Talk:Daniel Radcliffe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Daniel Radcliffe article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Good article Daniel Radcliffe was a nominee for good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are 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.
July 17, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed


Contents

[edit] Archived talk page

I have archived the talk page, as it was incredibly long and had comments dating back to 2003. I believe, for the most part, I did it right (it was my first time doing this), but if you know of a better way, please feel free to modify as necessary. Anakinjmt 02:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Video Game

Daniel did not do the voice over of Harry for the fifth Harry Potter game. He was busy doing Equus. Adam Sapp did Harry's voice in the game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.171.66 (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AKS-74U

Hey, as per talk page, this article was not to be merged with AK-74. It was done anyways. Please don't jump the gun and accuse me of vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.235.30 (talk) 04:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Personnal Life section

Read on a newspaper, Paparazzi section and I've found an article about a breakup between Radcliffe and another British actress, Laura O'Toole about 4 years older then him. I am very surprised that despite that being highly publicized in the UK (and also the US) there is no mention about the relationship even I've several TV reports on questioning about Radcliffe and relationships and stuff like that. I guess maybe part because O'Toole, despite playing on Equus (so as Radcliffe), doesn't have an article. But should it be mentionned in this article since most relations involving celebrities when being actor or whatever are mentionned. I've only seen a few weeks ago about being a rumor, but apparently there was a relationship between the two British actors.--JForget 23:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

No proper source for Daniel Radcliffe having any relationship :) Unless you can cite it, of course... BlackPearl14 Miss Granger\Pirate Lord-ess 03:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Checking up Google typing Radcliffe O'Toole, gave me this as first source and it's about their split.--JForget 00:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that's strange. And was there any other source than just this? You can put it in, but remember to put a <*ref>(url)</*ref> tag (w/o the stars) right next to it. I'll have to look that up to make sure it isn't something that was posted in a rumour newspaper. BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess 04:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I've added mention of it with a source, apparently they never made it public although there were rumours/reports since November 2007. Actually, there are numerous articles (okay probably some of them are copy and paste from the same news agency via several sites). One of the articles also mentions a relation between Hermione (Emma Watson) and rugby star Tom Ducker (although the latter doesn't even had an article tooJForget 18:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

That's fine; just forget about the Emma Watson and Tom Ducker thing, it's never happened. BlackPearl14Pirate Lord-ess 04:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Until some of the non-gossip sites have an article on that, there's no problem to remove it for now. Anyways, O'Toole doesn't even had an article as of now. Although, I may be wrong but she may pass WP:BIO.--JForget 02:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It makes zero difference how many sources are linked to for such a piece of information - the info itself is the stuff of gossip columns, so it would never belong in a proper encyclopaedia entry. Including this trivial info adds no value. If anything, it reduces this 'Daniel Radcliffe' page as a pathetic joke of an encyclopaedia entry. Daniloc (talk) 01:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

For your information, I talked to him about just that on his talk page. In addition, the "so wants Jessica thing" (unless it's referring to you) is not true. Sorry. BlackPearl14Hermione Granger's Muggle Alias 03:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm wondering if the kiss he received from presenter James Corden when accepting his Whatsonstage award is notable enough to be included. There has been a lot of talk about it, particularly with the fact that he seemed to be nearly attacked with it or rather if it was planned as a publicity stunt. [1]

His representative said that Radcliffe wasn't embarrassed, saying, "It was a spontaneous gesture that was very funny. Daniel took it in the light-hearted spirit it was intended." [2]

He also bought another apartment in New York for USD$4.9 million. More information about it in the reference. [3]

James Ryan (talk) 23:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Contributors really need to understand what is typically included in a biographical entry in an encyclopaedia. I'm afraid that excludes a lot of trivial information that would be found on fan websites or blogs, and the tabloids. As it is, there's too much of that stuff already, threatening to debase Wikipedia into Wikinquirer. Please don't add any more. Daniloc (talk) 20:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References

  1. ^ http://www.whatsonstage.com/index.php?pg=207&story=E8821204198639&title=WOS+TV%3A+Radcliffe%2FCorden+Snog%2C+Uncut+Speeches
  2. ^ http://uk.news.yahoo.com/wenn/20080227/ten-radcliffe-stunned-by-impromptu-gay-k-c60bd6d.html
  3. ^ http://www.azcentral.com/ent/celeb/articles/0226radcliffe-CR.html

[edit] Hellos

Protect the page. --81.1.105.185 (talk) 22:41, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Health Concerns

From Wikipedia:Verifiability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:V) 'Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy'.

By that standard, information that originates from the following article from thesun.co.uk does not qualify. Not only does that tabloid have no reputation for fact-checking, its reputation is for outright fabrication.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/film/article924465.ece

24.86.253.211 (talk) 23:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

The Sun is a good enough source. faithless (speak) 02:03, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
You must have tongue firmly in cheek, as the Wiki article on The Sun you reference has this to say under 'Sensationalism':

More generally, the Murdoch Sun has been criticised since its launch for its sensationalism, which on occasion has led it to publish stories on the most spurious evidence, and for its focus on celebrities for its news and feature coverage. It has regularly been accused of appealing to the lowest common denominator and dumbing down public discourse.

The paper's knack for sensationalism doesn't mean it can't be used as a source. Perhaps the sentence could be rewritten to something like, "The Sun reports that Radcliffe..."? It's not the New York Times or BBC, but it is the most widely read newspaper in the English-speaking world, and a story about an actor's smoking habits isn't exactly a WP:BLP violation. For our purposes, The Sun is a reliable source. faithless (speak) 04:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. If you look at the archived talk page here, you will also find under 'Equus' another discussion where tabloid as source was considered inadequate for reliability.

Beyond that, thesun.co.uk had also reported Radcliffe was under such a serious threat that he was under guard by ex-SAS agents, and yet within two weeks they also published the article about his smoking habit which included the detail of him smoking more because he's out and about with smokers Stephen Fry and Kevin Spacey. Not even bothering to explain the contradiction that he is so seriously threatened, yet he's out on the town, they also reported within the same period that Radcliffe requested the ex-SAS agents guard his dogs - even for The Sun, so obviously outlandish, unless one is gullible enough to believe it isn't an insult to ex-SAS professionals to ask they risk their lives for dogs.

If that sort of reporting doesn't make it apparent that it's silly season at the Sun on Radcliffe, then why bother pretending there are even any standards on what can be included in articles here?

Last point: One would think with a smoking habit like that, there'd be more than one tabloid who can unearth someone willing to talk for a bit of cash. And yet no other like story from any other source.

I'm afraid you're on seriously shaky ground if you're trying to argue the reliability of The Sun.

Where to start - I get that you don't like the paper and/or don't consider it reliable, and I'm not arguing against that, per se. And if this was anything even slightly controversial, I'd agree with you. But the level of reliability required of a source is directly proportional to seriousness the assertion it is sourcing. If Radcliffe came out as a gay, it would need very solid citations, i.e. the New York Times, BBC, etc. A person's cigarette smoking habit, on the other hand, is such a minor issue that we don't require nearly the degree of quality sourcing. As it's often put, "exceptional claims require exceptional sources." We both agree that The Sun is in no way an exceptional source but, as it's backing up such an insignificant assertion, its use is acceptable here. The more important issue as I see it is whether or not his cigarette smoking warrants a mention in the article at all. faithless (speak) 08:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
While I agree with your ending statement, it is not what you have been arguing before this. Secondly I doubt you'll find much support for the idea that claiming a pack a day smoking habit for an eighteen-year-old is 'such an insignificant assertion'. Lastly, you know very well even if (and that's IF) it truly were an insignificant statement, it still wouldn't pass muster if there were no citation. You are arguing that one very highly dubious citation is sufficient, as if the difference between zero and sketchy represented the upholding of some worthy standard.

[edit] His death

Yoh everybody, don't get me wrong...But I just saw on CNN that this motherfucker got killed, stabbed to death !

Shiiiit...No more harry potter movies !

I think you're thinking of Robert Knox, who appears as Marcus Belby in 'Half-Blood Prince. --Cubs Fan (talk) 02:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, it wasn't Daniel Radcliffe... http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/25/potter.killed.ap/index.html?iref=newssearch —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.127.16 (talk) 00:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)