This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MBisanz (talk | contribs) at 00:05, 30 August 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:05, 30 August 2005 by MBisanz (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Reagan assassination
"Some view Foster is partially to blame for snubbing the disturbed Hinckley yet she has never apologized for her involvment in the shooting which left Jame Brady paralyzed." It's pretty ridiculous to say that she owes anybody an apology; she's not responsible for Hinckley's actions. Besides, it's stupid to say that all celebrities should respond to the advances of crazy fans, and it's unfair to say Jodie Foster should have done it when she had no idea what was going to happen. I don't want to delete this until there's been a little bit of discussion, but this section is pretty biased against her. --PatadyBag 01:27, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Too much censorship
Wiki is supposed to be unbiased not a fawning hagiography of this women. Critics fawn over her but some see her as the hypocritical twit she is. She hides in the closet and makes commercials in Japan as to not damage her golden image.
Even if (for instance) she has made commercials in Japan, a) tons of American celebrities make commercials that never air in the United States (for instance, Jennifer Aniston in a Heiniken commercial that aired in Germany), so the fact that she's made commercials abroad doesn't merit mention in the article, and b) the dig about it being not to tarnish her image makes the article NPOV and hence it has no place in Misplaced Pages. --PatadyBag 02:13, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Isn't this Censorship?
The fact that she did make commercials in Japan (at least 1) is relevant to her
career. This is not an Aniston art. It is also reasonable to assume Foster is worried about her image since she is a Hollywood actress and has stayed in the closet for so long.
Patybag and Sciro you need to allow factual relevant info about Foster to be
allowed. Will the RC patrol or someone look into this?? This is supposed to be unbiased and INFORMATIVE about the real J. Foster. Please re-insert J. commercial info.
Jodie Foster is not God, she is what she is even if she won't admit it, part of the Hollywood
PR machine that turns out crap. Foster is considered by some to be a phony who hides her girlfriend and the father of her children.
Foster carefully cultivates an wholesome all american image while she hides in her closet as
millions die of AIDS when her prominence could bring greater awareness. She is a public figure who rakes in millions making violent Hollywood movies such as Silence of the Lambs.
Shame on Foster and those in Hollywood who aid in her propaganda! Activists say stop watching
Foster movies. Flightplan is a rip-off of Red Eye anyways.
Dude, you read like a bad tabloid. I don't know what your beef with Foster (and looking at what your "contributions" are, with Meryl Streep as well), but your information has no business being in an encyclopedic article. So she's done commercials overseas- so have tons of celebrities. Not even close to worthy of mention in the article. As for your speculation as to her reasons not for doing American ads, it's pure speculation that is propaganda at best. If you want to vilify the woman, then do it here on the talk page- not on the main article. --PatadyBag 04:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Facts are Relevant- Censorship is not
Facts are facts. This should be mediated by and Admin or someone. By deleting relevant biographical facts about Foster that is totally POV censorship. I challenge anyone to disprove that J. Foster has acted in Japanese commercials for large amounts of money. If a fact is true about a public figure and it is about her career how is it biased. It is biased to delete/censor this info. If you want to include this info for other relevant celebs be my guest. Foster's article should be informative and comprehensive not a hagiography that is a total biased POV. NPOV does not mean omitting facts that can be construed as negative (there's nothing wrong with being in a commercial). People on Wiki can decide for themselves how they feel about Foster not have the FACT that she was in J. commercials be censored. This is a well documented fact as is the FACT that she has not done US commercials in decades
- If you want to include "Some critics believe this is due to her desire to maintain a certain image in the American public" in the article, you'll have to let us know WHICH critics, if they're notable, where they have made these comments, and sources to document these claims. Zoe 06:42, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
Thanx for the tip
However the info/fact that she has done more than one Japanese commercial while she has not done any US commercials in decades is an undisputed relevant fact about her career and NEEDS to be allowed into her bio b/c it is biographical info. There's no need to censor truthful info about Foster's career or life. It's like omitting Clinton's scandal with Lewinsky b/c some people like Clinton. Readers can decide for themselves about a person based on the facts. Wiki should be about relevant facts not omission of the relevant facts about her career. If it's relevant that she has worked in movies than it's relevant she has done (worked) in Japanese Honda commercials. Let the people decide how they feel about this FACT don't censor it. Let the 1st Amd principles and NPOV be your guide not suppression of facts. 66.248.122.177 20:01, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
- Like I said, don't put in the editorial comment. Just say that she's made commercials overseas, and let the readers make up their own minds. Zoe 07:05, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
Some thoughts on Ms. Foster to help future edits
Let me start by saying I have nothing against Jodie Foster. She is obviously intelligent, but that is not the issue. She probably doesn/t know me personally even though I have worked in the movie industry (briefly). I appreciate the suggestions of the adm (Zoe and others) I just find it disturbing that certain relevant facts about J. Foster are suppressed such as her starring in Japanese commercials and that she is not open about her sexuality. Perhaps that is her right but she is a public person who could save lives if she "came out of the closet" so to speak. What bothers me about Foster is her apparent hypocrisy, shilling for the Japanese yet American commercials are not good enough for her. Its reasonable to infer that there is some PR ideas here. Once she apparently signed an autograph picture and took the fan's picture with her by giving it to her bodyguard (Celebrity Uncensored). If Ms. Foster is a mult-millionaire actress why does she have to "take" a poor fan's picture of her. Again it would be possible to infer some PR consideration on her part.
It's disappointing that someone who has benefited so much from America, has not done more for it. Does she contribute to charity? Probably a few but I haven't heard of any. One thing for sure she is no Cindy Sheehan. Ms. Foster stays apolitical as she rakes in the money from her Hollywood films. Maybe that's smart for her and too smart for us. Isn't FlightPlan very similar to a Twilight Zone plot about returning astronauts. I just urge people to think about who they want to have as their Movie Stars and their character should count too. 66.248.122.177 20:01, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm not going to revert anymore since it only ends up as a pointless edit war, but I remain firm in my assertion that mention of Foster's commercial work shouldn't be included in the article. Endorsement is a typical part of being a celebrity- if mention of foreign commercials merits attention here, then by extrapolation all celebrity endorsements worldwide should be mentioned in their respective articles. It seems the only reason you are so intent on including this virtually pointless information is because you've got something against Foster. As such, keep your opinions on the talk page instead of in the article itself. --PatadyBag 19:56, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
The Big Picture
Why does exist an article about Jodie Foster in Misplaced Pages? Is it beacause she speaks French, or because she made Japanese commercials or beacause she is inteligent or because she's an alleged lesbian? No! None of the above. Jodie Foster has an article in Misplaced Pages because she is a professional actress who won many awards (including 2 Oscars) and because many of her films are well received both by public and by critics. The rest is non-relevant material for an encyclopaedia. The main focus should be on her professional carrer. What car she drives, who is she sleeping with, what she's advertising for are a small matter, suitable for magazines and tabloids. The goal of Misplaced Pages is to reach a very high standard. In order to achieve this take a look at the Jodie Foster article in Encyclopaedia Britannica. There is nothing there even remotely close to the things that have been wrote recently here by an anonymous person who is not a user. Mr. or Mrs. 66.248.122... please take your beef with J. Foster elsewhere. Although I don't think you can, try to see the big picture. Tavilis 20:28, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
I Really Have to Strongly Disagree Here
First I admit I am still learning all the nuances of Wiki-editing (what to put in a talk page). Also maybe some of my previous opinion have been colorful yet honest. I have tried to be civil and everyone has been fairly civil but it is unfair to just delete relevant info about Ms. Foster's career just b/c you don't like it. I have never made any statements on Wiki about what language she speaks or what car she drives. I did not write about her brother's bio or the initial allegation of her lesbianism Second it is really unfair to delete an important section about her career (work) in Japan. I spent hours locating the relevant and editing the page to add some fairly innocous but relevant info about here ad work in Japan. People should have all the facts about her career and draw their own conclusion not have it suppressed. Her ad work in Japan rather than the US is relevant career info. I urge users and admin to look at the page before Mr. Tavilis deleted it. Admin Zoe has said facts about her work in Japan is acceptable. Readers get the "big picture" with more relevant info about a performer's career not less. Whatever my opinion of Ms. Foster may be I have not let it colored my most recent editing. Please revert to NPOV including Advertising Work section. I don't want to but perhap we need some objective mediation on this editing issue.
I'm signing my ID right here. 66.248.123.149
Although I appreciate your taking the more editorial aspects of your additions to the article out of your revisions, and although I accept that she has done commercial work in Japan, it simply isn't important enough relative to her entire career to be included in an article about her (much less to have its own section). The only commercial that should be included in the article is her Coppertone commercial from when she was young because it is a culturally significant and iconic commercial. (P.S.- Even when you sign now, it only shows up as your IP address- I suggest you register for an account so discussion can take place on your talk page). --PatadyBag 21:08, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
You've said that her commercials in Japan are a part of her career. It is true because she was promoting her image in Japan where she became very popular. More Japanese came to cinemas to see her movies and consequently more money went to America. So she did something good for US. And in the process she made some bucks for herself. Good for her! She didn't do any commercials in her adult life in US because she didn't have to. She's rich enough and she didn't have to promote her image there - she's already famous. But there are other things which are part of her career. For examples she enjoys kickboxing, yoga, karate, aerobics, and weightlifting and one might say these are very important for her career because so she stays in good shape. She also recorded some songs for the movie "Moi, fleur bleu" which was another important issue in her career. There are many facts that we could say are or were important for her career. All these are interesting trivia stuff but perhaps they better stay out of an encyclopaedic article. We better focus on her career itself than on the facts affecting her career. Again please refer to the Jodie Foster article in Encyclopaedia Britannica for a glimpse of professionalism. Tavilis 22:02, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Reasonable Compromise Solution
First I'd like to thank Mr. Tavisil for responding. However I do not think his comparison to her kickboxing, weightlifting hobbies is apt because these are not professional activities of her. (She is not being paid for it) I personally wouldn't mind succint bio. info. like that on the page if someone cares to insert it. What I have done is re-insert a very small paragraph on her relevant work in Japan at the very end. Factual, NPOV and some people will certainly find it interesting/relevant b/c it is part of her professional body of work. I hope this will bring consensus and we can move on. Also I will remove some of the earlier comments on this page which seem to offend people. This isn't about my opinion of her but providing relevant biographical facts of interest to the reader. Thanks for all your input. 66.248.123.149 22:59, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Here we go- I edited the page a little bit to what I view as an acceptable compromise. It retains mention of her commercial work, but doesn't mention that she hasn't been in commercials in the U.S. since childhood (since a) there's no way to be entirely certain of that, and b) it's a little redundant, seeing as Japan is specifically mentioned to the exclusion of the States). I also got rid of the mention of it being a lucrative deal, since that's why celebrities generally do commercials in the first place (thus, it sort of goes without saying). Hopefully this compromise works for you? --PatadyBag 23:05, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Let's just move on with consensus/comprom. and help Wiki be great
I am only trying to do my small part to put some relevant info and help Wiki grow as a great Internet reference resource I really feel we have spent enough time on this issue and can move on if everyone is reasonable. I'm not trying to upset any users/fans here. I'm just trying to add some relevant info about J. Foster. Quite frankly I found the last edit a little petty and unnecessary. To address some of Mr. PatadyBag's points: first you wrote that you "I'm not going to revert anymore since it only ends up as a pointless edit war" yet you delete some links and headings (a defacto revert). Second I'm happy to change the sentence to "any US television commercials since childhood" if that helps. There is no evidence I know of of Foster being in a consumer product TV commercial since the Coppertone. If anyone has other info. please present it. Also not all ad contracts are lucrative, some local ads may only pay a few hundred $ (scale) for local models/actors. Plus oversea ads are very lucrative that's why US celebs do them for overseas and not here (ie Dicaprio apparently got $2million for one Jp commercial). Therefore it is relevant to note that her Jp deals likely was lucrative and more importantly they have clauses which prevent them from being shown in the US. That's why Americans never see them. This applies (as PR) not only to Foster but to other celebs who do ads for Jp companies. All of this is relevant information b/c it pertains to her professional work.
Whatever honest mistakes I have made I have not delete any real info from this article. I've only tried add a little on her professional work. Why should anyone be afraid of this information about Foster's work? The heading and link citation is only to accord with Wiki style guidelines and make it easier for readers to follow. Let's remember these entries (biographical) are not just for fans of the subject but for people who might want to learn more about the topic. We shouldn't delete any relevant info on the subject unless absolutely necessary. Also these are just facts about Foster that some might find "trivial" but others might find useful and informative (or even entertaining). I might find the fact she starred in "Napoleon & Samantha" or she went to a French school trivial but I'm not certainly going to delete it. It's up to the readers to decide what facts are trivial and what facts are useful for them. If editors delete everything THEY find trivial Wiki has less info for its readers and everyone in Wiki loses!
Also NPOV doesn't mean no point of view it means multiple points of views for balance (Wiki Help) as long as its truthful, relevant and presented clearly for the encyclopedia. Don't let any comments made on the Talk page color your editing decision on the article's main page. I've already remove some of the more colorful comments on this page. There should be a presumption of inclusion for all facts pertaining to Foster's life and work. Let's all work to help add to Wiki and make it better. Thanks for listening.66.248.120.96 02:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
A hearty amen to the quest of making the Wiki better- and that's what argument like this ultimately does (once a solution is reached, anyways). Here's why I made the edits I did- I took out the header for advertising work because advertising is not a significant part of her career- she is known most for making movies, and that is what the primary focus of the article should be. I'm not averse to leaving in mention of the Japanese commercials, but at the moment the amount of space dedicated to this work is a bit disproportionate to the rest of her career. Second- I got rid of the setence regarding how lucrative the deals are because it's obvious without being stated that celebrities do commercials to make money; although I concede you point that not all people in commercials make a lot of money, Jodie Foster is an international celebrity, and hence any commercial she would be in is bound to be lucrative. Third, I got rid of the mention of clauses preventing airing in the U.S. because it really isn't important to the gist of the article and is at best fluff. Finally, I got rid of the mention of not having done U.S. commercials since childhood because you don't provide any proof for it. If you can find credible documentation that she's limited her commercial work to overseas, I'd be more than happy to include it. --PatadyBag 04:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
Reply to Mr. Patadybag
I guess we have to agree to disagree. I just feel you are being unfair with these edits/reverts. Facts about Ms. Foster's work are pertinent and can be helpful to learn more about Ms. Foster for readers. Encyclopedias should inform. You still did not explain why you erased the cite link. Also her Ad Work was under a small Subheading under Life and Career not a heading. It is interesting information at the very end of a fairly comprehensive article which readers can interpret as they wish. Also there is no evidence based on multiple media watchers that she has been in any US consumer TV commercial in years, based on this it's reasonable to assume that she has not done any US TV commercials since Coppertone. The burden of proof is on those who want to show she has done US TV commercials to provide the evidence. Absent that there is a reasonable presumption she has not since she is primarily a movie and not a commercial actress (except for overseas commercials as I've tried to note). I've asked for mediation help but I don't know how long it will take. Again this is not about my feelings about Ms. Foster or trying to anger anyone, only to include information that is useful for readers based on unbiased facts. 66.248.121.159 13:54, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- See Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style_(headings)#Capitalisation for how capitalisation in section headers are done, so "Advertising work" not "Advertising Work"; not that I agree with adding this section header. Note also that the japander link is in the "References" section, as we prefer not to have external links above that and the "External link(s)" sections. As for the misspelling, don't worry — it's a tricky name :) — Jeandré, 2005-08-28t22:15z
FINAL VOTE- INCLUDE/DON'T INCLUDE ADVERTISING INFO
Obviously this isn't going to get anywhere- the edits I made reflect the absolute maximum about the advertising that deserves mention in the article (just for comparison, at the moment you have as much space dedicated to the ads as is already dedicated to her two Best Actress Oscar wins). I call for a final vote on whether this ought to be in the article.
Oppose inclusion in the article, for all the reasons I've listed above. --PatadyBag 18:14, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose including in the article the info regarding the Japan commercials beacuse of many reasons discussed above.Tavilis 18:29, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
For inclusion as relevant info. and reasons listed above. However I take it this is a non-binding survey for info only per Wiki policy. Also this survey has not been listed in the appropriate dispute resolution page as far as I see. 66.248.121.66 18:43, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- I think we should consider this binding- you've already listed this conflict on the dispute page (in a rather biased way against me, might I add), and nothing has happened, so it seems like the fastest and easiest way to resolve this once and for all is to do what the results of this survey say. --PatadyBag 20:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose all votes. Zoe 20:51, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Ultimately, I'm not completely opposed to having the commercials mentioned briefly- but right now, there are 4 lines and a subsection dedicated to obscure commercials overseas and 2.5 lines dedicated to her two Oscar wins. It's extremely disproportionate, and should be left with only a brief mention of her ad work. --PatadyBag 22:05, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose - rather pointless info, to put it mildly, and highly disproportional. -- AlexR 16:33, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - One liner about it in filmography maybe, otherwise nothing Mbisanz 00:05, August 30, 2005 (UTC)