Talk:Latin lover

Latin lover - footnotes

Copied from User talk:CaroleHenson

Hello Carole. You placed a no footnotes tag to the page Latin lover (stereotype) which I wrote recently. I expected something like this, so I have a question what to do in a situation like this. Some 98% percent of the page is actually an article on Latin lover in film encyclopedia which I listed as one of the sources. Of course, I translated it and adapted it to the English language, but it is the only source. Other source which I mentioned is actually listed as the source for the article in encyclopedia itself, so I listed it, too. Other 2% are added names of some actors which are not named in the article from encyclopedia, but are categorized as such in their respective articles (I have this encyclopedia in PDF so I easily searched it) and couple of names are from the already existing Latin lover disambiguation page on Wikipedia. So, instead of adding footnotes from one and only source at the end of each passage, I opted for listing the source instead. What should be done?PajaBG (talk) 21:21, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi PajaBG, There should be footnotes at every instance of a source.

One way to think about it is, Wikipedia is a collaborative process where many people contribute to an article over time. As more people add and modify content, if there aren't footnotes, it's very confusing to tell where the content came from. Fortunately the article isn't too long yet, so it won't be too hard to do.

Do you know how to format multiple uses of footnotes using <ref name=""> - citation - </ref> for the first one, and <ref name="" /> for all subsequent uses?–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:28, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Here's an example, Debra Ruh, but I'd be happy to help you get started if you can point to a sentence or group of sentences and the applicable source.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:33, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

OK. Instead of naming it as a source, I spread it as references throughout the page. PajaBG (talk) 11:16, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Where was the other source used?–CaroleHenson (talk) 12:40, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Guess I wasn't clear earlier. Only source for the page is article from Film Encyclopedia. That article, in Encyclopedia, names Patalas' book as its own source, so I named that one as source, too, being source of the source. It you think it is redundant, I will remove it, though I think it should stay (if not as a source, maybe as a Further reading or something). PajaBG (talk) 15:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Yep, "Further reading" would be the way to go. I went ahead and made the change. Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:01, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Curious

Why are Robert Redford and Robert De Niro in an article about Latin lovers? It doesn't make sense. The citation provided is not accessible online and is in one of the Yugoslavian languages, possibly Croatian. Other actors mentioned could be queried as well, but the idea of Robert Redford (English, Scottish, and Irish ancestry) as a Latin lover is as crazy as it gets. And Michael York?!?! — O'Dea (talk) 11:53, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I removed the excessive clarify tags. The article was reviewed twice by the native English speakers, and though it certainly still has much room for improvement in the language department (you are free to fix it yourself), I doubt it is really that unintelligible to baffle you that much. If there are specific things you have problems with, post it here so we can discuss it, like you did with some other objections. After all, how would someone else know what is not clear to you?

As for the specificities, there is “an intrigue which insinuates the doomed affair". Insinuation obviously refers to the doomed aspect of the affair. If you know something on the subject, you know that these types of lovers/strangers are always presented with the gradually revealed sub-plot regarding some gloomy secret baggage from their past life which has negative effect on the present love affair. Hence, those affairs in most cases don’t survive. Both the past plot/scheme and the illicit affair can be refered to as intrigue. Guess in this case “victim of his past” might also be used. There are female counterparts in the movies. Entire Ava Gardner’s career was like that. Falling in love with Gardner in the movie almost always ended with break up, pain or death. So, if it should be improved in terms of language, either do it, or suggest here what should be changed.

As for the other specific remarks, here are some replies. The source in question is the two volume Film Encyclopedia, published in (at the time) Serbo-Croatian.

Article on Robert Redford (Vol. II, p. 412) - “In his career one could also notice a clearer decision for the intetwining of two classical star system types – mix of the boy next door (integrity and commitment which sometimes evokes heroes of the F.Capra’s movies from the 1930s), and of the discreet touch of the Latin lover’s attraction......He presented characteristics of the Latin lover in melodramas The Great Gatsby (J.Clayton, 1974) and Out of Africa (S.Pollack, 1985)”.

Article on Michael York (Vol. II, p. 733) – “He often performs in adventure films, sometimes in remakes, inheriting romantic Latin lovers. Even though he doesn’t resemble the type physically (blond/ginger, blueyed, pale skinned) he resembles them in his blend of boyish fearlessnes, and (emotional) weakness which seems to conjure the loss. In these parts he also brings a touch of the 1970s sensibility of “disappointment”.

As for Robert De Niro, I deleted him as someone obviously smuggled him under already existing reference later. For the same reason, I removed other piggybackers, almost 20 of them, inserted in time under the references which don’t mention them. I also removed duplicates and names inserted in incorrect periods. Take care. PajaBG (talk) 21:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)