This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
Just wanted to check something. I'm looking at this article in Firefox 2.0 and two images aren't being rendered; Image:Joshua A Norton.jpg in the infobox (I think that's because the image_size field has been included but left blank), and Image:Lazarus2.jpg at the start of the Life as emperor section. However, they both show up in my other browsers (IE7, Opera 9.1, Safari 3.0, and Netscape Navigator 9.0b2). Further, when I try to edit the Life as emperor section using FF, the image does show up in the preview.
Anyone else using Firefox seeing the same problems? I don't want to be too bold under these circumstances if it's fine for everyone else... -- DeLarge 16:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I removed two external links from the article (I was later reverted). I have no personal issues with Rotten and Kudzumonthly, but I removed them because we have a number of links to Emperor Norton biographies in the references section. There's no need to have a number of links that basically offer the same biographical details. Nishkid64 ( talk) 20:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Yup, that was me, changing the title. I typed in "Emperor Norton" and the title of the article that came up should have been "Emperor Norton," not "Joshua A. Norton." It's not the "Joshua A. Norton Utilities" or the "Joshua A. Norton Records." To avoid fixing redirects, I used "Norton I, Emperor of the United States," which technically would have been his majesty's correct title, no? ;-) Mtsmallwood ( talk) 19:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
His majesty should be referred to by his proper name. Which is of course, Emperor Norton. Malamockq ( talk) 00:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Me, I get along fine with the article bearing his name rather than title and the title being a redirect. Anyway, weren't photographs published of the Emperor on his boneshaker bicycle? Can such a picture be inserted in the article? Jim.henderson ( talk) 19:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Why does the article treat him like an emperor with titles such as "Imperial Career" and "Life as Emperor" when he was not an emperor. The U.S. government never recognized his reign. In my opinion, he was just crazy. American textbooks don't even mention him (or at least the ones I've used). Emperor001 ( talk) 17:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR ( talk) 03:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Joshua A. Norton → Emperor Norton — "Emperor Norton" is the most common name for this subject. I have seen WP:NC(NT) quoted as prohibiting this name by the same people who say he wasn't an emperor. I actually have contributed to that naming convention and I must say you can only quote it if you believe he was an emperor since it only applies to royalty. Since people basically only humoured Emperor Norton we must use his common name, per WP:NC(CN), the name under which he became a phenomenon. If *anyone* quotes WP:NC(NT) as applying then they automatically support a move to Norton I of the United States, so be careful ;-) We don't think Queen Latifah or Duke Ellington are "real" royalty or nobility, do we? The current title is entirely misleading — we are not bound to call people by their legal names if they are much more known as something else. WP:NC(CN) is policy for such strong examples of common usage. — Charles 20:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.Google Scholar search: "Emperor Norton" (113), "Joshua Abraham Norton" (11), "Joshua A. Norton" (8) Charles 20:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Why did he make his "regnal" name Norton? If that was his last name, shouldn't Norton have been his "house name" and his first of middle name be regnal? Emperor001 ( talk) 22:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
In the infobox, it says "Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico". The section of an infobox relating to a person's title, I believe, should include a legal title, as opposed to one that Norton placed upon himself. If ol' Jimbo called himself 'Dark Lord of the Universe', and that title was not legally upheld, then that title could not be put in the infobox of his article, imho. I ask that my point be reviewed, and a change made to the information in the infobox if my statement is concluded to be valid. Thank you in advance. EasyPeasy21 ( talk) 08:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The article text says notes ranged from fifty cents to five dollars. The accompanying picture depicts a ten dollar note. At least one of these is incorrect, though I don't know which. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.140.113.126 ( talk) 17:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
READ MORE CAREFULLY —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
121.215.188.140 (
talk)
01:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Just wond'ring, since that is what we are talking about here. Okay, he was amusing enough to gain some local attention and indulgence, but we are still talking about a crazy homeless guy. If this page should exist, there should be a page for every crazy homeless guy who claimed to be something. The difference between this "emperor" and the homeless guy I met a few years ago who was convinced he was George Custer would be.......what? 72.155.127.84 ( talk) 23:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)Who printed his banknotes - or were they hand made? Also, I heard that during his time, souvenir tourist memorabilia (small statues, etc.) were made. Can this be confirmed and illustrated? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Why is this article part of Wikiproject Micronations? Nutiketaiel ( talk) 12:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
From the current article it is not clear whether Norton was mentally ill (although the between-the-lines impression is given). Other explanations would be possible based on the text, notably that this was a successful gimmick that gave him a decent quality of living at low cost, or an elaborate joke.
A clarification would be beneficial to the article (if there is no consensus, then this should obviously be mentioned more explicitly, instead). 94.220.241.104 ( talk) 13:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Does present company think it would be a good idea to create a section for excerpts from literary works that mention Norton? The Sanity Inspector ( talk) 18:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Done It's in Wikiquotes, and it is a good idea to have here, so I added {{ Wikiquote}} to the article.-- otherl left 03:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Norton also had an appearance in "Bonanza".-- 80.141.201.241 ( talk) 15:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Check the Emperor Norton in popular culture article, and add there, if you want, as that is the correct place for this tidbit.-- Paul ( talk) 16:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
Just wanted to check something. I'm looking at this article in Firefox 2.0 and two images aren't being rendered; Image:Joshua A Norton.jpg in the infobox (I think that's because the image_size field has been included but left blank), and Image:Lazarus2.jpg at the start of the Life as emperor section. However, they both show up in my other browsers (IE7, Opera 9.1, Safari 3.0, and Netscape Navigator 9.0b2). Further, when I try to edit the Life as emperor section using FF, the image does show up in the preview.
Anyone else using Firefox seeing the same problems? I don't want to be too bold under these circumstances if it's fine for everyone else... -- DeLarge 16:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I removed two external links from the article (I was later reverted). I have no personal issues with Rotten and Kudzumonthly, but I removed them because we have a number of links to Emperor Norton biographies in the references section. There's no need to have a number of links that basically offer the same biographical details. Nishkid64 ( talk) 20:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Yup, that was me, changing the title. I typed in "Emperor Norton" and the title of the article that came up should have been "Emperor Norton," not "Joshua A. Norton." It's not the "Joshua A. Norton Utilities" or the "Joshua A. Norton Records." To avoid fixing redirects, I used "Norton I, Emperor of the United States," which technically would have been his majesty's correct title, no? ;-) Mtsmallwood ( talk) 19:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
His majesty should be referred to by his proper name. Which is of course, Emperor Norton. Malamockq ( talk) 00:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Me, I get along fine with the article bearing his name rather than title and the title being a redirect. Anyway, weren't photographs published of the Emperor on his boneshaker bicycle? Can such a picture be inserted in the article? Jim.henderson ( talk) 19:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Why does the article treat him like an emperor with titles such as "Imperial Career" and "Life as Emperor" when he was not an emperor. The U.S. government never recognized his reign. In my opinion, he was just crazy. American textbooks don't even mention him (or at least the ones I've used). Emperor001 ( talk) 17:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR ( talk) 03:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Joshua A. Norton → Emperor Norton — "Emperor Norton" is the most common name for this subject. I have seen WP:NC(NT) quoted as prohibiting this name by the same people who say he wasn't an emperor. I actually have contributed to that naming convention and I must say you can only quote it if you believe he was an emperor since it only applies to royalty. Since people basically only humoured Emperor Norton we must use his common name, per WP:NC(CN), the name under which he became a phenomenon. If *anyone* quotes WP:NC(NT) as applying then they automatically support a move to Norton I of the United States, so be careful ;-) We don't think Queen Latifah or Duke Ellington are "real" royalty or nobility, do we? The current title is entirely misleading — we are not bound to call people by their legal names if they are much more known as something else. WP:NC(CN) is policy for such strong examples of common usage. — Charles 20:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.Google Scholar search: "Emperor Norton" (113), "Joshua Abraham Norton" (11), "Joshua A. Norton" (8) Charles 20:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Why did he make his "regnal" name Norton? If that was his last name, shouldn't Norton have been his "house name" and his first of middle name be regnal? Emperor001 ( talk) 22:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
In the infobox, it says "Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico". The section of an infobox relating to a person's title, I believe, should include a legal title, as opposed to one that Norton placed upon himself. If ol' Jimbo called himself 'Dark Lord of the Universe', and that title was not legally upheld, then that title could not be put in the infobox of his article, imho. I ask that my point be reviewed, and a change made to the information in the infobox if my statement is concluded to be valid. Thank you in advance. EasyPeasy21 ( talk) 08:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The article text says notes ranged from fifty cents to five dollars. The accompanying picture depicts a ten dollar note. At least one of these is incorrect, though I don't know which. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.140.113.126 ( talk) 17:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
READ MORE CAREFULLY —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
121.215.188.140 (
talk)
01:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Just wond'ring, since that is what we are talking about here. Okay, he was amusing enough to gain some local attention and indulgence, but we are still talking about a crazy homeless guy. If this page should exist, there should be a page for every crazy homeless guy who claimed to be something. The difference between this "emperor" and the homeless guy I met a few years ago who was convinced he was George Custer would be.......what? 72.155.127.84 ( talk) 23:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)Who printed his banknotes - or were they hand made? Also, I heard that during his time, souvenir tourist memorabilia (small statues, etc.) were made. Can this be confirmed and illustrated? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Why is this article part of Wikiproject Micronations? Nutiketaiel ( talk) 12:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
From the current article it is not clear whether Norton was mentally ill (although the between-the-lines impression is given). Other explanations would be possible based on the text, notably that this was a successful gimmick that gave him a decent quality of living at low cost, or an elaborate joke.
A clarification would be beneficial to the article (if there is no consensus, then this should obviously be mentioned more explicitly, instead). 94.220.241.104 ( talk) 13:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Does present company think it would be a good idea to create a section for excerpts from literary works that mention Norton? The Sanity Inspector ( talk) 18:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Done It's in Wikiquotes, and it is a good idea to have here, so I added {{ Wikiquote}} to the article.-- otherl left 03:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Norton also had an appearance in "Bonanza".-- 80.141.201.241 ( talk) 15:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Check the Emperor Norton in popular culture article, and add there, if you want, as that is the correct place for this tidbit.-- Paul ( talk) 16:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)