Talk:Film industry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Filmmaking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to filmmaking. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
 |
The examples and perspective in this article or section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article or discuss the issue on the talk page. |
This article is basically about the Hollywood film industry. Shouldn't it be re-titled to reflect that? JW 10:49, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
- Not only that, it's only about Hollywood, with no mention of independent films. The Singing Badger 02:02, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup needed
This page is very, very difficult to extract information from for several reasons:
- The "History of film" section is far too long, and duplicates (and in some cases even goes beyond the scope of) History of film.
- The discussion of the actual film industry starts in the section "The motion picture industry" which comes about half way into the article!
- The "Film crew" section is far too long, and duplicates Film crew.
-
- I've been working on the Film crew page and if no one objects, I'd like to remove the redundant entries on this page. I'll leave a re-direct.--OldCommentator 03:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- "Independent filmmaking" should either be a sub-section of "The motion picture industry" or immediately follow it.
- "Development of film technology" overlaps "History of film". The two sections should be merged.
- "Endurance of films" is not about the film industry. There are other parts of this article as well that seem to belong to a Film as a social phenomenon article, rather than an article about the industry.
-
- Agreed.--OldCommentator 03:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll add appropriate merge tags, but there's more work than that needed. I hope that others will comment. -Harmil 16:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I reverted the page to an old version, since the next edit involved an anon cutting and pasting the articles on Film, Film crew etc. here to replace the previous content, resulting in a page that wasn't really about film industry. If you miss the old version, just look at the film article or the articles linked from its sections. - Bobet 21:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Holy moley! Ok, well I'll start putting back some of that information. While I would agree that the person who pasted in other articles was not doing the article a service, much of the information pasted in was valuable stuff that later edits expanded on. Simply reverting 3 months of work seems... a bit odd for an admin. -Harmil 22:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- The problem is, that the changes that were done to this article were done to sections that didn't belong to it in the first place. Any changes made were on parts of other articles, and tracking down the specific changes is very hard and not very fruitful, considering that the other articles have seen significant changes since, and pinpointing where the differences belong is probably more time consuming than actually reading through the articles themselves. Furthermore, since the changes were made to make this article more about film industry (instead of unrelated things related to film), it included cutting things that really didn't belong here, but are suited for the specific articles where the original text was cut from. The actual part about film industry (the section 'motion picture industry') had remained unchanged as far as I could tell. - Bobet 23:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
