Talk:Spencer Tracy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Wisconsin. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
If you give this article a rating or change a previous rating, please leave a short summary in the comments to explain the rating and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

I've cleaned up some of the errors on this page including the often made error that Louise Tracy was a Catholic. She was, in fact, an Episcopalian.

Donna

Contents

[edit] Possible copyright violation

This article and the bio for Spencer Tracy on IMDB are quite similar in wording. It looks like either the same person wrote both, or one was copied from the other. The author of the IMDB bio is Ed Stephan <stephan@cc.wwu.edu>. --Zippy 05:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC) ___________________________

I wrote most of the article about Spencer Tracy. I did not copy anyone. IMDB may have copied me but that I don't know.

Ariel Suarez


[edit] Photo

The photo of Spencer Tracy really doesn't do the man justice. Anyone mind if I sub another one for it?--Mantanmoreland 01:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm.... better photo but I think it may be too low-res.....--Mantanmoreland 01:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] devout roman catholic?

to say that he never divorced because he was a "devout" catholic in the same article that talks about his extra-marital affairs seems very silly. it's like saying "she was a virgin adult film star". he was not devout catholic when he was willingly having an affair. Keltik31 16:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely correct. To say that he was carrying on an extra-marital affair with her but that he was a "devout Roman Catholic" and didn't divorce his wife is quite ridiculous. AnnH ♫ 21:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
The reason I reverted it was that I found it to be a biased charge. Is he removing every reference to anyone of any faith who may have fallen short? No. Keltik31 has made it very clear that he is biased against Catholics. Beyond that, if "devout" is completely defined by flawlessly following the tenets of faith...who would be devout? People are human and humans make mistakes. Granted, he was being unfaithful to his wife, but he did it openly so. His wife knew. Beyond that, he was faithful in going to mass and observed other rules of his faith. IrishGuy talk 18:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

irish guy, how do you of all people know this? how do you know he followed all the other rules of his faith. and because he was open about it its ok? what if spencer was a child molester? as long as he was open about it would you still call him "devout"? are there any real standards to be adhered to in order to be a catholic? would the pope feel a man who is willingly breaking one of the ten commandements is a devout catholic? if he was an alcoholic that kept falling off the wagon i may see your point. but having an affair is a willful choice that a person makes. i reject your assertion that i am biased against catholics. i am not biased against anyone for the religion. just because i ask questions that you cannot answer or point to practices in a relgion that cannot be justified, that does not make me biased against anyone. i think you are biased against anyone who asks good questions that you cant answer. 1/2 of my family is irish and they are all catholics. the majority of them are in ireland. you think i hate them because of their religion? what a joke. Keltik31 18:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

If you are referring to your rudeness in the Catholicism article talk page, then yes, I actually did answer your questions. You simply didn't like the answers. As for the rest of your rediculous claims, there is a monumental difference between child molestation (which is assault) and having a mistress (which is consensual). If you cannot see that difference then I don't know what to say to you. IrishGuy talk 21:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

in the eyes of god, commiting adultery and molesting a child are both sins. sin is sin to god. maybe not to you because as i am finding, most catholics believe there are little sins and big sins. i do see the difference, but i dont believe that the bible says that god sees any difference in the sin. if you read the bible you will see what i am talking about. Keltik31 15:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Please keep your personal opinions of Catholics to yourself. They are entirely irrelevant here. IrishGuy talk 17:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

i'll do what i want to do, "irish guy". but thanks for your input. Keltik31 18:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Most biographies refer to Tracy as a "devout Roman Catholic". Personally, I think he wasn't. But if that's how he is referred to, than that's the way it should be stated in the article. Really, there is no point in getting in debate about someone else's personal life, especially someone who has been dead for nearly 40 years. --Cinefille 02:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Cinefille


[edit] Photo

The photo at the top of the filmography is of really poor quality, very dark and almost impossible to distinguish his features. Is there any particular reason why the much better publicity photo of Tracy, which was moved down, can't be exchanged with it? --Mantanmoreland 16:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

The poorer quality version is public domain so it should always be the first option even if the quality is lesser. Rossrs 13:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I realize that, but the other photo it replaced is still in the article. I was just suggesting switching their position within the article.--Mantanmoreland 13:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
The public domain image is the one that is supposed to be displayed first or more prominently. There is less justification for even keeping the second image as it is used solely to identify him, but I guess because the second one is more representative, it should stay. Rossrs 14:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, well you know these copyright policies better than I do! I'll hunt around for a better pub domain image. --Mantanmoreland 15:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Children?

His son John was deaf and had a clinic named for him. He died a couple of days ago.[1] Is that worth mentioning?--T. Anthony 15:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alcoholism?

It's a well-known fact that Tracy was a (rather extreme) alcoholic. Is there any particular reason why it is not in the article? Or am I blind? --Stephan Schulz 12:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Reliable sources? AUTiger » talk 13:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I would suspect that any biography of Tracy or Hepburn discusses the issue. It certainly is a central issue in "Kate: The Woman Who Was Hepburn" by William J. Mann, and is discussed in "An Affair to Remember: The Remarkable Love Story of Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy" by Christopher P. Andersen. Unfortunately, not being a film buff, I own none of them myself and only know this second-hand. --Stephan Schulz 14:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion campaign by 76.176.167.130

An editor identifiable only by 76.176.167.130 has been on a campaign to remove material he apparently finds personally offensive or discomfiting from a number of articles. He has deleted entire sections (and removed any citations which might support those sections) dealing with quite legitimate topics regarding the sexual orientation or sobriety of various celebrities, in particular Randolph Scott, Katharine Hepburn, Spencer Tracy, and Cary Grant. Although I myself am rampantly opposed to gossip and to the increasingly frequent "outing" of anyone and everyone that seems to be de rigeur in some circles, I believe that the material relating to sexual orientation may well have a legitimate place in these articles, especially as cited and most currently expressed. Therefore, the wholesale deletion of anything which in some fan's eyes "denigrates" the subject is in direct contravention of Wikipedia's stated purposes. I have reverted a couple of times, but see an edit war brewing. Is there a means of preventing this activity when the editor, 76.176.167.130, is not a registered editor? Monkeyzpop (talk) 21:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers priority assessment

Per debate and discussion re: assessment of the approximate 100 top priority articles of the project, this article has been included as a top priority article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)