Talk:Catherine Deneuve

message: The article is categorised under playboy models but nothing is mentioned abt her modeling for playboy. Is the cat an error? --Gurubrahma 05:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think it is  -- Samir   धर्म 05:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Playboy

message: I removed this statement about her role in Hunger:
", and her performance won her an indelible cult status in the States among lesbians, goths, and artistically inclined teenage boys. "
While there may indeed be some truth behind this, it needs to be rephrased and preferrably sourced if it's to be included. Even if she really did gain status in the gay community due to this role, I really doubt anyone can cite sources for inspiring "artistically inclined teenage[d] boys."
Rudd-O This article REALLY NEEDS to be NPOVized.  The second paragraph is a mess of glorifications.  Sure, Deneuve is a great artist in the eyes of many people.  But blatant praise like that does not belong on Wikipedia.
Unfortunately for you Rudd-O, the bio located on Wikipedia is the same bio for her everywhere else.  You call it blatant praise, yet it is fact.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.236.102 (talk) 23:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 71.227.236.102  -STOP the POV edits. STOP the sock puppetry (aka Smartissexy). STOP the vandalistic reverts. You have been reported62.64.201.37 23:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Either the Britannica or Wikipedia article is wrong about her birth year. Britannica says she was born in 1942, at the time of writing this article says 1943. Delta Tango • Talk 09:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible error? 

message: Smartissexy, thank you for confirming that you are the sockpuppet of 71.227.236.102. (Your attempted reverts of your talk page, at one moment smartissexy the next 71.227.236.102, show that too!)
Regarding edits: you must edit in good faith. By all means make constructive edits. Correct grammar, correct filmographies, etc. But you always want to add POV and remove genuine information and format against the style book just because you want it so! So go slowly. Do one thing at a time. Edit grammar THEN filmography and so on. Just trying to bulldoze your POV is against the spirit of wikipedia. 62.64.211.141 09:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have told you, you are perfectly welcome to make improvements.  Just don't try to slip in the usual POV rubbish you have been warned about by numerous people for months. You are becoming very overheated. So cool down. The article is not PR. I am being perfectly reasonable, please be the same. REASONABLE. (Sockpuppetry: we just know you are prepared to act dishonestly to try to get your way). 62.64.210.186 13:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should both stop arguing like children.  88888 14:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My version is superior, it incorporated a great deal of what 62.64.210.186 attempted to add in a very sloppy way. 62.64.210.186 if you touch the article again you will be reported for the 3RR. Smartissexy 17:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This is a joke, you added TWO SOURCES, you fixed nothing. Your version is poor, riddled with grammatical and spelling errors, and it is the same cut and paste hack job from NON-SOURCED sites. You don't need to repeat anything, it is clear my version is preferred as I am not the only one saying this. Like I said, take your own advice, if you vandalize this article again you will be reported for the 3RR.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartissexy (talk • contribs) 17:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have reverted back to Smart's version for a number of reasons including it is a far better building block than 62.64.211.213. In doing so I fortunately also removed the blatant copyright violations incurred by 62.64.211.213 which were lifted verbatim and uncited from the IMDB trivia section of Deneuve's biography there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfwine (talk • contribs) 17:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sockpuppetry and edits

message: Is it true she is bisexual? It says so here.  MerriFunn 13:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: She is not bisexual, and she has said that she is not countless times. Smartissexy 17:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sexuality

message: I have linked to the already existing self-standing filmography. 62.64.211.213 16:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right on. :) María (críticame) 17:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

text: That was Si c'était à refaire (1976). She asks her lawyer to make her pregnant. He refuses, but she succeeds in getting pregnant to make her prison term more bearable. It's in the filmography all right. --El Ingles (talk) 18:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks a lot.  I'd forgotten about being in Belgium in 1976 — that must have been when I saw it. Paul Magnussen (talk) 18:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Filmography

message: I looked in the filmography for a film I saw in France in 1966 whose title (unfortunately) I can't recall, but it doesn't seem to be there...
Deneuve plays a girl who gets involved in a robbery although she has a young son. The gang gets caught, and she spends the next couple of decades in prison.  When she gets out, she looks up her son to see what has become of him — but he falls in love with her, not knowing she's his mother.
I'm certain it was Deneuve, although not absolutely certain of the date.  is this film really missing, or is my memory playing me up?
Paul Magnussen (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was Si c'était à refaire (1976). She asks her lawyer to make her pregnant. He refuses, but she succeeds in getting pregnant to make her prison term more bearable. It's in the filmography all right. --El Ingles (talk) 18:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks a lot.  I'd forgotten about being in Belgium in 1976 — that must have been when I saw it. Paul Magnussen (talk) 18:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing film? 

message: :Image:Belle-de-jour.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 11:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Belle-de-jour.jpg

message: "cultivated lust object for art house filmgoers everywhere"? Jose João (talk) 08:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the standard for every biography of Deneuve. I can see this article is going to end up in an edit war again due to the amount of people who feel the need to remove references and have disregard for proper sentence structure and facts.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.11.187.178 (talk) 08:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cultivated lust object?

message: I see a lot of discussion above about the quality of this article.
This includes the comments:  "the bio located on Wikipedia is the same bio for her everywhere else."
AND "The biography ....is the ACCEPTED and SAME biography for Deneuve on nearly every other internet source."
These comments agree with my observation that there is a lot of overlap among various on-line biographies of Catherine Deneuve.  For example, the bit about "made her reputation playing a series of beautiful ice maidens for..." is in our article AND it also appears in the first three references.
The question I want to ask -- Are these other articles extracts from the Wikipedia article, or is the Wikipedia articles plagiarized from another source?
I'm hoping someone who is familiar with this article's history can answer this.
Thank you, Wanderer57 (talk) 21:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question re Article Sources 

message: I'd like to point the editors of this article to a great piece on movingimagesource.us about Catherine Deneuve, here: 
http://www.movingimagesource.us/articles/belle-de-siecle-20080604
I'm affiliated with Moving Image Source and cannot post this as an external link myself, but I think it should be added. Moving Image Source is a non-profit interested only in disseminating great criticsm. 
Thanks. 
206.252.136.194 (talk) 14:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible External Link 

message: This is to draw the following issue Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2008 October 2‎ to the attention of editors who are interested in the Catherine Deneuve article.  Wanderer57 (talk) 01:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for noting this problem. While much of the material had already been revised, courtesy of this article's careful editors, segments remained slightly too close to the source, close enough to be a concern as a derivative work. I have revised these portions to further separate and have also located a few sources to help support the text. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:36, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problems 

message: Years passed, and some websites are offline today, or have changed the way it indexes their pages. Here is a list of broken links I collected from the article, just to keep them for the record:
* http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n18724578/
* https://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Wyeth-Company-History.html
* http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/fashion/2007/08/02/efvuitton102.xml
* http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=14352
* http://www.stopclustermunitions.org/news.asp?id=10
* http://www.audible.fr/livre_audio/voix-femmes-democratie_BK_DESF_000031FR.htm
* http://archquo.nouvelobs.com/cgi/articles?ad=culture/20041126.OBS2461.html&host=http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/
* http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/fashion/article2173836.ece
* http://www.euroweeklynews.com/2011032386379/news/spain/catherine-deneuve-flouts-smoking-ban.html
I noticed that a lot of this article was based on the content found on toutsurdeneuve.free.fr. I would like to bring to the attention of everyone that this is just a blog like wordpress.com or blogspot.com, where anyone can say anything about anyone. Therefore, it doesn't comply with WP's expectations in terms of sources:
* http://toutsurdeneuve.free.fr/Francais/Pages/Interviews_Presse9099/LosAngelesTimes92.htm
* http://toutsurdeneuve.free.fr/Francais/Pages/Univers_Sorties/Sorties03_en.htm
* http://toutsurdeneuve.free.fr/Francais/Pages/Personnalite_Engagements/Politique.htm#int1
* http://toutsurdeneuve.free.fr/Francais/Pages/Interviews_Presse9099/Advocate95.htm
Also, I'm removing this link to Yasni: 
* http://www.yasni.fr/hortense+divetain/recherche+personne
It's a people search engine that scraps content from the Web...
So that's a lot of invalid refs. Actually half this article is based on unverifiable information... Not very compliant with WP's rules... --Thistrackted (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken links and other not valid refs 

message: Please add the following film to Catherine Deneuve's filmography: ' God Loves Caviar',  filmed in 2012, in the role of 'Empress Catherine II of Russia'. More details can be found here: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt2181959/
Spapkcom (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The IMDb is not a reliable source. ⋘HueSatLum ? ❢⋙ 15:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 22 November 2012 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Catherine Deneuve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070602200046/http://www.highbeam.com:80/doc/1G1-94716710.html to http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-94716710.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Catherine Deneuve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140117024536/https://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1290483.php/Thousands_sign_petition_against_"misogynous"_treatment_of_Royal to http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1290483.php/Thousands_sign_petition_against_"misogynous"_treatment_of_Royal
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130322163106/http://moscowfilmfestival.ru/miff34/eng/archives/?year=1997 to http://www.moscowfilmfestival.ru/miff34/eng/archives/?year=1997
*Added  tag to http://www.palmspringswalkofstars.com/web-storage/Stars/Stars%20dedicated%20by%20date.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:11, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Catherine Deneuve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080903103813/http://www.gala.fr/les_stars/leurs_bio/deneuve_catherine to http://www.gala.fr/les_stars/leurs_bio/deneuve_catherine
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1290483.php/Thousands_sign_petition_against_%26quotmisogynous%26quot_treatment_of_Royal
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What is the reasoning behind making all her photos, (or even many of her photos;) about her as an old, relatively has-been woman?  Seems like every bio should include (even emphasize) photo(s) of the person at the time (age) they become notable or most active/over-achieving.  (Example: Highly over-represented Old Man Albert Einstein pics are also a "cute and politically correct," but warped historical perversion! Photos tell (his)stories too.) --2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:282E:4AA5:9277:BB30 (talk) 09:32, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Photos