Talk:Natalie Portman

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Natalie Portman 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: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

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 GA‑class

	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
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as High-importance).

Natalie Portman has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 8, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed

Israel B‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel 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.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles.
Categorization : Diffuse articles from Category:Companies of Israel.
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page.
Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration.
Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005
Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel.
Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah
See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia.
Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data.
Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes.
Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention.
Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel.
NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries
Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel.
Stubs : See Israel stubs.
Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People
Other :
- Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary.
- Merge Nahal Rafiah (draft, heb) into Nahal as requested by Wikipedia authority

Template:WPCD-People

Theater or Theatre ?

I just noticed some the spelling of Theatre, so in American do you spell or as Theater? Govvy 20:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American=theater, British=theatre. Wikipedia standard is to use American spelling with America related articles. - Duribald 06:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

Lose the age comparison between Padme and Anakin in the triva sectinon. This has no bearing on Portman whatsoever.

bisexual

if portman would have a relationship with another woman, how does this not classify her as bisexual? 67.172.61.222 16:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated on your Talk page, when she said that she "is not opposed to a lesbian relationship," she was speaking hypothetically. The very next statement is "I've never dated a woman." To have a knee-jerk reaction and conclude that she is bisexual is stretching the point without adequate justification. To meet Wikipedia's standards, categorizing her as bisexual requires a reliable source in which she says she is bisexual or has been involved in a lesbian relationship. Wikipedia is a legitimate encyclopedia, not a tabloid or outlet for the rumor mills. Ward3001 16:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the paragraph in question for improved accuracy and added a citation to clarify the issue. I hope this puts the issue to rest for now. Ward3001 17:03, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i would love to know what your definition of bisexual is. 67.172.61.222 19:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From Wiktionary: Someone attracted to persons of either gender. "Wondering" "growing up" whether she was gay does not automatically put a person into the bisexual category. Formerly bi-curious at most; even that's a stretch. And it doesn't make those of us who can clearly see this homophobes. It's a matter of accuracy and not assuming something without clear evidence. Ward3001 20:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines Wikipedia set out for biographies of living persons says you should only mention the religious/sexual views in the article if "The subject's beliefs or sexual preferences are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life". So even if she is, I'm thinking the whole topic is really a moot point. swidly 04:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Picture

Could we change the picture we have of her on the page? Its at a weird angle and there are lots of others to choose from... Dropdead Joe 16:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of others that are not copyrighted and that conform to Wikipedia's image use policy? If you can find a good one, then go for it. Just be careful. Some editors seem to feel that they can copy an image from any source and post it in an article. There are rules about that. Ward3001 20:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Natalie Portman laughing.jpg

This is a horrible picture shall we remove it? Govvy 13:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly agree Ward3001 21:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So is the one of her with the skinhead/real short hair, why has that not been removed? Speedboy Salesman 23:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "laughing" picture is horrible because of the shadow over half of her face. The one with the short hair doesn't have that problem, som my vote is keep on that one. Whether you think she's good looking or not in the pic is more POV. -Duribald 06:47, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what with the shadow? It's not pitch black and obscuring her face Speedboy Salesman 18:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I think it makes her look like Two-Face. I'm voting agree to removal on this one. - Duribald 19:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-added the image; it's a free image, and since it's a free image, there is no reason for it not to be in the article. However, I added it back in a way that the image doesn't take up as much space as it did. Acalamari 21:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, I vote to remove it. There are several other decent pics of her in the article. The one in question adds nothing to the article, and the fact that some think it's a bad pic is sufficient for removal unless there's strong sentiment to keep it. Ward3001 22:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So in other words, you're saying that because some people don't like it, we shouldn't have the image in? I have to disagree; it's a free image (not a fair-use image) and we should use it if we can. Acalamari 23:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me quote myself to correct you: "sufficient for removal unless there's strong sentiment to keep it" (emphasis added). Per Wikipedia policy, whether it's removed or stays depends on the consensus of those who comment on this talk page. At this point there is no consensus. With a bit of patience on your part, we might reach a consensus, which I will respect regardless of whether it is remove or keep. Ward3001 23:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At any rate though, I've decided to remove the image for now. I think the image should be used in the article; however, I'd rather discuss it first. Acalamari 01:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me she is a very good looking actress and I like her very much, the reason I don't like this picture is because it doesn't show her in the best light. It makes her look more plain, I don't like that. I don't think the picture is flattering and I rather it be removed from the article. Govvy 07:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bad picture on purely technical grounds. If you gathered 100 professional photographers, I'm sure that exactly 100 of them would say this is a horribly bad picture. Can you imagine any paper encyclopedia using a picture like this one to illustrate a person? - Duribald 08:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is she dead?

can't find any news about it anywhere, so maybe we can remove the "july 24 2007" part?

It obvious vandalism. I just deleted it. Angel Of Sadness ^T/C 22:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Natalie Portman's birth date

The Wikipedia article states that Portman attended the Charles E Smith Jewish Day School in 1984. That is consistent with the information on Portman's face book page. However, the article also states that Portman was born in June 1981. That would mean she was only 3 years old when she attended CESJDS. That is not possible. CESJDS only offers grades K-12, and it does not admit 3 year olds into its kindergarten.

69.139.152.232 04:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC) Ira[reply]

You're assuming too much. The article says, "The family lived in Washington, D.C. in 1984 (she attended the Charles E. Smith Jewish Day School)." It does not say she attended in 1984, or how long they lived in Washington DC. Some children start kindergarten at age 4, which would have been 1985. Even age 5 would be possible. Unless you have access to the cited source, a TV interview, there's no way to know the details, and the article should stay as it is. Ward3001 17:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering...

I am asking nicely and polite: can someone please get a more current picture of Natalie Portman? I would like that very much and I would be very thankful.

From you faithful Wikipedian, Ahoskinson 95 01:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

where the easter egg

in this page it says the skit is in an easter egg inless i am reading it wrong and it is not it is in the black thing at the top of the list on the second disk i might be wrong on this but i am going to fix it. unless some one else realizes that i am wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quialman (talk • contribs) 05:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Languages spoken

That she can name four animals in another language does not make her a speaker of those languages. Is there an accurate reference to her Japanese language skills somewhere? DDD DDD (talk) 14:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misread the article and/or the source. In the source she said (while at Harvard) that she was studying Japanese. The article says "has studied or can speak" the languages listed. I don't see any inconsistencies. Ward3001 (talk) 15:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's misleading to the point of deception and shows bias. She cannot speak Japanese and obviously didn't study it to a high level. In this clip (http://www.vidarena.com/natalie-portman-vs-salma-hayek-video_16345_5_vidmC_9kkkQ-BQ.html#video1) she confuses the numbers 22 and 20 when she attempts to say them in Japanese. For the rest of the clip she relies entirely on the translator. 22:20, 30 November 2007

Let me try to state this more simply. The article uses the phrase "has studied ... Japanese." In the source she said "I take ... Japanese". "I take" means she took one or more courses at Harvard on Japanese. Taking a course on Japanese means she studied Japanese. Are you disputing the meaning of the words "take" or "studied"? There is absolutely nothing misleading about the statement in the article. It doesn't matter whether she studied it at a "high level". She studied it. Neither she nor anyone else has claimed that she can speak Japanese or studied it at a high level. So unless you can come up with evidence that she lied about taking Japanese, the statement should remain as it is. And if you're the one who edited it out of the article, don't do it again. That is considered vandalism. Thank you. Ward3001 23:22, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Sorry. It IS misleading as is written. List the languages she CAN speak. Then list ones she has studied. Not only is it misleading, it is inaccurate. Watching the video above, it's obviously she doesn't speak Japanese.DDD DDD 11:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]