Talk:Bugsy Siegel/Archive 2

copy-and-pasted block
A large chunk of this article has been copied and pasted between Bugsy Siegel, Flamingo Las Vegas, and William Wilkerson. As far as I can tell, it wasn't copied and pasted from some outside source — Google doesn’t find an outside source anyway — but being copied and pasted in these three places poses a problem for future editors, since any improvement that can be made to that text probably ought to be made in all three places. But that's ① labor-intensive, ② error-prone, and ③ unlikely to happen since there’s no way to tell that there are other copies of the text.

Is there some Wikipedia policy about what to do about duplicated chunks like this?

Further discussion about this should go to Talk:Bugsy Siegel, since I’ve copy-and-pasted my comment on the talk pages of all three articles.

Kragen Javier Sitaker (talk) 18:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Basically you put the bulk of the material in a single place and use the link to access it. I'd put most of the stuff about individuals in their articles and only include a snippet as necessary in the others.  There should not be large portions of text included in multiple articles. Note that I don't follow this talk page.  Vegaswikian (talk) 22:22, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks like it ought to be possible to use the transclusion feature to include the text in multiple pages, with edit links that work; the Current Events pages use this feature to include the events from each day into a larger monthly archive page. I have done this at User:Kragen/Transclusion test to see how well it works, and it seems like it would work fine for this case; the transcluded sections even get included in tables of contents.  The only downside would be that if someone read more than one of the pages, they'd still encounter the same text more than once, which could be confusing; and it's unusual. Kragen Javier Sitaker (talk) 17:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh hey, reading further, I found Help:Template about this. Kragen Javier Sitaker (talk) 18:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Air Conditioning on Opening Day
The part about the guests cursing the desert heat when the air conditioning broke down when the Flamingo opened is colorful and amusing, until one remembers that the during the day after Christmas in Las Vegas the temperature usually is in the mid-30s F to mid-50s F. Makes for very pleasant hikes in the back trails. Low 70s would be the extreme and rare high, and even then, while springlike for the northeasterners, I doubt this would've bothered a Los Angeles crowd very much. I culled the temperature ranges from http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/vef/climate/page14.php and http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMONtavt.pl?nvlasv. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roundmidnite man (talk • contribs) 06:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Celebrities
Under the Las Vegas section, when it talks about celebrities that attended the opening of the Flamingo, it has Thomas Pynchon listed as one of the celebrities who was present on opening day. On December 26th, 1946, Thomas Pynchon was 9 years old. I don't think he was quite a celebrity then. These names should be fact checked. --65.113.35.130 (talk) 21:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The article photo ?
Why has Siegel's cigar been photoshopped from the photo ? Is this US Law ? If so, can't we find a better photo ? It looks abit ridiculous to have such a badly edited photo on an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.47.71.13 (talk) 13:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Location of wounds and pop culture
Another editor has located the head wounds correctly, and I've added a photo link if you'd like to see for yourself. It's been awhile since I looked at this article. Given the massive influence of this man on pop culture in mafia movies, etc, I'm amazed that there's no pop culture section. Take a look at WP:TRIVIA please. Like machineguns in the U.S., these things have actually not become illegal. It's just that everybody things they are. WP:TRIVIA does not give you license to delete anything that looks to you like a pop culture section. Indeed it says the opposite. S B Harris 00:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * This article (and many other related to the Jewish mafia) are under attack from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Mynameisstanley. One of his socks, User:Xd69x, removed a lot of useful material from the article. Lala m7 (talk) 18:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've restored the cultural section. Feel free to restore other refs removed by this guy as well. S  B Harris 02:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I do not have any literature on the subject, but I do notice that all references to his mistresses is gone from this article, while it still remains in say, the Marie McDonald and Virginia Hill-articles. You might also want to put Esta Krakower and Whitey Krakow on your watch-list: The socks routinely get rid of those articles by redirecting them. In fact: whenever you see an article about any Jewish mobster shrink in size: suspect Mynameisstanley-socks...Cheers, Lala m7 (talk) 07:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Paranoid?
In the Bugsy's Ghost section it states "it is plain to see that Bugsy was quite paranoid". Paranoia is generally regarded as an irrational baseless or excessive fear and suspicion. As depicted in this article Siegel was immersed in a violently aggressive milieu, was himself a murderer and may have accrued his share of dangerous enemies, had stretched the patience among his mob financiers, and, ultimately, was shot to death through the window of a residence. Perhaps bullet-proof glass was a reasonable precaution and "extremely cautious" might be a more apt description than "paranoid". Yellow-lab (talk) 14:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, logically he was not paranoid. The title of the para doesn't seem apt either; nonsense about a ghost, together with unsourced material about a special room and tunnels which 'may or may not still be there' - why are we including dodgy bar tales? I'll remove it all until someone can provide a source that's more than just gossip. Little grape (talk) 14:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Name
Why is the article of this man titled with his nickname? "Bugsy" isn't his name, his name was Benjamin. I have no love for this multiple murderer, but "Bugsy" was not his name. At the least we should put his nickname in quotations in the middle of his name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supertheman (talk • contribs) 05:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Because the Wikipedia manual of style demands that he be named that way. We use the most common name, not the birth name, and certainly not a hybrid name like you used. That is why we have an article on Pablo Picasso and not Pablo Diego José Francisco de Paula Juan Nepomuceno María de los Remedios Cipriano de la Santísima Trinidad Ruiz y Picasso --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Which prompts the question of why we call the painter Picasso and not Ruiz (his father's family name). In Spanish, anybody with his name would be called Señor Ruiz, not Señor Picasso (much as Fidel Castro and Daniel Ortega are known as Castro and Ortega, not Ruiz or Saavedra. I wonder what Picasso's cohorts DID call him?? S  B Harris 04:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We call him Picasso, because he signed his own name Picasso. But this conversation should really be on the Picasso Page, not the Bugsy Siegel Page. AJseagull1 (talk) 21:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Last name?
I came across this website: https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/VG5L-TDQ that states that his last name was Siegel, not Siegelbaum which is different from what the source (i.e. PBS.org) states. It also gives the last names of his parents too. Cuddyc (talk) 23:09, 7 December 2012 (UTC)