Talk:Marlon Brando/Archive 2

Politics? O RLY?
Why is it that the list of his awards is under the "Politics" Section? 68.175.89.35 (talk) 04:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Widely Reguarded as the best actor of the 20th Century
A bit POV to me I think... Redwolf24 29 June 2005 22:08 (UTC)

Furthermore, as opposed to film actors of the 18th and 19th centuries?

well you have to name me an actor that A. revolutionized acting, and B. was as versatile as Brando? who can it be? nobody not Olivier, Hopkins, Hoffman, Pacino, everyone took from Brando, Dean, Elvis, etc...


 * Even if he is in fact the greatest actor of all time, to say he is widely regarded as such is to make a lot of assumptions about what a lot of people think. Perhaps, "often" is a better word. Or remove the line entirely. Focomoso 22:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * (seems someone removed the line while i was editing... Focomoso 22:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC))


 * A statement like that USUALLY smacks of POV, but in all honesty, just about EVERY authority - authors, critics, filmmakers, actors, etc. - namechecks Laurence Olivier and Marlon Brando as being the two leading candidates for the greatest actor of the last century. I think Brando gets the nod when it comes to film acting, even by critics who argue that his legacy rests on a surprisingly small number of great film performances. (That argument is definitely debatable, but a significant number of people have made that argument.) (L1759 04:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC))


 * It's definitely a matter of opinion. I never cared for Brando's mumbling accent, and who is to say he was better than Olivier, Tracy, Cagney etc.

Not a method actor
Late Career section "In his last film, The Score (2001), he starred with fellow method actor Robert De Niro."

Neither Brando nor De Niro are method actors. They both acted Stanislavski's system and were taught it by Stella Adler, not Lee Strasberg.
 * DeNiro was taught by both Adler and Strasberg, and Adler, like Strasberg, taught a derivation of the Stanislavski system, all of the likes of which became 'method' acting. They are method actors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.120.179 (talk) 08:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand, if you believe that Brando's being one of the best actor is a POV, then why not edit it out? Thanks.

Citations & References
See Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the  tags Nhl4hamilton (talk) 04:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

British Bias
why is someone deleting that marlon brando is widely considered to be single most greatest influential actor of all time perhaps its a brit who does that u would be shocked to check out the main page of lawrence oilivers profile check this out He is generally regarded to be the greatest actor of the 20th Century, in the same category as David Garrick, Richard Burbage, Edmund Kean and Henry Irving in their own centuries, He is one of the most famous and revered actors of the 20th century, along with his contemporaries John Gielgud, Peggy Ashcroft and Ralph Richardson this is pure brtish propoganda and i think olivier is overrated —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pc166 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * See WP:NPOV. -- Roleplayer (talk) 14:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
70.153.56.152. This acount is consistently vandalising this article and others. I don't know how to get someone banned, but it would be appreciated if someone could help out. Yojimbo501 (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Contributed to Terrorism?
He was in a play that funded weapons being smuggled into Israel/Palestine. He was aware that it was funding terrorism. Thoughts. Londo 06  16:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Which play? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 21:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Stella Adler, mid to late 40's period, will look into it as I can't recall the name off the top of my head Londo  06  11:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * In 1946 he was in Ben Hecht’s Zionist play "A Flag is Born"? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 11:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It may well have been that one. Londo  06  11:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should hold off on the extreme accusations like "contributed to terrorism" until we all know a little more what we're talking about? Hmm? Monkeyzpop (talk) 15:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I put the question mark after it as I use today's language, ie. it would be considered as such today. I shall endeavor to confirm the play and a little more about his involvement and the period. Londo  06  15:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers priority assessment
Per debate and discussion re: assessment of the approximate 100 top priority articles of the project, this article has been included as a top priority article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Why isn't his refusal of the 73 oscar mentioned?
Shouldnt his refusal of the 73 oscar be mentioned? He sent a Native American and she gave a speeech. I think that is noteworthy. Rd this http://www.nativevillage.org/Messages%20from%20the%20People/Marlon%20Brando's%20unfinished%20Oscar%20Speech.htm 70.108.100.102 (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Never mind. It is mentioned but it is hidden in the Godfather section. I'm adding it to the awards section.

Playboy quote
Just thought I'd point out for anyone interested that Brando's quote from the Playboy interview was inaccurately rendered in this article, in a way that made Brando look worse. We had it as "You've seen every single race besmirched, but you never saw an unfavorable image of the Kike because the Jews were ever so watchful for that. They never allowed it to be shown on screen.". The actual quote was "You're seen every single race besmirched, but you never saw an image of the kike. Because the Jews were ever watchful for that&mdash;and rightly so. They never allowed it to be shown onscreen. The Jews have done so much for the world that, I suppose, you get extra disappointed because they didn't pay attention to that"[emphasis mine]. I can see why it would still offend people, but it's interesting that whoever put this in initially omitted the more equivocal parts.&mdash; Chowbok  ☠  03:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Brando apoc.jpg
The image Image:Brando apoc.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --22:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism > Sexuality > 2008-06-03
It is NOT true that Brando is homosexual! It has never been confirmed! I find that very rude to accuse him of that after his death! Unless someone can provide me with proof I am removing that section! General Mannino (talk) 23:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It is something that has been mentioned on documentaries about the man, and as such does not warrant its complete removal. Londo  06  09:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't see any proof, so unless you provide me with the information I will remove it. (A video of the documentary, NOT a website because it could be false) General Mannino (talk) 22:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, at some point just the debate of his sexuality becomes part of his biography. whether he was or not, you can have an equal section citing people that say he was and people that say he wasn't. Would we ever believed Rock Hudson was gay in 1960? Or if AIDS and Marc Christian had been made public? A lot of these authors are just trading on dead people's souls, making money about people that are gone and can't speak up. Best thing: Don't buy their shitty books and periodicals. That said, since things have been published, as long as we try to present both sides, fair and equal amounts of each position, that is fair. Unfortunately Brando sexuality has become a topic of discussion and a part of his life.
 * FYI: Here is a link for one of the references that you removed: Thornton, Micheal "Larry gay? Of course he was". - Daily Mail. - 01 September 2006. (that was originally added here by
 * I don't know much about about this Micheal Thornton, probably another hack, but it is out there. Unfortunately pleasing you, General Mannino, is not the goal of Wikipedia. So, don't be surprised if the commentary comes back. But, maybe you can make it a 50/50 section, with verifiable sources. IP4240207xx (talk) 23:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * That's a website which could be a fake, I asked for documentaries, not websites because it could be false. The topic on his sexuality has no reason to be included in the article, it's not verifiable information. General Mannino (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have reverted the wholesale deletion of a section that has attribution. Please seek consensus first. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC).


 * I still don't see any verifiable resources, that website you gave me wasn't about Brando, and no documentaries mention his sexuality, so therefor it should be removed until it is proven. General Mannino (talk) 23:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I have warned User:General Mannino on his talk page that he has violated WP:3RR and the next step will be to ask for a block on this account. ~ WikiDon (talk) 07:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no proof, no facts, and no verifiable resources. Therefor there is no reason to include that part of the article. I will continue to remove it and if I get blocked from editing I will inform a higher-up Admin of the situation and explain to him that there is no proof, no facts, and no verifiable resources so there is no need to include that in the article. Wikipedia is just a place where immature kids like to vandilize everything. That's why in schools the teachers don't allow kids to use Wikipedia because most of the stuff is false. That's the problem with Wikipedia, a lot of peopel are corrupted. My job on Wikipedia is to clean as much stuff as I can up and make it true, factual, and verifiable. So if you get an Admin to block me, I will consult another Admin as I have just explained. I want to make Wikipedia better so that people get more educated and don't get F's on reports because the information wasn't true. General Mannino (talk) 18:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You have a job on Wikipedia? and it is to make sure peopel (sic) are not corrupted? Sounds neat, tell me more! LOL FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC).
 * Maybe the kid that got an "F" should look in the mirror for answers and not blame anyone else? HoundDog23 (talk) 17:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know the kid or adult or whoever who got an F from using Wikipedia, I heard about it, and I know people who have known other people who got an F from using Wikipedia (it was either a high school or college report, I forget which). Also you can't deny that Wikipedia has a lot of false information, and that's why people get F's on reports. General Mannino (talk) 20:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The point is that kid has nobody to blame but themselves. Yes there are a lot of errors in here. There are also a lot of errors in a lot of publications. But, it is very doubtful that if the paper had been done correctly, with citations (right or wrong as they may be), they would have got a "F". The additional point is that: You need to scrutinize information no matter "WHERE" it comes from. Lazy people, who don't want to learn, do the work for themselves, and question the material (i.e.: think for themselves) are going to get poor grades (unless the pay money for it, if that does happen... ;-)). So, people out there who get "F's" don't need to blame Wikipedia (and neither do you), they need to look in the mirror, and their own reflections, and blame the responsible party. Their parents. HoundDog23 (talk) 01:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Wally Cox
There is absolutely no reliable evidence that Brando's friendship with Cox was sexual so it is completely irrelevent to the sexuality section. The statements that his sexuality is a source of speculation and he had numerous affairs with men also need to be backed up by reliable sources or removed. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 19:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Brando (surname)
References to Brando's extended genealogy are not encyclopedic. The theory on the origin of his surname has no good evidence. Wjhonson (talk) 05:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There are numerous researchers who have traced his family origins back to the German immigrant. Google books records various further printed works (apart from the Greene Co. history) that have info on the family "The American Descendants of Chrétien Du Bois of Wicres, France " by William Heidgerd, Du Bois Family Association - 1968, and "Overbagh Ancestry" by Theodore S. Overbagh - New York (State) - 1991, and "Genealogy of Johann Wilhelm Brandow" by Effingham P. Humphrey - 1973. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 11:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, it appears there may be an error in most of the published genealogies which give Henry/Hendrik and Elizabeth as parents of Paulus ("Apollos"). Paulus was likely baptised in Katsbaan in 1789 the son of Henrik (Henry) Brando and Maria Regtmeyer or Rechtmeyer who married 18 March, 1786 in Katsbaan . The genealogies have likely confused that Henrik with a Henderik/Henry who was married to an Elizabeth and had three children baptised at Catskill Elizabeth 1782, Maria 1786, and Hendricus 1789. As that same Henderik was probably baptised in Catskill in 1765, the son of Hieronymus, it looks like Brando's ancestor may not trace to Hieronymus as stated in the Overbagh genealogy + others. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Katsbaan only seems to be a few miles SSW of Catskill so I don't think we can rule out Brando's ancestry tracing back to Hieronymus, but given the other error I agree it would be best to just stick to the NEHGS source at the moment. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 12:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Brando's Influence
I am not an actor so I can not speak with any sort of authority, but I think this article focuses a little too much on Brando's devotion to social causes that he believed in. While they are interesting and his sincerity is not in question, he is mostly known for being not only an incredible actor but an influential one. I don't know who it was but a film authority (or another actor) basically said that when it comes to film, "There is the period before Brando, and the period after Brando". He basically took the method of "hitting one's marks" and threw it out the window with his violently expressive freestyling, ad libs and body language. Jack Nicholson,Dennis Hopper, Al Pacino and many others would follow his lead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernard ferrell (talk • contribs) 16:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Zirin reference
I can't believe that I'm acting as an editor again; but unless someone owns up to placing NPOV tags on both the Zirin citation and the article itself (I am currently unable to find the editor in the history pages), then I will delete both NPOV tags. Whoever placed the NPOV tags should've explained their rationale. I certainly don't comprehend any rationale.

--NBahn (talk) 10:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I had not thought that I would edit Wikipedia anytime in the foreseeable future, but I find the idea that Zirin is grossly un biased to be absurd. This combined with the fact that whomever it was who put the NPOV tags on both the Zirin citation and the article itself has not offered a rationale has caused me to decide to remove the said tags. --NBahn (talk) 10:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I deleted the entire paragraph quoting Zirin because it made claims that the citation did not verify, most specifically that Hollywood actively blacklisted Brando and that it negatively impacted his ability to work later in life. It was also poorly written, employing loaded language unsuitable for an encyclopedia. If you're so invested, please rewrite the information to supplement what is already here about his politics and put it in his "personal life" section rather than "rising to the top." I also edited your talk section title because it sounded more like a tantrum than an invitation to discourse. Seijihyouronka (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Accusations of anti-semitism
Whether Brando was anti-semitic or not, he was accused of being such by the ADL and its president Abraham Foxman on several occasions, so it is quite right that the section should mention this. (92.12.243.240 (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC))
 * This has been discussed before, a banned editor cannot contribute. (That's period.) Bzuk (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC).

What are you talking about? I'm not a banned editor and I haven't even been on this site before. (92.12.243.240 (talk) 22:01, 15 March 2009 (UTC))
 * Ip addresses are generated dynamically on restart, it is very easy to get an IP. However, you have a point here and if you can provide substantive verification, the section should be acceptable. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC).
 * The ADL statement regarding the Larry King interview can be found here. The group called Brando's remarks "outrageous and offensive", adding that what he said "plays into the hands of antisemites and bigots", but did not call his remarks antisemitic, and certainly did not call him an antisemite. The ADL response can be mentioned in the section. Case closed. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 23:37, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

The American Jewish Congress called him an anti-semite, and said that his words were "blatantly anti-semitic". (92.11.117.247 (talk) 12:18, 17 March 2009 (UTC))
 * Provide a source, or stop bothering everyone. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 12:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a question here of credibility. Your constant incursions appear to be those of a sock. Why not establish a userid? Bzuk (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC).

I tried to register but for some reason it didn't work. Anyway there are loads of references to the statement released by the American Jewish Congress. The Jewish Defense League also called him anti-semitic. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/jewish-leaders-rage-at-antisemitic-brando-1303943.html. (92.11.117.247 (talk) 12:44, 17 March 2009 (UTC))
 * Nope. The AJC is not even mentioned in this article. The Jewish Defense League is not notable in this context. Now stop bothering everyone. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 13:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Try again, I'll walk you through it. Bzuk (talk) 12:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC).
 * I've read your source and be careful in using titles as if they represent factual statements. The newspaper title is not actually written by a journalist but is "tacked on" by an editor often as a "hook" which can or cannot represent the article's content or context. In this case, it certainly is identified as "anti-semitic" in quotes which is a complete tip-off that is is treated as a euphemism. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC).

Edits by banned editor
The editor who now calls himself LondonTowerBridge is a sockpuppet of banned editor HarveyCarter. He has been banned under approximately 30 guises, and for the past year or so has been attempting to edit under a range of IP addresses beginning with 92. Some people, unfamiliar with his history as a banned editor, have suggested that he register instead of using an IP, which he now has done (again). But this in no way abrogates the fact that he has been banned for life from WP and his edits are to be reverted regardless of merit. A look at the history of his sockpuppetry contributions, both registered and otherwise, make clear that his agenda and approach remain basically unchanged. As with all his prior identities, this new one is headed for the blocked list. Monkeyzpop (talk) 00:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually no I am not this HarveyCartwright character because I only discovered this site last week. (LondonTowerBridge (talk) 11:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC))


 * I don't see any mention of HarveyCartwright in this discussion. If you are new to this site, it is unlikely that you would have known of that alias. Blocked as a banned user.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 12:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

His Name was not Brando it was brandeau
My edits were taken out. It needs to be stated that Marlon's real name was not Brando but Brandeau. Thus, his father and mother were not Brando's but Brandeau's. I change it but some one reverted it for unknown reasons. JohnHistory (talk) 19:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)JohnHistory
 * Wikipedia guidelines call for items to be deleted if they are questionable and do not have citations from reliable published sources. The Brandeau information does not appear to match any known reliable sources, and you provided none.  Therefore your edits were reverted, which they will continue to be in this matter unless and until you can provide reliable citations for the claim.  Thank you. Monkeyzpop (talk) 01:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

If you chose to do you could have easily found a reliable source for the Brandeau. However, that is not your intent. I am only trying to improve the article which currently is dead wrong about his name. JohnHistory (talk) 01:51, 2 May 2009 (UTC)JohnHistory


 * You made the edit, therefore it is your responsibility to cite your evidence, not mine. I saw an uncited questionable edit, and it is every WP editor's responsibility to remove those and ask for citation.  The "modest task" you refer to here below was your job, not anyone else's.  Furthermore, a Google search for "Marlon Brandeau" turns up not one single reliable citation.  You're going to have to come up with one before this edit will be acceptable.  You, not someone else.  Monkeyzpop (talk) 04:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

If no else here is capable of doing this modest task, and only of deleting it -then I will do it for you in the next few days. Sound good? JohnHistory (talk) 01:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)JohnHistory

Since you are an authority could you please tell me where the source for his parents being named "Brando" is? The problem is that they were actually named Brandeau so I think you are a little red-handed here. JohnHistory (talk) 01:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)JohnHistory


 * Let me be clear. Brandeau was the ancestral name, but by the time of his parents' and grandparents' births, it was spelled Brando.  Therefore neither he NOR his parents were named Brandeau.  I can provide a reliable citation for this information.  Can you provide a reliable source that states that he or his parents EVER spelled their personal names Brandeau?  If not, you cannot make the claim in this article. Monkeyzpop (talk) 04:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, then I will add at least that Brando is the anglicization of the french name Brandeau. My source was a PBS doc I saw on him years ago. I thought it said he changed his name, but either way. This not that big of deal and I only noted that I think it's funny that "I will have to do it" why shouldn't we be equally motivated? JohnHistory (talk) 23:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)JohnHistory

Protection?
Rex Harrison has been protected due to repeated disruption by IP sock puppets of an indefinitely blocked editor (GranvilleHouston/JohnRedwood/HarveyCarter). Is it time to consider protection for Marlon Brando too?

Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 12:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you are advocating a long-term solution by protecting this article, I heartedly agree, as it is exceedingly tedious to confront continuous blatant troll attacks. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 13:26, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * If it was a long term solution, that would be great. The problem is that this editor has a bisexuality fixation and if it's not this article it will be another one. Articles get semiprotected and then when the semiprotection is lifted, the edits resume.  This is not the first time Rex Harrison has been semiprotected because of this sock puppet's edits.  Now it's Marlon's turn.  Before that it was Jeremy Brett .... there's a list, but I won't bore you with it.   The same sock also has an interest in smoking relating illnesses and has "contributed" such to Audrey Hepburn and Dick Van Dyke.  Two very narrow areas of interest, neither of which offers much usefulness to the articles in which the points are added, and which are presented with a biased viewpoint.   I say this only because the semiprotect is a short term solution only.  By all means, go for it.  I would support you, but it won't be the end.  Rossrs (talk) 14:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I see it as part of a process. If enough articles are semi-protected, without any impact on the blocked sock master, then sooner or later there's a strong case to be made for the indefinite block being converted to a community ban. Once that happens we can simply revert all edits made by the banned editor's socks, regardless of the edits' merits. This rapidly becomes very boring for the sock master. I deal with another sock puppeteer, and their disruption has decreased substantially since their indefinite block became a community ban - not because they pay any attention to the ban, but because it's far less satisfying making disruptive edits when the edits are immediately reverted without comment. Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 18:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. In that case, it's well overdue.  It's been a problem for over a year and has moved through quite a few articles.  Rossrs (talk) 22:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Granville's latest IP sock is pretending there's no consensus to revert his edits. Based on past dealings with Granville elsewhere I feel there's little point debating the issue (Granville suffers from WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT) so I've applied for protection. Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 11:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Anyway Brando is a common italian surname (and even first name. Many italians have been moving to france since 1800 as it was the closest 'rich  country' in that period. And many italian names have been also incorrectly regarded as native french surnames: ex. 'Cardìn' (that is italian-venetian) and 'Zola' (that in italy is zòla and not zolà), and so forth to Napoleone Buonaparte (who changed his name in Bonaparte in order to make it sound more french) whose parents were italian-tuscans of Livorno). So who knows, it's a possibility tha same happened to brandeau family.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.23.217.21 (talk) 01:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Re-protected
I have semi'd this article for a week due to persistent disruption from unregistered editors. Skomorokh 15:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, I was just debating whether to apply for semi-protection again. Like many sock-puppeteers this one is as persistent as it is obsessive. Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 15:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't the Bisexuality section title be changed to Sexual orientation or Sexuality?
From reading the Bisexuality section in this article, I do not see where Brando confirmed being bisexual. Sure, he says that he had "homosexual experiences," but I point out that plenty of people have had "homosexual experiences" and yet do not consider themselves bisexual. The same can be said of homosexual men and women who have had "heterosexual experiences" but do not consider themselves bisexual. The Bisexuality article even addresses this type of thing.

My understanding of Wikipedia policy is that we should not label anyone as homosexual or bisexual (or even heterosexual) unless they clearly identify as such. The Aubrey O'Day article, though a lesser-known celebrity, is one example of this. Two other examples include the Natalie Portman article and the Christina Aguilera article (just go through the past discussions for those two articles).

Despite other articles being careful not to categorize someone's sexual orientation unless that person categorizes/categorized it first, I see articles such as this one and James Dean doing it anyway. Why is that? I would hate to think that it is simply due to these two men being deceased.

I will also address this on the James Dean article, where there is only speculation about his sexual orientation from others, no confirmation from Dean himself. I mean, this being the case, Dean clearly should not be in Category:Bisexual actors, and probably neither should Brando. Flyer22 (talk) 00:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Categories are not to be added unless there is explicit confirmation by the individual or by an extensive amount of reliable sources stating it as fact, not as speculation. The LGBT Project tag for articles however, covers all LGBT subject matter, including notable speculation about individuals sexual orientation. A good example is Lindsay Lohan who was in a same-sex relationship but refused to categorize herself as bisexual or lesbian. Also, as far as I'm aware (I may have to do some reasearch) I believe Dean was openly bisexual (or at least comfortable discussing his romantic/sexual relationships with men). I think Brando was more speculation. The Bookkeeper   (of the Occult)  03:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Ha, I just read the quote. Maybe I got my actors mixed up. The category for Brando might be ok. It may need more source to confirm it. The Bookkeeper   (of the Occult)  04:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It's probably ok to say that he was bisexual, but I don't think it's a good idea to have a subheader "bisexuality".  Such a section should cover all discussion of his sexuality, because his relationships with both sexes place him in this category, and yet his relationships with women are dealt with under a broader and more neutral "Personal life" header.  The "bisexuality" section, brief though it is, deals only with his relationships with men.  It makes the overall section less neutral and places undue emphasis on the subject by spotlighting it.  Rossrs (talk) 04:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * So should we change the header to Sexual orientation or Sexuality and add information about his romances with women? Or should we simply incorporate that section into his Personal life section but titled as Personal life and sexual orientation (or something like that)? Flyer22 (talk) 11:52, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I feel it should be in the personal life section and headed "Personal life". If he was exclusively heterosexual, his relationships would be discussed under such a neutral header.   We don't discuss the sexual orientation of heterosexual people, it's just kind of taken from granted.  Cynthia Nixon is a reasonable example (given that I haven't spent much time searching for a better one.)  It mentions her relationship with a man, and her relationship with a woman, all under the one generic heading.  I think that's preferable. Rossrs (talk) 12:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. And, by the way, Rossrs, do you have any opinion about what I stated above regarding this similar topic with the James Dean article? Flyer22 (talk) 12:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks much better. I'll have a look at James Dean, but it's much more of a hot topic there.  The discussion goes back a couple of years on that point and still not really resolved.  Rossrs (talk) 13:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. And, yeah, I know, which is one reason I also challenge categorizing him as bisexual here at Wikipedia; others are always pointing out that his sexual orientation was/is basically speculation, no matter how many people believe him to have been bisexual or simply had "homosexual encounters" to "get ahead" in his career. Flyer22 (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Marlon Brando was bisexual why is this not in the article about him? It has been written about in many biographies about him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.234.170 (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Nobody here has paid attention to the direct quote from Brando that the "Personal life" section cites as a legitimate source. If you read it, you know that the man was addressing a rumor that circulated while he was filming The Missouri Breaks in the mid 1970s. The rumor had it that co-stars Brando and Jack Nicholson were having an affair. It was because the journalist addressed this rumor that Brando said, "Like a large number of men, I, too, have had homosexual experiences ..."

Why doesn't the article about Jack Nicholson include the same quote? Nicholson himself never commented on the rumor. If anyone restores the words "Brando was bisexual" to Brando's article, then I'm going to add "Nicholson is bisexual" to his article. Brando never commented on the bedroom during any other interview. His memoir tapdances around it, and Larry King didn't ask him about it during their CNN interview that you can find on You Tube. Brando did talk publicly about his children, especially after one of them was prosecuted for murder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.101.236.250 (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Irrespective of how many accounts there were of Brando's homosexual "encounters" or "affairs" there are, they'll always be redacted. The vast majority of editors on Wikipedia are blatantly homophobic. Funny how they "require proof" of homosexuality, but not of heterosexuality. Iamvered (talk) 17:41, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Marlon Brando sorta provided "proof" for his own heterosexuality by fathering fifteen kids. Besides, does "homosexual expierences" mean he is instantly homosexual or bisexual? Mythic Writerlord (talk) 10:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

should we make a new article about his son, miko?
hes been on TV quite alot lately should someone make a stub article or something? Thechode69 (talk) 04:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Sexuality removal
How come the Sexuality section has been removed completely? --79.72.167.183 (talk) 17:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Since it is all referenced it should remain. (92.12.80.178 (talk) 21:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC))


 * This article was positively bowdlerized in manner that is entirely inappropriate. I'm reinserting some of the material.Sylvain1972 (talk) 15:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Official Homepage
The link to the official homepage is not, goes to some sales page. removing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.167.42.249 (talk) 06:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Brando and the Internet
I heard once that during his later years Brando loved to get on the Internet and get into arguments with random people. Does anyone know if this is true? 207.255.127.59 (talk) 01:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC) Brando stared in Michael Jackson's "You Rock My World" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.129.17.39 (talk) 22:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Link Confussion
There are two links to "method acting" in the article, and they point to different locations: one to "method acting," another to "Stanislavski's system." First, and most important, this is at least confusing. In adition, though, it doesn't make much sense. Would someone who knows about Brando (1) consider why they link to different places and (2) think about either providing an explanation to the reader or link them to the same place. Piratejosh85 (talk) 00:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Daughter Rebecca - who is her mother?
Most sources cite Tarita as her mother, not Movita. Brando and Movita divorced in 1962, and Rebecca was born in 1966, when he was already married to Tarita. Is there any proof that Movita is her mother? Darena mipt (talk) 21:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Relationship with Marilyn Monroe.
He did not have an affair with Monroe that lasted her whole life. In his biography he says that they had an affair and then had in intermittent relationship for several years. Dr. Morbius (talk) 19:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Worst Supporting Actor
Marlon Brando won the razzie for worst supporting actor for the 1996 movie The Island of Dr. Moreau. Also his co-star val kilmar was nominated for same category —Preceding unsigned comment added by Master of Articles (talk • contribs) 18:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

LGBT
What the hell does Brando have to do with LGBT studies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KemalDion (talk • contribs) 14:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I assume its because he stated(as he is also quoted for in the 'personal life' section) that he has had homosexual experiences.Averagejoedev (talk) 05:01, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Who is Eugene?
In the introduction it says, "[Brando's] grandmother Marie Holloway abandoned her family when Marlon Brando, Sr., was five years old. She used the money Eugene sent her to support her gambling and alcoholism." Who the hell is Eugene? This person is never mentioned before nor after this one particular time. Clicking on the citation doesn't help as it only leads to the Wikipedia stub about Brando's autobiography which says nothing on the subject.Mbenzdabest (talk) 18:39, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Eugene Brando; his paternal grandfather. Scieberking (talk) 16:27, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Recent edits to lead
I've restructured, formatted and trimmed the recent edits to the lead. Scieberking (talk) 05:42, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Recent Scieberking edits -- Should put photo back in!
Also, you cut the reference to the famous photo of Brando as Johnny leaning on his Triumph. THAT is the famous image, although with a slight word change, you'd be right that Brando as Johnny(like Dean as Jim Trask in REBEL) is the famous image. Anyway, good edit. But we need the photo back!Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 00:56, 16 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Shemp Howard, Jr. Thanks for expanding the lead really well! I didn't remove that photo, but the vandal IP did as the diff shows. Anyhow, I've now restored it. I'd also written in detail about the Johnny Strabler persona in Legacy section if you've read it. Regards, Scieberking (talk) 05:34, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

AFI rating
The article indicates that Brando was chosen by AFI as "as the fourth greatest screen legend among male movie stars" and "The Fourth Greatest Male Star of All Time." The link from the latter reference indicates that the poll did not consider actors who were still alive and who had their film debut after 1950, including the likes of Paul Newman, Sean Connery, Gene Hackman, Robert DeNiro, and Jack Nicholson. I am new to the project, but it might be good to clarify that the poll did not encompass all screen actors of all eras.Arnold Rothstein1919 (talk) 07:22, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Arnold Rothstein1919


 * The list, actually titled as "AFI's 100 Years...100 Stars", contained the top 50 greatest screen legends of American cinema in 100 years; 25 male and 25 female. Scieberking (talk) 13:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

From the article linked above: "The American Film Institute defined an 'American screen legend' as an actor or a team of actors with a significant screen presence in American feature-length (40 min) films whose screen debut occurred in or before 1950, or whose screen debut occurred after 1950 but whose death has marked a completed body of work."Arnold Rothstein1919 (talk) 16:38, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Arnold Rothstein1919


 * Debuted before or after 1950, this list encompasses the top 50 greatest screen legends of American cinema, and it was perhaps meant to celebrate the 100 years of AFI. Sorry for the confusion. Scieberking (talk) 17:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I used to be Arnolf Rothstein1919. I made changes to the article to make clear that the AFI screen legends were primarily limited to actors who debuted in or before 1950, and to provide a source for the material. Arnold Rothstein1921 (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

The Young Lions
Just now changed this from 'a Nazi officer' to 'a German officer'. The terms are often used interchangeably in connection with World War II, and even thereafter. They are not.Frazierdp (talk) 02:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Gay or bisexual
If Brando (father of 15) really is gay or bisexual shouldn't he be in the LGBT people category? He kinda said he was gay, didn't he? But then again he was never spotted with men married three times and fathered many kids. All his (high-profile) relations where with women. 213.197.215.15 (talk) 15:51, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Marlon Brando was indeed bisexual - see the quote in the Lifestyle section. And yes, he should be in a bisexual person cat. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't mean the article should read, "Brando was bisexual." I removed that sentence and kept the direct quote from him that follows where "Brando was bisexual" used to be. Let the dead speak for themselves. The direct quote, which is from 1976, was the only statement that the legendary actor ever made on the subject. Many years later when Larry King interviewed him, neither of them brought it up. We do have proof that he fathered several children with different women. After one son grew up, he was accused of murder and there was a highly publicized criminal trial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.102.8.104 (talk) 14:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

early sex symbol?
"Brando was also considered a sex symbol, one of the earliest in the film industry to achieve widespread attention due to his enigmatic and sexy persona and the reports of his dalliances and relationships with various major Hollywood celebrities."

This statement is, at best, sloppy. The writer has apparently never heard of Rudolph Valentino or Ramon Novarro. Heck, Fred MacMurray was a sex symbol (at least, Paramount tried to promote him as one -- qv, Remember the Night). Yes, Brando was and remains one of Hollywood's major sex symbols -- but an "early" one? No way. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 12:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:OR
I am posting issues to justify the OR tag on the article, following a request in my talk page. Here you go: In the "rise to fame" section, the first five paras have no sources. The last two sentences in the section also are subjective without citations. The Godfather and later career sections, the latter's first 5 paras, also lack sources. The "personal life", "final years and death", and "politics" are no better. The only sections which are sufficiently sourced are "legacy", "comments on jews, hollywood and israel" and "early work". Thanks. Secret of success (talk) 07:21, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not true that anything not explicitly sourced is OR. The word here is "verifiable". If you know something is true, it's verifiable, right? Like 7*5=35, or "the Civil War was the North against the South". So unless you honestly doubt something in the article and can't confirm it with a quick Google check, there's no virtue in saying something is OR. And if you doubt something in the article and can confirm it, go ahead and put the source in the article. Thanks very much. --Ring Cinema (talk) 21:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * My deep apologies. I have removed the tag and there is quite a lot of unsourced info, so I am hesitant to replace it. If anyone wishes to restore it, you're most welcome. Regards, Secret of success (talk) 16:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing to apologize for. May I suggest that if you think something in particular is dubious, you can use the 'fact' template where the citation belongs. --Ring Cinema (talk) 19:26, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

More recent Picture
The current picture was taken over fifty years before he died. Surely we could replace it with a more recent picture of him? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamza725 (talk • contribs) 07:52, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Why File:Marlon Brando - The Wild One.jpg and not File:Marlon Brando old.jpg
The use of File:Marlon Brando old.jpg is not allowed here as the image is not free and can be replaced (WP:NFCC) by a free one File:Marlon Brando - The Wild One.jpg. While I have a degree of sympathy over the reasons for the change, you need to find a free to use one first before making any change.  LGA talk  edits   23:05, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Danny Thomas and The Godfather
I have read multiple books about Brando and the Godfather starting in the mid-1970s. I have never heard Danny Thomas mentioned. Where is the source for this?Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Should Godfather section be Renamed "Career Resurgence" or Something Like That
The section briefly mentions "Last Tango in Paris" which caused a sensation at the end of 1972 when it appeared at the NY Film Festival. It clearly was a factor in Brando winning the Oscar. The film was a huge hit (not as big as The Godfather, which was briefly the top-grossing movie of all time before Jaws), kept Brando in the Top 10 Box Office Stars, and put him on the cover of TIME Magazine. It shouldn't be given such short shrift.Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 02:13, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2014
"Irgun, a Zionist political-paramilitary group." This is quite a polite way to describe a terrorist organization. Please reconsider how you label them.

74.122.44.2 (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 13:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Gaining Weight in the 1960s
Did Marlon Brando really gain a great deal of weight in the 1960s? I'd figure it could be by the time he was filming The Missouri Breaks or something? He looked okay throughout the 1960s and early 1970s based on his films. Lacon432 (talk) 14:28, 9 August 2014 (UTC) Suppose it depends on what you consider OK: he seems about 30lbs overweight in "The Young Lions" (1958) to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.239.242.38 (talk) 17:50, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Merge Marlon Brando, Sr. article with main Marlon Brando article
Brando's father, Marlon Brando, Sr., currently has his own Wiki article. However, any notability he has would seem to come from the fact that he was Brando's father and for a time, executive producer of Brando's company. He does not seem to have done anything particularly notable on his own that would warrant his own page. Therefore I propose that it be merged with this one. TheBlinkster (talk) 16:03, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes I agree. A quick search shows reliable sources only mention being exec producer of his son's company, his personality and relationship with his son. That's information for Brando Jr's article. Brando Sr's article doesn't meet notability guidelines. Lapadite (talk) 23:48, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Rape?
"Paul anally raping Jeanne"--though they had anal inyercourse there was nothing gto suggest that he raped her. 31.52.255.175 (talk) 13:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * In an instance such as this, we go with how secondary sources characterize the matter. I don't know what the consensus of the sources are on the matter, but if you can present something matching our WP:RS standards which suggests otherwise, we can consider the WP:WEIGHT issue.   S n o w  let's rap 05:55, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Recent changes to Personal life section
With this edit, I initially reverted Engleham because I thought that Engleham was being disruptive. After that, Engleham came back and re-added his material. With this edit, you can see that I focused on re-adding Brando's full quote because I feel that the way Engleham cut it takes the material out of context; Engleham replied, "Stern is poor source. Brando for Breakfast by his daughter better. Lengthy quote unnecessary." With this edit, you can see that I argued: "What proof do you have that Stern is a poor source? Furthermore, you took one quote out of context. And worldofwonder.net is an extremely poor source." Engleham responded, "Stern has no citations. Cite also repetitive and redundant as BrdoForBrk by Brando's daughter famously featured the mag quote first; WOW blog reputable due to editorial oversight via WOW.net TV production company & Houston-Montgomery is published author." I noted that I would bring the matter here to the talk page. I maintain that what Engleham cut with regard to the Marlon Brando quote is not simply a matter of being lengthy; it's about context. And I maintain that this worldofwonder.net source is a poor source; we generally should not be using such sources, and we certainly should not be going on hearsay or a claim by a writer/editor in this case. I will take this matter to WP:Third opinion. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Notified.. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:49, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

To clarify, I made four changes.

1. Moved the quote from Brando admitting his bisexuality from the "Lifestyle" section (which suggests mere choice), to the "Personal" section.

2. The original quote attribution in the article was wrong. The original source was not Gary Carey as stated. The quote was given to a French journalist. And the given citation — Queers in History - didn't even mention Carey or anyone else - the book doesn't even offer sources. I went back to find the earliest available published reference. It was in Brando for Breakfast, hence I added it. As backup, I provided a second citation where Bosworth quotes it in her Brando biography. And I removed the poor "Queers In History" reference.

3. In an article that is already overlong, the quote was needlessly long to make its concise point. It doesn't meed "Homosexuality is so much in fashion, it no longer makes news." (WTF?) or "But if there is someone who is convinced that Jack Nicholson and I are lovers, may they continue to do so. I find it amusing." This is not "context": it's bullshitting.

4. The section on Wally Cox's death was also un-focused with an excessive quote. Part of it originally read: "As told by Patricia Bosworth to A&E, Marlon showed up and "climbed up a tree and looked down on everybody. He got the ashes away from Wally Cox's wife, the box of ashes, and they literally fought over the ashes ... He kept them first in his car and then by his bed ... Mrs. Cox was going to sue for the ashes but she finally said "I think Marlon needs the ashes more than I do." The A&E had no link to a citation.

I sourced the reference to Bosworth's book and chunked this down to: "In 1973, Brando was devastated by the death of his childhood and best friend Wally Cox. Brando slept in Cox's pyjamas and wrenched his ashes from his widow. She was going to sue for their return, but finally said "I think Marlon needs the ashes more than I do."[45]

However, there was no earlier reference to Cox to give this obsession context. Therefore, in the Personal section, I added three sentences: "His close friendship with Wally Cox was the subject of rumors. Brando told a journalist: "If Wally had been a woman, I would have married him and we would have lived happily ever after",[74] and writer/editor Beauregard Houston-Montgomery has stated that while high on marijuana Brando confessed to him that Cox had been the love of his life.[75] However, two of Cox's wives dismissed the suggestion that the love was more than platonic.[76]

The telling quote: "If Wally had been a woman" is oft quoted, usually without reference. I sourced the earliest reference to it I could find, and the quote from the former editor of Details magazine Beauregard Houston-Montgomery, who is quoted directly by the World of Wonder blog after they contacted him. (He also dismisses the notorious fellatio photo, so he's clearly not one for wild claims.) The blog is produced by the large TV production company World Of Wonder, and has editorial oversight, so is covered by WP:VERIFY. To balance the claim, I also provided the statement from his wives.

It would be great if someone could be bothered to clean up all the uncited A&E references elsewhere in the article. Engleham (talk) 14:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Engleham, as you can see, a WP:Third opinion section, which didn't amount to anything, was created below. And now I've started a WP:RfC.


 * Regarding your number 1 point, there is no "Brando admitting his bisexuality"; this has been discussed above on this talk page. Nowhere does he state that he is bisexual. In the section above, an IP stated, "Nobody here has paid attention to the direct quote from Brando that the 'Personal life' section cites as a legitimate source. If you read it, you know that the man was addressing a rumor that circulated while he was filming The Missouri Breaks in the mid 1970s. The rumor had it that co-stars Brando and Jack Nicholson were having an affair. It was because the journalist addressed this rumor that Brando said, 'Like a large number of men, I, too, have had homosexual experiences ...' Why doesn't the article about Jack Nicholson include the same quote? Nicholson himself never commented on the rumor. If anyone restores the words 'Brando was bisexual' to Brando's article, then I'm going to add 'Nicholson is bisexual' to his article. Brando never commented on the bedroom during any other interview. His memoir tapdances around it, and Larry King didn't ask him about it during their CNN interview that you can find on You Tube. Brando did talk publicly about his children, especially after one of them was prosecuted for murder."


 * So, going by that IP's statement, this is why I think you removed context.


 * And I clearly dispute using the World Of Wonder material (not just the source, but the material). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Third Opinion
A Third Opinion has been requested. It appears that the real issue is whether Stern (Howard Stern?) is a poor source. If that is the issue, take this to the reliable source noticeboard. If not, please state the question in no more than two sentences. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:51, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Robert McClenon, my main issue is this worldofwonder.net source and the claims made with that source. It is a poor source; I noted above that "we generally should not be using such sources, and we certainly should not be going on hearsay or a claim by a writer/editor in [this specific case with regard to Brando's love life]." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

RfC: Should the Brando quote remain the same, and should the worldofwonder.net material be used?
Opinions are needed on this disputed edit. For those seeing this from the RfC page or user talk page notification, the arguments for and against the edit are at Talk:Marlon Brando. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose to the worldofwonder.net source, after taking the time to view it. Agreed nothing about this source--how it is presented or the nature of a second-hand statement by someone immediately after they seemingly admit they were trying to pass off a hoax about having a photo of Brando and Cox engaging in oral sex--shouts reliability, nor anything in the piece itself, which seems to be more blog than anything, and anyway, non-WP:RS.  More neutral on the issue of the exact overall wording. I think the difference between them is perhaps not so large as either or both of you might imagine.  Needless to say, wherever there is conflict between two sources, the higher quality source, if there is an obvious one, should control. Can we see specifically the exact sources being debated between the two of you?  S n o w  let's rap 05:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose as perWP:RS -...side note... this article needs real help...quote farm is out of control. Horrible read should add Over-quotation.--Moxy (talk) 14:55, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment Summoned by bot. worldofwondernet is unacceptable as a source, obviously, and should be removed immediately. Coretheapple (talk) 12:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose the use of worldofwonder.net as source I think all of the information should stay but with proper sources. The quote about the funeral isn't too long. Absolutely all of it and everything else of the like should be in the Biography and Personal life sections. There shouldn't even be a Lifestyle section.Louieoddie (talk) 09:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment, while worldofwonder is clearly not reliable, that's only part of the edit in question. The other quote and the two sources in question need to be analysed as well. Best, FoCuS contribs ;  talk to me!  15:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose the source which isn't anywhere near a Reliable source, Support the quote i suppose. – Davey 2010 Talk 20:29, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose The source appears to be a gossip website and is likely to offer a skewed narrative through click-bait to increase its number of web hits. Like the above comments, I cannot see how it is a Reliable source. Tale.Spin (talk) 17:21, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 23:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Footnote to a comment to a footnote to an infobox
Thanks to Emir of Wikipedia for providing support for the assertion, it's a great improvement. Now we have something rarely seen on WP: we have footnotes in comments about footnotes and all inside an infobox. This a mess. We should consider putting the comment material that now appears in the infobox directly into the body text where it belongs. sirlanz 04:37, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have moved it out off the infobox into a notes section. Do you feel that it works better now, or do you have suggestions for improvement? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)