Jump to content

Talk:Michelle Williams (actress)/Archive 1

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

Cutting ties with Heath Ledger

There should not be anything on this page that speaks out in a libellous nature against Michelle Williams in regards to the death of Heath Ledger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sholt8 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Why is Ledger's death relevant to Williams' page? 208.1.120.200 (talk) 22:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Because they were together for 3 years and he is the father if her child. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.149.105.54 (talk) 23:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm still not sure why his *death* needs to be mentioned on this page - If John McEnroe is killed in a car crash tomorrow would "McEnroe was killed in a car crash on [insert date here]" on Tatum O'neil's entry? In addition, I agree with the first poster - the placement of the statement about Ledger's death is treading a fine line between extra information and inference that the death was somehow related to the breakup.70.189.213.149 (talk) 02:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
"On September 4, 2007, Williams' father confirmed to Sydney Daily Telegraph that Ledger and Williams had indeed split.[6] Ledger was subsequently found dead in a New York City apartment on January 22, 2008[7]."
The last sentence could be better worded so as not to imply that the split led to Ledger's death. --WTStoffs (talk) 02:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It's relevant because Ledger died so soon after their split, and that has some affect on her life. I think people seeking information on Williams in the future will find it useful to know that the father of her child died four months after they broke up. It's a relative issue; it doesn't apply in every case, but I think it does here. 140.247.250.223 (talk) 04:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

For some guidance, see the "domestic partner" parameter definition in Template:Infobox actor, the talk page of that template, with the link to WP:BLP#Well known public figures and the related links to policies for editing biographies of living persons such as Williams; espec. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and WP:V#Sources. See also Heath Ledger (family and personal life section and later secs.) for relevance to Williams and pertinent sections of Talk:Heath Ledger (including the talk archive). Thanks. --NYScholar (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Reliable third-party published sources and proper citations format

For help with editing requirements pertaining to biographies of living persons, please see the templates at top of this page and for citations format, please see WP:CITE. Thank you. All possibly-controversial material not properly sourced and extraneous questionably-sourced gossip unsuitable for an encyclopedia article on a living person are deleted on sight from biographies of living persons, as per WP:BLP. Most gossip-magazine style blogs are not considered reliable sources and not permissible. Please see the editing requirements and style guidelines before inserting any such material in this article and read the previous discussions. Thank you. --NYScholar (talk) 05:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Picture

Can't we just add the picture from the page Jen Lindley?AlexDuarte (talk) 08:17, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Why is Heath Ledger listed under Spouses in the Info Box?

The two of them were never married, and the couple were in fact in a domestic partnership. Heath Ledger's page reflects this, Michelle Williams should as well.24.190.34.219 (talk) 21:19, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

yes I agree... they were never married and there is a sentence in here that says "her husband"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.77.97.3 (talk) 01:49, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Source

WhisperToMe (talk) 18:54, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

The movie Timemaster

Michelle appeared in the movie Timemaster before she was in the film listed as her first in this article. Whether she puts it on her resume or not, it should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.115.236.102 (talk) 15:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Michelle Williams (actress)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:27, 4 August 2011 (UTC) I will be reviewing this article in the upcoming days.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:27, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:LEAD
  • I don't think the word small is necessary in the second sentence.

done

  • Change "Out of all of Williams's relationships since the 1990s, her engagement to actor and Brokeback Mountain co-star Heath Ledger remains the most high-profile" to "Her engagement to actor and Brokeback Mountain co-star Heath Ledger remains the most high-profile of Williams's relationships since the 1990s"
I haven't been able to find a solid source confirming that they were engaged, so I instead wrote "Her affair with actor and Brokeback Mountain co-star Heath Ledger remains the most high-profile of Williams's relationships since the 1990s"
Affair sounds like one of them was married and cheating.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Changed it to relationship

done

Early life
  • drop Michelle Ingrid

done

  • link bullying

done

  • this is confusing because you extend past the beginning of the next section without being complete. I.e., you start talking about Dawson's Creek before describing her early career guest appearances. Rearrange chronologically without redundancy.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

done

1990s
  • Her role as the younger version Sil should be Her role as the younger version of Sil, I believe

done

  • become Natasha Henstridge's monster should be become the monster character played by Natasha Henstridge

done

  • lead to the resignation should be led to the resignation

done

  • raise them both to prominence needs a citation

done

  • the second paragraph needs to be restructured. After the first sentence you need to follow it with text describing how while at DC she was able to do other side projects. Then give examples of such. The second sentence right now is kind of hard to figure out right now because it seems like the sequence might be off.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
For that paragraph I've tried to focus solely on DC, despite it carrying out to 2003 and her making appearances in between. I have however made a note of it in the next paragraph that she continued to make film appearances while still doing the show.
I've rearranged the section to fit the time period (DC has it's own paragraph with her commentary on it and the part about after the show ended was placed in the 2000-2005 section. Is that better? =/ Crystal Clear x3 02:04, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
2000–2005
  • She then appeared in the 2000 HBO television movie sequel If These Walls Could Talk 2, divided into three separate sections, it follows lesbian couples in different time periods.
I'm not sure what you want me to do here as the prose if the same as in the article
What about a period after 2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:34, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
done
  • Williams stars in it as the role of the victim's grieving sister. rm the role of

done

  • "most acclaimed movie from critics " seems wrong since she has twice been Oscar nommed.

removed

  • Commercially, the movie also did exceptionally, earning over $8.6 million. needs a budget number to make it clear why this was exceptional

removed

  • "in what marked the 2005 feature film debut of Richard Ledes, the generally ignored period piece A Hole in One."->"in the 2005 feature film debut of Richard Ledes and the generally ignored period piece A Hole in One."

done

  • What do you think of changing "Going from 5 theaters to more than 2,000," to "Going from a 5-theater screening to a 2,000-theater-plus screening,"

done

done Crystal Clear x3 06:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

done

2006–present
  • Chris Cleaves's book needs a name and year.

done

  • With 41.1 million in ticket sales at over 2,900 locations-how about some $ #s

done

done

Personal life
  • Is there a link for godparents?

done

  • Is she involved in any causes?
I've seen pics of her at some charity events but haven't found a RS about her being involved in any environmental or political causes
What kind of pics? event? How do you see pics, but not at an RS? Are you a friend of hers?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
I meant by seeing pics of her from getty images at events, but haven't seen any RSs cover her c.w. Crystal Clear x3 23:04, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Nope Crystal Clear x3 01:20, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Both images need {{Personality rights}} tags.
done Crystal Clear x3 23:04, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
  1. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Some minor issues remain. I am putting this on hold.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
done Crystal Clear x3 03:13, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Great work. I am passing this now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Trimmed

Today, I trimmed some text from the article. It seems to me to be more journalistic and content more suited to a magazine than to an encyclopedia. Another editor, Lobo, feels different ans suggested the matter be discuss here. For the record, I think the trimmed down version is an improvemnt, but if other editors feel it should be restored, then I am not attached to the text. I guess sometimes it is hard to seperate journalism from writing an enclclopedia, but I usually prefer less to more. Plus, this actress is still young and developing - do we really need so much about each of her films? --BwB (talk) 21:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you BwB for your civil cooperation. The main thing I was opposed to was the vast amount of text that you removed (over 1,000 words), and it was easiest to just revert all of it. I'm sure we could reach a compromise about removing some things...I agree that actor article should never go into too much detail about plot, for instance (but a short summary of her role in a film is interesting and useful). Some quotes may indeed be unencyclopedic, as well. But I don't think they should all be removed as a blanket rule, quotes bring an article to life.
"Plus, this actress is still young and developing - do we really need so much about each of her films?" - I don't really understand this point. I see no reason why a "young and developing" actress should not be given a decent amount of detail about her career. She deserves it no less than Laurence Olivier, really, people could potentially be just as interested in her as the former. All articles should be as full as editors feel inclined to make them (within guidelines), regardless of perceived importance. --Lobo (talk) 16:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


I think a vast majority of the awards from the awards column should be removed.... There are hundreds of IF festivals, many or most of which are very small. Even if "celebrities" or otherwise "well known" hollywood professionals occasionally go to these festivals, or submit IFs to them, that does not make them "notable" per Wikipedia standards. The Awards column is abzolutely jammed full of completely obscure awards that 99.99997% of Wikipedia readers don't care about, don't know about, and probably won't even read. BUT, they will see that the "awards" section for each of her films is 15 lines long, and assume that makes it one of the great films of all time..... its really that the producers spammed it to every single IF festival they could possibly manage.184.189.220.114 (talk) 21:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Jason Segal

Why is Segal listed as her partner? Weren't they just dating? She dated Spike Jonze for the same amount of time... Was Segal more significant for some reason? Just curious. Let Me Eat Cake (talk) 19:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no move. -- tariqabjotu 03:00, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Michelle Williams (actress) → Michelle Williams – When people look up "Michelle Williams," who are they looking for: An actress who starred in a series of successful movies and a highly successful TV drama, or, an R&B singer from a now-defunct trio who hasn't had much on her own? GeicoHen (talk) 03:58, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Oppose - I suspect if you divide page views for Destiny's Child by 3, + Michelle Williams (singer) you'll find the 1980 born singer has a better claim to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC than the 1980 born actress. But simply based on Google Books you don't have a case. This is a classic WP:TWODAB where there are competing notable subjects. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose; The actress is probably a bit better known, but neither individual has a claim to be the clear primary topic. 168.12.253.66 (talk) 13:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose It's too close to call who the primary topic is so the hatnote is needed.LM2000 (talk) 02:07, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Easily the primary topic in a WP:TWODABS situation. The actress's article has been viewed 421,223 times in the last 90 days compared to only 86,631. "Michelle Williams"+actress returns 44,400 hits in the Google News archives, compared to 4,730 for "Michelle Williams"+singer and 4,450 for "Michelle Williams"+"Destiny's Child". Google Books is also heavily slanted toward the actress ([1] vs. [2], though neither appear to return many reliable sources) and both have had the exact same period over which to claim long-term significance. There's no need to make the large majority of readers looking for the actress jump through an extra hoop, and the singer will be found just as easily through a hat note (which is already present, btw) as through the dab page.--Cúchullain t/c 13:54, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per Cúchullain. WP:TWODABS obviously covers this. Nymf (talk) 14:48, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose This isn't a case where the article is some stub of a person that nobody cares about. They both have generally the same notability. I should note that regular Google is divided - "Michelle Williams" "singer" gives 32,100,000 results while "Michelle Williams" "actress" gives 28,600,000. No primary topic. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 18:47, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Raw Google searches are notoriously flawed, and can be affected by the searcher's location and search history. For instance I'm getting only 20,800,000 hits for the singer and 33,500,000 for the actress. The page view statistics and books and news searches are much less variable (and favor the actress several times over).--Cúchullain t/c 17:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
From what I can see, news sources do not favor any over the other. The first page of Google News searches for Michelle Williams give me:
  1. Source about actress
  2. Actress
  3. Actress
  4. Singer
  5. Singer
  6. Actress
  7. Actress
  8. Actress
  9. Singer
  10. Singer

So yeah, it's unfair to pick one over the other. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 19:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

"Michelle Williams"+actress returns 44,400 hits compared to 4,730 for "Michelle Williams"+singer and 4,450 for "Michelle Williams"+"Destiny's Child" in the Google News archives. It's not even close.--Cúchullain t/c 19:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Michelle Williams (actress). 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 08:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Michelle Williams (actress). 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) 14:58, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michelle Williams (actress). 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) 12:10, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michelle Williams (actress). 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) 00:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michelle Williams (actress). 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) 00:34, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Certifications in Discography

Fair enough she is not a professional singer but can't chart entries and certifications be added regardless whether she is or not? Mn1548 (talk) 21:55, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I believe the chart entries and certifications are apt for The Greatest Showman: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack and not for an actor in the film who has only sung two songs in it. If she was a professional singer, then certifications would be an integral part of her career, but since she's not, simply stating the few songs she has sung (as part of her acting commitment to the film) should suffice IMO. Cheers! --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:32, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
What you say makes sense for the album as a whole but the songs on it, which she sang, I think should have the charts and certifications on it because as you said - she sung them. Also I think what you said about the certifications not being "an integral part of her career" because she's an actress and not a singer is true but that information is still true regardless which is why I think it should be on. Please tell me what you think about this. Thankyou. Mn1548 (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
We could pose this question on her talk page and see what other's think about it? Works? --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:10, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
That works for me. Mn1548 (talk) 18:20, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Added this discussion to the talk page regarding chart positions and certifications in the discography section as more view points are needed. Mn1548 (talk) 13:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Filmography

Why doesn't this page have a filmography? Just about every article for an actor or actress has a list of film/television appearances. 202.155.85.18 (talk) 07:56, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

It does: Michelle Williams on screen and stage. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Trading Accolades

Shouldn't her accolades as a trader be somewhere on her page? She won the World Cup Trading Championships in 1997. Sources:

Jfdco (talk) 22:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

It's already there. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michelle_Williams_(actress)/Archive_1&oldid=1145696645"