Talk:Zendaya/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Relationship with Tom Holland

About the GQ source persistently used to back a relationship between Zendaya and Tom Holland: It makes no direct mention that the two are together and it's considered WP:SYNTH to make any assumption that they are thru that source. Example: And so it was this summer [2021], when pictures emerged in the tabloid press of Holland and Zendaya in a car in L.A., kissing. It makes mention that tabloids are reporting this, clearly gossip fodder and tabloids are usually unreliable sources. Another: (Page Six: "Zendaya, Tom Holland finally confirm they’re dating with steamy car makeout." As if they had any choice.) Clearly taken from Page Six, which is a New York Post publication, and an unreliable source per WP:RSP. And one more: Holland's and Zendaya's fans had long obsessed over whether the pair were together (“tom holland and zendaya flirting for 8 minutes straight”: 1.5 million views). Nothing more than speculation and seeing it from the fans' perspective.

This is also a matter of the two (Holland, at least, going further into the paragraph I've been quoting from) wanting to keep this private, and so should we. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

References

I agree. Also the interview was mostly from Holland and that part is WP:ABOUTSELF where we might use what he says in his own article but not in articles about other people. Still they both seem to want to keep whatever sort of relationship they have private and it is mostly fan speculation as to whether or not it is long term romantic. Nothing close to supporting a domestic partnership type relationship. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

 Administrator note Hi all. The article is protected for 3 days to stop the current spate of unsourced additions. Apologies to anyone who had a legitimate well-sourced edit to make: feel free to add those here on the talkpage with an edit-request flag. Contributors wanting to add random gossip on the article subject's relationship status must remember to include reliable sources that actually confirm the edit they wish to make. Unsourced or poorly sourced material in this biography of a living person will continue to be removed and unfortunately the page will continue to be protected. -- Euryalus (talk) 22:51, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Adding that on reflection have reduced this to a month of extended confirmed. -- Euryalus (talk) 05:43, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

so we cant even comment? Snarevox (talk) 13:57, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I see, im trying to add a link to this discussion and it keeps erroring. I thought it was due to the extended protection status. I apologize. I am unsure as to why Im not able to include the link. Snarevox (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

[1] Snarevox (talk) 14:05, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Im trying to post the link about Tom Holland's desire to become a father as I feel it is relevant to this discussion. I am still learning. Here is the link:

www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/benhenry/zendaya-tom-holland-spider-man-no-way-home-tribute Snarevox (talk) 14:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/benhenry/zendaya-tom-holland-spider-man-no-way-home-tribute Snarevox (talk) 14:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

@Snarevox: How is it relevant? The source does mention that Holland is Zendaya's boyfriend, and while Holland is wanting to start a family, he isn't saying whether it will include Zendaya. This is one reason why we need to be very careful about including anything about relationships, or future plans stemming from them, in a BLP article, especially if they're in the just dating phase - they may not last. Wikipedia is not a tabloid. Such information needs to be published in multiple, reliable, independent, high quality sources per WP:BLP policies. Even then, we should avoid reporting about this at the current stage. Their relationship may become more notable if they become engaged, and they make that public for high quality sources to report. (Distinguishing this from tabloids taking pictures of them together, even with their consent, when they want to keep it on the down low.) MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:54, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

no offence but you're being a bit goofy. Almost every celebrity on wikipedia has who they are dating in their personal life section even if they are not engaged. I doubt all of them came right out to say "this is my boyfriend." Heck Tom Holland's page says he is dating Zendaya lmao. 216.181.10.71 (talk) 05:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

i dont know..i guess if i were to bring up wanting to start a family while im sitting next to my girlfriend, i would hope for my own sake that its well implied that she would be the second party involved and to be sure i would never bring such a thing up in her company if i intended it to be with anyone else...i dont know maybe im just weird. i didnt say the information was grounds to run with the story and publish a page, i simply said i thought it was relevant to the discussion. because it kinda is. sorry if i went afoul of some sacred etiquette. i was just sharing something that hadnt been mentioned, and i do understand the need for multiple sources but if someone says something in an on camera interview, i feel like it should count for something a bit greater than hearsay. Snarevox (talk) 19:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

    glad to see i wasnt wrong per se. Snarevox (talk) 14:03, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

why the goofy box around the reply? Snarevox (talk) 14:04, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

    is it because i indented 5 spaces? Snarevox (talk) 14:04, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@Snarevox: Yes, it's because you added spaces. Though what people do use might not technically be valid HTML, the way people indent on talk pages is to preface their line with one or more colons(:). Adding a leading space to a line will style it like that--sort of like preformatting except it doesn't escape wiki markup in other ways. It's a pretty basic thing to know about wikitext if in part because it's the first mistake someone might make with wikitext that produces a somewhat baffling effect where the cause isn't immediately obvious. To the content of your messages, it sounds like the rationales you're bringing forth here are original research; you're making assumptions and drawing conclusions based on what you think sources are implying versus what they actually say. (This isn't an admonishment so much as linking you with some information that might make clear why that sort of thing might not be as relevant as it seems in this discussion. :P) - Purplewowies (talk) 00:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 December 2021

Personal life

As of December 2021, Zendaya is in a relationship with British actor, and her Spider-Man star, Tom Holland. Lukemegner (talk) 10:01, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Please note, Wikipedia is not a newspaper and we do not add gossips to Wikipedia articles. Once their relationship is formally confirmed, you're welcome to make a new edit request. Please see WP:NOTNEWS

TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 22:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 December 2021

change the mentioning of her appearances in "Spiderman Homecoming and its sequels" in the introduction to "the MCU Spiderman Trilogy", with the option of listing the films afterwards at the editor's discretion. Deathbydeathstroke (talk) 00:53, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Zendaya as of right now still technically stars in the sequels of Spider-Man: Homecoming, I see no reason to change the wording at this time. DrPepperG (talk) 22:40, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 January 2022

Tom and Zendaya are dating. I feel like that’s something you should add. 8.48.249.67 (talk) 00:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Adding birth year in short description

I've come across this a few times now, and have reverted them all. WP:SDDATES says: The inclusion of a date or date range is encouraged where it would improve the short description as a disambiguation, or enhance it as a descriptive annotation. (emphasis mine) I don't see the birth year inclusion as a need to disambiguate this actress in Wikipedia, or to further describe her, but I might not be seeing something (reply below if that's the case). Also, I don't know how commonplace adding the birth year for a living person is ... though checking a small sample of names shows it appears not to be. I think it's more appropriate to add dates when it comes to those no longer living (their lifespan), though I'm not sure consensus is strong on either of these points. It should also be noted that the short description is intended to be brief in describing the subject of an article, and it shouldn't exceed 40 characters per WP:SDLENGTH (though I'm thinking a lot of articles' short descriptions may not be following this guideline). MPFitz1968 (talk) 20:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

The key point from the guideline is "Editor discretion is always needed, and in some cases there will be more important information than dating to be included within the recommended 40 or so characters, but if space is available such dates are encouraged." I see no reason to not include this here as this is sourced in the article, part of the intro description defining her and is something that they seem to encourage for context for bio articles. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Spider-Man

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.

---

It’s Spider-Man: Far From Home, not Spider-Man: Far from Home. The from is capitalized, that is used in every article relating to to the film. This is the only on that doesn’t capitalize it, and got reverted it. Am I wrong here or what? Hydro-Molecular Dude (talk) 05:55, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Those other articles don't conform to MOS:CT, this one does. The main article is named that way due to a lack of consensus to move it to the correct location, it sets no precedent to override the manual of style of any other article. The other articles that do it wrong should be fixed, not this one broken to comply to that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 06:02, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Then you were in the minority then. If the majority agreed on the films title and all the articles related to it, then it should be here. Your sole opinion doesn’t agree with the consensus that others have already decided. Then you’re wrong if you’re not supporting as the others are. Hydro-Molecular Dude (talk) 06:45, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't matter, local consensus does not override the manual of style. Also the majority only agreed on the title of that particular article. It didn't go beyond that although people mistakenly believe it does. WP:NOTBROKEN works. The redirect at the correct capitalization is listed as an alternative capitalization, there is no reason to not do it correctly. Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

It’s not correct though. By your logic, then why don’t you go out and fix every article to your preferred style. Why haven’t you don’t it? Because it will get reverted because it’s not correct. Hydro-Molecular Dude (talk) 07:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

It is not my preferred style, it is Wikipedia's style. We are all expected to follow it. Exception is if there is a discussion and a consensus for a particularly article to go against it but that only applies to that article, nowhere else. If you want to go against the MOS for this article, get a consensus on this talk page to do do, otherwise the manual of style applies as written, what happens on other articles is irrelevant. Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

We’ll you did say that the articles who do it wrong should be fixed. You’re also cherry picking, how is this following CT when the others aren’t, shouldn’t it be the same since it’s the same movie? But aside from that. The only consensus I should be getting from is you since you’re the only defending the inaccurate title. Im on the side of the movies article title, which you are against. The majority already agreed on this, and you are on the minority. Hydro-Molecular Dude (talk) 08:16, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

It is the same movie, the stylization of the title is a manual of style issue. Wikipedia's manual of style is being followed in this article. That is all that matters. Also this is an actor bio article. Look up her credits on IMDb. Geraldo Perez (talk) 08:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

The only one who says it’s being followed is you. Again I’m with the majority here and is saying that is wrong. You are in the minority here, and if you want it change, change it. Otherwise, this is still inaccurate. Regardless of the policy since the majority already agreed that the title should be capitalized. Hydro-Molecular Dude (talk) 17:10, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Not just me for this article. Still, to be persuasive, you need a policy based reason to go against the manual of style. You haven't given one. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:41, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Again, I’m just going on based what the consensus was for the title. You are still in the minority, you are the one who’s against what was already decided by the majority. Hydro-Molecular Dude (talk) 00:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

The current consensus at the film article is wrong, but it's the consensus there and has no effect on this or other articles linking to the film article, as per WP:LOCALCONSENSUS and MOS:CAPS/MOS:CT. The film article should be moved. This article and others are doing it right. The film article is doing it wrong. It's as simple as that. It's time to drop the stick and move on. Amaury • 00:45, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Hes the one who made this a big deal. Over a stupid letter that every article has it the right way. Except this one. I can drop it, but only if the majority changes it’s position. Until then, this is wrong. Hydro-Molecular Dude (talk) 01:29, 6 February 2022 (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.

should they match?

just noticed tom hollands page has a blurb about his relationship with zendaya, but zendayas page doesnt say anything similar. just wondering if both pages should sorta match or reflect whats said in one about the other? Snarevox (talk) 07:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Producer

People are adding producer as an occupation mostly based on her one vanity producer credit in Malcolm & Marie. While she did have some input to the creative parts of the film, she didn't get Producers Guild of America § The Producers Mark (p.g.a.) that is awarded to the producers on a project the Guild determines actually did the real production work. Actors get producer credits to show they are important to the project, not to indication they actually did production. This applies to her other producer type TV credits as well. This is just a vanity credit given to important people to keep them happy, it is not a task she actually did, just an acting credit enhancement. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Agree that production credit is too much here. Binksternet (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Relationship with Tom Holland (2)

Zendaya has been in a relationship with spiderman co-star Tom Holland since November 2021 JennaBear1985 (talk) 09:59, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2022

I want to add to zendayas personal life that is missing some information. 68.228.38.17 (talk) 01:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 02:08, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

First Name Only

The article seems to use her first name exlusively. That's disrespectful in itself. I know that she uses her first name in her career, but the article should make that very clear. --84.132.144.110 (talk) 19:17, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

The article title and usage of her name within the article is in keeping consistent with other celebrities who perform under mononyms and as per WP:NAMES. See Prince, Adele, Aaliyah, Cher, Madonna, Tiffany, just to name a few. DavidSSabb (talk) 09:01, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Should we create a separate article for Zendaya's videography

Further information: Zendaya § Filmography

Should we create a separate article for Zendaya's videography?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuelloveslennonstella (talk • contribs) 16:41, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Give a reason to do so. No obvious reason this is necessary. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:09, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

There is plenty of reason to do so, definitely more reason than there was for the creation of Zendaya discography. She has starred in several more films and television shows than she has produced and recorded albums, and has even made a selection of music videos and other media appearances. I think thats a good enough reason, don't you? I mean, you do seem to be quite an expert at this.

I think its time for a WP:SPLIT from Zendaya#Filmography to Zendaya videography. Her filmography, especially her appearances in Shake It Up, K.C. Undercover and Euphoria to name a few, are much more notable than her discography, thus they deserve their own article (Zendaya videography).

Reasons, reasons, reasons. I'm happy to add an article for her filmography, like I have tried to do before, I'm just quite sure you'll revert it again, even though I've given reason to do so. Samuelloveslennonstella (talk) 06:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Oppose None of those reason reflect any of the split justifications in WP:WHENSPLIT either for content or size of article. No need for a content split when the subject is well within the scope of the article and size isn't an issue. Added maintenance effort for another article that is not needed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Geraldo. I see no reason to split. Amaury • 18:44, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Oppose Her body of work is growing, but it's far short of needing to be split off, likely for several years at least. Markeer 02:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose it seems to me there is so reason to split this article. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 14:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Agree her work is expansive enough already to warrant a separate page. 61.68.75.207 (talk) 02:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose at this current time, the section doesn't need a split at its or the articles current size. Maybe in several years it might need a relook, but for now it fits here comfortably. WikiVirusC^(talk) 23:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: Section's not big enough for it to be necessary. This kind of split should be reserved for article size concerns rather than notability. Keeping these things together in one page is more convenient for readers until a section becomes so large that it becomes inconvenient. QuietHere (talk) 15:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Comment: I will add to the record that the OP attempted to split the said section of the article into Zendaya videography [2], roughly 24 hours ago. As I can see right now, there is absolutely no consensus for this action. Please keep an eye out for any future splits by this editor, as if this continues, we may need to look into sanctions, including WP:ANI. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: there is not enough content in her article to make this necessary. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose Not enough content to justify this Giver her another 10 years! Deathlibrarian (talk) 13:17, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Relationship with Tom Holland (3)

I know this has been added and rejected a few times but Zendaya posted a photo with Tom Holland on her instagram today that seems to confirm a relationship to me. Every media outlet refers to him as her boyfriend. I was thinking of adding "Zendaya is in a relationship with, British actor and Spider-man co-star Tom Holland"

https://www.instagram.com/p/CeRFBGPrNq8/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ban1o (talk • contribs) 20:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

agree ThreeTHOUSANDSANDGRAINS (talk) 11:45, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I also agree it should be inserted, I find it bizarre it's not on the page - She has stated on her instagram they are in a relationship - there is also Lifeandstylemage, Vogue Times of INdia, Elle, New York Post, Cosmopolitan and HarpersBazarre Buzzfeed and People Magazine The Independent News.com.au and USA Today How many references do we need? What source is claiming they *aren't* in a relationship? Deathlibrarian (talk) 10:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I think it meets the requirements of being significant now with sources that are not the normal gossip about transient dating partners of celebrities which is mostly what WP:GOSSIP wants us to avoid. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:33, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I would go with sources other than what Deathlibrarian put in their recent edits - namely HarpersBizarre and New York Post, the latter of which is clearly shown in WP:RSP to not meet the reliable sources criteria. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:04, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, there may be some that are not usable, but from what I posted, certainly at least Vogue, News.com.au, The Independent and USA today are all RS and can be used in this article.You can check them here Deathlibrarian (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I think we have 5 editors for the details to be included, and no dissensions, so it seems to have consensus. Deathlibrarian (talk) 00:49, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I have added the information, using Ban1o's suggested wording. Deathlibrarian (talk) 03:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Zendaya.com expired

The website and the link listed on the page has expired. I am unable to determine if she has another website, but in any case I am locked out from editing. Someone who is not locked out should remove the name of the website and the link. 2601:41:200:5260:4169:D1DD:7DCA:1498 (talk) 01:16, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 April 2023

Please change: "Her father is African-American, with roots in Arkansas; her mother has German and Scottish ancestry." to "Her father is African-American with Nigerian ancestry; her mother has German and Scottish ancestry."

Sources:

1) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-10322617/Why-Spider-Man-star-Zendayas-flower-Scotland.html

2) https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/tv/spider-man-stars-secret-scottish-25731642

3) https://www.seventeen.com/celebrity/news/a31509/zendaya-explores-her-family-tree-for-immigrant-heritage-month/

4) https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/8207418/spider-man-zendaya/

5) https://hollywoodlife.com/feature/zendaya-parents-4563949/

6) https://www.legit.ng/1407906-zendaya-parents-who-young-stars-mother-father.html#:~:text=Her%20parents%20are%20Kazembe%20Ajamu,from%20German%20and%20Scottish%20ancestry.&text=Iyabo%20Ojo%20and%20Funke%20Akindele,6%20other%20Nigerian%20celebrit... Dkdrone 19:55, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done WikiVirusC^(talk) 21:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

untitled

Zendaya father is a black American man with roots from Arkansas. He was born and raised in Arkansas and is the grandchild of sharecroppers. It’s inaccurate to say he is African American with “Nigerian” ancestry, when it’s a better and more legitimate way of describing him. Her father was also born Samuel David Coleman. Here is a link to factual info about his actual background https://www.yournextshoes.com/kazembe-ajamu-coleman/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msfixthisshitup (talk • contribs) 22:56, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Zendaya’s father background

Zendaya’s father is a black American man with roots from Arkansas. He was born and raised in Arkansas and is the grandchild of SHARECROPPERS. It’s simply incorrect to substitute his real Arkansas roots for having “Nigerian”ancestry. Zendaya’s father was also born Samuel David Coleman before he changed his name after taking a dna ancestry test and seeing he had ancestry that could be traced back to multiple different places including Nigeria, Iceland, and Macedonia. Link to Zendaya dad being from Arkansas and her visiting her cousins there https://www.yournextshoes.com/kazembe-ajamu-coleman/ Another link to his sharecropper roots https://hellobeautiful.com/2794456/zendaya-explores-her-roots-immigrant-heritage-month/amp/ Msfixthisshitup (talk) 23:10, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Correct Zendaya’s dad background

Zendaya’s father is black American. He was born Samuel David Coleman in Arkansas, USA. The link and story people use to say her father has “Nigerian” ancestry also mentions other places as well. He took a dna ancestry test and traced his ancestry back to multiple different places. “Between her German mother and her father, whose family roots stretch from Nigeria to Iceland and Macedonia, Zendaya Maree Stoermer Coleman says she's always been proud of her heritage, which comes spelled right out in her own multicultural name”. Link to article https://www.mic.com/articles/120806/zendaya-s-family-tree-is-a-reminder-most-americans-have-something-in-common Msfixthisshitup (talk) 23:16, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Zendaya’s dad background

This is the best most legitimate article that summarizes everything that’s been said about Zendaya’s father and explains things in his own words. There is suppose to be a video that isn't available with the article that Zendaya and her parents made about their backgrounds & the article I have explains what he said in the video https://www.entitymag.com/zendaya-parents-stoermer-coleman/ Zendaya father is the grandson and son of sharecroppers. Read the article and correct the information on this wiki article to make it more factual, instead of spreading misinformation. 204.116.70.84 (talk) 23:49, 30 April 2023 (UTC)