Talk:Soon-Yi Previn

Move request
I'm requested for the Soon-Yi Previn redirect to be removed, so this article can be moved to Soon-Yi Previn. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:39, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Why the "(Q1140914)"?
Why the "(Q1140914)"? ---Dagme (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Wikidata number. I've asked many days ago for the redirect at Soon-Yi Previn to be deleted so this page can be moved there, but alas not yet. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

"author of her published statements on the subject."
Soon-Yi Previn had two published statements during her scandal with Woody Allen.

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,976382,00.html

http://www.newsweek.com/soon-yi-speaks-lets-not-get-hysterical-197958

Vanity Fair only claims that the latter statement wasn't written by her, and cites an anonymous source and a family tutor who hadn't spoken to Soon-Yi Previn in years. I don't know if that does or does not meet Wiki standard's of reliable sources, but the statement on the page implies all of her statements were written by someone else, when only one has been in question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SammyTrujillo (talk • contribs) 09:22, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

"He has also both affirmed and denied that he acted as a paternal figure to Previn"
I think the wording here is unfortunate. The implication is that WA has been inconsistent in his statements. Yet if we look at the source, it becomes clear that WA has made statements about two different things. First, his relationship to his wife, to which he had been married for 18 years at the moment of the interview, describing how their 'dynamic' as a couple started. Second, his attitude toward Mia Farrow's adopted children (including Soon-Yi) and his limited role in their upbringing in the 1980's. I think it is totally consistent, and in line with the source, to call his role in his present relationship 'paternal' while denying a parental role in the upbringing of Mia's and André Previn's children. So I suggest that the sentence be changed. Agree? Mcouzijn (talk) 08:10, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree. Lately this article is being used more and more to promote opinions about Woody Allen's alleged guilt than its proper use as an encyclopedic article about Soon-Yi Previn. Plenty of sneaky subtle edits have been added (often without proper references from truly reliable factual sources) to paint Soon-Yi as an ignorant victim. I think it's a good idea to begin to revert this article back to an honest encyclopedic article about Soon-Yi Previn, and away from being a promotional conduit for those who have chosen to share their opinions of her husband here. -- &#124; Uncle Milty &#124;  talk  &#124;  13:27, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

"There are accounts suggesting that she was not the author of her published statements"
How is it *not* POV that these accounts (from the Farrow camp) are credible, relevant, and deserve to be inserted in the lemma? It is a fact that these 'accounts' were published in Vanity Fair. Does that qualify as justification to shed public doubt about the veracity of Soon-Yi Previn's public statement? I wonder. Mcouzijn (talk) 11:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Soon-Yi Previn
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 Soon-Yi Previn'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.

Proposal to remove dubious information about non-verifiable 'court testimony' that 'suggests' claim X
The article now states "Court testimony from Allen's doorman and housekeeper suggested that Allen and Previn began their sexual relationship during Previn's senior year in high school.[21][22]" No factual, verifiable source is given for the existence of such 'court testimony'. Both sources that are given, merely repeat the claim from a television programme with a clear anti-Allen bias, that made many claims that have not seen legal scrutiny. Moreover, the alleged 'court testimony' is not said to state or prove claim X but merely 'suggests' it - whatever that means. I think this information has no place in an encyclopedic lemma and I propose to remove it within a week.Mcouzijn (talk) 05:38, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Reference named "books.google.com": From South Korea:  From Teachers College, Columbia University:  From André Previn: </li> </ul>

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 ⚡ 01:26, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Imdb recently started listing Soon Yi as Woody Allen's daughter as well as wife
Within the past month or two, Imdb has been listing Soon-Yi Previn as both Woody Allen's daughter AND Woody Allen's wife, both on the Soon-Yi page and on the Woody Allen page. Furthermore, these entries are listed twice. Until a few days ago, Soon Yi was listed as having TWO parents, BOTH of whom were Woody Allen. They added Andre Previn at my request, but still have Allen listed as a parent TWICE, with no listing of Mia Farrow. What the phuquing firetruck numbskill sugarfit is this nonsense?? This jeapordizes Imdb as a source.

I suggest removing Imdb links from this and the Woody Allen article until this is removed.--WickerGuy (talk) 02:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

About the 'Epstein reference'
There have been three attempts to include, and two attempts to remove this line into the 'Marriage and family' section: "In 2013, [Soon-Yi] and Allen were photographed leaving sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein's townhouse on multiple occasions. This came after Epstein had pleaded guilty to child prostitution charges in 2008".

Of course, this line has nothing to do with either marriage or family; which is in itself reason enough to remove it here. But how is this line in any way relevant and pertinent to Soon-Yi and her life? I think it should be removed for lack of relevance and pertinence.

Another reason why the line is invalid is that there have been no 'multiple occasions' reported anywhere. This invalid information might make us think about the credibility of the whole line. What is known about any particular 'photograph' of Soon-Yi and Allen leaving Epstein's house? The answer to that question can be found in a news article in the New York Times of July 13th, 2019 ('Jeffrey Epstein was a sex offender') and in a Vanity Fair article of January 21st, 2020 ('Peggy Siegal sends her regrets'). The facts are that Peggy Siegal, an Epstein shill, had sent out a last minute invitation to several New York celebrities to attend a 'meet Prince Andrew' event. They were: Katie Couric, George Stephanopoulos, Chelsea Handler, Charlie Rose and Woody Allen. This was some time ahead of Prince Harry's and Kate Middleton's marriage, and the attendees would be able to 'meet' with Prince Andrew. Though the event took place in Epstein's house, his name was not on the invitation, and the invited apparently did not know Epstein, as Siegal had to explain to them that he was a man of wealth and a financier, which might have gotten their interest. The media spoke of a 'dinner party', but given the fact that Woody and Soon-Yi were photographed leaving the Epstein mansion in broad daylight on this December 10 winter's day, they must have left way before any 'dinner' took place.

It seems to me that this event, that is hardly important for a lemma about Soon-Yi Previn, has no place on this page. Its only 'relevance' may be found in an attempt to associate (Woody and) Soon-Yi with child molester Jeffrey Epstein, but the facts indicate that their visit had nothing to do with Epstein, nor with child abuse.

Hence I suggest this line be removed, unless someone offers some serious reasons why it should stay. If no opposition, I will remove within a week. Mcouzijn (talk) 02:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * If what you say is true, I concur with your suggestion to remove. But you haven't provided any sources for your claims. AlsoWukai (talk) 07:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I provided two sources, but I did not yet include the weblinks to those sources. Here they are, for your and other people's convenience.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/13/nyregion/jeffrey-epstein-new-york-elite.html

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2020/01/peggy-siegal-sends-her-regrets

Here is a weblink to the photo showing Woody Allen and Soon-Yi Previn leaving Epstein's house 'midway through the Prince’s visit, at 11.30am on December 5', as the photo's header says.

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/08/24/23/17653762-7391265-The_couple_leave_Epstein_s_house_midway_through_the_Prince_s_vis-a-45_1566684030608.jpg

Mcouzijn (talk) 17:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

There is a quote about "multiple occasions" in the Yahoo article. "The director and his wife, Soon-Yi Previn, have been photographed a few times leaving the financier’s townhouse—including in September 2013, five years after Epstein pleaded guilty to child prostitution charges, when a Page Six headline declared: “Woody Allen pals around with child-sex creep.”" If you don't think it should be in "Marriage and family", then it can be moved to a new subsection "Relationship with Jeffrey Epstein", in the same vein as subsections with the same name on Bill Gates and Bill Clinton.

Holidayruin (talk) 05:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I will revert your revertion, as there is no factual ground for the claims made in the text you like to see included in the lemma. Neither 'Yahoo news' nor any other source provides material evidence for Soon-Yi being 'photographed a few times (...) including in September 2013'. Nor does a gossip website 'Page Six' provide any evidence about Soon-Yi or her husband 'palling around' with Epstein. In sum, there is zero credible evidence to speak of any 'Relationship with Jeffrey Epstein' and baseless gossip will not make up for a clear lack of factual, verifiable evidence. Mcouzijn (talk) 16:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)


 * You can't just blanket disregard a source because you don't like what it says, WP:RSP says that Yahoo News is a factual, reliable source. Holidayruin (talk) 18:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken. Yahoo News is not considered as a blanket 'factual, reliable source'. This is what WP:RSP says: "Yahoo! News runs both original reporting and syndicated feeds of other sources. Editors have treated the original reporting as an ordinary WP:NEWSORG, and thus presumed generally reliable. Take care with syndicated content, which varies from highly reliable sources to very unreliable sources. Syndicated content should be evaluated as you would evaluate the original source. Syndicated content will have the original source's name and/or logo at the top."
 * In this case, the reference to Yahoo News is about syndicated content, which may be 'very unreliable'. This warrants a much more careful formulation of the lemma. As said: there are no reliable sources corroborating the idea of Soon-Yi Previn having been 'photographed leaving sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein's townhouse on multiple occasions'. There are no photos to prove it, too. This fact alone makes the section's validity highly suspect.Mcouzijn (talk) 10:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)