Talk:Sticks Nix Hick Pix

capitalization

Because it was the lead headline in the paper, "Sticks nix hick pix" was printed in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. All other Variety headlines of the time were printed in Initial Capital Letters (which remains the standard newspaper-headline style to this day).

This article title has it wrong both ways. I've changed the first reference to initial caps, because that's standard headline-ese, but am unsure whether to move to article to Sticks Nix Hick Pix, or change it to STICKS NIX HICK PIX, which is really ugly, or what. I've created both those as redirects to here, if for no other reason than to make sure that somebody else doesn't start the article anew there. - DavidWBrooks 13:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Just to complicate matters, both the above capitalization options exist as articles redirecting to here, except with the incorrect "hix" instead of "hick" ... and I had forgotten that I created one of those wrong articles, long ago! - DavidWBrooks 15:13, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Hicks

The article only says that rural areas did not want to watch movies about farmers, and that upper-class urban stories did unexpectedly well. It does not say that the movies they didn't like "portrayed them as unsophisticated". Variety was probably just using "hick pics" jocularly, to mean rural-themed movies. --Dhartung | Talk 21:15, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

ending in X

On the article page it says the headline is often misquoted with all the four words ending with X. Well, I was redirected by Wikipedia where it itself used four Xs!!! Would somebody please correct Wikipedia.

Not sure what you mean, anonymous unsigned poster. The incorrect spelling (all four X's) typed in as an article redirects to this, the correct spelling (just three X's). That's the way it's supposed to work. - DavidWBrooks 22:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Quote?

What is up with the quote? It doesn't really add anything, other than a demonstration of misquoting the actual headline (and misquoting "Ford to city: drop dead" to boot). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.61.151 (talk) 18:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It actually misquotes 3 of the 4 headlines it references! The famous Daily News hed was actually HEADLESS BODY IN TOPLESS BAR. 151.202.17.45 (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sticks Nix Hick Pix. 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://web.archive.org/web/20080905215551/http://www.simesite.net/abel.asp to http://www.simesite.net/abel.asp

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 07:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

There is no point to prominently displaying four mistakes

There is no point to prominently displaying four mistakes, the four headlines that some writer got wrong. This is idiotic.2600:1700:E1C0:F340:8991:E7C8:8CF3:5AA9 (talk) 19:46, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

It demonstrates how, as the article says, "the headline is one of a handful that have entered the lore of journalism" - DavidWBrooks (talk) 20:01, 2 May 2019 (UTC)