Revision as of 20:01, 2 February 2014 editPatGallacher (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers49,440 edits Dylan's allegations← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:01, 2 February 2014 edit undoHullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers96,059 edits →Sexual Abuse Allegations: cmtNext edit → | ||
Line 310: | Line 310: | ||
::: I agree, but that does not address my point at all. My point is, that what Dylan has done (accuse Woody Allen) is beyond dispute, is NPOV, and is not original research (in other words, simply saying he has accused is not a BLP violation, it's simply a fact). WHAT she was accusing Allen of is, of course, under dispute. THAT she has accused Allen is NOT under dispute. I simply do not see how saying that Dylan did something which is beyond dispute (i.e. accuse Allen very publicly) is a BLP violation. It is possible and would probably preferable to say that Dylan lodged accusations (again, this is simply an irrefutable, neutral fact) without going into the details of the allegations. ] (]) 19:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC) | ::: I agree, but that does not address my point at all. My point is, that what Dylan has done (accuse Woody Allen) is beyond dispute, is NPOV, and is not original research (in other words, simply saying he has accused is not a BLP violation, it's simply a fact). WHAT she was accusing Allen of is, of course, under dispute. THAT she has accused Allen is NOT under dispute. I simply do not see how saying that Dylan did something which is beyond dispute (i.e. accuse Allen very publicly) is a BLP violation. It is possible and would probably preferable to say that Dylan lodged accusations (again, this is simply an irrefutable, neutral fact) without going into the details of the allegations. ] (]) 19:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC) | ||
::::It's not a new allegation, although the specificity may be greater than previous accounts. The allegation is already mentioned in the context of the custody dispute. If the allegation were included in this manner, NPOV and BLP would require us to add the medical team's determination of its likely falsity, and the allegations of Farrow's supposed campaign in response to Allen's award nominations, and more, ad nauseam. If we're going to follow the "do no harm" foundation for BLP policy, this is a topic that should be handled minimally and quite carefully absent a real resolution or balanced evaluation in reliable secondary sources. ] (]) 20:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Soon Yi links == | == Soon Yi links == |
Revision as of 20:01, 2 February 2014
Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Woody Allen article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
Woody Allen was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
|
Template:WP1.0 Template:Vital article
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Archives |
---|
|
Links
Uh, I don't normally contribute to Misplaced Pages, so I'm not really sure what to do with these, but I thought someone who's more of a regular here might want to make use of these links.
http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/woody
And
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/music/archives/2009/06/interview_woody.php?page=1
Supposedly the first link is about Whatever Works, but it really isn't. It's more about Woody Allen's worldview. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.149.119.250 (talk) 08:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Ancient Greece?
"More recently, Ancient Greece has become a source for ideas." No link, no source, no further details? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamharush (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Umlaut? Königsberg or Konigsberg?
Hi,
I'm confussed about his official family name. While it's sure that the original form must be Königsberg, I wonder what form he has in his papers... does he have an umlaut in his american passport? German wikipedia lists Konigsberg without umlaut.
popolfi --217.224.15.195 11:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- It would be extremely rare for an American family to use such a form. I'm sure the umlaut got dropped as soon as whatever ancestor came over to the United States.—Chowbok ☠ 16:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Chowbok is correct. Of course Woody Allen is of German descent and thus he has a German name. Of course, as he is a Yiddish Jew we are not allowed to say he is of German descent so we can keep wikipedia's myth of Jewish racial purity. _ Anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.86.174 (talk) 11:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
- Please assume good faith. The article doesn't say he has German heritage, it says "His family was Jewish and his grandparents were Yiddish- and German-speaking immigrants." The source doesn't support saying he is German. That's why the category was removed. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
- In the old Germany existed a city called Königsberg, with umlaut, in the former East Prussia. But I don´t think that the reason is that his family came from this country. Jews took mostly very "soundful" names, like Blumental (valley of flowers), Rosenkranz, Goldberg (gold mountain) etc. Königsberg means: the king´s mountain. 91.221.59.5 (talk) 07:10, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
WP:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers priority assessment
Per debate and discussion re: assessment of the approximate 100 top priority articles, this article has been included as a top priority article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Categories: Films directed by Woody Allen
Since Woody Allen is a person and not a film, I think this article should not belong to the "Films" category. Agreed? Thanks Kvsh5 (talk) 06:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC) Agreed.Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 08:46, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Allen signed petition defending Roman Polanski
I propose that the following sentence be added to the artcle:
In 2009, Allen signed a petition asking that film director Roman Polanski be released from Swiss custody after Polanski was arrested for raping a 13-year-old girl.
- In Roman Polanski case, is it Hollywood vs. Middle America?, Los Angeles Times, October 1, 2009
Grundle2600 (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- I dont' agree with this:
- a) Woody Allen was only one of the signatories, he was not the leading personality behind the petition.
- b) Fact that he signed a petition is of minimal importance relating to his biography - while the other initiatives he took part in are not mentioned in the article.
- c) The proposed formulation is misleading, as Polanski was detained because of warrant relating to charge over 30 years old, not to any recent charge - and formulation used collides with Misplaced Pages policy on facts unrelated to the subject of the article, and at the same time violates neutral point of view required by rules for articles on biography of living persons.--ja_62 (talk) 17:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- Clear BLP violation, selective presentation of facts in order to increase disparaging impact of claim. More generally, content like this should be incorporated into 2009 arrest of Roman Polanski rather than scattered throughout Misplaced Pages. This is nowhere near significant enough in the context of Allen's life to mention in his biography. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- Agree. It's factually inaccurate, to start. Polanski was not arrested in Switzerland for child rape, he was arrested on a 30 year old fugitive warrant, not child rape, the petition is not about the crime, but is about the manner and the legality of Polanski's recent arrest. That's a completely different thing, about the process. It is undue weight in regard to that, and it is not relevant to what makes this article subject notable. It's a violation of WP:BLP. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
The "woody allen-character" section
I move to delete this section, as it is entirely speculation. Woody Allen has refuted this many times. Reduced to its essence, the section only serves to make two false claims: 1) All the characters in all the Woody Allen films that have ever displayed neuroses are not really several different characters but the same character that he's been working on since the 60's. 2) He chooses other actors to play that one character, since he is now too old to play him. --Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 23:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. In essence, that is nothing more than original research/writer opinion. There is nothing establishing that the roles Allen played were a character created by him, much less that he stopped portraying characters in his films because he was too old. The only film in which it could be confirmed that the age factor changed the film plot focus was in Scoop, in which the "crush" was changed from Allen having an interest in Scarlett Johannson to the converse. This isn't appropriate in this article. LaVidaLoca (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
His name
If he legally changed his name to Heywood Allen then why is the caption allen stewart konisberg? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.237.54 (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
- Because the caption is of his birth name. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Shouldn't his legal name appear in the first sentence of the article? E.g. Heywood "Woody" Allen (born Allen Stewart Konigsberg, December 1, 1935) is an American filmmaker... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.84.234.217 (talk) 23:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Did he choose that name (as opposed to Woodrow) partly because of Heywood Broun? I've never read anything to that effect, but given the rarity of the name and who Broun was, it seems like too much of a coincidence. Richard K. Carson (talk) 01:28, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Lawsuit with American Apparel
In regards to his lawsuit, is there an article that has information about it? If not, should there be a section about it in this article? I found out about it from seeing the American Apparel press release about the settlement: http://www.americanapparel.net/presscenter/dailyupdate/dailyUp.asp?d=52&t=1724 WhisperToMe (talk) 05:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think so. It seemed like a big deal to me, while it was happening, but in the grand scheme of things Woody, I don't think it bears much relevance. I think it bears more relevance regarding things American Apparel. If you still think it should be mentioned, I recommend inserting it into the "Work about or inspired by Woody Allen" section.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 06:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Woody's umlaut
LOL- Nice catch, Sara's Song. On both counts.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 04:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! Sara's Song (talk) 06:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Re: Ronan Seamus Farrow
I'm not so sure that we really need Woody's son's assessment in this article. I'm curious what other editors think.--Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 08:19, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
- I removed it because it had no reliable source. Was there one and I missed it?
--Javaweb (talk) 00:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Javaweb
Agnositicism/atheism
God and the meaning of life is an important part of Allen's work, and he is himself an agnostic/atheist who has made comments about the meaninglessness of life (e.g. "Your perception of time changes as you get older, because you see how brief everything is. You see how meaningless … I don't want to depress you, but it's a meaningless little flicker"; "... I'm spiritually empty 'cause I am an atheist and I've never found any consolation for the misery of life and the terror of what we go through, and I'm talking existentially now, not politically."), but there's nothing in the article about this aspect of his work and life. I'm not sure how to best incorporate it though. Fences&Windows 13:32, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
The chart about recurring collaborators
How do editors feel about this. I think it's tacky, takes up too much room and is not needed. If editors feel it's important to the article than fine but wouldn't putting it in prose be better than this? Opinions please, thanks, --CrohnieGal 14:49, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with you - the table/chart looks messy, is confusing and adds very little value. Not needed. - Josette (talk) 23:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- The big black X draws the eye to an aspect of the article that is not the number one priority, and in doing so, it overshadows more relevant content. The template is used in a small number of articles and, although I appreciate that it is used in good faith, I don't think it adds value. I agree with you and Josette. It looks like the exam paper for the worst student in the class, and I think it deserves an "F". Rossrs (talk) 07:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support: "it's tacky, takes up too much room and is not needed". Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
- I believe this section has morphed into "Actors and actresses in Woody Allen's movies". It's now a long and pointless list, with dozens of names. By comparison, Alfred Hitchcock#Frequently cast actors and actresses includes only ten people, and those specifically because they are frequently cast. Unless someone can defend its inclusion in this article I'll move it to Woody Allen filmography. Will Beback talk 12:14, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Copyright problem
This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Misplaced Pages cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 14:25, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
List of actors/actresses in Allen films
I think this section is useless. The actors and actresses aren't in any order (as far as I can see), and the list isn't even complete. To fix these problems would require a substantial amount of time. Furthermore, is this section even interesting? Perhaps if presented differently (like a category format) it would make more sense, but right now, I would support the deletion of this section. Wolfehhgg (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support deletion m.cellophane (talk)m.cellophane —Preceding undated comment added 04:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC).
Reference needed for statement about Mr. Allen's psychoanalysis
for the statement that Woody Allen ended his psychoanalytic sessions about the same time as he began a relationship with his present wife.
This is presented as his own statement without source.
Expelled from NYU?
It's been reported on several websites that he was expelled from NYU, although the reason isn't quite clear. BrotherSulayman (talk) 05:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
- Mr. Allen has said he was "thrown out". See this Fresh Air transcript and search text for "flunked". --Javaweb (talk) 11:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Javaweb
- "Woody Allen On Life, Films And 'Whatever Works'". Fresh Air. June 15, 2009. NPR. http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=105400872.
I flunked out. I was thrown out of New York University in my first year there…
{{cite episode}}
: External link in
(help)|transcript=
- "Woody Allen On Life, Films And 'Whatever Works'". Fresh Air. June 15, 2009. NPR. http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=105400872.
- He says he was uninterested in school at the time so he failed his courses. --Javaweb (talk) 23:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)Javaweb
Clothing is Singular...
See this example in The NY Times headline.
File:Woody.Allen.band.jpg Nominated for Deletion
An image used in this article, File:Woody.Allen.band.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests May 2011
| |
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC) |
"Significant Works About Woody Allen" Section
This information contained in the section doesn't seem to warrant its own section. It would probably make more sense if the info here could be integrated into other sections. Any other suggestions?Jpcohen (talk) 20:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Interiors
Please reference the film. It has no jokes or humor. "Gloomy" is not "speculation". The previous movies he directed were comedies. "sharp departure" is accurate as well. No speculation involved. Making wikipedia more objective is a good thing. However, none of these statements are controversial and there is no question about objectivity. --Javaweb (talk) 17:28, 21 July 2011 (UTC)Javaweb
- No disrespect but labeling the movie "gloomy" is a negative judgement. If you want to add a negative assessment of Interiors, I would recommend finding outside sources. For instance, if an Allen biographer calls the movie "gloomy," then that doesn't break the rules regarding WP:OPINION.Jpcohen (talk) 08:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps calling the movie "dark" would seem less judgemental.Jpcohen (talk) 08:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. It helps to have other editors review changes. --Javaweb (talk) 14:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)Javaweb
Did Allen get good performances from his actors
the removed text is not trivial. It helps answer that question. --Javaweb (talk) 22:05, 11 September 2011 (UTC)Javaweb
- It doesn't mention how he got good performances from his actors it just says that some actors and actresses in his movies won awards. It didn't tie into Allen at all, it wasn't him personally winning those awards and it just seemed odd to mention others in a section devoted to the awards that he himself won--GroovySandwich 04:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- The recent American Masters Doc from PBS mentions this exact thing and I think it's encyclopedic and interesting information about Woody himself to learn how many of the actors and actresses in his films have won awards, especially academy awards, and I've come to this page to find that exact information. I think it should be mentioned. Dancindazed (talk) 20:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Atheism
Did he renounce his atheism or something? The cats for him are gone. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 2:29 7 October 2011 (UTC)
potential resource American Masters
Woody Allen: A Documentary premiered November 20 2011 from 9-11 p.m. (ET/PT) and Monday, November 21 from 9-10:30 p.m. (ET/PT) on PBS 99.56.120.136 (talk) 02:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
"O.P.S. prices"
Buried in the Talk archives is the explanation that "O.P.S. prices" refers to the Office of Price Stabilization, an agency of the Economic Stabilization Agency, which exist4ed only during the Korean War. I think if the joke is worth including at all, "O.P.S." needs to be explained in the article, not just on the Talk page. While explaining a joke means it will not be funny, it would at least be understandable. If the joke cannot be explained without a lot of tangential exposition, I suggest deleting it as unencyclopedic trivia. jnestorius 17:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
help with the name of this "film"
Some one knows the name of this film by Woody Allen, in which he play a joker that wants to have sex with a queen... I don't really know if he directed it or if he wrote it
- Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex* (*But Were Afraid to Ask) --Javaweb (talk) 01:42, 3 September 2012 (UTC)Javaweb
Carla Bruni , French First Lady
There was a change to show Carla Bruni is now the former French first lady. At the time of "Midnight in Paris", Carla Bruni was the current First Lady. Can someone think of a way of wording it that would capture that? --Javaweb (talk) 08:18, 8 September 2012 (UTC)Javaweb I revised the clause of that sentence to, "Carla Bruni, who was the First Lady of France at the time of production." It accurately reflects her status during shooting in a concise way that maintains the flow of the sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.106.171 (talk) 17:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
He' the one
He is so good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.147.68 (talk) 08:35, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Need a section for the TV show, 'Kraft Music Hall: Woody Allen looks at 1967'
On December 27th, 1967, Woody Allen hosted a televised variety show titled “Kraft Music Hall: Woody Allen looks at 1967". The "Kraft Music Hall", which ran from 1967 to 1971, featured a different host on each weekly show. Woody Allen's clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNErWi_lTig Shouldn't mention of this be in the main article? Theaternearyou (talk) 04:44, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Allen is an author too
Allen is an author too. he has at least three published books. i don't know how to add "author" to the list of his occupations under his photo. 15:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC) Michael Christian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.229.11.14 (talk)
Oscar night tradition?
I read somewhere that on Oscar night (or perhaps only on Oscar nights in which he is nominated), Allen performs music at a New York club in lieu of attending. This isn't mentioned in the Academy Awards section; I'm sure it's probably referenced in a biography of him. 70.72.201.229 (talk) 15:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
"Born" vs né
Re:this edit: "Woody Allen (born Allan Stewart Konigsberg)" in the context of the article is clearer and simpler in English, the language of pages beginning with urls "http://en.wikipedia.org/..." "Woody Allen ( Allan Stewart Konigsberg)" is so unclear, the word needed a link to its definition. --Javaweb (talk) 10:45, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Javaweb
Which is it?
In the wives section, there are two conflicting dates for his fist marriage.
54 - 59 and right below that 56 - 62
So which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.100.176 (talk) 04:16, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Infobox bloat
The infobox is already bloated with irrelevant details about his personal life, including a list of his children and other relatives. Adding his girlfriends to the box overloads it with trivia. As it is, there are already entire subsections devoted to old girlfriends from his school days, when at most that kind of personal romance trivia shouldn't warrant entire sections, IMO. --Light show (talk) 21:23, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Birth name Allen, Allan
This subject has come up twice before on this talk page, but nobody has suggested multiple birth names. In looking up Woody Allen's birth name, I found a lot of sources saying Allen, a lot of sources saying Allan, and a few saying Alan. I was looking only at sources published before Misplaced Pages started in 2003, so as to avoid circular referencing.
- Here are some Allen sources
- Page 12 of The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, ISBN 0198601735
- Page 7 of Love, Sex, Death, And The Meaning Of Life: The Films Of Woody Allen, ISBN 0786748419
- Here are some Allan sources
- Page 24 of Woody Allen: A Biography, ISBN 0306809850
- Page 7 of Woody, from Antz to Zelig, ISBN 0313311331
I think we should tell the reader that various birth names are reported. I do not think we should choose one of them as being the one true answer. Binksternet (talk) 17:37, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Sexual Abuse Allegations
I believe that the sexual abuse allegations warrant a section. This was removed and I added it back - but an editor is trying to whitewash the page. The reason these warrant a section is that:
- The allegations continue to be a source of widespread discussion among critics and fans of Allen's work
- Allen's daughter, Dylan, not only complained of abuse when she was young but, now, as an adult, says that Allen did indeed molest her
- Allen's family has cut off ties with him and his biological son maintains that Allen is a child molester
I don't see how these facts do not warrant inclusion in an even handed discussion of anyone's personal life. To remove mention of any of these things violates NPOV.
Clubintheclub (talk) 19:55, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed I checked the New York Times reference and it says what you said, no OR or SYNTH. I can't check the vanity fair reference from work, so I can't vouch for that one, but the New York Times reference is fine. New York Times is a reliable source. KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh 18:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Great Do you mind adding a section when you have a chance? I am trying mediation/administrative warning w.r.t. the dispute with the editor who is whitewashing this page. I do not want to modify anything here myself. Clubintheclub (talk) 18:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Clubintheclub (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - rather than its own section, why not just include it in the section for his relationship with Mia Farrow? This way its integrated into the article with some context and not given WP:UNDUE attention. Just a suggestion... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Generally we do not add allegations, just as we do not for people's sexual preferences. Our adversarial legal system allows any allegations to be made at legal proceedings. Clearly in a divorce you have an advantage if make allegations like this against the person you are divorcing, it determines who gets custody. They may be true, may be false, but by reprinting them we are perpetuating trial allegations. We should stick to self-confessions and trial outcomes for sex truth or falsehood. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:36, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- The matter at issue is already treated, more evenhandedly and more appropriately, at Woody_Allen#Marriages_and_romantic_relationships, in the Mia Farrow section. Since Clubintheclub repeats some of the language there verbatim, they are clearly aware of that, and their claim I was "trying to whitewash the page" should be treated quite skeptically in light of that. There is no need for a second, more graphic and more inflammatory, treatment of the matter. My own preference aligns with Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )'s analysis, above, but I am quite reluctant to disturb the long-standing consensus on this point -- and certainly would not do so without prior discussion and consensus. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- I think the issue that I feel is not addressed is that the daughter herself, not the mother, claims that she was molested. Clubintheclub (talk) 21:22, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- The allegations may be true, or may be false. We do know that false memories can be implanted through repetition. The McMartin preschool trial children, now adults, still believe they were taken through secret tunnels and molested, because they were told over and over that they were. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Isn't the fact that we have a first hand admission (by the victim) of the abuse enough to mention it? Its not "our" accusation, its the accusation of the admitted victim. If she later recants, then that can be added to the article or the accusation stricken altogether. If its added to the "Mia Farrow" relationship section, its in proper context with the article not in its own section which brings Undue attention to the claim. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 23:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- The allegations may be true, or may be false. We do know that false memories can be implanted through repetition. The McMartin preschool trial children, now adults, still believe they were taken through secret tunnels and molested, because they were told over and over that they were. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Likewise, I don't think allegations warrant a section, despite the well-publicized chirps. That would place it as a TOC item in an encyclopedia, tabloid style. The article already looks a bit obsessive giving everyone he ever dated or winked at their own section, or listed in the info box. --Light show (talk) 23:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- At the Oak Hill satanic ritual abuse trial, Dan Keller just was released and apologized to. He spent over 20 years in prison based on false sexual abuse testimony by children. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:47, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Ms. Farrow was dumped for her adopted, adult daughter. Farrow had a strong motive to hurt Allen and that daughter. Farrow then claimed Soon-Yi was "retarded"(her word). Now we are supposed to believe Allen chose a brain-addled wife to live with for 20+ years and raise their 2 kids. She also had an accusation against Allen. She made an accusation against Allen in court and was not able to prove it and a team of experts concluded the accusation was false. Also,how likely is it that Allen would have been allowed to adopt his 2 kids if they believed the claims? Unless the allegations are proved, they are BLP --Javaweb (talk) 14:40, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Javaweb
- She also claimed that Soon-Yi was only 15 during her relationship with Allen, saying her adoption papers were faked. If these claims were made before a divorce proceeding they would carry more weight. If you are going to court, you go to win, and use all the legal weapons available. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:18, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Currently Dylan Farrow's renewed allegations against Woody Allen are on the online front pages of several newspapers and all over social media. It seems that there are a lot of people who are sceptical about the allegations, but that is no reason not to include them - they are clearly an important facet of his current reputation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.127.16.34 (talk) 10:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I am really wondering that there is no single statement (!?) about the actual allegetions in the English Misplaced Pages so far. Due to the upcoming discussion in Germany the German Wikipeadia stated today: "In 2013, the abuse allegations against Woody Allen were raised again, when the daughter Dylan Farrow stated in an interview with the magazine Vanity Fair and later on, in an open letter on the website of the New York Times in early 2014, that she has been sexually abused by him at the age of 7 years, see also
- Adopted daughter accuses - abuse allegations against Woody Allen, Neue Zürcher Zeitung on 14 October 2013
- Sexual Violence: adopted daughter throws Woody Allen abuse before, Der Spiegel on 2 February 2014
- Adopted daughter throws film director abuse before, Die Zeit on 2 February 2014
- Adopted daughter accuses Woody Allen, Die Welt on 2 February 2014
Ibohnet (talk) 16:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- I agree. That Dylan Farrow has gone public in this way is a fact and is beyond dispute. I don't think anyone could seriously say it's not notable. Whether the substance of her allegations are true does not alter the fact that she has acted in this very public way against Allen. I believe it will deserve a brief mention... not necessarily now, as Misplaced Pages is not a newspaper, but certainly in the near future. Marteau (talk)
- But see http://www.showbiz411.com/2014/02/01/mia-farrow-uses-close-pal-journalist-in-woody-allen-war-writer-of-latest-piece-is-close-friend and http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html . I don't see any reason to rush to judgment on a contretemps between two people (Mia Farrow and Woody Allen) with track records of creepy behavior. Dylan Farrow is a victim -- but whether of her father's sexual abuse or her mother's psychological abuse hasn't been determined, and the Misplaced Pages editing community is hardly well-qualified to even frame the discussion. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- I agree, but that does not address my point at all. My point is, that what Dylan has done (accuse Woody Allen) is beyond dispute, is NPOV, and is not original research (in other words, simply saying he has accused is not a BLP violation, it's simply a fact). WHAT she was accusing Allen of is, of course, under dispute. THAT she has accused Allen is NOT under dispute. I simply do not see how saying that Dylan did something which is beyond dispute (i.e. accuse Allen very publicly) is a BLP violation. It is possible and would probably preferable to say that Dylan lodged accusations (again, this is simply an irrefutable, neutral fact) without going into the details of the allegations. Marteau (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- It's not a new allegation, although the specificity may be greater than previous accounts. The allegation is already mentioned in the context of the custody dispute. If the allegation were included in this manner, NPOV and BLP would require us to add the medical team's determination of its likely falsity, and the allegations of Farrow's supposed campaign in response to Allen's award nominations, and more, ad nauseam. If we're going to follow the "do no harm" foundation for BLP policy, this is a topic that should be handled minimally and quite carefully absent a real resolution or balanced evaluation in reliable secondary sources. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- I agree, but that does not address my point at all. My point is, that what Dylan has done (accuse Woody Allen) is beyond dispute, is NPOV, and is not original research (in other words, simply saying he has accused is not a BLP violation, it's simply a fact). WHAT she was accusing Allen of is, of course, under dispute. THAT she has accused Allen is NOT under dispute. I simply do not see how saying that Dylan did something which is beyond dispute (i.e. accuse Allen very publicly) is a BLP violation. It is possible and would probably preferable to say that Dylan lodged accusations (again, this is simply an irrefutable, neutral fact) without going into the details of the allegations. Marteau (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Soon Yi links
The Soon Yi Previn bracketed hyperlinks are recursive to this page after a redirect, please remove them as they are pointless.68.5.176.101 (talk) 00:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
age of Moses Farrow at time of decision not to see Allen
According to the NYT article sourced in the Mia Farrow section, Moses was 15 at the time (not 14, as was previously written). That is confirmed in this recent Deadspin article as well: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html --Bobjohnson111980 (talk) 03:38, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Intro improvement
Currently the first line of this article claims: "Woody Allen (born Allen Stewart Konigsberg; December 1, 1935) is an American screenwriter, director, actor, comedian, author, playwright, and musician whose career spans more than 50 years." It should also include the acknowledgement that he is a "unconvicted pedophile".
This is because WP:TRUTH states 'to define the threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages as "verifiability, not truth".' For his own former step daughter to make such vile comments about him means that this article should note them as he is currently an unconvicted pedophile.7 Because assuming WP:Good Faith, there is no reason for her to be lying as she exposes herslef to the world as a victim of sexual abuse. That is sufficient for this Misplaced Pages's rules. Despite the gravity of the accuastions, the fact is Allen is now an "unconvicted pedohpile" to the same degree - articles about actors - through accusation are accused of being difficult to work with. That has not been tested in a court of law, but articles on this site still claim as much.81.129.202.205 (talk) 11:47, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- But the accusation has not been verified. As required by state law, the State of Connecticut looked into Mia Farrow's accusation. In 1993, the head doctor of the police-appointed medical team gave sworn testimony that Dylan "either invented the story under the stress of living in a volatile and unhealthy home or that it was planted in her mind by her mother" because of the inconsistent presentation of the story by Dylan. Doctors did not find any physical evidence of abuse. Even Nicolas Kristof, the columnist and friend of Mia Farrow who published the accusation, says he "should be presumed innocent". There are also other sources that dispute the accusation. --Javaweb (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Javaweb
Dylan Farrow allegations
Given that Dylan Farrow's allegations have been widely reported on press and television, I think it would be biased not to give them some mention. We don't need to say that they are true, if there are reliable sources which dispute these allegations they should be included. PatGallacher (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Perez-Pena R. (1993). Doctor Cites Inconsistencies In Dylan Farrow's Statement. New York Times.
- Former good article nominees
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- Top-importance biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- Actors and filmmakers work group articles
- Past Biography collaborations
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Jewish culture articles
- High-importance Jewish culture articles
- B-Class Jazz articles
- Low-importance Jazz articles
- WikiProject Jazz articles
- B-Class Atheism articles
- Mid-importance Atheism articles
- B-Class New York City articles
- Mid-importance New York City articles
- WikiProject New York City articles
- B-Class Comedy articles
- High-importance Comedy articles
- WikiProject Comedy articles