I'm trying to find out about the German movie / serial Homonculus, The Wik link in this (Movie serial) article directs me to the general article on "Homunculs," which only has a passing ref like the one here. The German Wik also does not seem to have any-thing on this film, which a German book on SF calls the mother of German black film style. 08:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Machinima
I have to question the prominent mention of Machinima, as opposed to countless other forms of serials that exist on the internet, and in the indie film scene, today.--
216.86.114.18400:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)reply
There was a fad for it at the time. The talk of "downloading" films dates that paragraph to the mid-2000s, that and the idea that the internet can only support five-minute-films. Nowadays people either say CGI or animation. There was a concerted attempt on Wikipedia to make the word "machinima" a thing, as with e.g.
sousveillance. It didn't take off, it obviously wasn't going to take off, and now someone has to get rid of it.
80.189.208.115 (
talk)
18:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Name change
The name of this article should be changed from Serial film to Serial (film).
Strictly speaking, the term "serial" is the singular form of the word "series". Exceptions have been made to distinguish the term "serial", being a specific medium in itself, from the term "series" as used in American English to refer to a television show. Although the plural form "serials" can be considered acceptable for this purpose of distinction, it is grammatically incorrect and whenever possible this article should strive to refer to a serial in singular form, so as to maintain distinction while still being grammatically correct.
68.96.52.9 (
talk)
16:33, 3 March 2014 (UTC)reply
If you want to go ahead and dedicate your life to tinkering with the word "serial", be my guest. Go on. No-one will help you. Show us what you can do.
80.189.208.115 (
talk)
18:48, 28 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Requested move 1 April 2019
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus. See excellent args and rebuttals below; however, since there have been two relists and after nearly a month with only a small amount of participation, general agreement escapes us. As is usual with no-consensus outcomes, editors can strengthen their args and in a few months attempt again to garner consensus for this title change.
Kudos to editors for your input, and
Happy Publishing! (
nac by
page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed.
put'r there15:00, 28 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - we do not name articles just to be internally consistent with Wikipedia navigation schemes, so the move rationale is flawed as it doesn't cite a reason per
WP:TITLES. According to
Google Ngrams comparison, the terms are just about equally common, but with "serial film" just a bit ahead at last measure. There are just as many reference works that use "serial film" as "film serial" to describe the same genre. --
Netoholic@21:01, 1 April 2019 (UTC)reply
CONSISTENT means to handle naming of topics similarly, such as using the same disambiguator. It syas consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles and so Wikipedia navigation (lists/categories) has no bearing. If you want those to be internally-consistent, then another way to accomplish that is to rename them to match this main article. We don't violate
WP:COMMONNAME just to match Wikipedia categories - that's backwards. --
Netoholic@21:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)reply
In texts pertaining to film serials / serial films, most film literature uses the single noun "serial". It is an immediately understood term to anyone versed in film terminology and, even for those who are not, once an explanation is made, "serial", in its noun form, persists in any film discussion as the key term. —
Roman Spinner(talk •
contribs)09:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)reply
No evidence to back up those statements, but I've given contradictory evidence above. This issue is not as clear-cut as it seems from your perspective. --
Netoholic@19:28, 2 April 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this
talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.