Talk:Susan Sarandon

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Susan Sarandon article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

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.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers / Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance).

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New Jersey Low‑importance

	New Jersey portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies: Person

	LGBTQ portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
	This article is supported by the LGBTQ+ Person task force.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

JohnAlbertRigali (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.

Her statement

Adding this sentence is crucial to understanding what she said. She made an accusation that is blatantly false, and it is not original research to cite this fact here. ". This is despite the fact that in 2022 according to the FBI there were over 7 times as many (1,122) hate crimes against Jews than there were against (158) Muslims.^[1]"

Leaving her false allegation up without correction is a libel against the Jewish people, and a violation of Wikipedia:English Wikipedia non-discrimination policy

Truth matters and Wikipedia should pride itself on truth not antisemitism. Yestyest2000

It is against WP:SYNTH to be placing "Sarandon said X" from one source versus "Y is the truth" to create the suggestion that Sarandon lied; it's practically a textbook example. --Nat Gertler (talk) 08:24, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As Nat says above, the disputed content is an example of synthesis. We don't have a source which compares Sarandon's statement with the rates of hate crime, so we should not make the comparison either. If a reliable source draws a comparison between Sarandon's statement and the rate of hate crime in the US, we could consider including it in her bio.

* Sarandon's statement was "There are a lot of people afraid of being Jewish at this time, and are getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country, so often subjected to violence". What allegation is she making? What is the "libel against the Jewish people"? Burrobert (talk) 08:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Calling this WP:SYNTH is false. either way there are articles linking some false numbers making the same point, so I will incorperate that into the article and then we'll see if you still have problems.

https://www.nysun.com/article/susan-sarandon-is-dropped-by-her-agent-after-saying-jews-coming-under-antisemitic-attacks-are-getting-a-taste-of-what-its-like-to-be-muslim-in-america

https://twitter.com/HonestReporting/status/1727103807300223113 Yestyest2000 (talk) 08:59, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you bring any exact wording here, with citations (from reliable sources) and gaining consensus prior to attempting to edit in any material concerning this again. TarnishedPath^talk 10:27, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the addition. Twitter is not a RS, the second sentence was classic WP:SYNTH. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:32, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that I've blocked Yestyest2000 for a week for BLPvio. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:33, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.aaiusa.org/library/hatecrime2023

"After" but not "because of"

At this point, we have in both the intro and and the body of the article that her representation dropped her after her comments, and that matches what we have in the sources, that X happened after Y. What we don't have is sourcing saying she was dropped because of, due to, in response to those comments. There is no public statement from the agency being quoted. There's probably enough mention to justify including it in the body, but in the introduction? It's not as though we tend to mention representation at all in the intro for major actors, much less a change of representation. I think we should delete that final sentence. Thoughts? -- Nat Gertler (talk) 17:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NatGertler, I think there's an argument for removing the material in its entirety per WP:WEIGHT, WP:DUE and WP:BLP given she wasn't even doing work for the agency. TarnishedPath^talk 07:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The agency was not representing her, is that what you're saying? If so, source? -- Nat Gertler (talk) 07:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying is that there's no indication in any of the reporting that Sarandon was currently doing any work that they'd gotten for her, or had any upcoming work which came from them. Given how much UTA made this about themselves they would have put that in their press release. This appears to be nothing more than UTA big noting themselves. Even if the material does stay in the article, given that it takes up all of 13 words in the body of the article, there's extremely little argument for it to be lede at all. The amount of space it takes up in the lede (10 words) is almost as much as is take up in the body which is a ludicrous situation and not at all in keeping with MOS:LEADBIO, WP:DUE and WP:WEIGHT. TarnishedPath^talk 09:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not finding anywhere where UTA "made this about themselves". Doing a quick Google search, I'm not seeing that they did anything but answer press inquiries with the simple statement that they no longer represent Sarandon. Given that her IMDb listing includes a work in "preproduction", that is a deal which was presumably negotiated through her agent. She is also in the cast of a TV series the release of which has been put on pause (for reasons relating to the war but not to Sarandon's comments on it) which is mentioned as a six-part series but could, presumably, have a second season (if ever released.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The very act of saying they are not representing someone is virtue signalling. There's no other way to interpret it than through the lense of PR. If they didn't want to make it about themselves, they would have decided to not represent her and not told the world about it.

In any case, I'm having a hard time seeing how something which makes up 13 words in the body gets 10 words in the lede. TarnishedPath^talk 02:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me where they "told the word about it" rather than answer inquiries? if someone calls you about someone that they think is your client but is a former client, telling them that you no longer represent them is the simple and direct answer, no signaling beyond the facts involved. Had they put out a press release announcing that they were no longer representing her, that might be a different matter, but I have found no sign that they did so. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 05:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After doing some searches, it appears you are correct. It appears as though it was Deadline that approached UTA. As I stated above though given that only 13 words is dedicated to this in the body of the article it seems WP:UNDUE to dedicate 10 words to it in the lede. TarnishedPath^talk 08:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the deletion from the introduction. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's sensible. Not everything can be jammed into a lede just because it is the issue of the second. TarnishedPath^talk 23:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.aaiusa.org/library/hatecrime2023

[1]