Talk:Alan Arkin

The Kominsky Method on Netflix

Alan Arkin has a major role in this Netflix Original film. I'm not sure which category it belongs in, movie or TV. These categories are expanding and should include cable and premium cable. Where would we have put "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee" when it only existed on Crackle. (Now I think the new ones come out on Netflix, but I don't know if they are exclusive.) Anyway, my point is maybe there should only be one category and the venue really doesn't matter.

Since it's episodic, I think I'll put it under TV. R39525 (talk) 20:00, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

References

Too many refrences to his 2007 Little Miss Sunshine Oscar

There's at least three places (all right next to each other) that mention him winning the Oscar for best supporting actor. It looks like several different people wrote it in, while watching the Oscars, before checking to see if someone else had already.

M*A*S*H*

Wasn't he Dr. Sidney Freeman, the psychologist, in M*A*S*H*? I was going to just add that, but then I wasn't sure. Could anyone confirm this one way or the other? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowviking (talk • contribs) 02:13, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

If you mean the TV series, the actor's name was Allan Arbus [1]. If you mean the 1970 movie, there was a David Arkin [2], but he played a different role. Not hard to see where your confusion came from. -- JackofOz 02:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. Shadowviking 14:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Photo & Children's article?

Heyllo ppl, there is a photograph of him in Yossarian, the role he played in the movie adaptation of the novel Catch-22. So can't we use it here too? and by the way does this qualify as a children's literature??? Elncid (talk) 12:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Birth year of Adam Arkin, son of Alan Arkin

In this article, the birth year of Adam Arkin is stated as 1957. However in the Wikipedia article on Adam Arkin, the year is stated as 1956. In the highly respected reference book "The Film Encyclopedia", 1994 edition, by Ephraim Katz, the year is stated as 1956.216.80.73.204 (talk) 23:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)Douglas Fornango, Chicago, IL (no current email address)

Main picture from 1975

Isn't the picture a little old? --Diblidabliduu (talk) 14:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Comma in opening sentence

​​ MOS:SERIAL says Editors may use either convention so long as each article is internally consistent. The lead uses the serial comma consistently except for in the opening sentence. I believe the IP who added a comma after "director" in actor, director and screenwriter is applying the Manual of Style correctly. Schazjmd (talk) 15:01, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

@Schazjmd In this case, I think you're right. There were other cases by the same IP where it was not correct. The article has some comma issues beyond that. —C.Fred (talk) 15:13, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Contradiction?

If this: In 1957 he made his feature film acting debut in a small role the musical film Calypso Heat Wave. then how this: Arkin is one of only six actors to receive an Academy Award nomination for Best Actor for their first screen appearance (for The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming in 1966).? --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

The filmsite.org ref recognizes that; in the list of "Film Debut Nominees/Winners for Best Actor Oscars", for Arkin, it notes (he had a minor role in a film a decade earlier), and similar notes for Ben Kingsley and Geoffrey Rush (both of whom won). But that same ref lists 8 "debut nominees/winners", so our article is off on that point too. Question is, is that source authoritative for calling The Russians... his debut despite the minor role 10 years earlier? Schazjmd (talk) 22:34, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Second Oscar nomination, first major film role. That's not a "debut" in any way I can see. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

It was his first Oscar nomination. But looking at the ref again, I see this time that it calls that list "a sampling", so "one of only six" is wrong on both aspects ― not his debut, and not "only six". Schazjmd (talk) 13:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I guess it depends how you look at it. The short film That's Me written by and starring Arkin was nominated. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Report of death

At this moment (13:49 UTC), only People is reporting that Arkin has died.[3] Given the guidance in WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, I am waiting for another source besides people to confirm the news before adding it to the article, even though People is sourcing the statement to Arkin's family. —C.Fred (talk) 13:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

[4]https://www.tovima.gr/2023/06/30/culture/pethane-o-ithopoios-alan-arkin/ does this work? Death Editor 2 (talk) 13:57, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

CNNNYT are now reporting the death as well. Natg 19 (talk) 16:35, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Nominated at In the News

This article has been nominated to be linked on the main page at WP:ITNC. However there is currently a strong consensus that article quality, in particular referencing, does not meet the customary standards expected for articles to be promoted on the main page. Editors may join the discussion at ITNC and are encouraged to help improve the article by adding citations to reliable sources for any claims of fact that are not obviously uncontroversial. This article is still subject to WP:BLP and I have orange tagged it due to the sourcing issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:23, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Carpet bombing

(moved from user talk arising after removal of the banner tag)

Really? You don't think there are serious gaps in referencing there? This is the third time the ref improve tag has been improperly removed from the article. I put it there in order to avoid carpet bombing the article with CN tags. But enough is enough. Bombs away. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:43, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

P.S. If you think the Ref Improve tag is insufficiently clear for general use, you should send it to MfD. This is exactly what the tag was intended for. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

• Carpet-bombing with tags from 20,000' doesn't achieve much because you're not looking at the detail and so it's indiscriminate – like a scene from Catch-22, in which Arkin starred. Let's look at the first paragraph that was tag-bombed to demonstrate:

Arkin was an early member of the Second City comedy troupe in the 1960s. In 1957, he made his feature film acting debut in a small role in the musical Calypso Heat Wave. In the early sixties, he appeared in episodes of East Side/West Side (1964) and ABC Stage 67 (1966). He also made his Broadway debut as a performer in From the Second City at the Royale Theatre in 1961.

The first thing we notice is that the chronology is wonky – it goes from the 1960s back to 1957 and then to the early sixties. Then the first sentence that was tagged was missing the conjuction "in" when it was tagged. Another editor came along soon after and added the missing conjunction but notice that they completely ignored the {{cn}}.

What you both missed is that the sentence is not accurate. Arkin did not make an acting debut in that movie – he appeared as the lead singer of The Tarriers. You can see this for yourself on YouTube. One might cite this but it's likely that some other jobsworth would come along to complain that this evidence won't do. So, the devil is in the details and indiscriminate nag tags don't help. The more of them that you scatter, the more people tune them out per banner blindness.

Andrew🐉(talk) 17:41, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I tagged unsourced claims of fact that are not obviously uncontroversial. Those probably numbered in the dozens. My point is that this was completely unnecessary. This is what the orange ref improve tag is for. It is intended to alert editors and readers that there are serious deficiencies in referencing and citations. CN tags may be used when there are only one or a handful of issues. The article is clearly in rough shape and piss poor referencing is a major part of that. Yet editors felt impelled to remove an obviously justified maintenance tag, not once, but three times. So instead, I spent close to half an hour cluttering an article with CN tags when only one was needed. If I am coming across as slightly irritated, it's because I am. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:35, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Readers don't need to be told when there are no citations in some places in the article – they can see this for themself. Per WP:V, the only places that citations are specially expected are for controversial statements and for quotations. Here's an apposite quotation

It is not fair to ask of others what you are unwilling to do yourself.

— Eleanor Roosevelt, My Day (15 June 1946)

But some doughty editors including Per$1$tenceofv1$1on and 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:5CE6:B6E2:4E06:219B have risen to the challenge and so the specific {{cn}} tags appear to be more effective than the {{refimprove}} banner in getting results. Well done everyone.

Andrew🐉(talk) 07:34, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I and another editor have been working on this page for the last couple of days, filling in CN tags. All but one have now been filled in (and I'm still searching for that one). So I reopened the nomination. I hope that's okay? If not, please revert - but I request that you or another editor reopen it after reviewing the article. Or let me know what further work, if any, is needed on the article. Thank you. Note that the Filmography section might need more citations before it can be marked as Ready. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:5CE6:B6E2:4E06:219B (talk) 09:21, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

- Am now working on Filmography section, not too many left to fill in. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:5CE6:B6E2:4E06:219B (talk) 10:02, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

- - The Filmography section should be fully sourced now. Please note another editor sourced many of the films to BFI, which looks fine to me - but if this single source being used so much is a problem, note that these films are also covered by the TVGuide ref and the Washington Post filmography as well. So these can be supplemented with these refs always used elsewhere in the section - but I didn't do that yet unless it's requested. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:5CE6:B6E2:4E06:219B (talk) 10:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

All updated now, incl. Theater - updated at nomination page on ITN. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:5CE6:B6E2:4E06:219B (talk) 10:50, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and work on the article. IP 2001 should please note that, if they had a registered account, they would have gotten a notification from my ping but IP editors don't get these, I was advised. But as they are following the discussion regardless, they are doing well. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:37, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Tarriers

There is no mention here of his being a member of the musical group The Tarriers, who had a top ten hit in 1956. There is information about this in the wiki article on The Tarriers. 68.234.76.251 (talk) 22:52, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Y It was already in the article – see Alan_Arkin#Musical_career. As they had some success with two hits, I have added details to the lead too. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Photo

Should we be seeking consensus about the best photo to have at the start of the article? It's obviously been changing a lot recently. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on (talk) 23:34, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

A gallery of candidates would help us compare them. See Talk:Raquel Welch#What image should we choose? for an example. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:32, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

One user in particular (an IP editor like myself - but a vandal) keeps changing them and writing aggressive edit summaries (check history page). This has also resulted in photos being deleted from the article as well. I've reported them. Can I also suggest once a photo is chosen here that any of the photos recently deleted from the body of the article be restored? As all the changing of the photos has resulted in some of them being removed and it would be nice to keep them in the article regardless of which photo is chosen as the main photo. Thank you. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:8D80:D3C:4CB:CA7D (talk) 09:09, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for all your work - personally I think that B/W photo of Arkin from 1975 is absolutely fine, but I guess that comes from the gut. It makes sense for someone who's had a long career to have a lead photo from the middle and not the end of it, but I'm not aware of any Wikipedia policies about this Per$1$tenceofv1$1on (talk) 12:29, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

References used in discussion

References

Marriages

Does anybody know the correct dates of Arkin's various marriages? Here it says he was married to Barbara Dana until 1994, but in his book "An Improvised Life," he talks about something that happened in 1997 when he was still married to her. Plus, IMDB (I think) says that he divorced her in 1999. In fact, the exact date given is November 2, 1999. But what makes it even weirder is that many sources say that he married Suzanne Newlander in 1996. Does anybody know what's up with these contradictory dates and which are the correct ones? InYourFaceNewYorker (talk) 01:09, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

interest in buddhism

mentioned at http://reportfromsantafe.com/episodes/view/797/alan-arkin-actor-and-author-out-of-my-mind-an-improvised-life Arlo James Barnes 06:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)