Talk:Carole Lombard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Presidential Medal of Freedom[edit]

Lots of sources online say that Roosevelt awarded her the Presidential Medal of Freedom, but that page here on Wikipedia says the medal wasn't created until Roosevelt's successor Truman in 1945. So something's not correct either in that article or this one. Discussion on Talk:Presidential Medal of Freedom. - Brian Kendig 15:01, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The In Memorium article in Baha'i World 1940-1944 states: "...she was publicly commended by Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, Jr...." There is no reference to a medal in this source. Occamy 18:24, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I am deleting the reference to the Medal of Freedom. Lombard never received this, either in life or in death. The official Medal of Freedom site does NOT list Lombard as a recipient.--26 July 2008 Susan Nunes —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

High school education dispute[edit]

Which high school did Carole Lombard graduate from? On the front page of the Hollywood High School website, she is declared one of their alumna. [1] [2]. Yet NNDB and several other sources claim she graduated from Fairfax High School, also in Hollywood. [3] [4] IMDb makes no reference to either. Which sources are correct? Hall Monitor 17:19, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Please leave me a note on my talk page if this dispute is resolved. As of today, I have precisely one-thousand, two-hundred thirty-four (1,234) pages on my watchlist. Hall Monitor 22:06, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Family home[edit]

I've removed the section about the family home in Fort Wayne being a museum. It's actually a B&B and as such it's not appropriate for us to advertise it. It is not a museum according to this website [5] which mentions that museums are nearby. They don't seem to be Carole Lombard museums, although as a famous daughter of Fort Wayne, she may be commemorated there. Rossrs 04:21, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

It Happened One Night[edit]

This is a minor point but I do not believe that Carole Lombard was offered the role of Ellie Andrews in It Happened One Night. Here's why. Much has been made of the fact that Lombard and Clark Gable were great lovers and that they only appeared in one film together No Man Of Her Own (1932). If Lombard had come close to appearing Gable in one of the classic films of the time, I would expect it to have been noted in biographies of either Lombard or Gable, and it would been an irresistible snippet of info for them to include. There is no mention of this in Clark Gable by Warren G. Harris, 2002, ISBN 1 85410 904 9 or Gable and Lombard by the same author, 1974, ISBN 0 304 29397 0. It's not mentioned in The Films of Carole Lombard by Frederick W. Ott, 1972, ISBN 0 8065 0278 9, in the quite lengthy biographical section that discusses Lombard's career, including missed opportunities. The possible casting of Myrna Loy, Margaret Sullivan and Miriam Hopkins are mentioned in Inside Oscar by Mason Wiley and Damien Bona, 1987, ISBN 0 0345 344537, without mentioning Lombard. Myrna Loy and Bette Davis discuss/are quoted regarding the possible casting of themselves and others without mentioning Lombard in Being and Becoming by James Kotsilibas-Davis and Myrna Loy, 1987, ISBN 1 55611 101 0 and The Girl Who Walked Home Alone, Bette Davis, A Personal Biography by Charlotte Chandler, 2006, ISBN 0 7432 6208 5.

There are other works that could and should mention this if it was true, but don't, but I think I've cited the main ones. All of these books should have been researched more carefully than the movie divas site which does not state where it drew its information from. I think the most significant point is that the fact that Gable and Lombard never appeared together in a good film (No Man of Her Own is generally considered insignificant to both careers) so if there had been a chance of them appearing together in what became a classic film such as It Happened One Night someone of note would have mentioned it. I'm going to remove it again from the articles in which it appears, and request that it not be added again unless a more reliable source can be provided. Thanks Rossrs 13:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I was completely wrong about this. According to Screwball by Larry Swindell, she was offered and almost accepted. Rossrs (talk) 21:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Height and measurements[edit]

I took out "At 5' 2" (1.57 m), and measurements: 34 1/2B-24 1/2-34" because I'm not certain it belongs in the article or where to place it if it does. Comments? Clarityfiend 07:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I strongly feel that they should not be in the article and I'm glad you removed them. To put it bluntly, she wasn't famous for her height or for the size of her breasts. Rossrs 14:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The 34" measurement seems a little low, from what I've seen.Lestrade (talk) 21:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Lestrade


I deleted the sentence about some ancestors who lived three hundred years earlier. Firstly because non-events like that do not belong in a biography at all, and secondly because it was uncited and speculative.Wjhonson (talk) 01:28, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Carole Lombard/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 15:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Will review. Starting first read-through. Tim riley (talk) 15:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

This is plainly of GA quality (and more). There are a few phrases I'll be quibbling at when the article comes to FAC, but there's nothing that doesn't meet the GA requirements. (As a purely personal comment, and it's absolutely none of my business as GA reviewer, but as the article is so lavishly illustrated I could do without the picture of Lombard in "Style and legacy", which I find positively scary.) Just one substantive comment: do we really believe that story about flipping a coin before the fatal airline flight? Who was there to see it and tell the tale? Is Classic Hollywood Bios a reliable source? Is the story corroborated in any other source? I'd like to be reassured on this point before I do the honours. Tim riley (talk) 15:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there's tons of books which say about flipping coins. Will remove photo, agree it doesn't really look like her and is rather scary!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:38, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Hmm. As there are good sources, then OK. No other queries.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Bahá'i Faith[edit]

She is categorized as a Bahá'i, but there is no hint at all in the article that she has converted. I've heard it often before that she was a Baháì - but wouldn't it be good to have a source if it is asserted in the article about her (or its categories) that she was? Especially if it is considered a Good Article (i.e. good quality) in WP a source for a faith that a person has converted into and not was born into should be presented... VINCENZO1492 05:38, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Here are some possibilities (mostly basic syntax for perusal here):
Perhaps a small paragraph or a couple sentences could be made out of these refs. Some details gleaned include her mother joining the religion earlier, Carole was exposed to the religion in her childhood and exchanged a letter with then head of the religion `Abdu'l-Bahá and officially joined the religion in 1938, though on the whole she kept her religion private. --Smkolins (talk) 21:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Well, I can't prove the reliability of these sources but: are self-referential Bahá'i sources the right ones? VINCENZO1492 07:35, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I included non-Baha'i sources for the basic facts, I believe in that context Baha'i sources can elaborate on details until better ones come along if they ever do. --(talk) 21:41, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

A sample fully cited:

According to publications in the religion, Lombard's mother joined the Bahá'í Faith while Lombard was still young.[1][2] Lombard reportedly exchanged a letter with then head of the religion `Abdu'l-Bahá in her teens[1] and officially joined the religion years later as an adult in 1938[3][4] though on the whole she kept her religion private.

Since things seem quiet I'll go ahead and post. --Smkolins (talk) 17:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry Smkolins! I did not recognized your statements before. Thanks a lot for your explanations and elucidating our Carola Lombard minds... VINCENZO1492 20:13, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

So User:Loeba took out the mentions of the Baha'i Faith saying "not mentioned in lombard biographies" which I roughly agree with (Gehring says her mother was a Baha'i or similar, I don't own the book but apparently there is some discussion on page 25; Matzen says she didn't "trumpet a religion" which fits my mention she was private about it (cited by a newspaper) and not attending church, well duh, she wasn't a Christian, she was a Baha'i from available sources.) I was modest in introducing the material after discussion here and saying that the sources were in the religion's records but I also included non-Baha'i sources that say she was a Baha'i, (see [6] on the left.) The main substance is in the non-Baha'i sources but the references in the religion are not obscure mentions but produced by the central authority of the religion. I tried to respect due weight. I'd like to have a discussion about this. And I'm not aware there is any debate about it.--Smkolins (talk) 18:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

@Loeba:: When it is not in the bio it is not true? Do you really want to persuade us this way or what you mean? Apart from that - your other edits named "trimming" are a bunch of POVs. You're adding your personal interpretations (e.g. "neurotic"), you're changing sentences/paragraphes that they get a different sense (e.g. marriage & films beginning of the 30s). Nor you're citing any source neither you're adding any references. These are not proper edits. In German they have a word for this: verschlimmbessern. But AGF - pls. xpln and have a nice day VINCENZO1492 19:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

@Smkolins: Sorry, I didn't realise there had been a whole discussion about this. I've been absent from wikipedia for months and didn't think to check the talk page - I wasn't just ignoring your caution in including these statements. To be honest my thinking is still that it probably doesn't need mentioning: I did a lot of research on Lombard when I wrote this article and didn't come across Baha'i once. Even the Larry Swindell biography, which is pretty detailed, makes no reference to it. The basic rule on wikipedia, when in doubt, is "defer to third-party sources and do what they do". So if none of the major bios mention it, I don't think we should. Lombard may well have had some interest in the faith, I don't deny that, but it appears that it wasn't a major part of her life… --Loeba (talk) 20:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

@Loeba: Well from the above you can see there was a "good article" review which failed partly over this question yet people were not on the side of taking things out about it. I came in afterwards and found various citations about the issue both inside the religion in official publications (and for that matter not a little side newsletter or something but a major organ of publication in the religion) and outside, if brief. It is not uncommon to me that biographers say little or nothing about it - it's a relatively obscure religion, even more obscure back then. They are most often writing to the general audience even in academic works and - as I stated - she was pretty private about her religion from available sources. So - please review the sources on their own merits and whether they serve the purpose of improving the article. As for the general editing mostly what I'd say is that you are re-writing what already went through a lot of hands for the "good article" nomination. --Smkolins (talk) 21:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean - there has only been one GA review for this article, it passed, and there was no concerns raised about her faith. I'm the primary author of this article - I wrote everything apart from the lead, death section and reception section (which were done by another editor while I was on a wikibreak; he also took it to GA). So if you think the article's been in good hands, it's mostly mine! Re baha'i additions: I still find it hard to believe it's appropriate, and you can't blame me for suspecting some vested-interest/bias on your part (based on your profile)...that's not meant as a snipe - and I do appreciate that you've tried to find good sources and kept the mention pretty brief - but you can see where I'm coming from..? --Loeba (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This is why I said judge the situation based on the merits of the sources. Part of my investment in wikipedia is to correct all too common misunderstandings related to my religion that I've run into in "real life" of course completely adhearing to the standards of sources and style. I'm an experienced editor and though I've spent a lot of time on religion I've also worked some in science articles along with the various minor corrections here and there. Yes the GA review passed, like I said I came after, but then someone brought up it should be cited - I guess it didn't come during the review. I don't look at citations as merely bring in facts for articles but links to go explore in their own right (like is often said in college, don't base anything on the wikipedia article but look up the sources.) Judging the sources on the messenger would seem to drift from the meaning of good faith, no? --Smkolins (talk) 22:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
@Loeba:So can you come up with a compromise since you see my addition as based on "good sources and kept the mention pretty brief"? As you say, it was rated a good article before with some mention and had no sources despite the fact that the large biographies didn't mention it? I feel that as you say I've done a pretty good job on the addition it adds to the quality of the article. --Smkolins (talk) 11:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry you misunderstood me - I was acknowledging the fact you tried to add the information properly, but if these are the only sources available I personally don't think it's good enough. Two are from Baha'i publications, which would count as primary sources, the newspaper link is dead, and the "" wouldn't pass our requirements for reliable sources (and the only source it provides as a reference is the same Baha'i link you already used, so it defeats the point). In my view there isn't enough secondary coverage of this to justify including it in the article, but we can get a wp:thirdopinion if you like. --Loeba (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
I can appreciate being busy. And I'm gratified you did followup checking the cites. Alas yes the dead newspaper article is an issue. I see the article referenced in a couple side websites [7], (which provides some clues where more might be found) and oddly if you do a google search for the article name it still lists the newspaper's website as the first hit but it goes dead and it isn't to be found on On the face of it yes I can see there is a problem of notability resulting. You can't see what i saw. I recognize not being enough by itself though I disagree it is self-defeating that they cite a Baha'i source - they are not Baha'is so them using it is clearly different than simply pointing to a Baha'i source. However the dangling reference to the newspaper story lead me to Matzen's own website. See what you think - a recognized expert on the topic's blog?: The weaver, by Robert Matzen, December 25, 2014] which I believe makes all the same points I originally depended on for the newspaper article (Baha'i, 1938, private about religion.) Based on those facts I suggest adding the most prominent details from the other sources such as I originally included, (reportedly a letter exchanged with then head of the religion, etc.) --Smkolins (talk) 19:25, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


The Matzen source is better, yeah. Initially it made me more sceptical because it indicates that 1) Lombard didn't believe in an afterlife and 2) she celebrated Christmas. But after a quick google it appears that both of these things are possible for Baha'is (that right?) I guess many readers will be interested to know about her faith so we may as well reference it. It's tricky to know how to fit it in but the early life section is probably best. --Loeba (talk) 11:21, 6 September 2015 (UTC) Update: actually it fits better in the 1938 section so I've mentioned it there. --Loeba (talk) 11:34, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the inclusion, minimal that it is. As for your questions, you have to be careful concluding from statements. Like about not going to church meaning she wasn't religious. Yes Baha'is have such a believe - Bahá'í Faith on life after death, but it's position in a personal role in life can have various forms just as the rest of her life has specific connections to the religion and these do not follow norms in society. For example while I'm certain she was private about religion because of the protestant atmosphere that could have been intolerant and affect her career, I also know Baha'is that are simply private about it and there are some aspects of the religion that very much refer to one's private life in devotions to separate the affect of public attention. She was a bit of a maverick - undoubtedly this was partly because of her personality. Yet being less common than one in a thousand is a pretty maverick situation for Baha'is in any case. Celebrating Christmas can be about family and minding one's relationship with friends, family and strangers, and be about decorating and making a special time - all of which Baha'is can endorse (see for example Ayyam-i-Ha. And even celebrating Jesus, whom Baha'is hold as a Manifestation of God the very same as our Founder, can be a positive endorsement of the Baha'i approach. Did you want to include the Baha'i sources that are effectively small biographies about her? At the very least one could say her status was visible among the Baha'is since the 1944–5 (when the earlier Baha'i World volume 9 was published.)--Smkolins (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

other comment[edit]

@Vincenzo1492: I'm sorry you don't like my edit but all I did is trim and rewrite some stuff - I can assure you it's all accurate (I just thought the lead was too long). I actually removed the word "neurotic", which has been there for over a year I think. And you don't need to put references in an article's lead unless it's for a contentious statement (see WP:LEADCITE). Everything is sourced in the article. Have a nice day to you too. --Loeba (talk) 20:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Carole Lombard/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The rating of low is surely absurd. Lombard was an actress of surpassing importance in her time. IXIA 16:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 10:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Where did she and Gable honeymoon?[edit]

Philip Varney writes in Arizona Ghost Towns and Mining Camps: A Travel Guide to History (p. 41, ISBN 0-916179-44-3) that “Clark Gable and Carole Lombard honeymooned [at the Oatman Hotel] after their wedding in Kingman. You can peek in on their room” and I have in fact peeked in on the room claimed to be where they stayed, rather more spartan than one might expect.

On the other hand, Warren Harris writes in Clark Gable: A Biography that “Howard Strickling wanted the newlyweds to be available for a press conference in Los Angeles on the morning after the elopement”... “Otto Winkler dropped the newlyweds back at Lombard’s house in Bel-Air at three the next morning [after the ceremony].”... “In late January 1940 the Gables finally took off on a honeymoon trip, heading for a hunting club in Baja California”... (pp. 200-201, 216, ISBN 0-609-60495-3)

Neither author gives references for their claims, although Harris has a three-page bibliography and Varney has none. I’m inclined to believe Harris over Varney, as he clearly researched Gable’s life in considerable detail, while Varney’s focus was not on Gable or Lombard but on the town, and he may well have simply accepted the hotel’s own claim. So I’m taking Oatman off the page. Anyone have any other thoughts on which version is more likely? Lee Choquette (talk) 01:07, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


From "Just Movies - 8,500 Film Quiz Questions and Nothing Else!", she was named Carol Jane Peters at birth and got Carole Lombard from the the name of the Carroll Lombardi Pharmacy on Lexington Ave and 65th St in Manhattan. (talk) 19:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ a b "Carol Lombard Gable". The Bahá'í World: A Biennial International Record (PDF). 9. Bahá'í Pub. Committee. 1981 [1945]. pp. 635–637. 
  2. ^ Williard P. Hatch (1981) [1928]. "Beylah Storrs Lewis". The Bahá'í World: A Biennial International Record (PDF). 11. Bahá'í Pub. Committee. pp. 503–505. 
  3. ^ "The Religious Affiliation of Carole Lombard great American actress". 26 April 2007. Retrieved July 26, 2015. 
  4. ^ Kevin Kilbane (September 29, 2014). "Fort Wayne native and acting legend Carole Lombard's life, death topic of first Mather Series lecture". The News-Sentinel. Fort Wayne, Indiana. Retrieved July 26, 2015.