Italicisation or not[edit]

I did not know about that, is it a guideline? I couldn't find anything about it anywhere, Of course if Pinter is not credited then perhaps the screenplay shouldn't be in the template? Jezhotwells (talk) 00:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See the articles on the films[edit]

Added the source re: Pinter's unpublished screenplay for The Remains of the Day, which is punctuated as an unpublished work "The Remains of the Day" (as are his other unpublished screenplays) in the appropriate section there. Pinter's unpublished and/or unproduced screenplays are not published works (by definition). Format for titles of unpublished screenplays is not to use italics. This is the template for Pinter's works, not for films. --NYScholar (talk) 01:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Punctuation rules for rendering titles of unpublished works may be found in various Style guides, some of which are listed in the Styles template. Wikipedia:MOS doesn't cover everything covered by published style guides; some parts are optional guidelines. There is a difference between how one punctuates the titles of unpublished screenplays and how one punctuates the titles of films (inc. those still in production and released films) in Wikipedia. --NYScholar (talk) 01:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All screenplays written by Pinter (and held in his Archive in the British Library if extant copies exist) are his works, whether or not he received credit for them in released films. There are occasions on which he was paid as contracted for his work, finished the screenplays, and asked to have his name taken off the credits of a film as per his contract; these matters are documented with published sources. If he wrote a screenplay or a filmscript, it is listed in the template as such, with the appropriate punctuation of the title to indicate whether it is published or unpublished [i.e., an unpublished manuscript]; there are 3 volumes of Pinter's collected screenplays published by Faber and Faber; please consult them for more information. --NYScholar (talk) 02:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC) [typ. corrs.; updated (in brackets); added link. --NYScholar (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)][reply]

In addition to the 3 vols. of published screenplays by Pinter, some are published separately; e.g., his screenplay for The French Lieutenant's Woman. (I own the 3 vols. collection and the single vol. of that screenplay, among others; these are verified publications.) --NYScholar (talk) 02:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I am trying to get my head around this - "The Remains of the Day" is unpublished - but in italics? "The Tragedy of King Lear" is in quotes and italics - what does that mean? Is there some significance in whether quotes are applied or not? Where can I find a description of how to use this? Some titles are un-italicised, some are un-italicised and in quotes, some are italicised, some are italicised and in quotes. that is 4 variants and I can't figure out what the differences are. Please explain as above you are just mentioning italicisation. Jezhotwells (talk)

Please see the edit summary; there was an errant italics mark that created a problem; I corrected it some time ago (i.e., removed the single set of ''). --NYScholar (talk) 02:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC) (updated. --NYScholar (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)][reply]

To answer the questions above[edit]

Italics are used for titles of published works that are novels, films, published screenplays of films; quotation marks are used to indicate titles of short stories and of other works of short prose fiction (generally including dramatic sketches), of poems (except for very long poems, like the Iliad, etc.), speeches (such as Pinter's Nobel Lecture, "Art, Truth and Politics"; the title of the published volume containing it is indicated as Art, Truth and Politics), and so on.
Though quotation marks are used for titles of (dramatic) sketches (and/or short works of prose fiction, e.g., monologues), I have found some recent published critical studies of Pinter's works are using italics for titles of dramatic sketches [i.e, treating them as titles of plays]. Because that convention may be in flux, I am retaining use of italics for published dramatic sketches (see edit. summ. done on 5/5/09). (updated.) --NYScholar (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[Added later for others' convenience:] Additional information: from sections on "Italicized Titles" (3.8.2) and "Titles in Quotation Marks" (3.8.3): "Italicize the names of books, plays, poems published as books, pamphlets, periodicals (newspapers, magazines, and journals), Web sites, online databases, films, television and radio broadcasts, compact discs, audiocassettes, record albums, dance performances, operas and other long musical compositions (except those identified simply by form, number, and key; see 3.8.5), paintings, works of sculpture, ships, aircraft, and spacecraft. … [Eliding 21 examples given.]" Quotation marks are used for "titles of unpublished manuscripts of any length" (MLA Style Manual, sec. 3.8.3 [118–19]). Pinter's unpublished screenplays and other unpublished manuscripts are thus placed within quotation marks; see below. --NYScholar (talk) 23:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)][reply]
I am retaining the use of quotation marks for titles of unpublished screenplays [manuscripts] by Pinter, as the titles of released films are rendered with italics. [Though one or two critical sources use italics for Pinter's unpublished screenplays for (already released) films (films based on others' screenplays), that is generally not correct.] Wikipedia's own Manual of Style (WP:MOS) does not distinguish between titles of *released* (published) films and titles of *unreleased* (unpublished) films (despite the correct format of using quotation marks for unreleased films in other encyclopedia and book publications). Newspapers (newspaper style) often use quotation marks for films [e.g., New York Times] or no punctuation at all for titles of films and plays (some British newspapers). Wikipedia is not a newspaper, however, and it does not follow newspaper style. It renders titles of both unreleased and released films with italics. [This subject (italics for film titles) has been discussed in talk page[s] of film articles (and in archived Talk:Harold Pinter). (updated) --NYScholar (talk) 23:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)][reply]
But the titles of unpublished works (unpublished screenplays, in this case) are not italicized; such titles are placed within quotation marks (to indicate that the works remain unpublished; if they become published, that would change).
[Please note: In the case of Victory: Pinter published his screenplay, but no film has been made of it. (There is another film of the same title, Victory, but it's not an adaptation of the novel by Joseph Conrad: Victory.) Because Pinter's screenplay is published, its title is rendered in italics (italicized). Sources that I added to the articles on the films for which Pinter has written screenplays are useful for understanding relationships between the original works, the screen adaptations by Pinter, and whether or not or to what degree the films have been based on his scripts; the complexities of attribution (or lack thereof, sometimes at Pinter's insistence) in credits are discussed in the sources cited. He had his name removed in some cases, even when some (or even a lot) of his (still unpublished) script was used in the film as released; e.g., The Remains of the Day). According to sources cited, his contract called for his being paid for his work, whether or not the script was used or whether or not his name remained in the credits for the film's screenwriting. [In the case of his (unpublished) script/screenplay for the film The Handmaid's Tale, according to the source cited in that article, he asked to have his name removed from the credits, but he remains credited and they used his script, but the usage displeased him. (added.) --NYScholar (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)] (Published critical sources refer to the manuscripts of those unpublished screenplays held in The Harold Pinter Archive in the British Library and/or to drafts sent to the writers of the articles.)[reply]
For further information, please consult style guides, as listed in the Style guides (Styles) template. (updated). --NYScholar (talk) 03:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC) [I've added some references and quotations from the 3rd ed. of the MLA Style Manual for convenience of other users; the MLA Handbook provides the same style; MLA Style for such practices as italicizing titles of certain kinds of works or use of quotation marks for titles of other kinds of works and for manuscripts of any length, and its other punctuation conventions generally follow commonly-accepted usage and are an illustration of it. --NYScholar (talk) 23:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)][reply]