Jump to content

Talk:Kirsten Dunst/Archive 2

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

Marie Antionette

It is mentioned that this film received favourable reviews, but it would be more correct to say that its reviews were mixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peachykeen606 (talk • contribs) 13:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

According to Metacritic, the film received generally favourable reception. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:45, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

True Heart

The 1997 movie "True Heart" isn't mentioned in either the body of the entry or the filmography. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_Heart

PCB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.162.63 (talk) 17:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Synopsis of "How to Lose Friends" needed?

Why is there a one-sentence synopsis of "How to Lose Friends and Alienate People" here? Would articles about actors be better-served if every movie they appeared in were also summarized? It seems to me like information that's better confined to the article about the movie, unless it specifically relates to the actor in question. User:Korny O'Near (talk) 02:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, if it's a problem, it would have been arisen during the article's FAC. Nobody had a problem with the sentence. Believe me, the people from FAC are very critical in the information included in articles. Also, other featured articles like Reese Witherspoon, Emma Watson, Jake Gyllenhaal, etc. have similar info. included in their articles. I don't see the problem why this article should be an exception. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
That sounds to me like a not-very-convincing appeal to authority. Should we just lock the article now except for post-2008 changes? I just looked at the Gyllenhaal article you linked, and one of the films he appeared in is described as "a film ignored by audiences and critics alike" (uncited, of course), so that article doesn't seem like some model for emulation. Can't we just talk about the thing on its own merits - are articles better or worse with synopses of each film? I think worse - it always reads like an awkward digression. Korny O'Near (talk) 03:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
By the way, I just checked the version of the Gyllenhaal article that seems to have gotten the featured article status, and that one has the offending line as well - some vetting. Korny O'Near (talk) 03:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Personal life

Why are there pieces about Berlin, World War II, Hitler's brand new Mercedes-Benz and Hitler's doorstep in this article? It does not look very serious. 83.83.68.2 (talk) 12:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

That was vandalism and reverted six hours ago. -Duribald (talk) 12:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Spam

Three films expected in the future are mentioned. This is spamming. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.36.65 (talk) 13:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Not if they are sourced. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:55, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Sounds like editors have a WP:CRYSTALBALL. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Removed Upside Down as being WP:CRYSTAL as A Jealous Ghost, Sweet Relief and Spider-Man 4 didn't happen as planned before. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:02, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate material

Deleted inappropriate material, added to the start of page, saying 'cock sucking whore'. Page should be watched. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireandy (talk • contribs) 17:56, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately that happens, especially with articles that are on the Main Page, as this one is today. Thank you for removing it. It's not always possible to revert immediately, but I can assure you, the first person who notices it will remove that kind of thing. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Style issues

This is an explanation of my recent edits to the 2003 paragraph of Spider-Man and after, which User:ThinkBlue just reverted.

  • "Following the success of Spider-Man" is gratuitous advertisement. It's irrelevant to a supporting role in an unrelated independent film.
  • Repeated used of "appeared" in the section is bad style.
  • "appeared...where she had" (in the Levity sentence) is less concise than "played".
  • "In this year" and the second "(2003)" are both redundant to the first "(2003)".
  • "The latter" is incorrect when there are more than two items.

Generally speaking, the whole section reads a lot like a magazine article. It's not too bad, but it's more verbose and dramatic that an encyclopedia should be.
—Codrdan (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

It wouldn't kill you to use a descriptive edit summary, especially on a featured article. I agree with most of your points, but I disagree on others. For example, it's not "gratuitous advertisement" to say "following the success". It was successful and that provides a good way of linking into the next paragraph. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Good point about the summary. As for linking, truth isn't a good enough reason. Links should describe some important relationship between the things they link. Any unrelated mention of success is just advertising. —Codrdan (talk) 20:39, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

"Upside Down" not being included within the filmography!

Kirsten has just begun filming for new movie "Upside Down", but it is not being accepted into her filmography. For years, upcoming films have been easily accepted in her filmography. By upcoming films, I mean films that are shooting right now. Not "pre-production" or just recently "announced" films, but the movies that are filming. I do not get why the film cannot stay in the filmography if it is already officially apart of the list films that she has worked on. Please explain this to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stiff036 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Oldest vandalism?

I just here removed an assertion that someone, added here, dated Kirsten Dunst. Seemed odd to me - I can only wonder why this wasn't questioned for all these years? It seems the article made it through Good Article and Featured Article candidacy with this entry intact: is it "common knowledge"? Or was it really four-and-a-half-year-old vandalism? --RobertG ♬ talk 14:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Cameo in The Day After Tomorrow

It is mentioned in the director's commentary in the scene when Jake's character is talking on the pay phone. How do you cite commentary? It's obviously a valid source KevDog32 (talk) 16:20, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Drop Dead Gorgeous is also not mentioned in the filmography.```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.33.10.155 (talk) 16:40, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

German Passport

Dunst told the Berlin daily "BZ" on Saturday that she had accepted German citizenship in addition to the American. link --Hoernum (talk) 06:00, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Neither the USA nor Germany allow dual citizenship! Q43 (talk) 00:43, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Germany does allow dual citizenship! (§ 12 Abs. 3 StAG ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.225.208.244 (talk) 04:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Request for correction

So she obviously is now an American-German actress, singer and model.
Please correct the lemma's introduction. Compare Heidi Klum.91.39.88.195 (talk) 02:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
The US also permits dual citizenship of US citizens. The only time a renouncement of citizenship is required is when one becomes a naturalized US citizen. Wikipedia itself has an article on just that subject.Wzrd1 (talk) 22:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Of Swedish descent?

None of the two references (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsten_Dunst#cite_note-3, None of the two references (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsten_Dunst#cite_note-4) proofs, that her mother is also of Swedish descent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.136.52 (talk) 19:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

That her mother ist also of swedish descent doesn't make Kerstin Dunst a "German people of Swedish descent", because that's something different. Her father ist 100% German, and her mother a only very little bit swedish. Hansa Teutonica (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Kirsten Dunst

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Kirsten Dunst's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "NYTimes":

  • From Rodarte: Jacobs, Mark (2005-08-28). "The Talk; Scissor Sisters". New York Times. Retrieved 2007-11-24.
  • From Bring It On (film): Scott, A. O. (August 25, 2000). "Bring It On (2000) Film Review; Strong, Modest and Sincere Behind All the Giddy Cheer". The New York Times. Retrieved February 10, 2012.
  • From Eugenia Kim: New York Times: "Top Hats, Bottom Prices"

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:24, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

singing debut

There reads: In 2001, Dunst made her singing debut
Strangely, Amazon.com has credited her a song in Drop Dead Gorgeous soundtrack, a duet with Allison Janney, "Spit It Out".
And, what is also strange, wikipedia article does not have that song at all in the soundtrack's track list. Here, they are credited with "Number One" (dialogue). Some sites, such as IMDB, do not credit Dunst or Janney at all. 82.141.65.143 (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia and IMDB do not have her name on the tracklist. However, Amazon.com and Allmusic do have her. I think we can be rather sure she has recorded the song. 82.141.119.130 (talk) 15:32, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Kirsten Dunst is not an Angel in Anchorman 2 : The Legend Continues

She is named.. (may have the wrong part wrong) but it goes something like this: (something Alterius?: Maiden of the Clouds — Preceding unsigned comment added by Npabebangin (talk • contribs) 09:45, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

The category "German people of Swedish descent" is wrong,

because her father is just German, and her mother has never had German citizenship. You could also say Kirsten Dunst belongs to the category "Swedish people of German descent", but Kirsten Dunst is not Swedish, so the category "German people of Swedish descent" doesn't make sense at all. 89.204.136.52 (talk) 18:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


But she has the German citizenship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.15.7.97 (talk) 19:47, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

She is not German

Yes she has German citizenship, but that does not make her German. She has never lived there and she did not even get the citizenship until she was 29 years old. JDDJS (talk) 19:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

True, and also, citizenship and nationality aren't the same thing. -- Chamith (talk) 16:46, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
no, absolutely wrong. If you've got the citizenship AND nationality -- no matter you ever lived in Germany or not -- of a nation then you are also part of this nation. As a citizen AND national. By the way: English WP is the only one among the big wikipedias that does not acknowledge this fact. Check the other WP! 5:10, 3 November 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.18.22.132 (talk)
What other wikis do has no impact on what we do here. And it is policy here that Nationality ans Citizenship are not the same. JDDJS (talk) 05:09, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Regardless of this nationality vs citizenship dispute, she was a Hollywood actress when she became notable. MOS:BLPLEAD states, "Previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." -- Chamith (talk) 07:59, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Her father was a German national living in the US and she became a German citizen by birth. Just like Ted Cruz or Bruce Willis became US citizens by birth even though both were born in a foreign country. She just didn't ask for a passport until she was 29. 80.136.82.148 (talk) 08:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, yes, both of them were born in foreign countries, but they are notable mainly for what they've done as American citizens, which is exactly the case here. And like I said above, MOS:BLPLEAD explicitly states that the previous nationalities shouldn't be included unless they are relevant to the subject's notability. To add, the infobox does point out that she is a German national as well.-- ChamithN (talk) 09:55, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
She was a German right from the start, just because this wasn't publicly known doesn't change that simple fact. 80.136.76.191 (talk) 07:50, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
In my last reply, I didn't call her a German or an American. She could be both, if she wants to. It's not up to you or me. I just simply noted that she is known for her acting career in America, and that we should stick to MOS:BLPLEAD. -- ChamithN (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

COI

@Rms125a@hotmail.com: do you mind explaining what the perceived COI problem is and how it manifests in this article? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:34, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kirsten Dunst. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kirsten Dunst. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:47, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kirsten Dunst. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kirsten_Dunst/Archive_2&oldid=1142347168"