Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:31, 19 January 2010

Biography Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Wasen't she doing some modeling last year, or something? 65.96.98.74

Italian-American, or Albanian-American?

In the body of the article, it says that Marisa is an Italian-American. Yet, this article is also in the Category of "Albanian-Americans". Which is it? -- Jalabi99 09:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Every source i've read says she's Italian and/or Sicilian & Guyanese, but someone keeps adding her to the Albanian category. I asked the person to come to the talk page to provide a source. Crumbsucker 12:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

That's what I'd like to know, the only places which claim her "Albanian" are few Albanian run sites, nothing independently confirmed and she herself never said she was of Albanian origin in any of her interviews. This same person has been adding several Americans to the Albanian category with no proof to back it up. I'm curious to know where is the proof that Alan Shepard, Connie Francis, Lee Elia, William G. Gregory, Donald Lambro, Ty Treadway are of Albanian or Arberesh, the bases on making them "Albanian", origins cause I looked and nowhere do any of these people make such claims. I also would like to know how Sandra Bullock, John Cena, Kemal Atatürk and of all people Benito Mussolini one of the biggest promoters of fascism opressors of Arberesh in Italy and who sought to dominate Albania, are considered "Albanian". Go figure. ~Mallaccaos, 4 May 2006

The edit on 26 Aug 2007 claims her father is Lebanese, which would make her Lebanese-Italian American. I think the edit is bogus.71.159.130.211 00:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)unsigned

Tuscan

Marisa Tomei is not an Albanian nor is she a Sicilian. She has repeatedly said that her ancestry is from Tuscany in Italy. Tomei is a Tuscan name.

Supercool Dude 03:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

mother comes from Messina, Sicily, father from Lucca, Tuscany...

She has dual citizenship between America and Italy. She sometimes travels under the Italian passport.

Does she sometimes not travel under her American passport? Why is this not worthy of note? TharkunColl 23:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• if she visits Europe, with an european passport she gets through customs quicker...

ph00ts plz

An article on an actor or actress really ought to have a photo.

-- Holy jeeze! Can we put any OTHER picture up? That one looks horrible! - W31RD0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.40.31 (talk) 15:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Why is it An urban ledgend?

i was reading the urban ledgend category, and i noticed that this
is an urban ledgend why?

I suspect it's the urban legend that her name was called for the Oscar when it was not really her who had won. http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/tomei.asp is the debunking of the urban legend that Snopes.com did. KyleGoetz 19:49, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Sweetheart

I removed the following unsourced statement. "The love of her life still remains to this day her college sweet heart Mark Segal from Philadelphia." Smylere Snape 23:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Does Seth MacFarlane not rate Marisa Tomei?

In the first episode of the second season of Family Guy ("Peter, Peter, Caviar Eater"), it is implied that Brian Griffin is responsible for the "miracle" of Marisa Tomei's Oscar. Why the dig, anyone? Surely there are many much less deserving Oscar recipients? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moletrouser (talk • contribs) 08:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: IMDb

Misplaced Pages:Citing IMDb -- which is an essay and not a policy guideline -- suggests we can cite certain things from IMDb, including cast lists from released films.

An uncredited role would not be in the film's cast list, so information about that in IMDb could not have come from the film but from a user. In cases of uncredited-role claims, we need to seek independent confirmation, particularly for claims about living persons. -- 207.237.223.118 (talk) 19:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

As I explained to you on your talk page, no, it isn't necessary to ask for citations for a film role listed as uncredited on IMDb. A great deal of specific information, regarding the particulars of a film itself, are vetted, which means they are confirmed through IMDb employees. Because the site has opened a lot of aspects for user submission does not mean the specifics of a film is not confirmed. It's a completely unnecessary thing to ask for confirmation for another source for a film role listed on IMDb. If you will note on the essay you found, it says specifically IMDb content suitable for Misplaced Pages: 2. Released films only: Sections such as the cast list, character names, the crew lists, release dates, company credits, awards, soundtrack listing, filming locations, technical specs, alternate titles, running times, and rating certifications. I've been on Misplaced Pages now for nearly 3 years, I've made well over 20000 edits and work almost exclusively on film and actor articles. Take my word on this. You do not need to ask for a cite for an uncredited role listed on IMDb. Because it was not in the actual credits of the film does not mean the role was not vetted by IMDb. You are mis-analyzing the comment on IMDb usage. It is absolutely acceptable for film credits. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate that you've been on Misplaced Pages for years. So have I; only the IP is relatively new, after a move.

Misplaced Pages considers a controversial source -- and I would, in all collaborative honesty, like your take on whether it has been controversial or not -- but IMDb is not an unimpeachable Bible. Therefore, I'm surprised and confounded at why any editor would deliberately want to block another editor from asking for a more reliable source. -- 207.237.223.118 (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You've been told now by three different editors - IMDb is a reliable source for film roles. Accept it. LaVidaLoca (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Indeed... useful for WP:Verification of certain facts, but but not for notability. They have a vetting process, and like all sources will make corrections if a piece of information they publish is shown to be incorrect... just as does the Washington Post or New York Times. Schmidt, 20:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding my edits

1. switching the picture. i think most people will agree that she looks better in the oscar photo. not only is it more recent, but she is smiling unlike the unflattering photo that currently shows.

2. in the career section, i am entering informaion about a few films. (FYI lavidavoca, using the phrase "star vehicle" is not POV, it is common knowledge. i will give a source to prove you wrong). i also changed the order of a few things. it mentions her 2000 film "what women want" at the top then mentions an SNL appearance six years earlier below that. everything flows better if it is in chronological order rather than being scattered all over the article.Excuseme99 (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Whether an image is unflattering or not is often a POV point, and in this case, more than one person has disagreed with you. The 2008 photo is not unflattering, there is no rule dictating that the Oscar picture be the one used. Both are free-use images, both were taken within a few months of each other and at least the dress fits well in the David Shankbone photo. Meanwhile, you've removed citations, invalidated others by introducing errors to them, put in less reliable ones that are improperly formatted and are edit warring to force your version through over the objections of more than one editor. Just because you post a note on this page that only reiterates that you're reverting back does not mean you have discussed it with editors who have already disagreed with your changes. Nothing has been discussed, nothing has been worked through, at no place has a consensus occurred to use the version you keep sticking in. This isn't what discussing disagreements is, this is just another way you've found to edit war. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Academy Award Controversy

I'm seeing the edit war regarding this section. I actually came to this article expecting to find something about it. Can we put it back with the {{Refimprove|section}} until someone finds the sources? The ShadowSkull 20:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Factually, no. The problem is that all of it violates WP:BLP and therefore cannot remain without very strong reliable sources. To that, it isn't edit warring, it is a strong adherence to policy governing biographies of living persons. It falls entirely on the person who adds content to support it verifiably and reliably. There are few other policies that are more critical on WP. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Understood, I googled for references and also removed the arbitrary (i.e. personal POV) statements. The ShadowSkull 13:10, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Found the Roger Ebert articles about this rumor. I think that's a good enough source. JJ Georges (talk) 11:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe this content belongs here. First of all, it discusses a rumor that was spread around. Second the link you added to Ebert's column comes up to a generic page. Thirdly, it occupies nearly 2500 kb of content, which is entirely undue weight to what is essentially an untruth. Fourthly, it conceivably is a libel issue in regard to what it claims about Reed. This needs to be removed. Fifthly, as Tomei said, it extremely hurtful, so why would we dedicate 1/7 of the article to this misadventure? Sara's Song (talk) 11:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, it might be too long, but since the rumor was admittedly hurtful to her career, it should be mentioned, especially since it apparently still needs to be debunked. The fact that Roger Ebert mentions this as an ever-recurring rumor proves that it did have some importance, however negative. I think any serious article about Ms Tomei should mention that rumor, if only to disprove it. I put the text back, and made it notably shorter, so it would not have "undue weight". I do not think this is a libel issue to say that Mr Reed started the rumor, since he apparently did. The fact that Roger Ebert's article claiming this is still online proves that Mr Reed has not sued Mr Ebert, so the information is apparenly genuine. Also, the Ebert pages are not "generic" at all : just take a look. JJ Georges (talk) 13:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

The fact that Ebert was not sued has nothing to do with us adding content that tends to smear another person, based on a rumor. Secondly, in your edit summary you stated: "pointless. It did hurt her career, so it should me mentioned". Please elaborate how that is to justify your revert. You actually added "She would go on to receive critical acclaim and respect for future performances in Unhook the Stars, Alfie and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead and received Academy Award nominations for In the Bedroom and The Wrestler.", so I'm wondering just how her career was hurt. And you did not answer why, since Tomei has said this is hurtful, would we want to remind her of that? Sara's Song (talk) 23:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

If Ms Tomei says that the rumor was "hurtful" to some degree (either personally, professionally, or both), then it must have been. The fact that she did receive nominations (I did not write this originally, I just put it back) after this "controversy" proves, if necessary, that she is capable of quality work and that her career has recovered. So mentioning this notable rumor, which has been reported in several medias and books, is not detrimental at all to Ms Tomei's reputation : on the contrary, it actually helps debunking it by providing several links explaining how and why there was nothing true about it. As for the "would we want to remind her of that", well I don't see the point. This article is not intended for the personal use of Ms Tomei and, as stated before, it is not defamatory at all; it is meant to be "encyclopedic", so it should contain as much information as possible for the readers interested in the subject. Since this rumor has done some damage to Ms Tomei's reputation, then it should be mentioned, with all the necessary information about its lack of veracity (while avoiding, I'll agree on that, to give it "undue weight"). You have three book references, one of which mentions an article in The Hollywood reporter about the subject, and two mentions by a major columnist : this proves without question that this rumor - however unfortunate - is notable and still needs debunking. Not mentioning it would be pointless and might actually do more harm than good, as some people would believe that wikipedia is "censoring the facts", or whatever. JJ Georges (talk) 23:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

And precisely how did this hurt her reputation? You've already not answered how this hurt her career. Did she lose roles? If so, what? Do directors balk at hiring her because Rex Reed said Jack Palance read the wrong name? How was she personally harmed by this? Also, just so you know, this has been in the article in the past and was removed. Sara's Song (talk) 00:31, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

• Start-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles