User talk:Nixeagle/films that are also novels list

Record of progress on this page

edit
Only major events, such as categories being completed or new categories being added

All of the above will be maintianed by Eagle (talk) (desk)

Question about linking

edit

As in the case of The Day of the Dolphin, where the Robert Merle article says that it doesn't really resemble the original novel. Do we then go ahead and link to it anyway? Another example is Cheaper by the Dozen, which only borrows the concept and not the plot of the novel. Her Pegship 23:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

    • Sounds like a question best asked on that page's relevent talkpage, personally, if the book is mentioned, you might as well link to it. After all someone may want to know about both. And the link that you do make is better than some wikilinks that I have seen:-). This one is actually useful.Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm baaaaack...

edit

I've been fixing links for The Exorcist and The Manchurian Candidate and The Poseidon Adventure and and and... so if I'm absent for a while it's because I'm relinking one of those tremendously linked article splits. *sigh* Her Pegship 04:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Suggestion to replace comment system

edit

I encountered one of this project's html comments in Syriana, and was rather confused as to what it was. I was quite tempted to remove it despite the "do not remove" note, because it looked like nonsense. This sort of tagging system is a form of instruction creep; people shouldn't have to know what these tags mean or how the project's bot works. It's unnecessarily complicated. I'm unfamiliar with the project/bot, so I hope this makes sense... How about just creating a user subpage of the bot that lists the split articles, so project members can use the system without cluttering articlespace? ~ Booya Bazooka 00:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Not sure where to suggest this

edit

or whom to suggest it to, but Practical Magic definitely needs to be split. The movie was based on the book, but they are so divergent as to be different entirely.--Ibis3 03:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply


I just took another look. I see that the article doesn't actually contain any info about the book at all. So I guess what really needs to happen is the creation of a Novel article.--Ibis3 03:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

False hits

edit
The order here does not matter... this is only for programmatic reasons. As such, please put EVERY false hit that is not the result of human error under this heading, even if they are repeated, the reason being that this allows me to determine which false hits are generated most frequently.

Mentions an unrelated book

edit

(items in bold are repeat "finds")

  1. The Abyss
  2. Amélie
  3. The Black Sleep (1956 film)
  4. Bride of the Monster
  5. Code 46
  6. Cool World
  7. Dark Star (film)
  8. The Day After
  9. Defending Your Life
  10. Edward Scissorhands
  11. Excalibur (film)
  12. EXistenZ
  13. The Faculty
  14. Fantasia (film)
  15. Gattaca
  16. Ghost in the Machine (1993 film)
  17. Gremlins
  18. Gremlins 2: The New Batch
  19. Halloweentown
  20. History of science fiction films
  21. The Island (2005 film)
  22. It Came from Beneath the Sea
  23. Kinsey (film)
  24. Labyrinth (film)
  25. Lady in the Water
  26. Ladyhawke
  27. List of science fiction clichés
  28. The Matrix Reloaded
  29. The Matrix Revolutions
  30. The Matrix
  31. Merlin's Shop of Mystical Wonders
  32. Mesa of Lost Women
  33. The Mummy (1999 film)
  34. The NeverEnding Story III
  35. Phase IV
  36. Pod People
  37. Renaissance (film)
  38. Repo Man
  39. Science fiction film
  40. Sid and Nancy
  41. S1m0ne
  42. Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow
  43. Slither (film)
  44. Soldier (film)
  45. Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation
  46. Steamboy
  47. The Story of the Kelly Gang
  48. Troll (film)
  49. Wizards (film)

Mentions a tie-in book or novelization, not the source

edit

(items in bold are repeat "finds")

  1. Armageddon (film)
  2. Back to the Future
  3. Back to the Future Part II
  4. Back to the Future Part III
  5. Battlestar Galactica (film)
  6. Captain EO
  7. The Care Bears Battle the Freeze Machine
  8. Conan the Destroyer
  9. The Dark Crystal
  10. Dr. Who and the Daleks
  11. Downtime (Doctor Who)
  12. E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial
  13. Event Horizon (film)
  14. Fantastic Voyage
  15. The Fifth Element
  16. The Final Countdown
  17. Gorgo
  18. Halo (film)
  19. Highlander (series)
  20. Independence Day (film)
  21. It's Great to Be Alive
  22. Jason X
  23. King Kong (2005 film)
  24. The Last Man on Earth (1924)
  25. The Last Starfighter
  26. Masters of the Universe (film)
  27. Meteor Man
  28. MirrorMask
  29. Piglet's Big Movie
  30. Santa Claus: The Movie
  31. Serenity (film)
  32. Shakedown: Return of the Sontarans
  33. [[Shine (film)]
  34. SpaceCamp
  35. Splash
  36. Stargate (film)
  37. Summer of '42
  38. The Terminator - comic book adaptation
  39. Terminator 2: Judgment Day - comic book adaptation
  40. THX 1138
  41. Tron (film)
  42. Ultraviolet (film)
  43. Virtuosity
  44. Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea
  45. Warlords of Atlantis
  46. Willow (film)
  47. The X Files (film)

Other

edit
  • Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory - This one I added the "split comment" to on May 7, yet it came up under this search. Her Pegship 15:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
    • Is the comment still there at the time of the search? I will do some testing... I might have made a typo in my regex statement... (also there is one condition that without 2 sweeps... 10% fall through the cracks...) I am sorry. When time allows I will fix that "bug". (plus will give us more flexibility in "filtering out" types of articles). Cheers!!Eagle talk 06:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)Reply
      • Yes, it was still there. No big deal as it was only 1 instance, but I thought you might want to know.

Her Pegship 17:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

    • Interesting... but I am unable to make a Regex based on a character's name. I am sorry about that:)
Unless... in the false hit films that you have found, namely those referring to characters from a book, is there a pattern of words that occurs in these... but does not occur in other films that you have seen. I will be looking for something next week as I am doing a complete revamp of the program that makes these lists. For more information go to Kevinalewis's talk page where him and I have been discussing some ideas. My side of the conversation is in my June Archive... and some is on my talk page. Eagle talk 05:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Articles with "split comment" appearing in the July 9 list

edit
  1. The BFG (film)
  2. Big Fish
  3. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (film)
  4. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)
  5. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (film)
  6. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (film)
  7. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (film)
  8. Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events
  9. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (film)
  10. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (film)
  11. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (film)
  12. Matilda (film)
  13. Scrooged
  14. Shrek
  15. Virus (1999 film)
  16. The Witches (film)

Suggestion

edit

I am checking the list now for false hits and find that several items are showing up which showed up in previous searches. (See the bold items in the False Hits section.) I know why, too: They're not based on books, so I didn't add the "split comment" to the article. Yet the program finds them again because of the "trip words" in the text, which I assume are words like "book", "novel", "based on" etc. My suggestion: Can the program exclude articles with the word "novelization" or "novelisation" in the text? That might eliminate some of the repeated false hits. Either that, or come up with an alternative "split comment" phrase, such as <!--No book split necessary - Please do not remove this comment-->, which I can apply to those articles. Any thoughts? Her Pegship 00:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)Reply