Talk:Jean-Eugène Robert-Houdin

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

Lack of discussion[edit]

why doesn't this article have a discussion? there is absolutely no discussion about this article -- i am sorely disappointed. παράδοξος Wikipedia might reveal truths παράδοξος 04:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More on Orange Tree[edit]

I want to know more about the Orange Tree, especially after seeing The Illusionist. Gautam Discuss 10:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to try this page: http://www.automates-anciens.com/english_version/automatons-music-boxes/robert-houdin-automatons.php . There's a paragraph about the Orange Tree. Onaryc 01:37, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert-Houdin and the Arabs[edit]

This article isn't very clear about what R-H was supposed to do in Algeria. Was he sent there to impress the arabs by showing that he was a powerful magician, more powerful that the local mullahs, and so help the french government scare the Arabs into submission, or was he supposed to expose the mullahs by showing the Arabs that the mullahs had no real magical powers and it was all about tricks that anybody could perform, even a european? The french Wikipedia article is very clear that it is the latter, the english article is not. (Another difference is, in the french article, it is not mullahs that R-H was asked to expose, but marabouts). Found in one of R-H's books on line: "The blow was struck: henceforth the interpreters and all those who had dealings with the Arabs received orders to make them understand that my pretended miracles were only the result of skill, inspired and guided by an art called prestidigitation, in no way connected with sorcery. The Arabs doubtless yielded to these arguments, for henceforth I was on the most friendly terms with them." 

Onaryc 11:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense[edit]

The lead is full of crap. "Conjuring" isn't real, so "the father of the modern style of conjuring" is a nonsensical statement. It's like saying that I'm the "father of the modern style of levitation" or that your mom is the "mother of the modern style of teleportation". — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 08:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What else do you want to call it?[edit]

Since this is an article about conjuring, what else would like to call it? Of course he is no more a magician than Robert Downey Jr. is Sherlock Holmes. But, since that was the role of his last movie, you have to call it what it is. The same in magic. Of course it's just pretend, but that's part of the art of magic. You don't refer it to conjuring or magic, then people won't know what you are talking about.

mtpascoe12:01 24 March 2010 {PST} —Preceding undated comment added 07:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Section restored but needs work[edit]

I noticed that a section was removed in March 2009 and never restored. I just restored it but it needs work to reintegrate it into the article. I'm going to alert one of the editors of this article and see what can be sourced. Carcharoth (talk) 11:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carcharoth, I've looked at the history, and your changes in particular. I saw only one line of vandalism and the deletion of some text. Your changes look perfect to me. Please be more specific about "...needs work to reintegrate it into the article," because I have no idea what the problem is. The original text (which was restored by your changes) looks fine to me. I agree that many of the statements need sourcing, but I don't have the requisite knowledge to know what the sources might be. In this case, I wouldn't trust Web searches to turn up good sources. Physical books would more likely contain reliable information. I'm sure the article as it stands contains minor errors and is incomplete, but that's the nature of WP--it's always improving. David Spector (talk) 15:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah you are right. Copying part of what I've said on your talk page:

"The wording of parts of that section is present in very early versions of the article, dating back 7 years. See here for example (that is the fifth edit to the article, in 2003). My concern is that the section was removed by a vandal and was missing for a year. The article was extensively edited during that year, so re-adding the section as I have done felt wrong, so I was hoping someone could take the missing section and integrate with the work done over the past year (which seems to have been a mixture of people)."

I'll ask Kingturtle if he would like to look at this article 7 years later! Carcharoth (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I should be asking Mtpascoe. I think he wrote the article from French sources or something. I will leave him a note about this and see if he can help. Carcharoth (talk) 20:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let me do some checking, but I should have all of the sources from when I expanded this article. It will take me some time, but I will get on it because this magician is an important person in the magic community. User:Mtpascoe (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2010 (PST)
Thank-you. I've been interested in the story of this person ever since I took the photos in Blois outside the museum (and watched a bit of the 'dragon display'. I regret not visiting the museum and I would do so if I was ever in the area again. Carcharoth (talk) 03:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

French translation[edit]

In part, some small sections. Those portions are an interpretation. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:05, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Controversy[edit]

It seems that the people who wrote the page has failed to read Houdini's biography about him. Now, despite the fact that it's used as a reference in the article, it turns out that the book is actually an exposé about the fact that Robert-Houdin was a total fraud, and how all of his illusions, from the Orange Tree to the mini Bakery, were all stolen from other magicians. This information would seem to be pretty important, and potentially throws his entire legacy out the window! This is something that should be discussed for this page. Obviously I don't want to suggest it needs to be rewritten, but I strongly urge people to actually read Houdini's discovery about his "hero". I think the man who named himself after him might be on to something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DullJake (talk • contribs) 02:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jean Eugène Robert-Houdin. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 01:59, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 December 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: MOved  — Amakuru (talk) 13:22, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Jean Eugène Robert-Houdin → Jean-Eugène Robert-Houdin – his forenames appear to be more consistently hyphenated than with a space Olivia comet (talk) 15:25, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. I see nothing objectionable about this proposal. BD2412 T 04:14, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jean-Eugène_Robert-Houdin&oldid=1194967886"