Wikipedia:Peer review/List of James Bond film cast lists/archive1

List of James Bond film cast lists
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I've struggled through updating the article with half an eye on it becoming a Featured List, but not feeling terribly good about what the result is. As it stands it's no more than a collection of the cast lists (which can be obtained from the individual film articles) and there seems little point in simply copying those. I've run up three other partial versions which may make for a better list (and closer to the FL status too). Does anyone have any thoughts as to which would make for the better page?


 * VERSION 1
 * VERSION 2
 * VERSION 3

Thanks, SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 15:27, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments Hey Schrocat. I share your concerns with the list as you have it here now. It is pretty much a cut-and-paste of cast lists from each of the individual film articles and offers not much at all in the way of additional functionality or information. Hope that helps, would be more than happy to provide additional comments upon request. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I think all of your litter trays are better than this one you have under review.
 * Version 1 is pretty much the same as version 3 as far as I could tell except for headings like "James Bond" which gives you (to my eyes) an odd-looking mix of two- and three-column tables.
 * Version 2 has that bold blue mid-banner for each of the categories of actors, I quite like it aesthetically but I'm not sure how it works from an WP:ACCESS persepective. It may be that it's just fine, but it's probably worth check with User:RexxS before you redo all that work just it for it to be inaccessible to screen readers.
 * I think, if I had to state a preference, it'd be for version 1 because, at least, that allows me find out all the Bond films where Bond was played by Dalton which, at least is additional to the functionality you provide with this current list.


 * Hi RM, how's things? You're right to think of the Access point for version 2 - it just doesn't work from that point of view. The difference between 2 and 3 is that version 1 is one large table (possibly over large) whilst version 3 has a series of tables, broken into categories. I'm really not sure which has the most issues surrounding it! Thanks for your input - at least it confirms that the current one is rubbish and version 2 probably won't work! Cheers - SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 21:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)