Disputatio:Dispositor cinematographicus

I prefer to use the word "director". I realize why some people would argue against using this word, as a film director is not a military or political leader. However, I feel that "moderator" is too light of a word. To me "moderator" means someone who moderates, or makes sure that things don't go the wrong way. A film director, however, does much more. In most Hollywood filmmaking, he does not simply make sure the film stays on a path, but also decides how a film should be shot, what to include in the film, etc. So I think, both in English and in Latin, "Director" is a better word for this job than "moderator". -Kedemus69.230.73.212 06:34, 19 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Movere[fontem recensere]

Move Moderator cinematographicus to dispositor cinematographicus? The source for dispositor (David Morgan, [1]) seems better than that for moderator (Some random person, [2]). -- Secundus Zephyrus 19:41, 15 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An "dispositor cinematographicus" (e.g. hoc fonte) retinendus est? Possumus etiam cum fontibus:

Moderator (hic de Petro Jackson et Mel Gibson), saepissime et in paginis nostris visus
Expositor scaenarum (hic de Romano Polanski)

Si "Dispositor cinematographicus" omnibus placet, categoriam respectivam mox movebo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:09, 22 Ianuarii 2020 (UTC)[reply]