User talk:Dekkappai/Archive 2

Boobpedia - Encyclopedia of big boobs
Jump to navigationJump to search

Filmographies

Ok mate.

  • Show me two or three pages that contain filmographies with all the columns you need. I know you did before, but it's kind of difficult to retrieve the scattered data in our talk pages. Would be nice if you wrote a short summary.
  • Colour: What do you think the colour of a filmography table should be?
    • The same green as the infobox (wold turn normal articles quite colourful, but readers could see at once that this is a filmography)
    • The same blue as the navigational headers on category pages (compare Category:Months for example)
    • The less colour possible. Clean and straight, simply with grey headers (maybe we get a problem there because we cannot display all the lines we'd like too, but it will work somehow).
    • Oh, I just got the idea I personally like best: Headers (and perhaps left column if there is one) in the green of the biobox, rest as straight and white as the category navigational headers. This would be less offensive to the eye, but the green header marks the table as filmography.

Looking forward to your input.

Prophecy 17:58, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Ok, please have a look at {{Supervixens}} for a start. We will have the problem that the filmography overlaps with the biobox if the screen width is less than 1024 px and if the filmography has all columns and long actress names in it. But you already know that... In "normal" cases (i. e. not all columns or average actress names), it evens fits on the page together with the biobox. Like it should do on {{Supervixens}}. I contracted some data in one column (Technical and stuff). I also moved the distributor to "Technical" which more sense to me. This would solve my little problem that a company is not a staff person. I think I'll move this field to "Technical" in the infobox too. Prophecy 19:29, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Quote: "I think all the info in the "Technical" column should have its own column: "Release date/distributor/ID#"" I don't understand that. It already has its own column. Or do you mean that the header title should be changed? I'd prefer "Technical", because it's short. Every other title would lengthen the header which causes collision problems with the biobox later.
  • Colour: As this is a template, it'll be very easy to change to colour later. One change and all tables have the new style.
  • Joy of Big Tits on Supervixen page: It's all manually coded for testing purposes. At the moment, {{Filmography start}} contains a few sample entries to test how it looks like. I added two Lucy Love films from her page too, to see if this also works with other filmographies. We shouldn't have too many lines if there's no cover photo for example. Lucy Love's page would become 2 kms long. :-)
  • Quote: "And this all means that each video in a list/filmography will have its own separate template file, right?" Yes and no. We can't force people to write templates for all films if they just want to write a filmography. There'll be a how-to guide. Short summary: You start every filmography with {{filmography start}} and finish it with {{filmography end}}. This creates the predefined filmography table. For every line in this filmography, you use the {{Film}} template. But (ha, and there's my new idea!) you don't have to create templates for all entries. Imagine the pain if you had templates for four films, but there are six more films to add to the filmography. You'd either have to create the other six (*sigh*), even if you wouldn't like to at that moment, or you wouldn't have any filmography at all. The film template will allow both: If there's an existing template for the film, it will use the data from this template and display it. If there's no template for the film so far, you can add the data manually, roughly like: {{film|list=1|title="Dekkappai's Adventues in Japanese Glubber Wobbers|released=[[2008]]|notes=Released only in Kasakhstan}}. So every filmography entry has a line with {{film|...}}, regardless if the corresponding template exists or not. As soon as a template for this film is created, all manual data will be overridden. No more table syntax anymore. No more formatting. Just {{Filmography start}}, {{Film}} and {{Filmography end}}. Roughly. If it works. :-) Prophecy 20:15, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Columns for each: I do not see any use, except if you want to have your table sortable (a functionality I just added, have a look at {{Filmography start}}) :-). But then comes the question: Sorting by date will be useless, because we have different formats (only year, full date, sometimes even comments inside the release date field). Sorting by cast is useless too. Sorting by running time? The only useful function would be sorting by title, director and ID. Title and Director are possible, so there's only ID left. Or is it for esthetical reasons? I'd rather prefer to have this in one field.
  • Having filmography entries for series: Yes. There will be no difference between films, videos, series or episodes. Everything that can have an infobox (and we already have type=series and type=episode there) can be displayed inline or as a filmography entry too. For example, if a director has created several single films and one series, you can make a filmography that contains his films and a single entry for the whole series. Other way round: Create templates for all Joy of Big tits videos, and you can a) list them on the Joy of Big Tits page and b) take a few single entries from there and put them into the filmography of an actress.
Once there is a template for a film or series, you can do with it whatever you want - use it as a biobox in an article about this film, use it as a filmography entry on various pages or just mention it inline within an article text. Prophecy 20:45, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
Well, I think I'll add the sorting functionality, doesn't do harm. No, don't start, not even the format how this template should look like and which parameters it has to hand over to the subtemplates are defined - even if it looks quite ready on {{Supervixens}}. It will take a while until the filmography templates are finished. When everything is done and tested you can start. But I'll leave for now. I'll continue tomorrow or later. Have a nice time! Prophecy 22:58, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
Funny... I just pushed the release date into a separate column! About the running time: It was you who added it to some filmography I think; I took the field out of your lists. If yuo say it's not necessary, I'll take it out, and all problems are solved. "Technical" could become "Distributor", done. Please note: We do not make any differences between videos and films. If we take the running time out, it will be for all kind of media listed in filmographies. But I think the running time is really not that important for a mere filmography. In the infobox, on the other hand, it is displayed. You can have a look at {{Supervixens}}. I took the test entries out. There's no documentation yet, but if I'm not completely wrong, {{Supervixens}} should be ready to use. Don't start creating templates though. When I made the how-to, you will be able to create templates with this automatic preview page. If you start creating them manually, you won't see your changes take effect. Also, the manual functionality is not yet implemented. I. e. it works if a template exists, but not with manual parameters. I did not even test what happens if there's no template. :-) Prophecy 09:57, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
One more decision: Most of the filmographies on Boobpedia do not contain director and cast. So I'm planning not to display these columns by default. With something like showdirector and showcast parameters you'd be able to display them. I think it's friendly towards editors who are just typing in their small filmography, while we are able to use the parameters. Do you think that's good? Or would you prefer it the other way round: All columns displayed by default, with parameters like nodirector and nocast to make them disappear. This would mean all other editors would have to turn them off manually. But it would have the advantage that many editors might want to make their filmographies more complete - if there's a field, why not fill it. Prophecy 10:08, 2 August 2008 (EDT)

We are getting closer...

Hi Dekkappai,

1. Different film and article names
I have now fully implemented the feature that a film can have a different caption than the article name. Just look at this and mouse over or click on the film name: {{film|Supervixens|year=1}} gives Supervixens (1975) (links to a dummy article in this case). This means:

  • If you want to mention Erotica (film) in a filmography, only Erotica ist displayed, but it links to Erotica (film). This can be done by setting the name parameter to "Erotica", but the article parameter to "Erotica (film)".
  • You told me that you'd like to have something like "GAS-092" to refer to. This works too. You only have to create a template which redirects to the original film template (to the template, not the article!).
    Here's a working example for Supervixens: I created the template {{Supervixens (film)}} in order not to produce a too stupid file on Boobpedia. {{Supervixens (film)}} only contains a redirect: #redirect [[Template:Supervixens]]. So you can write:
    {{film|Supervixens (film)|year=1}}, and it will be displayed as Supervixens (1975) - as if you wrote the original {{film|Supervixens|year=1}}, no difference.
    Same for {{film|GAS-092|year=1}}: Create a template named Template:GAS-092 wich contains a redirect to the original template, and you can write {{film|GAS-092|year=1}} or {{film|(Your original film title)|year=1}} with the same effect.
  • I chose the redirect solution for the following reason: It would have been possible to simply set name to "(Your original film title)" and article to "GAS-092". But this would mean that your article name would have to be "GAS-092" and would have caused your film to be listed as "GAS-092" in Category:Films - which wouldn't have been nice - and confusing for users. With the redirect solution you can have all at once: Create an article wich has a "speaking" English name, create a redirection template to be able to easily refer to your article in filmographies, and only have the clear English name displayed whereever and however you refer to your film. Imagine how easy the filmographies on your Japanese label list will become:
{{filmography start|style=listfull}}
{{film|GAS-001|style=listfull}}
{{film|GAS-002|style=listfull}}
{{film|GAS-003|style=listfull}}
[...]
{{filmography end}}

2. Default columns
I simplified the way how to display columns. There are only two versions left now: style = list (simple, without director and cast) and style = listfull (with director and cast). So "normal" editors can use the simple list for their mere listings of videos a porn star did, and you can use listfull to have everything displayed. The only thing that remains is that this lists "Russ Meyer" as director of all the films on his page, although we know that the director is Russ Meyer. This may appear silly at first, but there are films that have two or more directors. In this case, "Russ Meyer" would appear black and bold, and the link to the other director would be active and blue. I think this is acceptable. Otherwise the whole thing would have become too complicated to use.

3. And what if there is no template for my film? I simply want to write my filmography!
No problem. Do so. Entries for existing or non-existing templates can be used in friendly coexistence. See this:

{{filmography start|style=listfull}}
{{film|Supervixens|style=listfull|director=Test to show that data will be overwritten}}
{{film|Dekkappai's Adventures|style=listfull|released=[[March 19]], [[2008]]|distributor=Boobpedia films|starring=Dekkappai|director=Dekkappai|notes=His first film!}}
{{film|Dekkappai's Dreams|style=listfull|released=[[March 20]], [[2008]]|distributor=Boobpedia films|starring=Dekkappai|director=Dekkappai|notes=His second film!}}
{{filmography end}}

Title Released Company Director Starring Notes
Supervixens April 2, 1975 Russ Meyer Ann Marie, Christy Hartburg, Deborah McGuire, Shari Eubank, Sharon Kelly, Uschi Digard
Dekkappai's Adventures March 19, 2008 Dekkappai Dekkappai His first film!
Dekkappai's Dreams March 20, 2008 Dekkappai Dekkappai His second film!

If there ever will be a template created for "Dekkappai's dreams", all data you provided manually in your filmography will be overwritten by the data from the new template - no need to change your filmography later, even if the template did not exist at the time you wrote your filmography. See the Supervixens line: I added a dummy text for director, but it is ignored, because the template exists.

Note: If you list your "GAS-092" example in a filmography and there is no template yet, be aware of the fact that the film will be listed as "GAS-092" in your filmography until the template (which provides the real name) is created. You cannot work around this by creating the redirection template leading to the (not yet written) film template. This would create a dead red link.

Ok, I'll now have to write the documentation and set the procedure to create new template so that you do not have to create your templates manually.

Regards

Prophecy 03:21, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Tadaaaa!

Hi Dekkappai,

first of all, congratulations to your Featured article! Well, perhaps we'll have something similar here on Boobpedia too some day.

In addition to my congratulations, I'd like to BLAST YOU AWAY:

Look at the filmography below (and above all, look at the simplicity of the code)! :-)

  • Everything is ready now. I tested it with three articles, seems to work fine.
  • Perhaps I'll tweak some things like width for some filmography columns in the future as I see how it looks like on different pages and with different content.
  • I implemented the infobox style on a few pages, for instance Beneath the Valley of the Ultravixens. The article code has become short and easy to read now. No more huge infobox code at the top of a page.
  • If you want to create your templates now, go ahead: New film. You can type "new film" in the search box too, very fast access.
  • Please note: Do not simply copy the infobox entries from the article into the template as one single block, but do it parameter by parameter. Some parameters have changed since you copied your last version of the infobox.
  • Remember to set the parameter main release year. It did not exist yet when you copied the code. It's used to display the year in Supervixens (1975), for example (As it would be impossible otherwise to extract the exact year number from multiple release date entries).
  • Never create a film template manually. Always use New film!
  • When testing the infobox style for the three articles, I moved the reference from released to runtime so that we do not force other editors to add a reference section to their article. Freel free to move it back into a field which also appears in a filmography table if you would prefer to have the references displayed in articles with filmographies too. I think it's mostly you who writes filmographies with Russ Meyer films anyway, so the choice is up to you. :-)
  • Remember to separate multiple name entries (for instance in starring) by <br>. Otherwise we have the problem that the table becomes very wide and overlaps with the biobox, because a wiki table does not notice if there is a biobox to the right.
  • In the filmography example below you've got every feature implemented:
    • "Bivouac in the Ozarks" does not have neither article nor template, and it never will. Data is provided manually.
    • "The French Peep Show" does not have neither article nor template, but it will have in the future. Therefore I did not add manual data, as I think you will create templates in the future. If you want to have the new table in the Russ Meyer article: It's already there, just commented out. You can activate it, but you'd have to add the missing data manually until you have the templates.
    • "The Immoral Mr. Teas" already has an article, but no template yet. The code detects this and already displays a link to the article, but no data is added. When you create the template, the data will be imported and manual data will be overwritten.
    • "Supervixens" alreay has an article and a template. Full data is displayed.
    • "Lorna" has article and template, too, and the specialty that the article name differs from the film name. You can either write {{film|Lorna (film)}} or {{film|Lorna}}. The second example works, because I created a redirect from Template:Lorna to Template:Lorna (film) I think it's not that harmful to have a template with the simple name "Lorna", because it's not very likely that a second big bust film with exactly the same title appears. If so, we can give it another name.
    • "Pandora Peaks" will link to Pandora Peaks (film) and is therefore displayed with the "(film)" suffix. It's important to have this suffix, because there already exists an article about the person herself. As soon as you create the template for the film and provide name (Pandora Peaks) and arcticle (Pandora Peaks (film)), only "Pandora Peaks" will be displayed.

And now: Have fun!

  • Everything you need to know about adding a new film is in New film. You can skip the second step for the article creation if you already created an article (it wouldn't work anyway if an article already exists). But be sure to create the template.
  • Everything you need to know about how to use {{Film}} within an article (inline, how to construct a filmography or how to add an infobox) can be found in {{Film}}.

Go ahead, test it, tell me if you find bugs.

Regards

Prophecy 13:14, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

(Filmography deleted, made page too big. Prophecy 14:05, 5 August 2008 (EDT))

Answer

Yes. The answer is simple: You don't see anything of what you typed in your new template if you do not use New film. But you can copy the whole code out of the template {{New film}} and paste it into your new template. This will work. It's important that you have the documentation page included to see your changes. The documentation won't be attached if you simply create a template, but if you copy the whole code from {{New film}}, it will. So you can do this and delete the comments not necessary for you. You can even delete the four # signs in your skeleton file, they are only needed if you automatically create a template with New film. :-) Prophecy 13:36, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Title width: Strange. The column does not have a fixed width. It is only compressed if you have a small window. Try a larger window first, please. If the title column still is to small, please make a screenshot and upload it so I can see. About the sorting buttons: In particular for the Russ Meyer filmography I already found it very useful. I was looking for a certain film, but could not find it at once because they were sorted chronologically. One click on the title sort button, and there I was. Let's wait. I could add a "hidden" parameter to turn of the sorting, but let's see how things develop. Prophecy 13:40, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
What I thought - it's a small window, and the browser wraps all columns without fixed width. Providing a fixed width is sometimes silly, because if there's enough space, the line nicely transforms from a multiple line to a single line entry. But I've experienced the same with Ellen Medeiros while playing around with the new filmography feature. Maybe it's fixed soon, I found that you can provide something like a minimum width. So not too much width, but enough to not let all titles be wrapped. About sorting: Certainly. But we cannot activate the sorting functionality only for certain columns. And the title is already important enough not to take it out I think. Prophecy 15:38, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Title width: Fixed. I've set a minimum width of 100 px.
  • Template already exists: Not. I tried and got to the creation page without difficulty. Maybe you did not read the instructions carefully enough and replaced the "Template:" in the input box instead of simply adding "The Immoral Mr. Teas" behind it? ;-) Prophecy 15:44, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
Yes. Read the instructions. :-) "Save the page. Do not bother if you do not see any changes after you saved the page for the first time. Clicking on the edit tab again will show the changes." Prophecy 16:00, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
I wrote it somewhere earlier in your talk page, can't find it now. When replacing the infobox with the template in some pages (e. g. Supervixens), I moved the reference from released to runtime. Thus it's displayed in the infobox, but not in filmographies. This was deliberate. If you prefer to have references displayed in your filmographies too, you can just move the reference back to released. The reference cannot be moved after the title. As you write "Infobox data..." in your reference, the reader knows that you took all the reference from there. Just choose a parameter that is also displayed in filmography entries to have it displayed in both. Width: Perhaps 100px wasn't enough, but we cannot give all columns minimum widths. I also noticed that your screen resolution seems to be quite low. I think 1024x768 is standard nowadays, and with this resolution, everything is fine. Prophecy 16:19, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
Ah, now I know where the latest squeezing of the title column came from. You added "June Wilkinson (uncredited - torso only)" to The Immoral Mr. Teas. This is very long, and I forced the entries in the "Starring" column not to wrap. So the parser pushes other columns together, even if they have a fixed width. nowrap is stronger than fixed width. I'll change that and give this column a minumum width too instead of forcing a nowrap. Thanks for the hink. Prophecy 16:25, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Further

Ah, by the way: You can misuse some of the fields. For example, if you want to add an IMDb entry (is not displayed in the filmography), you can add it in the "Notes" column. See Anna_Semenovich#Cinema for example. And for the references, as said: If you add the reference to a field that is displayed in filmography entries too (like the release date), you should have it on the filmograph page too. Please tell me later if this is the case. It was planned like this, but I did not test it. Prophecy 16:35, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Just tell me how you mis-use them. Might be useful if changes have to be made. Continuous misuse is often a sign that the programming needs to be improved. :-) Ah, by the way: I already see a real advantage of the new format: It's easier to look at and find things. Have a look at the distributor columns in the filmography on your own page. PAD-RAM and PADRAM differ, so do RM Inc. and RM without Inc. Personally I think that things like Ltd. or Inc. do not need to be mentioned.
And one last point: We both know that this is excessive use of templates. Although I programmed them in a way they shouldn't consume too much server space, but please have an open eye on the server performance while adding the film templates. If the server is a little bit slower after you saved a new template, it's ok. But I sometimes noticed that calling your talk page took a little while. Maybe because you were saving a template, but maybe also because it already contains the whole filmography with all the templates. If calling your own talk page takes too long, even a long time after you saved your last template, you should stop for a while. We have to be careful, procede step by step and see how the new filmographies affect server time. Your talk page is a good example. If you save a template, the server tries to replace all pages containing the template with its content. As your user page is the only one with Russ Meyer templates so far, it's a good test to see if it can be called quickly long after you saved the last template or not. Prophecy 16:59, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
Yes, I noticed that too today when I was looking up something on IMDb. They also use "Company" and add the company that's behind the film, regardless if its DreamWorks Animation, a producing or a distributing company. Easy... But unfortunately we have different fields for that in the infobox. Do you think we need an additional field in the infobox? Or should "distributor" be completely replaced by "company"? Be quick with your decision, because besides quite a few changes in the programming, each and every page that contains a film infobox has to be changed - whether it's an article or the template itself. I took the "Distributor" field from Wikipedia, never thought of distributors of a film before. But I think we can leave it like this. I noticed it when adding the small filmography to Ellen Medeiros. Channel 69 and stuff appeared to me what one commonly calls a "label". But if there is something to be clarified, one can still do it in the field itself, perhaps by adding "label" behind the name of the company or similar. And - a label does distributing as well, doesn't it? Prophecy 17:25, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
Ok. Go ahead. Replace "distributor" in all templates and articles you created so far. This will make the entry vanish for now, but it will reappear when I have changed the programming. Example: distributor = RM Films International, Inc. --> company = RM Films International, Inc.. I have to leave now, but please tell me when you are ready. I change the programming then. Don't forget the non-Meyer films too. Do not change any other appearances of "distributor" except the exact parameter entries like distributor = RM Films International, Inc.. The rest is my business. :-) I have to leave now; I will do that tomorrow. Regards Prophecy 17:38, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
Please stop creating new templates. It collides with my changing of the film templates. The more files contain the templates, the harder it becomes for the server to cope with changes to the templates. Thanks Prophecy 18:24, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
Ok, you can continue. I think I didn't forget anything. We do not have to change the existing bioboxes in articles as you will turn them into templates and replace distributor by company anyway... If you see a "distributor" left somewhere, just leave me a message. :-) Prophecy 19:02, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Wow!

Hi Dekkappai,

you've done a lot of work while I've been away. Boku no Oppai and Russ Meyer look really cool. Thanks for your input. I wrote you quite a lot in the last time, and I see that I did not express myself clear enough in some cases, or it was just too much text, so I try to be as short as possible now. :-) There are some very important points, please read the following carefully. I contracted the main concern in the first sentence of every section:

Important
  • Please take English titles for the templates. Sure that creating the template {{GOLU-01}} worked. You simply created a film named GOLU-01. But now it was listed in Category:Film templates as GOLU-01, and nobody knew what it was. That's what I wanted to prevent by suggesting the redirects. Please take speaking names for your templates (i. e. the English title). The problem can simply be solved by moving {{GOLU-01}} to {{My Loved Big Boobs 01: Miu Sasaki}} which I did. Please note that it's forbidden to have a # in the filename, that's why I omitted it. So the procedure is as follows:
    • Create a film template named Template:My Loved Big Boobs XY: Actress Name (without #).
    • Create a redirect template named Template:GOLU-XY (or another appropriate ID according to your own system) wich redirects to Template:My Loved Big Boobs XY: Actress Name. That's all. You can use GOLU-XY in your filmographies like before, but the film template is listed under its speaking name.
  • Please do not add the reference to the title. Something you couldn't know: When you add a filmography entry like {{film|Dekkappai's Adventures}}, the software looks if a template with the name "Dekkappai's Adventures" exists. If so, it takes the data out of the template. If not, it takes the data you provided in the parameters. Everything ok so far. But on Boku no Oppai you added the reference after the title. I think that is one of the "misuse" cases you mentioned. :-) The problem is that the software now looks for a template named "Dekkappai's Adventures<ref name="xy">{{cite web|title=XY...}}</ref>". It did not cause any harm so far, but I think the results are completely unpredictable. Please add the reference to another field. Original title would be fine for example. It's only the name field that is extremely sensitive. I know that you like the reference after the title, but we cannot have that. It's not much work to move the references; I did it for two list entries. You can move the ref to released too, to have it like the existing GOLU-01.
  • Do not include # signs in article and template names. Inside the GOLU-01 template (now {{My Loved Big Boobs 01: Miu Sasaki}}), I saw that you specified article as "My Loved Big Boobs #01: Miu Sasaki". Same problem as with the title names: # in article and template names is not allowed (It actually means that this should become a link to section "01" of the article "My Loved Big Boobs " which does not exist). For name it's ok, because this is only the displayed title, but article is the actual filename which cannot contain #'s. Otherwise the link to your article (if you create it) would never become active and blue.
Not so important
  • Suggestion: You could upload bigger versions of your -s.jpg files with a width of 240px so that they fit in the infobox. The infobox did not exist at that time, I know. :-) But I know you are a perfectionist.
  • Advantage of the sorting function: I sorted Boku no Oppai by title and found that your titles differ: Sometimes you take "My Loved Big Boobs", sometimes "My Loved Big Boob" which makes it inconsistent. Above all if templates are created. Be sure to choose consistent filenames if you create them.
  • References in Russ Meyer. That's what I was afraid of. :-) Explanation: If you add a film template to the filmography, actually the whole content of the template is inside the page, even if not everything is shown. That means that the reference is there (because it's inside the film template), only the reference link is not shown explicitly. As {{Reflist}} shows every reference included in the page, it also lists the "invisible" references of the film templates. Solution: My suggestion to move the references into fields that are not visible in filmographies was rubbish. Add them to visible fields (like released). If they are listed under "References" anyway, why hide them in the filmographies.
  • Strange order of references on Boku no Oppai: I think that the page is parsed differently from what we are viewing: Humans look line by line, but apparently the page is parsed column by column. This will stop if you have all references in the same field I suppose.
  • ID doesn't show: The ID is only shown if the company is specified. It's the company that gives IDs, so I thought this was ok. I added the ID to {{My Loved Big Boobs 01: Miu Sasaki}}, and now it shows on Boku no Oppai too. I added the company to #04, and now the ID is shown together with the company. Be sure that the IDs are consistent. Is it true that #1 has GOLU-01, but the others have GOL-XY without U?
  • Available on (CD, DVD, Tape): Like I said elsewhere before: I think the users know how and where to get their videos, and the format is listed there. On the other hand... That would be cool little icons. :-) Perhaps later, some day...

Thanks for all your input. I'm glad that you think it's even better than imagined. :-)

Regards

Prophecy 07:47, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

A little secret...

My silence? Here's a little secret: I live in a completely different time zone than you. :-) The reason why we can communicate so much is that I'm a real night owl... So if I don't answer, I most probably sleep or I'm at work. :-) Your thoughts and suggestions:

  • IDs as file name: You've got a serious argument there. I moved GOLU-01 back. It's better like this. So let's keep it like this: Japanese videos by their ID where you think it's appropriate, but everything by English title if available.
  • Smaller cover: Hm, you are probably right. It's not very likely that a video out of the Boku no Oppai series gets its own article, is it? I guess they may be considered artistic, but not worth each its own article. I was just thinking of the picture in an infobox, but if there's no article, no infobox is needed.
  • The Meyer problem: I just don't see it as a problem. The footnotes may seem annoying to you, because you seem to have a very small screen resolution. I jsut watched Boku no Oppai and Russ Meyer with a 1280px width resolution - and it's a feast for the eye! No more squeezed columns, everything straight and nice. And the footnotes: For me they are ok, even in the Meyer article. I split them into two columns. Ok, it strikes the eye that they all have almost the same text and that the only difference is the page number. But that is the price we have to pay. I you pull entry out and put it on another page (like Julie Williams for example), it's normal and perfect. I added a references section there. It would be nice if you moved the reference to realeased, because we simply cannot hide the references. If someone else adds a reference to the article later, he would wonder why his references start with 2 and where the first one is hidden. So better show the number in the filmography table.
  • Of course, in a "normal" article, footnotes would have been only like "Frasier, p. 29" after the book was first mentioned as a whole. But as I said: it's the price we have to pay. We do not know where our film templates go and with which other templates they are combined. So every single one needs the full citation. There is absolutely no way of "turning off" single references when we want it. Either all or none.
  • Just two other thoughts:
    • I'd remove the words "Infobox data from" from the citations. This has worked with real bioboxes, but it does not work tieh filmography lines anymore. If someone reads this, he will think that the footnotes refers to the actor's biobox or the film infobox at the top of the page. So this is another argument for moving the refs to released. And the footnote should only read: "Frasier, ... (rest of citation)", not "Infobox data from Frasier, ...".
    • Heretic: Why do you need references for the Russ Meyer templates at all? Delete them! They all have an article, and in each article you write "is a 19XX film by Russ Meyer". It was us two who introduced citations in infoboxes here. Before, there were either no references at all or simply in the article text. Why not add the reference after "19XX" in the article text? All appearances of the template have alink to the article text. They do not need a reference, because they are already the product of your and my research. The source is the article. I do the same with my photographer templates. Katja Ehrhardt for example has quite a few citations in her biobox, but the header in Category:Katja Ehrhardt models has none. And needs none. You might say: "Hey, but you already solved the problem! Her biobox has refs, and her header doesn't!" Well... these are two different templates. :-) The film templates were the first step towards a global data unification. So, finally, my opinion is: Either Russ Meyer films do not need refs and the ref should be in the article itself, or we just let them all as they are. Because we cannot say that Boku no Oppai is a completely different case, only because the citations are shorter and refer to an existing internet page. The Russ meyer refs refer to different pages too, only in a print media. For me it's perfectly ok to leave al references inside the templates. But we'd have to move them to released to make the visible for other readers and editors.
  • Cease creation of templates: No. Why? I know that I probably won't put references in my film templates, but cite the sources in the article text. But I have absolutely nothing against your technique of adding a references to a template. Both ways can coexist, and I don't think the Russ Meyer references look sloppy.
  • See how existing templates work with BP: They already work. We tested it four hours. :-)
  • Wait for input: You will not get any input. Maybe from admins, but not from other editors. The greatest reward you can get is that other editors start using your templates. Like Bunny Yeager and Irving Klaw - articles I did not create, but which have been created using my New photographer how-to. Some day other editors will see the cool filmographies on your pages, look at the code and think: Hey, that simple? Dekkappai made templates just for me to use in my filmography? And they'll use them. If they write about Russ Meyer actresses, that is. :-)

I think I'll work on my flags now. I want them back in all boxes... :-) The film templates were a great test. The follow the same principle. Even after putting the film template into many pages, the server is fast as always. Only changes to the very mother template {{Film}} might cause the server to crash some day, but this will not be necessary very often.

Regards

Prophecy 14:34, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://www.boobpedia.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Dekkappai/Archive_2&oldid=70333"