Talk:Martin Scorsese/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Photos

Doesn't seem redundant to have what essentially the same photo --or photo session event placed on this article? --leahtwosaints (talk) 05:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Golden Globes on Filmography

I think we should add them.

Rapist Roman Polanski

Unfortunately, it appears that Scorsese is supporting the child rapist Roman Polanski, does anyone else feel that this fact should be included in his wiki page? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6854480.ece —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.59.123.139 (talk) 21:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

PS: Before anyone rages on about using the term "rapist", please be aware that he (Roman Polanski) has testified before court to sodomizing a 13 y.o. girl without her consent. 151.59.123.139 (talk) 21:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Im new to wikipedia, but I think this information is important and should be added (He signed the petition, which is a public declaration of support). --IGraywolf (talk) 19:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

This is something that has been discussed over and over on nearly every article on Wikipedia where the subject signed the petition. First of all, the petition was not a public declaration of support for Polanski. It was a public protest against the manner and circumstances under which he was arrested. Secondly, actors and directors frequently sign various public petitions in order to bring publicity to an event or incident. An encyclopedia does not routinely mention each and every petition or letter signed by an article subject. It is not an action that has any bearing on the notability or biography of the article subject. If any encyclopdia were to focus on only one petition or letter that was signed, it puts undue weight on one single signature. Considering that most people do not seem to understand the intent and content of the petition, what would be added, and what has repeatedly been removed from the article is inaccurate and therefore inappropriate. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:09, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

To add to this (and I agree with Wildhartlivie) - the document was signed by a couple of hundred people, and it would not be appropriate to add this to each of their biographical articles. To highlight only a relative few people such as Scorsese would also place undue weight on this person, bearing in mind that his signature carried no more weight than any of the others. This particular petition is only of interest because the case is currently in the news, but taken within the context of Scorsese's entire life and his beliefs on a range of issues, it is of little importance. I think it's also important to note what has been implied in previous edits, and what has been stated clearly in edit summaries and talk page summaries in this, and other, articles : some editors have taken the view that the petition shows "Hollywood supports child rape", but the document makes no mention of the crime of which Polanski is accused, nor does it personally endorse Polanski. All it does is say that they disagree with the legal and political process that led to Polanski's arrest. That's entirely another thing, but unfortunately several of the editors who have tried to force this point into a number of articles, seem not interested in what the document actually says. Look at the original comment here : "Scorsese is supporting the child rapist Roman Polanski." I question the intent of the editor that made that comment. I have no idea if the editor has read the document, or has only seen a news article naming Scorsese as one of the signatories. I see nothing in Scorsese's actions to indicate that he supports a rapist; his signature challenges the validity of the process that led to the arrest of an individual, and the individual happens to be Roman Polanski. When we start to inaccurately assess a person on the basis of a document they have signed, or try to smear or label them, it then becomes a major problem under our biography of living persons policy. Rossrs (talk) 00:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Improper category

He is not an Italian, he is Sicilian, he should be listed as Sicilian, not Italian, because Sicilians are not only not Italians, they are not even Europeans, they are mostly Moors and Turks. --

First of all, he is not Italian, he's AMERICAN. Second, Sicilians ARE Italians AND European since Sicily is part of Italy, and Italy is part of...? Yes, Europe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.48.233.229 (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Non sequitor

Under "early career" we have:

"Although the Vietnam War had started at the time, Scorsese (who had struggled with asthma since his childhood[7]) did not serve in the military."

Surely a lot of guys didn't serve, if they weren't drafted. OK, the asthma bit may explain why he may have been rejected if he did get drafted, but it seems that this is presented in an veiled judgmental manner. They is no reference, for example, to why Sylvester Stallone didn't serve on his page. Nick Cooper (talk) 14:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Best-of-decade list

Apparently Martin Scorsese made a list of his favorites of the decade. Does anyone have a link to it? 207.255.127.59 (talk) 01:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Changing Favourite to Favorite

I felt that the spelling of favourite in Age of Innocence article should be changed to favorite because Martin Scorcese is from New York, not the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.201.51.130 (talk) 18:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Religion?!

• To me something incredible appeals. An italian catholic directs a film "In Shutter" wherein the buddhists are the doctors and the catholics, edward "teddy" especially, are the mads.

So which religion is mr. scorsese one?!--188.100.203.218 (talk) 13:46, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

"Iris" as homage to 1920s silent cinema?

This bullet point is under "Director trademarks" in the article:

Sometimes highlights characters in a scene with an iris, an homage to 1920s silent film cinema (as scenes at the time sometimes used this transition). This effect can be seen in Casino (it is used on Sharon Stone and Joe Pesci), Life Lessons, and The Departed (on Matt Damon). Iris is also the name of Jodie Foster's character in Taxi Driver.

Is this supposed to be for real, or is it a joke? It's a joke, right? It's not actually positing that MS is honoring 1920s silent cinema in Casino (what's that connection?) or through Foster's name in Taxi? It is a joke, right? — HarringtonSmith (talk) 18:03, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Notice: if someone doesn't defend this bullet point, I will delete it. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 12:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Vittorio De Seta, not De Sica

The old guy near Marty and Salvo Cuccia is filmmaker Vittorio De Seta, not to be confused with Vittorio De Sica, passed away many years before —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.33.101.97 (talk) 16:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

middle name

When editing, at the top of the article it reads

Martin C. Scorsese<!-- please attach a definitive reliable source of some sort before changing middle name -->

Isn't IMDb credible enough? There, it says

Martin Marcantonio Luciano Scorsese,

with no middle name starting with the letter c to be found. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Update: Oops, should've seen the above. And while I don't consider Yahoo! Movies to be an authoritative and therefore suitable source, I'm of the opinion IMDb is, and I concur that Martin Marcantonio Luciano Scorsese is the name that should be used in the introduction and infobox. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 17:42, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't see any discussion of this in the talk archives. WP:RS/IMDB says that no, IMDB isn't reliable enough a source as it's written by volunteer editors, much like Wikipedia and their info isn't referenced. Up until 18 Jan 2010 the name listed in the Wikipedia article was Martin Marcantonio Luciano Scorsese. All Hallows Wraith found [[blacklisted].c1ty-d@ta.com/elec2/06/elec-NEW-YORK-NY-06-part9.html the political donations source], which gives Scorsese's middle name as Charles. Since then our article name has stayed 'Charles' or 'C'. No search on Google Books turn up 'Charles' as far as I can see. The New York Times, The Washington Post, a Scorsese biography and The Passion of Martin Scorsese: A Critical Study of the Films give his full name as Martin Marcantonio Luciano Scorsese. I would take these sources over the political donations listing. We could re-add 'Martin Marcantonio Luciano Scorsese' and if any other reliable sources for Charles come to light, we could reconsider.Span (talk) 23:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed – and great sources: two renowned newspapers and two published books, what more could possibly be needed?

(As for IMDb: As opposed to Wikipedia, IMDb has a "filter" in the form of staff manually checking submissions before clearing them, and while the system is far from perfect – I submit corrections rather regularly –, it still is of quite high quality in many instances and regards and de facto very likely already used heavily by Wikipedians, especially where filmographies are concerned. So I'm not sure the absolutist wording and tone of WP:RS/IMDb makes much sense anymore. But none of this matters here, since you invoke other, arguably much more suitable sources.) – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:55, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I re-added "Martin Marcantonio Luciano Scorsese" and refs. Few people seem to be enforcing any black listing of it as a source, though they seemed to try at one time. There is much here that goes on de facto that isn't a good idea. I would always favour the strongest sources possible; IMDb really isn't very strong. Enjoy the weekend. Best wishes Span (talk) 22:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

None of the sources you mentioned precede Wikipedia's mention of this as his name. They all obviously just copied it. I would trust Gary Boyd Roberts, a professional genealogist, who lists it as Charles. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Aside from that, California Divorce Records lists Martin C. Scorsese divorcing Laraine Brennan in 1972 (listed at ancestry.com). All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:53, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that just because a source comes later than a Wikipedia article it undermines the source. That would mean than any book, article or essay coming later than a WP mention is deemed unreliable. It is not an obvious deduction with Scorsese that they must have copied it from Wikipedia. The four sources are pretty strong, in terms of WP:RS, though arguably the legal sources are stronger. No books of Google Books' 59 000 references to Scorsese mention Charles. I think we can at least conclude that sources are at variance.Span (talk) 00:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The whole argument that his middle names are "Marcantonio Luciano" rests on sources that came after 2007. That means that if this was 2006, we wouldn't be having this conversation. A divorce record from 1972 is pretty definitive, as is a political donation listing. These are the types of primary documents that would actually have accurate information about someone's name. Aside from that, how many genealogists out there have their own Wikipedia page? Gary Boyd Roberts does, and he lists his middle name as "Charles". Who better to know this kind of information than a professional genealogist? All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 00:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

"Luciano" was added to the entry on July 26, 2006 by 205.188.116.132, a known vandal. You can thus find books that list him as "Martin Luciano Scorsese". Marconstiatmao (whatever it is) was added by Francispear on March 12, 2007. Francispear is a man of few edits, but one of them is this one. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 00:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Interesting (and, unfortunately, very plausible-sounding) "genesis theory". If true, this kind of mistake would put the books' authors and (arguably more so) the Post and NYT to great shame. But then, why wasn't his full supposed middle name – Charles – put into the [previous version of the] article instead of a mere C.? (Also, if Charles can be sufficiently substantiated, someone please submit a correction to IMDb.) – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 14:58, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

No worries, as long as the Wikipedia article keeps saying Charles, it'll be put into the next couple of books. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2011 (UTC)