Wikibooks:Featured books/Nominations/Addition/Movie Making Manual

Movie Making Manual

 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose - doesn't meet naming standards, and navigation is poor to confusing. Content is very good, though. Webaware talk 06:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Support This is a fairly complete and interesting book. It just needs naming to be sorted out. RobinH 08:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose. I agree with webaware. The content in this book is excellent, but there are many confusing aspects that really could be ironed out first. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 16:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Support I like it. A very original book. Xania [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 20:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol comment vote.svg|15px]] Comment This is more of a weak support, but I'm leaving this as a neutral "vote" at the moment.  One of the reasons for the naming convention of individual modules is that this book pre-dates the Wikibook policy of WB:NP.  As such it is "grandfathered" into this policy by default with the current naming convention, although if somebody wants to get into the business of renaming these pages to something more typical of current Wikibooks naming conventions, I wouldn't complain.  If we had a collaboration of the month, I would strongly suggest that this book receive that sort of treatment to push this book forward to a featured book status.  A sort of "B" class book that really needs to be upgraded.  --Rob Horning 21:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose The naming standards thing should be a no-brainer. Opposing a book for featured status is not condemning it to permanent obscurity.  In this case, it just means we can look forward to featuring it in some future date when all the technical kinks have been worked out. -- Kowey 16:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Not done, there seems to be no consensus on this one, I agree with Kowey and Rob that it'd be able to be featured if the formatting was fixed up, per the requests above, since there's been no argument about the quality of content. This will be archived sometime soon. Mattb112885 (talk) 15:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)