Talk:Merian C. Cooper

Should this be in here?

"Cooper kept a copy and Dagmar kept a copy (which now belongs to me)" Should this be in here?

The entire section relating to Cooper's autobiography is sloppily written and lacking in suitable academic tone. 65.6.138.68 19:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

At the very least, it should clarify who "me" is.

Who is "Nina"?

Presumably "Nina" was Cooper's Polish paramour who bore him a son, later called Maciej Słomczyński. This point is crying for clarification. 65.6.138.68 19:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

No kidding. This article is a disgrace and needs major rewriting. Languagehat (talk) 16:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Family News

The pedigree presented here was prepared without the aid of the appropriate editorial tools so that some of the relationships are unclear (for example the vital dates for Cooper's wife, Dorothy Jordan). The pedigree uses the term "Living" in a confusing manner, is "LIVING JORDAN" to be taken as a claim that Dorothy Jordan is yet alive? (She died in 1988, BTW) One of the twin sons is named as "Living Cooper". This is really atrocious. [still living]

The whole section "From Count to King Kong" (which is badly titled for a website with pretensions to academic detachment-title is exactly factually accurate !) ought to be removed as irrelevant to the subject. Pedigrees ought to be given only where such information is relevant to the historical significance of the personality in question, such as a king whose entire position rests on his ancestry. Merian Cooper's life and accomplishments would have been significant even if he had been raised in a foundling home without any documented ancestry. 65.6.138.68 19:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Merian Cooper has twin sons both of whom were Colonels in the USAF. And hopefully they will add some more info etc

see their line of descent decried above as follows:

Count to King Kong

• 1 Count Jacques LESERRURIER

+ Elizabeth LEGARE

• 2 Susanne LESERRURIER b: 1673 d: bef 1721

+ Jean Francois GIGNILLIAT b: 17 MAY 1657 d: 1699

• 3 John GIGNILLIAT b: 1700 d: 25 MAR 1750

+ Mary Magdalen DUPRE b: 15 NOV 1711 d: ab 1776

• 4 James GIGNILLIAT b: 30 JUL 1746 d: 12 MAR 1794

+ Charlotte PEPPER b: 17 NOV 1748 d: 9 SEP 1803

• 5 Elizabeth GIGNILLIAT

+ Col John COOPER b: 1751 d: 1816 Aiken, SC Major in Rev War, Col in War of 1812

• • son of Richard Cooper of n. Darien, Ga & Hester Merian
• 6 Charles Marian COOPER

b: 1797 McIntosh Co, Ga (moved to Fla) d: 1857 + Anne/Annie Frances GARNIER b: 1807 SC d: 1884

• 7 Charles Philip COOPER , Atty

b: 13 Aug 1827 Cuba d: 9 Jan 1895 Jacksonville,Fla + Hesse M. JACKSON b: 1828/1829 Ga d: Bef 1870

• 8 John C. COOPER b: Jan 1861 Ga

+ Mary C. CALDWELL b: Jan 1862 Tenn

• 9 Merian C. COOPER, Col, Gen, Exec RKO, Director - KING Kong

b: 23 Oct 1893 Jacksonville, Fla d: 21 Apr 1973 Cal + Dorothy JORDAN (decd 1988)

• 10 Richard M Cooper (twin) , Col, USAF Retired
• 10 Chas G Cooper (twin), Col, USMC Retired
• 10 Sister

/s/ line by LE C GM/PS User:76.245.67.21

footenote- the above line includes many substantial, planter families of historic note.

Anti-Semitism and VM

I took the liberty of browsing through the book which allegedly mentions Cooper's antisemitism and stripping him of the VM. This is the book, same edition (Cambridge 2001), with a query on the name Cooper. 5 results found, not one Cooper is this Cooper. What's more, page 204 doesn't mention any Cooper at all. Sir Wolf (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

WW1

There is a character account in the book 1918 The Year of

Communism

Communist spies were quite real.Jimjilin (talk) 19:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Removed information

• The following sentence was removed because it did not have any supporting source. If anyone finds a source for it, though, feel free to add it back in.

In January 1919, while on special duty with the American Red Cross in France, he located the grave of Lieutenant Frank Luke, Jr., America's second-highest-scoring ace of World War I, near the village of Murvaux.Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 22:05, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

• I removed the following paragraph because it is a large portion of information that is unsourced. If anyone finds the source, please add it back in~

On April 4 and 11, 2007, Turner Classic Movies aired six films that had been produced by Cooper at RKO but had been out of distribution for over 50 years. According to TCM host Robert Osborne, Cooper had agreed to a legal settlement with RKO in 1946, after accusing RKO of not having given him all the money due him from his RKO producer's contract in the 1930s. The settlement gave Cooper complete ownership of six RKO titles—Rafter Romance (1933) with Ginger Rogers, Double Harness (1933) with Ann Harding and William Powell, The Right to Romance (1933), One Man's Journey (1933) with Lionel Barrymore, Living on Love (1937), and A Man to Remember (1938). According to an interview with a retired RKO executive that was used as a TCM promo for the premiere, Cooper allowed the films to be shown in 1955–56 in a limited re-release, and only in New York City.Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 19:05, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Merian C. Cooper/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: RL0919 (talk · contribs) 02:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I just added a nom to the category, so only fair that I take the one from other end of the queue. Expect to complete review by the end of the week. --RL0919 (talk) 02:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Review summary immediately below, with more detailed comments after. This isn't quite ready for GA, but the issues seem like they could be resolved somewhat quickly (especially if you have some alternative sources for the sourcing issues), so putting on hold for a week to let editors work on the issues.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: On hold pending resolution of issues

Prose concerns:

• I did some basic copy editing in a few spots; feel free to overwrite if I've caused any factual mistakes or other issues.
• In general I think another pass of copy editing is needed. There are awkward wordings in a number of places where I would prefer that more involved editors do the adjustments. Some examples:
  • "He was the youngest of his siblings." He isn't his own sibling.
  • "He was educated at The Lawrenceville School in New Jersey and graduated in 1911. Cooper graduated high school in 1911." Seems redundant.
  • "He only stayed there for 6 months because, after branching into the world of journalism, he went on to work at the Des Moines Register-Leader as well as the St. Louis Post-Dispatch." The word "because" implies some sort of reason will be given for his departure, but really it is just a chronology.
  • "He was helped by German soldiers and was taken to a prisoner reserve hospital." The word "helped" seems odd here -- he was captured, yes?
  • The Polish-Soviet war is mentioned twice in the same section in a way that seems redundant.
  • "Cooper discussed the plans for Pan American Airways with John Hambleton, which was formed during 1927." The dependent clause seems to be misplaced, assuming it was the airline that was formed rather than Hambleton.
  • The Searchers was from C.V. Whitney Pictures, but is discussed in the paragraph about Argosy Pictures. Also, C.V. Whitney Pictures is named after Cornelius Vanderbilt Whitney, so not clear how Cooper "form[ed]" it.
• Lead is a little short, but technically within the guideline.

There are some sources used that do not meet the desired standards of reliability:

• Filmreference.com (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 93#filmreference.com and Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Resources)
• IMDB (see Wikipedia:Citing IMDb)
• TVTropes (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 211#TVTropes)

Of the five images used, three seem fine, but two have concerns:

• File:Merian Cooper.jpg is tagged with the claim that it is public domain under the "life of the author plus 70 years" rule, but there is no source and no indication of who the photographer was. Also, the public domain rules are not the same in every country; it needs an explanation of how it is free use in the United States, where Wikipedia's servers are based.
• File:Cooper Fauntleroy.jpg has tags claiming both European and US copyright expiration, but again no source or other information to substantiate publication date, which is needed if those tags are to be considered plausible.

I'm assuming all the above could be addressed within a seven-day hold period, but let me know if you think that will be a problem. --RL0919 (talk) 16:13, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! I'll be reworking the page this week with my student. So far we've replaced the unreliable sources and started on copyediting. I was able to find File:Merian Cooper.jpg in our Cooper collection. I added more information to the image on the commons and updated its copyright tag. I'm still on the hunt for the Fauntleroy photo. I'll post again when I think we're done with the revisions. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@RL0919: I'm going over your review again and I'm not sure what to do with Cooper's filmography. The style of the table is good (David Lynch's filmography has a similar style). I think it's too short for its own page; do you think it should be removed entirely? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@Rachel Helps (BYU): I don't think I made any comments about the Filmography section. If you think the items mentioned above have been addressed, I can re-look at the article and let you know where we stand. --RL0919 (talk) 18:07, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@RL0919: You didn't comment on it, but you did mention it parenthetically in the check/fail section. I think maybe the section should later in the article, since you mentioned the page's layout should be checked too. It's not quite ready yet for re-review, but it should be in a few hours. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:12, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I think you may be mis-reading the pass/fail template. The pass/fail icons appear after the specific GA criteria. The "fail" items were "prose, spelling, and grammar", "citations to reliable sources", and "images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales". I don't think you need to do anything to the Filmography for GA. --RL0919 (talk) 18:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@RL0919: Oh, yes, you're absolutely right. I should have looked more closely. I took out the Fauntleroy photo and I replaced it with one from our collection here in the Harold B. Lee library. I think I've addressed the prose concerns. I agree with you about the lead and I'll have one of my students expand it today.Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@RL0919: The page is ready for you to look at again.Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 16:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I moved one sentence; the issues from before appear to be addressed and no significant new issues were created in the process, so congratulations to you and your student on your new GA. --RL0919 (talk) 17:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)