(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Template talk:Infobox film - Wikipedia Jump to content

Template talk:Infobox film

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bluealbion (talk | contribs) at 03:12, 2 January 2024 (→‎Full film in infobox: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template-protected edit request on 16 November 2023

Include the title Lyrics by in the template Montoo Bassi (talk) 04:48, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit template-protected}} template. DonIago (talk) 13:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And Production Design by: 200.68.186.212 (talk) 17:54, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MPAA Ratings

Add a ratings piece to this template where you can type the MPAA rating. NZStyleDeckSealant (talk) 04:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably take a look at WP:FILMRATING. DonIago (talk) 04:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image upright value

I recently wrote the article for Transition (film). Its unusually tall poster makes the infobox take up too much vertical space in the article. Would it be desirable to introduce an image_upright parameter to allow scaling the image down? -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 15:01, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Maddy from Celeste: you can use |image_size=. Setting it to a px value between 150px and 200px might work for what you need. The infobox is coded so the images has its |upright= default to 1, which by default for many users, renders images at 220px. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was told that said field is deprecated. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aspects: Where or when was |image_size= depreciated here or on Wikipedia? It's still a functioning parameter for Module:InfoboxImage and is in use here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:03, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The documentation there at "size" points to WP:IMAGESIZE which says that. I haven't researched it so no idea how valid that claim is and how we should move forward with that. I hate when editors deprecate fields with no roadmap on how things should move forward. Gonnym (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I'm not interpreting the wording at IMAGESIZE correctly, but what is the wording that says it's depreciated? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Use is discouraged per WP:THUMBSIZE which then leads to Except with very good reason, do not use px (e.g. |thumb|300px), which forces a fixed image width measured in pixels, disregarding the user's image size preference setting. In most cases upright=scaling_factor should be used Gonnym (talk) 21:43, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Image_size and Border fields were removed almost ten years ago in March 2014, [1], and the tracking category Category:Pages using infobox film with image size parameter, has been practically empty for years. Aspects (talk) 05:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They are still available in the infobox. It's not a good idea to remove documentation from parameters that are available to use. If they should be removed, then they should be removed from the code itself and not just the documentation (and then possibly an upright parameter should be added to allow image fixing). Gonnym (talk) 14:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The parameters were deprecated in 2014. I only updated the documentation to reflect the change. Betty Logan (talk) 15:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that makes more sense. It seems it was reverted here. Gonnym (talk) 19:18, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we should adjust and allow |image_upright= to be used instead. I see you already have that in the sandbox Gonnym. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Maddy from Celeste: you can now use |image_upright= to adjust the scaling factor of the image size if you desire for Transition (film). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Production Design

Can someone add a Production Design box into this template? I don’t know how to do it, but as a PD myself I would love to see this information first hand ok each film’s wikipedia page. 200.68.186.212 (talk) 17:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're going to need to provide more detail as to exactly what you'd like to see added, but I would also advise that many editors who work on film articles feel that the infobox is already bloated and that adding more fields wouldn't be an improvement. DonIago (talk) 18:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Full film in infobox

The full short film Steamboat Willie entered the public domain today and thus can be added into article. Should a full film parameter in infobox be added? (in the style similar to "voice" in Joe Biden infobox for example; in songs infobox we already link the music video) Hddty (talk) 08:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this specific instance, the full film is already in the article. In general, I do not think we should have entire films in an infobox. Primefac (talk) 13:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See also Template talk:Infobox film/Archive 33#Add parameter to display the full film. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fully support facilitating access to works in the public domain, but I think the infobox should be retained for essential encyclopedic information (which I wouldn't count the full film among). As Primefac points out, Steamboat Willie already enjoys prominent placement in the plot section. But wow, Mickey Mouse is finally in the public domain—a watershed moment. Betty Logan (talk) 15:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I support adding a parameter like this to the infobox. I might suggest adding a link to wikisource (similar to what is done for the books infobox). They have a growing collection of movies as well as the scripts listed Bluealbion (talk) 03:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]