Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Bernard Lee on stage and screen/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 promoted by The Rambling Man 23:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Bernard Lee on stage and screen edit

Bernard Lee on stage and screen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 07:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With a career in acting that started at the age of six and ended with his death aged 73, Bernard Lee was a RADA-trained English actor who is probably best known for playing the role of M in the James Bond films. This record of his professional work has been split away from the main Lee article as it was out of place there and not a full reflection of his work. Aside from that, we are now nominating this for featured list status because we believe that it now satisfies the criteria. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 07:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Comprehensive, thorough, and expertly put together. I conducted a few copy edits and over linking issues in terms of linked common words such as "English" and "stage"; too small to list here so I just cracked on with it. Congratulations on yet another fine list on an overlooked and underrated actor. -- CassiantoTalk 19:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments a few picky things...
  • No real need to link "actor".
  • Lead paras are all very brief, could you consider merging a couple of them?
  • "Selected stage credits" so the list is incomplete?
    • It is as complete as we can make it. There is no single list from a single source, so we have had to put this together from news sources. - SchroCat (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I just say that because we have {{incomplete list}} for lists which may not be comprehensive. It's not a barrier to FL by any means, but worth considering if you're suggesting you've just listed the "selected" credits. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in over one hundred" -> "more than 100"
  • "as well as on stage and television dramatisations" seems like an odd run-on after the previous "over 100..."
    • Would it help if I reversed the sentence? "Lee appeared on stage and television dramatisations, as well as in more than 100 films"?
  • Why do stage credits have no end dates?
    • Because we don't know them. I could change the column title to "start date" and remove the dash, if you'd prefer?
      • I suggest you just add dates which are relevant to Lee if you know them, or add a note to say there is no evidence to help with end dates? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Night Sky is initially out of order.
    • Schoolboy error - now in the right place. - SchroCat (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where are Queen's and Rusholme theatres (since they have no link)?
    • London and Manchester now added - SchroCat (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why are you saying "ITV Television"? the TV of ITV is television!
  • "Hallmark Hall of Fame, "Beauty and the Beast"" has no channel.
  • Avoid shouting in the refs (e.g. ref 37).
    • Done. I couldn't see any more, but please let me know if I've missed any others. - SchroCat (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, as always, for your comments: much appreciated indeed. - SchroCat (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As always, you're very welcome. Good to work with keen and appreciative editors. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again: I think I've addressed them all correctly, but please let me know if I've introduced any additional errors! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 05:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
Comments from Crisco 1492
  • Bernard Lee (10 January 1908 – 16 January 1981) - Dates aren't really necessary here, just the year. 16 January or just 1981, no real difference for his performances.
  • Suffering from stomach cancer, Lee died on 16 January 1981, aged 73. - Likewise not necessary (except maybe the stomach cancer)
  • Otherwise quite impressive. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Crisco: your comments taken on board and now the article tweaked appropriately. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 05:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on prose. On an unrelated note, I'd love to do something like this for Astaman or Rd Mochtar. Shame tracking anything that's not a film (including the character) would be next to impossible without digging into archives. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 00:03, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Doesn't "the" normally come before "age of six", or is this different in British English?
  • Not different at all - just my inability to proof read properly! - SchroCat (talk) 05:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Role columns should probably be sorting by last name, where possible (a couple of entries obviously don't have last names).
  • I'm not sure about how to deal with those with titles: "Inspector Dodds" for example: Sortable under I or D? And really no idea where to begin with "William of Orange"! All the others should now be OK. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 06:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • For those I'd sort them under I and W respectively. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:07, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd guessed right on the WoO one, for the inspector etc I'd plumped for the surname. I played around sorting uner the title, but it looked wrong compared with those with title and full name (Superintendent Frank Hanbury naturally sorts under H for Hanbury, but it looked wrong having Inspector Dodds under I in the same table). So I've left those all under surname, if you're OK with that? - SchroCat (talk) 06:34, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Television: For the blank rows in the Channel column, you could try dashes of some kind to fill them. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Excellent and fascinating. The lack of theatrical end dates is not a problem and I prefer the article acknowledge the absence as it now does. I'm sure some end dates will find their way into the article in short order. Considering how long ago these performances were I see no reason why this or the lack of a complete list of stage credits should bar an FL status. I don't like the title "selected stage credits". Perhaps you could find some way to acknowledge that this is the most comprehensive list of stage credits known to the editors and that there may be other stage appearances, otherwise readers may be left with the impression that you intentionally left out performances for whatever reason. Does the "role" column really need to be sortable? "M" and "Superintendent Meredith" are his only recurring roles. Perhaps add a note to the effect that Lee also played this other lesser well-known role (or perhaps not, probably not). Otherwise I got nothing out of that sortable list. I sometimes think people add sortable columns because they can, not because they need to. Title and year are all that need be made sortable. I think you should add his day of birth and death back into the article. Readers shouldn't have to click onto the main article to learn either; nor should they be left with the impression that the editors don't know the dates. I can forsee future editors putting those dates back into the article. My only other suggestion - and I'm willing to bend on this - is to change "suffering from stomach cancer" to "battling stomach cancer" though I'll defer to the majority opinion about that. I'll look through the lists for disambiguation errors. I've already spotted one: Danger Point. - Fantr (talk) 17:39, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is slight value for making the roles column sortable if for example readers just want to look at his Bond entries, so I'm happy to leave that to the nominator's discretion. Betty Logan (talk) 20:00, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your comments, and especially for the additional theatre references you provided, which are now all added. I've dealt with the two tags you left on the page: both points have now been corrected. I would also prefer to see full dates of birth and death as I always maintain those datres refer to the individual actor, rather than the career, which is dealt with in the rest of the lead and article. Does anyone else have a view on this (I'm sure I've seen both formats in other lists). I agree with the "Selected" aspects of the stage section, and I've reduced the title to "Stage", which is more in line with the other sections. In terms of the sort, I've previously found it useful when looking for a particular character, (normally if someone has played one of the more notable roles), so I guess the added level of functionality doesn't hurt to be in place, even if it is only going to be used by a minority of readers. Thanks again for your comments and all your additional help on this. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 06:37, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support – It's another great job and there aren't really any "improvements" I can suggest. Just one thing caught my eye, the entry for Bons Baisers de Hong Kong (1975) has been tagged; technically a Featured list shouldn't really be tagged because it indicates unaddressed problems. If there are other sources giving contradictory accounts then it would be much better to just clarify the confusion with a note. Otherwise, it's a comprehensive, well sourced and nicely structured list and I support its promotion. Betty Logan (talk) 19:50, 12 March 2013 (UTC) EDIT: I see Fantr tagged that entry just before I read it so obviously it's not an oversight on your part. Betty Logan (talk) 19:53, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your comments and support, Betty—they are much appreciated! As I mention above, the tags are now gone, with the points being dealt with. Thanks again. - SchroCat (talk) 06:37, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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/Bernard_Lee_on_stage_and_screen/archive1&oldid=1079643845"