Talk:Russell Crowe
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Russell Crowe article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
A Very Special Person… was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 08 May 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Russell Crowe. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
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. |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
New Zealander and Australian
Why are some so quick to revert back to Crowe being a New Zealander. The man himself, has publicly stated that he identifies himself as an Australian. It is important to highlight his New Zealand heritage, but equally his Australian identity. Hence, why one of 'New Zealand-born Australian', or 'New Zealander Australian' would make far more sense. The link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdTaa_nLkok&t=12m22s
Secret Service
Crown may well have been threatened by Al Qaeda, though they made a mistake if they thought he was an American. But he would not have been protected by the US Secret Service. The SS only guards the president and top American officials. There is little to no likelihood that they would be used to guard a foreign actor. If there were government provided guards, FBI is more likely.Royalcourtier (talk) 20:09, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the challenged assertion as well as the one next to it regarding Scotland Yard. There was no supporting source at all. Elizium23 (talk) 21:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Removal of content from "Altercations and controversies"
An editor has removed a huge amount of information labeling the cuts as "not notable" and "pov". While the section is not without its problems I don't agree that making huge sweeping cuts to the section is a constructive approach to fixing it. There are a couple of issues I have:
- Removing information on the grounds it is "not notable". This is a false pretext for removing content since notability only pertains to whether an article should exist. WP:NOTEWORTHY specifically states that notability criteria does not apply to article content.
- Secondly, removing content on the grounds it is not neutral is not a constructive way to fixing the problems. If something is not neutral then it can usually be fixed with a re-write, or by adding more content to balance the WP:NPOV concerns.
I suggest the following preliminary steps to address the problems with the section:
- Remove content that is a direct BLP concern only i.e. if the content is potentially libelous.
- If something is not sourced then tag it or remove it at your own discretion.
- If a claim is attributed to a source that you believe does not meet the criteria for WP:RS then either find an alternative source or tag it.
- If something is not neutral worded, then try and re-write it so it is or otherwise tag it.
Bearing these concerns in mind I am going to restore the content since it has been incorrectly removed under one criterion that does not apply, and no effort has been made to address the second problem constructively. Removing huge amounts of sourced information under sweeping statements looks like a whitewash at best and is disruptive at worst. Betty Logan (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
→ This section keeps getting removed. Suggest maybe an edit lock as it is probably a concerted effort at controlling image as he's currently releasing his editorial debut. Section restored again, as well as added recent controversy re "actresses acting their age". This is his own words, so would be hard to remove under a POV clause. Erik Veland (talk) 12:26, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
I suggest that Crowes controversial and aggressive public participation in circumcision debate is a notable part of his image especially given the long duration of his participation and its obvious newsworthiness in publications with large distribution e.g. Crowe uses his twitter account to enter controversial public debates on a range of issues, such as his opposition to circumcision.[1][2] Diggers2004 (talk) 03:35, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- Most celebrities have Twitter accounts, and most celebrities have opinions on a wide range of topics, but there is a substantial difference between someone just expressing a viewpoint and somebody legitimately taking part in a debate i.e. Liz Taylor and AIDS, Angelina Jolie and sexual violence in war zones etc. If he has engaged in activism against circumcision then I agree his views on the subject would be relevant then, but they should be framed within the context of that debate. You have to bear in mind that he is ultimately only notable for his work related to film, and trivial mentions of his opinions are pursuant to that. Betty Logan (talk) 16:30, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- I see the distinction. Thanks Diggers2004 (talk) 01:38, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- ^ "Russell Crowe tweets in support of mother trying to stop circumcision of son". http://www.news.com.au. Herald-Sun (News Corp). Retrieved 13 November 2014.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help)|website=
- ^ "Russell Crowe sorry for anti-circumcision tweets?". International Business Times . 13 June 2011. Retrieved 14 June 2011.
{{cite news}}
: line feed character in|newspaper=
at position 31 (help)
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- High-importance biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- Actors and filmmakers work group articles
- B-Class biography (musicians) articles
- Low-importance biography (musicians) articles
- Musicians work group articles
- B-Class biography (sports and games) articles
- Low-importance biography (sports and games) articles
- Sports and games work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Australia articles
- High-importance Australia articles
- B-Class New South Wales articles
- Low-importance New South Wales articles
- WikiProject New South Wales articles
- B-Class Queensland articles
- Low-importance Queensland articles
- WikiProject Queensland articles
- B-Class Sydney articles
- Low-importance Sydney articles
- WikiProject Sydney articles
- B-Class Australian music articles
- Low-importance Australian music articles
- WikiProject Australian music articles
- WikiProject Australia articles
- B-Class New Zealand articles
- Low-importance New Zealand articles
- B-Class New Zealand music articles
- Low-importance New Zealand music articles
- B-Class Māori articles
- Low-importance Māori articles
- WikiProject New Zealand articles