Talk:Shemp Howard

Shemp's Actual Date of Birth, Location of Birth, Original Surname

I have a copy of Shemp's original birth certificate, State of New York, #12184. Shemp was born Samuel Hurvitz on March 11, 1895 at 39 Henry Street, Manhattan, NY. He was delivered by midwife Olga Donn of 59 Rivington Street. Don't know where you people get your information from.Brprivate (talk) 03:04, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

This is what's known on Wikipedia as Original Research WP:OR. It is not allowed. There are dozens of Samuel Horwitz's and Samuel Hurvitz's, and the information you provide does not distinguish between them. Since a wide variety of cited sources state that Shemp Howard was born on a different date and in Brooklyn, you must come up with an *acceptable* and *published* source in order to change this information. Also, as to your last question, please see WP:CIV and remember that one of the primary guidelines on Wikipedia is to presume good faith. Monkeyzpop (talk) 19:45, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I am at a loss to understand how a verifiable copy of Shemp Howard's birth certificate is somehow an unacceptable and unpublished source of his birth statistics/information - unless it is the wrong one, which is what you are apparently accusing me of using. It is the correct certificate, obtained from the president of the Three Stooges fan club. I cited the source with its certificate number which anyone can use to look it up independently within the vital statistics system in the State of New York. You also state that "a wide variety of cited sources state that Shemp Howard was born on a different date and in Brooklyn". These "sources" do not themselves cite their source, which considering my primary record citation are clearly hearsay. Additionally, your contention there are "dozens" of other Samuel Horwitz/Hurvitz's is unsubstantiated. Finally, I have a copy of the original in hand, wherein Samuel Hurvitz was born to Jennie and Solomon Hurvitz (both of the correct age corresponding to their years of birth), both born in Russia. There is also a little hand-written note in the lower left corner that states it is Shemp's birth certificate, noting the "Hurvitz" surname and the Manhattan address. What more do you want?Brprivate (talk) 20:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

In this case at least, it appears that Wikipedia supports hearsay over actual, verifiable facts - as long as a large number of sources cite the same incorrect information. Anyone wishing to correct the record with an actual verifiable source appears to be thwarted by consensus. I've seen two different dates for Shemp's birth on 10 different websites - none of which provide a source - yet when I state I have his birth certificate in hand with a slightly different date it is somehow the wrong one. Show me your birth certificate and I'll show you mine.Brprivate (talk) 21:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Mr. Brprivate (it would be nice if you registered an account so that you could be addressed directly, but here is fine if you insist): First, you are, I believe, now in violation of WP:3RR and subject to blocking. Second, I do not care one little bit what Shemp Howard's birth date or birth name is, insofar as having an ax to grind about which fact is correct. Your edits, while laudable for the original research behind them, do not conform to WP standards. The standard is published citation. There are lesser standards, but the primary standard is "What has been published in a reputable resource?" The information you provided earlier (date, city, surname, midwife, etc.) did not IN ITSELF distinguish between Samuel Horwitz (as his family name was spelled in several census records and in the autobiography of his brother) and the several other Samuel Horwitz's and Samuel Hurvitz's born in the state of New York at about the same time. Therefore, BASED ON THE INFORMATION YOU PROVIDED EARLIER, it cannot be used as prima facie evidence that it is THE Samuel Horwitz/Hurvitz discussed in this article. Subsequent evidence you provided suggests that it is, but still leaves two major obstacles: it is Original Research insofar as it contradicts PUBLISHED evidence in reliable sources (one must consider the subject's own brother's autobiography to be fairly reliable about the family's last name, for example), and the fact that the spelling "Hurvitz" contradicts MANY other family records both published and unpublished. Until these obstacles are overcome, we cannot simply take one unpublished document, originally researched, and use it to contradict a comparative mountain of published and cited material, EVEN IF THAT MATERIAL IS "HEARSAY." That's not the way Wikipedia works. There is a reasonable means of getting the information you wish published on WP to be included, but you have not achieved that yet. If you do, WP editors such as myself will champion your edits. Until then, we are forced to abide by WP guidelines (one of which, I remind you again, is to presume good faith). Monkeyzpop (talk) 01:50, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

It appears that no matter the facts, Wikipedia appears hell-bent on enforcing a standard which stifles accuracy in favor of “evidence” based on published content, whether or not this published content has any basis in reality. I can assure you that family lore – especially that of public figures/movie stars – is highly subject to error and revision (sometimes outright fraud), generally depending on how many generations it has passed through. As such, unless someone has actually undertaken the job to check into the matter, any inaccuracies will forever linger, rendering an accurate accounting impossible if held to the standards by which Wikipedia operates. For example, after investigating my own family history and carefully documenting the results, I found a very large published history for one branch, which I was very happy to locate - until I looked into the line where our branches met. It was absolutely incorrect, which I was absolutely certain of because I had carefully documented the source records (all relatively easily obtained). I found the reason for the inaccuracy was due to a submission by a cousin who used oral tradition and memory (and probably a little guesswork) rather than publicly available primary source information. There is an old saw in genealogy circles: “Genealogy without documentation is mythology” and this certainly applied. When I called the publisher to submit my corrections, he stated that he would gladly take my submission for the record but no corrections would be made, as he did not intend to publish any more volumes (too expensive, too much work, etc.). So for the last 50 years, people have been citing a source that has the authority of being published but lacks credibility. Indeed it is positively misleading. Its publishers should be dismissed for accepting such information, as it completely compromises the integrity of the genealogy not only from that point on, but in a more general manner, for its standards cannot then be trusted. If Wikipedia’s standard is “published citation” in a “reputable resource”, then the problem becomes “what is a reputable resource”? In my case, are the books (and websites) published on the Stooges credible as regards genealogical information? Without citing primary documents, the answer is a resounding “no”, regardless of the author’s family connections, if any. As my “original research” proves, not one person who has published anything on the Stooges appears to have looked into the matter of obtaining Shemp’s birth certificate! I haven’t read Moe’s autobiography, but unless he had a photographic memory, I’m willing to bet he got many of the details wrong. The possibilities for inaccuracy are endless (parents lie to their children for many reasons…)

This whole thing started because I found a 1900 census record that has Moe’s family living in Manhattan rather than Bensonhurst as claimed in all the literature; I found this curious since it is now so easily checked. In addition, I found that Moe’s month and year of birth were different on the census than in the known record as well. While census records are notoriously inaccurate, it was accurate as to Shemp’s birth dates, leading me to believe there is an issue with Moe’s actual date of birth as well as the birth-in-Bensonhurst claim. Wouldn’t it be interesting if Moe didn’t know his correct birthday?

In the case of the Stooge websites and (some of the) published materials, it appears people repeated what they were told and then published the results, to unknown standards. Others then cite these results to bolster their own arguments, but how worthy are they to be cited? If not held to a high standard, they are essentially worthless. I’m sorry, but repeating the same falsehoods over and over doesn’t make them any truer; they are worthless as a “published citation”, the Wikipedia standard. And so Wikipedia carries on with this worthless information, which renders much of Wikipedia worthless. You state that “there is a reasonable means of getting the information you wish published on WP to be included, but you have not achieved that yet. If you do, WP editors such as myself will champion your edits”. Excuse me for being thickheaded, but I cannot see how this can be done without amending the cited, published material and/or breaking the Wikipedia edict of “no original research”. Any help in this matter would be most appreciated.

All I wanted to do was make people aware of an error in the date of birth of a beloved public figure; maybe uncover a few more inaccuracies somewhere down the line. While Wikipedia provides a wonderful way in which to look into the matter, it appears Wikipedia might work to keep the facts of the matter from ever seeing the light of day. I will defer to your edit and hope a way can be found to publish accurate information.Brprivate (talk) 05:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I realize it can be frustrating to have first-hand knowledge or evidence of something and not be able to use it in Wikipedia. I have found myself in precisely the same situation on occasion. But that is how Wikipedia operates, and as a general rule, there is nothing to be gained by arguing that you don't like the rules of the particular game you want to play. We all either abide by those rules or don't play here. If it is of any help, here are some of the specific rules of this venue: "Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources....Material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors." (WP:RS). "If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to premiere such a discovery." (WP:OR) "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true." (WP:V) I suggest you read some of the linked articles in full, as they will elaborate usefully on these points. But in any event, these are the rules of the game here, and must be adhered to or risk deletion or re-writing by other editors. Thanks. Monkeyzpop (talk) 07:06, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I've changed Shemp's entry back to the way it was until I can get some confirmation and then contact some published sources with the evidence. Brprivate (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:30, 3 October 2011 (UTC).

Someone mentioned the president of The Three Stooges Fan Club. This organization must publish a newsletter or something. Or, a member might have researched and written an article on this subject.

If so, this will be an independent, checkable source, not OR. It can be referred to as a source for information in the article. Also, it will likely be quite accurate, as fans tend to do lots of work on their favorite subject, just for the fun of it. 2A00:23C7:E287:1901:4110:57A2:1329:4F12 (talk) 12:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Requested move

Shemp's birthdate is ACTUALLY March 17th. The date you show is from record of the death certificate which was in error. Shemp was born on Saint Patrick's day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fugcheese (talk • contribs) 17:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Move in order to replace nickname with proper name

---

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support. Use his proper name. – AxSkov (☏) 06:59, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support -Ethan0 19:05, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose He is far more known under the name Shemp.144.126.161.43 15:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

This article has been renamed after the result of a move request. Dragons flight 07:18, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Question

If we're going to call him by his real first name why not call him by his real last name?144.126.161.43 15:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hair

Does anyone know what type of hair Shemp has?

Evereything is Relative

Quote "Shemp used his somewhat homely appearance for comic effect, often mugging grotesquely or allowing his hair to fall in disarray. He even played along with a publicity stunt that named him 'he Ugliest Man in Hollywood."

It seems to me that many of his Stooges roles were as the romantic figure. If a Stooge was involved with a woman, it was usually Shemp. Maybe it's because of his independent career in Hollywood. Two different worlds, where the ugliest man in one is the dream-boy in the other?WHPratt (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Shempport.jpeg

Image:Shempport.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:06, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Crimin.jpeg

The image Image:Crimin.jpeg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Objection

Anyone object to changing it to Barney Fag instead of Frank? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.205.54.4 (talk) 03:44, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

shemp ambulance or firetruck

Has anyone ever seen or heard of a hand drawn picture of an ambulance or firetruck drawn and signed and initialed by shemp. I have not been able to find anything. It was said that it may have been a concept vehicle for one of the movies. please if anyone knows let me know.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayapple32 123 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC) 

Son or daughter?

The article states that he had a son, Morton; and a few lines underneath it it states that his biography was writen by his "daughter and son-in-law". Was it a son or a daughter? If this means daughter-in-law and son-in-law, to whom was the son-in-law married? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.55.59.207 (talk) 03:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

succeumed?

"Curly succeumed to the series on January 18, 1952 at 48"

wtf?71.164.103.93 (talk) 21:46, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Military Service

He was in the service during World War One. Worth a mention?2A00:23C7:E287:1901:1899:599E:6842:863 (talk) 12:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Shemp Howard. 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/20131215055306/http://threestooges.net/forums/gallery/9_11_03_11_8_19_15.jpg to http://threestooges.net/forums/gallery/9_11_03_11_8_19_15.jpg

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) 21:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)