Talk:James Woods/Archives/2020

Orphaned references in James Woods
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of James Woods's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "SNL": From Bernie Sanders:  From Primetime Emmy Award:  From Saturday Night Live (season 15):  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:11, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Twitter stuff
It's probably pointless for me to post this here, but in case anyone happens to read this talk page, we need third party reliable sources to comment on James Woods' musings on Twitter. Otherwise, we get, that speculates on what he meant when he posted some random thought – which could very well have been a joke. People do sometimes tell jokes on Twitter. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:48, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * He seems to have grown into a hardcore Trump supporter. Yesterday his praise of Trump was even retweeted by the Donald himself:


 * https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1262158573720801281 :) 195.67.149.164 (talk) 13:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Neutrality of Twitter section
There seems to be irrelevant inflammatory information here. I'm not sure if such information is appopriate for a BLP. Him circulating a meme, for example, is not really appropriate.  IWI  ( chat ) 13:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I see nothing wrong with any of this material. Woods' circulation of various falsehoods and fringe hoaxes to more than 2 million followers attracted substantial attention from the sources and is therefore appropriate for the short section here. Neutralitytalk 14:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * That is true, but the mention of a random tweet referring to a financier seems irrelevant for wikipedia, almost as if something is being implied. Could be just me.  IWI  ( chat ) 14:55, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * He was spreading a well-known, false conspiracy theory. If it were really "random" or insignificant, then this message would not be reported on by the reliable sources. Neutralitytalk 15:31, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough.  IWI  ( chat ) 13:48, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Sexual allegation section-makers
The section should be removed, which I will do with reference to similar issues noted here first, then here, and and once again, here. In those very similar edits, the users were new editors who apparently were unfamiliar with the guidelines explained.--Light show (talk) 16:57, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * These accusations do not qualify as "gossip" or "he said-she said"; they are widely reported in credible, third person sources, and so should be included as important events in the subject's life. --Treybien2 (talk) 2:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)