Talk:Vanessa Paradis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Pop music  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Biography / Musicians (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject France (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Need photo[edit]

please. Sasha l 13:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


i just dont know how to put it on there(photo i mean) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koko1727 (talkcontribs) 20:50, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The Layout[edit]

This chick is really hot. I mean goddamn, but don't you think it's an overkill on the photos? Robert Taylor 23:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

One of the most beautiful females I have ever seen, big fan. Ellis McNicoll

CD cover Image License[edit]

I have uploaded the image from her 1992 CD cover. It might be the wrong the licensing. Can someone help me fix it? Thanks

Claiming marriage between Paradis and Depp[edit]

First of all, as a long time fan of Depp, I know for a fact that their has not been an official announcement of marriage, that is unless you don't count the tabloid-frenzied Star magazine. Please refrain from editing both the Paradis and Depp pages with false statements of marriage. It gets old having to remove them. Thanks. Nikki88 22:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Paradis[edit]

I think it's more than relevant to have the pronunciation of her surname after the title. It's common to show the correct way to pronounce foreign names; in this case, for non-French speakers. Also, her name is among the most mispronounced names I've ever seen. The most common incorrect pronunciations being "Para-DISE" and "Para-DEES". I see no reason why it was removed, please state why you thought it was unnecessary. Nikki88 03:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Aside from my own opinion that pronunciations written like that are insulting to people's intelligence, I removed it because WP:PRON states that pronunciations written like that may be more unhelpful than not. For every person who will pronounce it Paradee, they'll be sombody who interprets it as Paradeh, or Paradey because that's how DEE is pronounced in their native tongue. Also, I notice there is no pronunciation required for the equally French Chantal, which if read as written, would be pronounced Chant-ull. Regards, BertieBasset 20:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

My opinion differs from yours, but I'm not at liberty to continue adding it. Nikki88 02:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you could edit the proper way using IPA or how you see fit? However, I do see it important to have the pronunciation for her article. Nikki88 04:17, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Something close to [vane'sa para'di]. —Nightstallion (?) 00:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
No, he said IPA, you nob

link to a video showing her singing abilities as a kid: useful?[edit]

Hi, I found a video in youtube that shows her performing at the TV show "L'École des fans" in 1980 (and indeed, she performs very well for a 7years old kid!):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO5DnP8vzRc
Do you think it could be useful to add it in the "external link" section? Being a "wikipedia beginner", I'm not sure if it's appropriate material too (related to legal issue, etc.). Oc.Gal 00:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:20, 27 August 2007 (UTC)



Surname

the surname PARADIS is greek, I am 90 percent certain, I have a feeling that her father or grandfather is greek and emigrated from Greece and moved to france —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.12.144.21 (talk) 02:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, "paradis" is a French word. It means "heaven". The word "paradis" might have arrived from Greek into French some 2000 years ago (like many other French words), but there's absolutely no reason to think that all French people named "paradis" or "petros" descend from Greek immigrants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.115.20.215 (talk) 22:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

About vanessa paradis' house in Sapin with Johnny Depp[edit]

this information is only based on internet rumors. therefore i will delete this statement until someone confirms this: "Johnny Depp and Vanessa Paradis have a house in Mazcuerras(-> Cantabria-> Spain)" --Froilánperez (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Enough footnotes for ya???[edit]

The "Personal life" section has now an average of a footnote every 8.84 words. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 18:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The number of inlines is about right, I think: one or so per fact not covered by the immediately subsequent inline (that is the standard I impose on myself for pretty well any content I add).
I have removed the exact dates of birth of the children, see WP:DOB. Her children are not (yet) notable in their own right, but the year of birth is relevant in relation to milestones in her career. I've left comments for article stability. It is a bit ironic that the reference confirming the name of their daughter is headlined "Johnny Depp laments fan sites for daughter" and this reinforces the need to be careful about BLP issues involving children.
I am not really convinced that a list of Vanessa's earlier boyfriends ("briefly dated"? who cares?) is noteworthy, but by all means persuade otherwise... --Mirokado (talk) 00:26, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
The guideline you provided does not really specify that we must strip DOBs of children from month/day. Since removal of sourced material is pretty controversial in this article, please do not do that unless a consensus is reached. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 16:53, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Source language, italics, fan sites,[edit]

You must really read policies (such as WP:NOENG) before enforcing them. English sources are preferred over non-English ones, but it doesn't mean that they cannot be used. Also, stop removing the obvious – I'm adding another source that states they are sisters. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 15:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes. and I found an English-language source, so no foreign-language source is needed. There's no need for citation overkill. And according to WP:VERIFY, nothing is "obvious" and all claims, particularly personal claims, must be attributed to a reliable-source citation. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Hearfourmewesique's edit here introduced a number of stylistic errors, removed citation requests, added uncited claims, removed reliable-source citations and otherwise violated a number of policies and guidelines. His subsequent edit incorrectly suggested I had removed the fact Vanessa and Alison are sisters, which not only hadn't I done, but I included a citation supporting it from Vanessa's own website. That was among the edits he removed. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Before you claim "stylistic errors", learn about properly using citation templates (a publisher is a publisher). You keep removing sourced information about Merhar, it's edit warring at its worst. Also, "Alison is a French actress under the name Alysson Paradis"??? This one would make me laugh, if only I weren't involved... Read that one again and tell me how you came to the conclusion that it makes any sense at all. This is becoming a matter of WP:COMPETENCE. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 19:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't know what to say. The Hollywood Reporter is not a publisher. It's a magazine. Magazine titles are italicized. That magazine's publisher is Prometheus Global Media.
Given this, I really wish you would temper the needlessly aggressive tone that has helped to get you blocked from editing multiple times so far. We're all on the same side. We all want the same thing: to make the article as good as it can be. I'm your colleague. I've tried to treat you as one. Please treat me as one.
There is no one-and-only way to use citations from an official site, so there's no sole "proper" way, to use your term. The pertinent part of Vanessa's website being referred to is the biography. Vanessa's official site spells her sister's name as Alison. That's different from the sister's stage name. Lots of performers use fancier-looking stage names, so it's honestly nothing unusual. Jon Bon Jovi was born John Bongiovi, for example. It's fairly typical, so Im sure why it would make anyone laugh. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  1. Please familiarize yourself with various uses of the {{cite}} templates, as it has been done in various articles. "Work" is always a secondary parameter (optional), while "publisher" is always present.
  2. If you really wish to work together in good faith, please stop constantly reverting while discussing.
  3. The site you provided is a fansite, and its being unofficial is actually stated here. Therefore, the "Alysson is Alison" claim is far fetched (which is what I wrote from the beginning). Hearfourmewesique (talk) 13:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I did not see it was a fansite. It's in French, so I was admittedly handicapped by the language barrier. But you are correct and I agree with its removal.
RE "If you really wish to work together in good faith, please stop constantly reverting while discussing": I'm sure you'd agree that this must go both ways. I've given reasons in the edit summaries for a variety of mostly small edits, and I'd appreciate you addressing them individually and not blanket revert, which might be taken as evidence of WP:OWN. I'm sure you'd agree with most if not all of these edits. For example, I added a translation of a French-language website. And I removed a redundant citation that did not support a claim while your other citation did.
No parameters are required to be filled, and the fact is that newspaper and magazine names are italicized. For a start, could we agree on this basic tenet of grammar? Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Italics. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I changed the wording of the reference to Stanislas Merhar since neither source gave years, and neither source said they lived together. Again, surely, we can agree that a citation has to say what we're saying that it says, true? --Tenebrae (talk) 20:42, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

  1. The "variety of small edits" may be commenceable for the edit summaries, but make everyone else's job harder. Therefore, it might be better to perform a larger scope edit with an edit summary pointing to the talk page, and explain all edits there. Otherwise, if this becomes a consistent pattern in your editing habit, you might be seen as a WP:TROLL.
  2. The msn.fr source was mistakenly stripped of a parameter, I've corrected and restored it.
  3. There are four valid images in the article. If you wish to dilute this number, you cannot just pick a randopm image and remove it at will. Please follow the correct procedure and use whatever method you find useful to gain consensus on this subject.
  4. Your translations are, again, commenceable, but not necessary. I don't speak French myself, but Google Translate usually does an OK job. If your purpose is to make it easier on the reader, then I have no problems with it.
  5. In the past, you repeatedly removed chunks of the article for being unsourced, and now that I went and gathered so many sources... don't just start removing them. It's actually insulting to my good faith. At least discuss it first.
  6. The Merhar sources both date back to 1998, and state that they "just broke up".
  7. The MOS you cited states that magazine names should be italicized in the article, but it is entirely separate and different from cite templates. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Periodicals are always italicized as a matter of basic grammar. That's why the "work" field automatically italicizes. The work and the publisher are two different things. The Hollywood Reporter is the work; Prometheus Global Media is the publisher. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
I appreciate your saying you have no problem with providing a translation. I wish you would own up to have summarily and blithely removed them in your blanket revert, then. A revert which also restored a misspelling of Down syndrome.
It is discussion to say that a source does not say what one claims it says. You wer correct on the Merher 1998 source and I fully acknowledged it and owned up to it. But the other source said not a word about Alysson having a sister ad not even mention Vanessa's name. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
The documentation for {{cite web}} and {{cite news}} clearly indicates that the web site or newspaper title should be italicised and the publisher not. The publisher is often not needed if the work parameter is already clear enough. This italicisation is required for featured articles. --Mirokado (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
  1. If we have one source that confirms that Alysson and Vanessa are sisters, the second source does not have to reaffirm this fact. It rather serves to reaffirm her notability as a French actress.
  2. Please seek broad consensus as for the images.
  3. I have corrected my own assertion about her "briefly" dating Kravitz, as some sources indicate they were together for 4 years. You reverted that, and also turned the word "Afterwards" into "fterwards". Why did you do that? Hearfourmewesique (talk) 03:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Tenebrae asked me to weigh in on this.

  • Template values Magazines are italicized (no irony intended), and that includes in citations/footnotes. WP:ITALIC does not indicate that italicization is not restricted to the article body. When using cite templates, I use the "cite newspaper", or "cite news" template. It's the template prescribed for periodicals (not just newspapers), and one benefit of it relevant to this discussion is that when using it, the value to use when specifying the name of the publication is "newspaper" (in other words {{cite news|newspaper=NAMEOFPERIODICAL}}), which automatically italicizes the name of the publication (which pretty much disproves the notion that italics are not intended for footnoes). Yeah, I've seen word "publisher" and "work" used too, but I'm pretty sure the former is incorrect, since a publication and a publisher are two different things. To be fair, "work" does appear to be given as an option for this template at WP:Citation Templates, but neither "work" nor "publisher" automatically italcize what's in front it. This is why I use cite news. Might I suggest this as a compromise?
  • Citation limits I don't think that providing multiple cites for a passage is a problem. I do so myself quite frequently, and notice it done commonly across Wikipedia. One reason I favor doing so is because I fear two things: 1. Link rot, and 2. Challenges to the reliability of the source. So one source supports that Alysson is both an actress and Vanessa's sister, and the other supports only one of these things? So what? It's not a big deal, and I don't think that two citations is the number that WP:OVERLINK seeks to address.
  • Images Unless an image is integral to understanding the article's topic (such as providing a graph illustrating a statistic over time or an equation or diagram illustrating a scientific phenomenon), images should be limited so that they do not cause gigantic lacunae or violate WP:STACKING. The last one currently in the article, File:Lunon - Vanessa Paradis Solidays 2010.JPG, should be removed.
  • Conduct during conflict
To Tenebrae: This conflict may have have been unfortunate, but I usually don't make accusations of WP:OWN after only one or two reverts. Hell, I wouldn't even bring up the accusation of edit warring. While talking it out here should be the procedure instead of reverts, this is did not rise to the level of WP:OWN. Addendum: I would also stay away from the accusation of "bullying", since that word describes a completely different type of phenomenon from generic incivility. I think the recent raising of the public consciousness with respect to bullying has now caused that term to be used and misused more commonly. I'm placing this in an addendum here not only because I neglected to address it earlier, but also because I recall Hearfourmewesique using it improperly in my earlier edit conflict with him, so it seems only fair and consistent to make that point with you, Tenebrae.
To Hearfourmewesique: Comments like "learn about properly using citation templates (a publisher is a publisher)." violate WP:CIVIL. If you have information on a policy or guideline that supports your position, then why not just cite it? You need to focus on the content of the edits, and on the arguments that support your opinion. Impugning the knowledge or intelligence of the person disagreeing with you is just an ad hominem comment, and violates WP:NPA. Had you merely linked to the citation templates page and cited the information that supported the notion that "publisher" was the right value to use, and Tenebrae ignored you, that might've made greater frustration on your part understandable. But not only is that that not what happened, WP:Citation templates and the italicization function of the newspaper value in the cite news template appear to prove you wrong. Why not present evidence and arguments instead of making comments about what the other guy needs to "learn"?

Hope this helps. Nightscream (talk) 05:12, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

If I would vote for removing an image, I'd choose this one, since it is the least aesthetically pleasing; we should aim for quality when in comes to pictures. As for the rest – you are correct and I do apologize (again) for getting heated up, I'll explain more on your talk page. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 20:53, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I would say that we have two images of her from 2012 and one from 2007. Since she was performing professionally and well-known while still a teen, it would be undue weight to remove a 1991 image and keep three from 2007-2012. In any case, I'm happy to drop my objection to the number of images in this article. If everyone's OK with four, then so am I. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Dressed in black[edit]

Hi Tenebrae. I have found roughly 90% of this article's sources, and you've done little more than removing chunks. This time, I'm asking you to incorporate this image that supports another easily verifiable claim that you removed. Thank you. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 19:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I have only removed or tagged uncited claims, which is a responsibility of all of us.
The image in the link appears to come from a personal blog — it's hard to tell, since http://3.bp.blogspot.com/ itself goes to a file-not-found page — so we can't cite it. And while you may scoff, lots of false and Photoshopped images proliferate on the Internet, so there is no way of knowing if this image from an unknown blog, which is disallowed as a reference source, is legitimate or not. On a separate note, what she was dressed like in an ad doesn't seem of major import unless the wardrobe or the look somehow impacted on her career. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Stop this now. Read meta:Don't be a dick and make yourself useful for a change. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
It's actually written in the Vogue source. Besides, it would be really far fetched to assume that all the images found online (examples: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]) are fake as well. Including this one from Flare (magazine) (image number 2). Just stop it. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
  • The fanpop link from above is actually a behind-the-scenes video, was that forged as well? Hearfourmewesique (talk) 21:13, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
As others besides me have noted about you, on your talk page and elsewhere, you make heated comments that are highly uncivil. You do so again above. I'm not going to respond in kind.
The cite I was referring to was the newspaper The Independent, which as you'll see here was the one that followed "portraying a bird swinging in a cage" and which did not support that statement. The Vogue citation wasn't then one being used to support that claim. It's there now. That's all that was necessary.
I'm afraid I'm not seeing the necessity of your continuing personal attacks on me, both here and in your edit summaries. I would ask you to please stop; I believe Nightscream has already cautioned you about being civil with other editors.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────When you repeatedly disregard my pleas to be cooperative and do anything besides removing chunks of material, it's anything but civil. Change your attitude and I'll change mine. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 22:28, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you're conflating editing preferences with verbal abuse. As Wikipedia says, "If you do not want your writing to be edited ... then do not submit it here." Calling someone a dick is something different entirely.
Again, an admin has told you that there's no excuse for incivility; you can see that I'm staying civil with you despite your name-calling. Now then: You supplied an RS cite; I haven't touched a word. We're on the same page, in utter agreement, so I'm not sure why you're still fulminating. --Tenebrae (talk) 03:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)