Talk:Jan-Michael Vincent

Jan-Michael Vincent
Incorrectly listed on Netflix and Wikipedia as playing a Trapper in Escape to Grizzly Mountain. Having just watched that movie in full and checking the credits, Mr. Vincent does not appear in the movie nor is he listed int he credits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RonCHenryIII (talk • contribs) 23:43, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Buffalo '66
In what universe is Buffalo '66 "critically acclaimed?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.128.162.69 (talk) 00:35, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

possible first movie?
I'd have to buy a copy of "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" and check the credits, and I think that film was made in about 1965, but there's a scene where I've always thought was Jan-Michael Vincent's first movie appearance....  after Clint Eastwood ("the man with no name") and Eley Wallach ("Tuco") blow up the bridge that the Union and Confederate soldiers were on each side of, the two of them go over to the side of the river that had been occupied by the Confederates. They come to a spot that had been blown up by artillery (I think it was an old church now open on top and sides) and there's a young Confederate soldier lying there, mortally wounded. Clint Eastwood kneels down by the kid, who is looking up at him, grimacing in pain and not able to talk. Clint puts his cigar to the kid's mouth and looks away for a minute, when he looks back down at the young soldier had expired and the tobacco smoke was just floating out of his mouth. There's no mistaking Jan-Michael's face. I thought he acted the part of being in pain, dying, and scared very well.

It's not in his movie listing, but like I said, I've always thought it was him, and probably his first appearance in any film. Anyone else seem to agree? If you have a copy of the movie and he's in the credits, maybe that can be added to his list of films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.173.28 (talk) 17:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Jan-Michael Vincent (July 15, 1945 – March 8, 2019)
This date of death needs to be updated: Jan-Michael Vincent (July 15, 1945 – March 8, 2019)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.36.112.16 (talk) 18:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree, but he died February 10, 2019, not today, read the death certificate on TMZ source.--Zugmoy (talk) 19:20, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * February 10 is accurate, according to sources. The February 10 death hit the news on March 8. travisl (talk) 21:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I updated the date everywhere it made sense Kwyxz (talk) 00:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There seems to be no source for his birth year of 1945 or the stable 1944. I remember seeing a source for 1944 yesterday.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


 * The death certificate clearly has 1945, that is the one documentation that needs to have that 100% right Rusted AutoParts  02:25, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

There appears to be confusion among the RS.--- Coffee  and crumbs  20:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 1944:
 * The Washington Post
 * TheWrap
 * BBC
 * 1945:
 * The New York Times
 * The Hollywood Reporter
 * Associated Press


 * Sorry about the confusion. I have only been a pending changes reviewer for awhile. I was actually protecting the Feb 9 date correctly most of the time. One editor persuaded me it was wrong, and I made one bad edit. Sorry about that. The USA Today article is actually not helpful as it doesn't list the death date. I know for sure now the correct date for his death. Is the 1944 and 1945 date for his birth correct? Thanks! It's really chaotic today... dawnleelynn(talk) 22:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * According to The Washington Post, "Jan-Michael Vincent was born in Denver on July 15, 1944 — although his death certificate says 1945". The appear to have factchecked the death certificate and found it to be incorrect.r--- Coffee  and crumbs  23:42, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


 * It doesn’t matter if The Wrap or WaPo put 74. His death certificate which had been linked in the article clearly dictates 1945. Rusted AutoParts  23:44, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia where secondary sources are to be trusted more that primary sources because of the exact mistake you are making now. The Washington Post, a reliable source, found the death certificate to be incorrect. TMZ who hosts the redacted PDF is not a reliable source.--- Coffee  and crumbs  23:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Don’t be condescending to me, it’s an unwise decision to walk that route. And may I ask what led to WaPo making this unilateral decision? What has told them that 1945 is incorrect thus making the official medical document wrong? Rusted AutoParts  23:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't want to war over this. I will leave it alone. However, please donot use a TMZ document as a source. --- Coffee  and crumbs  23:57, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * TMZ has known to be wrong. It is not a reliable source. Since that is the case, the death certificate should be taken out of the article. The book source states his date of birth well before he died. He could have had it corrected before he died if it was wrong. He did not, so that must be the correct date of birth. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Also there should be a consensus as to which date is used. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 00:05, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * You seem to be suggesting that because TMZ provided the death certificate that now makes the certificate unreliable/incorrect. That’s just wrong. That’s official North Carolina Health and Human Services documentation. Unless there is evidence to support doubting official medical documentation that is needless discountment of valuable info. Rusted AutoParts  00:07, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is exactly what I am saying and it is original research to use primary sourcs when there are secondary sources available. I am going to instead find a consesus in the reliable secondary sources available. --- Coffee  and crumbs  00:11, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * This isn’t a numbers game. Just because a certain amount of websites say something doesn’t discount an official piece of government documentation. Rusted AutoParts  00:18, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I said consensus which implies giving due weight to the reliability of the sources. I give a redacted/modified court document hosted on a TMZ website zero weight.--- Coffee  and crumbs  00:25, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh gee, Coffeeandcrumbs gave the certificate zero weight out of five, that’s a real shame. Rusted AutoParts  00:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note that the sources linked from the template at the bottom of the article are supporting a 1944 birth. That's Library of Congress, WorldCat, SNAC and national libraries other than that of Poland Bhunacat10  (talk),  00:08, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * If supports a 1944 birth, the ones that do in source should be correct. TMZ is considered an unreliable source as long as I have been on Wikipedia. When did TMZ become a reliable source? - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 01:59, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I’m not seeing any specific outlining in Reliable sources that says TMZ isn’t considered reliable. What is stated is “Whether a specific news story is reliable for a fact or statement should be examined on a case-by-case basis”. TMZ was the outlet to break the story anyway. We aren’t trying to confirm a piece of gossip we’re verifying a deceased persons age and the TMZ source contains in it official government documentation. Redacted info is for the private stuff the public doesn’t need to know. It does still contain the information everyone is using to report the death. Rusted AutoParts  02:20, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


 * We all know the government is never wrong, even when they are. Just ask the IRS. :) Seriously though, governments can and do make mistakes, and it's not inconceivable that the death certificate got it wrong. - BilCat (talk) 06:21, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

ITNRD
If anyone is interested in collaboration, this qualifies for ITNRD since the death only just became public on March 8. Pinging we may have to go all hands on deck before this is ready for Main Page.---  Coffee  and crumbs  18:40, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:59, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

California Army National Guard
Vincent is described by sources as having done a "tour of duty" in the CANG as well as a "stint." A tour of duty usually means time in combat or other hazardous duty like being at sea. Simply being in a reserve unit is not a tour of duty. I've tried to find evidence of him going to Vietnam or some other deployment, but have found nothing.

Stint is an odd word-choice, despite one of the sources using it. I propose the sentence reading "Vincent finished a period of service in the California Army National Guard by 1967." — Preceding unsigned comment added by LebanoGranado (talk • contribs) 06:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:21, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Jan Michael Vincent.jpg
 * Is there a way to upload another image that will be more appropriate? Matt Campbell (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2019 (UTC)