Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Jump to content

Talk:Mel Brooks/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

The Producers

"Such success has translated to a big-screen version of the Broadway adaptation/remake with actors Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane"

Wasn't the movie version somewhat of a flop? According to Boxofficemojo, its budget was $45 mil and made only $38 mil total. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aronnyc (talk • contribs) 07:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

The remake of the movie was, yes--TimothyJacobson (talk) 11:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
To be fair, a producer could make more money with a flop than with a hit. The Ankou (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Whatever would give you a crazy idea like that? --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:06, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Jpgordon, go watch The Producers and you'll understand 186.221.151.96 (talk) 19:44, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Irony doesn't work well in text, I guess. (I've seen The Producers perhaps a dozen times.) --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

herrings

was his father really a herring dealer? come on.

Dumb question.Lestrade (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Lestrade

topics

Quoting Homer Simpson: "You mean Mel Brooks is Jewish?!". Come on, his movies are full of Jewish gags and there's no mention on this page?!

What...you mean like "Druish Princess"? --Alcalde 19:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I'll add it — ßottesiηi Tell me what's up 23:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Another credit to add: He contributed his voice to the character of a newborn baby in the 1970s TV special and audio recordings of "Free to Be You and Me" with Marlo Thomas.Pistachio329 (talk) 18:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Even in the future everything is out of order

His first wife and children are mentioned at the very end after his second wife and child. Should there be sections for his personal and professional lives? --68.198.246.166 13:55, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I remember Mel mentioning that he was in the 78th division in WWII on an old Johnny Carson Show. He told a story about getting chewed out for shooting a German telephone line in two. All I could find on the web is this mention on an Australian TV interview, this year: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s1090168.htm

Actually, I saw something about that, except he didn't mention getting in trouble and I think it was on Letterman. I remember he mentioned it was during the German retreat. The area was supposed to be safe, but things were still chaotic. He and his squad had a pool to see who could shoot the most of them plastic balls you see on some lines. They got back to base and it was in turmoil. When he asked what was going on, someone told him that the Germans were attacking/destroying their communications line. Brook's indicated he volunteered to take his squad out to look for them. Best as I can remember, but it should be in some video source sompelace. IMHO (talk) 07:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

"Andrew Denton: What sort of a war did you have, did people actually shoot at you?

Mel Brooks: It was called World War Two remember? It was a big war.

Andrew Denton: How quickly people forget.

Mel Brooks: Yeah, yeah. I remember we were...I was with the 1104th Engineer Combat Battalion, attached to the, I think, 78th Division of the 7th Army, and we were near the Germans, and they were on the other side of a creek, and we were on one side of the creek, and we could hear them singing: "Ja, ja, ja, ja, ja. ja, ja, ja, ja", and I said give me that, give me that blow horn, and I sang, "I’ve been away from you a long time..." I did a Jolson medley, and believe it or not, at the end of the medley I could hear clapping. That was my wartime activity."

I'm going to look for more referances to the 78th Div. so I can add it to the main page. Mytwocents 07:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Mel Brooks and "taste"

There are many good quotes from Mel Brooks about "bad taste" being the best compliment you can pay his movies (such as criticisms of "The Inquisition" in History of the World Part I).--Buckboard 08:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Origins of 2000-Year-Old Man

I was under the impression that Reiner and Brooks began the 2KYOM thing when Reiner purchased a tape recorder in the early 1950s; he and Brooks were sharing a cab that day and rather than hooking the machine up and saying "Testing" or something, he looked at Brooks and spoke into the microphone, "Is it true that you were present at the Crucifixion?" Whereupon Brooks responded by saying "Ooohhh, boyyyy" and off they went. They ad-libbed these bits at parties for many years before the first commercial recording came out, and that it was only ever a party game for them until much later on. Any way to confirm? Wspencer11 15:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Reccuring themes/events in movies

Should we mention some of the themes or events that seem to reccur in most of his movies? One thing I noticed he does a lot is compare a situation to Paris, like in Spaceballs when the self-destruct alarm is activated President Skroob asks "where the hell are we? Paris?!", and when Renfield in Dracula Dead and Loving it 'wakes up' from his bad dream he says "two veloptuous women, grinding, heaving, how to describe it... have you ever been to Paris?" Just something I thought was worth mentioning...

You are right in that there have been several recurring themes, such as Jewish jokes, comparative references to Paris, out-of-period product lines (Campbell soup, Ovaltine, Gucci bags), etc, but I wouldn't consider it specifically characteristic of his films, thus not worth a special notation here.
Christopher, Salem, OR (talk) 10:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Reccuring event/events/themes that should be mentioned in this article according to my observation of Mel`s works would be Nazis, Adolf Hitler, and Swedish women among others, for ex Nazis are an event in (1968) the producers such as Franz Liebkind which needless to say is a former Nazi who has penned an admiring musical tribute to Adolf Hitler, titled Springtime for Hitler. The two protagonists, Max Bialystock and Leo Bloom, purchase and produce this "worst play ever written" as part of a plot to defraud investors by overselling and staging a sure-fire flop. And again in 1983 in the movie To be or not to be Nazis and Adolf is also made fun off it should be noted that Mel was a producer and actor of this movie and not a director anyway Mel also stars in an rap/hip hop video where he stars as Adolf and an short clip narrated by Mel entitled Hitler on ice. Swedish women is also an reccuring event which i have noted in Mel`s work such as the princess Ingrid (swedish female name) in an episode entitled the diplomats daghter of the tv-serie get smart and then again in 1968 the producers Max Bialystock and Leo Bloom have an assistent named Ulla which is a swedish female name and then again in the 1974 movie young frankenstein which was directed and co written by Mel Dr. Frederick Frankenstein played by Gene Wilder have an female assistent called Inga which is a swedish female name. --212.181.199.36 (talk) 02:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Brooks' parents nationality

Kaminsky is a tipical polish surname, not russian. And from XVIII century until 1911 Poland was divided into 3 parts (russian, prussian and austrian). Becouse of that polish citizens where treated as russian, german, or austrian. So it would be good to check if the Kaminsky familly weren't polish Jews. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.160.143.2 (talk) 13:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

Early life

Cleaning up a recent edit, I've removed for now "For high school, he went to Eastern District High. He graduated in 1944." as it conflicts with a long-standing statement that he went to Abraham Lincoln (New York). Perhaps he went to both but that's not how it was worded. Anyway I don't know the facts and have added a citation request there. Cheers, Ian Rose 20:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


Graduated from Virginia Military Institute - There is no entry of Mel Brooks or Melvin Kaminsky ever having graduated from VMI, either by the Alumni Association web site, published alumni directories, or by barracks lore. Sorry. TPHerb (talk) 01:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Immortal? Really?

Now... I know there was once this one Jewish guy thats pulled it off, so I'm not saying it's impossible... but doncha think that there should be some kind of external source associated with that part of the entry?

AFI's 100 years 100 laughs

Mel Brooks was the director with the most top 15 appearances (three): Blazing Saddles (6th), The Producers (11th), and Young Frankenstein (13th). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.33.250.120 (talk) 02:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The Man In the Moon

No mention of this classic 1960 TV movie is made in this article. What gives? Titanium Dragon (talk) 23:58, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

1921?

I always thought 1926. --83.6.73.75 (talk) 12:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe that's right. Can you cite a reliable source for that date? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
According to the book, "It's Good to Be the King: The Seriously Funny Life of Mel Brooks", by James Robert Parish, pp. 16-17, (Wiley, February 26, 2007, ISBN-10: 0471752673) Melvin Kaminsky was born on June 28, 1926. JeanColumbia (talk) 12:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. IMDB and IBDB also agree that it is 1926. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Yiddish speaker?

Brooks has made reference to Yiddish theatre cliches, and famously used it in Blazin Saddles. Out of interest, is he a native Yiddish speaker? Would make an interesting addition to the piece, and also explain some of his cultural influences.--MacRusgail (talk) 22:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't know for sure, but I heard him on German TV speaking some Standard German with kind of Yiddish accent and full of typical errors of a Yiddish speakers.--94.219.210.153 (talk) 16:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Walk of Fame

4-23-10 Received the 2406th star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36744614/ns/entertainment-celebrities/

Add it as you wish. Go4thAndDie (talk) 22:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

NM. Go4thAndDie (talk) 10:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Disney

Was there not a tele-film in 1988, made to celebrate Mickey Mouse's 60th birthday, in which Brooks played a producer--TimothyJacobson (talk) 11:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Ignore my above comment, I was thinking of Carl Reiner--TimothyJacobson (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

German or Polish

A dispute seems to have arisen (again?) as to whether Brooks' father's family was German or Polish. I've copied the other editor's comment and my reply from my talk page and suggest that the discussion be carried out here. I've reverted the article to the status quo ante, pending consensus. Favonian (talk) 22:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Gdansk was not German as Germany were none existent yet. The history of Gdansk is simple -> Prusia was first before Germanic nations created Germany as we know it. Gdansk was a free city that did not belong to either Poland nor Germany. Both Polish and German citizens were living there. All Surnames ending with "ski" like Bromowski, kowalski, etc,(in USA "sky" for proper pronunciation) or "icz" like Ciechanowicz, Krajewicz have Polish origin and they are part of original naming in whole Poland throughout Polish history. Many Jews were changing their names to Polish surnames to prevent being recognized as Jewish, because they were not tolerated in most of the Europe back then, and Poland gave them a freedom of leaving on Polish teritory, back then known as Polish Shire or Warsaw Shire(Ksiestwo Polskie or Ksiestwo Warszawskie). Please read more about it in some History books... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.171.129.74 (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
This reference, quoted in the article, states that Brooks' father considered himself a German Jew, and that's what matters as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Favonian (talk) 21:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
As the link above seems to be dead, I have provided another one [1] and as someone recently added a category "..of Polish descent" [2] I suggest to remove that category until a source clearly supports such a claim. And please no WP:OR based on Gdansk is Polish and stuff like that. 80.136.64.37 (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
It would seem that someone who is from Poland and is named Kaminsky would be considered "Polish". This already being in the article doesn't make restoring its removal OR (and this is an insignificant cat, not prose in the bio). Removing a cat on BLP article seems to me like revisionist OR. Please provide a source that he was not Polish. You can be Polish and German and Jewish all at the same time, by the way. Or be [Polish and Jewish] and [German] or [German-Jewish] and Polish or any number of ways to self-identify or be identified by others. JesseRafe (talk) 17:55, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
The cat was just added on Jan 29 [3] without any reasoning or source, there's no status quo or consensus to use that category. It's pretty absurd to add a category based on the sounding of a name and ask for a source to prove the opposite. Yes, you might be Polish and German and whatever, but you need a source if you want to add such a claim to wiki. And finally: No, Danzig was not part of Poland when Brooks' father left the city. 80.136.64.37 (talk) 18:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
And Brooks himself describes his first reaction when the Germans attacked in 1939 as "we are German" [4] 80.136.64.37 (talk) 18:27, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Bannend in Germany?

I personally remember seeing "To be or not to be" in German TV in the early 80s, could someone please give references for

The song - satirising German society in the 1940s with Brooks playing Hitler - was banned from both radio airplay and television in Germany due to its deliberately ironic portrayal of the Nazi involvement in World War Two,

And I doubt that making fun of the nazis is a reason for a ban, it's more likely that some people at that time thought slapstik would play down the nazi crimes.

having a look at the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu2NqfISm9k&NR=1 I can understand why sexy Nazis don't seem approriate for an 80s audiance which doesn't understand the ironical lyrics. 

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.219.210.153 (talk) 15:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

frequent actors

There has been a revert war recently dealing with the topic of who mel brooks frequently casts in his movies. One person adds a list, and another person removes it saying it's WP:OR.

My belief is that this information does not count as WP:OR because it can be found on the cast lists in each of those movies' wikipedia pages. This is merely a collection of those lists. Just because some external source does not collect those lists themselves doesn't mean that this information is OR because it's already in this very same wikipedia.

My argument is that the same thing happens with many things without it being OR - for instance, Category:1984_births. No external source has all these people listed on the same page, but they all have their own Wikipedia pages listing their DOB, which is collected in this category. In the same way, all these actors have wikipedia pages listing which Mel Brooks movies they are in, which is collected in the Mel Brooks page. Just my two cents Rebent (talk) 19:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

rottentomatoes rating section

is utterly ridiculous, a waste of space, and possibly not even fair use. -99.121.57.103 (talk) 16:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

This section, I agree, is not necessary. It reeks of unprofessionalism. Wolfehhgg (talk) 13:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Rating

Sorry, still at C. The major issue is the refs, while the Ref section has 54, there are maybe only 10 unique references, and many are less-than-ideal. In fact, there's a ref-improve tag on the article that has been there since 2007. Sad to say, I just don't see this as a B article. Magister Scientatalk (Editor Review) 03:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

The Date of His Wife's Death

His wife, Anne Bancroft died on June 6, 2005, Brooks mistakenly quoted that she died on June 5, 2005, that must have been the last day he saw her alive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.34.211 (talk) 22:57, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Collaborations

What does the Collaborations section of this article show? Initially, I took it to mean a table of other artists Brooks collaborated with for his films, but was then completely thrown by Brooks appearing in the table himself. Perhaps some clarification as to what exactly the table shows is needed. BBMSteve (talk) 09:56, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Movie plots

Seems to me the movie plots are unnecessary; interested readers can go to the articles, but meantime they hurt the flow of the article narrative (which is about Brooks, not the individual movies.) --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:05, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

A few words about plot can be useful context, but I agree that the plot details in the article need to be trimmed. Cresix (talk) 15:22, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Richard Pryor - Blazing Saddles

The graph includes Richard Pryor acting in Blazing Saddles, which wrong. He got credits for the screenplay, but for the acting part was chosen Cleavon Little. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.173.184.18 (talk) 20:40, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Gene Wilder is marked as not being in this movie but he is. He played the drunken Gun Shooter Jim. Also please double check the graph there are other wrong posts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.204.125 (talk) 18:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Father

Mel Brooks recently stated in an interview with NPR's Fresh Air that his father died of tuberculosis. However, I checked the source for the page and found a contradiction: in the 1980 interview, he said that it was a kidney disease. Should we add the discrepancy? Go with the more current article? Short of looking up a death certificate, I don't know how to resolve this. Thanks! Laurenthian (talk) 20:14, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

High School Yearbook Address

111 Lee Ave Williamsburg, New York/ from American Masters~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 14:14, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mel Brooks. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 18:09, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

RfC: Is a military infobox appropriate?

The consensus is to exclude an infobox module about Mel Brooks' military career as undue weight because his military career does not contribute to his notability. Cunard (talk) 23:13, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should this article include an infobox module about his "military career?" --Light show (talk) 16:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Remove

Mel Brooks/Archive 1
AllegianceUnited States United States
Service / branch United States Army
Years of service1944–1946
Rank Corporal
Unit
Awards
Mel Brooks
Brooks receiving a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame on April 23, 2010
Birth nameMelvin James Kaminsky[1]
Born (1926-06-28) June 28, 1926 (age 98)
Brooklyn, New York, U.S.
MediumFilm, television, musical theatre
Years active1949–present
GenresFarce, parody, musical comedy, satire, sketch comedy
Spouse
  • Florence Baum
    ​
    ​
    (m. 1953; div. 1962)​
  • ​
    ​
    (m. 1964; "her death" is deprecated; use "died" instead. 2005)​
Children5; including Max Brooks
He did not have a "military career," which makes the module misleading and erroneous. Before his 65-year career, he spent two in the army after being drafted. To place a military module which would take up nearly half the infobox would, IMO, be ridiculous and an insult to people like Chuck Yeager and other career service members. --Light show (talk) 16:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
The same problem concerns bio infoboxes for Clint Eastwood, Paul Newman, Clark Gable, Elvis Presley and James Stewart, which I've noted on their talk pages. --Light show (talk) 03:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Just needs to be "military service" as it appears in other biographical infoboxes. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Why does his birthday make him notable, or the place he was born? -User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )
No one said it did. The primary purpose of the infobox is summarize basic biographical data. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 02:08, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Right. In that vein, the basic biographical data about Brooks' military service is that it was during WWII and in the army branch. The listing of rank and medals is too much. He's not famous for his rank and medals. Binksternet (talk) 02:35, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove. Undue weight and contributes to infobox bloat. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:13, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove. Summoned by bot. Is this some kind of joke? Mel Brooks is notable for many things, but a military career is not one of them. He was a World War II draftee, which is a fine thing, but he and the millions of other WWII draftees, thousands of whom have Wikipedia articles, do not warrant a military infobox unless that is a significant aspect of their lives directly related to their notability, for otherwise inclusion would be undue emphasis as noted by User:Binksternet. Coretheapple (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove: I tend to agree that WP:WEIGHT applies here, if in an atypical fashion. The core of Brook's WP:notability is not even in an infinitesimal way predicated in his military career. The analysis might come out differently for those entertainers whose fame arose before they enlisted, since greater attention would have been paid to their military careers and thus at least a small portion of their notability might be integrated with this service--this argument might apply for Elvis Presley for example, whose service drew a great deal of media coverage, and exerted an influence on his future image and altered the course of his career some. But Brooks served well before the events giving rise to his initial notability; the only reason someone might be aware of Brooks' service (and I daresay there are die-hard fans that don't even known about it, let alone the average person) is because he gained fame thereafter. No, all things considered it's just too insignificant to his general notability. Snow let's rap 08:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove - He was never known for his career in the army and there's no mention of it in the lede (It's more or less a mention in the article anyway) so having an infobox on it is rather useless and as noted above it makes the overall infobox look rather bloated, Better off as it is/ was (IE without it). –Davey2010Talk 19:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove - I have found myself recently to be an infobox proponent. But let the pertinent facts (World War II, rank of Corporal, any other verifiable information) be recorded as part of the Personal Life section. Shouldn't be more than a sentence or two. He isn't notable for his military service AFAIK. LaughingVulcan Grok Page! 02:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove. Has nothing to do with Brooks's notability. There are probably at least tens of thousands of bios on WP that could be inappropriately treated this way but wisely are not. (A counter-example would be John F. Kennedy, whose military service was notable and the subject of best-selling autobiography, even though he is most notable as a politician. Brooks is not notable as a solider in any way at all.) The purpose of infoboxes is to provide a very compact précis of the most important basics facts about the subject, not to serve as an indiscriminate trivia sidebar with every possible field filled in. This exact matter, of non-notable military service, should be addressed directly at WP:INFOBOX, since it's coming up in multiple RfCs at the same time (see Talk:Elvis Presley.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  10:30, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
    PS: That huge tract of over-decorative infobox space can be replaced in the article prose with a single and more informative sentence: "During World War II, Brooks – a draftee – served in the 78th Infantry Division of the United States Army from 1944 to 1946, earning the rank of corporal." The medal should not be mentioned, as it was auto-awarded to all who served overseas during the period, and mentioning that he received it is just trivial and redundant detailia that incorrectly implies it was a special honor that Brooks received; it's really just part of the post-war uniform of anyone who served in the war. Anyway, that sentence is just an example of how pointless the infobox material is; Brooks' military service is already adequately covered in the article, and I don't propose replacing the extant prose on the subject.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  10:41, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove as undue weight. To those below arguing "it's verifiable therefore keep": no, we don't have to include every possible verifiable fact in the infobox, and in fact MOS:INFOBOX directs us to focus on key facts instead. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:31, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Keep

  • Keep The removal of the icons was a good compromise and it is less distracting, your eye is not drawn toward the military information giving the impression that this was what made him notable. I think the icons should be reserved for career militarists and people who died in service. I have warmed to it, and I suggest as a compromise it be kept collapsed, the flags and icons should be kept too. The curious reader can expand the section, and it doesn't overwhelm the box. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 13:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep I've commented on the template's talk page. I enforced MOS:ICONS and that will likely alleviate your concerns. There were lots of WWII veterans from Brooks's generation. For people curious about that service the infobox is a great place to find those details quickly. Richard Arthur Norton is wrong in his assertion that the module is "reserved for career militarists and people who died in service" because articles about those subjects would use Template:Infobox military person. The module is meant specifically for people like Brooks whom are notable for something other than military service. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep - Summoned by bot. Did he serve in the military? Yes. Can this be verified in reliable sources? Yes. User Light show rightly emphasized that the infobox should "quickly summarize key relevant details of the bio." Brooks' stint in the army is covered in the body and should be summarized in the infobox. Inclusion does not create too large of an infobox and I see no reason compelling reason to leave it out. Meatsgains (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Not every verifiable fact appearing in the article belongs on the infobox. His military service is not "key" to his notability, and I see no compelling reason to include it. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 02:10, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
What does his birthdate and death date, education, place of birth and place of death have to do with his notability? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep; I agree with above. This is precisely why the module exists, for precisely these cases. Not wanting to use it, even via consensus, sounds like not liking it. It is not up to us to judge whether this was a remarkable aspect of his life or not; if reliably covered, it's got to be added in the infobox. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 14:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
It is absolutely up to Wikipedia editors to assess what the most important facts are. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. A pretty straight-forward application of WP:WEIGHT as I see it. The fact that another contributor supposedly created a template with this situation in mind says really nothing about whether or not editors working on biographies have to conclude that said tool is appropriate--and that's true whether we are talking about perspectives on a specific article or more generally. Per WP:LOCALCONSENSUS, that is a decision that is made here, independent of what happens on the talk page for the template. And we are certainly not compelled to include "every fact reliably covered"--clearly argument does not reflect how content is organized on this project, or infoboxes would be miles long and no one could oppose the inclusion of any fact, no matter how incidental. In reality, policy points us towards exercising real discretion in deciding what information gains primacy at the top of the article.
Infoboxes are fine devices for imparting the most centrally relevant information about a topic at a glance (I regularly defend them in RfCs in a variety of contexts)--but in biographies, said information should be kept to just 1) general biographical details that a person might reasonably want to know about any subject (dates of death and birth, any aliases) and 2) information which relates to the core of their notability (offices for politicians, mediums and genres for entertainers and artists, ect.). These details do not fit in either category and I think including them would put weight on his military service that is inconsistent with the kind of encyclopedic summary of the topic's notability--which should be the only kind of content found above the fold. Snow let's rap 06:26, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I dont get it. Two and a half years ago the editors decided to exclude the military module from the infobox. So why is it still there??? Iwanttoridemybicycle (talk) 09:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mel Brooks. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 01:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mel Brooks. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 23:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mel Brooks. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 14:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Free city of Danzig or German Empire?

Was James Brooks born in the U.S to German Jewish Parents or was he an immigrant from Danzig? If it's the former then I'd say it would be more likely it was before Danzig became a free city and would've still been part of the German Empire.--Comnenus (talk) 18:56, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ "How to be a Jewish Son—or—My Son the Success!" (video). David Susskind Show. 1970. p. Season 12 : Ep. 7. Retrieved January 26, 2014.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mel_Brooks/Archive_1&oldid=1136368106"