Talk:Jennifer Grey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article in need of a non-free picture[edit]

Since Jennifer Grey had a botched nose-job that 1) completely changed her appearance and 2) significantly decreased her notoriety from its high in the 1980s, this article ought to have a non-free picture reflecting her appearance circa Ferris Bueller's Day Off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Equaaldoors (talk • contribs) 22:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not that getting a nose job wasn't a mistake for her career, but not sure that points 1 and 2 result from the nose job being "botched" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.32 (talk) 17:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nose job?[edit]

Anyone know about this?

Sure - it's very public knowledge - she admits herself that it was the worst thing she could have done for her career. 97.106.164.66 (talk) 04:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually more curious about the "botched" line. It looks like the doctor did a good job in giving her a normal nose. It seems like "botched" is just an excuse to cover up the decision to change the only thing that made her note worthy as an actress. I'd like a source that the nose job was botched. ( A report saying that the actress said so is not particularly probative.). Is there a copy of the pleadings in a malpractice suit against the doctor? Or did the doctor do exactly what he was supposed to do and the actress was unhappy with the results? When a source says X said "y" it is not a valid source for the truth of "y'. It is merely evidence that X said it. For example, a New York Times article saying that Bill said, "I did not have sex with that woman" is only evidence that Bill said that. It is not evidence of the truth of what Bill said. 75.191.151.75 (talk) 06:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • starpulse.com: Nose Job Ruined 'Dirty Dancing' Star's Career,[1]:
"I went in the operating theatre a celebrity - and come out anonymous. It was like being in a witness protection program or being invisible. I remember going to a restaurant where I had been going for years. I ran into people I knew and would say, 'Hey.' Nothing. I'll always be this once-famous actress nobody recognizes... because of a nose job." It's kinda sad...--87.148.233.212 (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
so, still a botched decision to have a nose job rather than a botched nose job? 2602:306:CF9E:B2C0:60C0:40E6:6163:21A9 (talk) 19:33, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of debut film in Lead section[edit]

Jennifer Grey's debut film is the first film in which she has appeared making it clear how her career was started and how she began as an actress, that of which is very notable in her life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cerenok9919 (talk • contribs) 23:52, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is what belongs in the Lead section, and not what is "notable in her life". Notability is a test for whether a subject merits an article, not for what goes in the Lead. The things for which a subject is notable are those things for which the subject is mostly known, which is generally explained in the opening sentence of the Lead section. Did you not read this when I mentioned it on your talk page? Grey is best known for Dirty Dancing and Ferris Bueller's Day Off, and recently attained more recent fame as a champion on Dancing with the Stars. She is not best known for Reckless, as she only had a minor part in that film. While her first film appearance is certainly significant enough to mention in the article (and indeed it is mentioned in the Career section), that is not the same thing as saying that it belongs in the Lead, given the function of the Lead, as is it understood by the consensus of the editing community here. It certainly does not merit being mentioned in the Lead prior to the things for which she is best known. Do you dispute any of this?
Btw, where you the one editing from those four IPs previously?
Also, a couple of tips regarding editing here:
  • Please be advised that when a good faith editorial dispute arises that requires discussion, the editors need to cease editing during the discussion. Continuing to revert the article back and forth, even when a discussion is ongoing (as you did when you reverted the article) is called edit warring, and is a blockable offense on Wikipedia. I'll leave the article as it is for now, as a show of good faith, but I thought I'd point this out to you for future reference.
  • AS per WP:EDITSUM, when you make an edit, make sure you include an edit summary giving a brief explanation/summary of your edit, and the relevant policy, guideline or consensus that are you citing, if any, when doing so.
  • Lastly, please make sure you sign your talk page posts. You can do this by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of them, which also automatically time stamps them. Nightscream (talk) 00:12, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: The following two posts are copied and pasted from User:Cerenok9919's talk page:

If this is causing disagreement then I apologise but Jennifer Grey's debut film is very notable because it was her first significant work in showbusiness so I think it is only right that this information be kept in the opening paragraph. If you have a different opinion on the matter then please try to make it clear to me. talk 19:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It adds to the notability of Reckless and should be in that article's intro. However, most of our articles about film actors do not mention their debuts (Harrison Ford, for instance, does not mention his debut in Dead Heat On A Merry-Go-Round), particularly if they were small or uncredited roles. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: Here's an excellent example: It's worth mentioning in the lead of The Tiger Makes Out that it's Dustin Hoffman's film debut (probably the only thing notable about that film in retrospect). But the article about Hoffman doesn't mention it in the intro, instead properly referencing The Graduate as his breakthrough role (much as Ferris Bueller's Day Off is Grey's). Daniel Case (talk) 19:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cerenok, regarding the issue of "notability" and the Lead, I responded to this in my January 26 message above. Please read that message and the explanation I offered in it (which Daniel Case echoes), and let me know what your responses are to my and Daniel's reasoning, as well as the other points I raised and the question I asked you. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 21:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further issues with Cerenok edits to lede sentence[edit]

Cerenok, while you seem to see our point now about Reckless, you have nonetheless chosen to make further edits to that section of the article that, while they do not concern any statements of fact about the subject, are nevertheless borderline disruptive as they have compromised the effectiveness of the sentences.

You wrote, and repeatedly restored, this text

Jennifer Elise Grey (born March 26, 1960) is an American actress. Grey became known for her role in the 1986 film Ferris Bueller's Day Off, and later in the 1987 romance Dirty Dancing, for which she was nominated for a Golden Globe Award.

Nightscream has restored the original lede, every time, which remains thus:

Jennifer Elise Grey (born March 26, 1960) is an American actress known for her roles in the 1980s films Ferris Bueller's Day Off and Dirty Dancing, the latter for which she was nominated for a Golden Globe Award.

It seems like you saw the existing lede as sort of a run-on sentence, perhaps because your English teacher in secondary school pointed such things out to you. I'd say it's arguable, since I've both seen and written worse, but if you want to be really strict about it it is. It doesn't, I admit, do any favors for the article's overall readability score.

So it occurs to you to try to break it up. You picked the wrong place. There's no need to cut off the participle phrase in the secondary predicate, because doing so requires a needless repetition of the subject that disrupts the flow of the sentence (which you compounded by unnecessarily reusing her name. What other antecedent could "she" have had at that point)? The original version conveyed the same information in three less words.

And we saved more by not being specific about the years of release of the two films. See summary style. We will go into specifics, if the reader wants them, in the article. We don't need that level of detail in the intro.

Where the sentence could be not so much cut as repunctuated is in the last clause. It doesn't need to be a separate sentence actually. I think our old friend the semicolon can be used here as it's really a comma splice.

So, the revised sentence, with some tightening:

Jennifer Elise Grey (born March 26, 1960) is an American actress known for her roles in the 1980s films Ferris Bueller's Day Off and Dirty Dancing; the latter earned her a Golden Globe Award nomination.

That's 35 words, as opposed to 39 in your version and 38 in the existing lede. See how much fun editing can be? Daniel Case (talk) 04:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, there's more serious problem, Cerenok, that you are continuing to revert the portion of the article that has been disputed, and without making any attempt at discussion with me or anyone else, despite our attempts to do so with you, and without any edit summary or any word as to your rationale. One of your four sock puppets was already blocked previously. If you continue in behavior such as this, your username account will be blocked as well, as will any other account you attempt to use to disrupt Wikipedia. Nightscream (talk) 09:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Protected[edit]

I've protected this page due to edit warring. Everyone reverting should please stop reverting each other and please discuss the proposed changes here on the talk page, in order to hopefully come to a consensus. I would like to remove protection as soon as possible. When that happens, if the edit warring continues, blocks will likely be handed out. - jc37 04:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Link to Brat Pack[edit]

The reference to the Daily Telegraph, the author erroneously linked Jennifer Grey to the Brat Pack. American Flyers, the film that was referenced, was not a core Brat Pack film. The only reference cited was either American Flyers, or Red Dawn. Red Dawn, starring a few peripheral members of the Brat Pack, is not considered a Brat Pack film. Nathraq (talk) 18:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a secondary source that backs up your claim?
Also, just so you know, when a source is cited more than once in an article, it usually employs the ref name tag, so that the source can be cited again elsewhere in the article, which was the case with the Daily Telegraph story that you removed. Removing the source for one passage, while leaving in the secondary ref name tag for a latter one, causes a citation error to occur in the References section, which you can see here. Sometimes a bot will rescue the orphaned ref, but I just thought I'd let you know for future reference. :-) Nightscream (talk) 20:59, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are many sources listing the Brat Pack and their members and peripherals. None list Jennifer Grey. New Yorker Magazine Article from 1985 is one source, in addition to an article in People Magazine from 1999 found here People Magazine Article on brat Pack. Not a slight against Ms. Grey, just maintaining conformity. The Telegraph article is the single source that has listed Jennifer Grey as a Pack member, and I have noticed that some fan sites have picked up on that. As far as magazine articles from the 80s until the present, I can not find one that lists Ms. Grey.

I missed the orphaned ref, thanks for catching it.Nathraq (talk) 02:23, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the Daily Telegraph not sufficient? You cannot assume that all sources will list every single member. If that were the case, then you'd have to disqualify the New York Magazine story that you yourself linked to above, since they make no mention of Ally Sheedy, Anthony Michael Hall or Andrew McCarthy. (Clearly, they're biased against people whose name begins with the letter A.) Seriously, though, magazine articles are not exhaustive indexes or encyclopedias. If we can agree that a given source like New York Magazine may not mention every member, then it can be concluded that not mentioning a member or members cannot be evidence that that person isn't one. Therefore, the fact that some sources do not mention Grey cannot be taken as evidence that she is not one if another sources indicates that she is. To say that well, The Telegraph is wrong, without firm evidence to that effect, would be the inverse equivalent of OR (omitting information based on personal knowledge or opinion, as opposed to including information based on personal knowledge or opinion). Nightscream (talk) 03:23, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I should have rephrased my statement... The Daily Telegraph was the only source that has ever included Ms. Grey as a Pack member. While the New Yorker may have omitted some of the other Pack members, there are enough sources that have Sheedy, Hall and McCarthy listed as such. We can say the Telegraph was wrong, as there is absolutely no other source, article or interview that has listed Ms. Grey as a member. Maybe if we lucky, we can get Ms. Grey to comment on this matter herself :). Peace Nathraq (talk) 13:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We can say the Telegraph was wrong, but we cannot base an removal of that information on what we say, since that's [[WP:|synthesis]], a form of OR.
Yeah, getting her to comment, or looking for a secondary source that addresses it, would allow us to remove the material from the article. But without such a source, it would be inappropriate to do so. Nightscream (talk) 13:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jennifer Grey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jennifer Grey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:50, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Birthplace[edit]

Recent editings (July 2021), and other sources (some other Wikipedia languages) indicate that Jennifer Grey's birth place is not New York City, but Los Angeles County. It was reverted because the source (FamilySearch) was not accessible without signing up.

However this is a public information that can be found freely, here is an accessible link: https://www.californiabirthindex.org/birth/jennifer_grey_born_1960_7251195

It has the exact date of birth (March 26 1960) and the name of the mother (Wilder) matches, and is indeed in Los Angeles County. All sources stating New York City as place of birth might be taking the information from this Wikipedia page, so unless there is a more reliable source, it seems more accurate to set Los Angeles County as the birth place, with the proper source for the information. Grimko (talk) 20:27, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Grimko: Hi, Grimko.
First, new sections/messages go at the bottom of the page, not the top. I've moved this discussion to the bottom for this reason.
Regarding Grey's birthdate, Wikipedia requires this type of information to be supported by citations of secondary sources.
Regarding the public records, WP:BLPPRIMARY states:
"Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses. Where primary-source material has been discussed by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to rely on it to augment the secondary source, subject to the restrictions of this policy, no original research, and the other sourcing policies."
Other Wikipedia articles cannot be used as sources, since that is circular sourcing, as explained at WP:CIRCULAR. But if secondary sources can be found that support this, and can be shown to be more reliable than the sources currently in the article that indicate New York City as her birthplace, then we can change it. And if one source or set of sources cannot be shown to be more reliable or authoritative than the other, then the article can simply note that there is disagreement among the different sources.
I did a cursory Google search just now, using a few different variations of search terms, and found two secondary sources, generally considered reliable, and they both indicate New York as her birth place: Biography.com and TV Guide. I could not find any indicating Los Angeles. But again, if you or anyone else can find them, we can then discuss it here. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jennifer_Grey&oldid=1207448097"