Talk:The Thin Man (film)

"Hard-drinking"?
I wonder whether "hard-drinking" is really a good description of Nick Charles. To me,the phrase "hard-drinking" implies using alcohol to cope with sadness or fear or some negative emotion, or, problem-drinking, drinking in spite of being impaired or harmed by drinking. WC Fields, and Rick in Casablanca, and Al Pacino's character in Sea of Love, are what I would call "hard-drinking" characters. In contrast, Nick and Nora certainly drink a lot, but is it "hard"? They have a great time and never seem to suffer from it; also they don't drink in order to cope with problems or sadness. In the fantasy-world of the Thin Man movies, alcohol isn't harmful (at least, not harmful to Nick and Nora). Nick and Nora are like Bertie Wooster in PG Wodehouse's books: not so much "hard-drinkers" as "enthusiastic tipplers". HandsomeMrToad (talk) 04:35, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, they drink constantly, and Nick is often shown as being quite tipsy. I've reverted. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes they drink A LOT, but they don't drink HARD. It doesn't hurt them, doesn't require effort, doesn't interfere with their lives, doesn't cause tragedy.  (Did you read my explanation which you just replied to?)


 * I am re-editing in a way which, hopefully, will achieve consensus. If you disagree with my edit, it might be better to discuss the question further here, and wait for consensus to emerge before you revert.  Usually, it's better to further edit an edit you disagree with rather than just reverting it.  See here: Consensus.


 * Best wishes, HandsomeMrToad (talk) 07:55, 26 February 2019 (UTC)


 * UPDATE: the earlier formulation also erred in describing Nick as "hard drinking" without mentioning that Nora drinks just as much as Nick does. Remember the first time we see Nora, she enters a bar, asks Nick how many martinis he has had so far, and orders the same number for herself.  The couple drinks copiously, not just Nick. HandsomeMrToad (talk) 08:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You restored the change without a consensus to do so, so per WP:BRD and WP:STATUSQUO, I've restored the status quo ante. Make your arguments here, get a consensus to support it, and you're done.  No consensus, no edit. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Once again, you made changes, and you edit was disputed. When edits are disputed the article remains is the status quo ante while discussion is ongoing.  You have restored your preferred version, in violation of WP:BRD anbd WP:STATUSQUO (which are interpreting incorrectly). Please self-revert. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:54, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I wonder whether you are reading what you link to. From the link you posted (WP:STATUSQUO):""If you see a good-faith edit which you feel does not improve the article, make a good-faith effort to reword instead of reverting it. [You did not do this; you just reverted my good-faith edits which you felt did not improve the article, three times so far.] Similarly, if you make an edit which is good-faith reverted, do not simply reinstate your edit – leave the status quo up, or try an alternative way to make the change that includes feedback from the other editor. [I have tried to do this, twice so far.]""


 * And no I have not "restored [my] preferred version" as you said; I have changed, re-worded, and refined my edit into a new version, in order to address the problem with the previous version of the article and also accommodate your objections to the edits which you have reverted, as suggested in WP:CON, WP:BRD, and WP:STATUSQUO. (The problem which (IMHO) needs to be addressed is dual: 1. Both Nick and Nora drink a lot, not only Nick; the previous version of the article only describes Nick as "hard drinking" but did not mention that Nora drinks just as much; and 2. They drink a lot, but it's not "hard".)


 * Best wishes, HandsomeMrToad (talk) 01:05, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Neutral pointers to this discussion have been placed on the talk pages of the appropriate WikiProjects. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:54, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Good. I will, of course, abide by the consensus when it emerges, as suggested by other users and admins. Thank you, HandsomeMrToad (talk) 01:05, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Here from WT:FILM. I have a couple of thoughts: Google Books shows results for this film and the character being described as "hard-drinking", so generally speaking, I support this. However, it is a kind of slang that may not be that obvious to English-speaking readers all over the world. So perhaps plainer language is more suitable, or there could be a Wiktionary page to link to. The latter seems like a lot of fuss, I know, but throwing that out there. I took that approach with "popcorn movie" elsewhere. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 21:21, 28 February 2019 (UTC)