Talk:Édith Piaf
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Accent
Isn't it a bit precious to use "É" all the way through? Accents are usually omitted from capital letters in French; one can use them, but why do it here? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:36, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
- Here in the English Wikipedia, I think it makes sense to use the same spelling as in the French. Your question is still valid for the French article, though. (I wonder if my local library has a French paper encyclopedia?) Abu ari 08:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Death
Where should technical errors like the date of Edith Piaf's death being reported as the 10th at the top of the page and the 11th further down in the text be reported? I have similar errors on many pages and would like to let someone know about them. User Alan S12:10, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- They shouldn't be reported but corrected (that's the beauty of Wikipedia). Where you notice a discrepancy but don't know which is the correct version, a note like the one above on the relevant Talk page will do. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Song
Wendy McNeill does a fabulous song (http://zed.cbc.ca/go?c=contentPage&CONTENT_ID=121650) about Edith Piaf. Kind of summarizes a lot of her life. FireWorks 20:31, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Dear Editors of Wikipedia
I would appreciate your sending me information about where you obtained the biographical information for Edith Piaf on the Wikipedia website.
It is my understanding that Edith Piaf's real name is actually: Edith Annette Gisson Holliday. I do not believe that the name Gassion as listed on your website and a fake website with her grave marker is accurate. Also,I do not believe that Edith Piaf was Italian as some of the surnames you have listed would imply. Further, I do not believe that Edith Piaf is related to a circus performer or a madame of a bordello.
I heard a rumor recently that Senator John Warner wrote a Fake biography about Edith Piaf since he is making money selling her recordings. I am still investigating how Senator Warner is related to Edith Piaf and how he accessed Edith Piaf's recordings to sell after 1945 when there are people that have said Edith Piaf was actually killed during WWII by the Nazis because of her Jewish heritage the fact that she was related to French and Belgian royalty. One would wonder how Senator Warner left WWII in 1945 with Edith Piaf recordings in tow if Edith Piaf lived beyond WWII.
- Paline HollidayEarpCarroll Brown
- Note written 7 months later: The above fascinatingly bizarre opinion was written in January 2006. Apparently, everybody was stunned into silence by its content, since it never got any response, at least not on this page. (John Warner?!?!?) - DavidWBrooks 22:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] La Vie en Rose
I recently created an article for La Vie en Rose, so any contributions from people with knowledge about Edith's signature song would be appreciated - AKeen 16:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Clean this article up!
It's pretty messy and unprofessional at the moment. Let's clean it up already.
Mark 23:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion
The entirety of this article was deleted, without comment, due to alleged copyright violation a few days ago. It seems absurd to have nothing more than "a French singer" for possibly the most famous French chanteuse. I have supplied a translation, more or less bad, of the Piaf article at the French Wikipedia. But I think that some discussion would be warranted before yanking an entire article. RandomCritic 21:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. Well, the article was not "deleted", just marked as a possible copyvio (all the previous revisions are still there and could be restored). It's not excluded (though IMHO unlikely) that the issue is the other way round: the site that I spotted has actually copied from Wikipedia. In any case I guess we had to wait a few days before rewriting the whole content, just to be sure. Please, consider that the page is still listed here:
- In any case I just followed the "canonical" procedure.
- Believe me, I was really disappointed for my "discovery".
- --Gennaro Prota 01:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Not my fault. That's someone who doesn't read what he has in front of his eyes.
- Here you still keep some courtesy. There must have been something which made you lose your temper between writing this and the next paragraphs. But it was not me.
- Don't be offended but you seem very unfamiliar with Wikipedia procedures. Yes, I forgot to add the link as an argument to the copyvio template (because I was in a hurry and because I'm quite new here —this is my first possible-copyvio tagging), but the link is anyway here:
- (if someone provides a link and wastes time for that, please be gentle enough to take it a look)
- I didn't draw conclusions. Rather you jumped the gun. I was investigating yesterday (sorry for not being able to do that *immediately*, boss; I'll ask my company to give me more spare time) and found that the first version which comes close to the one at
- is revision as of 04:56, 16 November 2003
- That comforted me as the site reports "©2004–present EdithPiaf.com" so it is very likely older.
- Yes. As I said, sorry for not working 24 hours a day here.
- Your main misunderstanding is that I made an assertion of copyright violation. I just made a report of possible copyright violation. You seem also very unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies and with Wikiquette. Please take a look at that. And remember we are all here for the same reason. No need to bite.
- The point is that you, by honest mistake, replaced a good article with a copyright violation notice. The effect of your report was to make the article inaccessible by normal search. Of course it was still in the history, but that is not where one would expect to look for it. Furthermore, people are inclined to assume that copyright violation notices are not only made in good faith (which I don't question) but based on solid information. I would only ask that you refrain from making your "reports" in the future before you have solid evidence that a violation has occurred (e.g., if you yourself are the copyright holder). RandomCritic 13:31, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand your nick now :-(
--Gennaro Prota 12:25, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't mind if the article is reverted to the last pre-copyvio form, but I should note that there is a little information in the French article which could be incorporated; for instance, it clears up the October 10/October 11 death date question. RandomCritic 05:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Films
There's a section with films without any explanation. Did she act in them or are they about her? AxelBoldt 07:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- I wondered this myself. I would say they are about her but I didn't check the full list (I would not exclude that some of them just feature some of her famous songs in their soundtrack). I have worked on this article but then lost interest. I have seen you did a nice work with the section titles. If you continue on this track I guess that will incentive me to join again :) —Gennaro Prota•Talk 14:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Piaf appeared in all of them except "Edith et Marcel" which is about her. It seems that "Al diavolo la celebritá" was included erroneously, so I've deleted it. RandomCritic 20:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- Probably because Marcel Cerdan appears in it. —Gennaro Prota•Talk 20:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandals
someone obviously vandalized the article: From the age of three to seven she was blind, and from eight to fourteen she was deaf and suffered from severe Androgenetic alopecia. According to Piaf's biography David Beckham - Mein Kampf,
anyone can change that? Wathiik 07:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)