Talk:Kevin Spacey: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Kevin Spacey/Archive 3) (bot |
|||
Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
== Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2022 == |
== Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2022 == |
||
{{edit semi-protected|Kevin Spacey|answered= |
{{edit semi-protected|Kevin Spacey|answered=yes}} |
||
Fix spelling/grammar - add commas and change "concerned"->"concerns". |
Fix spelling/grammar - add commas and change "concerned"->"concerns". |
||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
To: |
To: |
||
The director of the film, Gene Fallaize, dismissed concerns about working with Spacey. [[User:Tompkins789|Tompkins789]] ([[User talk:Tompkins789|talk]]) 23:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC) |
The director of the film, Gene Fallaize, dismissed concerns about working with Spacey. [[User:Tompkins789|Tompkins789]] ([[User talk:Tompkins789|talk]]) 23:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC) |
||
:{{ESp|d}}, thanks. [[User:Adrian J. Hunter|Adrian '''J.''' Hunter]]<sup>([[User talk:Adrian J. Hunter|talk]]•[[Special:contributions/Adrian J. Hunter|contribs]])</sup> 04:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:52, 6 December 2022
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kevin Spacey article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Kevin Spacey was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This was the most viewed article on Wikipedia for the week of October 29 to November 4, 2017, according to the Top 25 Report. |
Regarding Spacey's allegations in Synopsis
In the synopsis, it unfairly portrays Stacey as suspicious or even guilty, yet because all of the allegations were dropped, Kevin is allowed to be seen as innocent, yet to address this at the top is often disputed by other editors who have emotional attachments to the subject matter, claiming that 'not guilty' is not the same as charges dropped, and although I agree it's not the same, Kevin was never found guilty, therefore it is perfectly fine to add that he was 'never found guilty', because he wasn't, therefore he is still innocent in the eyes of the law, and whether you're a high profile person or an average joe, everyone has the right to remain innocent until proven guilty You may argue that in the article discusses in detail that he was not found guilty, this is not addressed within the synopsis, so why is it important to show that he was never found guilty within the synopsis? well, the synopsis acts as a "TLDR" (Too long didn't read) where it briefly addresses the article before addressing it all within categories. So I hope that others agree with my view that wiki should be written within factual and impartial context rather than emotional or hearsay. Hogyncymru (talk) 23:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
The header mentions the allegations. It doesn't say he was found guilty or assign any positive or negative weight to the allegations, so saying he was not found guilty is kind of superfluous and comes across as defensive imo. Also, just tacking on the short sentence "Kevin was not found guilty of any misdemeanour." at the end of the header really kills the flow and doesn't mesh with the previous sentence. However, I'm new to wikipedia so maybe you folks feel differently. Ficaia (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Bias Editors
The article is not here to affirm editor's viewpoints and to show Kevin as a guilty party in the synopsis (a segment which summarises the article..) if a synopsis closes off as being defamatory due to how it is worded, no judge nor jury has convicted him of being guilty of the allegations mentioned within the article, it is our duty as editors to show every viewpoint regardless of how they feel for the person personally or who they are associated with, Wiki already has an image problem with not showing accuracies and those bias editors are the ones who tarnish the reputation of this whole site, it doesn't even matter if you're an experienced editor who's been here for 10 years with hundreds of awards and accolades under their belts, if they tarnish just one article with their own viewpoint, that in itself destroys the democracy we live in, to learn history as it was documented and to give everyone a fair defence, otherwise, we are doomed to have one person with a chip on his/her shoulder dictating what THEY want the article to look like.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hogyncymru (talk • contribs)
- The lead makes absolutely no judgement about his guilt or innocence, as it should. It simply says that allegations have been made and what has happened to him since. The only editor editing with a bias here is you, who is constantly trying to add a line to suggest that he's innocent. We don't take a stance either way. We just list the objective facts in the lead, which is that Spacey was accused of sexual misconduct by several people and that he's been removed from most projects as a result. Those are indisputable facts. A random producer defending him can be added to the body of the article, but would be completely unbalanced to add it to the lead. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 16:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
first of all, I never said he's innocent, second, I edited it from my very first edit where I said "He was not found to be guilty" to "In 2018, film producer Paul Schrader offered Spacey a role in his new film and wrote, "If he's guilty of a crime, incarcerate him. If not, let him act." So where in this edit does it say that he was not guilty?, does this mean you reverted my edit without reading the edit first? because that doesn't seem very fair does it?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hogyncymru (talk • contribs)
- First of all, please sign your talk page posts. You've been around for long enough that I shouldn't have to remind you. Second of all, I have no idea how you're claiming I didn't read your edit when I responded to the direct content in each edit. If we include a random producer defending him in the lead, why not include all of the negative things people said, like Jon Bernthal? The lead is just no place to include someone's personal opinion on the matter. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 16:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Because you said that I said that I wrote in the article that he was not guilty, I amended that to the latter, so that's why I was confused as to why you claimed that I did include it when you joined in.. however, I will leave things be, I personally think the synopsis is a mess, too much information even if I did have my addition added, it still would have been too much, as to my signing, I have memory and dyslexia issues so find it hard to add it every time, but one last thing, I really am not warring with anyone, I just want everybody to be seen fairly and I hope you see that from a human level, I really don't want to be punished for wanting to help, I can see nothing can be done here to add to the synopsis (even if the billionaire's boys club isn't his last film because you reverted that too), but as of now, I apologise for making anyone feel uncomfortable for my involvement. Hogyncymru 17:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- The Billionaire's Boys Club is his last film to date. Yes there's been news reports of him being cast in an Italian film, however Spacey has yet to comment on it himself and production hasn't started yet, meaning there's no guarantee that it's going to happen. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 16:55, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2021
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Kindly change section title 2017–present: Baby Driver and career controversy to 2017–present: Career controversy.
Baby Driver was released in 2017, but there's no mention of it in this section, so putting it in the title makes no sense.
The discrepancy dates back to the edit that created this section in the first place, 1028941812 - which is to say, there never was any content to match the title.
The alternative to changing the title would be to add such content now, obviously. However, as it stands, everything in this section relates to the controversy in one way or another, whereas Baby Driver was released half a year before, so that doesn't seem ideal to me. Adding it to the previous, pre-controversy section would be better... except that that doesn't fit with the current "to 2016"/"from 2017" split. *shrug*
- 2A02:560:428C:A300:68B1:3D08:DB8E:6034 (talk) 20:56, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
question about the new picture
hiya I'm a newbie but surely the previous picture was better for his page as it was more recent? it's been replaced by one from 2009 that has a Spanish description on en.wikipedia, why is that? ty ty — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterSelIers (talk • contribs) 14:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
sexual misconducts allegations : why is it allegations and not convictions
As per rhe article : "On May 26, 2022, Spacey was charged with four counts of sexual assault against three men in the UK"
This is a bit more than an allegation, he's been convicted of sexual assault. Allegation is "a claim or assertion that someone has done something illegal or wrong, typically one made without proof". Here there are clear proofs, so I suggest the "allegation" part should be left off. 2A02:2788:2B4:652:2565:52CC:C535:CC9A (talk) 06:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- A criminal charge is not the same as a conviction. He has not been convicted. ––FormalDude talk 07:27, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2022
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Fix spelling/grammar - add commas and change "concerned"->"concerns".
Under 2017-present:
Change from: The director of the film Gene Fallaize dismissed concerned about working with Spacey.
To: The director of the film, Gene Fallaize, dismissed concerns about working with Spacey. Tompkins789 (talk) 23:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Done, thanks. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 04:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delisted good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- Biography articles of living people
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- High-importance biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- Actors and filmmakers work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class California articles
- Mid-importance California articles
- C-Class Los Angeles articles
- Unknown-importance Los Angeles articles
- Los Angeles area task force articles
- WikiProject California articles
- C-Class LGBT articles
- C-Class WikiProject LGBT studies - person articles
- WikiProject LGBT studies - person articles
- WikiProject LGBT studies articles
- C-Class London-related articles
- Low-importance London-related articles
- C-Class New Jersey articles
- Mid-importance New Jersey articles
- WikiProject New Jersey articles
- C-Class Theatre articles
- Mid-importance Theatre articles
- WikiProject Theatre articles
- C-Class television articles
- Low-importance television articles
- WikiProject Television articles
- C-Class Maryland articles
- Low-importance Maryland articles
- WikiProject Maryland articles