Per WP:FILMNAV, Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers#Filmography navbox templates, and multiple discussion over the years, only works where Berkeley could be considered the primary creator of the material should be included, due to WP:UNDUE. Films where he is credited as choreographer, especially early works, do not meet this criteria - in the case of films, this is usually reserved for director, writer, and sometimes producer. Per this version I have left in the films where he is credited with directing a specific sequence, although even this may not be appropriate in some cases. Films should not be added where he is solely credited as choreographer. We do not have navboxes for editors, cinematographers, composers (unless the articles are for the soundtracks), wardrobe, make-up, etc., the same logic applies to choreographers. --woodensuperman 09:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FILMNAV is not a policy, therefore it is not mandatory. It is simply a guideline, a suggestion as to how to edit, not a recipe for how one must edit.If you are familiar with Berkeley's work, you know that many of his early films, in which he was the choreographer, were notable primarily becauise of his musical production numbers. You maynot be aware that film industry practice in the 1930s was that the "choreographer" was, in fact, the director of the musical numbers. This is even more so the case for Berkeley, for whom the production sequences were not "dances" per se, but fully realized musical extravaganzas, which Berkeley was completely responsible for conceiving and implementing -- the film's director had no part in them. They were, in effect, films within the films. These facts, which are abundantly available to be verified by many sources, make Berkeley's entire history of primary importance to the template. Please do not restore them without a consensus on this talk page to do so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:14, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unrelated comment for now: Please remove the horrible abbreviations which have no place in an article, let alone in a template. --Gonnym (talk) 09:18, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Another option would be to split further, with the films with sequences directed by Berkeley in their own group. --woodensuperman 09:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is already much, much better. --Gonnym (talk) 09:37, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the changes have been very good, the template looks better, and this is a good place to present it. The directed film portions are important to the history of film, and, as pointed out, they are directed by Busby so are fine for a template (like Tarantino's directed scenes in the original Sin City film which should be listed on his template). Randy Kryn (talk) 12:16, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Randy, but what about the films where he is only credited as the choreographer for the film, not director of the musical sequences? Kiki (1931 film) for example? Surely these fail WP:FILMNAV? --woodensuperman 12:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In many cases he would not be listed as co-director but would still be known as the director of his sequences, and good-to-go for the template. But yes, since he's not mentioned on the Kiki page adding the template there would be a ghost template, and not applicable until he's added. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:50, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
