Template talk:Pictured

Creation
With all the Blu-ray image replacements and additions I've been doing, I've been adding a lot of actor names to the image documentations - detailing which actors are visible in a given screencap. Currently, that's all being done by hand, with no real consistency: some people are putting "Shown are...", others use "Played by..." or "Pictured are...". Could we put together some sort of template for this part of things, to make things more consistent?

Something like this:

...to get this:


 * Pictured are Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, and Michael Dorn.

...where the template automatically indents and italicizes the line, links the actor names, and inserts the word "and" before the final name in the list (if more than one is listed). I don't know how to build that myself, but I think it would be helpful - and easier to get new users to include - for adding and/or revising images, and would allow us to standardize image info pages: Thoughts? - Aatrek  13:42, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1. Caption
 * 2. Actor tag
 * 3. Remastered tag (if applicable)
 * 4. Copyright tag
 * 5. Categories


 * How many actors would it need to handle? I've seen images with 8-9 actors in it. Are we going to list them all? -- sulfur (talk) 13:59, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Well, do we have established guidelines? We have images like File:Data wins Stratagema.jpg which do have a lot of actors, and all actors that can be named are. Is it possible to make the template accommodate however many names are input? It would also have to handle the unknown performer credit. - Aatrek  15:11, January 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * We can have lots of parameters, but in order to make things feasible (and simple) for the coding, we'd have to come up with a clever format. I'll tool around with one using the image listed above and see if I can't come up with a clean method of handling this. -- sulfur (talk) 15:34, January 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, I've created one, but to simplify it, it does require putting in the actors from Right to Left... then reverses that order to indicate left-right in the image (if there are more than one shown, of course).
 * Examples of usage:
 * The image above shows an example in full usage. I'd like to clean up the "unknown performer" credit a bit more, but as a starting point, it's pretty good I think. -- sulfur (talk) 16:07, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * The image above shows an example in full usage. I'd like to clean up the "unknown performer" credit a bit more, but as a starting point, it's pretty good I think. -- sulfur (talk) 16:07, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * The image above shows an example in full usage. I'd like to clean up the "unknown performer" credit a bit more, but as a starting point, it's pretty good I think. -- sulfur (talk) 16:07, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * The image above shows an example in full usage. I'd like to clean up the "unknown performer" credit a bit more, but as a starting point, it's pretty good I think. -- sulfur (talk) 16:07, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

If there's a way to mask "Unknown performer" as "an unknown performer", that would probably work well enough... is there a way to get a multiplier in there (like putting a "2" someplace would make it into "two unknown performers")?

What's the reason for the L-R reversal? Is that just one of those weird coding things? It's definitely a good start!- Aatrek  16:16, January 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * No simple way to mask "unknown performer" as yet, except perhaps by hand in adding the template, such as " Unknown performer|two unknown performers ".
 * In terms of the R-L v L-R, that was done to make the "and" portion simpler. Otherwise, the code for the "and" would have to go into each and every "if" call, making the template really complex and almost impossible to add to. -- sulfur (talk) 17:03, January 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * I might be able to fix the "unknown" issue, but I won't have the time to do so for a few days. - 17:19, January 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * I've reformatted this to work with the names added in the order they would appear. Could someone who knows how to check see how badly this taxes things, because if I'm going to get that unknown thing solved it's going to get even more complicated. Since this was renamed (see below), I'm leaving the pages that already use this "broken" until I know we're keeping it like this. - 20:31, January 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * Since sulfur is already changes these, I'll take that as an "all's well". - 20:41, January 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not a total fan of "pictured", but I can definitely live with it. I think that I've fixed all of the template calls to change the order of those listed. Here's hoping. :) -- sulfur (talk) 20:45, January 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * Done, and hopefully this isn't eating to many resources now. - 21:07, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this! - Aatrek  23:54, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Unknown performers
Can you fix the problem when there are "two unknown performers/actors"? File:Danar fires warning shot.jpg for example. Thanks. Tom (talk) 09:23, January 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * This now supports up to three unknowns for one call, any more than that though and each one should have their own call. - 07:21, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Two other problems I've encountered are people with a add on like Young (actor). Is there a way to display Young instead of Young (actor)? The other one is unknown stunt performer. Can you include it to unknown actor and unknown performer so an "an" will appear there, too? Again thanks for your work. Tom (talk) 11:04, January 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * For actors with disambigs in their names, use the dis1 template. So, it would be used such as:
 * Giving:
 * -- sulfur (talk) 14:32, January 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * -- sulfur (talk) 14:32, January 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * -- sulfur (talk) 14:32, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Tom (talk) 15:05, January 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Stunt added. - 19:55, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Name
I suggest renaming this "Pictured", as that avoids having two words smashed together for the name and makes the wiki code look closer to the desired result. Also, I think pictured better describes what the template is. - 16:08, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought about using "pictured" first, but I'd really prefer to use something more like "remastered image", so that the word "image" is included in the template. I'm definitely open to suggestions though. -- sulfur (talk) 16:15, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't "actors" just be simplest? If that's too generic, I think "pictured" would work just as well (after all, a picture is an image). - Aatrek  16:19, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

"Pictured in image" with shortcuts maybe? Using "actors" might lead to problems with production POV images where not everyone in the image is an actor. - 16:21, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
 * I vote for "pictured" as of now, but am open to other ideas. 31dot (talk) 22:24, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

I've moved this to Pictured for now (see post in section above). - 20:31, January 24, 2013 (UTC)