This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The statement "even by his editors at the Times" is proved by Arthur Gelb's autobiography City Room.
Okay then cite it. Then there will be no need to put a Fact tag. Yojimbo501 ( talk) 22:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Howard Thompson often spoke of Crowther as being his mentor. Must find third-party documentation (now that both Crowther and Thompson have passed on) to support this. AndreasKQ 05:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I am concerned by the statements concerning Crowther's political viewpoints. No source is cited for these statements. They need to be cited or I will have to take them out. I'm not saying they're not true. They may be. I just think that controversial statements need to be attributed even for dead people.-- Stetsonharry ( talk) 12:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
No one has come forward on this issue, so I removed the text about his political prejudice because it was not referenced or sourced. It appears to be original research. If not, I would ask that it be reinstated with appropriate citations.-- Stetsonharry ( talk) 15:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
These allegations now seemed to be sourced, but they consume far too much of this biography, at least one-third. He is not notable because of his alleged left-wing bias, but because he was a powerful film critic for the Times. This needs to be cut back substantially. Stetsonharry ( talk) 19:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I've asked for intervention from the Biography Notice Board. Stetsonharry ( talk) 20:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Since there seems to be no immediate objection, I've made appropriate edits per WP:SYN and WP:WEIGHT. Stetsonharry ( talk) 14:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I have a problem with this: Crowther's review of the wartime drama Mission to Moscow chided the film by saying it should show "less ecstasy", and said "It is just as ridiculous to pretend that Russia has been a paradise of purity as it is to say the same thing about ourselves."[3][4] The problem is that if you read his original NY Times review from April 20, 1943 ( http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9505E5DD1638E33BBC4850DFB2668388659EDE), nowhere in the review will you find those quotes. In fact, Crowther's review pretty much does not take the film to task whatsoever, except to say it's a bit too long, and even seems to laud it as mostly fact-based. (It was revealed later that the film was secretly commissioned by FDR himself as a propaganda piece, in an attempt to get Americans to feel more comfortable with our new ally, the Soviet Union.) The first of those two references may be the source of your quotes, I don't know, but I do know the April 20, 1943 review, as found in the NY Times archive, is not. 71.204.84.204 ( talk) 01:43, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The statement "even by his editors at the Times" is proved by Arthur Gelb's autobiography City Room.
Okay then cite it. Then there will be no need to put a Fact tag. Yojimbo501 ( talk) 22:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Howard Thompson often spoke of Crowther as being his mentor. Must find third-party documentation (now that both Crowther and Thompson have passed on) to support this. AndreasKQ 05:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I am concerned by the statements concerning Crowther's political viewpoints. No source is cited for these statements. They need to be cited or I will have to take them out. I'm not saying they're not true. They may be. I just think that controversial statements need to be attributed even for dead people.-- Stetsonharry ( talk) 12:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
No one has come forward on this issue, so I removed the text about his political prejudice because it was not referenced or sourced. It appears to be original research. If not, I would ask that it be reinstated with appropriate citations.-- Stetsonharry ( talk) 15:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
These allegations now seemed to be sourced, but they consume far too much of this biography, at least one-third. He is not notable because of his alleged left-wing bias, but because he was a powerful film critic for the Times. This needs to be cut back substantially. Stetsonharry ( talk) 19:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I've asked for intervention from the Biography Notice Board. Stetsonharry ( talk) 20:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Since there seems to be no immediate objection, I've made appropriate edits per WP:SYN and WP:WEIGHT. Stetsonharry ( talk) 14:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I have a problem with this: Crowther's review of the wartime drama Mission to Moscow chided the film by saying it should show "less ecstasy", and said "It is just as ridiculous to pretend that Russia has been a paradise of purity as it is to say the same thing about ourselves."[3][4] The problem is that if you read his original NY Times review from April 20, 1943 ( http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9505E5DD1638E33BBC4850DFB2668388659EDE), nowhere in the review will you find those quotes. In fact, Crowther's review pretty much does not take the film to task whatsoever, except to say it's a bit too long, and even seems to laud it as mostly fact-based. (It was revealed later that the film was secretly commissioned by FDR himself as a propaganda piece, in an attempt to get Americans to feel more comfortable with our new ally, the Soviet Union.) The first of those two references may be the source of your quotes, I don't know, but I do know the April 20, 1943 review, as found in the NY Times archive, is not. 71.204.84.204 ( talk) 01:43, 10 April 2015 (UTC)