→Recent edits: re |
Flyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs) Combined sections. |
||
Line 108: | Line 108: | ||
:I looked at the site in question (hollywoodlife.com), and I could find nothing about any sort of editorial oversight in their TOS. Maybe I missed it, but if you find anything, let me know and I might change my mind. [[User:Nymf|Nymf]] ([[User talk:Nymf|talk]]) 07:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
:I looked at the site in question (hollywoodlife.com), and I could find nothing about any sort of editorial oversight in their TOS. Maybe I missed it, but if you find anything, let me know and I might change my mind. [[User:Nymf|Nymf]] ([[User talk:Nymf|talk]]) 07:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
==Recent edits== |
|||
Hello, {{ping|Flyer22}} and {{ping|Nymf}}! I have a question. Maybe my first source was unreliable, but why my second? Even though she listed at 163 cm by multiple sites, her [http://www.megan-fox.com/meganfox/ official website] has her at 165 cm. Is her website reliable? Most models have their height stated in their article, so I'm wondering if her [http://www.megan-fox.com/meganfox/ official website] is okay. [[User:GoldenBoy25|GoldenBoy25]] ([[User talk:GoldenBoy25|talk]]) 07:28, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, {{ping|Flyer22}} and {{ping|Nymf}}! I have a question. Maybe my first source was unreliable, but why my second? Even though she listed at 163 cm by multiple sites, her [http://www.megan-fox.com/meganfox/ official website] has her at 165 cm. Is her website reliable? Most models have their height stated in their article, so I'm wondering if her [http://www.megan-fox.com/meganfox/ official website] is okay. [[User:GoldenBoy25|GoldenBoy25]] ([[User talk:GoldenBoy25|talk]]) 07:28, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
:megan-fox.com is not her official website; see at the very bottom where it says "unofficial fansite and has no affiliation with Megan Fox herself". As for the other source, see the section above. [[User:Nymf|Nymf]] ([[User talk:Nymf|talk]]) 07:42, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
:megan-fox.com is not her official website; see at the very bottom where it says "unofficial fansite and has no affiliation with Megan Fox herself". As for the other source, see the section above. [[User:Nymf|Nymf]] ([[User talk:Nymf|talk]]) 07:42, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:53, 13 January 2015
Megan Fox was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
why is she tagged as being native american on the bottom of the page
when the wikip age said she on;y had euorpean ancestry
Someone put this in the page its true
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1645154/20100805/eminem.jhtml
it shows how she was in Eminem's "Love the Way You Lie" music video.
Transformer PC stunt
Is it a coincidence that Fox and her love interest - the lead actor with an unpronounceable name - in the first transformers movies should both be part "Native American". Was the producer trying to send some PC message?
Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2014
Request for editing her 'early life', specifically her ancestry Megän Fox is also 1/256th Powhatan Native AMerican, as she herself claims (source: http://ethnicelebs.com/megan-fox). Sfentami (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not done: Source, which is not reliable, says
"possibly 1/256th Powhatan Native American"
. But even with some good sources I doubt there will be consensus to mention 0.4% of an individual's ancestry. Sam Sing! 09:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2014
Please have me edit Megan Fox. Eiji Mendoza And Megan Fox retired from modeling in 2009 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.49.156.179 (talk) 17:09, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Personal life section
SNUGGUMS, with this edit, you re-added the "overly detailed" tag to the Personal life section, stating, "it's looking better, but still is bloated- just about everything except for family affiliations and bisexuality is pure fluff." This is after I significantly cut the section down after you first placed the "overly detailed" tag on it; I'm clarifying here on the talk page that that's what you mean by "looking better." Currently, the Personal life section has five paragraphs, and includes the type of material that is commonly a part of Personal life sections, including in WP:Good articles and WP:Featured articles. Will you clarify what you feel is "pure fluff"? I don't consider Fox's statements on drugs (including that she's tried them), men and socializing to be pure fluff. The same goes for mentioning her brachydactyly (clubbed thumbs), that she has obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), insecurities, low self-esteem and has engaged in self-harming. Also keep in mind that some of these comments, such as how she feels about men, have gotten significant press; part of Fox's WP:Notability is because of the "crazy things" she says. Religion is also very important to people, so I didn't cut her religious commentary. Flyer22 (talk) 19:11, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- Point-by-point:
- Not sure why drugs would be needed in a page unless the person has gotten into legal issues and/or had addiction problems (including death from drugs)
- I don't know how in the world it would matter what age-range of men she dislikes, how non-social she is, or why she distrusts women (this also seems to be contradicted by the statement of bisexuality)
- Clubbed thumbs, on the fence with this one
- OCD is completely unnecessary- tons of people have it
- Insecurities- many people also have these, not sure what value it adds to include this
- Self-harm, no big problem with inclusion
- Fear of flying and Britney Spears songs: pure trivia
- It's not so much the religious affiliation as it is the idea of "keep[ing] from going the same route as Marilyn Monroe, Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears" that is really unneeded (and doesn't have very good tone to begin with).
- A big problem with "Personal life" sections is that they can become extremely bloated with unnecessary detail and gossip. In many cases, particularly for those who have only had few high-profile relationships and/or said partners were integrated into one's career, it's better to integrate such detail into a "life and career" section. This article does need work outside of that section, but those bits aren't helping it. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:28, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- I can agree to remove the drug aspect; the person who included it must have included it because Fox supports the legalization of marijuana, which, of course, got publicity.
- I cannot agree with removing the bit about her general dislike of men (I'm not stating that I think we should include all of it, but rather a shorter version of it); this is because it has been emphasized not only by the media, but by her (including how easy she thinks it is to manipulate men, as noted by the bisexuality paragraph). Another reason I also object to removing it is because it is a contrast to the fact that the vast majority of her fans, as noted by WP:Reliable sources, are men. The "distrust and dislike of all men" aspect does not contradict her bisexuality at all, unless one argues the point that she is married to a man (but then again, that's why I used the word general); she tells us, as shown in the bisexuality paragraph, "I have no question in my mind about being bisexual. But I'm also a hypocrite: I would never date a girl who was bisexual, because that means they also sleep with men, and men are so dirty that I'd never want to sleep with a girl who had slept with a man." Her general dislike of men is very clear by that comment. If you mean the "distrust of women" part is contradicted by her bisexuality, I don't see how, and she is specifically speaking of women in the acting industry by commenting on that distrust; but I don't mind if we remove the "distrust of women" part. And as for the other social aspects... Noting that she is basically anti-social -- for example, that she generally does not go out and party and would rather avoid people -- and that she has only had sex with two people is very relevant; this is because, like Fox and the WP:Reliable sources on those matters state, people think that she is outgoing and has had sex with a lot of people; that is part of the public's perception of her. However, it seems like that material belongs in the Personal life section instead of in the Image section.
- The only valid reason I can see for not mentioning her clubbed thumbs is that, despite WP:Reliable sources stating that she has them, and many people stating it from looking at photos showing her thumbs, it doesn't seem that she is on record as confirming this. That's why I had an issue with the clubbed thumbs aspect being added when it was added.
- Stating that we shouldn't include mention of her OCD because a lot of people have it is similar to stating that we shouldn't include cancer material because a lot of people have it. Sure, cancer is deadly (OCD has been at times as well), but both of these are illnesses. Are you sure you are not confusing obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) with obsessive–compulsive personality disorder (OCPD)? Maybe she is as well. But either way, both of these are disorders, and a person's disorders are usually mentioned in their Personal life section. OCD is not as common as you are making it out to be. For example, the Epidemiology section of the Obsessive–compulsive disorder article currently states, with a WP:MEDRS-compliant source, "OCD occurs in between 1 to 3% of children and adults."
- Her insecurities are relevant as part of the self-harming and low self-esteem mentions. I don't see why the self-harming aspect, which is another major psychological issue, and has received significant discussion regarding her, should not be mentioned. We also note Angelina Jolie's self-harm issues, but that's in Jolie's Early life and family section, which also notes her depression and use of drugs. And it's there, instead of in her Personal life section, because it wouldn't fit in the Personal life section with the way that article is set up. And, of course, that article addresses Jolie's insecurities. Another thing to keep in mind is that people often don't think of beautiful women as having such issues, which the sources on these matters note.
- I can agree to remove to the "fear of flying and Britney Spears" portion.
- I can agree to remove the "keep[ing] from going the same route as Marilyn Monroe, Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears" portion.
- As for having a "life and career" section, as you likely know, we generally do that with articles about musical artists...not with articles about actors/actresses; I discussed that before; see Talk:Angelina Jolie/Archive 10#'Success' headings if you haven't already. I wouldn't prefer the "life and career" setup for the Megan Fox article. Flyer22 (talk) 20:28, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- Update: As seen here, here, and here, I edited the section down, keeping our above comments in mind. For example, I tied the "[public thinks] that she is outgoing and has had sex with a lot of people" aspect into her thoughts on men and the fact that she is antisocial; in this The Daily Telegraph source, she uses the exact word antisocial. I also added a comment on her feelings about having OCD. People's feelings on relationships, whether or not they are social or antisocial (or something in between), and information about their psychological issues...especially mental disorders...are common additions to their Wikipedia articles. Whether in the Early life section and/or the Personal life section. And whether or not it is a WP:Good article, WP:Featured article or a lower-class article. I don't see why these aspects should not be included in the Megan Fox article, especially given the media attention these matters have received. If there is room for mention of people's vegetarian or vegan diets in their Personal life sections, as is commonly seen on Wikipedia, there is room for these matters as well. Flyer22 (talk) 14:41, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
With this edit, I reverted GoldenBoy25 (talk · contribs)...in part because celebie.com is not a WP:Reliable source. And with this edit, Nymf reverted him because he used hollywoodlife.com (Hollywood Life) as a source. I would have reverted GoldenBoy25 again, before Nymf, but, since Hollywood Life redirects to the Movieline article (and is a part of that company) and Movieline is a WP:Reliable source, I'm confused as to whether Hollywood Life is a WP:Reliable source. Flyer22 (talk) 07:03, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- I looked at the site in question (hollywoodlife.com), and I could find nothing about any sort of editorial oversight in their TOS. Maybe I missed it, but if you find anything, let me know and I might change my mind. Nymf (talk) 07:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, @Flyer22: and @Nymf:! I have a question. Maybe my first source was unreliable, but why my second? Even though she listed at 163 cm by multiple sites, her official website has her at 165 cm. Is her website reliable? Most models have their height stated in their article, so I'm wondering if her official website is okay. GoldenBoy25 (talk) 07:28, 13 January 2015 (UTC)