Talk:Rupert Graves

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good at football[edit]

Some folks have been having their idea of fun with ridiculous edits about Graves being "good at football". We now know why people say this. Its truth value and its origin are both irrelevant. It is not an encyclopedic statement. If you want to include some sourced information about clubs he's played for, achievements, dates, etc etc - fine. But this bare, unsourced "good at football" shit is like "good at tiddlywinks", or "good at masturbation", or "good at breathing". It will be reverted each and every time it gets put back in, so just don't bother, ok? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - thought putting in the origin may at least stop people putting the bare phrase straight into the text. Agreed "good at football" will always be subjective but if a verifiable source crops up for the size of his family I guess that may be worth adding in future? -- Al Clark (talk) 20:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What does the size of his family have to do with his alleged sporting prowess? ALL STATEMENTS in Wikipedia articles need to be properly sourced. But not all statements that are sourced are acceptable. I'm sure we could find some reliable source that tells us some famous person was fond of annoying his sister by cracking his knuckles. But so what? Is it appropriate material for an encyclopedia? Of course it's not. Same with "good at football". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:22, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, I agreed with you about the "good at football" part? (Or at least I thought I had.) It's the "has five children" part I thought might count as acceptable information if it was sourced properly. If not, why is who he's married to worthy of inclusion? -- Al Clark (talk) 16:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Al, my issue was with this "good at football" stuff, and that was the sole subject of my original post. You then connected it with his family details, which didn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. I can see what you're getting at now. But my point remains that all statements should be sourced.
I am now rolling back 50.89.7.121 (or anyone else) whenever they insert "good at football". That might mean that other, acceptable edits they do get reverted in the process. Well, tough. They've shown a complete lack of good faith and refusal to play by the rules, so any edits they make are automatically suspect. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Arrived from Recent Changes to revert another one, it seems. After reviewing the history, my first inclination was that the page would benefit from semi-protection. However, I see that there have been recent constructive edits from IPs, and the football/children thing just seems silly, not especially harmful. What is all this about. Am I missing something? Rivertorch (talk) 19:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that a statement is "not especially harmful" is no saving grace. How about we say that Queen Elizabeth is "good at shaking hands", or Barack Obama is "good at talking"? Do you suppose they would last more than 5 seconds? I'm not disputing the veracity of these things, I'm objecting to their utter triviality, their unsourcedness, and their lack of detail. I've explained my position above: "If you want to include some sourced information about clubs he's played for, achievements, dates, etc etc - fine." But that never happens, does it. The fact that this precise form of words "good at football" keeps on getting added, but the adder never comes here to explain or defend themself, and never even has an edit summary, tell me this is pure trollsmanship. That alone is good enough reason to revert them. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. I hope I didn't seem to be defending such additions; I merely was weighing the pros and cons of requesting semi-protection. My question was this: do you know what is prompting this series of edits? It might be one person, of course, but they involve a wide range of IPs. Rivertorch (talk) 21:58, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See this edit by Al Clark, which told us:
* "On a DVD commentary for the first series of the BBC's Sherlock, Mark Gatiss asked Benedict Cumberbatch "Tell us about Rupert Graves, Benedict." His reply, "Rupert Graves is good at football and has five children," has proved a popular catchphrase among fans of the show."
I reverted it. with the edit summary:
  • "rv to last version that has no mention of being "good at football" - whether it's true or not, and regardless of how many people use this "catchphrase", it is not encylopedic and does not belong here".
I stand by that reversion. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I should hope so. Do you think semi-protection is warranted? Rivertorch (talk) 22:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do; they show no sign of letting up. Sorry to be so dilatory. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request made at RPP. Dilatoriness is a common side effect of being on the opposite side of the globe. Omg, he's upside-down! Rivertorch (talk) 17:41, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's odd, I was always taught that you guys are on the opposite side of the globe. We're obviously closer than we thought. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:05, 13 July 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Edit request from 76.4.103.17, 21 August 2011[edit]

Rupert Graves is good at football and has five children.

76.4.103.17 (talk) 22:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Jnorton7558 (talk) 23:25, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request[edit]

Please correct the last line of his filmography; Graves is in all 6 episodes of Scott & Bailey, not just 3. Thanks 68.146.80.110 (talk) 15:53, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done: Graves is not credited in Episode 4 of Series 1 of Scott & Bailey (only appears in opening summary and closing preview) so changed to 5 episodes. Al Clark (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 7 April 2012[edit]

Doctor Who[6] unknown TV series (1 episode) should be changed to doctor who, character: Howard Carter, TV series (Episode 2– Dinosaurs in Space)

Emmaleah17 (talk) 18:48, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. mabdul 20:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request[edit]

Change the spelling of Alfred Harderburg to Harderberg, for his role in the Wallander adaptation "The Man Who Smiled." IMDb ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1581667/ ) has it as Harderberg.


Edit request on 7 September 2013[edit]

NB: The following is a request to be permitted to edit this entry to improve it as described below, NOT a specific description of the text to be inserted.

I would like to contribute to the expansion and improvement of the coverage of Rupert Graves’s extensive theatre career on the Rupert Graves page, which is currently *extremely* limited (especially compared to the almost over-comprehensive coverage of, e.g., his voiceover work).

Rupert Graves’s serious acting career as an adult began in the British theatre. His first stage role was in The Killing of Mr Toad (1983) at the King’s Head Theatre in London, and he had appeared in two successful West End London theatre productions (Sufficient Carbohydrate, 1983–4, and Torch Song Trilogy, 1985) before his first significant film, A Room With A View (1985) was even released. In all, he has appeared in significant or lead roles in around 22 theatre productions in the UK and USA since 1983. He has been nominated for the Olivier Best Actor Award (for David Rabe’s Hurlyburly, 1998), and won two other theatre acting awards (for the original 1991 production of Philip Ridley’s The Pitchfork Disney, and a shared all-cast award for the 1999 Broadway production of Patrick Marber’s Closer).

Almost none of the above is reflected in Rupert Graves’s current Wikipedia entry, which devotes just *four lines* to his ‘theatre work’ and gives it extremely low priority (at the very bottom of the page, below his personal life and a ‘Filmography’ which - by contrast – is so exhaustive that it includes unreleased feature films and TV voiceover work!)

I am a registered Wikipedia user who has contributed to/edited other non-protected Wikipedia pages – but I have not yet made enough contributions to be classed as an ‘established user’, i.e. I do not have automatic access to edit/add to this ‘semi-protected page’ without assistance or permission. I am a professional, established Humanities academic, so I consider that I can be relied upon to contribute to this page as accurately as possible, including citation of sources (and you can be assured that I will not be posting spam/nonsense or other damaging content!) In addition, I have seen ten of the theatre productions/performances concerned (1988–2000) and have good access to reliable primary supporting sources. ClaireMonk (talk) 16:37, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't possible to unlock a semi-protected article for one user, so it would have to be unlocked for everyone (and that wouldn't be a good idea on this article). However, you appear to be one edit away from autoconfirmed status. Try fixing a typo somewhere, then come back and see if you can't edit Rupert Graves. Rivertorch's Evil Twin (talk) 22:14, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I entirely understand why unlocking of this article wouldn't be a good idea. I didn't realise I was only ‘one edit away from autoconfirmed status’ – that’s good news. When I have the free time, I’ll do as you suggest, then return and edit. Cheers. ClaireMonk (talk) 14:35, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With your reply here, you should be autoconfirmed. No guarantees; I just volunteer here. Rivertorch (talk) 22:13, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on November 16, 2014[edit]

Rupert Graves has appeared with Helena Bonham Carter six times : he is in Turks & Caicos and Salting the Battlefield with her (2014). Jed (talk) 05:17, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rupert Graves. 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. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rupert Graves. 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. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:34, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rupert_Graves&oldid=1207456262"