Talk:Anita Ekberg/Archive 1

Untitled
I have cleaned up some subjective material but I still feel this article lacks overall cohesion. I don't think the factual information is bad, but there was just too much flair and emotion for an encylopedic article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chupon (talk • contribs) 12:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Help
I'm trying to do a clean up and add the first refs and cites but somethings not working with the contents box. please help. thanks.Catherine Huebscher 010:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Have closed the reference tags. Think the article works now. AntiuserX 17:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Good work on expanding the article. Entheta 17:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Difficulty speaking Swedish
Hi there, I was just wondering where someone got the information that she speaks Swedish with difficulty? There is a link here for anyone who wishes to listen to Ekberg speaking Swedish. It sounds quite fluent (although she has an incredibly strong Skåne accent) and I can't tell the difference between her and any other 75 year old Swedish speaker. I don't want to change anything until I give someone a chance to reply but it does seem a little unfair to say that she has difficulty speaking her native language if that is not indeed the case. Good article apart from this though :) Intesvensk
 * This was previously responded to on my talk page. It seems like the audio file on that web page is not available anymore. I was there when she gave that speech and she alternated between Swedish and English, had trouble finding the words in Swedish. Author Bengt Forslund wrote about Anita in his book about Swedish actresses, "[she] speaks her native tounge with a thick foreign accent" (Forslund, Bengt, Bengt Forslund presenterar svenska filmstjärnor, Stockholm: Alfabeta bokförlag AB, 1995. ISBN 9177124448). Entheta 21:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

In Popular Culture
It seems odd to have one section titled "In Popular Culture" in an article entirely about a person who is a popular culture figure. IMO. Wanderer57 (talk) 13:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, but it seems perfectly straightforward to me. In one case, it is the Culture that is Popular. In the other, it is the person who is a figure in, or of, popular culture. PårWöet (talk) 07:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

The lead photograph
Here as in many other articles about celebrities of the past, a point is made of having the lead photograph reflect the person as he/she currently looks rather than a reasonable image of him/her at the time of his/her fame; the image, in other words, that is identified with the celebrity - that, indeed, in great measure IS the celebrity and hence the subject of the article. I fear I don't understand this obsession. Ekberg, for example, is indissolubly associated with such images as her standing in the fountain in La Dolce Vita. Why make a point of posting this image of an ancient hag? 71.167.226.41 (talk) 17:26, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The images were reorganized after your comment.
 * I might have used different words than "ancient hag". But I agree that the most important image of a person whose celebrity is based upon a past activity is one that is contemporary with that activity, because we only know the person because of it. Some celebrities have continued with their activities for many decades, and are readily recognized however youthful or mature the images (Shirley MacLaine, James Garner, Mickey Rooney, etc). But Anita Ekberg is not one of them.
 * I'm sure that we don't want the primary image of deceased celebrities to make us say "What's that?".  Where does "up to date" stop?
 * The standard should be to use an image that is associated with the work of the person. If there must be an image that is more recent but not contemporary with the work, show it as a subordinate image ... if at all.


 * Kudos to Abhishekupadhya for changing the order of the images. PårWöet (talk) 23:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Current state
Her situation sounds so desperate in 2011. It would be helpful to post an update on what's happening with her. So sad that these actors, once at the height of the glamorous life, are now reduced to poverty. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 23:51, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Death Announcement Article
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-30767431 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starius (talk • contribs) 12:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)