Jump to content

Talk:Tom Hardy/Archive 1

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

People from Hammersmith

Why is he in the above category when the artical says he's from East Sheen? Fair enough they are near-ish eachother but for starters one is south of the Thames and the other is north - with several miles of river in between. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.97.85 (talk) 13:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

BLP

How does inserting material about Mr Hardy's private life as reported here in Pink News (http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/07/29/inception-star-tom-hardy-reveals-affairs-with-men/) breach BLP?  Francium12  16:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

This is an encyclopaedia profile of an actor; gossip repeated in tabloids and blogs and added here without context is neither responsible or valuable. If you're looking for the relevant section of the policy, see here. Regards, Skomorokh 16:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Gossip is unverifiable. The contents of a first-hand interview published in a magazine is inherently verifiable. Are we saying something only become worthy on inclusion once published in a high-brow broadsheet rather than a low-brow tabloid?  Francium12  16:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree, it is not gossip as it is from a direct interview so it CAN be included in the article. However, I would suggest when including not to make any assumptions and only state what the actor says. Don't assign labels such as gay or straight or bi when the actor himself does not use them. Also, I believe it is preferable to find a source to cite that quotes the interview verbatim, and if that's not possible to indeed search for a more "high-brow" publication that references it, before simply citing the given "low-brow" source. Remember I said preferable, not necessary. Also, finding additional sources that cite the interview also helps. 71.190.182.22 (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
The problem in this case is not that the Daily Mail is inherently an unreliable source, but that in this case it has been proven as such. Basically, the article they ran is a selectively misquoted cut-and-paste rip-off of an interview that was originally published in a different magazine way back in December 2009. I fear the Mail has fallen below the standards of journalistic integrity that would be satisfactory for inclusion in this article. The source of the original interview doesn't appear to be available online, but it's been reposted in full on IMDb: [1] DWaterson (talk) 18:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Sources:

Those are just my looking it up. You're right it seems that the Daily Mail is quoting Attitude, at least if it's telling the truth here. But doesn't the Mail's publishing essentially give their stamp of approval to the interview? And if it is indeed an interview with correct quotes, doesn't it merit a sentence in his personal life section? BE——Critical__Talk 19:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's another source: Inception star Tom Hardy admits he had gay sex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.150.181 (talk • contribs) 05:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
That's a two-sentence anonymous mention of the interview's juicy bit elsewhere, without attribution.

Perez Hilton article: http://perezhilton.com/2010-07-28-hes-gayish-inception-star-tom-hardy-reveals-his-fluid-sexuality —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.190.2.213 (talk) 19:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

These are clearly derivative of the one story. The Daily Mail stamp of approval doesn't count for much (see DWaterson's comment above), and we cannot rely on the word of a pseudonymous imdb commentator. Comparing the excerpt on IMdB and the report in the Daily Mail, one gets a very different picture – context is everything. In general, it's irresponsible to rely on any partial interview not vetted by a reliable source; see Resignation of Shirley Sherrod for why.
If we can verify that the Attitude interview is as posted above, then a neutral, balanced paragraph on Hardy's sexually might be responsibly added (I'm not aware of any issues with the journalistic standards of Attitude but please correct me here if there are any). Best, Skomorokh 19:37, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't know about Attitude either, though it doesn't look RS. I asked the question here, so maybe if you go put in that it's your question also we'll get some feedback. BE——Critical__Talk 19:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I see you like the Attitude, but I didn't find anything against the Daily Mail in a brief bit of research. BE——Critical__Talk 20:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
These equally reliable sources should give you an idea: [2],[3], [4]. Skomorokh 20:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
It is always best to reference from primary rather than secondary sources. However, I can't claim to be an avid reader of LGBT publications such as Attitude (magazine). Isn't Pink News [5] a reputable source for LGBT news (more so than the Daily Fail :-) )? 92.13.4.64 (talk) 22:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
But for WP, we should use secondary sources. BE——Critical__Talk 22:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Turns out there is a small error in the IMDb reproduction of the original article. It was actually published in the December 2008 edition of Attitude. Regrettably I do not appear to have retained a hard copy. DWaterson (talk) 23:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I'll ask our specialists. Skomorokh 23:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Tomhardy23.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Tomhardy23.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Tom-Hardy.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Tom-Hardy.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Tom-Hardy.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Black Hawk Down (film)

Um... Black Hawk Down was about a UN-US operation in Mogadishu, Somalia. It had nothing to do with the Gulf War.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.180.249.209 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 5 April 2006

I know this is the wrong category, but I don't want to spend too much time on this. It still says that lawless is an upcoming film, just so you know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.59.218.183 (talk) 10:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 October 2012

50.76.153.81 (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Please change TOM'S picture. It's not flattering at all. He is so beautiful, he deserves to be represented in a much better light.

Thanks

Lauren Phillips 50.76.153.81 (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Change it to what? —KuyaBriBriTalk 20:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldv8riwBi11qc66nv.jpg

Also, who erased the parts with him experimenting with guys and having played with everything and everyone!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.45.97.172 (talk) 05:40, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

THIS PAGE IS A MESS!!!

FIRST OFF, YOU NEED TO CHANGE THAT MAIN PIC TO THIS:

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldv8riwBi11qc66nv.jpg

NEXT, YOU NEED TO INCLUDE THE ARTICLES WHERE HE MENTIONS EXPERIMENTING WITH GUYS AND HAVING PLAYED WITH EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING! THIS IS WIKIPEDIA, NOT SOME POLITICALLY CORRECT FORUM!

SO PLEASE FIX THESE ISSUES ASAP!!!

sorry for caps lock, but I'm not re-typing my message!

Fix it NOW, kthnx bai! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.45.75.118 (talk) 02:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Sweeney Todd Correction

Tom Hardy played a constable in a BBC adaptation of Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. This version came out in 2006 and is not related to the American version directed by Tim Burton. This page lists the 2007 as the year of release and links to the Tim Burton film. The IMDb page for the correct TV film is here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0479760/. Wkuelthau (talk) 08:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)wkuelthau

Charlotte Riley

Tom is no longer with Charlotte....perhaps that could be updated.

Well, according to this article published just yesterday, they are still together. --Λeternus (talk) 09:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Height and Weight

Tom Hardy's a big guy (although he's shorter than Aidan Gillen), I thought that should be mentioned in the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.43.30.19 (talk) 01:18, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

For you. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:35, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2014

Mad max is coming out in 2015, not 2014 128.2.91.50 (talk) 19:16, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Done Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 20:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Tv career needs updating

He needs to have Peaky Blinders added to his Tv career. He plays Mr Solomon, a Jewish gangster, who appears in SO2 EP2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.251.252.157 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 9 October 2014‎ (UTC)

His role as Alfie Solomons for Peaky Blinders in 2014 is already mentioned in the § Television section. The information was added on 13 October by User:TDFan1000. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 13:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

"Irish Catholic"

It seems no biography of any prominent English person is complete without an (invariably unsourced) claim that they are of Irish descent. If someone can back this up then they are of course welcome to, otherwise I will delete it.Shiresman (talk) 22:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Better put it back then - the following regards his 'Fighting Irish' leprechaun tattoo "The Irish leprechaun; an ode to his Irish heritage on his mother’s side. Not that she was impressed. “She kept saying ‘my beautiful boy, my beautiful boy,’” he recalls, laughing." Source www.tom-hardy.co.uk

With the huge waves of Irish immigration to the Britain in the 19th and 20th centuries, is it unsurprising that many English people are actually of Irish descent? Though this fact seems to perturb many....for some reason?

If his mother's background is listed, why isn't his father's? Anybody know what his father's race/ethnicity/nationality is? --zandperl (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

driven to extremes

Add to Tv his appearance on 3 episode tv series "driven to extremes" 2013 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2798876/ 86.189.129.19 (talk) 13:07, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Child 44

I don't see reference to his film in Child 44 Slacrouix (talk) 15:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Never mind I see where you wrote it was a box office failure. Slacrouix (talk) 15:55, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Sexuality

In an interview with Attitude Magazine in 2008, Tom Hardy revealed that :"he is bisexual and has had relationships with men" and it has several sources, so we should mention to this in personal life section. CerberaOdollam (talk) 10:25, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

  • I've looked at a number of sources and at best they said he had some sex with men--not that he said he was bisexual (the opposite, actually), etc. If you have a good source that actually says that, let's have it. In the meantime, I agree with the IP's removal just now of the content; the sources I followed there are either not reliable or don't confirm the content that was in the article. Drmies (talk) 04:19, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
The claim that Hardy is bisexual seems to be clearly wrong, so it was appropriate to remove it. It's unfortunate that anyone would feel the need to put words in Hardy's mouth or misrepresent what he actually said. If the article were to mention anything about this issue, it would have to carefully convey what the sources actually stated: that Hardy experimented for a while with having sex with men, found he didn't like it that much, and stopped. I'm not sure how appropriate it would be to say anything about the subject at all, however. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
You don't have a neutral point of view. It seems that you disagree with mentioning his sexuality because "you" don't "want" him to be bisexual and It's not acceptable. Personal opinions shouldn't be involved in encyclopedia. According to several sources including Attitude (magazine), PinkNews, Daily Mail he has said: 'I had sexual relations with men' He didn't use the word 'bisexual' but what does that mean when he say sexual relations with men? Maybe you should look up bisexuality. @Drmies: You say: he had some sex with men. What is that even mean? @FreeKnowledgeCreator: you say: he stopped. stop?! It doesn't make sense! We're talking about sexual orientation. There are no such things. Drmies, It doesn't matter that it's "some" or "a lot". FreeKnowledgeCreator, It doesn't matter that he's "still" in a same sex relationship or "stopped". When someone has sexual attraction and behaviors with the both same and opposite gender, he/she is bisexual. A heterosexual man never have any sexual relations with other men. CerberaOdollam (talk) 10:57, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
CerberaOdollam, eh, first of all, you cannot assign such motives without some really strong evidence, which I do not believe you have. Second, duh? Your claims about some kind of unchanging sexuality in human beings are ridiculous. Either way, it is not our job here to pontificate on those matters but go with what reliable sources say. You are welcome to post on WP:BLPN, but in the meantime we're not going to stick this in the article--not because FreeKnowledgeCreator or I hate this or that sexuality (well, I can't really speak for them, but I assume good faith), but because this is an encyclopedia and we are to present well-verified facts in a neutral way. I mean, it's even hard to define what "sex" is, apparently since, as it seems to be in this case, he didn't get to fourth base, if I remember the sources correctly. Drmies (talk) 16:00, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
These are not my claims and it's not 'ridiculous' Drmies scientifically humans cannot change their sexual orientation, because they were born this way. As I said a heterosexual man never have any 'sexual relations' with other men if they have so they're not heterosexual. CerberaOdollam (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Your grammar is flawed, and so is your thinking. I didn't say people change their sexuality--I said peoples' sexualities can change. Either way, that's not the point here. Now, we don't seem to have the 2008 article, and it's not on the Attitude website. However, Attitude referred to its article, mentioning the "2008 Attitude interview in which he spoke about experimenting with guys in his youth". That's what we got--it doesn't say he's bisexual, it doesn't say he called himself bisexual, in fact he pretty much denies being bisexual. So there's that. Also, no, we're not going to put in an encyclopedic article that someone had some sex some time with some people. We're not a tabloid. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

The crucial point to note here is that, per WP:BLP, we aren't going to say that Hardy announced that he is bisexual when he did not actually do that. Whether to include facts about an article subject's sexual behavior would depend on the level of coverage those facts received; if there is a lot of coverage of something and it becomes part of someone's public image, then there can be a case for mentioning it. Despite what Drmies seems to be suggesting, there is no absolute rule that a biographical article cannot ever mention someone's sexual behavior. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Mad Max: Fury Road

Tom Hardy is not in Mad Max: Fury Road. Mel Gibson is older and is still the star of Mad Max. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.93.176 (talk • contribs) 18:34, June 15, 2017 (UTC)

Please find a source for this so it can be cited. – 🐱? (talk) (ping me!) 18:35, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Peaky Blinders

He was in 10 episodes of Peaky Blinders, not 11. I'm pretty certain of this because I've watched the whole series again just to make sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreamerwickee (talk • contribs) 16:45, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tom Hardy. 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) 07:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

First paragraph is very strange

Given that his work is listed in following sections, is it really necessary to give exhaustive details in the first part. Not pretty Cannonmc (talk) 02:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tom_Hardy/Archive_1&oldid=1164975070"