Talk:Marisa Tomei/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Tuscan

Marisa Tomei is not an Albanian nor is she a Sicilian. She has repeatedly said that her ancestry is from Tuscany in Italy. Tomei is a Tuscan name. Supercool Dude 03:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

mother comes from Messina, Sicily, father from Lucca, Tuscany...

She has dual citizenship between America and Italy. She sometimes travels under the Italian passport.

Does she sometimes not travel under her American passport? Why is this not worthy of note? TharkunColl 23:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

  • if she visits Europe, with an european passport she gets through customs quicker...

Why is it an urban legend?

i was reading the urban ledgend category, and i noticed that this
is an urban ledgend why?

I suspect it's the urban legend that her name was called for the Oscar when it was not really her who had won. http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/tomei.asp is the debunking of the urban legend that Snopes.com did. KyleGoetz 19:49, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Italian-American, or Albanian-American?

In the body of the article, it says that Marisa is an Italian-American. Yet, this article is also in the Category of "Albanian-Americans". Which is it? -- Jalabi99 09:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Every source i've read says she's Italian and/or Sicilian & Guyanese, but someone keeps adding her to the Albanian category. I asked the person to come to the talk page to provide a source. Crumbsucker 12:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
That's what I'd like to know, the only places which claim her "Albanian" are few Albanian run sites, nothing independently confirmed and she herself never said she was of Albanian origin in any of her interviews. This same person has been adding several Americans to the Albanian category[1] with no proof to back it up. I'm curious to know where is the proof that Alan Shepard, Connie Francis, Lee Elia, William G. Gregory, Donald Lambro, Ty Treadway are of Albanian or Arberesh, the bases on making them "Albanian", origins cause I looked and nowhere do any of these people make such claims. I also would like to know how Sandra Bullock, John Cena, Kemal Atatürk and of all people Benito Mussolini one of the biggest promoters of fascism opressors of Arberesh in Italy and who sought to dominate Albania, are considered "Albanian". Go figure. [2] ~Mallaccaos, 4 May 2006

The edit on 26 Aug 2007 claims her father is Lebanese, which would make her Lebanese-Italian American. I think the edit is bogus.71.159.130.211 00:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)unsigned

Sweetheart

I removed the following unsourced statement. "The love of her life still remains to this day her college sweet heart Mark Segal from Philadelphia." Smylere Snape 23:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Photos

An article on an actor or actress really ought to have a photo.

Holy jeeze! Can we put any OTHER picture up? That one looks horrible! - W31RD0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.40.31 (talk) 15:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: IMDb

Wikipedia:Citing IMDb -- which is an essay and not a policy guideline -- suggests we can cite certain things from IMDb, including cast lists from released films.

An uncredited role would not be in the film's cast list, so information about that in IMDb could not have come from the film but from a user. In cases of uncredited-role claims, we need to seek independent confirmation, particularly for claims about living persons. -- 207.237.223.118 (talk) 19:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

As I explained to you on your talk page, no, it isn't necessary to ask for citations for a film role listed as uncredited on IMDb. A great deal of specific information, regarding the particulars of a film itself, are vetted, which means they are confirmed through IMDb employees. Because the site has opened a lot of aspects for user submission does not mean the specifics of a film is not confirmed. It's a completely unnecessary thing to ask for confirmation for another source for a film role listed on IMDb. If you will note on the essay you found, it says specifically IMDb content suitable for Wikipedia: 2. Released films only: Sections such as the cast list, character names, the crew lists, release dates, company credits, awards, soundtrack listing, filming locations, technical specs, alternate titles, running times, and rating certifications. I've been on Wikipedia now for nearly 3 years, I've made well over 20000 edits and work almost exclusively on film and actor articles. Take my word on this. You do not need to ask for a cite for an uncredited role listed on IMDb. Because it was not in the actual credits of the film does not mean the role was not vetted by IMDb. You are mis-analyzing the comment on IMDb usage. It is absolutely acceptable for film credits. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate that you've been on Wikipedia for years. So have I; only the IP is relatively new, after a move.
Wikipedia considers a controversial source -- and I would, in all collaborative honesty, like your take on whether it has been controversial or not -- but IMDb is not an unimpeachable Bible. Therefore, I'm surprised and confounded at why any editor would deliberately want to block another editor from asking for a more reliable source. -- 207.237.223.118 (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
You've been told now by three different editors - IMDb is a reliable source for film roles. Accept it. LaVidaLoca (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Indeed... useful for WP:Verification of certain facts, but but not for notability. They have a vetting process, and like all sources will make corrections if a piece of information they publish is shown to be incorrect... just as does the Washington Post or New York Times. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding my edits

1. switching the picture. i think most people will agree that she looks better in the oscar photo. not only is it more recent, but she is smiling unlike the unflattering photo that currently shows.

2. in the career section, i am entering informaion about a few films. (FYI lavidavoca, using the phrase "star vehicle" is not POV, it is common knowledge. i will give a source to prove you wrong). i also changed the order of a few things. it mentions her 2000 film "what women want" at the top then mentions an SNL appearance six years earlier below that. everything flows better if it is in chronological order rather than being scattered all over the article.Excuseme99 (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Whether an image is unflattering or not is often a POV point, and in this case, more than one person has disagreed with you. The 2008 photo is not unflattering, there is no rule dictating that the Oscar picture be the one used. Both are free-use images, both were taken within a few months of each other and at least the dress fits well in the David Shankbone photo. Meanwhile, you've removed citations, invalidated others by introducing errors to them, put in less reliable ones that are improperly formatted and are edit warring to force your version through over the objections of more than one editor. Just because you post a note on this page that only reiterates that you're reverting back does not mean you have discussed it with editors who have already disagreed with your changes. Nothing has been discussed, nothing has been worked through, at no place has a consensus occurred to use the version you keep sticking in. This isn't what discussing disagreements is, this is just another way you've found to edit war. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Academy Award controversy

I'm seeing the edit war regarding this section. I actually came to this article expecting to find something about it. Can we put it back with the {{Refimprove|section}} until someone finds the sources? The ShadowSkull 20:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Factually, no. The problem is that all of it violates WP:BLP and therefore cannot remain without very strong reliable sources. To that, it isn't edit warring, it is a strong adherence to policy governing biographies of living persons. It falls entirely on the person who adds content to support it verifiably and reliably. There are few other policies that are more critical on WP. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Understood, I googled for references and also removed the arbitrary (i.e. personal POV) statements. The ShadowSkull 13:10, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Found the Roger Ebert articles about this rumor. I think that's a good enough source. JJ Georges (talk) 11:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't believe this content belongs here. First of all, it discusses a rumor that was spread around. Second the link you added to Ebert's column comes up to a generic page. Thirdly, it occupies nearly 2500 kb of content, which is entirely undue weight to what is essentially an untruth. Fourthly, it conceivably is a libel issue in regard to what it claims about Reed. This needs to be removed. Fifthly, as Tomei said, it extremely hurtful, so why would we dedicate 1/7 of the article to this misadventure? Sara's Song (talk) 11:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, it might be too long, but since the rumor was admittedly hurtful to her career, it should be mentioned, especially since it apparently still needs to be debunked. The fact that Roger Ebert mentions this as an ever-recurring rumor proves that it did have some importance, however negative. I think any serious article about Ms Tomei should mention that rumor, if only to disprove it. I put the text back, and made it notably shorter, so it would not have "undue weight". I do not think this is a libel issue to say that Mr Reed started the rumor, since he apparently did. The fact that Roger Ebert's article claiming this is still online proves that Mr Reed has not sued Mr Ebert, so the information is apparenly genuine. Also, the Ebert pages are not "generic" at all : just take a look. JJ Georges (talk) 13:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
The fact that Ebert was not sued has nothing to do with us adding content that tends to smear another person, based on a rumor. Secondly, in your edit summary you stated: "pointless. It did hurt her career, so it should me mentioned". Please elaborate how that is to justify your revert. You actually added "She would go on to receive critical acclaim and respect for future performances in Unhook the Stars, Alfie and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead and received Academy Award nominations for In the Bedroom and The Wrestler.", so I'm wondering just how her career was hurt. And you did not answer why, since Tomei has said this is hurtful, would we want to remind her of that? Sara's Song (talk) 23:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
If Ms Tomei says that the rumor was "hurtful" to some degree (either personally, professionally, or both), then it must have been. The fact that she did receive nominations (I did not write this originally, I just put it back) after this "controversy" proves, if necessary, that she is capable of quality work and that her career has recovered. So mentioning this notable rumor, which has been reported in several medias and books, is not detrimental at all to Ms Tomei's reputation : on the contrary, it actually helps debunking it by providing several links explaining how and why there was nothing true about it. As for the "would we want to remind her of that", well I don't see the point. This article is not intended for the personal use of Ms Tomei and, as stated before, it is not defamatory at all; it is meant to be "encyclopedic", so it should contain as much information as possible for the readers interested in the subject. Since this rumor has done some damage to Ms Tomei's reputation, then it should be mentioned, with all the necessary information about its lack of veracity (while avoiding, I'll agree on that, to give it "undue weight"). You have three book references, one of which mentions an article in The Hollywood reporter about the subject, and two mentions by a major columnist : this proves without question that this rumor - however unfortunate - is notable and still needs debunking. Not mentioning it would be pointless and might actually do more harm than good, as some people would believe that wikipedia is "censoring the facts", or whatever. JJ Georges (talk) 23:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

And precisely how did this hurt her reputation? You've already not answered how this hurt her career. Did she lose roles? If so, what? Do directors balk at hiring her because Rex Reed said Jack Palance read the wrong name? How was she personally harmed by this? Also, just so you know, this has been in the article in the past and was removed. Sara's Song (talk) 00:31, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Clearly debunked Rumours and urban Legends have no place in biographical articles, ths is not a gossip tabloid. andi064 T . C 04:26, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
This is idiotic. Said rumor is significantly enduring (I read it again some months ago in a magazine, which shows that lazy journalists are still repeating the "Jack Palance read out the wrong name" rumor without double-checking the facts : that's how it hurt her career.) so it should be mentioned.This article is meant to present complete information about its subject, not to be a piece of feelgood journalism intended for Ms Tomei's personal enjoyment. Also, I don't give a damn about someone having removed it before, as wikipedia articles are meant to evolve. Sorry, but I don't see the point in arguing over this anymore. If this article can help people disprove this rumor by presenting links to all the evidence that the award was rightfully hers, then it can be more useful than pointlessly ignoring the issue. This is certainly more significant - however unfairly - to her public image than the fact that she refused to perform a sketch on Saturday Night Live. JJ Georges (talk) 07:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
I would remind you to keep a civil tongue here. Characterizing opposing opinions as idiotic and pronouncing what you don't give a damn about is not acceptable conduct. You have been asked TWICE to give examples of how this hurt Tomei's career and have been asked how it hurt her reputation. You have twice failed to elaborate on those statements. Your insertion has been twice removed by different editors. Continuing to return this repeatedly is not acceptable. I think it is time to open a request for comments about this and gauge the overall community consensus for including what amounts to bad faith rumours about whether or not this belongs, since you continue to forge ahead and repeatedly return it. Sara's Song (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
As this article is on my watchlist, I've been watching this argument for a while. Yes, let's do that - get

that ever-popular vote for consensus going. I don't thing there's danger of anyone here canvassing or "stacking the deck", is there...? --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 21:46, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

This is nonsense. Ms Tomei called the rumor hurtful (without specifying if it was personally of professionally hurtful) AND the Time article suggested that this may have played a role in her career being relatively low-profile in the few following years. I think all possible arguments have been given about this rumor being somewhat important - although detrimental for a time - about Ms Tomei's public image. I also think that it's blindingly obvious that my goal is not to slander Ms Tomei, but to give complete information about her, which is what an "encyclopedic" article is supposedly about. Now, having a life of my own, I won't waste any more time arguing about this. Especially with a user who is now apparently blocked for sockpuppetry. JJ Georges (talk) 08:55, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
The mere idea of such a vote is utterly useless, and I seriously think it should be erased from this talk page. JJ Georges (talk) 10:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Estragons (talk • contribs)

Academy Award "Controversy" consensus

Lets make the consensus absolute and totally visable. Discuss in thread above then !Vote here(IPs and non auto confirmed users will not be counted).

"The Jack Palance Oscar urban legend should or should not be included in Ms Tomei's article?" !Vote Include or Exclude (or words to that effect) poll runs for 7 day. andi064 T . C 10:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

!Votes

  • Exclude - andi064 T . C 10:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Include This "controversy" over a very notable controversy is utterly ludicrous, to say the least. The fact that it was important to the public image of the article's subject is now amply referenced. Plus, the fact that this "vote" was initially proposed by a sockpuppet adds to its ridiculousness. Actually, I think this vote is useless and should be erased altogether, as it is just a waste of time. I don't even think such a vote for "consensus" is valid at all. JJ Georges (talk) 10:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Exclude Obvious WP:BLP Gossip and urban legends no matter how well sourced remains just that.. gossip. Estragons (talk) 10:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Include a *minor reference* to it. It *was* gossip, it *was* a rumor, however it was notable gossip and rumor - very well known. It deserves a bit of a mention because of its widespread notability but also to prevent the casual passerby from adding it in the future and causing exactly *this* from occuring again. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 18:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Opinions

The mere idea of such a vote is utterly useless, and I seriously think it should be erased from this talk page. JJ Georges (talk) 10:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

please see Wikipedia:Consensus, this is how it is done on all other disputes such as WP:AFDif you dont like the process or the result take it to arbitration once it is completed. In the mean time please stop interfering with the consensus building process. Estragons (talk) 11:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, IMHO this method is crap. Voting for consensus is moronic. This is my opinion, so just live with it. As for Sara's song being a blocked sockpuppet, I didn't make this up. JJ Georges (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I believe it is a mistake to call this a "Vote". It is poll. It cannot be a 'vote', because Wikipedia is not a democracy. $0.02, Eaglizard (talk) 18:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
  • I have completely rewritten the 2 or 3 sentences in question, and I believe the current version might be more acceptable. I think it makes it quite clear that this was Reed's doing, that the rumor was false, and that Ms Tomei found it hurtful. (BTW, I would not have edited it at all if I didn't agree that it's relevant to this article.) Eaglizard (talk) 18:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Way to be bold, Eaglizard. ;-) --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 19:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Heh - lest I be accused of wikistalking or collusion, let me just point out that I did only come to this page after seeing it discussed on your talk page, SRQ. I was just curious what exactly could cause such controversy in an article about the beautiful and talented Ms Tomei! :D Of course, being a WP editor, I just had to stick in my US$0.02. Hope it helps. Eaglizard (talk) 20:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
The sockpuppet, "Sara's Song" was the one actually making the most unnecessary noise about it all. Also, check your email, please. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 21:18, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, this content warrants coverage in the article per WP:WELLKNOWN and WP:HOAX; it's well-documented in reliable sources and it's relevant to her career (as Tomei has herself said, it had a personal and professional impact). I feel a well-sourced sentence or two noting the debunked hoax is appropriate, and the current wording is fine. --Muchness (talk) 21:46, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

The current version seems perfect to me. JJ Georges (talk) 08:40, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I think it looks very good too. The previous version went into a little too much detail, this is now specific and brief. I also like that there is a link to Tomei speaking about it, although she does throw a new theory into the mix that could end up attaching itself to the myth. Rossrs (talk) 15:40, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Since a majority of users have agreed that the info is relevant, I think we can consider the argument closed. JJ Georges (talk) 08:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Equality On Trial

The Equality on Trial campaign has just released an online video featuring Tomei playing the part of one of the plaintiffs in the California Proposition 8 trial (attempting to strike down their gay marriage ban in federal courts). I don't know if this is sufficiently notable to be mentioned in the article? *Dan T.* (talk) 00:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Description of her role in The Wrestler

" In 2008, Tomei performed nude dance routines in the independent film The Wrestler opposite Mickey Rourke.[20" That's it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.249.59.152 (talk) 14:14, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Tattoo

Some Wikipedians are immensely fascinated by tattoos. Tomei has an Egyptian eye on her right foot which is relatively easy to see on occasion in her video Core and curves. Varlaam (talk) 17:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Does Seth MacFarlane not rate Marisa Tomei?

In the first episode of the second season of Family Guy ("Peter, Peter, Caviar Eater"), it is implied that Brian Griffin is responsible for the "miracle" of Marisa Tomei's Oscar. Why the dig, anyone? Surely there are many much less deserving Oscar recipients? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moletrouser (talk • contribs) 08:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Elizabeth Taylor is said to have received her Oscar as a consolation prize following a miscarriage. Varlaam (talk) 17:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

SNL and Jay Mohr

The article currently says that she didn't want to do a sketch because she didn't want to offend another actress. This is not the case. (That was the sketch that Shannon Doherty did not want to do, so as not to offend Sean Young) I have the paperback version and audio version of the book, and Jay talks about it on his podcast. In Jay's stated opinion, Marisa did not want to do the sketch with him, because he was not a cast member. He was a featured performer. He reports that her reasons for refusing to do the sketch was that it was too soon after My Cousin Vinny, and she did not want to be stereotyped.

I'd like to update the article, if no one objects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.169.131.14 (talk) 13:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Career headline

The career section has been split in half: one headline says the word "Fall" as if her career was interrupted, and the next says "Resurgence and success." There is no indication that her career has had a lapse; she has worked on at least one film 22 of the last 25 years. Thus I am trimming this distinction. The Career section will be admittedly long so it could be split again, but if so, it should have NPOV headings.Chagallophile (talk) 17:01, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Marisa Tomei. 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) 14:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marisa Tomei. 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) 02:15, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marisa Tomei. 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) 08:36, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Marisa Tomei Slaughtered her Own Lamb

Animal lover or kind she is not! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.43.191.10 (talk) 19:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

maybe she just loves lamb in a different way - like roasted... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.160 (talk) 18:09, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Marisa Tomei and Julianne Moore are cousins

Marisa Tomei and Julianne Moore are cousins as documented on Finding Your Roots with Henry Louis Gates, Jr. 96.228.47.127 (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marisa_Tomei/Archive_1&oldid=1077763213"