Jump to content

Talk:Anna Nicole Smith/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Comment by NotGonnaTellYouMyName

You will be missed, Anna. At least you're with your son now.

I feel really sorry for that baby. She don't got a momma no more.

**CLARIFICATION**

J. Howard Marshall is a huge billionaire. In 4/86, Forbes estimated his net worth at around $550 million. Therefore, when Nicole was going to receive approximately $-486 million, one could understand why his children were so upset. With Marshall a billionaire, $486 million was no big deal.

Valuations on private companies are highly speculative but that is mostly a minor issue. What the elder Marshall considered "no big deal" cannot be considered anything but speculation. Considering what I have seen reported, I think most would say everyone involved in the case thought $486 million was a big deal.

I think clarification is warranted on the $830,000 judgment against Anna Nicole Smith for the sexual harassment case. It was a default judgment. The only reason judgment was ruled against her was failure to appear/participate in her trial. (And what's unfortunate, which I don't have the source right now.. is that Maria was a girlfriend - Anna is bisexual - and she filed this civil suit against her. Again, probably for the money.)

Citation Needed

I think we should rename this article "Citation's Needed". I mean c'mon people, there is 17 of them on her profile! There is 1 for "The case has gone on for more than a decade, producing a highly publicized court battle in Texas and several judicial decisions that have gone both for and against Smith in that time". This info can be found all over the Internet!. It is talked about on the news every other day. Why is a Cit needed? There is 1 for the "Supreme Court's decision on May 1, 2006". There is is even 1 asking for a Cit on her becoming a spokesperson for Trimspa after she lost weight. You can find those commercials on every single channel and she went on every major talk show to tell the world how she lost the weight by using Trimspa!!! I don't follow her work, but there should be someone on this site that does. Why do you need a Cit for every bit of info? No other profile on this Wiki site asks for sources on common everyday facts. I'm not going to add or delete from this profile, because I don't follow her work. But I think it is stupid and unprofessional for someone to place "Citation Needed" all over a profile, on topics that are common knowledge, even from someone like myself who doesn't even know any of the movie Anna has been in. But she has now passed on, so the contributers here should remove the unnecessary Citation from her profile. And next time, RESEARCH IT YOURSELF! I do it all of the time for other profiles. Let's make this place look like a professional Wiki of knowledge. I'm just sick of people places Cit's where ever they pleae, when they could easily find the sources needed.....

The2ndflood 08:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It might help if you would follow normal practice and post your comments to the bottom. This is a long discussion and there is a good chance people are going to ignore comments here. Also, you might want to read wikipedia policy, especially on the need for sources. Bear in mind a editor is fully entitled to remove unsourced information. Definitely it's better to tag or delete then leave unsourced information as is Nil Einne 11:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This is a place for info. If you can't find the info yourself, why post a cit for it? Why bother altering anything under that profile? I am sick of seeing cit's everywhere. I have found info for many of them that took my five minutes to find. If people are that lazy, then don't post anything. You are just trying to defend and/or justify the lazy paths of people on here. Try finding the info yourself, if you can't, then place a cit. But this place looks more like a bunch of kids are playing around on it, instead of adults who should know how to use the Internet.

The2ndflood 04:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Added subsection to 'Death'

Added subsection of 'Reactions' to Anna Nicole's death. Will most likely be subject to a lot of vandalism. Please keep your eyes on it and remove any vandalism or graffiti.

A Conspiracy section may be added later, as many rumors are swirling at the moment. --Ozgod 02:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Can something be added to this 'Reactions' section regarding the frenzy of Wikipedia activity on her page when her death was announced, or does that seem unrelevant? --stemperm 03:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It would be irrelevant since vandalism to anyone's page generally ensues when their names appears in the news. When that tidbit about Judy Garland's lost childhood records came up, her page experienced a surge of vandalism. Activity on wikipedia, unless monumental, is not something that would be worth noting. Personal reactions to Anna's death, from family, friends, colleagues, et. al would suitable for this section. --Ozgod 03:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
It might help if you would follow normal practice and post your comments to the bottom. This is a long discussion and there is a good chance people are going to ignore comments here. Nil Einne 11:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

There is so much controversy and speculation regarding her death that her death warrants a separate page, as was the case with Marilyn Monroe's death.

Can we add this recap of her last days, provided by the Miami Herald... Found at [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.192.126.24 (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

Obituary

Virgie Arthur, Anna Nicole's mother, shocked America last weekend (October 14, 2006) when she appeared on CNN newswoman NANCY GRACE's show and warned her daughter to look out for Stern. Holding back tears, her mother advised, "Be very careful about who you hang around with - because you may be next." Arthur went so far as to suggest that Stern is trying to get his hands on the millions her daughter looks set to inherit from her ex-husband, oil tycoon J HOWARD MARSHALL. She added, "If Howard Stern marries her and she ends up dead, then who does the money go to? "I just know that Danny didn't kill himself. He did not overdose himself.". Mark Furhman of the OJ Simpson trial also believes it was a double murder and Howard Stern is the prime murder suspect.

Father of her Child

In light of these unfortunate circumstances. Prayers go out to the family. I wonder how this will affect the outcome of the court case with her daughter and Birkhead. It might make it easier to do the paternity test instead of blocking it. However, there has been another gentleman that has come forward to claim he is possibly the father. A gentleman by the name of Chris Haupt. I think it could more of a way to get attention even though he was spotted a few time with her last summer in LA. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Again, a tragic turn of events and I wish the family all the best. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.215.128.103 (talk • contribs).

Possibly if she has a will and it designates who the child goes to than that will have greater prescedence. Also the child is a citizen of the Bahamas. So that is another element to complicate the matter. Joneboi 22:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Death Vandalism? (Confirmed as Valid)

Attention to the editors of this article - recently unsourced claims have been added about the possible death of Anna Nicole Smith. Can someone verify if this is vandalism or if the info is valid? All that has been derived is that she has collapsed and might be hospitalized at the moment.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Her death has been stated by both CNN and Fox News as coming from law enforcement and her lawyer. The great kawa 20:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, she is certainly gone. :(!

Yes you are both correct, a valid reference in the article has been cited now: http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/02/08/anna.nicole.collapses/index.html .¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Be that as it may people are continuing (and will continue) to add snide remarks in regards to her death as she was a highly controversial public figure, so the semi-protection should apply for at least a short while. Midnightguinea 20:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes it should definitely remain semi-protected for at least several hours. At the moment vandalism is still being removed.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 21:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Agree. Semi-protect as the vandals have begun their onslaught. The great kawa 21:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Gah. Someone is going to have to find out what's going to happen to that court case she was involved in. It's probably just going to be dropped, eh? Most importantly, the language in that section implies that she's still alive, as does much of the article. Therealhazel 21:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Just deleted obscene remark under "Memorial" section John Bob 21:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Im sorry guys i dont do this but often but i really didnt like her im acctually quite happy shes gone. Maverick423 21:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC) (PS. i was ganna place a little song about her death just now but well i decided not to even though i didnt like her) Maverick423 21:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's the end of that chapter. I knew she was gonna die eventually and its a real convienent considering the fact Daniel died, who did it ***comment deleted*** .74.195.3.199 21:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted part of the above anon's comment as it was a legally dangerous statement that falls under the purview of WP:BLP (not for Smith, but for the individual being accused). 23skidoo 21:24, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

can we get the vandalism off? pretty crappy.

shame it happened.

The hell? How is it danegrous and you make Wiki seem like its the damn Bible.74.195.3.199 21:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

It's dangerous because Wikipedia has to get information on living people correct. You can't go make accusations about someone. Read this section from the WP:BLP page: "Without reliable third-party sources, a biography will violate No original research and Verifiability, and could lead to libel claims." Nphp20 21:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
And to add to the above, the rules apply to talk pages too. I don't like editing other people's comments and usually don't, but the wording that I removed from the anon's posting basically suggests a certain individual is responsible for her death. There is no way to know something like this until a criminal investigation is completed, if one is even warranted, so to even speculate this in a talk page opens Wikipedia to libel concerns. 23skidoo 23:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

This is sad that people would trash her after she is gone. You know she lived her life like she wanted to, people shouldn't judge her it was her life not yours. Let her rest in Peace

W'ere not attacking her, she just fucked herself up over the pass 5-6 months.74.195.3.199 21:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Sadly, have to agree. It's not as if she's suddenly a martyr or something, death doesn't change that she made mistakes. Let's just keep the article clean and neutral and get out all of the aggression here.JohnnyRush10 23:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Kbroome 01:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)== Reason and Time of Death == It still says that it's likely she died of a drug overdose, when that is pure speculation and none of the references support that claim.

Can anyone find some links as the time and reason for her death? --Lincoln F. Stern 21:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


That kind of information probably won't be public for awhile, I'd guess. I think Stern is the only one who gets to make a statement, and that'll probably be held until tomorrow. At least, I'd hope so... If your wife dies, the first thing you think shouldn't be "what should I tell the press?!" Therealhazel 21:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

**personal attack removed** she had heart dysrhtmia. A heart attack.74.195.3.199 21:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Heart attack is an assumption, c.o.d. pending until autopsy.--FiftyOneWicked 21:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

No its not, newspapers and the M.E. don't make "assumptions" and quit cutting out stuff.74.195.3.199 21:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

"Newspapers don't make 'assumptions.'" Hahahahahahahahahaha okay. Casey J. Morris 00:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I haven't even touched the main article. I watched the news conference and CNN and if either the newspapers or M.E. knew what the C.O.D. was: I am sure it would have been mentioned in either the press conference and CNN wouldn't be taking stabs and trying to guess what her C.O.D. was. Provide me with a link from any newspaper and then go ahead and put it in her article too. Whoever removed it please don't. This is a relevant discussion as to her death. --FiftyOneWicked 22:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think she died from a sex overdose...? I'm gonna change that to pending. --Skippytim 23:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I say we all just wait for the results from the autopsy tomorrow. --Swarjo01 00:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Full Protect

Would an admin please lock fully lock this article (edits have been crazy since the announcement) until things calm down a little? CaveatLectorTalk 21:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


Heh i agree i didn't like her but i still cant stand vandalism. admins please lock it for a bit Maverick423 21:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't look like the rapid editing has affected the quality of the article. All the vandalism I found when I first came by was cleaned up within seconds, and we need to be able to edit once more news comes out. Therealhazel 21:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Another admin has protected the article from edits by anonymous IP editors, so that should reduce any vandalism considerably since 99% of it comes from IP numbers. If an IP with a legitimate piece of information to add really wants it in, those editors can request it here. 23skidoo 21:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks like this has been semi-protected as requested on WP:RFPP, if you guys need full protection for a few hours, best to drop a note by WP:RFPP. Cheers! —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

More information on this site. Might be useful - I can't seem to edit page. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6344725.stm (Wordforge 23:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC))


News Conference

News conference is currently in progress.

Evilgohan2 21:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

info

Here's info what happen to her

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17050167/?GT1=9033

Speculative Comments

Absolutely no information regarding her cause of death was given during the press conference so there should not be any placed here for the next few days.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Evilgohan2 (talk • contribs).

Right, like we'll pay attention to you.74.195.3.199 21:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if this is correct but did they say she was in room 38? --Lincoln F. Stern 21:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Lincoln.74.195.3.199 21:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Unremovable Vandalism

At the very top of the page there is a comment that says: "She died of overdose on trimspa"...it would be unproductive to revert due to the many edits in between the addition of this vandalism. For some reason I cannot locate the location of the statement when trying to edit the page (even with the Find on this Page tool in my web browser).¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 21:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Good someone got to it.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 22:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone vandlised the recent death template. See the history for more information. RHB Talk - Edits 22:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

It doesnt say anything about no friggin TrimSpa in the history.74.195.3.199 22:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

She died in Hollywood, Florida. Not Miami, Florida, someone fix that. Edit: Someone already fixed it.65.92.149.236 22:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk page guidlines

Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, specifically the section

Don't edit others' comments: Refrain from editing others' comments without their permission (with the exception of prohibited material such as libel and personal details). It is not necessary to bring talk pages to publishing standards, so there is no need to correct typing errors, grammar, etc. It tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Never edit someone's words to change their meaning.

There has been a few users deleting other people's talk comments without an explanation. --Lincoln F. Stern 22:24, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

i saw that too somewhere up in the death sections a user was deleting names. now as far as the rules goes it clearly states that noone is allowed to edit someone elses comment. so those that are doing that please stop its in violation of the rules (everyone has a chance to voice there opionins on the talk page)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Maverick423 (talk • contribs)

Actually any talk not related to the improvement or changes that need to be made to the article can be removed by any editor. Talk pages of articles are solely for that purpose and they're not general discussion forums for the subjects of the article. If people are making off-topic comments and they're being removed that is proper editing.--Crossmr 23:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Maverick, the policy on libel trumps most other policies here, as libel poses a greater threat to Wikipedia than almost anything else. Removing potentially libellous information from people's comments is a duty. Argyriou (talk) 23:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry but it is pretty clear you shouldn't delete other peoples comments unless it is libel or contains peronal details. It further states to save room one should archive and not delete comments. --Lincoln F. Stern 23:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
As I pointed out, if the comments are off-topic they can be removed. Not archived. Have a look at the guidelines you referenced, second sentence which is in bold. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views.. If people want to have general discussions about the subject they can do it elsewhere or find their comments here removed.--Crossmr 18:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
ah ok i wasnt aware of that rule well then if that was the case then its ok. Maverick423 14:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

please lock down the discussion

Someone please lock out the ip-address editors from the discussion. The removal of edits is already out of hand. 63.3.5.2 22:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the talk page has just been locked down to unregistered users. --Lincoln F. Stern 22:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Anna Nicole Smith just a stage name?

In Marshall v. Marshall, it is stated that Vickie Lynn Marshall was her legal name, and is confirmed here. If so, this article needs some overhaul to comply with WP:MOSBIO --Zimbabweed 22:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Food allergy?

In the only episode of her TV show that I saw, where she was a judge at a bikini contest, she went to a Mexican restaraunt where she was served a dish loaded with onions. She sent it back- saying she was allergic to onions. When the waiter brought the replacement, it was also loaded with onions. Smith said something about not being able to eat it because she could die or it could kill her. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 00:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

I remember that episode, perhaps that may be a factor in her death? The autopsy will answer a lot of questions tomorrow. --Swarjo01 01:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Nurse

Has there been any information about why Smith traveled with her own nurse? Rhobite 00:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC) CNN and FOX News is saying that she was possibly sick with the flu when she went to Florida with Howard K. Stern to purchase a yacht. She brought the nurse along probably for that. Some people are saying she had a methadone addiction. Some methadone is given by a nurse through an IV.Chancetinker 17:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Question

I noticed that a lot of nasty vandalism has been added to the talk page and the article. Why is her website gone? I went there and all I saw was "Anna Nicole Smith: 1967 - 2007". Janet6 01:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I didnt edit it - but I tried to visit the site and I think it was just overwhelmed with people visiting....who knows. The site doesnt work. NYKenny 17:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Documentation of vandals on page

I guess some of the vandals are Farkers. Go to [2], there are a few wiki-fiti shown there. -zbewski


Farkers? I think it's time to lock this one down for a while. SSJPabs 01:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not completely sure. One of the edits came verbatim from the comments section in a Gawker post. It could be a person that frequently reads both Fark and Gawker and did it as a joke.THE evil fluffyface 02:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Just cleaned up sentence about claims of Anna marrying Marshall for "money, which she denies." Someone thought it would be cute to add that she married him for "money and sex." 24.192.126.24 07:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC) joshm

CNN

They just had a screenshot of this article on Paula Zahn's show on CNN.. luckily no vandalism. Rhobite 01:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, saw that too. They were discussing the vandalism and the rude remarks about Smith. Nphp20 01:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Post death vandalism here if you can.

-zblewski

I've removed the vandalism screenshots from this page.. I can't think of a reason why we'd want to preserve and reproduce it here. It's available in the article's history for those who are interested. Rhobite 02:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Seminole Hard Rock

I tried to change it myself, but I'm not an "Established Registered User", or it went to full lockdown while I was still editing. Anyways, can someone change where the Seminole wikilink points to when discussing the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in the Death section, its not located in Seminole, Florida, but is named for the Seminole Indians, who own it. Cyraan 02:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --JWSchmidt 03:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the edit, sorry if im nitpicking, but I don't know if linking to the Seminole takeover is best either. It was called the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino when it was built and opened, at least a year or so before the takeover took place, unless the naming was a part of the takeover deal when it was still being negotiated. Cyraan 03:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Nevermind, I forgot there where two, and I'm thinking of the one in Tampa, I dont know about the one in Hollywood, but linking to the Seminole Tribe's article might still be a little more accurate. Ill go ahead and remove the editprotected request though. Cyraan 03:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Protected

This page is protected for several reasons, firstly because of vandalism and secondly because of insertation of unsourced speculation of the cause of death. Discuss the possible causes and reports here until the medical examiner's report is released. Teke (talk) 02:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


-news people keep saying it's a heart attack, mixed with collapsed lung and pnemoneua. put that "the initial reports after her death claimed.... -zblewski

Can't even fix something to find that this has been fully protected. Vandalizing over some dead chick is just plain pathetic. Black Kat 18:58, 8 February, 2007 (UTC)

Only Semi-protection is necessary. This page is being watched by me and many others, and vandalism would be reverted. - Gilliam 03:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Semi protection

I reduced the protection to just semi with the caveat that the user take care of the page, or full protection will be reinstated. Teke (talk) 04:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with the semi-protection of the talk page, it's unwikilike and could easily deter newcomers. Someone might be interested in this but they couldn't even make a suggestion. --WikiSlasher 09:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Reaction section

I dispute the neutrality as well as the necessity of the "Reaction" section (under the "Death" section). It is true that Perez did deface some pictures of Anna Nicole Smith on his site, but the "mocked sadness" sounds like someone's opinion and not an objective fact. I also do not think this section is needed on Smith's final biography because several other articles on Wikipedia do not have quotes from other people concerning another person's death, whether the death was recent or occurred well before the start of Wikipedia.THE evil fluffyface 02:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you think the entire section should be removed? --JWSchmidt 03:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
The section is necessary because reactions to her death are relevant to how she was viewed in life. My choice of words of "mocked sadness" may have been poor in choice, although I selected them after seeing many people viewing his site felt he had was treating her whole death with a sense of insincere mockery. When the temp edit is removed the mock sadness should be removed and just left to the defacing he has done of her pics. My apologies.--Ozgod 03:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
There's an section of the Steve Irwin article on the reaction to his death, and again quite a bit of talk page banter discussing the contents of said section. -- Longhair\talk 09:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Facts

The article says she worked as a law enforcement officer for 28 years. I couldn't prove that. This article has the fourth highest hit count. Try and deal with citation. Thanks Samuel 02:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It looks like it has been removed. I would like to point out to the Admins that The article is now the second highest on Google, up from 4th earlier today on a search for "Anna Nicole Smith". That means lots of people are viewing this page. The point is: we need to get those citations and remove any unsourced / un-verifiable / or just plain untrue information ASAP. Danski14 03:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Boyfriend vs. Husband

In the Death section, it reads "[...] Smith's boyfriend, Howard K. Stern, was with her when she died [...]". However, this section immediately follows a section in which it claims that Smith and Howard K. Stern were married in September 2006. Thus, shouldn't "boyfriend" be changed to "husband"? Jeffshantz 03:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Apologies, I just noticed in the Howard K. Stern article that "it was not a legally binding marriage." Jeffshantz 03:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It is inacurrate to say that he was "with her" when she died. CNN has reported that he was at the hospital, but that his whereabouts at the time her body was discovered is unknown. It would appear that when the nurse discovered her body, she was alone and already dead. Hence, the bodyguard unsuccessfully attempted to revive her.
I object to Stern being referred to as her boyfriend. There is much speculation that the "marriage" which was not legally binding was purely a legal manuever. He would be more appropriately described as her "longtime attorney and companion". Cleo123 03:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I also object. Someone had changed "boyfriend" to "lawyer", which was a good idea. Also, you could say he was at her deathbed, but it is unclear if he was there at her final moments. Danski14 04:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Age at Marriage to Smith

{{editprotected}} Browsing through and saw that Anna's age is incorrectly reported compared to the date she married Billy Wayne Smith. The article says she was 17 as of April 4, 1986. With her birth date of November 28, 1967, she would be 18 years of age on April 4, 1986. One of the three figures (date of birth, date of marriage, or age at marriage) needs to be changed appropriately. Everchanging02 03:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Further, The date of birth of her son, Daniel Wayne Smith is listed as January 22, 1986, but 'a year' after their marriage. By this, I would assume the year of their marriage is what is at fault. Please fix this. Everchanging02 03:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
In other words: Change the date of her marriage to Smith ("April 4, 1986") to "April 4, 1985". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Everchanging02 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC).
Other sources indicate that the 1985 marriage date is correct, though it's a bit difficult to find a good reliable source for this as so many sources just seem to reference eachother. --- RockMFR 04:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Appearances

{{editprotected}} Reading "Smith as spokesperson" section seems like it would be better suited under the Appearances heading. Anyone agree? Joneboi 04:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Or what about a "Career" heading and rearrange the information that is currently under headings regarding her career? Joneboi 04:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Not done as an editprotected request - the article is now semiprotected only, so you should be able to make the changes yourself. Proto::► 14:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I logged on to anna nichol smith didn't know that was a pen name and not real name. IP I guess attributed to me vandalism of page. Or was that the vandalism of everyone and that message just showed up on the page of anyone that went there?

reactions

I removed the reations section wikipedia is not a memorial, one or two is find but it is becoming too large and now half unsourced, we want to improve this article not make it worse. Jaranda wat's sup 05:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

In the reactions section, I removed the Rosie O'Donnell and Crane Durham text. Both entries seem more to embarrass these two living people with potentially libelous statements rather than contribute on the extensive life of Smith. They violate WP:BLP, especially at this time. -- Jreferee 16:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
O'Donnell's comments may prove to have been prophetic, and they echo the post-mortem comments of Smith's own mother. Durham, on the other hand, should be fired for what he said. Wahkeenah 15:41, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I had added a reaction from TRIMSPA and agree with you that this should be removed eventually - but I think you may have been hasty in removing all of these since the response to someone's death says as much about the person's life as does his or her passing away - to say nothing about the messengers themselves -- hriver 11:35 MST, 9 Feb 2007

Statement From PETA on Anna Nicole Smith's Death

PETA released a statement on the death of Anna Nicole Smith Crocoite 20:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

There's also this: http://blog.peta2.com/2007/02/farewell_anna_nicole_smith.html which includes some links to the stuff she's done with PETA in the past. — coelacan talk — 08:31, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Some vandalism just got corrected by OverlordQ

There was vandalism added by Visual-undeath and removed by OverlordQ, i'm not sure what it means by being semi-protected.

Just noting it (easier than tracking through history)

Koshatul 08:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I presume there has been discussion regarding the subject prior today - where are the talk page archives? ---*- u:Chazz/contact/t: 14:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Autopsy

i hear the autopsy is ganna be done today on her. does anyone know more or less when it is. Maverick423 14:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

the media is reporting that it'll be done today. So, we'll just have to wait and see. dposse 14:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Here is a link to an AP story on the scheduled autopsy. --Allen3 talk 14:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

hey guys i just heard on the radio that they suspect anna's death on a drug overdose. appearently someone close to her said she suffered the same fate as her son. im ganna look for a source on this but its still not notable since i take it it wasnt a offical autopsy report Maverick423 15:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

so far i only got this ( The autopsy has started) http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/02/09/smith.dies/index.html

so the report on the radio cannot be confirmed since the autopsy recently started. Maverick423 15:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The autopsy has not yet been confirmed. Sources say that there were persription Drugs in her hotel room but they did not find any inside of her. Smith's case is an unusual one. It wil take about 3-4 weeks until anything will be confirmed. My Thought? Trimspa. From all of the pills and other Trimspa products she had been taking, her weight had been changing rapidly. This is very unhealthy for someone who has been taking many drugs. I may be wrong, but this may just be the thing that lead to Smith's Death. Drums0212

Birthplace: Houston or Mexia, Texas?

This one is a stumper. The AP is still reporting Houston today, but both the BBC online and the New York Times say Mexia. Can anyone find conclusive proof one way or the other? It's possible that the NYT is saying Mexia just because she grew up there. Perhaps there's an article in one of the Houston papers or someone could find her birth certificate online? If you change it, please, of course, refernence it well. Moncrief 16:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I've always heard she was from Mexia. All the people in this area claim she is from Mexia.ShadowWriter 17:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
There isn't any doubt whatsoever that she grew up in Mexia. This is a question about her birthplace. Of course you can be born somewhere else and move to your hometown the next day. Moncrief 17:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I see if her birth certificate is publicly online.ShadowWriter 20:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Her mom said on Good Morning America that shes from Houston, and the whole Mexia thing was just fabricated. Link: [3]Jeztah 21:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Anna was born in Houston, not Mexia. [4] Smith was born Vickie Lynn Hogan in Houston. During junior high school she apparently moved with her mother to Mexia (pronounced meh-HAY'-uh), about 80 miles southeast of Dallas. [5] Born: 28-Nov-1967 Birthplace: Houston, TX [6]And here is the Transcript from Good Morning America, from her Mothers mouth. But she admitted that Smith's claim of a poor, country-girl background was somewhat exaggerated. "Well, she didn't come from a small town, as she said she did," Arthur said. "I asked her, 'you were born in Houston, middle-class family. Why do you tell that story?'" Smith said that a "rags to riches" story was much more interesting to the media, Arthur said. [7] I'm new here and nervous about making changes until I have more experience or I would change it myself. Someone needs to, please. Randyp455 23:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Great! Change it in the article, please (giving a source so we don't have to go through this again). Thanks! Moncrief 01:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
According to the online Texas Birth Index, 1903-1997, Vickie Lynn Hogan was born in Harris County, Texas. Houston is in Harris County; Mexia is in Limestone County.

It still says she went to high school in Mexia, which is possible, but unlikely, considering her mother's statement. Could someone confirm that?Jeztah 15:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you PLEASE sign your posts? Moncrief 05:55, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
My bad, that was my message. Signed. Jeztah 15:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I saw an article that had a picture from the Mexia yearbook didn't it? Said she transferred in, in ninth grade and then dropped out or left or something in tenth grade? Maybe I was just dreaming that :) Wjhonson 15:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
You're not dreaming. I don't know what grade she was in, but her mother testified in court that she transfered to a high school in Mexia and subsequently dropped out of school. Cleo123 09:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Don't you people read this article before commenting on it? If you'll read the article, it says she was in the ninth grade when she transferred to Mexia High School. A footnote to that claim links to an online article that has more information, including her yearbook photo. — Walloon 13:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Vickie Lynn Hogan was her given name birth name

StjamesphatazzHer article should read... Vickie Lynn Hogan was her name at birth. not Marshall. Did she get a Legal Name Changed when she married Smith and to Anna Nicole Smith but when did she legally change her name? And then she married Marshall 2nd Husband which then her name was Anna Nicole Marshall ( if Anna Nicole was legal) and after Marshall death she recently married her lawyer and latest husband, Howard K Stern making it Vicki Lynn Stern if Anne Nicole was not legal name. Stjamesphatazz 18:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The title of the article should not be changed. It should reflect the name by which she was known to the public, and the name she herself used professionally as an adult. Should we change the Marilyn Monroe article to that of her birth name Norma Jeane Mortenson? A large number of entertainers do not use their birth names throughout their career. There should be a redirect, though, from her birth name to this article, if there isn't already. Also please note that her birth name is featured prominently at the beginning of this article; it's just not the title of the article. Moncrief 18:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure I completely understand what it is you want to say. I can, however, point out our naming conventions, which state that articles about people should be named in the way that the person was/is most commonly known. Anna Nicole Smith was/is most commonly known as Anna Nicole Smith. AecisBrievenbus 18:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

- I agree with the firsr user. But to the second comment, you're right, Vickie Lynn Hogan was not the name she went by, BUT, I am only saying that the birth name should be changed, the ARTICLE name can remain as it is. And about Ms.Monroe: same thing...The article should be called Marilyn Monroe, but her birth name should in fact read Norma Jean Mortenson. — CarrierOnline 17:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Sign your posts, please. Who are you? Have you read this article? Her correct birth name is given. Moncrief 00:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I would say it's a bit ambiguous perhaps. Typically an article is named by their most known name so "Anne Nicole Smith". Then within the article the person would be called perhaps by their second most well known name *even if* it's not their birth name, so I'm going to have to side with Marshall. Marshall, since she has been involved in lawsuits revolving around and about that name. It's doubtful she ever *went by* Hogan at any rate. Can we not call this conflict "vandalism" however? Content-war is not vandalism. Wjhonson 02:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Smith cannot be buried

judge just ruled that she cannot be buried till the paternity test is conducted. man thats kinda sad Maverick423 18:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Mind finding a link for this? I had heard the judge didn't want to take DNA. -- Zanimum 18:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
The actual situation is that the Judge said the body can't be given over until the related issues concerning the paternity test are resolved. We don't know that she is going to be buried. The concern on the other side would be over a quick cremation. Once the body is released to someone, the court has no further say in whats done with the body. I really wonder who the body will be released to anyway. The judge denied a request for an emergency DNA test because its assumed that samples will be taken during the autopsy. The concern over her DNA has to do with fears that a different child will be produced for the DNA test. As far as being sad, be sad for the daughter. I think she is headed for the most horrible kind of life imaginable. 12.96.162.45 20:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


CNN here is the updated link though http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/02/09/smith.dies/index.html Maverick423 18:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


you know that DNA thing is new too it says now that he doesnt want to take it. but he wants to hold the body till feb 20 (dont mean to make that sound bad) Maverick423 18:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

    • UPDATE: According to the Associated Press [8], the California judge has withdrawn his request of the Florida authorities to hold the body until a DNA test can be performed. Broward County coroner Joshua Perper has assured Judge Richard A. Schnider that Smith's DNA had been preserved during the autopsy. 147.70.242.40 01:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

What are they gonna do with Anna's body while it's not buried? You know, how do they keep bodies fresh when they're dead?? wouldn't something happen...

reaction needs cleanup

the reaction section needs expansion and cleanup. I wanted to type something like "Reaction since Smiths death have been pouring our from friends, family, and former business partners" or something like that but i didn't know how to correctly phrase it. Any ideas would be great. dposse 18:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Why not include the show named after her?

Why is the Anna Nicole Show not listed under her television appearances? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.51.173.99 (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

requesting change to article (I'm locked out)

"could not make enough money to support herself and Daniel. She then became a stripper at a nightclub in Houston."

I think this is heavy POV. There is no way to judge her motives for becoming a stripper and the article should not suggest that "not making enough money" at other jobs was the reason. 12.96.162.45 20:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


Medical Examiner News Conference

Can someone get a few sources? --Lincoln F. Stern 20:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[9] CNN is updating its news article as the guy talks. dposse 20:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

birth of daughter/new paterity claim

Please provide more detail than "On February 09, 2007, AP reported that Zsa Zsa Gabor's husband Prince Frederic von Anhalt may be the father." It sounds too much like speculation and needs some justification - why has he joined the paternity suit? Romdoll 21:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Prince Frederick von Anhalt is now claiming that he is the father of the baby. [10].
The story also includes a new claim that Anna Nicole Smith asked him to adopt her so she could call herself a princess.
So its not speculation. He claims to have had a ten-year affair with her and claims that he was seeing her around the time of the pregnancy. Personally I think the claims are just an attempt at publicity, but he has made them in his own name and there is nobody who can authoratively deny them.12.96.162.45 21:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, we know. It's already in the article. dposse 21:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Howard Stern vandalism

Someone was changing the name of the lawyer/companion/husband/etc Howard K. Stern in the article to Howard Stern a different person. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CloneGuard (talk • contribs) 22:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

It's been reverted already. Thanks, though. dposse 23:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The wikipolicy on names.

Just to be clear, what is the wikipolicy on a persons name? This person has three names. Her birth name was Vickie Lynn Hogan, her married name is Vickie Lynn Marshall, and her stage name which everyone knows her by is Anna Nicole Smith. I just want some clarification on what to put in the introduction to avoid edit wars later. dposse 23:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:MOSBIO: "While the article title should generally be the name by which the subject is most commonly known, the subject's full name should be given in the lead paragraph, if known. ... For people who are best known by a pseudonym, the birth name should usually appear first in the article, followed closely by the pseudonym. Follow this practice even if the article itself is titled with the pseudonym." AecisBrievenbus 23:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Ah. Do you want to do that now? I have no idea how to fix this per wikipolicy, unless there's no need to. dposse 23:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Afaict the lead paragraph is correct at the moment: "Vickie Lynn Marshall ..., better known by her stage name Anna Nicole Smith..." Nothing needs to be changed. AecisBrievenbus 23:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Ah! Ok. thanks. dposse 23:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Anna Nicole Smith was her legal name (ie did she change her name like Marilyn Monroe did?). Does the rule above apply if the person legally changed their name? Thanks. Yankees76 14:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Anna Nicole discussed this on Larry King Live. Anna Nicole Smith is a stage name. Her married name is Marshall. please see the reference: [11] dposse 18:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected Talk Page.

I thought this talk page had been semi-protected to stop IP vandals from vandalizing it. Why was this page unprotected so soon? Acalamari 00:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Because it's "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", people have to be able to contribute somehow without waiting 4 days right? --WikiSlasher 01:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia policies also state that libel is to be removed immediately from articles or article talk pages. The semi-protection was placed due to an exceedingly large amount of trolling amassing from anonymous editors and new accounts.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 01:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I was actually talking about this talk page. The article is still semi-protected. If the semi-protection on the article was dropped, we'd be reverting double or triple the vandalism we have now. Imagine if it hadn't been semi-protected at all. The other day when we had 7-9 users editing at once...with no semi-protection, it would have been worse. Acalamari 02:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
So was I. I think there is a real need to keep the article semi-protected but with the talk page like I said in an above section, it's unwikilike for newcomers to not even be able to use the talk page. We can always revert vandalism/libel on the talk page. --WikiSlasher 12:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Another Subsection to Reactions

I think one of the critical developments of the reaction section, will develop in time, is how the media has gone from portraying her as the dumb ditzy blonde to the tragic sexy drugged up pin-up girl. The fact that the media has gone from ripping her apart to creating this tragic figure is a certaintly a reaction that needs noting. If anyone can find articles from newspaper or magazines that have swapped views on Anna Nicole since her death and reference it, it would wonderful in the future to developing this section.--Ozgod 03:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

All that would be POV and original research. This isn't about the media and their reactions to this woman, this is a encyclopdia article about Smith's life, career, and death. That's all. dposse 03:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
How the media reacted to her is relevant because their reactions to her during her life did have an impact on her and the changes they made aftewards shows the retrospection they observed - i.e. her public image while she was alive and her public image after she died.--Ozgod 03:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
It's not notable here, though. It's completely POV is you compare a article from two years ago and now. Of course it's going to be different. The media are made of of humans, and they do care when someone dies this young, especially a celebrity. Your point of view that the media is evil is fine, but it has no place here. dposse

The point being, dposse, is to record the change in the media's view of Anna Nicole after her death compared to when she is alive. That is my point as to why the section is relevant.--Ozgod 16:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

You would have to have a published source that states that the media has changed their opinion. Gdo01 02:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Its not POV but it would be original research until there is a source saying what amounts to the obvious (the same thing). The media reaction to her and how it changes over time is certainly notible here but initial analysis can't be here. I dont know that there is anything unique about what happened though. Media coverage about the recently dead always tends to be more positive. Most reporters don't like bashing the dead. Her reputation is also getting better as a side-effect of everyone in the world going after Howard K. Stern. She was a stupid drunken junkie whore. There is nothing redeeming about any part of her life. But as bad as she was, the animals around her are all worse. 63.3.5.2 19:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

This SHOULD be added: (I've tried to add it you guys keep calling it spam) A very touching song written with regards to her death. Anna Nicole Where Are You? http://www.myspace.com/normaugustinus

It's a MySpace link. I believe that MySpace links are normally removed. Acalamari 21:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Unless it is the article subject's "official" myspace link, it will be removed. Please see WP:EL.--Isotope23 01:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Came across this, thought it should be added

http://www.annanicolesmith.com/

82.35.250.141 07:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I've re-added the Rottentomatoes.com link which someone deleted. The website is cited as a reference in the article itself citing her critically panned film performances. Her page is much more visible in the external links.

Controversy

Lets face facts. Despite what you may have thought of this woman, she was highly controversial, and generated massive publicity for herself through her actions in life. So maybe there should be a section simply titled Controversies. Some of the other stuff could be incorporated into that. The fact that three men are claiming paternity of her child, and alluding to the possibility that there may be many others, gives us yet another insight into her somewhat troubled life.Cattona 08:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Any content that is controversial should be placed at the relevent historical points in her life. The proposed subsection wouldn't be half as useful as simply merging all such content into the normal flow of the article. — coelacan talk — 10:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. E! True Hollywood stories, which thrives on controversies and failure for their shows, goes chronologically, so should we. -- Zanimum 19:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Jumbled information

I think the article needs a bit of cleaning up, with her death mentioned nearer the top of the article. In the section about the birth of her daughter it suddenly mentions her "corpse". This just seems slightly confused as it precedes the section about her death. Can someone change it about a bit? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seraphim Whipp (talk • contribs) 13:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

It seems chronological to me. -- Zanimum 19:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

wow

you guys work. She died yesterday and you got it here today. wow.24.144.137.244 16:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, they shore work. Wahkeenah 16:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
We had it updated within minutes of the news networks reporting. -- Zanimum 19:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
What language are you writing in? Moncrief 05:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia > media. 24.127.55.63 11:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
That explains it. Wahkeenah 12:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Daniel - father of Dannielynn Hope

As this has become a more and more predominant theory into the bizaare/suspicious deaths of both mother and son, I think a section should be added to discuss this topic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lisalisa46410 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

This is not a theory. Its a paranoid guess. There is not a single fact to confirm what amounts to a wild accusation about the parentage of a living person (Dannielynn). As such, its a libel risk and should not be in the article until at least one fact can be found to support it. 63.3.5.2 19:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, discussion on the discussion page is fine discussing between users who the father is while the article itself should track the developments on this paternity suit.--Ozgod 17:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

ah, excuse me but are you guys implying that the son of anna nicole is also the father of his own sister??? you mean a case on incest??? Danraz 14:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anna_Nicole_Smith/Archive_2&oldid=1190102781"