Talk:Katharine Hepburn on screen and stage
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
12 Oscar nominations
She had 12 (and not 10) Oscar nominations. Would be nice if someone could update the respective section to include the years of The Philadelphia Story and Woman of the Year.
Removing certain columns
Before I just remove them and then have Loeba come after me ;), I'll bring it to talk first. But are the Genre, Co-stars, Director columns necessary? Especially if the film itself has it's own article page? When you look at WP:FILMOGRAPHY, NONE of those columns are in it, because when you're talking about the genre and co-stars, you're not talking about HER filmography anymore, you're talking about the film itself. Doesn't make any sense to have it on here. Any opposed to me taking it off? Lady Lotus (talk) 12:32, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- Same with the theatre credits, the Location and Theatre seem redundant since most of the theatres have a wiki page. Opposed to removing the location column? Lady Lotus (talk) 12:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- The co-star and director columns have been there since before I was even on wikipedia [1]. I just thought they were pretty harmless and gave users a bit of extra information, something I'm not sure why you're so against? Anyone can get a straight list of films she appeared in from IMDb (or tons of other directories), why not tell them a bit more? These things are related to her filmography, because it tells you who she worked with (a key aspect of her career). I really don't understand the comment "the Location and Theatre seem redundant since most of the theatres have a wiki page" - what does that have to do with it? We're not trying to advertise the theatres or anything - the point is simply to tell interested readers where she performed. If they don't care about this information, they can very easily ignore it (same for the co-stars and directors). --Loeba (talk) 20:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- In regards to WP:FILMOGRAPHY, none of that is included but if you're really hard up about keeping it there, how about just removing the co-stars? It makes the table looks crappy and extended and it's the kind of information that's not that important for her filmography table. Same with the theatre and location, it just seems redundant when most theatre tables i've seen just have the venue and that alone suffices. I'm all for having the venue/theatre but removing the location column. Lady Lotus (talk) 20:27, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- I guess I'm not that fussed about the co-stars (although I really don't see what's offensive about them either), but I definitely think the theatre locations should stay. Readers shouldn't have to click on the theatre articles to know where she was performing (which is several different locations throughout her career). It's just one little column. --Loeba (talk) 21:16, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- In regards to WP:FILMOGRAPHY, none of that is included but if you're really hard up about keeping it there, how about just removing the co-stars? It makes the table looks crappy and extended and it's the kind of information that's not that important for her filmography table. Same with the theatre and location, it just seems redundant when most theatre tables i've seen just have the venue and that alone suffices. I'm all for having the venue/theatre but removing the location column. Lady Lotus (talk) 20:27, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- When you look at the way filmography tables are written, it says that the notes field should not be allowed to get overly cluttered. This field is to include optional, additional information such as medium, episode titles, or awards.
- Costars, directors and genre are NOT a medium, episode title or awards and it's causing the table to look BEYOND cluttered. This is simple MoS and none of that applies to her filmography. If users want to see who she co-starred with then they can simply go to the article page of the film and look. It's the whole reason why there are separate articles. Plain and simple. You are trying to cram everything into one table to make it easier on the user to not have to click 1,000 different links but in reality you are cluttering the table of information that realistically makes it harder for them to navigate. Columns are going based off MoS and removing irrelevant information. Now with the location, if you want to combine the location and venue to look like this:
Year Title Roles Theatre Notes 1928 These Days Veronica Sims Cort Theatre, New York City
- Instead of this:
Year Title Roles Theatre Location Notes 1928 These Days Veronica Sims Cort Theatre New York City
- I'd be totally fine with that. Yes? Lady Lotus (talk) 21:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- Having the location like that does look better, yes. As for the other stuff, I've had enough battles on wikipedia lately, I'm not going to get into another one. Although I do still intend to question whether awards pages should be limited or not...I won't raise the issue now, but it is something I want to ask the community about). --Loeba (talk) 21:57, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'd be totally fine with that. Yes? Lady Lotus (talk) 21:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I will tell you that it was another respectable editor that educated me on the removal of certain awards per the WP:INDISCRIMINATE. You can look at it here when we discussed it with another editor. Talk:Tom_Holland_(actor)#Minor_awards and User_talk:Lady_Lotus#Tom_Holland. Lady Lotus (talk) 13:10, 7 November 2013 (UTC)