Talk:Uma Thurman

talk

Where is the born? The text says Boston, while the box on the right hand side says Amherst. --M_Buisman

What is this Letterman ridicule? Is he trying to pretending that "Uma" = "O my"? Please clarify. --Menchi 12:26 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I think that they both just had funny-sounding names, so the introduction just sounded amusing. GGano 04:37, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Any particular reason the filmography is in reverse order?

When did this event with David Letterman at the Oscars ceremony occur? I find it hard to believe that it is responsible for any significant part of her fame. --Yath 05:19, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Previous image illustrating article at Image:PulpFiction1.jpg

This seems to have too much fan information in it. Who cares if she wears size 11 shoes? 202.72.148.102 12:11, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

From the article: 'On May 1, 1998, she married actor Ethan Hawke, whom she had met at the set of Gattaca, and gave birth to a daughter Maya Ray and later on, son Roan.' Um. She gave birth to Maya and Roan on her wedding day?! Somebody who knows, please fix this and delete my question. eritain 03:08, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

From the article: "The marriage ended in divorce less than a year later, and in 1967 she married before Thurman's father Robert Thurman (b. 4 August 1941), a professor at Columbia University of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist studies." Along with some grammatical problems, this sentence is factually misleading. It suggests that Robert Thurman was a Columbia professor when he married Uma's mother in 1967, but he actually joined the Columbia faculty in 1990 or thereabouts. In 1967 he was probably still in graduate school at Harvard.

irrelevant facts

size 11? height? completely irrelevant. Lockeownzj00

• Her height *is* actually relevant...it's tough to find roles when you're taller than the leading men... Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 23:10, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

lives in Hyde Park, NY? Should this be here? Even if you consider it public knowledge, it is not the same like saying New York City. - anon

not irrelevant although shouldnt be a section for it, facts could be blended into the article. crap writing from the original author(s). deleting and forming into main. - adi

life in India

I have heard that she apparently lived in India for a while and went to school there, can anyone verify this please? thank you. 213.6.10.4 12:54, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Facts

This article is biased, and written by an author whose opinion is rather peculiar.

What is this about the Draconian World Order

That seems really out of place for the article. Please explain when it talks about medication.

Reviews of film work?

As Thurman is a film actor and Wikipedia is a site for information rather than trivia - can we fix this with a section backed up by attributable quotes? thegirlinwhite 13:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree, like many bios it has been afflicted by celeb-trashyitis. Arniep 17:32, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Picture

Can someone find a better picture of her to head the article? 69.182.63.231 01:31, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I second this one, this is a pretty bad photo The Hobo 06:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

We should use a free photo at the top, we have an alternative under personal life section-feel free to swap them over. Arniep 10:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. --The Hobo 16:25, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Quotes

Whats the point of having a quotes section? Isn't this meant for uhh wikiquote..? Moving it to wikiquote :/

- user: adi kurian - email: adi.conflicted@gmail.com

I reverted your deletion because it looked like simple blanking. To avoid that in the future, please use the edit summary when making edits. It helps immensely when on vandal patrol! — Kbh3^rdtalk 05:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

number of siblings?

Robert Thurman states that he has five children, while this article states that she has three brothers. Could someone in the know fix the apparent discrepancy? - BanyanTree 17:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Where exactly did he say he has five? --Fallout boy 09:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I suppose you mean this [1]. That is odd, every biography I've seen on her states she has three brothers, and I googled it and I can't find this mysterious fifth sibling. It is possible it's a child from a previous relationship.--Fallout boy 09:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

After looking into it, I found that she does have a half-sister named Taya. Added.--Fallout boy 09:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Filmography wrong way round

the filmography is upside down on this article, should be in chronological order (see all the style guides). please reverse it, or this article will be removed from FA list. Zzzzz 11:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Please see Katie Holmes, today's featured articles, which lists from latest to earliest films chronologically. JackO'Lantern 15:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I think Wikiproject film decided on this method some time back. Arniep 22:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

no dont see katie holmes as it is also in the same boat (see its talk page), except that article is also being slammed on its talk page for being generally rubbish. of all actor/director/musician/writer FAs there is only 4 including this one and katie holmes that dont follow the guideline of earliest first. policy is here Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works). and wikiproject films decided nothing of the sort - see Wikipedia:Filmographies which states earliest first. cheers. Zzzzz 22:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I see you're carrying the same discussion on multiple pages. I defer to my comment on the other page except to point out that both articles zzzzz links are inactive and he just changed the order shown to suit his needs. Why should I believe you carry this discussion in good faith when you're changing "policy" to fit your argument? Sad. Cburnett 03:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

A further note. Zzzzz changed the Wikipedia:Filmographies to fit his argument so he could use it as an authoritative source (despite it being inactive). I've started discussion on Wikipedia talk:Filmographies#Chronological ordering to address this since Zzzzz is scattering discussion on many articles' talk page. Please continue this discussion there. Cburnett 03:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Not only that, making threats instead of requests is the tactic of an ass. Wow. Seems that Zzzzz was never taught how to play nice in the sandbox.

I'm only here because I wanted to note that I was surprised to see that Uma had been doing voices in 1984 in Nausicaa... but it turns out that she did a voice overdub in 2005, so I moved the 1984 listing to a 2005 listing with a note that the movie was originally released in 1984. I felt that this would be a truer chronology of Uma's work. —XSG 16:26, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Thurman likened to Mae West, Greta Garbo and Marlene Dietrich

This quote in the lead paragraph is misleading, I believe. "Thurman's style of acting has been likened to actors from the Golden Age of Hollywood such as Mae West, Greta Garbo, and Marlene Dietrich." As written, this seems to be saying that Thurman's overall acting style, or usual acting style recalls these women but this is not the meaning conveyed in the sources cited.

The first reference to Mae West reads "As played by Uma Thurman, Poison Ivy is perfect, flaunting great looks, a mocking attitude and madly flamboyant disguises. Like Mae West, she mixes true femininity with the winking womanliness of a drag queen. " This is talking about one characterisation only and the comparison is more to the character than to the actress. It does not refer to Thurman's "acting style" but rather to the persona or perhaps, the attitude she conveyed. It would be more accurate to say something like "Thurman's acting style has been likened to that of a drag queen". Sorry, but that's what is actually being said there. It says Mae West also acted like a drag queen, but does not say that Thurman acted like Mae West, but that she and West project a similar kind of femininity, the same type of femininity projected by drag queens.

The second reference to Garbo and Dietrich reads ""People talk about beautiful actresses," says Tarantino. "Like Cameron Diaz — she's a beautiful girl. But I went to high school with three girls who look like Cameron Diaz. Uma Thurman is a different species. She's up there with Garbo and Dietrich in goddess territory." Tarantoni is talking about her appearance being goddess-like. There is not a single word that suggests he is talking about her acting style. Furthermore Tarantino is talking about his lead actress in the film he is [then] currently promoting Kill Bill. He's not in the position to be objective, and chances are, he is not. He's talking in superlatives with Garbo and Dietrich by inference being his greatest "goddesses" but if it had been more beneficial to compare Thurman to Minnie Mouse, I reckon he would have.

To take these quotes and use them as a basis for saying Thurman's acting style has been compared to "actors from the Golden Age of Hollywood such as Mae West, Greta Garbo, and Marlene Dietrich", is a huge stretch. It's simply not an accurate representation of what was said. I would like to remove this from the lead paragraph as its inclusion there suggests it is a viewpoint that is held more strongly than the sources indicate. It bothers me that it's in the lead paragraph as that it's part of the lead paragraph suggested for display on the main page. I would be far happier to see these quotes accurately represented in the article itself in the "Career" section. Rossrs 13:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I went through and rearranged it so that it makes more sense.--Fallout boy 22:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed "numerous" from the Mae West comparison but otherwise the edits are superb. I think it makes the article much stronger by including the quotes. Thank you for doing this. Rossrs 06:57, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

"Thurman began her career as a model and modeled professionally throughout the late 1980s before moving to acting in 1988." When are the late 80's? --Gbleem 00:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

trivia

Has anyone read the new "trivia" section? I think it's fair to say it's worthy of deletion. Anyone second that? Wave of Mutilation 12:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Seconded. There's a strong precedent that featured articles don't do trivia. --Fallout boy 12:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

And I'll third it. Featured article or not. Agree with edit summary ("trivia - trivial") Rossrs 13:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Could someone do something against this dumb "Ass rape" Vandalism? The article is on the main site(which is perhaps the reason of the vandalism), so could it be made temporary unchangable or something? --DocBrown 14:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello, it was quite easy, opening "Edit this page" viewed the original content of the page - I just saved the page and the original content re-appeared. Nevertheless this gives no secure answer to prevent the next pedophilic "Ass rape" vandalism case... User: Martin Jurek (Czech Rep.) 14:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, yes, I have done this. I was not logged in at the moment so I recoverd the old articel over my IP and not my Username. I'll watch this articel over the day to see if it was vandalised again. --DocBrown 15:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Someone whould concider looking this persons IP up and contacting the authorities. This act of vandalism was clearly disturbing and should not go unnoticed. Capt.Nero

I fixed the page again Sunday, June 25, 2006. I agree that Wikipedia needs to have a maehanisim in place to try to prevent tampering with the pages. This could be done by only allowing those who log in to edit any page. This would not infringe upon the philosophy Wikipedia has that anyone can edit the page, it is just restricting it to those who log in so those who violate terms of service can be held accountable. Thank you.

Pronunciation

Her first name is officially pronounced (yoo-ma) not (oo-ma). --PJ Pete

If this is so, why has she never corrected anyone about it? It's not like she's a shrinking violet when it comes to putting people straight. JJ

Updates

This new interview [2] is a good source for a lot interesting info straight from Thurman - how she feels about her early career and divorce/post-divorce. Too lazy to add some of this to the article myself, but to anyone working on this page.... Mad Jack 07:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I took out the wikiquote, commons, and spoken section.

I'm still somewhat new to this, and somehow, someone had linked porn onto them. I could be wrong about the origin of the pictures, but removing them removed the pictures as well, so I could be correct.

Height

Before changing Thurman's height, please read WP:RS. Celebheights provides a citation indicating that Thurman's height is 5'11 (actually, a link to an article in Time Magazine). The rest of the claims on that page are not reliable as per WP:RS but rather, unverifiable original research. --Yamla 21:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

You initiated this, so it is you that "changed her height" (actually, changed the referece to her height). As a reliable published source, you cited a gossip magazine in which she claims she's "like five foot eleven." (My emphasis.) This, I should point out, from a person known to be self-conscious about her height, and already cited as having body dysmorphic syndrome.

Well, anyway, if an assertion is a gossip magazine is a reliable source, here's another one:

http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,1217449_1%7C%7C517779%7C0_0_,00.html

Larry Dunn 20:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

No, really, please read WP:RS. Time Magzine in this context serves as a secondary source. Entertainment Weekly serves at best as a tertiary source and maybe not even that. It certainly does not cite its information. Thurman may well be lying about her height but unless we can find a more reliable source, we have to accept her statement as cited in Time Magazine, as per WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:V, and WP:NOR. --Yamla 20:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

No really, please read those pages yourself, more carefully, as Time Magazine is clearly not a secondary source. First of all, it does not rely on a measurement of her, but only on an assertion by her. They did not lay her down and measure her, and they did not refer to a source that did so. There is no difference between the Time source and the ET source because assertions are not ipso facto accurate. What would be ipso facto accurate here would be a measurement, not an assertion of height.

Second, it's fairly ludicrous to artificially inflate an article in Time Magazine as a "secondary source," because secondary sources, as indicated in the pages you cite yourself, are generally scholarly and peer-reviewed, and syntheses of primary sources. Would you seriously assert that someone being quoted as saying she's "like 5'11" is an example of a synthesis of peer-reviewed scholarship?

Let's get real here -- it's one pop magazine versus another. Larry Dunn 20:48, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

In one case, we have a source for the information. In the other, we do not. This is what makes the Time Magazine claim more reliable than the Entertainment Weekly claim. Granted, neither are great, but the Time Magazine claim is better. As an aside, aren't both magazines owned by the same corporation? --Yamla 20:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Look at WP:RS#Aspects_of_reliability -- none of them are indicated in the Time Mag article. Again, the matter here is one of height, not one of an assertion of height.

Example. If I tell my local paper that my house is 28 feet tall, and the local real estate guide simply says that my house is 30 feet tall, the paper is no more a reliable source than the real estate guide. My assertion does not make it so, in any respect.

Let me try to find a compromise. Larry Dunn 21:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Larry, your compromise is entirely satisfactory to me. You have stated that there's some dispute and provided citations to two different figures. Thank you, I believe this is the best option. --Yamla 21:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Well the current edition says Uma is 6'10". Now, she is a very tall woman to be sure, but 6'10"? That's ridiculous! She's much shorter than that!

Filmography

I have removed Bee Movie from her filmography as she is no longer listed as being involved in the project on IMDB, or elsewhere.HorseloverFat 08:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

7*

I meedet that person once;and she leaft here not the best notes in sympati.

(diet Mrs Thurman ever some Physchologi studies?!)

More or minder corrcet Theodanarchist but about the nonsence in the top file is us(You and me) known theat i can not change the the Atribute about a Phsychologi studium in the article when i do not whent cleard about that bevor,That person told also that she have a dougther with name Justin and else nonsence,just about negativ reportet,that her spoken was in violence words about her doing,what shoud i say,not good to put it in the article as unlclear//CC.to.add18.00UTC+1 SU-03.6.07.*

Virgin Media

Uma thurman stars on Virgin Media (UK Cable TV) advertising campaign