actually raw footage or science experiments, but they are objectively 5 of the most historically important films ever made. -- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 23:43, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey everyone. There's a relevant discussion at Talk:Blowup#Requested_move_2014 if any of you want to chime in. I just wrote a comment about how I (and evidently the Wikiproject) believe the film to be one of the core (most vital and significant) film articles for an encyclopedia, but I think a lot of you are probably more knowledgable on the subject than I am so if you get a chance please feel free to tell me that I am overstating my point. Thanks!-- Yaksar (let's chat) 16:07, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
When was the last time that the core list was updated? Per
this discussion, it's clear that the list of core films should be updated to include at least 10 films from each task force, specifically newer ones such as the Documentary films and Silent films task forces. This needs to be done, before the classification of any articles on the list can be reassessed. Is there someone who is in charge of maintaining the list, or can it be updated by anyone? And once it is updated, who is responsible for making sure that the parameter |core=yes
is only used on the talk pages for articles in the list?
Fortdj33 (
talk) 20:05, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
OK, based on this criteria, here is the revised core list [1], including films for all of the existing task forces. 135 films would need to be removed from the core list, due to additions from the TSPDT list. Please let me know if you have any questions, otherwise I will work on updating the page and all of the related films. Fortdj33 ( talk) 12:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
The core list doesn't appear to have been updated since the above discussion four years ago. To that end I have prepared a new top 250 based on the current TSPDT metalist, which can be viewed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Core/update. I still need to do the various task forces, but if there are no objections I will keep going and implement the revised list.
It's worth asking the question though, is this method of selecting "core" articles something we want to continue with going forward? Are there other thing we ought to consider (e.g. Vital articles?) or do we even need a core list at all? PC78 ( talk) 19:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Film Project‑class | |||||||
|
BTW, now that I've seen the list it'll be easier to get started. Cheers, Shir-El too 14:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Are the core articles for the regional task forces included in the list, or have they yet to be determined? As a member of the Korean task force, I have to question the inclusion of some of these films. Feathers in the Wind and Marathon appear to be on the list (and correct me if I'm wrong) because of a few hundred user votes on IMDb. But The Host and The King and the Clown don't make the list, despite being the two most successful films at the South Korean box office. PC78 ( talk) 11:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
1000
500
1000
500
1000
500
1000
500
1000
500
The core list is to be updated once a year (so it says on the project page - note that I said regular, not frequent). Having thought about it some more, I'm not sure that even 1000 votes is enough; let's be honest, in the grand scheme of things, 1000 is not a lot of people. Also, you seem to be going by the average vote given to each film, but wouldn't a greater test of popularity be the total number of votes received? I'm still adamant that box office results need to be factored in, though. Perhaps have the top five from the box office, and top five from IMDb? PC78 ( talk) 02:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure where to comment here, but I'm in the Japan-Korea film projects. About Korea: At first glance, I'm not sure what criteria is being used for inclusion, but it seems extremely recent/blockbuster-centric. True, Korean film has really taken off since the late '90s, but that's because the '70s and '80s were relatively bad decades. There was a "Golden Age" in the 1950s and '60s, which the west barely knows about, and a mini-Golden Age during the silent era. By far the most important Korean film of all time, I would think-- picture Citizen Kane and Birth of a Nation rolled into one-- would have to be Arirang (1926 film). It's a lost film, but almost all pre-Korean War films are lost, as are many before 1970. About the removal of Feathers in the Wind-- Sure, it's a small little film, and I'm not claiming it belongs here either, but Korean critics have claimed it is the best romance filmed in the country. The book 1,000 Films You Must See Before You Die lists only two Korean films-- The Housemaid (1961) which I think definitely belongs on any list of important Korean films, and Attack the Gas Station (1999), which I don't know much about. Every text I've read on "important" Korean films also includes Yu Hyun-mok's Obaltan (1960). HERE is a site which lists 100 important pre-1996 films. Dekkappai ( talk) 18:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I've revised the list to bring the IMDb minimum votes threshold up to 1000, and have added the New Zealand task force slots as per the current schemata. Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 04:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
From the discussions above, it is obvious that there is still much debate regarding some of the methodology, particular with regards to both the top box office slots and the task force allocations. From the comments that have been made - as well as what has not been said by anyone - I'd like to propose the following actions for the meantime which appear to have consensus.
This will at least allow us to transition towards commencing the Core department and thus also begin focusing on setting up the core contest. Thoughts? Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 08:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Would it be okay if I added The Texas Chain Saw Massacre to the list, because it seems to be a pretty important film to me, in terms of it's influence on modern horror films. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 12:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I couldn't help but notice that Oldboy and The Host have been added to the core list. I assume they've been taken from this list? PC78 ( talk) 09:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
As mch of a huge fan of TSPDT as I am (I added every film in the top 100 to my Netflix list, among others on the list), I think it shouldn't be the ONLY factor in deciding whether a film is core or not. For example, Jurassic Park and Titanic were each the best-selling films ever at one point or another, which is arguably enough reason to give them core status. Additionally, because of TSPDT's formuas, films from this millenium are excluded from the top 250 listing for the next few years. Therefore, I suggest some changes be made so that films that are excluded from TSPDTs top 250 be given special exceptions if they meet other requirements:
This is merely to ensure that highly notable ad praised films that are excluded from the TSPDT list be recognized as important as well. 174.130.11.116 ( talk) 20:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The 2008 version of the 1,000 greatest films is here. Entering the top 250 are The Great Dictator, Zero for Conduct, La Samourai, Johnny Guitar, Shoot the Piano Player, and West Side Story. Falling out of the top 250 are To Kill a Mockingbird, Meshes of the Afternoon, The Life of Oharu, Floating Clouds, and Crimes and Misdemeanors. Also, in case you want to know, the detailed listing of the top 250 on the website has been expanded to include numbers 251-300, and TSPDT plans to bring the entire list under the same format throughout 2009. 71.61.225.71 ( talk) 00:45, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay, so I've updated most of the list now to reflect the new December 2008 list. One notable thing I'm waiting on, though, is the imminent release of the 21st century list, which I started using to fill up task forces' allocation when they couldn't do so with the TSPDT 1000 list. Anything still left hanging is currently commented out at the bottom of the list, but still is temporarily retaining a core=yes
parameter on its talk page. Once the new 21C list is released, most of these will resolve one way or the other. Any remaining blank spaces can be allocated to films formerly on the TSPDT lists, perhaps...
Girolamo Savonarola (
talk) 23:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I would like to know if there was any particular reason why The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was removed from the list without so much as notifying the appropriate article and/or editors in question. -- EclipseSSD ( talk) 19:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps this is a question asked by many authors, and I'm bothering you with this, but I still wonder why Airplane! and Trainspotting are absent from the list. Is there a way to include these films, maybe people could vote?-- Music 26/ 11 14:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 03:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
...has been completed. Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 22:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
The current inclusion formula uses They Shoot Pictures as the key resource for identifying core topics. It lists the Top 250 from that website's list of 1,000 films, and based on the existing national cinema task forces, it also lists core topics that were not in the Top 250. Based on genre task forces (e.g., war films), the formula uses IMDb.
The website's list was updated in January 2011, but WikiProject Film's list was not updated accordingly. Here is what I suggest. I do not think we should list core articles just based on the existence of national cinema task forces. In most cases, a task force is started but never actually used, and we shouldn't list articles in expectancy of that DOA task force to improve them. We should also avoid using IMDb for genre additions; IMDb voters are not exactly the finest purveyors of films, and such lists may suffer from recentism (e.g., Inglourious Basterds being at the top of a list of all possible war films). I think we should reference the They Shoot Pictures list more fully. Should we do the Top 500 instead of the Top 250? Perhaps Top 1,000? Let's figure out a new inclusion formula before we update our list. Erik ( talk | contribs) 16:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
It seems like we're keen on the Top 500 of the meta-list. Let's give this discussion a few more days of exposure (basically a week's worth) before going ahead with the list update. Erik ( talk | contribs) 17:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Why is History of film not a core article?-- Cattus talk 10:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I have 5 suggestions for films to add to the core list, all of which come from the earliest years of film. This era, or pre-era, to film history is barely covered in the current core list and I think that it should be. Chronologically: 1) Sallie Gardner at a Gallop 2) Roundhay Garden Scene 3) Monkeyshines 4) L'Arrivée d'un train en gare de La Ciotat 5) The Great Train Robbery (film) I doubt that any of these films would make it on a list of the Greatest Films Ever Made and most of them are actually raw footage or science experiments, but they are objectively 5 of the most historically important films ever made. -- Deoliveirafan ( talk) 23:43, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey everyone. There's a relevant discussion at Talk:Blowup#Requested_move_2014 if any of you want to chime in. I just wrote a comment about how I (and evidently the Wikiproject) believe the film to be one of the core (most vital and significant) film articles for an encyclopedia, but I think a lot of you are probably more knowledgable on the subject than I am so if you get a chance please feel free to tell me that I am overstating my point. Thanks!-- Yaksar (let's chat) 16:07, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
When was the last time that the core list was updated? Per
this discussion, it's clear that the list of core films should be updated to include at least 10 films from each task force, specifically newer ones such as the Documentary films and Silent films task forces. This needs to be done, before the classification of any articles on the list can be reassessed. Is there someone who is in charge of maintaining the list, or can it be updated by anyone? And once it is updated, who is responsible for making sure that the parameter |core=yes
is only used on the talk pages for articles in the list?
Fortdj33 (
talk) 20:05, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
OK, based on this criteria, here is the revised core list [1], including films for all of the existing task forces. 135 films would need to be removed from the core list, due to additions from the TSPDT list. Please let me know if you have any questions, otherwise I will work on updating the page and all of the related films. Fortdj33 ( talk) 12:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
The core list doesn't appear to have been updated since the above discussion four years ago. To that end I have prepared a new top 250 based on the current TSPDT metalist, which can be viewed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Core/update. I still need to do the various task forces, but if there are no objections I will keep going and implement the revised list.
It's worth asking the question though, is this method of selecting "core" articles something we want to continue with going forward? Are there other thing we ought to consider (e.g. Vital articles?) or do we even need a core list at all? PC78 ( talk) 19:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)