Talk:Arthur Hiller

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date format[edit]

TRM, I don't believe the d-m-y format is correct for this bio. I found no sources that used it, including Canada's CBC and Globe and Mail. Do you mind changing it back via script? --Light show (talk) 05:21, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement ideas[edit]

I think it's unusual for a bio to be considered "well-written" by one editor and "shitty" by another, as in the ITN candidate section. Any specific improvement ideas might therefore be helpful. --Light show (talk) 06:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Date of Birth[edit]

He was born on November 22, 1923 according to a lot of sources, he was born 10 days after his wife of 68 years who's birthday was on November 12, 1923 who also died on June 24, 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.64.217.66 (talk) 15:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That 10-day fact is confirmed by the Hollywood Reporter. --Light show (talk) 04:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was he born on November 13 or November 22?[edit]

It appears there is some disagreement on his date of birth. The NY Times claims he was born on 11/13/1923, whilst the LA Times and Film Reference give his DOB as 11/22/1923. For the time being, until we could potentially obtain some concrete information, I have created an admittedly ugly workaround — listing both in the lede and only giving a month in the IB as well as the body.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 02:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think just listing the month in the lede and both in the body, with possibly an endnote might be a better option (less cluttered). Connormah (talk) 03:27, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'd vote to keep it on the 22nd, which is cited by the Los Angeles Times, closer to Hollywood. Another factor is that the NY Times article was apparently rushed, since their top image originally had a totally mislabeled caption. It was a really silly error, which implies a higher likelihood that their research on the date might not have been great. Unless we have other sources with the 13th, I'd just skip the NYT source for now and use the 22nd. --Light show (talk) 04:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just checked Katz's The Film Encyclopedia (Collins Reference) which uses the 22nd. --Light show (talk) 04:40, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Light show: Would you be willing to provide some specific citation information (reference template stuff) for the encyclopedia, in case we can use it as a reference?--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 05:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I've got the book. -Light show (talk) 05:32, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know. --Light show (talk) 05:51, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Light show: If it's alright with you and everyone else, I think we can switch to 11/22. Please send me the reference data for the encyclopedia reference so we can have an additional source.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 06:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We could simply have a note stating the NY Times's dob. --Light show (talk) 04:59, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
While we discuss this, I have replaced the cluttered lede with an endnote, per Connormah's suggestion.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 05:04, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But if there is only one single source that uses the 13th, as opposed to the others cited, why not simply have the lead and infobox look complete? It looks strange as it is. We can just add a note to the NY Times date. --Light show (talk) 05:30, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, The Guardian also lists 11/13 as the DOB.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 06:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hiller stated during an interview that he was born on the 22nd. I suggest we just use the interviewers, Emmytvlegends.org, as the DOB source and remove all the newspaper cites, at least for the DOB part. --Light show (talk) 17:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arthur Hiller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arthur_Hiller&oldid=1207528270"