Talk:Cary Grant

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition A debonair Hollywood legend (1904 - 1986) who appeared in 72 films between the 1930s and 1960s. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Visual Arts [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant Not specified

Where did this article come from? Is it an outside source? Matt Innis (Talk) 19:26, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

Heck no. I write every word of everything I write. This is an adaptation from some pages from my Howard Hughes biography (yet unpublished). But thank you for asking. Does that mean this is good?Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 19:36, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Well, yes it is good, but please don't mistake our honorable motives. All we ask is that anything that is copied or transferred from an external source be referenced correctly (if it is indeed the case); in the event that something comes from WP, there is a flag that can be set appropriately. But I assume that neither is the case, Mr Bernstein ;). --Robert W King 19:38, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Robert, just so you know, I would rather eat my own fingers than take an article from WP. haha, but TRUE. If I never see that site again, I'll be a happy man.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 19:41, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
And for the record, never in my life will I ever be accused of plagiarism. It's not who I am. My literary agent at Artellus is selling some of my books; I guess I'm a good writer. :)Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 19:43, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Perish the thought! Incidently, you did mention that it is adapted from your upcoming biography on H. H.; do you think that it would be advisable to reference the source once it becomes available? It's somewhat unusual ground I am not familiar with (in terms of CZ's guidelines); essentially I'm only looking to make sure that everyone CYAs for potential future legal reasons... --Robert W King 19:51, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
It also just occurred to me that we do have a Topic Information Workgroup, and I'm wondering if you should be a part of it considering. I think Matt or Stephen Ewen might provide more background. --Robert W King 19:57, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Oh, man, I just wrote a long reply and then it got lost. WELL, here goes again. The Hughes book is not going to be forthcoming until I cut at least a 1,000 pages out of it, and so most if not virtually all of what is here will probably be out of the final draft. And I have six books that can come out before the Hughes (which I won't even get to for at least a year or so), so by the time the Hughes IS ready -- say, four or five years -- I am sure CZ will have everything sorted out about this and that. But thank you for bringing it to my attention. I'll bear it all in mind. Because I AM rooting through my backlog of writings; this is why I am able to post stuff so quickly here. I have been writing full-time since 1996. So I have a lot of pages hanging around. Tee hee. I already have an article on World's Fairs which I am about to begin to enter . . . Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 20:00, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

Topic Informant

Topic information workgroup? You mean, so I learn how to deal with the article once it is done?Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 20:02, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

Well, for example, if I were famous and an author here I wouldn't be allowed to write an article about myself, but I can be a topic informant should anyone choose to write about me. See Larry Sanger for reference. I don't know if this pertains to only self-referencial articles. Because you're publishing books on the topics that you're also contributing articles to, I would think that you might quality to be one, but I'm not 100% positive. Actually if you want to leave a message on the talk pages of either Matt or Stephen, or even Dr Sanger, I'm sure they would be able to clarify.
Okay, I'll do it now. Thanks!Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 20:11, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
The topic informant group is exactly as Robert describes it above. If the article were about *you* or your works then you would become a topic informant. This would mean that you cannot write the article yourself, but instead you write a page that others can use as a reference. They can choose to use it or not. In this case, it's not necessary, but if Cary Grant were alive, he would become the topic informant. Also, if this article were about you or your work about Cary Grant, then you would be a topic informant.
It seems that at this point you are an author. Once you choose the proper workgroup that this article is in, then an editor can take a look and decide if the article is accurate enough to go through our CZ:Approval process. So keep going! Matt Innis (Talk) 20:33, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
I'm going! I'm about to input an article I wrote on the Korean War. It's a first stab, but since there's nothing here yet, what the heck, right? Thanks for your help!Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 20:38, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Having written books about a subject absolutely does not, in itself, qualify one to be a topic informant about the subject. A topic informant is so designated for both of two reasons: (1) the person has special, first-hand knowledge of a person, company, or other thing with interests, and can serve as an original source about it; (2) for the same reason, the person has an inherent potential conflict of interest in writing about that subject. Writing many books and doing much research usually does not give one any special first-hand experience of the subject. It merely makes one an expert and thus a candidate for editorship, not for being a topic informant. See CZ:Policy on Topic Informants. A borderline case is Hayford writing about his father.  :-) --Larry Sanger 21:27, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Thanks for the clarification! --Robert W King 21:30, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Haha, yes, indeed, Dr. Sanger. Hence, I may have NO idea what I'm writing about. Haha. So it goes.Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 21:31, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

I think the metadata page is jacked up.