Talk:Kathleen Kennedy (producer)/Archive 2

Employer
has changed the employer to this article, Kevin Feige, and Jim Morris to Walt Disney. Kennedy is the president and employee of Lucasfilm. Feige is president and employee of Marvel, and Morris is the president and employee of Pixar. Is there some reason you're changing all these page without citations? Please explain here before reverting any more changes. Nemov (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I added this as a topic of discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography. There doesn't appear to be a guideline how employer should be listed. --Nemov (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2021
For clarification of anecdote of Kennedy evolving from secretary to producer, change this:

"I remember Kathy came into the room with her steno pad and her pencil, and she was horrible at taking notes," Spielberg recalls. "She was terrible, and didn't know how to do it very well. But what she did know how to do was interrupt somebody in midsentence."[12]

To This:

"I remember Kathy came into the room with her steno pad and her pencil, and she was horrible at taking notes," Spielberg recalls. "She was terrible, and didn't know how to do it very well. But what she did know how to do was interrupt somebody in midsentence. We'd be pitching ideas back and forth, and Kathy — who was supposed to be writing these ideas down — suddenly put her pencil down and would say something like, 'And what if he didn't get the girl, but instead he got the dog?' "[12] 64.53.160.93 (talk) 15:31, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * What is this clarifying? The addition seems too wordy to be included in the section. Nemov (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ with a rewrite. Without the second bit, it seems unclear why she would be hired for organization when she was "horrible at taking notes". ◢  Ganbaruby!   (talk) 19:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Knighthood
Why is she titled as Dame Kathleen Kennedy? She was appointed a "honorary commander of the Order of the British Empire". On the Queen's list, she is listed as CBE, not DBE. First, commander, or CBE, does not bring the use of prefix Sir/Dame as it is the third class order, while only the first two allow this (second class would be DBE, Dame Commander, which she isn't). Second, non-British citizens, which can be awarded only honorary titles, even if awarded one of the first two orders in hierarchy are not allowed to use Sir/Dame anyway, but can use the post-nominal letters depicting their order. So, she can't be Dame Kathleen Kennedy by any stretch of imagination (unless she switched to the British citizenship in the meantime), but only Kathleen Kennedy, CBE. PajaBG (talk) 11:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed it for now until there's some support for inclusion. It seems like it doesn't belong. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Controversy
It is odd that the whole controversy about how Kennedy and her treatment of various Lucas properties is completely unmentioned. It's well documented, and you can take a NPOV on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.51.227.35 (talk) 21:34, 9 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Feel free to include a section on the "controversy" if you can establish significant coverage backed by reliable sources. Nemov (talk) 22:59, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * This is very bad advice, @Nemov. See WP:CRITS. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:01, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * "Section" is probably too broad, but controversial material about WP:BLP can be included as long as it's properly sourced and balanced. Nemov (talk) 23:17, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Nemov who made YOU the keeper of this article 2604:2D80:560D:4900:B063:C86F:F72A:1BD0 (talk) 05:00, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No one. Do you have any other questions? Nemov (talk) 14:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

"A rocky period..."
I've rolled back some additions regarding very WP:RECENT editorializing stuff that isn't central to this biography. Until there's consensus for adding this stuff it should remain out. Nemov (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * All of this is part of her career, not biography. All of it is also well documented and covered in the media and should be apart of her time at LucasFilm. Solo was five years ago. Not sure if WP:RECENT applies here. None of what I added is controversial material, adding what I wrote below for reference! The One I Left (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * ""She has presided over a rocky period for LucasFilm with the critical reception being mixed on the Star Wars sequel trilogy including, The Force Awakens (2015), The Last Jedi (2017), and The Rise of Skywalker (2019). Despite the films succeeding at the box office, the series was criticized was its lack of direction and consistency. During this time she also oversaw the development and production of the Star Wars films Rogue One (2016), and Solo (2018) the last of which was a commercial failure. The film also suffered numerous production related issues including the initial hiring of Phil Lord and Christopher Miller who had worked on the film for over five months with a quarter of the principal photography completed. Kennedy fired them and replaced them with Ron Howard who led the reshoots and completed production. The film ended up becoming one of the most expensive films in cinema history"."


 * The Force Awakens, Rogue One, and The Last Jedi were all well received by critics and were also box office hits. The reception of those films and how they were produced can be discussed in further detail on those article. Calling this a "rocky period" isn't neutral and it's not really grounded in reality. Nemov (talk) 20:48, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * So addressing that I def agree that individually they were well received by critics and were box office hits which is why I said, "Despite the films succeeding at the box office, the series was criticized was its lack of direction and consistency". I cited the sources. I would say it's entirely based in reality that that is a common complaint with the trilogy as a whole. I am happy to go into depth though and add that each film was well received. When I wrote, "rocky period", I was referring to more than just the sequel trilogy, although one has to admit the legacy of the sequel trilogy as a whole is rather mixed.The One I Left (talk) 21:19, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You can't cherry pick only a few of the mentioned films to prove an otherwise false statement. The ups and downs of the Star Wars franchsie are well documented and the paragraph quotes sources.
 * It's only the "Rocky period" expression, which is questionable. Otherwise the paragraph is fine. 2A02:A31C:35F:5180:CC38:DDF8:3921:D17B (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It's not fine. It's not important to this person's biography. It's WP:UNDUE and leans too much on WP:RECENT. Nemov (talk) 19:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Whether it is or isn't important for the biography is disputable. However what is certainly just a false take is that inserting a paragraph about the well documented underperfomance of the most valuable franchise under Kennedy's management would give undue weight to criticism. Furthermore, the controversy goes back to 2017 at the very least so it's questionable whether it's a case of recentism. 2A02:A31C:35F:5180:CF4:B8AB:A86D:2C73 (talk) 21:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)