Jump to content

Talk:Buster Keaton

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Buster's name

[edit]

He was Joseph Keaton VI, but not Joseph Francis Keaton VI. First of all, while the Keatons traditionally named firstborn sons Joseph, the middle names changed with each generation. Thus while Buster was the sixth Joseph Keaton in that family line, he was not the sixth Joseph Frank or Joseph Francis Keaton.

Buster's middle name was Frank, after his maternal grandfather. His father, Joe Keaton V, is evidently the source of the middle name as "Francis" after a falling out with his father-in-law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.39.43 (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Public Domain?

[edit]

Can anybody tell why all of Buster silents and some early talkes are in a Public Domain (at least according to Archive.org)? Is it because they weren't copyrighted when originally released? Usually only the films released before 1923 are considered to be in a PD.

It's interesting that his autobiography "My Wonderful World of Slapstick" is also claimed to be in a PD: http://www.archive.org/details/mywonderfulworld010536mbp It contains lots of useful information and can be used to expand and improve this article. --Betty Kerner (talk) 19:06, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can't say I am an expert in this, but I think this has to do with two facts: Keaton did not really protect his films and so much time has passed that they're mostly public domain anyway.Djathinkimacowboy (talk) 21:28, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a point or two

[edit]

Under the silent film era, there is a citation needed as to who said Fairbanks recommended Keaton for the role. If I'm not mistaken, that's in a Fairbanks bio and a Keaton bio ... I'm not sure which, but I think the Damfinos (BK fanclub) also state this on their website.

Not being in possession of any books, does anyone know if the BK fan club site is good enough to use?

Also I see there is a citation needed to support Keaton's independence in his own feature-lengths based on his first feature-length performances. I think this is common knowledge, but again, this must be in Keaton's own book, a bio or somewhere, I know I have read it.

The reason is Schenck wanted it that way, so did Arbuckle.Djathinkimacowboy (talk) 18:11, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good edits, but I have undone this one for the stated reasons. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 19:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I appreciate all that has transpired. There is, however, one bothersome thing. The edit you reverted, which I should have done much better, was aimed at clarifying a confusing paragraph. It was also meant to reveal commonly known facts, such as Keaton's status when he went under MGM and the facts about his 1st film with them The Cameraman.

That is why I asked you on my talk page whether something in that actually needed a citation, aside from the films themselves - but it was wrong of me, because it all does need a citation. I'll stick rigidly to the right way and find a proper citation for that information. People should know the history of "Cameraman". Cheers for the vigilance anyways.

When I am able, I will streamline these sections into a less confusing narrative.Djathinkimacowboy (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have not read the Keaton or Schenk biographies you refer to at the top of this discussion but if you cite them including page numbers you should be able to make the desired changes. Binksternet (talk) 21:28, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I have no copies of any books at present. I was reminded of salient facts when TMC channel aired BK month (last month of course). Is Robert Osborne an unimpeachable citation? :) Seriously, though, I don't see why the Damfinos group cannot be cited, if they were to have published this material online....Djathinkimacowboy 01:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keaton's Spanish stage names

[edit]

We need a reference for Keaton's Spanish nicknames, since the old ref. was a broken link. While I personally can attest to the correctness of the statement in the article, I tagged it citation needed. My knowledge is not at issue nor is it a reference, but there is no ref. I know of which can be used here .... Djathinkimacowboy 06:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A call to action to clean up the article

[edit]

There are too many redlinks (deadlinks) and I think we have too many wikified titles in the TV section. I move that this be turned into a list, easy to read, reference and wikify when applicable. It ought to be in the form of a list instead of this awful mess that is nearly impossible to edit. In fact, each category having titles should have the titles as a list. Djathinkimacowboy 16:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speaking of which, I just created a stub article for The Buster Keaton Show, with book ref Neibaur, James L. (16 August 2010). The Fall of Buster Keaton: His Films for MGM, Educational Pictures, and Columbia. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 183–4. ISBN 978-0810876828. Retrieved 17 December 2011.. Problem is, it appears to contradict the main article's section on Keaton on TV, in several respects, such as the actual names of Keaton's first and second TV outings. Anyone know which is right? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:57, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Shawn, your work is excellent here. I think if you've found a verifiable citation of fact you should correct it, if it is wrong in the article. 'Wikipedia's word' is not law. By the way, I wanted to apologise because I mistook the original edit you made. I actually mistook it for mischief and I'm sorry for that. Djathinkimacowboy 17:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Didja, your "dead links" are WP:Redlinks and they are encouraged on Wikipedia, as a hint for ways to expand the encyclopedia. I'm not sure what format you are wishing to use in cleaning up the article, in making a list. We have a list at Buster Keaton filmography. Do you wish to expand the filmography? Biography articles generally do not contain an exhaustive list of works by prolific artists such as Keaton because the list would be too large. Binksternet (talk) 17:10, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, no, I'm saying if you look at all the titles and citations in this article, they make a mess that causes migraines. I think they should be arranged in columns in each pertinent section, so that one may read the section info then peruse the list. Do you think it could be done easily here? That might help clean up a bit of the verbiage, not that it is bad. I had no intention of expanding the filmo, I think it may be excessive now! All those TV shows cited inline, what a headache. Djathinkimacowboy 17:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An example if I can use a crude illustration: there could be some brief text about "Buster Keaton Rides Again" but not wikified. Beneath that at the section's end would be the list of TV pertinent to the article: that would be wikified and I think the reader would get that immediately. I think as much as I admire Shawn's work, too many stubs and things are being created here on Wikipedia for Buster. Only his major works that have enough citations should be made into articles, of course. But the minor TV appearances and things like that, feh. Djathinkimacowboy 17:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But articles on actors/directors always have sections of prose which talk about the titles that person has appeared in. It's a written summary of the person's career. Unless I'm misunderstanding, I don't see what the problem is? --Lobo512 (talk) 20:24, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. I'm sympathetic to any suggestion of article improvement but I'm not sure what is being proposed—how it would look and how it would read. Binksternet (talk) 22:36, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm also not sure what is meant by "not wikified." You mean not wikilinked, I think, to the stub article Buster Keaton Rides Again. I do agree we could redirect and merge Buster Keaton Rides Again to The Railrodder, which has a section on the documentary and is not an overly long article, quite easily. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good heavens: the article is a migraine to read and to edit. That is the point, it is just like al the other articles here. These kinds of articles do not need all the inline text wikified like this, when they're almost all titles, when we could do a short wikified filmography after each section. That way, all the titles are in order, listed, wikified, and the text/citations would stay as they are. That is it, what is so difficult to understand? Djathinkimacowboy 00:25, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try again. Let me explain this carefully: I propose we move the TITLES of all Keaton's work into lists, an appropriate list at the end of each section. I.e., list of films in his silent film career, list of TV work in the TV section and so on. If we mention it in the article, we simply italicise the title and get on with it. In my proposal, the article has a mini-filmography at the end of each section, wikified with its link (if appropriate).

Also, this way the text is a bit more clear, easier to edit, the reader has a handy list which in the end will be chronologically arranged anyway, and the lists and text would be a snap to edit. In short, it is a bit of an experiment, and what's wrong with that? Djathinkimacowboy 00:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Understood; even though this does not rest solely on your support, Shawn, I am giving up because I think I was wrong. The article is fine. Just an idea I thought was good, and no longer think is good. Also, I see no one here quite got what I was proposing anyway. Djathinkimacowboy 03:20, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No that wouldn't have been good. These are meant to be encyclopedic articles, not lists. People can find a list of his titles on imdb or on his filmography page. On the contrary, the article ideally needs more *prose*! I don't think there's anything ugly or confusing about having lots of wikilinks, by the way. --Lobo512 (talk) 11:31, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)This is so fun to be able to do. May I direct you to Columbo and List of Columbo episodes, and then tell me whether Wikipedia may include lists or not! I am again proposing the idea we organise Keaton's work into short, simple lists by era so fans can consult them.—Djathinkimacowboy 22:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barton Sewell

[edit]

The Barton Sewell who owned a Chilean copper mine died in 1915. Was the libertine Leah Clampitt Sewell, his widow, or the wife of his son ? 86.147.59.12 (talk) 07:59, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The wife of his son. Kafziel Complaint Department: Please take a number 13:33, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Buster Keaton. 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) 08:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buster Keaton. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 04:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. 💵Money💵emoji💵💸 21:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The two passages give very plain, straightforward information. What copyrighted book or article do you believe they may be lifting from? --Tenebrae (talk) 22:25, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

sons' last name?

[edit]

Under "Personal Life", it says that Keaton's sons, quote, "later took the surname Talmadge". But in the next paragraph, it says Natalie changed the boys' last name. Which is it? Did Natalie change the name, or did the boys themselves make that decision? Elsquared (talk) 06:21, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Influence and legacy

[edit]

I seem to remember that Johnny Depp's character in Benny and Joon emulates Buster Keaton, and that some of the bits that the character acts out were originated by Keaton, as well as Charlie Chaplin.PurpleChez (talk) 13:21, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

hello how are you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.152.36.219 (talk) 05:17, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mentor to comedians

[edit]

I've heard interviews in which Lucille Ball credits Keaton with help on I Love Lucy. In 1964 Ball did an interview with Dick Van Dyke in which he revealed that he was helped by Keaton, and Ball interrupts and says Keaton also worked with her. Although Ball is mentioned once in the article, it seems to me this is a neglected and significant part of Keaton's career that is worth writing about. The interview is on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/search/let's%20talk%20to%20lucy%20with%20dick%20van%20dyke - kosboot (talk) 19:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Buster_Keaton&oldid=1193934285"