The text of the entry was: Did you know that in 1972, Charlie Chaplin received an Honorary Academy Award for "the incalculable effect he has had in making motion pictures the art form of this century"?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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 is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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 is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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 is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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 is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, realise, defence), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2016
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Please change "Statues of Chaplin around the world, located at (left to right) 1. Teplice, Czech Republic" to "Statues of Chaplin around the world, located at (left to right) 1. Trenčianske Teplice, Slovakia" because the statue is located in Slovakia, not Czech Republic. Also, the file "Chaplin statues.jpg" says in the description the location "Teplice, Czech Republic". However, this is wrong - it can be seen in the source files of the collage, where is linked the original file "Trenčianske Teplice, socha Charlie Chaplina.jpg". Trenčianske teplice is a town in western Slovakia 
Q2: For citations number 226 "Maland, p. 181; Louvish, p. 282; Robinson, p. 504." and number 442 "Louvish, p. xvi; Maland pp. xi, 359, 370." is "Maland" for the 1989 or 2007 publication source?
Q3: This is possibly connected to Q1. For citation number 189 "Vance, p. 208." is "Vance" for the 1996 journal article or the 2003 book? Mitchumch (talk) 07:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Q4: For citation number 134 "Chaplin, pp. 255–253." the page range is incorrect.
Q5: For citation number 354 "Louvish, p. 168; Robinson, pp. 166–170, pp. 489–490; Brownlow, p. 187." does "pp. 489–490" belong to author Robinson or is this citation missing an author? Mitchumch (talk) 10:07, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
I'll get back to this soon, it's unfortunately been several years since Loeba and I wrote the article so I don't have the sources readily available at the moment.TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 15:29, 9 October 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3
FYI. There may be a coding issue with Template:Sfnm as reflected in citation number 383 "Robinson, pp. 455, 485; Louvish, p. 138(for quote)". The spacing and period is missing. Please see Template talk:Sfnm section Issue with code? for my current effort to resolve issue. Mitchumch (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Following on from the edit war regarding Chaplin's self-identification as an anarchist, I think this should be mentioned somewhere, though not necessarily in the lead. More broadly, it would be good to address what his political opinions and activities actually were.--Jack Upland (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
The only one edit waring was you. If Chaplain self-identified as an anarchist, then he was. Subjective views with regards to other interpretations are irrelevant, unless they are conflicting. CassiantoTalk 19:02, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
What are you talking about? All I did was revert the removal of text that was accurate and well-sourced. Looking at the history that text seems to have been removed and re-added before.--Jack Upland (talk) 20:48, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
While I agree that more could perhaps be said about Chaplin's political views in the text, I think more research needs to be done into that subject before we add anything. It would be misleading to label him an anarchist because he stated it in an interview he did late in life. If my memory serves me correctly, there's not a lot that we definitively know about Chaplin's views. He was certainly on the left politically for his whole life, but I doubt he discussed his beliefs in depth in public at any point in his career. It seemed to me that Eliko's edit was just another case of a person stumbling across an interesting statement and adding it without doing any further research into the subject.TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 20:49, 18 December 2016 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3
I think Chaplin's speech at the end of the "Great Dictator" is probably his definitive political statement. As the speech shows, he firmly believed in democracy, but was highly critical of market capitalism where workers were left in poverty. Mediatech492 (talk) 22:14, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
"Charlie" in northeastern Isaan region of Thailand
Looking for something to watch on TV with a Thai-Isaan girlfriend and her 6-year-old daughter, they came across "Charlie" on Youtube. Both had seen it before and loved it, especially the 6-year-old. Someone had done comic commentary over the old silent movies in the language of northeastern Thailand or Isann, which is identical to Lao language in the southern parts of that country. To them the commentary was what added to the antics of Charlie. I wonder who did this and when. Quite a production I would think. I wonder if it has been done in other countries/languages. Maybe worth researching and adding to the page. The "Isaan Charlie" films are titled "Thai dub" but they told me it's actually Isaan language, not Thai, which is spoken in the rest of Thailand and Bangkok (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uK8SEDL7DE). JuanTamad (talk) 01:05, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
My edit summary reads: "Please don't change citation style without gaining consensus per WP:CITEVAR". What is the meaning of your heading "Reverted edit, again"? I don't believe I've ever reverted any of your edits before. SagaciousPhil - Chat 12:09, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
@Sagaciousphil: For "Reverted edit, again", see Reverted edit from Talk:Charlie Chaplin/Archive 7. In response to WP:CITEVAR, a quick review of policy appears to refer to the formatting types of inline citations. I don't think the policy you referenced is applicable to this edit. According to WP:CITEVAR, the following is to be avoided:
switching between major citation styles, e.g. parenthetical and <ref> tags, or replacing the preferred style of one academic discipline with another's;
adding citation templates to an article that already uses a consistent system without templates, or removing citation templates from an article that uses them consistently;
Please specify which of the "to be avoided" conditions I violated. Mitchumch (talk) 12:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
The key phrase is: "editors should not attempt to convert Wikipedia to their own preferred style, nor should they edit articles for the sole purpose of converting them to their preferred style". The "style" of the sources list was without indentations when it passed FA so that is the established style for the article and consensus would be required to change it. As far as I'm aware the indentations also cause accessibility issues especially for those using mobile devices. Also, the bullet points let those using screen readers know that it is a list. I will leave it to others to comment further. SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
@Sagaciousphil: Your use of the phrase "editors should not attempt to convert Wikipedia to their own preferred style" completely ignores the definition of "citation style" and the detailed "to be avoided" conditions discussed immediately beneath that claim. My edit does not violate the "to be avoided" conditions. If it does, then please specify which condition it violated.
FA-class articles remain editable and there is no Wikipedia policy that says otherwise. Your application of WP:CITEVAR appears invalid in this instance.
I checked the mobile device mode here and see no accessibility issues and bullet points appear in that mode. I can't see the impact in mobile mode due to reverted edit. Even if true, the solution would be Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) not a revert. I have been making substantial edits to the "References" section since October 2016 to improve functionality without objection. Mitchumch (talk) 16:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)