Talk:Cornel Wilde

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Columbia University WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Columbia University, her schools, environs, and people. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

Start

This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] Wilde's date of birth

IMDB lists Wilde's date of birth as 1915, not 1912 as in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgreenbook (talk • contribs) 20:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IMDb as a source

I've removed a citation that directed to a trivia section for IMDb (regarding the movie The Naked Prey. IMDb can't be used as a source for trivia facts for movies because, evidently, it is not reliable. See this talk page for more info. If another source can be added, please re-add the citation. Pinkadelica (talk) 06:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] His birth name, and place of birth

German Wikipedia and various others sources say he was born "Kornel Weisz", in Prievidza, now in Slovakia, but at that time part of the Hungarian part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. And it also says that his family did not move to the USA till 1920, when he was 4 or 5. This seems to square with the US Census info, that also says he was born in Hungary. His father’s surname was Weisz, so it stands to reason that, no matter where he was born, he would have had the surname Weisz at birth, and "Cornelius Louis Wilde" came later, and "Cornel Wilde" later still. IMDB says he was born in Hungary, and that he was of Hungarian-Czech parentage. His mother's surname was Vojtech, a very common Czech or Slovak name. This all needs to be looked at and included as appropriate. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

If your claim is that the New York Times is incorrect, surely a suitable citation can be found. Otherwise, it is Original Research. IMDB's position is not relevant, it cannot be used as a source. Quatloo (talk) 01:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not claiming anything, simply reporting what other sources have said. I can't see why the IMDB note is not relevant. It may not prove to be accurate, but it certainly isn't original research. It deserves to be reported here. If it were the only source that said he was born outside the USA, I'd be a little sceptical, but it's far from the only source. I've added it as a footnote. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

IMDB does not qualify as a WP:Reliable source. If you do not have a reliable source for your claim, you should not include it in the article, especially if your intent is to contradict the New York Times. Quatloo (talk) 01:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Once again, it is not I who am claiming anything. I hold no brief for IMDB or any other source. I have no interest in contradicting the NYT or any other source. My sole interest is in ensuring we have a complete and accurate picture of this, or any other, subject of one of our articles. If a significant number of sources report him as having been born in Slovakia, including the German version of Wikipedia, I'm in no position to say they're wrong, or they're right. I take no position on that issue; I'm just interested in letting our readers know that there is a discrepancy in the public record about where he was born and what his birth name was. That's all. And that's all I've done. But since you keep on denying it, if IMDB doesn't qualify as a reliable source, why is it used as a source for virtually ALL the actors we have articles on, including Cornel Wilde? -- JackofOz (talk) 06:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

IMDB is generally listed as an external link, which is different from it being used as a source. No fact in Wikipedia should ever point to IMDB as a source. But IMDB can appear in the list of external links. Quatloo (talk) 09:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Is that an official policy or guideline, or your own personal position? Can you point me to where it says, or at least implies, we shouldn't use IMDB as a reliable source? -- JackofOz (talk) 11:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It is official policy.[1] Specifically, overwhelming consensus is that IMDB is not a reliable source[2]. I also recommend you read some of the hundreds of discussions exist on Wikipedia coming to this same conclusion[3]. Quatloo (talk) 11:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Quatloo. It all reads ok according to what you've said, except for "The Wikipedia community has rejected this proposal". I'm not sure how to interpret that in terms of using IMDB as a source. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The proposal was not rejected on any grounds that people feel IMDB is somehow reliable. It was rejected for other, more technocratic concerns. I only used the link to show you discussion of the subject. What you should do is use the Google link[4] and view the hundreds of other times this exact question has come up in Wikipedia, and gauge for yourself the overwhelming consensus of unreliability. Quoting from the policy link that I gave you, "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." After viewing the other links, you now know IMDB fails this requirement, and fails it spectacularly. Quatloo (talk) 05:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)