Talk:Sergio Franchi

About Sergio

Hi everyone !!! here's User:Rei Momo from IT.Wiki. I Made the Latin page of my friend Sergio Franchi. You can use the picture, because I put free license. It will be nice to put a picture of Sergio also iin English page.

Can you help me? Good luck!!!

Rei Momo It. Wiki

193.58.223.72 (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Removed section

I removed the section on his interests. Wiki is not a tabloid. --BwB (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

That's not all you removed! You removed almost 2,000 words of my article in progress! This was rude and major interference from a fellow editor! We have both already commented at length on my talk page, your talk page, and with other editor. For the record, I completely disagree that the section on his interests is tabloid in nature... Nor is the information on his family demographics. Sergio Franchi's classic car collection was a very important collection.. as was shown by the references. It was at least as important as John Denver's airplane collection.. which was discussed in his biography.Cathlec (talk) 17:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Use this template {{Construction}} at the top of the article. . Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 16:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Leszek Janczuk: Big helpCathlec (talk) 17:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

talk: Well, I ended up using most of your suggestions re Family Life, and incorporated the hobby material I wished to retain in the Biographical Bits and Pieces section. Hope we are more copasetic now. I am new to Wikipedia, and this is my third major article (all related to Franchi: Biography, Filmography, & Discography), and where I would really appreciate your help is in Wikipedia matters. I would like to know how to use the American Musicians Template. Can you help? Do I copy (and how) from someone else and rename? Also after I get it done on one page (or Sandbox) How do I move, copy, to main pages? Haven't been able to find Help here. Thanks, CatherineCathlec (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Can someone direct me to where to find info on American Musicians Twmplate and how to use. ThanksCathlec (talk) 19:37, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

• Can you be more specific? Are you referring to an infobox template? There is a category entitled American Musicians template, but not much else. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 21:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Got it! with some helpCathlec (talk) 23:06, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Someone without a user page has vandalized the Sergio Franchi template on all three related pages Biography, Discography, and Filmography! How do I fix? How do I keep it from happening again??CatherineCathlec (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I responded on your talk page. You did not add a template, but a navigational box. First, create the template with the navigational box in the template, then add the template to the article not the navigational box. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 21:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I came here to answer your help request, and I didn't see any vandalism. If I am wrong, please re-open this request. Cheers --andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 23:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Just a note, have been under some respiratory distress and hope to complete article shortly.Cathlec (talk) 15:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

picture uploading

I uploaded a new photograph of Sergio Franchi under fair use on Wikipedia. Did this befor some time ago, but something is wron, and can't use. File is uploaded as File:Sergio Franchi Rare Pewter Collection, Look magazine, 1969.jpg. When I try to add it to the Sergio Franchi page, it is not working Only displys file name, not image. The only thing I can see wrong in the Wikipedia image file is that it contains no description under the image. Something wrong. The rationale and license info seems to display correct. Help! Cathlec (talk) 19:53, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

frameless|right

There are 2 subjects that I need help with in my editing:

1. The Sergio Franchi article on which I have been working is a member of two hidden categories..."Articles with improper non-free content." This may relate to a photo of Sergio Franchi on PlayBill Magazine which I uploaded with rationale and license on August 26, 2012. I have received no feedback that this photo was not accepted. The second hidden category is "Articles with improper non-free content from February 2013." This must relate to a new photo that I uploaded today, as the article has been tagged. I used what I thought was the proper Template and Rationale on this article, also. The editor left no details of defficiency. Can someone help with this? 2. I am trying to add Categories, and the CatBot involved is very confusing. I am trying to add the category "Sergio Franchi" to which I will be adding subcategories involvings Songs and Albums. My reading of the CatBot page says that I first need to add the parent category for Sergio Franchi...which I cannot find. His name is on all of the categories on the article, but am at a loss to know how to chose the administrative category under which "Sergio Franchi" is subcategorized. I have read the Wikipedia Help article about creating categories, etc., but would benefit by a more concrete example of using this information. OR, consider substituting the Non-free image of the 'Nine" poster or National Tour Programs the were changed to depict Franchi's takeover of the starring role (above)? ThanksCathlec (talk) 23:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Removed contested non-fee image.Cathlec (talk) 19:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

1. Both those hidden categories are a part of the {{non-free}} template Stefan2 added with this edit. For all I can tell there's but a single non-free image, the book cover, and I don't think we actually need that. The article is rather picture-heavy anyway, and Franchi's look is so constant that yet another photo of him seems redundant. I'd suggest waiting for Stefan2's reply to your explanation on his talk page.
2. You have added Category:Sergio Franchi to the artticle, but that category does not yet exist (thus the red link). I've just checked other eponymous musician categories such as Category:Elvis Presley, Category:Michael Jackson and Category:George Frideric Handel, and those commonly have parent categories such as Category:Wikipedia categories named after actors or appropriate sub-categories of Category:Wikipedia categories named after musicians. However, I don't think we yet have enough other articles to justify an eponymous category for Franchi; at the very least we'd probably need three or four articles for that. Thus for now I'll remove that category again. Huon (talk) 03:49, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

To Huon and Stefan2: At the present time I do not agree with either of your positions regarding the use of images on the Sergio Franchi biography. First of all, what are "enough images." I do not believe that editors should be concerned with the absolute number of images. I do not believe that pictures which represent different aspects of a person's life are excessive. On the Filmography I used lots of images because Franchi was in a lot of TV productions. On the biography page, I am sure I could remove a few images, but our culture is image-driven and I used the images believing that their use would draw attention to this person's life. Dying before the advent of the internet his memory was almost allowed to die because none of his contemporaries carried his story onto the internet..thus my desire to preserve the biography of a person who was very important during the late 20th century in musical and theater history. As for my own motives as an editor of Wikipedia, I have used my work on these pages to increase my expertise as a Wikipedia editor, and have made contributions on every page that I felt competent to add at the time. This has also increased my editorial knowledge. Enough about personal motivation. As to the issue at hand... Wikipedia's biography portal describes a biography as "a detailed description of someone's life. More than a list of basic facts [education, relationships, and death)....a biography ...highlights various aspects of his or her life...." THAT is why I believe that the non-free image depicting Franchi's beloved avocations were deserving of representation in the 2 photos showing his automobile and pewter collections. I also felt that a textual statement would be enhanced by the 2 photos that I had discovered. As to the Non-free book cover depicting Sergio Franchi's 18 months of his life on the Broadway stage musical "Nine'..as you are aware, usually only the original creator of the role is given fair space. However, his role was considered important enough by the producers to warrant new posters, programs, and an new original song...I believe that the visual reminder of his impact on musical theater history in 1984 was important. There were no other free images available after 1976 when the copyright law regarding publicity photos changed. I am interested in improving as an editor, and if you still believe that I should remove the Library of Congress image (Pewter collection), I will comply with your suggestion. Please consider my argument on it's retention. ThanksCathlec (talk) 16:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

To Huon regarding Categories: I agree that there are not enough articles to have a separate category for Sergio Franchi at this time. I am really interested in learning how to use categories. I am just starting to try and add articles on "Sergio Franchi Albums." I have committed to being a part of Wiki Project Albums., and even using examples from other artists in my sandbox, I cannot get a handle on how to start my first Album article, add the Category "Sergio Franchi Albums"...or albums that I have planned on other important artists. I have read the pertinent articles...and have hit a road block. Any Concrete help would be appreciated. ThanksCathlec (talk) 16:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for removing the category; I had intended to do so myself, but I forgot. Regarding the images: The non-free content criteria say: "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Since we don't actually discuss the non-free "Nine" cover image and the article text doesn't even mention the fact that the cover is in some way special or sigificant, I don't see how that's the case. If we have a reliable source discussing that significance, we can just as well add a line a la "Franchi made the cover of Playbill: The National Theatre Magazine", and not showing the cover wouldn't be detrimental to the readers' understanding. Thus I'd say the NFCC prohibit the use of this non-free image. I don't have much of an opinion on the various free images; many seem to highlight comparatively trivial details of Franchi's life (for comparison, we don't have an image of Elizabeth II with her corgies).

Regarding the albums-and-categories issue, I'm not quite sure what kind of help you're looking for. As positive examples I'd point to our Good Articles on albums. The examples I looked at were categorized by decade, language, producer and artist; decade and language would be easy for Franchi as well. The people at WT:WikiProject Albums may be better able to help you with album articles than I am. Huon (talk) 23:23, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

To Huon: You haven't said anything new to contradict my use of the 2 Non-Free iages. Regarding the depiction of Franchi's Pewter collection I repeat: Wikipedia's biography portal describes a biography as "a detailed description of someone's life. More than a list of basic facts [education, relationships, and death)....a biography ...highlights various aspects of his or her life...." And I do not agree with your analogy that a picture of Quenn Elizabeth with her Corgi has no place in an encyclopedia article. In the interest of consensus, i have stated that the Pewter pic is less important than the 'Nine' Playbill picture...to satisfy Stefan2 statement about 2 NF photos being "excessive"??? However, your claim that using the 'Nine' Playbill pic is not significant to the article, I disagree. Simply stating that Franchi starred in the Broadway play and the National tour is not sufficient. It is my claim that not using this picture would detract from the significance of his role in the musical. It is not enought that virtually all of the images of Nine show only the original stars and would therefore conceal Franchi's contributions. Including it adds to the reader's understanding of this part of theatre history. The inclusion this picture is significant because it a pictorial representation of Franchi's contribution! That seems like a "no-brainer" to me. I am aware the the use of copyrights changed in 1976-77, but there are no Non-free images that depict his role in the Broadway musical after he took over on May 9, 1983. NEW QUESTION: Would using a Non-Free image of the 'Nine' poster or program depicting the changes made to accomodate Franchi's starring role (as mentioned in the article) be more suitable than the Playbill cover? I have Images of those both the Poster and the National Tour Program depicting Franchi's role. Appreciate your feedback. Cheers.Cathlec (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

In the interst of consensus I have remove the NF photo of Franchi & his Pewter collection. Could it be argued that since the image was donated to the Library of Congress in 1973, that it is a free, educational image? Just interested in learning. CatherineCathlec (talk) 02:58, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

To Huon By the way, in your post you state (regarding the NF images)..."many seem to highlight comparatively trivial details of Franchi's life." There are only TWO NF images, the two under discussion! Your statement appears to trivialize both me and the person who is the subject of this well-researched biography. By the way, your analogy re a picture of QE II and her Corgies being trivial, I completely disagree. There is a very long history of depicting monarchs with their dogs in artistic images. Seems artists feel it humanizes them (my opinion). As I originally stated, the Wikipedia Biography Portal atates, a life is just not about professional life, but the whole person. Cathlec (talk) 03:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

That comment was about "the various free images", not about the non-free images. How exactly is it trivializing to either you or Franchi to note that he's better-known for other aspects of his life than collecting cars and pewter? Those seem mere hobbies to me. Wikipedia should give weight to various aspects of a person's life in relation to the weight given them in independent sources. The "publicity photo" in the "more changes in life" section and the "in Concert" photo in the philanthropy section don't seem to illustrate anything at all beyond Franchi's looks, and we have multiple other photos for that. Huon (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

To Stefan2 Please read my additional comments above. In the interest of consensus, I have removed the Non-Free image of Sergio Franchi and his Pewter Collection I uploaded in February, and agreed to have the Orphaned image deleted. I hope you will remove the Non-free image tag from the article. However, I dO NOT agree with any of Huon comments re the use of the 'Nine" playbill image. That photo has been in the article for 6 months without any editorial objections. I have presented some additional rationale above. I hope you agree that the rationale for keeping This image confirms to Wikipedia policy. Thanks, CatherineCathlec (talk) 15:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

First of all, you should avoid using too many images in an article because this may make it take too long to load the page if you are behind a slow Internet connection, and it may be cause problems to people who pay per megabyte. If there are lots of images available, it may be better to link to a gallery page, such as Commons:Category:Sergio Franchi, instead of including all images in the article.

Secondly, there is no automatic permission to use non-free images in an article. You always need to show why removal of an image would be detrimental to the understanding of the article (WP:NFCC#8) and why you can't use a free image instead (WP:NFCC#1). In this case, there are lots of free images available which could easily serve the same purpose as the unfree images. The book cover is therefore currently up for deletion at WP:FFD. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:14, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Removed contested non-free image.Cathlec (talk) 19:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Too much information!

This reads like a fan page, not an encyclopedia entry. Way too much detailed information, especially in the bottom third of the entry. Also, it doesn't have a neutral POV and almost gushes over the subject of the biography. It's a little nauseating, frankly, and unprofessional. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 16:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely agree with you. YouarelovedSOmuch (talk) 05:06, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Reads like publicity piece

I second the comment above and find that it reads like some kind of press release put out by a publicist. It's way too long and detailed considering this man was not a major global star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.68.79.202 (talk) 14:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Reply to POV comments

To 69.125.134.86 (talk) Strange to have two unsigned, anonymous POV comments at the same time. The article was meticulously researched, and the POV therefore is a reflection of the sources cited. The article does not contain flowery adjectives...that would have been flagged by a "bot." Actually, none of the editors on Wikipedia are professionals...we are all unpaid amateurs. I do agree that there is too much detailed information in some sections, and will try to reduce where possible. To 72.68.79.202 (talk) Again, another anonymous comment. The Wikipedia criteria for a biography is "noteworthy" -- Not "major global star." Catherine LeckieCathlec (talk) 17:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

To talk and talk: I have edited out a portion of the details on the 60s, 70s, and 80s; removed two photos, and removed most of the Trivia entries. Being shorter, I feel that the article now reads better. I have read the POV discussion guidelines. If you have any Specific criticism about POV language, please list them. While realizing that some editors might have differing opinions, it is my opinion that the POV tag should be removed.Cathlec (talk) 22:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Page needs a lot of help

I too agree with others here that the page is written like a fan page, not a professional article. Lots of details and facts are great, but they are laid out in such an unorthodox manner. One of the reasons I originally went to Franchi's page was to find out when and how he died. I quickly discovered there was no "Later life and death" section, or anything comparable, and it took me quite a while just to find out this information. It's like the article's author was ga ga for him. I just want to know the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YouarelovedSOmuch (talk • contribs) 20:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Were this a fan magazine the presentation would be fine but it is supposed to be encyclopedia article. I'll start revising it piecemeal. Motsebboh (talk) 01:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

I've gone thorugh the article piece by piece. It still needs a lot of work, still contains excessive information, still is not up to Wikipedia standards, etc. But it's a step better than it was. YouarelovedSOmuch (talk) 10:49, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Compared to the torrent of issues and complaints and accusations already launched over this page, this might seem like small potatoes. But I was completely confused by this sentence: "He became an American citizen in 1972." Wait -- what was he before? He's listed as Italian-American in the very first sentence. I realize that this might be clarified farther down in the entry, but it needs to be made clear right here! Jeri Southern (talk) 03:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)