User talk:FredR

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page of Wikipedia user FredR. If you have a comment or message for me, please POST IT AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE above the last comment/message. You can sign your entry by typing four tildes (a tilde is the ~ symbol), leaving no spaces between, thus ~~~~, which is automatically converted to a name and date. Thank you.

Contents

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On November 20, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Julius Garfinckel , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Howdy there Fred. Kindly nominated by Daniel. Do feel to self nom in future Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mae Day

Thanks for the detailed proof that Mae West was born in 1893! As a West fan, I'm tired of both the insistence she was born in 1892 and the idiotic gossip she was born several years before that!! One of these days somebody is going to claim she was 60 when she made her first film. (206.124.207.102 18 Feb 2006)

[edit] More Joan Crawford

Thank you for tidying up some of the areas in the Joan Crawford page that I missed. It all looks great. I wonder how long before someone changes it. regards Rossrs 11:04, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Joan Crawford's age

Is she 100? Hi Fred,

I'm interested in the murky issue of Joan Crawford's date of birth, and notice that you've recently changed it to 1906. On what basis do you make that change? I'm just interested to know if you might have found something useful in that regard.

It's an odd situation and various sources have different dates.

  • The book Joan Crawford: The Last Word by Fred Lawrence Guiles ISBN 1857932684 gives 1905 based on his "research" though he doesn't define what his "research" was.
  • Joan Crawford at the Internet Movie Database gives 1904.
  • Genealogy Mag article assumes birth date to be 1905 based on young Lucille LeSueur being aged 5 in a 1910 census.
  • Same article as above quotes Charles Kidd, in Debrett Goes to Hollywood, saying Lucille was probably born in 1904.
  • Standard Times online quotes author Karen Swenson, who is researching for a Joan Crawford biography, as saying she believes Crawford was born in 1904 based on the timing of Crawford's birth in relation to other events which can be somewhat more easily verified. (Also states San Angelo as a more likely place of birth than San Antonio).
  • Carl Johnes who knew Crawford and wrote about her after her death says that San Antonio did not keep birth records until 1908 - Crawford chose 1908 as her official year of birth simply because it was the earliest birth she could claim based on the fact that birth records did not exist. He says he date of birth could be anywhere between 1904 and 1908 depending on who you believe.

I find it all interesting and a bit of a mystery - not a solveable one probably - and now 1906 is thrown into the mix, so I'm just curious. I'll put this in the Joan Crawford talk page also in case anyone else can shed some light.

Perhaps the article should not attempt to provide a definitive birth date, but perhaps say c. 190- (whatever shows to be the most substantiated date) with perhaps a sentence or two about the doubt about the date. What do you think?

regards Rossrs 09:46, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Promoted to glory

Using this phrase for death is a clear breach of Wikipedia's neutrality policy so I have removed it. The articles should be written in neutral language for everyone, not specially phrased to suit the preferences of a particular group. If you feel it is essential to mention this concept in each article I suppose it would be acceptable to write "X died at the age of XX. (within the Salvation Army the death of a Salvationist is known as being Promoted to Glory. ). 82.35.34.11 22:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Interested in an L.A.-area Wiki meetup?

It appears as though L.A. has never had a Wiki meetup. Would you be interested in attending such an event? If so, checkout User:Eric Shalov/Wikimeetup.

- Eric 06:23, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Summaries

When editing articles, please fill out the summary. Especially if you delete information, you should explain why. Even if it's just "copyedit" or "sort categories".......something. Thanks. Cburnett 17:14, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Revert Beverly Hillbilies

Hello, why did you revert my additions to The Beverly Hillbillies? --Bubba73 02:52, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] La Tierney

Good work on Gene Tierney -- what a wonderful actress! By chance I watched several of her films recently. Laura of course, and Night and the City, but I particularly liked her in Where the Sidewalk Ends. Cheers, -- Viajero | Talk 17:35, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Riverboat pix

On 'my browser the Riverboat article edit that I "reverted" (to your consternation, actually these were resized smaller) shows all images neatly to the right in a vertical stack. It sounds like this is not the case with your browser, as you indicate the images are bunched at the top. I use Safari on the Mac and have no problem with a number of other browsers. If this is not working correctly for you this might indicate a Wiki problem. Answer here, I will watch, or post this and your answer to my page. Best wishes, Leonard G. 04:57, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Could you provide me with a 4:1 reduced jpeg of a screen shot of the layout you see? Also, the browser and OS. You may e-mail this as an attachment to my e-mail address which I will send to you via the user contact e-mail (WP does not allow attachments). I will send you what I see. This sounds like a serious problem. To get the page use the article history or to select edit of 06:53, 16 May 2005 or use the link [1].

[edit] Mary Astor

Hello Fred, I just wanted to congratulate on the fine job you've done on the Mary Astor article. I started it quite a while ago, and I'm delighted to see what a strong and comprehensive article it has become. I think it has the makings of a Featured Article - well done!! Rossrs 10:03, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Westcliff?

Hi Fred- I'm guessing by your edits that you also live in Westcliff-on-Sea? Well so do I, not far from Hamlet Court Road... anyway, just thought I'd say hello to a fellow Westcliffian... I do the website for the allotments in Westcliff BTW, wlcs maybe we've met? Do you drink in the Hamlet Court or Spread Eagle?? cheers quercus robur 02:15, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] Spelling out IMDb/IBDB

Hi -- regarding the external links in Jayne Mansfield ("IMDb" vs. "Internet Movie Database"/"IBDB" vs. "Internet Broadway Database"), I think it's more helpful to users if they can immediately tell from a link where it leads. If a user doesn't know what "IMDb" or "IBDB" mean, they are unlikely to follow the links just to find out. Tregoweth 22:04, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Section headings

I note that you have been changing headings in various places to capitalize each word, as in "Section Heading". This is contrary to [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style {headings)]]. I haven't taken the time to search out every place where you have made such changes, but it would be nice if you would not do this, so that we can maintain a reasonably consistent style. --Michael Snow 20:03, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Weissmuller

Hi Fred, I added some notes on the Talk page of the Johnny Weissmuller article, regarding your and my recent edits. Please have look, Jeronimo 06:50, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hello "FredR" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

[edit] Ramona

Hi, I probably should have notified you some time ago, but I've nominated an article you started, Ramona for good article status. The GA review is taking place now and if you're interested in helping out, come on down to Talk:Ramona. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page moves

When you want to move a page, please follow the guidelines at WP:MOVE. "Cut and paste" moves leave the editing history behind. Also, it's important to check for double redirects after a page move. Anyway, you're doing great otherwise, thanks for contributing. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 19:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for References

I noticed that you just added a lot of information to the Jaclyn Reding article and was wondering where you got it. The information that you added really needs to be cited, especially because the information has been removed before. e.g. the name "Jaclyn Adamowicz" has been removed due to lack of references. So if you could add some links, the book that you got it from, or an interview you got it from that would be great, thanks. --ImmortalGoddezz 16:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter if you can attest to it or not, but it needs to be referenced in the article. Romancewiki is not a reliable source and when googling "Jacyln Adamowicz" only 4 unique results turn up; one of which is romance wiki, two spanish sites where the information has been taken from wikipedia and one is another foreign language site of which I am not familiar. Which is why I am concerned about where the information has come from. Wikipedia:Citing sources is a good place to start when citing sources, templates can be found here Wikipedia:Citation templates. Information on what is verifiable and what is a reliable source can be found at each link. I would also recommend that you take a look at the policy on no original research, this is one of the reasons why citation is so important so if you can please add your citations to the article it would be appreciated. Thank you. --ImmortalGoddezz 19:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where footnotes go

If you're working on an existing article that consistently uses the convention that footnotes go immediately after punctuation with no intervening spaces — such as Hugh E. Rodham did before your changes — please do not change the convention, and please do not change some of the footnotes to go before the punctuation, or to have added intervening spaces. It just degrades the appearance and consistency of the article, to no useful end. Thanks. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jaclyn Reding

I noticed that you reinstated information on the author, Jaclyn Reding that had been removed. I have reverted your edit because none of the information can be verified by a reliable source, and seems to be original research. As the original research policy states 'Facts must be backed by citations to reliable sources that contain these facts' Ancestry.com is of dubious reliability and your use of USsearch is original research. Added to those two things I cannot find any reliable source that says that Jacyln Reding has gone by the name Jaclyn Adamowicz. The ancestry of Reding needs to be published in a reliable secondary source before the information is added back to the article. I hope this makes sense and helps you with future editing. --ImmortalGoddezz 20:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

Hi FredR, I have noted that your contributions recently to the Anna May Wong article have introduced new elements which have been beneficial. The one comment that I would like to make is that major changes should appear on the talk page, either before, during or after the revision (most useful is before, of course) and that any edit should be accompanied by an edit summary, regardless of how brief. I have copywrited "tweak" as my very quick note, but I can lease it to you for a nominal fee. Jest kiddin' as I know you are an experienced writer and editor, but edit comments and talk discussion are essential for other editors to see the direction you are going. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Anna May Wong

You deserve a chocolate chip cookie!
You deserve a chocolate chip cookie!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC).