Talk:Look-alike

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Espionage Low‑importance

	Look-alike is within the scope of WikiProject Espionage, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of espionage, intelligence, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.EspionageWikipedia:WikiProject EspionageTemplate:WikiProject EspionageEspionage articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conan

There was a guy on The Today Show who looked exactly like Conan O'Brien. He even turned up on Conan's show later on. I can't remember his name, though. Any help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.30.150.195 (talk) 04:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stalin

Gelovani was not a look-alike of Stalin, he didn't look similar to Stalin, he was only an actor.

The employed look-alike of Stalin was Jewsej Lubizki.

The assassination of Bill Gates

Hyperlinked text on this page for the film The Assassination of Bill Gates leads nowhere. It should be a link to the film Nothing So Strange.

Merge Look alike contest?

Should Look alike contest be merged into this article? ZueJay (talk) 19:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial entry?

The Internationally recognised^{[citation needed]}, non-profit exclusive membership organisation www.lookalikes-unite.com represents, supports and assists the highest quality celebrity impersonators and is a highly reliable and independent source of information and reference for professional tribute acts and those interested in this niche area of the entertainment industry.^{[original research?]}

Material above moved from article for discussion. Seems quite commercially oriented to me. WBardwin 03:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saddam Hussein's 2008 Interview

I'm pretty sure that Saddam Hussein could not possibly have been interviewed in January 2008, you know, on account of his being dead since 2006. The danger of editing wikipedia is not blatantly false, ridiculous statements but the seemingly factual ones that don't automatically stand out unless read in full. Is there any way of automatically cross-checking this with other wikipedia entries to see if the information is in line? That way the chance of factual accuracy is increased (or decreased, I suppose, if people are determined enough!)

The interviews with Saddam Hussein were conducted prior to his execution, and no one ever claimed the contrary. Nihil novi (talk) 01:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Along the lines of Saddam Hussein and ridiculous statements, there is no need for a section on his son Uday as there is no verifiable evidence Uday ever used look-alikes, in fact there is more evidence to the contrary. The only claim is made by one person who is personally profiting from selling the story.

Trickietrickie 17:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do we need the Kjell Elvis image?

I think that the images of Elvis Presley & Kjell Elvis are too dominating, while not too well illustrating the topic. On the other hand, Kjell Elvis might be one of the better known Elvis impersonators in Europe; still I think he is hardly known outside of Scandinavia, and those images rather serve as advertisement for him than anything else. So wouldn't it be better to take those images out? --KnightMove (talk) 11:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There is already a section dedicated to Elvis impersonators. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 02:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. There is a major difference between 'impersonators', and 'look-alikes'. Elvis impersonators wear a wig, signature glasses, and the resemblance of his costume, and usually entertain captive audience. Look-alikes, on the other hand, can be mistaken for the real thing on the street, and don't have to be famous, nor do they have to be performing. Kjell Elvis is a look-alike first and foremost, and the resemblance is striking. There is no problem having such rare illustration in here. Poeticbent talk 06:25, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with KnightMove. Placed at the top of the page as they are now, the real Elvis and his Scandinavian look-alike are "too dominating". Particularly as the article deals not only with live look-alikes but also with literary and filmic ones and a couple of other kinds. I can just about stomach Elvis and his double, if put in their proper place within the "Real life" section. Having them stick out above the entire article, like some sort of Colossus of Rhodes, seems a bit much. A modicum of modesty on the Elvises' part would be highly desirable; not every Wikipedia reader is necessarily a great fan of Elvis.

Also, it would seem appropriate to have the Elvis duo follow their chronological predecessors, Field Marshal Montgomery and his double.

Thanks.

Nihil novi (talk) 08:52, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We don't really have a choice of an alternative image for the infobox at this point in time. Field Marshal Montgomery's double doesn't look like him anatomically, and the uniform alone can't make up for the lack of striking resemblance. Please look around for any two other photographs in Commons as a suitable replacement for Elvis. I would love to see them. Poeticbent talk 14:35, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Looking like" someone isn't limited to being someone's identical twin. Facial expressions, behaviors, etc., can also enter into the picture.

During World War II, someone obviously felt that Clifton James came close enough to Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery to qualify as a stand-in.

In any case, my main concern would be to move the Elvises down into the "Real life" section, where they belong.

Nihil novi (talk) 21:54, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Look-alike

Hello,
I notice your revert of my edit here and invite you to reconsider. Those entries provide nothing of interest to the reader, as they are all already mentioned in the "Literature" section above. They therefore tell us nothing beyond that those particular works have also been made into films. Of course, both a work of literature and its film adaptation may be listed, but only if the film importantly elaborates on its source material, which does not seem to be the case with any of the entries here. You may not agree with my content removal, but surely removing information which is effectively stated twice is at least not "incomprehensible".

Thank you. Citizen Canine (talk) 11:47, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, if you found my edit-summary wording hurtful. Your "Film"-section deletions would have frustrated readers interested in films that featured look-alikes. That was why I found those deletions difficult to understand. I hope you understand my motivation in restoring them.

Regards, Nihil novi (talk) 03:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]