Difference between revisions of "Submissions:2015/Fuzzy as Fuzzy St. John: The Value of Identifying, and Properly Assigning, Film Genres"

From WikiConference North America
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Added proposal)
 
Line 27: Line 27:
 
'''If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).'''
 
'''If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).'''
   
  +
# [[User:Gamaliel|Gamaliel]] ([[User talk:Gamaliel|talk]]) 08:35, 23 August 2015 (EDT)
# ''Add your username here.''
 
   
 
[[Category:Submissions/2015]]
 
[[Category:Submissions/2015]]

Revision as of 12:35, 23 August 2015

Title
Fuzzy as Fuzzy St. John: The Value of Identifying, and Properly Assigning, Film Genres
Theme
community
Type of submission
presentation
Author
David N. Lewis
E-mail address
uncledavelewis@hotmail.com
Username
Pinikadia
Affiliation
WVXU-FM Radio
Abstract
Wikipedia retains strict standards in terms of classifying the genres of motion picture productions, and some editors will not allow a particular film to inhabit more than sphere of experience or presentation. If Sam Peckinpah’s “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia” is not a Western, then what is it? Where do we draw the line when we decide that a given genre designation is too inclusive or general (“Drama”), or too specific (“steampunk”)? Why can’t a film be “Experimental/Avant-Garde” and something else when it contains an Experimental/Avant-Garde sequence, such as is the case with Alfred Hitchcock’s “Spellbound”? As an editor of Wikipedia’s Experimental/Avant-Garde listings and other film related pages, I have long been struggling, with myself, and other editors, over these issues. In my paper, I plan to address some of these topics: how much is too much, where we go when we’re not sure, and what criteria we might include when we are trying to develop descriptive information for motion picture productions. In addition, I would like to propose some guidelines as to the use of imdb as a resource; some aspects of it are unreliable, but not all, and to discourage all editors from referring to it is like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Wikipedia has developed the potential to become one of the major resources of information about films and television programs and we should not have the blinders on so tight that we cannot expand our usefulness to film scholars, yet we owe it to our readers to keep in place sensible kinds of controls. It is also one area of entertainment where we haven’t gained a lot of blowback among users for unreliability and bad information, as we have in the music space. With guidelines that allow our entries to grow organically, we can gain much in the realm of film scholarship.
Length of presentation
30 min.
Special schedule requests
None
Will you attend WikiConference USA if your submission is not accepted?
Yes

Interested attendees

If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. (~~~~).

  1. Gamaliel (talk) 08:35, 23 August 2015 (EDT)