![]() | George Robey is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 29, 2014. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There must be 100s of photos of Robey, nearly all in the public domain after this length of time. So why has someone put a pic of him in drag as the main picture? LOL. ( Goldmanuk ( talk) 00:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC))
Ssilvers, maybe there are a few too many images here. Which shall I delete? I'm kinda going with the stamps. Cassianto talk 20:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
In US English, we would say "Shakespeare role" and "Shakespeare play". Can you check with one of your Queen's English experts on whether you need the ean or ian ending in UK English? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 18:30, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Cassianto, the two short articles about Robey listed in the EL section ( this and this) describe Robey's style of humour in his acts in a more concrete way than the article does now, and I think adding a couple of sentences or short quotes about this would be very helpful to readers. Would you kindly look at them and see if you agree? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
In Reference (footnote) #1, we say that Robey's DNB biographer was James Harding. Is this the same person as James Harding (music writer)? If so, we should link the name. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
In the LEAD, we say that Robey's film career was only modestly successful, but we don't really say that anywhere in the body of the article, unless I'm missing it. Can we make it clearer in the body? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
I changed the first sentence in the section which mentions the war, because it suggested music hall had declined by 1914, which is not the case, though it was facing a powerful competitor in revue, which probably had taken over a quarter of the theatres by 1914. Johncmullen1960 ( talk) 06:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm in the process of reading the entire article, but I came across something that does not sound quite right. It is this passage in the second paragraph of the section George Robey#Early life:
The first sentence says he studied science at Leipzig University. The third sentence says that he studied art and music". There is no indication of the connection between these subjects. Did he enroll in order to study science but then switched to art and music? Did he study science, art and music? Did he study mainly science but discovered art and music on the side?
Also, since you've already said "which he used as a base while studying science at Leipzig University", unless there is some other event that took place, there is no need to say later, "having successfully enrolled at the university". CorinneSD ( talk) 21:04, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
In the last paragraph in the section George Robey#Shakespearean roles is the following passage:
I noticed "Variety artistes" and then "variety artists". Since "artistes" is a word, and since both are in a quote, I hesitated to change "artistes" to "artists". Perhaps someone could check the original text. CorinneSD ( talk) 22:14, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:George Robey/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Needs general expansion
....(
Complain)(
Let us to it pell-mell)
07:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
|
Last edited at 20:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC). Substituted at 16:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on George Robey. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
It is as amusing as always to be told to "use the flaming talk page" by people who do not do so themselves; and to be referred to
WP:BRD by someone who fails to notice, or ignores, that that essay says, for example, "BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes"
and "If you revert twice, then you are no longer following the BRD cycle"
. I would also point out:
"Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications.".
-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
You are right that it states "BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes"
, and if I had been guilty of that, then you would have been right to pick me up on it. Sadly I see you are again ignoring AGF by claiming I reverted only because I didn't like the changes. That's obviously horseshit, as I gave very valid reasons in my edit summary. If you try to add unsourced information into any article, you should be aware that someone may revert it. You need to read and understand
WP:BURDEN before you try that sort of nonsense again. And after you were reverted for the first time, with a very valid reason shown in the edit summary, then that's the point that you should either find a source or use the talk page. The fact that you did neither but just edit warred speaks more about your approach to "collegiate" editing than anything else. -
SchroCat (
talk)
08:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Mabbett, you really must learn not to edit war on this. Once is enough, but twice just makes you look idiotic. With regards to "For The George Roby pub, see..." it's a building, and not a very notable one at that. We'd better link "The Admiral Duncan pub in London to Adam Duncan, 1st Viscount Duncan and The Dick Turpin pub in Brentwood, Essex to Dick Turpin then. Cassianto Talk 16:30, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
I am aware that the the 1956 biography by Wilson on p.158 states that George Robey made his radio debut in 1936 but this is demonstrably incorrect and a look though the Radio Times (or a search of the BBC Genome project) or a search of the British Newspaper Archive would prove this. I'm not going to change the entry again but maybe someone with an interest in Robey could fix this. Hazel75 ( talk) 12:57, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:08, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | George Robey is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 29, 2014. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There must be 100s of photos of Robey, nearly all in the public domain after this length of time. So why has someone put a pic of him in drag as the main picture? LOL. ( Goldmanuk ( talk) 00:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC))
Ssilvers, maybe there are a few too many images here. Which shall I delete? I'm kinda going with the stamps. Cassianto talk 20:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
In US English, we would say "Shakespeare role" and "Shakespeare play". Can you check with one of your Queen's English experts on whether you need the ean or ian ending in UK English? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 18:30, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Cassianto, the two short articles about Robey listed in the EL section ( this and this) describe Robey's style of humour in his acts in a more concrete way than the article does now, and I think adding a couple of sentences or short quotes about this would be very helpful to readers. Would you kindly look at them and see if you agree? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
In Reference (footnote) #1, we say that Robey's DNB biographer was James Harding. Is this the same person as James Harding (music writer)? If so, we should link the name. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
In the LEAD, we say that Robey's film career was only modestly successful, but we don't really say that anywhere in the body of the article, unless I'm missing it. Can we make it clearer in the body? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
I changed the first sentence in the section which mentions the war, because it suggested music hall had declined by 1914, which is not the case, though it was facing a powerful competitor in revue, which probably had taken over a quarter of the theatres by 1914. Johncmullen1960 ( talk) 06:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm in the process of reading the entire article, but I came across something that does not sound quite right. It is this passage in the second paragraph of the section George Robey#Early life:
The first sentence says he studied science at Leipzig University. The third sentence says that he studied art and music". There is no indication of the connection between these subjects. Did he enroll in order to study science but then switched to art and music? Did he study science, art and music? Did he study mainly science but discovered art and music on the side?
Also, since you've already said "which he used as a base while studying science at Leipzig University", unless there is some other event that took place, there is no need to say later, "having successfully enrolled at the university". CorinneSD ( talk) 21:04, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
In the last paragraph in the section George Robey#Shakespearean roles is the following passage:
I noticed "Variety artistes" and then "variety artists". Since "artistes" is a word, and since both are in a quote, I hesitated to change "artistes" to "artists". Perhaps someone could check the original text. CorinneSD ( talk) 22:14, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:George Robey/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Needs general expansion
....(
Complain)(
Let us to it pell-mell)
07:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
|
Last edited at 20:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC). Substituted at 16:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on George Robey. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:40, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
It is as amusing as always to be told to "use the flaming talk page" by people who do not do so themselves; and to be referred to
WP:BRD by someone who fails to notice, or ignores, that that essay says, for example, "BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes"
and "If you revert twice, then you are no longer following the BRD cycle"
. I would also point out:
"Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications.".
-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
You are right that it states "BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes"
, and if I had been guilty of that, then you would have been right to pick me up on it. Sadly I see you are again ignoring AGF by claiming I reverted only because I didn't like the changes. That's obviously horseshit, as I gave very valid reasons in my edit summary. If you try to add unsourced information into any article, you should be aware that someone may revert it. You need to read and understand
WP:BURDEN before you try that sort of nonsense again. And after you were reverted for the first time, with a very valid reason shown in the edit summary, then that's the point that you should either find a source or use the talk page. The fact that you did neither but just edit warred speaks more about your approach to "collegiate" editing than anything else. -
SchroCat (
talk)
08:28, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Mabbett, you really must learn not to edit war on this. Once is enough, but twice just makes you look idiotic. With regards to "For The George Roby pub, see..." it's a building, and not a very notable one at that. We'd better link "The Admiral Duncan pub in London to Adam Duncan, 1st Viscount Duncan and The Dick Turpin pub in Brentwood, Essex to Dick Turpin then. Cassianto Talk 16:30, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
I am aware that the the 1956 biography by Wilson on p.158 states that George Robey made his radio debut in 1936 but this is demonstrably incorrect and a look though the Radio Times (or a search of the BBC Genome project) or a search of the British Newspaper Archive would prove this. I'm not going to change the entry again but maybe someone with an interest in Robey could fix this. Hazel75 ( talk) 12:57, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:08, 17 February 2022 (UTC)