Talk:Rin Tin Tin

The hoary old myth that Rin Tin Tin garnered the most votes for Best Actor in 1929 but the studios decided they needed a human winner while patently absurd is widespread on the net and elsewhere. Deleted the assertion, which has no contemporary evidence at all to back it up. aldiboronti (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Looks like this was taken from a web page, not wikified in any way, probably copyright, includes ad copy. Ortolan88

Yup, it's a copyright violation alright... http://www.citipets.com/2_article8.cfm

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rin_Tin_Tin&action=edit#

Could some wikicop do the copyright violation honors to this article? Ortolan88

Anyone can add a copyright violation notice. I'd do it, but I can't access the aforementioned page. WP:CP explains how to do it, for future reference. Stephen Compall 16:50, 13 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

..it´s not an actor, it´s a character (consuming several dogs)

Birth/death dates fmted per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates_of_birth_and_death; the birth & death places are usually included in text in the article. Also if the dog was "found", I question the actual birth date--hence added "c.". Added back the partial list of films because it's interesting & relevant; although maybe should be a separate section at end of article listing all of his films. Elf | Talk 21:02, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Done, just 10 months after you asked for it ;) Proto 09:36, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cool, that's about my speed, too. :-) Elf | Talk 05:32, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The bit about Rin Tin Tin III seemed to be nonsense, however creative. If this can be confirmed, feel free to add it back. Stephen Compall 16:48, 13 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Wasn't there a Rin Tin Tin cartoon at one point? However, in the series I'm thinking of, the dog was very small, and went on adventures with a young boy.

Maybe you're thinking of the Belgian comic Tintin about a boy who went on adventures. He had a little white dog.

I very definitely recall a Rin Tin Tin comic book series back in the 1950s and early 1960s, mostly of RTT as the companion/possession of a park ranger in (IIRC) Alaska. As a matter of fact, I wish this article would provide adequate summaries of the plots of the radio series, movies, and TV series. Apparently the dog was first presented in the frozen north, evidently paired with an adult, but the TV series moved him to an wild west Army cavalry fort in the wilderness where he was paired with an orphan boy. What, definitively, was supposed to be the backstory to this dog? Sussmanbern (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

The Rin Tin Tin Kennels website claims that "Jr." and "II" were both sired by the original. And that "IV" was sired by "II". Until someone comes up with a source that says otherwise, I've taken out the claim that the subsequent dogs are not decended form the original.

They also say that the "Jr" that appeared on TV was not "Rin Tin Tin Jr." but another dog. The makes sense as RTT Jr would have been over twnety years old when the TV show was recorded. cdixon 76.183.29.230 23:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

There's an image of Rintintin's grave on Flickr at http://www.flickr.com/photos/26022927@N00/37160552/. If we can legally add this to the article I think it would add a nice touch. Off2Explore 22:54, 16 Apr 2007 (UTC)

The dog Rantanplan in the Lucky Luke comic series is named after Rin Tin Tin.

Something is wrong with the final paragraph of the Radio section. There are run-on sentences, and the final information there, noting the performers Lee Aakers, James Brown, and Joe Sawyer, refers to the television series but is not clearly stated so. I am not sure how to correct this, but it is garbled as currently shown. StevenTiger (talk) 14:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

At least two solid new books on Rin Tin Tin, one on his film career, one on his (and his pups') lives. The book by the respected journalist Susan Orlean just got a big review in the New York Times. The article should be updated from these solid new sources, and possibly cross listed with the Darryl F. Zanuck article, and Warner Brothers. Interesting new information on Zanuck that I hadn't seen elsewhere. Profhum (talk) 04:44, 22 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

There's an extract from the Susan Orlean book here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/9010387/Rin-Tin-Tin-the-dog-who-charmed-the-world.html that disagrees with the article as it presently stands. Most noticeable where he was buried. MidlandLinda (talk) 16:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

I've been using the book to expand the article. It's quite good. Binksternet (talk) 06:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Susan Orlean, in her exhaustive and well researched book, says she failed to turn up a source for the name. Rin Tin Tin was found on the battlefield, though, and rin-tin-tin was the current French version of machine gun fire (cf. our rat-tat-tat.) If you pronounce it in French you'll see it's apt. Okay, that's Original Research, but are any of you reading this an authority who can find an article on it, probably in French? Best, Profhum (talk) 04:49, 22 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

While I haven't seen the book, if it is exhaustive and well-researched, she presumably discusses the origins of the two good-luck charm dolls Rintintin and Nénette, from doll characterers designed by Francisque Poulbot at least by 1913 (no reason to suppose that he was influenced by machine gun sound in a war that hadn't begun). http://www.poupendol.com/poulbot-dolls.html

I have deleted the section I recently added referring to the US Navy's USS Rin Tin Tin as, on reflection, she could not be named after the dog but rather, along with USS Nenette, after the same dolls. It would be relevant if there were an article on the dolls. Davidships (talk) 19:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Poulbot once said that Rintintin was the pet name he used to call his wife; she called him Nénette in the same fashion, as a term of endearment between lovers. That's why he named the pair of dolls Rintintin and Nénette in late 1913, with Rintintin being the girl doll contrary to the way everyone else in France called the dolls. I have no idea where Poulbot got the pet name Rintintin or why he would aim it at his wife. Binksternet (talk) 05:59, 4 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

"In New York City, New York, Mayor Jimmy Walker gave Rin Tin Tin a key to the city". This is currently in the Death and posthumous recognition section, and is given the reference Orlean, Susan. "The Dog Star", The New Yorker, August 29, 2011. This positioning implies the award was posthumous.

Considering that Walker was only mayor for one further month after Rin Tin Tin's death, are we sure this isn't referring to an earlier event? Anyone got the book? Something I've found on google http://www.statesman.com/life/books/orlean-tells-all-about-rin-tin-tin-1903031.html?printArticle=y tells that his owner once received the key - are we sure some confusion hasn't occured? LukeSurl ^{t c} 22:53, 13 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

We have Category:Animal actors. I am pretty sure that is the only category this dog really should go in. However it is more clear to me that dogs do not go into nationality categories. Category:American actors is a sub-cat of Category:American people by occupation, so dogs do not go in it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

What you are describing is a problem caused within Wikipedia by Wikipedians who are interested in categorization. The problem is iatrogenic; caused by those who are supposed to be fixing it. Clearly actors can be animals. Clearly animals can have a nationality, and they can be described as having been active in the 20th century. So we can have an animal be a 20th century American actor, such as Strongheart and Rin Tin Tin, even though both of these dogs were born in Europe (one in Germany, and one in France). Both acting careers were from American residence and American activity. Binksternet (talk) 18:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Keep in mind here folks that if we are going to be listing the dog's nationality, the original Rin Tin TIn was by birth French, not American. Mediatech492 (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

• We have Category:Animal actors. That is meant to capture all animals that act. There is no need to subdive them into any more categories. To do so is to mix people and animals. Doing so was never the intention of the categories. I did not know it was so bad. We do not categorize actors by where they performed, but by nationality. These are nationality categories. Actors who were nationals of Mexico or Italy but only performed in US films are still in Mexican and Italian actors categories. So the dog is not an American, and does not belong in American categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
• The descriptor of animal actors is "Individual animals used in film and television (see also animals on television and the Patsy Award)." which clearly suggests it should be the only acting category these animals are in.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • No other animals are in any sub-cat of the actors category besides Rin Tin Tin. There is clearly a decision to not put animals in the other categories, and there is absolutely no reason to put Rin Tin Tin in those categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:27, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

There is long-standing practice to not mix up fictional with real characters in categorization, and in general to keep "people" categories populated only by people. In this case, the same should apply, and Rin tin tin should not be in any categories with "people" as the top-level parent. I think the animal actors are sufficiently small in number that categorization of them as animal actors is sufficiently defining. In the future, if there were hundreds or thousands of animal actors, one could imagine dividing that grouping by nationality (whatever that means) of the animal in question, or by type of animal, but for now with only 42 notable animal actors, we don't need more categories for them at this point. Yes, animals can be actors and can be active in the 20th century, but people categories should contain people only, that's just the way it's always been, and non-humans have always been hived off into other categories. The naked "actor" in english generally is taken to mean a human in this case, and animal actors almost always use the qualifier "animal" when describing them. I suggest we apply a dose of common sense here - when such categories were set up, or when users are browsing these categories, do they expect to see non-human actors? Would they expect to see fictional actors as well? I think the principle of least surprise suggests that no, Virginia, they aren't looking for or expecting dogs here.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 19:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

another example is Hatsune Miku who is a virtual algorithm but who also happens to be a singer. She is in the idols category, which is probably inappropriate, but she doesn't show up in any japenese singers cats ongside humans I don't think.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:25, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Even though I've been contributing to Wikipedia for six years, I still cannot wrap my head around categories. I think they are an artificially hierarchical construct, with whimsical limits placed on them, when they could have been more free-form and organic from the start. That said, I will leave the categorization of this article in other hands. Clearly there are a great many proponents of the current system.
I'm dismounting Rocinante and I'm chopping up my lance for firewood. Binksternet (talk) 15:14, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Categories are not tags, for one, and yes they do impose artificial hierarchy - and if you follow a given category down to subs of subs of subs, you will often find things that would have no business in the parent, since parent/child relationships are often incorrectly used to indicate relations as opposed to proper sub-setting. There are also somewhat inconsistent rules around when they are used - for example, if someone is from X, then they can always be categorized as being such - even if people rarely talk about it - but OTOH if they were once a waiter, they cannot be categorized as such, since that is not DEFINING. Then the whole business of non-diffusing gendered/ethnic categories gets added in and the media dramaz around that, with 90% of people not understanding that doing non-diffusing cats correctly in an emergent (vs top-down designed) category tree is rife with challenges. Read the algorithm here, which gives correct results and is the clearest way I could find to explain it, and then ask yourself how many wikipedia editors are likely to follow that algorithm. The problem is, if you don't follow it, someone will write an article about how wikipedia is sexist/racist. If you want to discuss categorization further, please swing by my talk page, I find it a fascinating topic and I think I understand the current system -with its many flaws - pretty well - and I'm trying to push for a better system of category intersection which may interest you.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:14, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have not been able to find any sources describing exactly how a jump height of 11 feet 9 inches was achieved. This is likely either a boosted jump or complete fabrication, as the current world record dog jump height is 5 feet 8 inches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:5500:C370:FD00:7CF7:A88A:5DB5:653A (talk) 16:53, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Guinness Records confirms a dog named Feather made a vertical jump of 191.7 cm (75.5 in). ^[1] Mediatech492 (talk) 17:42, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 10:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Comments

• " in Flirey France who" commas.
• "in 1958 and in 1959" in both 1958 and 1959.
• "After Leonard died in 2006" repetitive, perhaps "After Leonard's death in 2006"
• Is Preservation breeding a relevant link here when you talk of keeping the bloodline?
• " (Duncan had never done so)," unnecessary as you've just said Hereford was the first to do so.
• "The current Rin Tin Tin XII dog" ->"The current dog, Rin Tin Tin XII, ..."
• What's an "aerial gunner"?
• "subject to bombs" subjected
• "Duncan rescued the dogs and brought them back to his unit." unref.
• " he kept one of " -> "one puppy of"
• "Duncan, Rin Tin Tin, and Nanette II settled at his home in Los Angeles. Rin Tin Tin was a dark sable color and had very dark eyes. Nanette II was much lighter in color." unref.
• Link Strongheart in the main body.
• "of respected film" according to whom?
• Link "key to the city" to Freedom of the City.
• Link those dog foods, e.g. Ken-L Ration.
• "was the most popular actor with the very sophisticated film audience in Berlin." in whose opinion?!
• "the Academy " link it.
• " Rin Tin Tin and the rest of the crew filmed ..." unref.
• "Rin Tin Tin and Nanette produced ..." Nanette II?
• "the death was given a wide variety of fabrications"-> "aspects of his death were fabricated"
• "the famous" no need.
• Filmography tables could use row and col scopes and a caption per MOS:DTT.
• Some entries across tables missing refs.
• Title and Role seem to sort three different ways.
• "Junior appeared in several films ... " unref.
• "Story lines" ->" Storylines"
• "A fictionalized account " unref.
• Reference date format should be consistent.
• NY Times -> The New York Times
• Be consistent with format and linking publishers/works.

That's a first pass, so it's on hold. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:21, 6 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for picking up the review! I will address the issues in the next day or two. Binksternet (talk) 16:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm about halfway through these points. I corrected Duncan's military position to the formal term armourer – the person who maintains the guns. He embellished his role in many interviews but author Susan Orleans punctures the puffery. I didn't think preservation breeding was so appropriate, as that topic is about saving precious and rare genes, but this case is just thoroughbred breeding lines for continuity and marketing. Binksternet (talk) 01:55, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Okay, done with this first pass. I discovered a mistake in the two Houston Chronicle refs: both were linking to the same URL. Binksternet (talk) 05:52, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Tables still need work, per this edit of mine needing to be replicated across all of them. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:09, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Tables have always been a mystery to me. I flail away at them until they don't look completely wrong, usually by copying some markup from somewhere else. This morning over coffee, my wife the CSS whiz and HTML developer helped me through some table markup struggles at the Jim Brickman biography, but I probably miswired parts of it. Back to this GA review: Let me know if there is further work to do. Binksternet (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

All good! I did the last single-row table. A nice article and certainly per Wikipedia, a good one. So I'm promoting, nice work. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:28, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

The introductory section contains this sentence:

"Duncan groomed Rin Tin Tin IV for the 1950s television series The Adventures of Rin Tin Tin, but the dog performed poorly in a screen test and was replaced in the TV show by trainer Frank Barnes's dogs, primarily one named Flame Jr., called JR, with the public led to believe otherwise."

This is a poorly written sentence.

It is unclear what the phrase "with the public led to believe otherwise" refers to, since the sentence has stated numerous things.

I hope someone knowledgeable on the subject can write this clearly. 2601:200:C000:1A0:CF1:8191:EC52:4A97 (talk) 17:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply