Talk:Farrah Fawcett

Can Someone Please Tell Her About Enzyme Therapy?

It has no side effects and is extremely effective. Enzymes are so cheap there is no money in the treatment, plus its a natural treatment, so the system doesn't recognize it. If anyone close to her reads this, please look it up.

Anal cancer

There is a factual conflict between whether Farrah has anal or rectal cancer in this article. The article says anal and the footnote says rectal. This page is probably getting hit a lot on the eve of the broadcast; would a true Wikipedian please work this out? I am but a nestling. DioxonFreak not logged in96.238.101.102 (talk) 02:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Fawcett has anal cancer. I have inserted a ref for that immediately following the term, as it does not support the claim that she had surgery for her first bout, which is noted in the other ref. I've taken the liberty of changing your section title. Thanks for the heads-up, although of course it is the ref which is wrong and not the Wikipedia article. I could cite five notable refs for "anal cancer" and someone else could come along and cite five notable refs for "rectal cancer". And anyone reading the articles which state the latter will go off believing that. I have seen a preview of Fawcett's documentary, and she says the term in her own voice. I would direct anyone else who has a question one way or the other on this or any other detail to watch the documentary Friday, 5/15 at 9PM ET on NBC, and take your information on this from the source. Abrazame (talk) 03:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Gay icon?

Why is Fawcett listed as a gay icon (category)? She's not gay, in fact she's had relationships with several men over the years (Lee Majors, Ryan O'Neil)? If no one has an answer, I'll rever the addition. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:22, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Okay, turns out she appeals to gays. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:37, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Gay Icon Project

In my effort to merge the now-deleted list from the article Gay icon to the Gay icons category, I have added this page to the category. I engaged in this effort as a "human script", adding everyone from the list to the category, bypassing the fact-checking stage. That is what I am relying on you to do. Please check the article Gay icon and make a judgment as to whether this person or group fits the category. By distributing this task from the regular editors of one article to the regular editors of several articles, I believe that the task of fact-checking this information can be expedited. Thank you very much. Philwelch 20:36, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Picture

There's a famous poster of her in a red bathing suit. Someone should replace the current pic (from Myra Breckinridge) with that one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.22.195 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 1 July 2005 (UTC) That poster is copyrighted and Farrah owns all rights to it. I would not put it up, without her permission. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.8.184.155 (talk) 22:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately you chose the wrong version of the poster

You chose a version of the poster that I'd never seen, and as old as I am you can believe I saw the original... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.16.25.25 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Filmography is incomplete

Probably the best Playboy video to date is the video about Farrah Fawcett that she made when she turned fifty. There is some nudity, but there is more art than nudity. The going rate on Amazon for a copy of this DVD is $199.99. They are hard to find. I had one, I think my son took it with him when he went away to college. Imagine that, a 20-year-old watching a 50-year-old woman with lust in his heart.

"Playboy: Farrah Fawcett, All of Me" (1997) Directed by Mark S. Manos

http://ia.imdb.com/media/imdb/01/I/36/16/80m.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.16.25.25 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

A link to the poster

http://www.cybertown.com/ffposter.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.159.155.219 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If Guernica (painting) is iconic enough to justify fair use (Wikipedia:Fair use), than certainly this poster is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghosts&empties (talk • contribs) 19:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Incoherent at Shatner's Roast?

I just watched that roast twice. While I agree that she was not exactly smooth in delivering her jokes -- far from it -- I do not feel that she was incoherent. NSpector 08:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• What roast were /you/ watching? I can't believe they let her go that long. It was embarassing. Rockhound 18:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It could also have been an act. Either way its not our place to assume one thing or another. These personal biography pages are disasters waiting to happen if we don't stay as NPOV as possible. I deleted the tabloid comment as it is the kind of thing that absolutely must be sourced, and the plastic surgery remark seems unnecessary and likely unfounded. If someone can provide a somewhat reliable source then maybe it will work. I also cleared up the roast information along the same lines.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 07:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Add: She was rather coherent during the Emmy ceremonies when she spoke so I find it hard to believe the entire roast deal was for real.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 07:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

University

did she not attend the University of Texas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.167.31 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Orr injuries

"In 1998, she was injured by then-boyfriend James Orr when he tried to stop her from vandalizing his house." Entertainment tonight just said that Orr attacked her and then she returned the next night with a baseball bat and hit his car with it when he wouldn't let her in the house. --Gbleem 05:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Cancer

how do u get anal cancer —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.43.250.76 (talk) 21:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

Probably similar to how one gets breast cancer, prostate cancer, or brain cancer. Eating lots of beef increases your chances of colon cancer, because of how long it takes to digest (according to my nurse friend). Lewie 21:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Nurse friends are always excellent sources of information...while low fiber does predispose you to colorectal cancer, Ms. Fawcett had a completely different type of cancer. 68.115.83.140 (talk) 12:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

To correct you, ulcerative colitis is thought to be one potential contributing factor to anal cancer, and in turn diet is thought to be a contributing factor to ulcerative colitis. There is also a genetic predisposition to both gastric disease and all types of cancer. Abrazame (talk) 13:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Does Fawcett have rectal cancer or anal cancer? It is an important distinction, as the two have different causes. Nietzsche 2 (talk) 01:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

The article states that the metastases in her liver were found in May 2007. However, the large majority of people with liver metastases are dead within a year of the secondaries being found in the liver. Is it certain the metastases were found as early as 23 months ago? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 00:43, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

The cited source for that part of Wiki's article states:

"She was declared in remission on Feb 2, 2007, but three months later, scans showed 'not only had it recurred, it metastasized to her liver,' Nevius said.

"The latest treatment in Germany tried to address the cancer's spread to that organ, he said."

I realize this is an important distinction for those with the disease as well as those in the medical profession. If anybody can source a different or more specific mention for this detail, please discuss it here. Nevius is not the doctor, but he is being quoted by the media as her spokesperson as he is the person producing the documentary about Fawcett's treatment. Of course I would prefer to use terms and dates specified by the doctor, if we could find a quote. The article quotes Piro addressing the hematoma specifically, but not the cancer. I am assuming Piro, an L.A. doctor, would be privy to, but not authorized to speak on, her German treatment.

As for the distinction between anal and rectal cancer, I think the edits here have merely been one of linguistic propriety, to put it one way. I have seen both words used in articles about Fawcett. I have not edited that detail one way or the other, due to this conflation of terms in media sources and my own lack of understanding of that distinction. The person inquiring above about the cause was responding to vulgar vandalism. My editorial instinct is that sourced information about causes that are not specifically about an individual person's case is probably best for articles about disease or disease prevention and not articles about the individual person. Abrazame (talk) 01:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

There are significant differences between anal and rectal cancer. Anal cancer is a squamous cell cancer while rectal cancer is an adenocarcinoma (glandular cancer). Anal cancer has been linked with HPV infection (same virus that causes cervical cancer) while rectal cancer has been linked with diet and ulcerative colitis.

Fair use rationale for Image:Charlies angels 1st season dvdcover.jpg

Image:Charlies angels 1st season dvdcover.jpg 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 05:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Passive voice

Interesting and useful article, but can it loose the passive voice? "It was revealed..."? Eeeuww. Instead, (just a fabricated example) how about phrasing such as this: "Sarah, in an interview in the Curmugeon Weekly [footnote goes here], revealed that...". Bill Wvbailey (talk) 00:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Health update, 04-Apr-2009

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/04/exclusive-farrah-fawcett-hospitalized

Farrah Fawcett has been hospitalized and is in bad shape, sources close to family and friends tell RadarOnline.com exclusively.

She has been battling cancer for three years and recently returned from Germany, where she had experimental stem-cell treatment. Sources told RadarOnline.com that she is critical but stable in a Los Angeles-area hospital. They also say she is unconscious and has been hospitalized for days. wiki-ny-2007 (talk) 23:38, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The very first sentence says: Farrah Fawcett (born February 2, 1947) has died an American actress. " As of 1:25 p.m., on Monday, April 6, 2009, Pacific Time, it has NOT been announced that she has died! Please change this ASAP! Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrewBe (talk • contribs) 20:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Apparently the radaronline report was incorrect, in true tabloid style. According to her spokesperson in an AP article[1], not only was she not "in bad shape," but she had never received any stem-cell treatment. Furthermore, she had chemotherapy and radiation in 2006, but not surgery as is reported in this bio. Abrazame (talk) 10:24, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Did she receive an experimental stem cell transplant? If so it should be included, as right now it says she went for 'holistic treatment', which is generally code word in the cancer community for forgoing modern treatment in favor of unproven herbs, spices, cartilage, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.115.83.140 (talk) 12:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

As stated in the post immediately above yours here, supported by the link therein, a spokesperson has said she did not have stem cell treatment. There will be a documentary airing on U.S. network television this Friday which may shed some light on the treatment. However, we cannot speculate on the modernity or comment on the nature of her treatment without a notable reference. Abrazame (talk) 12:56, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Redmond O'Neal

Stop trying to sensationalize the guy's arrests. He is a living person dealing with a challenge. He is also the child of Farrah Fawcett. While in the real world he is a valuable and multidimensional human being and an important and enduring part of Fawcett's life, Redmond has not chosen to be a celebrity or actor and is not himself encyclopedically notable. Note that, other than one sentence about his birth noting his father, the vast majority was about his addiction and record. This is undue weight both from the standpoint of its being Fawcett's bio and from the standpoint of its coverage of this young man. It's not a question of what's clearly lacking in your heart, it's a question of what's clearly lacking in your editorial responsibility given that this is an encyclopedia and not a gossip column. We need to refrain from emphasizing the tabloid elements of an article subject, in this case Fawcett's life, and virtually ignore those elements of their relatives', in this case her son's. Abrazame (talk) 16:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

April 6 news

I have restored the fact that Fawcett learned about her liver cancer two years ago, and has been living with that cancer and receiving treatment for it these past two years. This was noted not only in the article referenced but in its title. This is not some horrible new development that has transpired during or since her time in Germany. Just because most of the press is sensationalizing it due to the fact they just learned of the development, we need to take a broader perspective and present the history of the woman's life, not the history of the news reports about her. It's the misreporting of all of this that lends itself to the misrepresentation that it's a sudden turn for the worse and she's at death's door. Let's try and distill the facts and the actual reportage from the breaking tabloid news around here. Thanks, Abrazame (talk) 07:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Didn't Lee Majors launch her career? Strange Wikipedia bio entry

This is a strange Wikipedia bio entry. According to this entry, she was doing commercials in the late 1960's and did an "I Dream of Jeannie" episode in 1969. And it mentions that she at that point married Lee Majors in the early 1970's. This totally leaves out that she got her Hollywood start when Lee Majors visited the University of Texas and saw a picture of her and dropped by the Tri-Delt house and told them "Tell Farrah Fawcett that Lee Majors will pick her up at 7 tonight" or something to that effect. Didn't he launch her career????, introduce her to Hollywood??? I could have sworn I read that a dozen times - but nothing in this Wiki entry. And didn't they divorce because Majors didn't want a starlet wife, but Victorian ideas and wanted her pregnant at home, cooking food for him??? I think he actually said that. But no mention of anything here. Not even why they got divorced. Maybe I'm thinking about a different Farrah Fawcett, and this one in Wikipedia didn't inhabit this particular Earth. I think they are two different people, what with all the information left out of this Wiki entry. This is useless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.54.161 (talk) 19:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

If you're talking about the Farrah Fawcett that inhabits this earth, she's one of the most photographed women in the history of said earth, and there's been more than a few words accompanying those photos. Perhaps you can find the strings of quotes you're recalling from a notable source (not fan magazines, unauthorized bios or tabloids) and actually reference them in the article. If Majors began her career, then married her, but didn't want a starlet wife, that's kind of self-contradictory, no? I'm not saying I haven't read it, or that one couldn't glean the second part of that from the TV movie, I'm saying what's your point...what was his point...and does it stack up as the real story? What purpose does it serve in her bio? The germane issue to her bio is that what is notable is that she appeared in this or that project, not her former husband's alleged and changing views on her career, much less his bon mots to her roommates as they dated or speculation on the cause of their divorce.

Having said all that, I agree that this bio needs some work, as it's heavily weighted toward latter-day tabloid tales. Fawcett is not Anna Nicole Smith or Paris Hilton, she is notable not only for her relationships and her beauty and her fame but for having been an actress with a decades-long career. The bio should better reflect that. Abrazame (talk) 03:02, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I see multiple problems with what you wrote and suggested. First of all, it all took place in the late 1960's, and most newspapers do not have those articles up on the web - the web only really took off in the mid-1990's - a quarter of a century later. Secondly, Farrah Fawcett was Hollywood actress and starlet - not a nuclear physicist or politician - so the vast majority of her coverage was in tabloids etc, i.e. she was not a topic for discussion by what you would consider to be serious media. Thirdly, it is largely a waste of time for somebody like me to insert anything in Wikipedia articles - Wikipedia entries are largely dominated by people who have serious serious SERIOUS interest in the topics at hand, i.e. they "own" a half dozen pages at Wikipedia, and immediately delete/change edits that they don't like (that's probably the primary reason why Wikipedia will never be a serious resource - at least, not until the people running Wikipedia figure out a solution to that). Thus, I don't waste my time with edits. Heck, the Lee Majors stuff was probably put up at one time (probably multiple times), but taken down by whoever "owns" this page. And, lastly, any sort of edit that might be considered negative in ANY SORT OF LIGHT WHATSOEVER has to come down at Wikipedia - negative information is basically not allowed at Wikipedia (in case you hadn't noticed that) - another major shortcoming of Wikipedia until they figure out a way to be able to put up negative information without it being taken down.

One more minor comment, with your regards to what I wrote being "contradictory". I guess you weren't around when it all happened and was written about, but Majors introduced her to Hollywood for things like commercials - never expecting (or wanting) her to become a major star - and when she did - poof, there went the marriage, i.e. it's actually not contradictory if you knew the full story.

Direct-to-video

Wasn't the All of Me piece shown on the Playboy Channel and/or Pay-Per-View prior to or concurrent with the video release? As such, isn't it essentially the same as other cable or television films/specials and not truly direct-to-video? Could we get a ref for the direct-to-video status of those titles? Abrazame (talk) 23:22, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Encounter with crazed fan

This reads very poorly; e.g. "They tried—but failed—to throw the book at him." It needs a more summary style than a story. 69.221.128.207 (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I re-edited that down to its unsensationalized essentials and incorporated it into a newly formed section on Extremities rather than its own section. I've also expanded and split into sections other areas of her career, in an effort to give appropriate weight to what she's actually been notable for, and less to her cancer and her son's difficulties. Abrazame (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I like the way you divided her career into subsections. Good call. LA Movie Buff (talk) 02:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Deleting content from talk pages

I've just restored two deleted sections to this talk page. As per Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, talk page content should be archived, not deleted. Deleting content because you don't agree with it, eg this, is inappropriate. It's censorship and Wikipedia is not censored! A more appropriate response to the suggestion might have been to answer with a modified version the edit summary used in the deletion. As for this edit, it's expressly covered by Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#When pages get too long; "Archive—do not delete: When a talk page has become too large or a particular subject is no longer being discussed, do not delete the content—archive it." Of course the page is less than 32KB in length and there are only (now) 20 sections so the page doesn't meet the general archiving guideline in that section. i.e there's no need to archive yet. --AussieLegend (talk) 23:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I've just been made aware that one of the deleted sections was started by a banned user, so I'm re-deleting it as such deletion is entirely appropriate. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Death

Death?

did she really die or no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.16.2 (talk) 05:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

She's not dead, unless the anonymous IP that saved that information knows her personally or has some other way of knowing this information before the press finds out. There is no news source reporting her death at this time. — ^{`</sup>CRAZY`(lN)`SANE<sup>`} 05:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

The old Wikipedia custom of jumping the gun surfaces again...192.12.88.7 (talk) 05:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Proseline

I tried to quickly reformat the "Cancer" paragraph to remove the proseline, but since I'm not an experienced contributor, a work check would be appreciated. If it looks OK, the proseline template may also be removed. Thanks--Webwizard (talk) 10:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)