Talk:James Earl Jones

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Actors and Filmmakers (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (marked as Mid-importance).
WikiProject Star Wars (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Wars, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Star Wars saga 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Othello awards[edit]

"his performance of Othello is considered[by whom?] one of the greatest in history"

I was looking for a way to revise this phrase, perhaps by citing a review or listing awards associated with his role as Othello. Several web sites claim he won an Obie for the role, but the definitive Obie awards listing on does not corroborate that (though he did win an award for Baal in 1965). However, it appears his Othello did win a Drama Desk Award for best performance in 1964. I am not sure how significant this award is, but noting it would probably be closer to NPoV than the current wording. I couldn't make the change though since the article is locked. --Restless coder (talk) 05:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Ambiguous Wording[edit]

"Jones has been married to Cecilia Hart since 1982, with whom he has two children, Flynn Earl Jones and Shaquonique S. Jones. He was previously married to the actor and singer Julienne Marie. They had no children. Both actors have played the role of Desdemona in the same production in which Jones played Othello." Can no one clarify that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


Is this article a stub?

Kingdom Hearts II[edit]

what role did he play in KH2? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

although these are not chat pages IMDb says that he voiced Mufasa just like he did in the film. MarnetteD | Talk 07:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Uncredited in Star Wars?[edit]

He is credited in the 2004 DVD, not sure about 1977

He was originally not credited in Star Wars. It wasn't until later versions that his name was included (this was a decision by both Lucas and Jones, as I understand it). - Kevingarcia 07:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

How about his role in Sandlot. Can someone please add a filmography. He was also the narrator for an insect educational video from the 1980's. He also has one of the most distinctive voices in acting history can someone add a soundbite? This article is poor and needs major work.

"he is uncredited in some versions of the films, though some note Jones as the only African-American actor in Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope" - Is that sentence suggesting he is uncredited because he is Black? I know both facts are relevant, but I can't see what else is being insinuated by including the two statements in the same sentence. Anyone?


I am pretty sure the Vader / Lion King / CNN bit was actually an imitation of Jones' voice by Harry Shearer (although he did voice work in other episodes). But I cannot find a source so am not changing it at this time. 03:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The DVD audio commentary for that episode confirms that it was harry Shearer.


I wrote a small bit mentioning that he played General Solomon in Tiberian Sun but some one deleted it. Jamhaw 18:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)jamhaw

This is true, I was looking for a way to add this to the page, but locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snub999 (talkcontribs) 16:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Bell Atlantic advertising[edit]

He provided the voice "tag" for the advertising campaign for Bell Atlantic (predecessor to Verizon Communications. Anyone remember what the tag was?

On the actual phone he was the voice of "Welcome to Bell Atlantic" Cowbert 20:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

He also made the internal announcements for the company. Imagine having Darth Vader making announcements to you?

Should be given a higher priority. As a New Jersey resident, I think I can speak for millions of others for which Jones and his unmistakable deep voice were almost a daily presence in our lives. He spoke for Bell Atlantic in all kinds of ways. I suspect he made more money as the spokesman for B.A. -- FOR YEARS --and practically "the Face and Voice of" B.A., than from all his other jobs COMBINED.--William M. Boyce (talk) 13:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Please, we need a disambiguation:[edit]

James Earl

James Earl Jones

James Earl Carter

James Earl Ray

Hopiakuta 21:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


Can we get one for the infobox? Stilgar135 23:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Claymation Creation Link[edit]

Is that Haydn's oratorio? If not, the link needs to be fixed. DavidRF 23:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

James Earl Ray[edit]

Anyone want to mention this particularly awful event: 02:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Definately NOT!

DarthSidious 14:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)DarthSidious

Fair use rationale for Image:DarthVaderbeckoning.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:DarthVaderbeckoning.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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 09:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Conan6.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Conan6.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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding IMDb[edit]

In response to an editor who asked for a citation regarding the disallowed use of IMDb as a reference source:

Wikipedia: Reliable sources - Are wikis reliable sources specifies that wikis are not allowed as reference sources. IMDb falls under that definition as it has solely user-generated content, and, as noted elsewhere at Wikipedia:Reliable sources, IMDb does not "have adequate levels of editorial oversight or author credibility and lack assured persistence." -- (talk) 17:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Pre-Med Major[edit]

I know the source says that his undergraduate major was "pre-med," but in truth, that's not an actual college major. I think our source goofed. Can that be removed or changed in some way? Maybe something along the lines of, "focused on the pre-medical sciences in college" or something? Hillthekhore (talk) 12:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

personal positions[edit]

His statements on not doing endorsements apparently come from his bio:

[from "James Earl Jones: Voices and Silences" page 360]: My voice is for hire. My endorsement is not for hire. I will do a voice-over, but I cannot endorse without making a different kind of commitment. My politics are very personal and subjective.:

If that's good enough, feel free to cite it.Mzmadmike (talk) 01:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

"Todd" not birth name[edit]

This is a canard that apparently got started on IMDb. However, James Earl Jones' autobiography, James Earl Jones: Voices and Silences by James Earl Jones and Penelope Niven (Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1993, ISBN 0-684-19513-5) states that it is a nickname only, and only used by one person at that.

The first time he mentions his own name is page 43, where he quotes his mother: "'Put on your snowshoes, James Earl,' she ordered."

The only reference to Todd is on page 62, where Jones states it was a nickname only used by his uncle Randy, who was close in age to Jones. "Ruth got her visit from Randy and me -- her brother and her son, enough alike in age and now in size to be brothers. I called Randy 'Duke' and he called me 'Todd,' after the comic strip character Tipton Todd."

There it is, in Jones' own words: It was nickname based on a comic strip character. It was not his birth name. -- (talk) 01:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

As for, that site has no accountability, no credentials, and no contact addresses in order for someone to send a correction. Every site makes errors -- The New York Times and other papers accept and run corrections -- so makes errors like everyone else. The difference is, mistakes there get in, and there's no apparent way to correct them. -- (talk) 01:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I just watched the Screen Actors Guild awards and they did a career retrospective on JEJ. It showed a poster for one of his earliest performances (high school or college) and it said "Todd Jones as Othello" DFS (talk) 08:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

As noted above, Todd was a nickname — not a birth name. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:34, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Slurring of articles[edit]

The Education and the Military articles are intermingled to the point where the Military article starts with the word "instead." Could this be fixed up? Just another guy trying to be a Chemical Engineer, Nanobiotechnologist, and Mathematician (talk) 19:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


I keep seeing things all around the internet that he died, but I'm not quite sure if it's true. Could someone please varify this for me? Crazyconan (talk) 05:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Would you care to provide a link to these "things"? Google News returns lots of current articles about him, but none about him dying. Here's an article published today about him, so it seems unlikely. [1] JRawle (Talk) 14:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Apparently, when James Earl Ray died, some sources announced James Earl Jones. It was an error.Mzmadmike (talk) 01:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I did not see this on the page, but he was also in the episode "Thor's Hammer" of "Stargate SG-1" where he played The First/Unas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hollywood Star?[edit]

Does James Earl Jones have a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. If not, why not?

Edits 4/12/2011[edit]

I have left most of the relevant text in the career section in tact but have re-organized and re-ordered it to fit Jones' genuine notability over the last 50+ years as one of the finest actors in the U.S. The fact that he won two Emmys in the same year plus a Tony (and an Obie, as yet unmentioned) plus sustained critical acclaim has more overall significance to his true notability than the Star Wars gig in which he never appeared on screen. As commercially successful as SW was - it is simply one of his many, many film activities, so I have folded into "Film roles." There is a ton more to be done here to give Jones his real due (as an encyclopedia and not pop-culture fanzine should do), but this is a start. Sensei48 (talk) 05:33, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Mentioning some well known roles in the lead[edit]

This edit (mine) has now been reverted. Any third opinions? Usually it is good to mention some of the best known roles of any actor, particularly in this case so that readers can quickly put the voice to the face and name. If we decide these two are not sufficient, then I think it makes sense to add a few more of his roles to the lead, rather than removing these ones. Placing a few roles in the lead is not to imply that those are more important than others; it is merely to assist the reader in identifying the notability of the man. Gregcaletta (talk) 12:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

You mentioned two voice over roles. His "face", which is well known to readers, is not seen in either of these. He has far more onscreen roles than voice ones. Placing items in the Lead is inherently POV which is why we also avoid WP:PEACOCK terms there. Any items in the lead should be roles that were important to his career like The Great White Hope not fan items like The Lion King (in which his voice time is minimal BTW.) You will also want to take a look at WP:LIST which is why we don't need more items MarnetteD | Talk 12:51, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
The idea that Jones is "best-known" for two movies in which he did not even appear is recentist, superficial pop culture POV. An encyclopedia article should reflect its subject's real notability, and nearly every one of these "best-known" POVs should be removed from actors' articles.Sensei48 (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
The edit didn't say he was best known for those roles; it just said he did those roles. It's silly that readers have to look past the lead to actually identify who the guy is. It's not POV if we simply say "Among his many roles are X, X and X". No one is disputing that he voiced the roles of Mufasa and Darth Vader, so it is not POV. It might be WP:UNDUE if they were not his highest grossing films, and WP:UNDUE could be resolved by adding The Great White Hope and other important roles instead of simply reverting (the way we reach NPOV is through consensus building and compromise, not reversion). Gregcaletta (talk) 03:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Did you read what we both said. Neither of those voice roles, especially TLK are all that notable in the breadth of his career. Attempting to include them is POV. Per WP:BRD you entered them they have been reverted and of those that have spoken so far there is no consensus to include them. MarnetteD | Talk 03:22, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Marion Anderson Award[edit]

I would like to point out that James Earl Jones recently became the 2012 recipient of the Marion Anderson Award. Although the award gala will not be until this November, I feel that he should still be recognized here for such an honor. Here's a link to the press release if you want proof: --Lordhood117 (talk) 16:45, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Ranger School?[edit]

Either he earned his Ranger Tab or he "washed out". Not both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Lead section is not compliant with guidelines[edit]

The lead section is not compliant with the WP:LEAD guideline, which states that the introduction should "summarize the most important points" and "Provide an accessible overview" that "can stand on its own as a concise version of the article". To do this, it should include a summary of the highlights in his life, more prominent stage and film roles and awards. Diego (talk) 21:32, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes to highlights of his life and to a summary of his acting career. No to "more prominent stage and film roles," which would be an editor's POV, especially since JEJ's career is so long and diverse. WP:LEAD also says "The first paragraph should define the topic with a neutral point of view, but without being overly specific..." and "not everything in the lead must be repeated in the body of the text. This includes specific facts such as quotations, examples, birth dates, and titles." Sensei48 (talk) 22:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Then let's not use editor's POVs to select or reject the roles, but the available reliable sources. Most (all?) the biographies linked have highlighted the role as Darth Vader, so that one is a must; NOT including it is POV. Any other role or award that appears cited in two or more sources is a likely candidate to be included. (Also the "not everything in the lead..." guideline you quote is irrelevant; that would apply to something in the lead that is not included in the text, but this case is the opposite).
Maybe your concern is that to single out one such role in the lead would make it appear as the only one for which the actor is known. To counter it, we can include something along the lines of "Jones has performed on many recognized roles throughout his career; among them, roles X, Y and Z are frequently mentioned by media". That would state the importance of his whole career while give proper weight to the roles that reliable sources consider important to mention. Diego (talk) 22:42, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The bios referenced in the article (the ones to which valid links remain) list appropriately a large number of roles, and the Darth Vader voice work is not given any more prominence over any other except in Rovi. As previous discussions have noted, one of "the most prominent actors of the 20th century" actually appeared in over 40 films. He did not appear in Star Wars, and the article here appropriately mentions that work as an "also" with his other work. I'm sure some other editors will chime in. SW would not be appropriate to include in the lede because it does not receive any special emphasis in the majority of the cited sources and because voice work is secondary to actual acting roles.Sensei48 (talk) 23:15, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
We disagree; being the voice work for an iconic cultural figure makes that role more relevant. Darth Vader has to be included in the summary because: 1) it is the only one referenced by ALL sources that list any significant roles, which makes it above the others; and 2) because of the relevance of that character. And we *do* have sources that give more prominence to that role (BBC: "remains best known as the voice of Darth Vader in Star Wars" here and here; L.A. Times "the actor's famous alter ego -- Darth Vader"; Herald Scotland "the child who as a man would create the voice of Darth Vader" at the intro paragraph).
At the same time we don't have any one claiming that "voice work is secondary to actual acting roles" nor that Darth Vader is *not* important to his career (if we had one stating that, then yes there would be a POV conflict). So let's post a notice to have wider feedback if you want; but references are on the side of supporting the inclusion. Diego (talk) 06:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I have a question for you: what do you think of mentioning the Honorary Academy Award in the lead? Should it be included or not, and with which criteria? Diego (talk) 06:38, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
OK, and pardon my brief delay in responding. I'm not sure what you mean above by "the relevance of the character" - relevance to what? An encyclopedia article is supposed to stand as objective and neutral; Jones's significance as an actor goes far far beyond SW, and that is what the lede should reflect, as does the article. To refer to DV as "an iconic cultural figure" is highly problematic; beyond its self-evident POV, it is inaccurate - "pop culture" yes and likely temporarily; "cultural figure" - not hardly. I have no problem with expanding the lede to include mentions of prominent roles and awards, and in response to the last question above, absolutely yes. Also appropriate and cited in the article should be the fact that Jones won two Emmys in the same year, the only actor ever to do so. As to roles, allusion to Star Wars is fine among his other more noteworthy actual acting roles. POV is POV, even if it appears in some of the sources; what I would object to is going any farther with it than Britannica does here:
Note that it is not part of the lede there and does not appear at all until the last paragraph, with voice roles appropriately subordinated to his actual acting roles. Also, the text of the Wikipedia article as it is avoids the pop culture confirmation bias that elevates SW beyond everything else Jones has done - it simply says that he is also well-known for it, and in that regard reflects the same kind of encyclopedia treatment that Britannica affords it.
With these cautions, I'd be interested to see what an expanded lede would look like including SW.Sensei48 (talk) 05:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I'd include the major award-winning roles in addition to the "best known for Darth Vader" voice work. I don't know what's more significant about his personal life besides the usual statistics (multi-racial heterosexual American male), but overcoming the stutter looks significant for an actor; and there are whole sections for education and military that could be summarized too. Diego (talk) 06:54, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I'd suggest that there is a tipping point here. The Britannica article above does include a "perhaps best known" phrase for DV, but not as the primary point about Jones, with the voice work listed last among his major accomplishments. I'd prefer to see this article retain its integrity as an encyclopedia article and emphasize Jones' real notability as an actor and keep the pop-culture perspective in a subordinated position.Sensei48 (talk) 07:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Britannica has different rules for style than Wikipedia; the "real notability" of the actor is decided by the sources, not editors' opinions, and the article highlights have to be included in the lead section. But if you have an allergy to the words "best known for", I'm OK with simply stating "Jones was the voice of Dath Vader", as long as it's in the lead to comply with due weight and WP:MOSINTRO. Diego (talk) 09:14, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm OK with that, as above. But if you look at the sources quoted in our Wikipedia article (and a number of these are dead links) - look here [2], here [3], here [4], and through the other sources, the emphasis is generally on breadth of career rather than on a single role. You can find such an emphasis if you're looking for it, but due weight cuts more than one way in this case.Sensei48 (talk) 17:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
...and I'd add that The Great White Hope is the role mentioned in every source.Sensei48 (talk) 17:30, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
That's good. The Great White Hope should be in the lead too, and we also have covered the breath of career with "one of America's most distinguished and versatile actors". This looks like consensus. Diego (talk) 17:51, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
OK...howz about we sandbox a new lede here and make it collaborative before inserting it into the article?Sensei48 (talk) 12:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

RfC: Should Darth Vader be mentioned in the lead of James Earl Jones?[edit]

The result of this discussion is to include the role of Darth Vader, along with other roles mentioned in the article text per WP:MOSLEAD, and that a reflection of reliable sources that summarize this actor's career will produce a lead in keeping with WP:NPOV. - Alanscottwalker (talk) 23:55, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There is an ongoing disagreement about including the Darth Vader voice acting as a prominent role for James Earl Jones in the lead, as part of a summary of his career. You can see previous discussions at Mentioning some well known roles in the lead and Lead section is not compliant with guidelines. You're welcome to state your position on this. Diego (talk) 06:47, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Include Compare to Sebastian Shaw, whose role as Vader, though much smaller, is mentioned. Since his is a featured article, I think it's a good standard to judge by. It appears only two editors have voiced disagreement with this, which I find difficult to understand. --BDD (talk) 17:42, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
If I may respond - there are extensive discussions about this on this page. The Shaw reference is a bit of a red herring - DV may be the only thing of note that he has ever done. Jones is in contrast an actor of great achievement and accomplishment who was very well-known and greatly respected long before Star Wars, and an encyclopedia article is supposed to present what is truly notable about its subject, not simply confirm pop culture biases. Sensei48 (talk) 05:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I think saying the brief Vader appearance was "the only thing of note [Shaw] has ever done" indicates a pretty heavy pop culture bias itself. He certainly would have an article even if he had never portrayed Vader. Another article worth comparing to is Harrison Ford. By several measures, he's one of the most successful film stars of all time, yet I doubt anyone would think it appropriate to remove the mention of Han Solo in his lede. And I have read the previous discussions on this page—if sources such as the BBC and the Los Angeles Times call Vader one of Jones's most prominent roles, we're in no position to contradict them. --BDD (talk) 19:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Please do not misquote and misread what I wrote, which was that SW may be the only thing etc - big, big difference, phrased that way because I didn't know much about Shaw.Sensei48 (talk) 23:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Include -- Per WP:LEAD, the lead optimally should be a very concise compendium of all the article's major points, as opposed to simply an introduction. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:36, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Include per cautions listed above -- in the discussion section above.Sensei48 (talk) 05:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Include. Omitting it because Star Wars would be "pop culture bias" seems strange, as if roles in pop culture works could not be notable and accomplished roles. It is also a good example of how his career has diversity.Shubi (talk) 05:19, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
  • No-brainer include The nice thing about RfCs if that you get non-experts voicing their opinions. I'm no film buff, and, having not read the article yet, the only role I can think of that Jones played is Darth Vader. That's what he's most famous for, and it should be there. Ego White Tray (talk) 19:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Include And I do not think it detracts from his other fine work - it is mainly that this one item is always mentioned in the same breath as his name <g>. Collect (talk) 17:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Include Star Wars, The Lion King, Dr Strangelove, and Conan the Barbarian should ALL be included in my opinion. Cheers! RichardMills65 (talk) 20:48, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Conan the Barbarian? I dunno. Not exactly Othello, The Great White Hope or Fences. We want to be representative of work for which he's best known, not do a context-less laundry list. He wasn't the star, and most people think of that as an Arnold film. Even Dr. Strangelove is iffy, but the movie did mark his first film role and is an acknowledged major classic.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New lead paragraph[edit]

James Earl Jones (born January 17, 1931) is an American actor. Since his Broadway debut in 1957, Jones has spent more than five decades as "one of America's most distinguished and versatile actors"[1] and has been termed "one of the greatest actors in American history."[2] Jones has won several awards including a Tony Award and Golden Globe Award for his role in The Great White Hope. He is also known for his voice acting role as Darth Vader as well as several television, stage and film roles.

As a child Jones overcame a stutter that lasted for several years. He studied a pre-medical degree and served as an army ranger during the Korean War, before dedicating his career to acting.

On November 12, 2011, Jones received an Honorary Academy Award.[2]

Proposed text. Discuss. Diego (talk) 22:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Nicely done, I'd say. Some questions/suggestions. Instead of the second para as is with the stutter - a brief mention in the article - the lede would be more reflective of the article if it enumerated a half dozen or so of his roles that receive attention in the article, perhaps the Emmy roles or high box office roles such as Field of Dreams and the like. Also, I'd change "as well as several television, stage and film roles" to "as well as many film, stage, and television roles" since that's what's in our article - many, and a preponderance of film and stage. Also, GWH needs italics. But overall I think this hits the mark for a respectable article. Sensei48 (talk) 23:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Agree. Nicely done. We can probably get rid of the word-echo "actor" in the first two sentences by combining them this way:
James Earl Jones (born January 17, 1931)[3] is an American actor who in a career of over 50 years has become known as "one of America's most distinguished and versatile"[4] and "one of the greatest actors in American history."[2] Since his Broadway debut in 1957 ... (and from here we can include some of the work / accolades he's amassed, as per Sensei48).
Also, "Army Ranger" should be capitalized. Proper-noun phrase. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
I've included a mix of the above as the new lead. Feel free to make any additional changes that you consider necessary. Diego (talk) 23:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


  1. ^ Rebecca Flint Marx. "James Earl Jones Biography". All Movie Guide. Retrieved April 12, 2011. 
  2. ^ a b c Nicole Sperling, Susan King (November 12, 2011). "Oprah shines, Ratner controversy fades at honorary Oscars gala". LA Retrieved November 14, 2011. 
  3. ^ "James Earl Jones Biography (1931–)". Retrieved February 20, 2008. 
  4. ^ Rebecca Flint Marx. "James Earl Jones Biography". All Movie Guide. Retrieved April 12, 2011. 

Citation requests[edit]

I'm bringing this to the talk page for discussion rather than reverting. An editor has removed citation requests from redlinked movies, saying, "red links do not require a source per the film MoS and all of these can be found at the allrovi website which is A) a reliable source and b) linked below)." I'm afraid I'm not finding anything about that at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film, and in fact Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#External links includes AllRovi in the same category as IMDb, which isn't considered a WP:RS for reference citation but can be used as a "for further reading" EL.

Since we can't rely on ELs as reference citations, I'm not sure I see the harm in asking for citations for redlinked claims. Is there anything wrong with wanting reliable-source reference citations? This is an encyclopedia — what could it hurt to have footnotes for a higher level of credible accuracy? --Tenebrae (talk) 17:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Aside from WP:AGF there is the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of filmogrpahies, "written by" and "recorded by" lists on Wikipedia with red links in them. What WP:POINT are you trying to make be adding cn tags to only this article. IMDb and Allrovi may have problems but they do not have entirely made up films on them - a thing that has occurred more than once here at Wikipedia. The Turner Classic Movie site is a reliable source as well [5]. Since you have a bee in your bonnet about this I am not sure why you don't consider blue links as needing references as well since Wikipedia cannot be used as a RS and, indeed, false info gets added to our articles all the time of which this [6] is but one example. BTW in your revert you added back a link to a DAB page that I had removed so please check what you are doing rather than blindly reverting. If you wish to get more involvement from other editors you might link to this discussion at the filmproject talk page and whatever consensus they reach will be fine with me. MarnetteD | Talk 17:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see you take on such a defensive tone; I'm not sure how dismissing my reasonably stated issue as having "a bee in your bonnet" is assuming good faith; neither is saying sarcastically, "I am not sure why you don't consider blue links as needing references as well."
If you would like to discuss this more calmly and straightforwardly, I would love to do that. The fact is, however, that the policies / guidelines you cited in your edit summary do not exist, and so I'm not sure in that case that there is an established basis for removing good-faith citation requests. Indeed, it's unusual for citation requests to be removed at all. I believe in this case that citation requests are reasonable, and certainly don't hurt anything. May we please discuss this without sarcasm and as two well-meaning, experienced editors? --Tenebrae (talk)
This is an article where I have checked every single addition to the filmography over the last seven years and removed those that were false. So the question is what source are you going to allow for filmographies? Also, please point out the policy / guidelines that states that red links must be sourced. My question is why are the red links in this filmography in this article being questioned and not any others. Once again what is the WP:POINT. I wasn't being sarcastic (and your accusations of such I find offensive) about blue links and I provided a link to false info being added to articles that you seem to have ignored. Here is another one [7] that was added to a navbox (which are much like a filmography) and, under your criteria as near as I can understand it, would have been allowed to remain because it went to an actual Wikipedia article. In cleaning up this mess Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Vandalism by 201.19.*.* I found false credits that had been in articles for as long as a year. Thus, the info in blue links is every bit as likely to be unreliable and need sourcing as those that are redlinked. I do not see how your citation requests enhance the article but, as I suggested, you are perfectly free to see what others think and I will go with their consensus. As to tone I can't help you there since I see far worse here every single day. I can say it might have been different if you hadn't blindly reverted and added back in the DAB link as I mentioned above. MarnetteD | Talk 21:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
You really believe "what got a bee in your bonnet" and falsely claiming I was trying to disrupt Wikipedia to make a WP:POINT to be proper, good-faith behavior?
"I have checked every single addition to the filmography over the last seven years" — and so no one is allowed to question you? You are WP:OWNing this article when you claim that no one is allowed to ask for citation requests because you personally will not allow it. "Point out the policy / guidelines that states that red links must be sourced"? WP:VERIFY — one of the core Wikipedia policies.
I'm sorry you won't allow another editor to ask for citation requests; I've never heard of an editor removing citation requests and objecting to an editor asking for verification. You say you want other editors' comments. Fine. I guess we'll do a Request for Comments. But honestly, I can't imagine there beign a consensus to not ask for verification. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Please stop being so melodramatic. I do not claim ownership of this article I was simply pointing out that I have vetted the performances listed in the filmography to the best of my ability. I know WP:VERIFY quite well and nowhere in it does it state that red links "must" be sourced. You have yet to answer any of my questions. What source are you going to allow for redlinks? Why do the films/TV shows that do not have wikiarticles in this filmography need sourcing and those in other articles do not? Why do you AGF blue links when I have given clear examples of their being wrong and not redlinks? These are inconsistencies and without explanation I do not understand where you are coming from. MarnetteD | Talk 22:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry you find my good-faith efforts at discussion "melodramatic." I must confess I find it a self-contradiction when you say, "I do not claim ownership of this article I was simply pointing out that I have vetted the performances." If no one is allowed to question your "vetting," then of course you're owning the article.
WP:VERIFY says all information in Wikipedia must be verified. "Everything" would include redlinks. I'm sorry that wasn't more clear.
"Why do the films/TV shows that do not have wikiarticles in this filmography need sourcing and those in other articles do not?" Somewhere there's an essay in Wikipedia saying something to the effect that none of us are responsible for the entirety of Wikipedia, but just for fixing whatever might be wrong in those articles on which we're working. Because things aren't verified in other articles doesn't mean we don't verify this article.
If you think all the bluelinked items should be tagged, that's your right and you may have a point. But that's a separate discussion about your removing citation requests. I hope these points have addressed your questions and concerns. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────And I am sorry that you find my good faith efforts at maintaining the integrety of the article to be ownership. I guess that means that we all display ownership every single day on every article on out watchlist. As to the mention of the WP:OTHERSTUFF essay that might apply if you regularly questioned redlinked and required and asked for WP:VERIFY other entries without articles but I can't find that so that is why WP:POINT is one of my concerns. On the other hand the same essay would apply to adding cn tags to the bluelinks. So as mentioned below sources have been added. MarnetteD | Talk 23:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Sources have been added. As they are both lists it would not seem necessary to add them to every single entry. MarnetteD | Talk 23:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

An editor has removed citation requests from movies in the filmography that do not have their own film articles. All information needs to be verified by reliable sources. External links, such as to IMDb, are not necessarily allowed as reference citations. Should these citation requests have been removed? --Tenebrae (talk) 22:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Nope, keep the tags or cite the films (or better yet, create the articles). AllRovi or the BFI should be able to verify the existence of any of the redlinks so it's not an impossible task. GRAPPLE X 22:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Please be sure to read and consider the thoughts expressed in the section above - for instance it has already been stated that Allrovi cannot be used. Also plenty of examples have been given for the unreliability of blue links so if the discussion comes down for having the "cn" tags then that is fine but we should write into the various MoS for biographies - film projects - etc - that every entry be it blue red or black in a filmography needs a reliable source. MarnetteD | Talk 22:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Ah, given this was under its own heading I didn't realise it was directly related to anything above it; I've brought it to a lower-level heading to prevent anyone else making that same assumption. I'm not saying blue links are inherently reliable, but they do offer a means of verifying information that is a dramatic improvement on no means of verification. I also fail to see why AllRovi has been considered unreliable; this is the first I've heard it called such. I've used it for plenty of articles before (here are some examples) and Jones' filmography here seems perfectly suitable for the purposes of sourcing anything we're missing. A general source for the filmography, to assuage any doubts over redlinks, is not only a good idea here but a good idea to move forward with. FL-class filmographies (example) source every item, be it red, black or blue, so it's not a new suggestion nor is it harmful. GRAPPLE X 22:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the fix. I also was unaware that Allrovi was considered unreliable and now that I look at the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#External links linked to above it does not state that Allrovi. Indeed it does not mention it at all except for showing how to set it up as an EL. Grapple I have had a go at adding TCM as a ref for the whole filmography. Please feel free to improve it and add Allrovi as another ref as well. Thanks ahead of time for your efforts. MarnetteD | Talk 23:09, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I went ahead and added Allrovi. The formatting could still be altered as you see fit. MarnetteD | Talk 23:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
With all due respect, I've found at least three entries that do not appear in either AllRovi or TCM. I would trust and assume there are no objections to cite requests at claims not cited by the two sources we give for this section. (At least one of them doesn't even appear in IMDb, which seems like a red flag.) --Tenebrae (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── And your work checking them is much appreciated. Please go ahead and remove the ones that aren't listed at either site. Several discussions about filmographies over the years have concluded that we aren't trying to be comprehensive to a performers whole career. Not that we can't be if it is sourced but it isn't requried. MarnetteD | Talk 23:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks — that's nice of you to say, and I genuinely mean that. And you're right — we can only do the best we can. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • This looks more or less resolved, but I think all the entries need to be sourced regardless of being red or blue links. Being blue-linked doesn't necessarily substantiate the claim Jones appeared in it. Betty Logan (talk) 20:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Betty Logan. Are there any more problems or can we consider this resolved? Dreambeaver(talk) 18:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Looks like all good. It ended up being a productive collaboration between editors initially on different sides of an issue. Wikipedia at its best. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Military career[edit]

It looks like the military career has gradually been split in to its own section, but now has no live sources to use. Does anyone more familiar with the page know which ones cover this period of his life? Dreambeaver(talk) 18:28, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Found the archived link. Not sure about the source — it looks like it might be the website for a documentary. We might want to upgrade, but in the meantime, it's something. I have his autobio if I can just find it! --Tenebrae (talk) 18:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Great, thanks. I'm glad that it was done so quickly. It's definitely nice to have something there until some upgraded link becomes available. Dreambeaver(talk) 18:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Digging into the more subtle details, consider his military service and awards. Military service awards are public records, and I feel he should have them recognized on this page. Any research moles up for the hunt? Nathan.k.graff (talk) 04:13, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

House MD[edit]

Why does this article not mention his appearance in the episode "The Tyrant" of the show House M.D.? (talk) 07:39, 31 January 2014 (UTC)


Is his surname "Jones" or "Earl Jones"?

I was just watching an episode of The Big Bang Theory where Sheldon called him "Mister Earl Jones".

Also, this wikipedia article states that his father's name is "Robert Earl Jones" - so is "Earl" the middle name for both, or are they (non-hyphenated) "Earl Jones"es? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


This says he graduated from university in 1955. Then it says he went into the Army in 1953 and then into drama and never mentions going back to school. This doesn't make sense and needs to be clarified. There are other issues with this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:12, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

The source linked after "Crouch believed forced public speaking would help Jones" doesn't say that at all.[edit]

The article says "Crouch believed forced public speaking would help Jones gain confidence and insisted he recite a poem in class every day", and they cite a single article from the Herald Scotland, which doesn't seem to say that anywhere: All it says is this: "The change was inspired by an English teacher who noticed Jones’ love of the written word and challenged him to confront the condition. “I’d never thought of acting until it was suggested that lessons could help me try to speak again,” he recalls, explaining that he had given up trying to speak between the ages of four and 14."

It doesn't say he was forced into public speaking, nor does it say he insisted he recite a poem every day. All it says is that this man challenged him to try and confront his fears. And given the amount of evidence against "flooding" therapy, where people are forced to confront their worst fears, I'd wager it was probably a much more gradual and intimate process than what the article is suggesting. Unless we can find another source for Jones being "forced" into public speaking, and "insisted" he recite a poem every day, I think this sentence should be edited to more accurately reflect what the cited article actually says. moeburn (talk) 16:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Good catch. I've adjusted this. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)