Talk:Florian Pittiș

Untitled

A less known fact about Florian Pittis was a freemason leader.

This part was cut out by Dahn with no reason. As Wikipedia is a public encyclopedia I say there is a problem. 90.5.212.112 (talk) 19:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. I would like to know the reason, too. Or are freemason topics about famous Romanians taboo? Mycomp 04:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mycomp (talk • contribs)

I see that DanaEn dislikes the fact that I opine that his much too early passing away might have had anything to do with his heavy smoking, anad she deletes it all the time. I am not implyig that his smoking caused his death, just that it hastened it. What do the administrators say to this? Is this information pertinent or completely irrelevant. I will obey their decision. Mycomp 05:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mycomp (talk • contribs)

Seems like original research, unless it can be attributed to a reliable source. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Does this count? http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Prostate_Cancer_More_Advanced_in_Men_Who_Smoke.asp or this http://www.fightprostatecancer.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6347 If you, the administrator, consider it irrelevant, I will obey to your decision and not add it anymore to the article. Please advise.

Besides, can a user (who is not an administrator, as is the case with DanaEn) threaten to block another user (me) as (s)he wrote on my talk page? Mycomp 12:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Neither of the links you provided seems to mention Florian Pittis. It is true that I'm an administrator, but that doesn't give me any extra authority over content decisions; in theory I'm knowledgeable regarding practice and policy, given my experience around the wiki, but that's not quite the same thing. :p As far as threatening to have you blocked, that was probably an error on their part... seems much better to have a civil conversation about things, no? – Luna Santin (talk) 06:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The provided links don't mention Florian Pittis, which is only natural, because they are general research papers showing that smokers have a much higher risk of getting prostate cancer, and once they get it, to die much earlier than non-smokers. And my sentence is "It is not unreasonable to believe that his heavy smoking contributed significantly to his early demise." It is a very cautious expression, don't you think? Anyway, I take it that you don't forbid me to add the sentence. I am not a vandal, and I actually consider DanaEn to vandalize my editing by repeatedly deleting my sentence. I don't think Wikipedia is a place for hagiographic biographies. And, what are we going to do about the threat on my talk page? Will you caution her/him for overstepping her/his authority? I will delete it, OK? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mycomp (talk • contribs) 13:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The issue here is very simple: the user Mycomp is not following Wikipedia's guidelines. She/he makes unsubstantiated claims about smoking and its role in the death of Pittis. Mycomp is adding info without providing references and according to Wikipedia guidelines "unreferenced facts are subject to removal". In this case, the unreferenced fact is Mycomp's allegation that Florian Pittis was a heavy smoker, but nobody knows or can prove for sure that he was (what does "heavy smoker mean? Did Mycomp count the cigarettes Pittis smoked?). Another reason for deleting Mycomp's "contribution" is that she/he is trying to promote an anti-smoking campaign on a biographical page. I have sent an e-mail to Mycomp explaining that this biographical page is not the place for medical information and/or education and that her/his statement is not objective. Finally I had no choice than to issue the vandalism warning. Please note that I am not the only user having a problem with Mycomp's allegations, user Galaad2 undid Mycomps' revision on August 13th explaining why (please refer to the article history).DanaEn (talk) 16:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, here we go again. So the problems are: a. can Pittis be called a heavy smoker? b. can we write in somebody's Wikipedia article that (s)he was a heavy smoker? c. was my sentence an "unsubstantiated claim" as you say, DanaEn?

To a. I think we can call him, Pittis, a heavy smoker. Proof, from the web:

1) in Romanian- "Pittis fuma la greu la Carpati-fara..." (Pittis was smoking heavily Carpati without filter...) written by the journalist Cristian Geambasu in the newspaper Gazeta Sportului in August 2007.

2) again in Romanian: "Pittis fumand Carpati fara filtru, fumator patimas, ... (Pittis smoking Carpati without filter, a passisonate/ardent smoker, ...) in the Romanian newspaper called Jurnalul National (April 22, 2005)

3) a website dedicated to him (http://www.radio3net.ro/florian-pittis/3) is described din Jurnalul National Sept. 1, 2007 "Florian Pittiş - Profetul generaţiei in blue-jeans", ca element distinctiv se găseşte fumul de Carpaţi." (Florian Pittis-the prophet of the blue jeans generation, having as a distinctive element the smoke of Carpati [cigarettes]" The link above is really funny because cigarette smoke is used as a background design for the homepage :) Take a look.

4) "Pittis inseamna plete, blugi, tigari Carpati si rock" (Pittis means long hair, blue jeans, Carpati cigarettes, and rock) in the Romanian newspaper Evenimentul Zilei of August 13, 2006 http://www.evz.ro/articole/detalii-articol/407430/quotPittis-inseamna-plete-blugi-tigari-Carpati-si-rockquot/

Do we need more proof? I think not.

So, next, to b. Can we write in somebody's Wikipedia article that he/she was a heavy smoker? Take a look at the articles about George Harrison, Winston Churchill, Richard Burton, Rula Lenska, Slim Keith, Dwight Eisenhower, to name just a few. Or are there special rules for Romanian actors? I think not.

Next, c. Was I right/wrong to say "It is not unreasonable to believe that his heavy smoking contributed significantly to his early demise"?

Beware, I did not write that his heavy smoking CAUSED his death, I said it MIGHT have CONTRIBUTED to his early death (at age 63). I provided two references:

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Prostate_Cancer_More_Advanced_in_Men_Who_Smoke.asp ("substances in cigarette smoke may act as cancer promoters. They may not cause the cancer itself, but they may affect the cancerous cells’ DNA in a way that makes them grow more quickly)

http://www.fightprostatecancer.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6347 ("A genetic process involved in the development of prostate cancer is strongly associated with smoking levels, according to researchers at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of California, San Francisco. Previous studies have associated smoking with progression of prostate cancer tumors, but this study is the first to determine how the process works on a genetic level."")

In response to these proofs, I was told by administrator Luna Santin that these research papers do not mention Pittis' name, so they are invalid. Is this answer for real? If a certain person's name is not mentioned in a research paper, it does not count as proof?

More proof about the link between smoking and prostate cancer? Here is one more: "PHS study links heavy, long-term cigarette exposure to aggressive prostate cancer" by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. http://www.fhcrc.org/about/pubs/center_news/2003/jul17/sart1.html

One more: "...a correlation was found between smoking and the occurrence of fatal prostate cancer." (http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:tiylj6TJ6DQJ:websites.afar.org/site/PageServer%3Fpagename%3DIA_d_prost_8_r_life+no+link+between+smoking+prostate.cancer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&client=safari

Or maybe, Florian Pittis was the exception to the laws of science?

And, with all due respect, DanaEn, I would prefer that you next time refrain from making ironic remarks a la "Did Mycomp count the cigarettes Pittis smoked?" Because I think they are inappropriate.

So, if you still do not agree with me, I suggest that we take the case to arbitration.

Until then, as a compromise, I will put back my sentence without the word "significantly". To me, you, DanaEn, are the vandal, because you deleted my sentence time after time, a sentence which I think I now have proved is not taken out of the blue Mycomp 06:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Mycomp, whatever your arguments, they don't stand as this page dedicated to Pittis is in ENGLISH. Neither I nor the administrators understand Romanian. So, unless you have personally counted the number of cigarettes smoked by Pittis in a day, you don't have the authority to make the statement that he was a heavy smoker. And the administrator has told you the same thing, therefore you will be reported again for vandalism. DanaEn (talk) 20:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

DanaEn, you don't understand Romanian? Really? So the DanaEn who contributes to the Florian Pittis article on Romanian Wikipedia is not you, right? Anyway, I translated the Romanian articles for those who do not understand Romanian. You mean to say, that if the primary information is not in English, it cannot be used on English Wikipedia? Really? So, if I want to write about some local custom in, say, Tahiti, but I have the information only in French, I cannot write an article about it on English Wikipedia? You must be joking. Again, you make this preposterous claim, that if I did not count his cigaretts personally, I have no right to say he was a heavy smoker. Do you think the article about George Harrison or about Ike Eisenhower was written by somebody who counted the number of cigaretts personally? Do you think Wikipedia is some kind of a fan site where only the sanitized version of somebody's life may be written about? I substantiated my claimes clearly. It seems you have no arguments to refute my claim, so stop vandalizing the article. Mycomp 23:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source which mentions Pittis specifically, and which supposes his death was a result of smoking? If not, the claim is clearly original research (see policy page for details). – Luna Santin (talk) 00:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I beg to differ. You do not seem to have read carefully what I wrote. "Contributed to" and "result of" are two different things. I never said his death was a RESULT of his heavy smoking, I said people might be forgiven if they think that his heavy smoking CONTRIBUTED to his early death. Namely, had he not been a heavy smoker he MIGHT have lived longer. In the Ernest Hemmingway entry is says that electroconvulsive therapy may have helped precipitate his suicide. No source whatsoever, let alone a reliable source that mentions Ernest Hemingway "specifically" is cited, and it is allowed to stay without anybody complaining. By the way, do you agree that the proof I provided is enough to call him a heavy smoker, or do you agree with DanaEn that because the original sources I cited (there are a lot more, I just chose some) are in Romanian they are invalid? If this were the case, the whole article about Florian Pittis should not even be here on the English Wikipedia, because ALL the original sources are in Romanian, as he was Romanian. And did I convince you that is it allowed to write in an article that somebody was a heavy smoker?Mycomp 02:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Mycomp, both Luna and I have read very carefully what you wrote. Your claims cannot be proven and you are not following the Wikipedia guidelines. Pittis died of prostate cancer, not lung cancer. In any case, I do not see how your contribution enriches this Wikipedia page? Your statement is very subjective and can be considered gossip.DanaEn (talk) 04:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I would like to announce that three administrators have accepted on Romanian Wikipedia that my sources which claim that he was a heavy smoker of Carpati fara filtru (cigarette brand) are verifiable and credible. So, this information has been added to the Romanian article. I hope it is allowed to add it to the English article too- without implying that his death is in any way linked to his heavy smoking (I will not do it as yet until I get the go-ahead from an administrator). Mycomp 09:40, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Mycomp announcement is untrue yet again. I didn't see three administrators accepting his allegations. On the contrary, Mycomp's allegations about Pittis's death and smoking have been removed. The page only has a note at Miscellaneous that the artist used to smoke which is quite different from Mycomp's claims that the artist was a heavy-smoker. DanaEn (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

If it can be reliably sourced that Pittis smoked, that's a slightly different ballgame (keyword if); extrapolating anything from that, however, would be WP:OR. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:18, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

It's not a secret that the artist smoked, but to make statements about him being a heavy-smoker and that his death was caused by smoking is "original research".DanaEn (talk) 22:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I suggest compromise, in the spirit of Wikipedia, just like it happened on Romanian Wikipedia. So, let's not write anything regarding his death, just about him being a heavy smoker (like in the case of George Harrison, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Burton, Winston Churchill, etc. who are called heavy smokers whithout any references given whatsoever). And let me translate into English the first sentence of the article that I cite as reference- from the Romanian newspaper Jurnalul National of April 22, 2005 (I gave three more references above, which I translated into English): "Te miri cand il vezi pe Pittis fumand Carpati fara filtru, fumator patimas, nu se fandoseste cu tigara, chiar o stoarce de fiecare molecula de nicotina." (You have to wonder when you look at Pittis smoking filterless Carpati, a passionate/ardent smoker, he does not put on airs with his cigarette, rather he squeezes it of its each and every molecule of nicotine.). Sorry, for my maybe imperfect translation (but it is done in good faith). And, once again, I am being accused of wanting to slander Florian Pittis' name, which is very far from the truth. (Did the people who wrote that George Harrison was a heavy smoker want to slander his name? I don't think so). I love(d) him just as much as any other Romanian. Mycomp 02:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mycomp (talk • contribs)

Oops, did I do something wrong? I added the reference, but after I saved it, I see that all that was after my reference has disappeared. Can anybody help me retrieve it? --Mycomp 03:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

No problems. You have to have both the start and end tags for the reference: <ref>content</ref> -- you left off the end tag -- it happens to us all sometimes.

Also this may be helpful in building the content of a reference: Citation of generic sources Atom (talk) 03:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. How embarrasing. --Mycomp 03:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mycomp (talk • contribs)

References

Heavy

Hi, I can understand a desire to make every Wikipedia article accurate. In a Biography of a Living Person (BLP) article we should give every point of information great scrutiny. In this case, it is not a BLP. The citations given do support that he was a frequent smoker, what some people would characterize as a heavy smoker. Whether we choose to leave the comment "heavy" or not, the current citations do support the fact that he was a smoker, and the types of cigarettes he preferred. So please leave the citations alone, if you would.

Could you explain why you are so adamant that the word "heavy" not be included? Thanks, Atom (talk) 02:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Mycomp is trying to promote a distorted image. I want to respect the truth and to be objective. The truth is that we only know Pittis smoked. How much nobody can say for sure.DanaEn (talk) 02:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry, are you or Mycomp certified translators so you can be trusted with these translations from the Romanian language? As I read they sound hilarious to me.DanaEn (talk) 02:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

It is all rather a big to do over nothing important. Why is it such a big deal to you? This is not a BLP, and the evidence seems pretty clear from good citations that he smoked -- alot, and preferred the brand of cigarettes. I have no vested interest in how he is described. I just wonder why you are so adamant that he not be described as a "heavy" smoker, when it seems clear that he was? Do you trust the Romanian translation?? Give me a break. Could you cite the Wikipedia policy that requires that citations be in English? Atom (talk) 02:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, Atomaton, are you saying that if the article is about a person who is no longer living then one is allowed to post all sorts of allegations and claims? The references used by Mycomp are from Romanian newspapers and none state the number of cigarettes smoked in order to qualify a person as being a heavy smoker. Mycomp translations cannot be trusted. Is he a certified translator? If the references provided are not written originally in the English language, I don't think they are valid.DanaEn (talk) 02:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

No, I am certainly not saying that. What I did say is that a BLP article requires great scrutiny. In most articles that are BLP, suggesting that someone was a "heavy" smoker might require very solid citations. In an article that is not BLP, some rational judgement, such as if you find four articles that say that a person smoked alot, that suggesting that they were a "heavy" smoker might not be challenged. Say, like in the Winston Churchill article. I appreciate your concern for keeping the article accurate. It just seems that you are picking through nits. I think the citations are valid, even if not ideal. Clearly they indicate that he was a smoker, and what type of cigarette he preferred. Whether he was, or was not a "heavy" smoker is a minor and subjective thing. If course we want the article to be correct. But, this article has numerous unsupported statements that you choose not to question and insist on citations for, why do you choose something that is very likely, and so minor, and not say anything about the more important statements? For instance it says "Florian Pittiş (4 October 1943 – 5 August 2007) was a Romanian stage and television actor, theatre director, folk music singer, and radio producer." How do we know he was a radio producer? How do we know any of these things, there is no citation. "In 1992, he was one of the founding members of the band Pasărea Colibri." That is a big claim...no citaion. "the only Romanian radio station that broadcasts exclusively on the Internet." I assume we mean the only Romanian Radio station that broadcasts exclusively on the Internet. We should have a citatin to back that up, right?? "Great admirer of Bob Dylan, he had masterfully translated and adapted some of Dylan's songs" There is no citation, but we could probably dig up that he translated Dylan's songs. How do we know he was a "great admirer" of Dylan? A rational judgement? Or do we have a ciation for that someplace?

I'm not picking on just this article. I could pull up a Biolgraphy, of say Winston Churchill, or Harold Wilson or Josip Broz Tito and come up with numerous similar items. I don't understand your concern about something so very small when you seem to care not for the more important. Atom (talk) 02:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I see that you removed the section entirely. In the edit summary you suggested that after a review of other articles you felt that the fact that he was a smoker is not notable. I was happy to try and help generate citations, but I am not knowledgable enough about the subject to make a case for notability. Also, as it was in a section titled trivia it probably is trivial, and not notable. I think perhaps everyone has spent more time than is necessary on this particular item. Atom (talk) 13:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, thanks to AdiJapan the issue looks solved for now. AdiJapan edited the page in an objective manner. Thank you.DanaEn (talk) 19:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

Now that the dispute regarding Pittiş's smoking is over, I think I can make a point about what is considered "trivia" at Wikipedia and what's not.

As most Romanians remember, Florian Pittiş was often asked to do the voice-over in television shows, especially in scientific documentaries. His deep voice, his clear pronunciation and his engaging intonation were just perfect for that, and we could often hear him as the narrator at Teleenciclopedia, a documentary show that's been on TV for more than 40 years now. Once he was reading a text on monkeys, for yet another documentary: "The monkeys started to fight. The same also happens in our theater." Of course, the second sentence was not in the original script, but he said it with the same scientific-ish tone that the sound editors could have missed it. Luckily they didn't. The story about the monkeys A sample of his voice

This what I would call trivia. His smoking habit is not trivia, it's almost a symbol of his personality. — AdiJapan 09:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Florian Pittiș. 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:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20120912030758/http://www.protv.ro/stiri/social/florian-pittis-o-voce-de-neuitat-un-spirit-liber-un-idol-cu-plete.html to http://www.protv.ro/stiri/social/florian-pittis-o-voce-de-neuitat-un-spirit-liber-un-idol-cu-plete.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081009062111/http://www.cotidianul.ro/a_murit_florian_pittis_era_tinar_doamna-30576.html to http://www.cotidianul.ro/a_murit_florian_pittis_era_tinar_doamna-30576.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080411070315/http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=30 to http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=30
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080411070320/http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=31 to http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=31
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080411070326/http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=32 to http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=32
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091027213043/http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=432 to http://www.radio3net.ro/rorock.php?cx=details&id=432
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070915055642/http://www.radio3net.ro/artisti.php?cx=details&id=64 to http://www.radio3net.ro/artisti.php?cx=details&id=64

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) 00:39, 5 December 2017 (UTC)