User talk:Satinandsteel

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Satinandsteel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 08:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Filmographies

Hello! I noticed that you're doing quite a bit of work on filmographies. I felt that I should point out a couple things to you. First, filmographies (or any list of works) should be in reverse chronological order. Therefore, 2009 would be at the bottom and not the top. Second, using "XXXX in film" links where the year of the film is linked should be avoided. Please see WP:LOW for these points and more. Dismas|^(talk) 22:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! And episode titles should only be in "double quotes", not italics. Italics are reserved for titles of television shows, films, books, and music albums. Basically, italics for larger works, "double quotes" for smaller. Dismas|^(talk) 22:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you know that the film or TV show is notable enough for an article but it just doesn't have one yet, then link it. WP:REDLINK says that red links are fine. Basically, you're creating the link so that once there is an article, it automatically becomes a blue link. If you don't link it, and an article is eventually created, then the creator of that article has to go around to each article that could conceivably link to it and put the links in himself. So it's simpler to just have red links.

On the other hand, if the film was a short or something that isn't going to have an article, it's likely best left unlinked. Dismas|^(talk) 14:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another thing. Please don't add episode names in the same line as television show titles. This content belongs in the "Notes" section, in quote marks, not in the title. There is a standard format at WP:ACTOR for filmographies. If you have worked on filmographies that incorporate episodes under the title, please fix them. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. While your creation of filmography tables is appreciated, please note that items in the "Notes" section are not followed by periods. It is not a sentence. For example, in Brooke Nevin, items such as: TV series. TV movie. 5 episodes. These should not be followed by a period. I have removed them from the article. Thanks. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 15:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Filmographies June 2010

Hello. Thank you for your work on creating actor filmography tables. Regarding your work where you are changing the headings, for example: here, here, and here, you are reverting filmographies to old (outdated) coding. Please note (again!) that there are guidelines for the tables at WP:ACTOR. There was also a lengthy discussion regarding changes. Please use the current guidelines/coding for filmographies if you want to update tables or create new ones, which is very simplified:

{{Filmography table begin|Year|Title|Role|Notes}}

This replaces the last preferred version:

{|class="wikitable" style="font-size: 90%;"
|-
! style="background-color: #B0C4DE;" | Year
! style="background-color: #B0C4DE;" | Film
! style="background-color: #B0C4DE;" | Role
! style="background-color: #B0C4DE;" | Notes
|-

as well as the very outdated version you have been adding:

{| border="2" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="margin: 1em 1em 1em 0; background: #f9f9f9; border: 1px #aaa solid; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 90%;"
|- bgcolor="#CCCCCC" align="center"
|- bgcolor="#CCCCCC" align="center"
! Year
! Title
! Role
! Notes
|-

It is not clear why you are reverting the coding on tables to older versions, and changing the heading color. Some of what the code you are using is very outdated, from several versions prior, and you are only setting Wikipedia backwards. The blue heading has been preferred for some time. This is not the first time you have been asked not to instill your own ideas on filmography tables (as witnessed in above section). There are standards for a reason, please use them. The new heading code is much simplified, hiding the hard-code markup from editors. And again, blue is the preferred color. Please see WP:ACTOR#Filmography_tables for more information. Click on edit to see the coding. Thanks! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 14:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Youropheliac, all of the examples above lack consensus, as the RFC on WT:ACTOR found. Ping me and I'll fill you in further. Cheers, Jack Merridew 16:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm sorry =\ I didn't know I was doing that - I just thought it was kind of a case of "pick the one you like best", though I did try to use the one I thought was more 'recent'. I'm confused now though; is the above right, or did I miss something..? I did read through the links, but I think Jack there is telling me that it's not been agreed upon?? I didn't know filmography tables could be so complicated, heh. Is there anyone I could ask about the questions I have? ♪Your Opheliac♫ 15:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I missed the above reply. You would be best off listening to me on this issue. Teh blue is non-standard and really only a fistful of folks ever pushed for it. I'm cleaning up all sort of messes in filmographies and welcome your help. I just wikified Julie Delpy, for example; that's the sort of form you should be following. Cheers, Jack Merridew 03:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did wonder why no one responded (though that might just be because I just figured out how to use those :'s)! I'm not sure, though - I think it looks better with something to differentiate the headers from the titles, etc., and having the years, etc. all separated when some are the same (like: 1991, 1991, 1991) looks a little repetitive. Thank you, though. :) I did wonder when I saw I had a new message what I was doing wrong now, I'm starting to think it's something no one will ever agree on. =\ ♪Your Opheliac♫ 06:02, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I just forgot about this thread. I see you've less then 600 edits in the last year and a half... while I've made more than that in the last ten days.

The headers are differentiated from the data cells, although not dramatically. This is about accessibility for those using variety of browsers; some use monochrome hand-phones or Kindles; some use displays a metre wide. It's also about consistency across the whole project.

The explicit years on each row are also about accessibility as well as being able to sort the table. On Julie Delpy, you can now click the little controls in the header to sort by, say, title. Sorting flat-out requires that all the years be there. Imaging a person with a vision disability who uses a screen reader; these tools enable them to access out content, but it gets all confused, for them, if things like the years are omitted.

There's be a ton of talk about this and the consensus is pretty clear. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. Please see:

User:RexxS/Accessibility and the related discussion at:
User talk:RexxS#rowspans

The other day, you changed the Zachary Bennett page to use more rowspans; on things like "TV movies". This is a major impediment to accessibility and I'm asking you to cease the practice, immediately. Ultimately, this is all going to have to be reworked and I hope the above example is enough to convince you that this is not a matter of mere preference. The relevant guidelines are WP:TABLE and WP:ACCESSIBILITY, and I'll be raising this issue there. I'm asking a few editors to have an initial discussion at User talk:RexxS/Accessibility. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 04:33, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I changed the page and then noticed I had a new message, I didn't do it on purpose. I decided to stop editing filmographies, it seems to be a lot more complicated than I thought and I don't want to cause trouble. :) Thanks for taking the time to correct me, and I like your name (sounds vaguely familiar). ♪Your Opheliac♫ 08:02, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I saw that the posts were only four minutes apart. I've certainly hit save and then seen a message bar; it shows that you were reviewing the edit before saving. I'd not seen your edit when making the above post; I'm sure I took more than four minutes on it. This area has been a bit contentious, but it's sorted-out. You probably read Lord of the Flies a while back; see: Jack Merridew. Cheers, Jack Merridew 16:25, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do review before saving. The message bar tends to blend in for me, though; apparently I'm not too observant, heh. I've actually never read Lord of the Flies (though I've heard of it, of course), but I did just read the part on Jack Merridew - he sounds a bit brutal! ♪Your Opheliac♫ 18:12, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow. I just looked at RexxS' page, and was very surprised to find myself mentioned over there! I don't know if you still look at my talk page, but I don't "love" rowspans, inappropiate or otherwise, and I did try to do it correctly. ♪Your Opheliac♫ 00:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, they're inappropriate in the contexts we've seen you using them, and you've done this to at least a hundred articles. You could help fix them, now. See the Delpy example, and others that Rossrs and I have fixed. Jack Merridew 01:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Title sorting in filmography tables

I notice you've been adding sortable film tables, and I thought you may be interested in this. By adding a sort key, you can sort titles to avoid sorting by "A", "An" or "The". By also adding a "no link" to those that titles that are not linked, you can also sort the title without creating a red link. An example is at Frances O'Connor. I'm glad you're working on updating these filmographies. Rossrs (talk) 13:59, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you. I try to be the friendly sort. To answer your question, there's no rule and there's nothing to even suggest that one format is used more often than an other. There's a discussion you may be interested in reading, and commenting on which started about the use of seperate awards tables, and I put forward a suggestion for including a "medium" column in the general filmography, which could serve the purpose of presenting the credits in chronological order, but which could be made sortable and therefore allow TV or film credits to be looked at individually. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers#Awards and I also started a sandbox at User:Rossrs/Sandbox/filmography and awards. Your thoughts would be most welcome. Rossrs (talk) 08:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And yet Summer Glau's body of work that includes film, TV and video games is in a section called "filmography". But they ain't all films! I preferred your edit. It looked much tidier, in my opinion. The only error was having "films" as the table header. Aside from that, I think it was fine. I think the word "filmography" is misused in numerous articles. Rossrs (talk) 12:29, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention that the rowspans broke the sortability. Even if the other editor doesn't personally like the tables to be merged, the removal of rowspans was an improvement in terms of WP:ACCESSIBILTY. I always link to that in edit summaries. At least it gives other editors a chance to read it, and hopefully discourage them from reverting. Rossrs (talk) 12:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

good work ;)

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work cleaning-up filmography tables. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My very first Barnstar! I'm so proud. :D Thank you! ♪Your Opheliac♫ 10:09, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

enjoy... and keep it up. terima kasih. Jack Merridew 10:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Erwin

Your recent edit was summarised as WP:ACCESSIBILITY but introduced significant changes to the content. Hyperdoctor Phrogghrus (talk) 06:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It did? How so? All I did was 'fix' the Filmography table. Satin and Steel 01:16, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the diff, it appears that under 2001, "Web Girl" changes to "Virtually Casey"; "Work" changes to "Worked"; 14 episodes (2002-2003) changes to 15; "Jackie Chan Adventures" changes to "Teen Titans" and "Everwood" changes to "The Robinsons: Lost in Space". Did you mean to make those changes? Hyperdoctor Phrogghrus (talk) 06:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite sure which of Web Girl or Virtually Casey is correct, but the 7th Heaven Work/Worked was a mistake - I probably read it wrong. As for Jackie Chan, Teen Titans, Everwood, and The Robinsons, they only changed because they were no longer listed with rowspans - otherwise they're still the same. And it's 15 episodes on Everwood instead of 14 because I didn't list the episode from 2004 separately. Satin and Steel 23:32, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Web Girl was the original title for Virtually Casey. Satin and Steel 23:33, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should come hang out with us on the internetz!

Hi! I wanted to let you know that we have created an IRC channel for "countering systemic bias one new editor at a time", aka closing the gender gap! Come hang out at #wikimedia-gendergap if that subject interests you. We hope this channel can serve as a safe haven to hang out, talk about Wiki, brainstorming, increasing women's participation in Wikimedia, article alerts and foster friendships. I hope you join us! (And if you need any IRC help, just let me know!) See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -- changes to Colin Morgan

Hi -- thanks for the recent improvements to the filmography table on Colin's biography. Looks good and your peers approve! Can I find out from you the evidence that Colin played John Leary in 2009 Nan's Christmas Carol? Is this only from IMDB or do you have personal or other conclusive facts to back this up? Thanks! Panpantom (talk) 10:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

changes to article already in compliance with the MoS

I don't understand your changes to the article Noley Thornton. Your edit summary said it was "per WP:ACCESSIBILITY", but that page of the MoS says nothing about preferring tabled lists of works over bulleted lists (a bulleted list which was in compliance with WP:LISTGAP). So if the article was already in compliance with both WP:ACCESS and WP:LOW#Filmographies, why did you change it? — fourthords | =Λ= | 08:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Madeleine Stowe may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Jan+30%2C+1994&author=HILARY+de+VRIES&pub=Los+Angeles+Times+(pre-1997+Fulltext "The Trip to Bankable",] ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', January 30, 1994</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:39, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 16 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Dena Kaplan page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:DATERANGE

Hello Satinandsteel. I notice that you've been doing some work on WP:BLP filmographies. A couple of things – First, you may want to review MOS:DATERANGE: under Wikipedia's WP:MOS dateranges in a format like "2012-2015" are not correct, and should instead be "2012–15" (notice the use also of an {{en dash}} rather than a "regular" dash...). (You may also want to review WP:FILMOGRAPHY, and MOS:DASH as well...) Also, your removal of the "Episode:" from Filmography 'Notes' column will be considered controversial by some (and is not necessary under WP:ACCESSIBILITY), so you can expect to be reverted in some cases when you do that... Just so you know. If you have any questions, just shoot me a line. Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:27, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just figured out / remembered how to respond to these... hopefully I'm doing it right. Anyway, thank you! :) These things change so often it's hard to keep up. I'll do better in the future, though!

I see you're still not doing MOS:DATERANGE and MOS:DASH correctly. And you're still removing "Episode(s):" from the 'Notes column without consensus. Please at least properly learn the first two MOS guidelines when applying your edits, and please consider halting the latter practice to save the rest of editors a lot of extra work having to clean up after your edits. Thank you. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:55, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For your efforts

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		It is a lot of work to convert filmographies to tables. Thank you for taking the time to do it MarnetteD\|Talk 22:20, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :)

Katherine Barrell Filmography

Thank you for creating the table. Please restore the director, producer, writer credits you deleted in the process. See WP:FILMOGRAPHY for guidance and go one step further: review the Matthew McConaughey filmography and Morgan Freeman on screen and stage examples provided. Pyxis Solitary (talk) 06:10, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

->> Thank you for restoring the above-referenced credits. I think the McConaughey example reduces page usage but ... nevertheless ... it's important to provide Ms. Barrell's film history both in front of and behind the camera. :-) Pyxis Solitary (talk) 10:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! :) Her Filmography isn't as extensive as the above-named actors, so I didn't feel it quite deserved a page unto itself. Thank you! ~SatinandSteel

"a page unto itself". :-D That's not what I meant but I can see how it was interpreted that way. I meant that in the McConaughey example the behind-the-camera credits on a film are included in the *Film* Notes field. Sometime in the future, when her history becomes extensive, I predict an editor will merge her *Other works* credits regarding films with the *Film* section. Ciao! Pyxis Solitary (talk) 01:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editor has nominated Katherine Barrell for deletion

Just thought you'd be interested in what's going on: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katherine Barrell (2nd nomination). Pyxis Solitary (talk) 06:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral notice

As someone who has edited Lyndsy Fonseca, you may or may not wish to join a discussion at Talk:Lyndsy Fonseca#Request for comment. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Filmography

Hi. You've removed some of the acting credits of the actress here. Please add them back. −αΣn=1NDi[n][Σj∈C{i}Fji[n − 1]+Fexti[(n^−1)] 07:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Francie Swift for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Francie Swift, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francie Swift until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Myndy Crist for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Myndy Crist, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myndy Crist (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lori Rom for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lori Rom, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lori Rom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:05, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Isabel Glasser for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Isabel Glasser, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isabel Glasser until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Una Damon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Una Damon, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Una Damon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Anastasia Horne for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anastasia Horne, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anastasia Horne until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]