Talk:Victoria Principal

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.

Contents

[edit] Age

why does she continue to lie about her age????--65.124.77.23 15:08, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

I reverted year of birth from 1945 to 1946. This is supported by IMDB, among other citations. While her year of birth may be in question, it is extremely unlikely that she was born in January 1945 as a U.S. military brat in Japan (which other than the date seems undisputed) In January 1945 Japan was still at war with the U.S., and the only American military there were POWs. - Bert 171.159.64.10 23:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

When I was visiting this web a week ago, I was elated to read her correct birthdate. But now, it's back to her incorrect birthdate. You guys, whoever edited this, she is really 61 years old., born in Jan. 3 1945. I've read in some mags article describing her as 61 years old beauty. Some work were done in her face by Dr. Harry Glassman. She continues to lie about her age. Her age showing on neck and face even with make-up. Dallas interview is not reliable, because she will never accept the truth that she was born in 1945 (or 1946 some sources say). (Text added by 209.247.23.173 (talk · contribs) to article page, moved to talk page)

IMDb should be used very cautiously as a reference - other than Writers Guild of America credits, its content is essentially fan-submitted with an undisclosed degree of verification or sources. On the other hand, the Dallas Interviews site, an official site for the Dallas series in which Principal acted, gives 1950 as year of birth. That may very well derive from her own publicity, but it is verifiable. (The first sentence of WP:V states: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.) What source, not counting IMDb, is to be quoted as a reference for 1946? Gimmetrow 21:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
An anon editor keeps changing the year of birth to 1945 citing "Parade mag several years ago". Without at least a more specific issue, how can anyone verify such a citaton? Gimmetrow 20:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

FWIW; The World Almanac consistently gives her birthyear as 1950. This would seem more likely given her father was an US Air Force serviceman. Phyllis1753 01:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed

  • It's highly doubtful that she was born in Japan to an American serviceman in January, 1945, when the U.S. was still at war with Japan. The famous bombs were dropped in August 1945. Gimmetrow 20:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


I just heard tonight (January 3rd) on "Entertainment Tonight" (an American hollywood gossip show owned / run by Paramount Pictures) that she was "57" today.

I also recall reading in "Celebrity Skin" magazine several years ago when they ran some of her naked pics that she was born in 1946 (I think) in Japan. From what I know of the times then I doubt that US military dependants were living in Japan then as it was still under strict military occupation by the US of A (nuked 'em good!).

If I had to guess I would go with what Paramount Studios is saying about her as I doubt they would lie about that. If they got caught it would be a serious matter and would make them look stupid.

In any event, it is her own fault that all of this confusion exists. She looks like an old hag to me who is wayyyy past her prime. Boss Mann 01:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

(moved from article page) Yes, I agree with one of the editors, that "it was all her fault".I have no doubts that she was born either 1945 or 1946. In some old World Almanacs (80's and 90's), her birthyear was listed 1945 not 1946, but several years later was changed to 1950. The problem is some celebrities cannot accept the reality that they are really older. Olala! Glo. (Text added by 209.247.23.173 (talk · contribs) to article, moved to talk page)

The 2007 and 2003 World Almanac have 1/3/50. If this is a change from older editions, perhaps it was changed because the older editions *had it wrong*? Nevertheless, a note that "Editions of The World Almanac from the 1980s listed 1/3/46." has been added to the footnote. Gimmetrow 11:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I contradict the above statements that the older editions of World Almanac "had it wrong" that's not the case - She changed her birthyear from 1945 to 1950. One of the editors here says, "why she continues to lie about her age". My suggestion, to read the "Message Boards of Victoria" at IMDb.

Another case of disputed age has been resolved here at Wikipedia as well as World Almanac - Sally Jessy Raphael birthdate had been printed in World Almanac as Feb. 23, 1943 for several years instead of Feb. 23, 1935, and also here at Wikipedia. It was her fault. Her correct birthdate is really Feb. 23, 1935. Another case disputed birthyear and also, resolved was Jaclyn Smith, correct birthyear 1945 not 1947. Glo

The point is, assuming the World Almanac changed, how do you *know* that the older version is right and the newer version is not? Gimmetrow 00:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
(moved from article page) The World Almanac & Books of Facts, etc. aren't realiable for sure, and also The "Dallas Interview", because Victoria herself gave her birthyear as 1950 for her own publicity. Her disputed birthyear is all her fault. Amen.
Please, comment here rather than on the article page. I would suggest reading Wikipedia:Reliable sources. A source doesn't become "unreliable" (in Wikipeidia terms) simply because you disagree with it, or it contains errors. Even the New York Times prints mistakes (or it wouldn't print corrections), yet it is a reliable source. If I cited NYTimes.com for a 1950 birth, would it still be called unreliable? I don't know whether 1950 or 1946 is correct, I'm just listing what the sources say. Gimmetrow 20:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More

I lived on Robins Air Force Base In Warner Robins GA with Vicky (as we called her). She was one grade ahead of me in school, making her roughly a year older than me. I was born in 1951. We went to Rumble Jr. High school together and rode the same bus from the base. This can all be verified by researching a copy of the Rumble Jr. High year books in the 1964-1965 time frame. I had one with her picture in it until a few years ago when it disappeared during a move. My name is Gerald Lawley and I can be contacted by email at gerald@lawley.net BTW, she was an excellent high jumper who used the scissors method (pre Fosbury Flop)and told us even then that she knew she would be an actress when she grew up because she could cry real tears at will and then promptly demonstrated said talent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.100.166.84 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 31 January 2007

Several news articles from the 1980's (you can look them up online) refer to her romance with Andy Gibb, and his family's concern about their "14 year age difference." Mr. Gibb was born in 1958. You do the math. She was NOT born in 1950. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.218.148 (talk • contribs) 13:14, 5 February 2007

Please provide the links. Perhaps one of them will be a reliable citation. Gimmetrow 13:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Can we use a bit of logic here? No one seems to dispute she was born in Japan, or was an army brat, so taking those as given she probably was not born in January 1945 - the war was still going on! Its therefore possible her dob was then either 1946 or 1950. Post nuclear war Japan was under tight control, and had few supplies, so why would the US army ship a pregnant woman into it? I personally still think that January 1946 in Japan is still way to early for the US Army to be shipping pregnant women into the area: her mother would have had to have been pregnant from May 1945 at latest, so she would have been 3months+ pregnant when the bomb dropped. Looking at the Japan article, official American occupation didn't end until 1952, so any date before that makes sence. Much as though I am sure she is happy for us to debate her DoB forever, 1950 seems more likely than the two dates in 1945/6. Rgds, - Trident13 00:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
This has been going on for over a month now. As said above, nobody seems to dispute she was born in Japan in January. Despite numerous requests for a citation for 1946, the only references "provided" for 1946 so far are vague references to gossip magazines from the 1980s and unspecified editions of World Almanac, without any link (for online) or edition/page (for print) to allow verification. Given the time allowed for a real citation, and the lack thereof, I think mention of 1946 should go until/unless a specific, verifiable, reliable citation is given for it. Does anyone have a reasoned objection to this, or is this consensus? Gimmetrow 01:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's a 1982 article from Woman Magazine. I don't think they would have had any reason to lie about her age back then. It says she is 14 years older than Andy Gibb, who was born in 1958. http://www.beegees-world.com/archives51.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.218.148 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 8 February 2007

Woman Mag is the most reliable reference available? And the same site hosts http://www.beegees-world.com/archives17.html, which says Principal was 30 when Gibb was 22.... Gimmetrow 01:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Uh yeah. The correct article is from 1982, when Ms. Principal had no reason to lie about her age. The second one you mention is from 1997, which is about the time she started lying about her age. It often happens with actresses when they hit the big 5-0.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.218.148 (talk • contribs) 03:29, 18 February 2007

I also read in the Time Almanac 2007, it says her birthdate is Jan. 3, 1946. I thought I'd check to see if it was changed to 1950, but still the same 1946. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.23.173 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 18 February 2007

Please sign your posts with ~~~~ My local library doesn't expect the 2007 print edition of Time Almanac 2007 with Information Please for quite some time. However, the online part of the Time Almanac is available at infoplease.com, where 1/3/50 is listed. Gimmetrow 20:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The 1995 Info Almanac stated her birthday as Jan.3, 1945. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.23.173 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 4 March 2007

PLEASE sign your posts with ~~~~ Provide the entire, complete title and page number, and it will be checked. Gimmetrow 03:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

1995 Info Please Almanac, p.701 - title - People. Although a question mark appears at the end of 1945, but it could be year 1946.

Great, you've provided a source after three months of asking. Had you provided this to begin with it would have been much smoother. Now, there are two legit sources given for 1950, so you cannot remove 1950 without a very very strong source. An older edition of a work which currently (in 2007) lists 1950 is certainly not a very strong source. On what basis can you possibly be asserting that the 1995 info is correct and the 2007 info is incorrect, except your own personal opinion? Gimmetrow 20:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe she will tell next year's Almanac editors that she was born in 1960, and you people will swallow that too.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.218.148 (talk • contribs) (12:25, 16 March 2007)

Yes, you are right about it. According to one of the editors here, in a 1995 Info Almanac, her birthyear was listed as 1945. Of course, that year when her birthyear was listed as 1945 was the correct one. Then few years after 1945 became 1950.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.23.173 (talk • contribs) (21:00, 17 March 2007)

PLEASE sign your comments with ~~~~
The "one of the editors here" to which you refer also edits from 209.247.23.173.
  • WHY* would you say 1945 is the "correct" one? As a fact it is highly dubious (there were not a lot of U.S. servicemen on Japanese soil in January 1945, you know, let alone their spouses...), and such an extremely unlikely claim would need a very strong source for support. Even as a citation it's dubious. Wikipedia can only go by what other sources say (see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Attribution). Gimmetrow 04:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Obession with her age

Some of the comments here go way beyond wanting to correct the record, to obsessing about Principal's age in a way that bespeak some mental illness.

What's wrong with putting both 1946 and 1950 in until there's a definitive source? What is it to the various posters to make such nasty comments? So WHAT if she lies about her age? Is this important for some real reason?? 68.36.127.193 09:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello moderator, I invite you to open IMDb message board about Miss Principal. Thanks. Ori —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.23.173 (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC) It's me again moderator, I just discover this today, drcinema33 posted a comment about Miss Principal on IMDb message board. The subject Re; Victoria's birth date + other discripancies- posted - Oct. 18.2007. drcinema33 was on the Dallas Production crew according to the post/comment. Thanks for checking. Ori —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.23.173 (talk) 9 January 2008

If you read something on BBC.com, you may not know it's true but at least you know the source and can form some opinion about the source's bias and reliability. With an anonymous forum post, you can't even do that. Anybody can post on imdb saying they have inside information. That's why Wikipedia tries to follow published sources, not anonymous comments on forums. Gimmetrow 04:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)