Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Jean Harlow filmography/archive1

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was withdrawn by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Jean Harlow filmography

Jean Harlow filmography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): — Maile (talk) 21:52, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Harlow is a key figure in American cinema history. This is my rescue of an abandoned and totally unsourced list, originally created by a sock who was blocked shortly thereafter. I have recently checked various reliable sources to bring this up to list criteria, and have otherwise edited the prose to bring it up in standard.. — Maile (talk) 21:52, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisTheDude Can you please close this out as withdrawn? I'm not going through this about the browser issue mentioned below. Browser issues are not Featured criteria, not FLC nor FAC, but it certainly is a good way to muck up a nomination. Everything looks fine on my browser, and I don't need this nomination. I am officially withdrawing this. — Maile (talk) 01:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maile66 - I'm just a regular user, I don't have the authority to close a FLC, that only be done by the FLC director or one of his delegates (see the top of the page)..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments
  • I think the lead is a touch too long. Most of the first paragraph is probably not needed in this article, nor is the sentence starting "Her co-workers and colleagues appreciated her genial camaraderie"
 Done
  • No reason for her name to be in bold in the first sentence of the lead or in the lead image caption
 Done
  • "Among the vehicles she starred in, were" - no need for that comma
 Done
  • Last paragraph is only a single sentence, it should be merged with the one before
 Done
  • Image captions - "Jean Harlow & Myrna Loy Wife vs. Secretary (1936)" => "Jean Harlow and Myrna Loy in Wife vs. Secretary (1936)". "Jack Conway Jean Harlow Clark Gable in Saratoga (1937)" => "Jack Conway, Jean Harlow and Clark Gable in Saratoga (1937)". In the latter caption the film title should also be in italics and wikilinked.
 Done
  • Some of her roles are missing from the first table for films where she is not listed as "uncredited", so presumably she was credited with a role, is this info not available?
 Done - One role was "unbilled extra", and the others were unknown. She appears in the cast list, but nothing specific
  • One note in that first table just says "Al Christie" - what was his significance?
 Done - he was the producer
  • Refs against The Saturday Night Kid are not in correct numerical order
 Done
  • "Loews" is wikilinked the third time it appears - should be linked the first time
 Done
Resolved comments from ~ HAL333([2]) 17:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I've been told that you should place the scope on the film title rather than the release year.
 Editor note: Actually, it's the rows and columns headings, to facilitate screen readers. If you open the edit screen on those, you can see that's how I did it - rows and columns. But I just checked a number of successful Featured Lists. Most of them do it as I have. But there were a few who did it like you are saying. Maybe we're both correct. — Maile (talk) 00:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm kimd of indifferent to it. Sometimes I do it and sometimes not. ~ HAL333([3]) 17:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the references, LA Times is italicized, but The Atlanta Journal Constitution isn't.
 Done The cite template automatically italicized one, and kept telling me that it wasn't allowed on the AJC. I finagled around until I finally found something that the template likes to let me italicize that.
  • The information in Among the vehicles she starred in were China Seas (1935) with Clark Gable and Wallace Beery, Suzy (1936) with Cary Grant and Franchot Tone, Libeled Lady (1936) with William Powell, Spencer Tracy, and Myrna Loy, and Personal Property (1937) with Robert Taylor. needs some sourcing.
 Done
  • In the short subjects section, shou;d some of those be red-linked? Or are they not notable?
 Done
  • I'm confused by the role Woman in cab as Harlean Carpenter. I assume what's meant is that she's Carpenter's double in this scene? You should clarify this in a note.
 Done I'm confused by it also, but that's exactly what the source said. Since she ditched the name "Harlean Carpenter" when she became an actress, I thought maybe someone in the studio was having a little joke about the name. I just shortened it to "Woman in cab"

But nice work overall. I'm glad to see that my own Clark Gable filmography will have a companion. ~ HAL333([4]) 23:44, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And, oh, you're right about Gable and Harlow FLs ... kind of good timing on this. — Maile (talk) 00:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TRM

  • Is Fox Film the same as Fox Studios? Isn't one the company and the other the location? I checked the former article and found only one mention of "Fox Studios" but several "Fox Studio" mentions.
 Done For clarification here, I just changed the one instance of "Fox Studios" to "the studio", since "Fox Film" is in the previous sentence. Hopefully, that just resolves that issue.
  • Jean Arthur is overlinked in the lead.
 Done
  • "uncredited debut in two 1928 films," what about the 1928 short?
 Question: Make a suggestion. This is what the source says: Honor Bound for Fox was released April 28,1928, Moran of the Marines for Paramount was released in October 1928, "There is some speculation as to which of these films is Jean Harlow's first movie appearance." She made Chasing Husbands for Hal Roach after those two. The latter is a "lost film", but the image from the film in the source dates it as "1928". — Maile (talk) 23:53, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with the formulation but nothing I can see suggests the "latter" is a lost film (indeed, that should be noted and linked, as with the other "lost films" in the list) nor can I see a reference saying this appearance came after her two movie appearances. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 00:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's in the book reference p.9 the author has just finished mentiniong Honor Bound and Moran of the Marines. The new paragraph begins, "Jean next received $10 per day for her bit role in the Charley Chase bit comedy Chasing Husbands ..." The next paragraph begins, "Sadly, Chasing Husbands is a lost film ... " with only the script and still photos still existing. — Maile (talk) 00:38, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well that sounds fine in terms of chronology then. Perhaps include that she was in the short in the lead as it was same year as the other main movie appearances. And link lost film. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 00:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "UCLA Film and Television Archive" not in italics in the lead but consistently in italics in the references. Shouldn't it be a publisher in the refs?
 Done
  • "Her career" ->"Harlow's career" as you've mentioned other people in between.
 Done
  • "Norwegian" no need to link, Norway and its people are commonly known to English speakers.
 Done
  • "an overnight star with the audiences" this is a bit emotive/POV. If it's a quote, quote it. Otherwise it's not particularly encyclopedic in tone.
  • Clark Gable is overlinked in the lead.
 Done
  • Don't use MGM without putting (MGM) after the first unabbreviated usage.
  • " look-a-likes " piped to a redirect, I would say "look-alikes" would suffice.
 Done
  • You have "Hollywood Walk of Fame " non-italics in the lead but italicised in the refs.
 Done
  • I don't understand why column widths are vastly different between tables.
 Question: Clarification needed on what you are seeing. The coding in the two tables are identical. And on my computer, they look identical in column widths. — Maile (talk) 23:04, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well I've looked at it on Chrome and Firefox and the col widths for each table are different in width. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:35, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Different in Safari too. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:37, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting, now that you bring it up. I primarily use Firefox, which is where they look the same to me. But over in Chrome, there certainly is a difference. I'm not sure it's fixable for every browser out there. Suggestion? — Maile (talk) 00:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well given it's not the same in any browser I use, I suggest you take it up at the Village Pump (technical) if you can't fix it yourself. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 00:30, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK - diff. — Maile (talk) 00:49, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very good. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 00:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, meanwhile there is a discussion at VP over this, I resolved the issue between my two browsers, by zooming the Chrome one notch. Like magic, both Firefox and Chrome look identical to me. — Maile (talk) 01:15, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not "between" browsers. The problem is between sections. You have two tables with identical column headings yet the column widths are different. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 01:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it's undesirable hard-coding of col widths using %. Suggest you take a look at how to resolve that. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 01:26, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is the row scope the year, not the work, after all the principle piece of information in each line in this filmography is the film, not the coincidental year of release.
  • In sortable tables every item that is normally linked just once on the first appearance should be linked every time because after re-sorting there's no assurance that the linked item will appear first.
  • Watz title needs an en-dash in the year range.
 Done

That's it for a quick run-through. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Making a note here that this has been withdrawn over the above issue, which even the Village Pump (technical) says is not possible to achieve.diff This really should not be happening on a nomination here. — Maile (talk) 12:07, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Jean_Harlow_filmography/archive1&oldid=991349867"