Template talk:FilmLinks

Inclusion, exclusion, formatting, sequence et al
I rather expected this sort of discussion would occur here. However, it appears the party is happening over there with the "Exterminate! Exterminate!" Deletionist Daleks now appearing on Planet Film. Flatterworld (talk) 23:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * If there is no consensus to delete the template, we will continue discussion here. I asked you some questions on my talk page to understand how the template would work with the external link guidelines. I like the practicality of combining external link templates in one place, but I was concerned that it would lead to link farms. I hope you can follow Lugnuts' example at the discussion; he and I disagree often but we keep it focused on the content. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 00:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Is that how you describe what you've been doing? 'Focusing on the content'? Really? How droll. Flatterworld (talk) 17:33, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Well Erik, I guess your buddy Bovineboy didn't get your memo. Or perhaps his concept of 'discuss' is to talk to himself? Or did the two (three?) of you have a nice little online chat and decide that's all that was needed? Whatever. You guys are definitely poster children. Enjoy your fifteen minutes. Flatterworld (talk) 22:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry Flatterworld, can you specifically refer to what I did that has irked you so? I was merely doing what the closing admin suggested in the closing of the TfD. It would be great if you left snarky comments out of these discussions, and if you problems with individuals, then you address them on the Users talk pages.
 * The formatting that is currently being used in this template matches the formatting of the individual templates already being used. This allows either the template shell or the individual links to be used and have the same formatting. What are your issues with the current formatting? BOVINEBOY 2008 01:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


 * No, what was posted at the end of that discussion was the usual: "The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section." I thought that was clear. Look at what Erik posted above: "If there is no consensus to delete the template, we will continue discussion here." Also clear. As for formatting, I brought that up in the deletion discussion relative to similar templates - remember? I even changed the template so various options could be seen, as 'visualization' was apparently too much for some who could only scream "Delete! Delete!" You don't like them? Fine. But why do you assume it's your call and no discussion is needed? You don't like 'snarky' comments? Then follow Assume Good Faith - from the beginning, which was NOT done in the deletion discussion, and no apologies were ever made for all the bullying that went on there. You want to see a discussion on a User Talk page? Go check Erik's User page history - he moved the discussion from here to there, then he decided he didn't want a discussion anywhere. I'm through with all of you in this entire Film section. You want to run it as your private fiefdom, kicking newcomers in the teeth, go ahead. You want to ignore what's going on in other areas of Wikipedia because you're so certain there is nothing you could possibly learn from anyone else, go ahead. I had thought the complaints about how Wikipedians were treated by 'Eternal Septemberists' were overblown, but now I see what's been going on. And you either Still Don't Get It, or you like it that way. Considering you found time to 'update' this Template, but not its documentation and not MOS:FILM, it's pretty clear which is true. Nothing I can do about that, which is why I'm leaving this part of Wikipedia. Is that clear enough for you? You're now free to play your passive-aggressive games with someone else.Flatterworld (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm really sorry you are not liking my attempt to be a collaborator. To be fair, I think that this template does have potential to be very useful. And I don't remember seeing any bullying, just editors expressing their opinions about the template in question. If you think I, or anyone else, have been uncivil, I suggest you take it up at WP:WQA. Now, would anyone be opposed to me adding Hkmdb title and bollywoodhungama? Those are the two most used (at least that I've seen) used for Hong Kong films and Indian films, respectively. BOVINEBOY 2008 01:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Just checking back to see if any of you have figured out what discussing and editing In Good Faith means yet. According to MOS:FILM, you haven't. You still claim you have no diea what bullying means? Really? jftr, you claim 'potential', you wasted plenty of my time here, yet somehow you haven't managed to actually use the template yourselves, or even let anyone else now about it through the (supposedly) usual channels of the Film project. (You are getting better at your passive-aggressive techniques, though. You must be very proud.) Flatterworld (talk) 18:25, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Request to remove Internet Archive link
I would like to request that the Internet Archive-part of this template be removed. The Internet Archive film-template also includes a [more]-link that links to a list of all articles that use the template and some users use that function to list films available at the Internet Archive. --Bensin (talk) 03:57, 8 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with that. Be bold and remove it. BOVINEBOY 2008 19:08, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Good! Done. --Bensin (talk) 15:49, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * So is that your new idea - to find an excuse to remove each link one at a time? Because none of you so-called 'members' of the Film Project have yet managed to find or update MOS:FILM, have you? Still claiming 'good faith', are you? As I said before, your passive-aggressive behavior isn't Wikipedian - not that you care, obviously. It's your personal playground (aka gang territory) and you want to make sure everyone else knows to keep out, right? Flatterworld (talk) 18:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Request: remove BFI
The BFI template no longer works, and can't be made to work. It is in processing of being deleted from enwiki all articles. Please remove it from this template. More info at Template:BFI talk page. -- Green  C  23:39, 15 October 2023 (UTC)