Talk:James Cagney

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Good articleJames Cagney has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 10, 2009Good article nomineeListed
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 30, 2017.

Misc. Errors

1. Cagney Married Carolyn Nelson. 2. The movie is "Angels with Dirty Faces" not wings ....

Dysprosia
21:50, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Correct anything you know is wrong. But check first! Your second correction is clearly in order, and I've just made it. But Frances Willard "Bill" Vernon married Cagney in 1922 and survived him, Carolyn Elizabeth Nelson was Cagney's mother! -- Someone else 22:07, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I have a lot to say about Cagney. Only for the moment am I saying nothing. Orangetuesday 07:12, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This might be of interest to the article; When asked who the greatest movie star of all time is, Orson Welles said James Cagney. This is in the Parkinson interview (on youtube, part 4). --85.83.126.224 02:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new to Wikipedia - not sure if this would be worth changing, but Cagney's own quote, sourced from the Doug Warren biography, about how he refused to say the line 'I'm your baby, ain't I?' in 'Sinner's Holiday', must have been a misremembering on his part. He says the line loud and clear in the original trailer for the movie, which is on the TCM website. It was cut from the finished movie. --Juditoo (talk) 16:17, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, perhaps that's what he meant. I'll look into a bit more and try and work it into the article. Thanks! --20:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Picture

I'm glad Cagney got a postage stamp, but can't we get a better picture than that? Come on. There must be dozens of great and usable pictures on the net. Also there should be more than one, which can go next to the filmography. --Mantanmoreland 03:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do people think of the new picture? I think the copyright situation is OK. Is it correctly formatted? I don't have much experience with photos.--Mantanmoreland 23:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why 'remembered'

It is opinion and OR, unless one can cite it, to say that Cagney is remembered as a noir star or crime picture guy. He starred in a wide variety of roles, particularly in his later career. He won an Academy Award portraying George M. Cohan. It is more accurate to describe him as winning acclaim for a wide variety of roles, and I have changed the lead paragraph to say so. (P.S.why am I the only one using Talk?)-Mantanmoreland 20:03, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As long as I'm griping, I would add that this article really could use a lot of strengthening. He was a subject of several biographies and at least one autobiographical book, Cagney by Cagney. There is tons of stuff out there. I will do my best to flesh out this article but I hope that others pitch in. I'll post a notice somewhere to see if more editors can flock in and work on this.--Mantanmoreland 20:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin j's edits

Thank you for adding information to the Cagney article. However, a couple of notes. You made over forty minor edits in about an hour. It would serve WP better if you would use the sandbox or other means to construct your submissions exactly the way you want them and then submit them, rather than several dozen tweaks in a row. It makes it very tedious for others to follow your edits. Also, even though you submitted much useful information, you have unfortunately slaughtered the grammar and understandability of the article. Sentences now run into each other without sense, words are misused ("it's" for "its," etc.), and it will take someone a fair amount of time to correct these errors. Perhaps you would be willing to go over the article now, sentence by sentence, and repair not the content but the grammar. Thank you. Monkeyzpop (talk) 20:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers priority assessment

Per debate and discussion re: assessment of the approximate 100 top priority articles of the project, this article has been included as a top priority article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Road to Featured Article

OK, so this article is currently at Start level, and has clearly a long way to go before we can get it on the front page. I've made a few changes to the lead and early life sections having just got hold of a bio.

However, I think the that the whole things needs a considerable rewrite. I suggest that the career section needs splitting up, it should be the meat of the article and I really think it needs some subsections. Perhaps we could split it by stage, and then by film, possibly subdivided by studio/independent. Additionally, there are some stuff that come from the IMDB trivia section, which really isn't reliable. I'm hoping to get hold of his autobio and another bio of him over the next few days which hopefully will allow some better sourcing of stuff. I'll keep making more minor edits and other general stuff while hopefully we can reach a consensus here Ged UK (talk) 19:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, nobody has any comments, so I'll just make the changes. I've split the career section up into smaller chunks based on studio/independent status and filled out the Early Life and Early Career sections. I've just started on the first warner section. Ged UK (talk) 21:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm plodding on with this, not quite as fast as I hoped, but hopefully got a bit of time over the next few days to finish the main section, ie his movie career. Then I'll add a section on his politics/political involvement, which should help dent some of the trivia section, which I intend to get rid of. Ged UK (talk) 16:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cagney was a friend of Reagan etc. and contributed to the GOP (Newsmeat ref hidden for now in Categories template). Newsmeat does not go way back, but I am pretty sure he was for Ike etc. as well. As I understand it, Cohan was also a Republican. Collect (talk) 11:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(I just left a comment on your talk page too) Thanks for that. There was a discussion on here about his politics, but it got deleted in the banned IP section below. I'll be sure to make ref to the newsmeat site when I get round to his politics, which isn't very well sourced in his Bios/autobio. --Ged UK (talk) 11:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As near as I can tell, he was counted as "left wing" during the 30s, but was angry at being labeled "Communist" which was apparently one of the reasons for doing YDD. After the start of WW II (possibly as early as 1941) he appears to have changed his politics, and by the time of Reagan, labeled himself "arch-conservative." I suspect many changed after WW II, the father of a close friend lost a professorship at Columbia in the early 50s, became a book dealer and a staunch capitalist! Collect (talk) 13:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've heard the YYD/patriotism argument before, but I've not found anything that really backs it up. Where does that 'arch-conservative' quote come from? --Ged UK (talk) 13:24, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Yankee Doodle Dandy article helps to dispel the over-mythologizing of this issue. Keep in mind Reagan was an FDR liberal also. I recall how he spoke fondly of FDR even as he was running as a conservative. FDR offered hope to the average citizen, and the GOP offered nothing but despair. That's basically it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Though it does feel rather like OR to me, but the points are valid. --Ged UK (talk) 13:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What feels like OR? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The whole patriotism section seems to be OR, as someone has worked out dates etc. It's right, I think, but still OR. --Ged UK (talk) 14:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please be specific. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually an interesting topic far too complex for here. FDR actually ran well to the right of Hoover (whose proposed works projects were derailed by the Dems -- see the 1932 Dem Platform "We advocate an immediate and drastic reduction of governmental expenditures by abolishing useless commissions and offices, consolidating departments and bureaus, and eliminating extravagance to accomplish a saving of not less than twenty-five per cent in the cost of the Federal Government." at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showplatforms.php?platindex=D1932 ). Wendell Willkie had been a Democrat until 1939 http://www.usfamily.net/web/timwalker/sitedocs/home.html and after his defeat was a close ally of FDR. FDR, by the way, did not consider himself a liberal particularly, but did view Henry Wallace and Huey Long as major problems in the Dem party. The whole story gets very convoluted indeed. Collect (talk) 13:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also see http://books.google.com/books?id=UVfIKEqIkDMC&pg=PA46&dq=cagney+%22arch-conservative%22 (page 46). Collect (talk) 13:54, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got "Cagney by Cagney" ... p. 164 has "(in 1939) When Ronnie (Reagan) and I saw in what direction the group was headed we both resigned the same night." Also, that his first vote for a Republican was for Tom Dewey, and that he went to a Willkie election party wearing a Roosevelt button. I think this brackets his political change, to be sure. Collect (talk) 18:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, cool. I haven't got that far into that book yet. And my copy has a different page number, annoyingly. Which chapter? --Ged UK (talk) 19:30, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I used the 1976 Doubleday edition ... it, dear me you must know this on general principles, is in the last chapter <g>. Collect (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have the softback version. Pg 182 in mine, chp 13. I'll have a good read of it later. Thanks! --Ged UK (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In style, it reads like it was dictated to an assistant who organized it all. No real autobiography is so precise in all the sequences of events. (ok, so I am a little cynical) Collect (talk) 01:34, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Needs political ref in article -- someone thought the cite in category list was insufficient. I thought you would probably do better at writing the full section. Collect (talk) 04:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Ged UK asked me to take a look at the article, which was when I noted the category and the ref with it. There really isn't a precedent for adding a ref to a category addition. While it doesn't show in the reflist, it does leave a cite # hanging at the bottom of the article, which looks odd. The article is slated to be included in the Version 0.7 release, which will be basically set on Monday. I don't really want a hanging ref # in the release. At present, all the newsmeat link shows is that Cagney made a handful of donations to the Republican party machine once his friend Ronald Reagan began his presidency run. That alone doesn't confirm he's anything besides supportive of a friend's major political effort. That's my objection to it at the present moment. Meanwhile, the information isn't going to go away, and once it is covered in the article, if it is supported, it will be fine. I'd like to note that when there have been several very recent edits to an article, it wouldn't hurt to check for an {{inuse}} template, which was there when you returned the category last night. It nearly compromised 2 hours of work when I started to save it (see the time frame on the history). The "inuse" template is a great tool when you know you're going to be there a while. Now, on to other things.

This is essentially the note I left for Ged UK: I actually think the article is shaping up quite nicely. I did a bit of copying editing (a very little bit) and reference formatting (using template citation style), which I'd be glad to do as it goes along if that style isn't something you're familiar with doing. I found a specific citation for the Orson Welles video (the actual television episode) and added that. One thing I'm not as comfortable with are the numerous quotes highlighted in the article. There are 14 instances of quotes highlighted - either in a box or a quote template. I'm afraid that is probably too many, at a point when the article would be reviewed for FA status, that would be an issue raised. I'm sure that most could be blended into the article and leave only two or three as standouts. The quotes and miscellaneous facts should probably be incorporated into the article - the last bit, on his grandson working in a video store, is sourced from IMDB. IMDB isn't considered reliable for something like that, and really, what does it matter where his grandson works? Maybe he owns it? In any case, I'll come back tomorrow night and work on the citation templates some more. FA will definitely require one style only of citation within the article and the templates allow for good organization of the citation material. Let me know if there is something specific you'd like me to do. Wildhartlivie (talk) 13:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per talk with Ged, the ref was given as a placeholder, IIRC he intends to place the material indicating Cagney voted GOP from Dewey on in a section on Politics. The cites are from "Cagney by Cagney," his autobiography. A RS. Thanks! Collect (talk) 13:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits from Banned User HC and IPs

Warning Wikipedia's
banning policy
states that "Any edits made in defiance of a ban may be reverted to enforce the ban, regardless of the merits of the edits themselves. As the banned user is not authorized to make those edits, there is no need to discuss them prior to reversion."


1) HarveyCarter (talk · contribs) and all of his sockpuppets are EXPRESSLY banned for life.

2) Be on the look out for any edits from these IP addresses:

AOL NetRange: 92.8.0.0 - 92.225.255.255
AOL NetRange: 172.128.0.0 - 172.209.255.255
AOL NetRange: 195.93.0.0 - 195.93.255.255

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "Warren14" :
    • Warren, p 119-130
    • Warren, p 120-130

talk) 18:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

 Done --Ged UK (talk) 13:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Sorry I haven't done much to this article recently, I'll try to knuckle down and finish the career section and update the personal life section as soon as I can. --Ged UK (talk) 09:39, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I think the career section is finished. I haven't as yet managed to find much about what he was upto after his final retirement and his death, though I suspect judging by his health it wasn't much.
I'll be working on the personal life section over this weekend and the Christmas break, which will cover the politics as well, then hopefully it can be peer reviewed in January. --Ged UK (talk) 12:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nice

I did take the "liberty" of adding the Jack Warner dubbing of him as an "againster" with cite to the lede ... it was actually used on several actors by him, it appears. Collect (talk) 13:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I came across one reference, when talking about the Merriam issue, where Warner refered to a professional against-er, and Cagney took it to mean him, though there's no guarantee! --Ged UK (talk) 13:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated your reference to the citation templates. If you have any more of the info to fill in on it (author, dates etc) i've left the blank fields in to add. Ta. --Ged UK (talk) 14:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Stuyvesant

Stuyvesant H.S. would've been delighted to claim Cagney, but he graduated from Seward Park. E A (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have to check back over the sources, but I'm pretty sure what I wrote is what's sourced. Do you have another source that says different? Are the schools totally separate and always have been? GedUK  10:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you wrote what's sourced too, as it's in at least one of his obits. I only mention it because I went to Stuy, and it was an embarrassment that we couldn't claim him as a graduate. I'd be happy to be wrong!E A (talk) 15:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not doubting you, it's just difficult to include. I'll scour some of his other bios to see what I can find. It may well be that we have to put a note on .GedUK  15:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hoofer

Just a note about a possible error, I'll let y'all make the correction. In the second paragraph, the term 'hoofer' has a link to the article 'Dance' in which 'hoofer' does not appear. Using the Wiki search engine for 'hoofer' redirects to the article 'Tap Dance', the link should be corrected. i.e.»

hoofer. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.254.252 (talk) 02:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Hmm. I'm not sure that hoofer should redirect to
Tap Dance, I've always thought hoofer has a wider meaning than that, and I'm pretty sure Cagney was using it as a slang term for dancer anyway, but I think that's something that needs to be discussed somewhere else. Is there a wikidance project? I'll have a look later. GedUK  09:15, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
This is moot since the word is no longer in the article but just for the record, the Historical Dictionary of American Slang lists as the second definition of "hoofer": "Orig. Vaudeville, a dancer, usually a professional performer such as a tap-dancer." While it's interesting that they use tap-dancer as an example, the definition indicates that other types of professional dancers are also hoofers.
talk) 00:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

File:James Cagney Commutative Stamp 1999.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:James Cagney Commutative Stamp 1999.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is
    non-free
    then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no
    fair use rationale
    then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --

talk) 18:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on James Cagney. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Theatre work table

Why isn't there one? 108.54.159.197 (talk) 23:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He didn't do much or any theatre once he got into movies. Most of the notable theatre stuff is included in the prose, so I'm not sure that a table gets us much. GedUK  08:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:James_Cagney&oldid=1193679777"