Talk:Merv Griffin/Archive 1

I do not recall the beard.
I do wonder what this is from:



Hopiakuta 17:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It is from a moment when his sanity deserted him. 66.108.4.183 16:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I have removed material from that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Docg 23:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Biography section
Since the article is a biography, adding a "biography" section makes little sense to me. Please explain why this article needs a "biography" subheading. Rklawton 21:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The whole entry reads like it is a mere paraphrase of the press release from his publicist; however, some whole paragraphs are not paraphrased but are just cut and pasted from the release. RUReady2Testify 21:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Gay rumors
Considering the New York Times considered the persistent rumors about Griffin's sexuality notable enough to be mentioned in his obituary (alongside the palimony and sexual harassment suits that dogged him through his life) wouldn't it be permissible and relevant to incorporate them into this article? ChrisStansfield 22:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually this article is missing almost any mention of a personal life of any kind. He talked about his wife quite regularly on his talk show and their divorce was as well publicized as any Hollywood divorce. Although Merv was extremely discreet, biographies usually include some kind of personal life section. As to the gay rumors, this is always an issue when somebody has an open secret. Ninquerinquar 23:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


 * alongside the palimony and sexual harassment suits that dogged him through his life What a ridiculous statement! Both suits were in the year 1991.  One year does not equal a whole life! Young Kreisler 13:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The suits lasted a year. Reference to them followed in articles about him for the next 16. No, it wasn't his "whole" life- mea culpa. It was, however, a significant portion. ChrisStansfield 22:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Update, refs and NPOV language has been introduced to resolve this matter. Benjiboi 21:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

he died
he died

Sexuality and Personal Life
There is no need to keep removing details about Griffins Sexual orientation. Being gay is not "negative" information. Details about the subjects sexuality have been documented by Michaelangelo Signorele in his book "Queer in America", as well as on his blog.

If unhappy about the way that I have phrased my entry, then by all means clean up the text, but there is no reason to whitewash the facts. Merv Griffin was GAY and closeted. FACT. Griff 07:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think it's a matter of finding the appropriate sources. I wouldn't consider Signorele's book (alone) an entirely reliable source.  Rklawton 13:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Exactly. The Rolling Stone article is more professional and a touch less sensationalistic. Young Kreisler 13:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * If there is a published source that says Merv was gay, then you can edit in that he was gay and cite the source. Deciding for yourself whether the source that someone else cited is not "reliable" is original research, and is prohibited. You may not delete factual statements that are backed up by source material, simply because you say the source is unreliable--that itself is a factual assertion that needs to be backed up with sources. Further, if you do this without siomilarly checking the "reliability" of all other cites in the article and deleting teh unreliable and deleting those without cites, then you are obviously enforcing a point of view, and you have violated NPOV. So, if you really think a cited source is unreliable, especially one in support widely acknowleged fact that ol' Merv was gay, then you had better put the kettle on because you have got your work cut out out for you. Then, of course, you'll have to go back and check all the cites on all the entries you have ever contributed to. Seems much better to find a "reliable" source that says Merv was straight, Geuss you'd still bett get that kettle on. RUReady2Testify 21:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems like his sexuality is appropriately covered now (although it is a little light on information about the lawsuits). How about more coverage of his personal life? As Ninquerinquar states, "He talked about his wife quite regularly on his talk show and their divorce was as well publicized as any Hollywood divorce." What about his son that worked with him until his death. It mentions his relationship with Eva Gabor as a "beard" but does not talk about their friendship much. Is the sum total of this man's life a headline - "Entertainment Industry Giant and Closeted Gay Man Dies"?

I hope to include some information about his closeted conservatism. I find it fascinating that he perceived it as harmful to his career if he revealed his political beliefs. Ursasapien (talk) 11:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Bette Midler always says that, no matter what she does or how she dies, her obituary will read "Started Career at Continental Baths." Ninquerinquar 19:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

http://www.queer.de/news_detail.php?article_id=7468 Hy also on german pages you can find news about it. 85.8.124.114 15:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Catholic-American
I support removing this from the lead. He isn't noted for being a Catholic. If we include this in the lead, then we could pretty much include every category item in the lead, because he is presumably all of those things as well. Rklawton 19:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed it a few weeks ago. Happyme22 20:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Section headings
I renamed the sections with what I thought were better titles, but User:Emerson7 said in his/her edit summary that he/she changed the headings back "per MOS." If it really is per MOS, than please forgive me, but I do have a problem with two "game shows" section, one that's a subsection within the "career" section and one that's not. Also, was his death really part of his "private life?" Sexual orientations were definetly private, but I remember watching NBC featuring his death as the main story of the day. And the first section is entitled "Biography"...if only that one section is a biography on Merv Griffin than what does that make the rest of the article? You would have to make everything a subsection under it, thus changing the heading to "Early life" would be much better. That one's common sense. I know my efforts to rename the sections weren't the best either, but I'm not exactly liking them how they are. Thoughts? Best, Happyme22 06:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * one thing it reveals is major problems with the article's continuity...it certainly could stand a bit of tweaking. as far as the 'biography' header, i think it's far more appropriate lead with that than having everything bumped out as level two's. major sections should encompass like data, much like a chapters of a book. once the continuity is addressed, i think the rest will fall into place. actually, perhaps by first setting up the structure, the article can be fashioned around the toc. either way, this should be too difficult for us to work it out. --emerson7 | Talk 03:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Content aside, does anyone have anything against my version for the headings? Happyme22 03:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


 * FYI, the link you have there doesn't go to any section header changes. I was bold and corrected section headers to bring things under career and bio as appropriate and tweaked a few titles. Benjiboi 15:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Jeopardy logo.png
Image:Jeopardy logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)