Talk:Karl Dane

Where he commited suicide

Previously, the article listed Karl Dane as commiting suicide in the Fairfax District of L.A. That's not correct. He commited suicide in his apartment which was located on Burnside Drive, located in the Miracle Mile section (or district) of L.A.

69.234.72.14 05:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC) Bernie

Kenneth Anger's Babylon Hollywood

I have twice removed a very brief mention of this extremely inaccurate book. My view of the book is that we either ignore it or we give it a fuller treatment where we describe what its faults are and defend Dane against the wrongs it caused in his historiography. A brief mention isn't sufficient.

I've also taken out an unsuitable blog-style reference. Binksternet (talk) 15:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

It is not a blog styled reference as that site is even cited on his biographer's site and many other silent sites as well. I dont see how its any more 'blog' like than something like goldensilents.com or silentera.com which are both cited on many wiki articles. However the reason I added the reference was because most people know of Karl Dane through that book up to this point. It was inaccurate and I agree with you on that, that was the whole reason of adding it. If you'd like I could type up WHAT was inaccurate about it although I felt that was already covered in his later years section. A full rebuttal would be something like Dane didnt have a down fall because of his accent, he had personal troubles and thats why his career ended. He lost most of his money in a bad business deal and was robbed the day before he killed himself. He never actually ran a hot dog stand but invested in one. Anger...angers me. I am only trying to clarify for the masses who have read that book and think it IS accurate. Feel free to add your own take on it I guess; what would you write and cite?--Maggiedane (talk) 00:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Only very rare blogs can be said to be expert-level references. Certainly, Leonard Maltin's websitewould be one such example for the film industry. What credentials does forgetthetalkies have? Who wrote the bits about Dane? Is this person a published author on the subject? A blog site cited by other blog sites isn't enough.

All of the points you mention would be good material for a fuller treatment of how Anger messed with the memory of Dane by his need for exciting and scandalous writing. The problem is that, if the forgetthetalkies blog is deemed unsuitable, what source can we use to rebut Anger point by point? Binksternet (talk) 04:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Well I still argue its not unsuitable; as its not a blog though it has a simple layout. That site has done things like upload clips of Dane speaking and gathered information about surviving films for many stars including the elusive Theda Bara. Why is their Hollywood Babylon 2 article 'unsuitable'? The author went and researched what Anger said, and what other sources had to say. I dont see why its unsuitable. THAT being said I'm with Poshone...the Karl Dane site mentions it. I dont believe his biography will be out till later this year but I dont see why Forget the Talkies or the biographers site wont do.--Maggiedane (talk) 06:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Hala Pickford writes what she wants to write at forgetthetalkies.com, which is why I called it blog-style. Self-published web pages are typically only used as references for themselves; references proving that they exist. If there were a Forget The Talkies! article, the website would most certainly be used as a reference for itself. The policy page WP:SOURCES has further detail about the limitations Wikipedia has in place regarding self-published sources.

I took a spin 'round the intertubes and I didn't find a reliable third party source quoting Hala Pickford. Did I miss the one you were thinking of? Binksternet (talk) 08:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the reference was to this page Karl Dane Page. What I was saying was I feel its as reliable as Golden Silents (also published by one author), and Silent Era. Those two sites have been listed on nearly every silent film article and are published ala Forget the Talkies. For a few examples see the references of lost film or List of incomplete or partially lost films. None of those sites are wiki article worthy...I dont think there is any silent film site that is (feel free to prove me wrong).

As for a site quoting Miss Pickford I googled and all I found was Gold Sea and John Bunny. I agree a bunch of self published sites should not be used but saying because one person writes is self published is murky territory (and the reason I feel that way is what I just said above about other silent film sites). That being said, I still think of something is well researched it should be linkable. I mean on the subject of Karl Dane the only information out there right now is the biographer site, FTT, and Hollywood Babylons. And technically all 3 were done by one person...and two of those are published! I guess its a silly point to argue on just referencing Anger but I'm really keen on it strictly because I know a lot of people hear of Dane that way, and it is inaccurate and that should be known.--Maggiedane (talk) 08:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

My favorite of the self-published websites is www.karl-dane.com by Laura Balogh. It's so good because Balogh acknowledges her sources in style. I'm looking forward to her book when it comes out. Binksternet (talk) 17:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree as I love Miss Balogh's site. So what consensus have we reached here?--Maggiedane (talk) 00:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you have any idea if her book will refute Anger? If it will, perhaps waiting for it is better than trying to make this article say what you want with the self-published Hala Pickford material. On the other hand, if you were really hot to go, the refutation of Anger could get started now with Pickford as a temporary stand-in for Balogh. Binksternet (talk) 04:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Karl Dane. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080430013838/http://www.dfi.dk/cinemateket/kosmorama/240/kosmorama240.htm to http://www.dfi.dk/cinemateket/kosmorama/240/kosmorama240.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080506214216/http://www.dfi.dk/cinemateket/Program/Filmbeskrivelse.htm?id=v1006344 to http://www.dfi.dk/cinemateket/Program/Filmbeskrivelse.htm?id=v1006344

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) 00:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)