Talk:Vincent D'Onofrio/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

son?

Maybe I missed it, but is Joe D'Onofrio his son? The latter actor is listed as one of the leads on the (as of this writing) upcoming NBC series "The Black Donnellys". I imagine the last name is not all that common, at least in the USA.

No, D'Onofrio has two children, Leila and Elias.

65.183.161.196 17:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)== worst actor == He's considered the worst actor on network televison?! That's certainly NPOV! No attempt at a citation? I'm gonna tidy that up. Cheers. Helluo 21:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm real new at this so forgive me if I don't use all the correct lingo. I think Vincent is great. It scares me to think that he may leave L&O being replaced by Noth. It's just not the same show.70.162.6.53just me70.162.6.53

Marital Status

This is the only sight that I have found that lists Vincent Donofrio as currently married to Carin Van der Donk. Is this confirmed? I guess it's not because I see it has been changed back to divorced???

D'Onofrio and van der Donk are still legally married. IMDB lists this as well.

They are divorced. The information was changed on IMDB as well. You can change the information on as many public sites as you want but it does not change the fact that D'onofrio has referred to Van Der Donk as his ex-wife repeatedly. Give solid proof (not IMDB, which relies on publicly given information), or have D'Onofrio contact Wikipedia himself to verify the information. Stop the editing war or a page lock will be requested due to vandalism.

Wikipedia has confirmed with a validated spokesperson for the D'Onofrio family that the couple are, indeed, still legally married after a separation that occured in 2003. The information has been verified by WP:OTRS, Shell_Kinney and TrishGow as having come from someone authorized to speak on behalf of Mr. D'Onofrio. In doing research for the D'Onofrio article (as citations are required to support Wikipedia content), we found that comments made by Mr. D'Onofrio during his separation must have led journalists to make assumptions about the final disposition of his marriage. Using incorrect source material as support (no doubt found elsewhere on the internet), it was concluded in most published articles that a divorce had been finalized. As shown in the text approved for Wikipedia by the D'Onofrio family, that is not the case. A comment has been posted in the body of the article citing the verification and respectfully requests no further edits to the relevant portion of the Personal Life section or the page will indeed be locked. IMdB recently had the correct information and again it has been changed by a user. Hopefully, the correct information will once again be posted there and filter down to the various D'Onofrio fansites. Thanks for your support, TrishGow 16:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I was the one who almost requested the vandalism lock. Thank you very much for going out of your way to verify the correct information, even though an official statement would be most useful. It maintains the integrity of the Wikipedia article and the Wikipedia community. It is vital that this Wikipedia article about D'Onofrio contain valid information, as incorrect information would reflect poorly on the Wikipedia community, and could possibly reflect poorly on D'Onofrio. Again, thank you for the efforts. Thanks also to D'Onofrio for helping to maintain the integrity and accuracy of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.61.9.168 (talk) 01:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC).

You are very welcome. And thank you for your kind words. Unfortunately, another user who still disputes our verification has changed the data once again. There should be no need for an edit war, I'm rather puzzled about it. I really don't want to request the lock...but may have to do that, or request dispute resolution. I wish there was an "official" statement, but until Mr. D'Onofrio grants an interview (as it appears he has not in some time), the authorized spokesperson is the only validation we have. We know the identity of the spokesperson and have verified it, but have agreed not to print their name for privacy sake. TrishGow 03:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome, again. Unfortunately, until an official statement is released, or until D'Onofrio himself addresses the issue directly, speculation and edits will undoubtedly continue because the source of the information is not official. I think it is unfortunate that the D'Onofrio page has evolved into an edit war over a minute detail of his personal life. Wikipedia should not have to be at the mercy of people who want to fight with each other.

Wikipedia has explictly defined rules about edit wars [1] and even more stringent rules regarding the pages of living people [2], and dispute resoultion [3], [4]. I support a semi-protection on the page but not a full protection lock of the entire page. I would not support a lock on the entire page because D'Onofrio's filmography and biography needs to be updated as he continues to work in the entertainment industry, and to update any events in his life. This is what the article is intended for. The D'Onofrio page, along with every other Wikipedia page, is meant to be an encyclopedic page. The pages are not intended to be a fan pages or PR pages. [5] The edit wars on this page erode the integrity of the page and the reputation of the Wikipedia community. I am seriously considering adding this edit war to the "Lamest Editing Wars" page! [6] 20:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry to interrupt here, but if you honestly believe the policy is to allow misinformation, especially in the case of living people, to remain in articles, I would have to suggest you are mistaken and may wish to re-read policies like WP:LIVING. Information given to WP:OTRS from reliable, verifiable sources is perfectly acceptable for use in articles, especially when the subjects are trying to correct information about themselves. Please stop defacing the correct information and adding in your own commentary - neither action is supported by any of the guidelines you're quoting and may lead to blocks for disruption if things continue in this manner. Shell ^babelfish 04:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure why you are directing your comment at me since I have not been involved in the actual edit war of the section. In fact, I thanked Ms. Gow for working with Wikipedia to correct the article and have been trying to help her. If your comment is directed at me, kindly explain why, as I hoping you have confused me with the person who keeps re-editing the page. If it will make you feel better, I will create an account. 07:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it's less an edit war and more someone trying to enforce their POV and disrupting a biography of a living person. The edit being made is fraught with opinion about the subject and commentary about fans. None of that belongs on an encyclopedic page. I've been in communication with an Admin who feels blocking the vandal's IP addy may be a better option than locking the article at this stage. See Talk Page. I don't really support locking it either for the very reason you state. I'm unfamiliar with semi-protection, though. Thanks for the info. Resolution one way or the other would be nice. And I'm going to leave it in the hand's of the admin at this point. I agree, the situation is unfortunate overall for Wikipedia. I appreciate your comments and guidance, and your respectful attitude toward me as a fairly new member of the community. TrishGow 22:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. Thank you again and you are welcome. :) 07:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

References and Guidelines on Living people

There was quite a bit of speculation in the article and a lot of facts that have no reference. Only the IMBD and a non-english site are given; the non-english forum probably doesn't meet the guidelines for external links but I'm still in the process of translating. A great deal of text has been removed in deference to our guidelines for living people - facts need to be referenced to remain in the article, especially if they are negative. If you have added to the article and can remember where you got the information, please add that source to a References section and help clean up the article. Thanks. Shell ^babelfish 14:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

malcolm X and Vincent D'Onofrio

I hoep I am adding this in the right area..... .Here is the story on the malcom X edit. Spike Lee used some (B+W) footage from the Oliver Stone movie JFK. There was a potential that Vincent would have been in some of this footage, so permission needed to be given for this by Vincent. When the final edit was released some of this footage was used but WITHOUT any shots of Vincent D'Onofrio. If one would watch the movie you will not find Vincent in the movie at all.

This unsigned message by Cvanderdonk was left on my talk page as I had reverted an earlier edit on this subject. I am moving it here as it will help to explain why the citation for the film should be removed from Vincents filmography. MarnetteD | Talk 01:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

additional credit

--68.88.4.204 06:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Vincent also played in another movie with Armand Mueller Stahl, a futuristic alternate- world movie. Vincent plays the bad guy I believe. I'll try to remember the name of it. Must have been straight to video release. 68.88.4.204 06:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Eric

I think you are thinking of "The Thirteenth Floor", which is listed in D'Onofrio's filmography. It was a theatrical release. 68.62.95.95

Diagnosed with "exhaustion"??? Maybe

The article states that D'Onofrio was diagnosed with "exhaustion" after collapsing on the set of "Law & Order". Maybe. But we don't know this. We only know that this is what we have been told. Quite possibly, it is accurate. But it is also entirely possible that whatever caused the collapse is something D'Onofrio does not wish to discuss with the public, and that "exhaustion" is only what the public was told in lieu of private medical details.

For this reason I think it would be more appropriate for the article to say that spokespersons for Law & Order (or whoever) stated that exhaustion was the reason for his collapse, rather than asserting that exhaustion was the reason for it. (A fine point, but I think an important one.) Daqu 17:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Picture

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/03/Full-metal-jacket-901.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.194.192.213 (talk) 21:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)