Talk:Brighella

Theatre Low‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

I think whoever wrote this article didn't do much research. Especially where it says Brighella's plans were "foiled by their own ineptitude." Quite the contrary -- Brighella's plans traditionally are very workable and clever, and it's usually luck alone that will cause them to be foiled. I think in a day or two I will expand this article a little, and I expect that if no one has objections or evidence for me, I'll take out that line while I'm at it. --Sobekneferu 07:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know who it was that apparently changed Fenocchio to 'Ben' or why that happened, but I fixed it. If there is a character with similar traits to Fenocchio who is named Ben, Duchartre didn't mention him, and there would be no reason to remove Fenocchio from the list.--68.35.94.119 23:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was most likely vandalism. It happens. It's just up to us to act as custodians of the articles. Thanks for being the one to catch this time.IanThal 23:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scapino

There seems to be enough material on the character of Scapino to justify either a separate section or even a separate article. What do people think?IanThal 19:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think Scapino well merits his own article (but then again, I'm the one who wrote his article, so...) Still, I think there is enough information to make him separate -- especially if someone's willing to sit down and really do an hour or two of research! -- and certainly there are more minor characters than poor Scapin on Wikipedia who get their own articles without complaint. --Sobekneferu 22:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now, does anyone else think it strange that someone appears to have copy/pasted Scapino's article right into the middle of Brighella's? I can't seem to get rid of it, but it shouldn't be there, and especially not as long as Scapino's separate article still stands.--Sobekneferu 22:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Once again, here I am -- I fixed it. --Sobekneferu 22:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brighella. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 13:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Illiterate

Illiterate article. Very macaronic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.154.93 (talk) 16:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]