Talk:Gene Wilder/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Five Films

Gene Wilder made five films with Richard Pryor. The entry forgot Blazing Saddles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.72.232.231 (talk) 03:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Chronology of controversy

A statement is made elsewhere in Wikipedia that Wilder is a self-described atheist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_atheists

It is significant that this entertainer has the courage to state his religious convictions. 68.89.38.13 fixed IP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.89.38.13 (talk) 01:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I made a minor change about the tit-for-tat of the Wonka controversy. Chronology is not very interesting. These are two intelligent men and they said what they said. As far as I am concerned: you give them one turn each and no rejoinders or last words. I am sure that they are still friends and everything, not that it matters. Amorrow 23:23, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

There's a lot of detail about Wilder's work against cancer and the death of his wife Gilda Radner on her bio page. Quite a lot of that is ad rem here. Some mention of his work on the Producers might be useful.

I removed a reference to him having a cameo in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" as I see no evidence he made such a cameo. --Esprix 20:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

It's probably likely that he would have flatly refused to cameo in the film...he despised the remake and said it was all about making money. Although Depp did a great performance in it, the original was much better and could have done without the Hollywoodisation :-) SmUX 23:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Filmography Accuracy?

I don't ever remember seeing/hearing Wilder in "Stuart Little," and the IMDB page for it has no mention of him. Where did we get this?

• It's probably another stint in the latest round of Valdalism. I've found it a few times with the characters from Roseanne. I'll remove it.Mitch 21:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Removed link to the song "Sappy"

There was a link on the word "sappy" that I assume was supposed to go to an article about the word "sappy", but there is no such article, and the link went to an article about the song "Sappy". I removed the link.PerDaniel 23:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Gibberish after "United States Army from 1956 to 1958

He served in the United States Army from 1956 to 1958. Is cousins with Goldie. Amazing. Is Jon's idol. Super.

miviam@yahoo.com75.41.126.80 12:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

"Best known"?

I switched around the lines about "Willy Wonka" and "Mel Brooks", I think it makes a little more sense this way. --Smart Mark Greene 22:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Nothing

There appears to be nothing on Gene Wilder's page. Any reason? 21:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

No worries, I've reverted the page. Uber HW 21:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

#38 on The 100 Greatest Performances?

"In 2006, Premiere Magazine placed two of his performances on its list of The 100 Greatest Performances:

• Ranked as #9 -- Dr. Frederick Frankenstein (pronounced FRONK-en-steen) in Young Frankenstein.
• Ranked as #38 -- Willy Wonka in Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory."

The latter I cannot confirm online - see [1]. I have written a note about it.

Can anyone explain this? Is the online list different from the printed? --Jhertel 21:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Frankenstein. It's Fronkonsteen

His performance on Young Frankenstein is on the top ten of Premiere's 100 Great Performances. So, why is there not any other mention to this movie in the article? There are two times were his "best known roles" are mentioned... And he was nominated for an Oscar for this movie (as a screenwriter). Besides, it would be good to have a discussion on his nominations and awards. He was nominated for an Oscar for The Producers, and won an Emmy. Nazroon 14:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Deaf/hearing loss...or something "different"?

I might be mixing him up with someone else (Leslie Nielsen springs instantly to mind) or I might be thinking solely of his character in See no evil, hear no evil, but I am fairly sure I read somewhere about him either having a hearing issue or some sort of colour-blindedness or something like that. No mention of either here or on iMDB though. If anyone looks into this and can't find any reference in the sort of places where you'd find out this information, feel free to edit and remove this section. SmUX 23:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Scratch that. Reverse it.

The actual quote from Wonka is "Strike that... Reverse it." I have seen the movie many times and know it well, but I don't know where to source it. Also, I don't know if Will & Grace said "Scratch that" in reference, rather than an actual quote, so I am not changing it.

Yes, I believe it to be "Strike that... Reverse it." Iamdooser (talk) 02:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Trivia Section Too Long

Some people want to axe trivia sections in wikipedia. I disagree. See Wikipedia talk:Avoid trivia sections, but I think that the section here is too long. Generally, I think that much of the trivia section is good. However, it's really long, about half of the article. In my subjective take, were I to clean it up, I would do the following:

• Wrongly accussed of commiting a crime in 4 movies: LEAVE IN TRIVIA OR DELETE
• Richard Prior movies and relationship: INCORPORATE IN DISCUSSION OF RICHARD PRIOR RELATIONSHIP ABOVE
• Declined title role of Royal Tenenbaums: A PERFECTLY GOOD BIT OF TRIVIA
• The "fuck" story from his childhood: DELETE IF TRIVIA SECTION TOO LONG
• Next three items on wife Radner, work in psychiatric hospital, and his politics: PROBABLY FOLD THEM IN ABOVE, HOWEVER, IF THE ITEMS REALLY ARE BULLET-POINTS THAT DON'T FIT INTO THE FLOW, POSSIBLY KEEP IN TRIVIA SECTION.
• Played congas with the Talking Heads: LEAVE IN TRIVIA OR DELETE
• Will and Grace comment: LEAVE IN TRIVIA OR DELETE
• Story about accepting Willy Wonka role only if he could come in with a pratfall: KEEP IN TRIVIA!
• etc etc

Pigkeeper 21:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

i agree, the trivia section takes half the article! it just needs some cleanup, some things shouldn't be considered trivia (the fact that his a democrat and oposes the war on irak, the foundation of "gilda's club") I'll do some cleanup now.Yamanbaiia 14:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Retired?

Is it safe to assume that Wilder is retired, considering both his age and the fact that he hasn't done any TV or movie acting in almost five years? Should this be added to the article? --Schmendrick 17:47, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

It should be mentioned if you can source it, he has never said "i will never work again". And in his 2005 book he never says anything about being retired, he just slowed down a lot because of his age and illness. Yamanbaiia 18:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Sitcom

Didn't he have his known sitcom about ten or twenty years ago? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.244.244.57 (talk) 13:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

No -Yamanbaiia 13:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, yes. It was called "Something Wilder", and it aired on NBC in 1994/95.

Yamanbaiia, don't be so quick to comment on something if you haven't done your research... 172.135.62.201 (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Funny thing is, i did my research. There's no mention of this "Something Wilder" thing on his Biography, i checked before replying. If you know better just add it into the article.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 19:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Try a new research: imdb, youtube... etc. It DOES exist! 84.60.160.117 (talk) 00:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Why?

Why was the part of him being Jewish was removed?

"Born in Milwaukee, the son of Russian Jewish immigrants, Wilder studied drama at the University of Iowa, where he was a member of the Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity, graduated in 1955, and later attended the Bristol Old Vic Theatre School in the UK. He served in the United States Army from 1956 to 1958 where he served as a Medic in the Department of Psychiatry and Neurology at Valley Forge Army Hospital in Phoenixville, Pennsylvania." Not there anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.240.23.250 (talk) 07:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I am expanding the article, i deleted that by accident. By the way, only his father was Russian, so the original sentence was incorrect.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 08:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Birth date (Imdb has it wrong)

Brian Scott Mednick's biography "Gene Wilder: Funny and Sad" has a photo of Wilder's birth certificate, which confirms he was born in 1933, not 1935. Also, he graduated college in 1955, which would have made him 22, the usual age someone graduates from a four-year college. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.241.48 (talk) 21:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

He was born in 1935, not in 1933. There are numerous sources that say 1933 and numerous others that say 1935, but maths shows that it's 1933.
FACTS:

• His mother died when he was in the army (1956-58).
• He says he lost his virginity after his mother died, when he was 21.
• 1933+21=1954, while 1935+21=1956.

Therefore he is 72 years old and not 74. --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 01:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, while the math could work, one piece of it doesn't. He graduated from the University of Iowa in 1955. College graduation occurs in May or June, so if he were born in late June 1935, he would only have been 19 when he graduated from college, which is not likely. Rather than base this on math, a more definitive source needs to be determined. A lot of the sources which pop up on Google copy from one another and at least one that I saw at a glance contradicts itself between title and text. I would consider the biography at the University of Iowa to be the definitive one, since it is based on his donated papers and his records of attendance. It also details that he graduated from high school in 1951 and that his year of birth is 1933. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, do you think they really checked their records when they wrote that? i will never understand how college in the U.S. works, but isn't it possible he went there only for 2 years (53-55, 18 going on 20)? Both Britannica and Encarta list 1935 as the correct date and, it's probably BS, but "The Official Gene Wilder Myspace page" also lists 1935 as the correct year. Who2.com has this to say: "Wilder graduated from the University of Iowa with a degree in Communication and Theatre television in 1955... Some sources list Wilder's year of birth as 1935. However, statements in his autobiography seem to confirm 1933 as the correct year.";...word, because if he was born in 1933 he should really revise his autobiography.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 02:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The way the education system works in the US is that there are 12 years of regular school, usually starting at age 6. High school includes the final 4 years. A high school graduate is generally 18 years old, with attendance compulsory until age 16, which is the age at which a "dropout" is allowed to quit. A normal college/university education takes 4 years, and in the 1950s, there weren't 2 year degrees. All the sources agree that he graduated from UI with a degree in theater, which would be a 4 year program. While there are 2 year university programs now, they are not termed degree programs in this way. While the university page publishers may not check his official transcript records, they do have his papers, and he is an alumnus of the school, a description which would require a 4 year degree. School systems simply did not accelerate students in the 1950s, so it's just not possible that he graduated from high school at age 16. As far as either Encarta or Britannica, both are tertiary sources which aren't considered the pinnacle of available sources. I checked the MySpace page, the biography there is a copy of the Wikipedia article as it existed on 1 January 2007, so I'm doubtful it's truly an official page. All of this follows a natural chronological order if he were born in 1933: graduating high school at 18 in 1951, university 4 years later, followed by the Army, which happens to be from 1956-1958. I'm not sure on your notes on his loss of virginity, but there's always the chance it was a factor of how it was worded. I don't know off-hand where my copy of It's Always Something is since I've moved and my books aren't where they should be, but I seem to remember Radner commenting on Wilder being 13 or 14 years older than she was. Wildhartlivie (talk) 18:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

1933 is correct, I had read here that he was 21 when his mother died, but right here HE says that he was 23, so imdb was right all along. Shame on Britannica and Encarta.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 19:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

GA review

I've always been a fan of Wilder's work, so it was such a pleasure to read this article and learn about his career and personal life. This is an overall very good article and it definitely fulfills a majority of the Good Article criteria: it is mostly well written and correctly formatted per the MOS, it is verifiable and includes no apparent OR, its coverage is broad, it is neutral and stable, and it is illustrated with mostly free images and one image with a correct fair-use rationale. I have a few suggestions and comments which may not take much time at all to fix:

• Wilder's autobiography, Kiss Me Like A Stranger, is cited quite a few times. Because it's a book source, it should be cited per WP:CITE: "When citing books and articles, provide page numbers where appropriate." You could list it the first time as is (<ref>Wilder, Gene. Kiss Me Like A Stranger. HarperCollins, 2005.</ref>) and then give a shorter citation with the corresponding page number included (<ref>Wilder, 102.</ref>) You could also always create a Bibliography and list the full bibliographic information there and only include the shorter citations in the refs -- your choice. The point is that page numbers are necessary and would even give you more refs! :)

Done

Some notes on the prose (which could use a full copy-edit were this destined for FAC):

• His first major role was as Leo Bloom in The Producers (1968) starting then a series of prolific collaborations with Mel Brooks such as Blazing Saddles (1974) and Young Frankenstein(1974), the script of which got them a nomination for an Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay. This entire sentence is awkward. "His first major role was as Leo Bloom in The Producers (1968), which began a series of prolific collaborations with (writer/director?) Mel Brooks." The last part after the comma could also be split from the first sentence to eliminate a run-on; "got them" is unprofessional and it's not stated that Wilder also co-wrote these films. "For the latter script, which Wilder co-wrote, they received a nomination..."?
• Watch those "also"s! "Wilder is also known...", "Wilder has also directed and written...", "Wilder has also written a memoir..."
• Nitpicky, but "Gene Wilder is the son" bugs me; obviously both of his parents are deceased. Maybe something like "Gene Wilder was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to Russian immigrant William J. Silberman and his Chicago-born wife Jeanne Baer"?

Done

• becoming Balthasar, (Romeo's cousin): portraying?
• Is there a source for his fencing record?

The "first American" statement was on the article before I started working on it and it says nothing about this on the book, so removed.

• He didn't stay in England long, wanting to study the Stanislavski's 'system: remove the "the"
• He supported himself, at first, with unemployment insurance and some savings and afterwards with odd jobs such as driving a limousine and teaching fencing.: "At first he supported himself" and fencing doesn't need to be linked here as it's already linked previously in the section.

Done

• Months went by and Wilder began touring the country with different theatre productions, participated in a televised CBS presentation of Death of a Salesman, and was cast for his first role in a film, a minor role in Arthur Penn's 1967 Bonnie and Clyde. Verb disagreement: "touring", "participated" and "cast". Change to "toured"?
• The article states that The Producers "didn't do so well on its first release", but what about the Oscar nominations? For Wilder, especially?

Done?

• Why is Super Chief linked? Wrong link and the next line says it was changed to Silver Streak, right?
• Wilder missed Radner as soon as she left, so he called her. ...and? The next sentence has her divorcing her husband, so a little transition would be nice. :) "so he called her and their relationship intensified"?
• Radner divorced and moved in with Wilder, marrying on September 14, 1984. Oddly phrased. "Radner divorced Smith and moved in with Wilder; they were married on..."?
• His second novel, The Woman Who Wouldn't, was released on March 2008. In, not on.

Done

Again, this is definite GA material but for now I'll put it on hold. After the above issues are addressed I'll have no qualms with passing this for GA. :) Just let me know when it's finished or if there are any questions or concerns. Thanks! María (habla conmigo) 13:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I did copy work on the article today and added a full bibliography of Wilder's books and Radner's. I love Gene Wilder, and loved Gilda Radner more. I am always a little sad when I write anything about her. I think the article is shaping up very well and have to commend the work that Yamanbaiia has done to it. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Great work, guys! The copy-editing helped greatly and the addition of page numbers makes the text much more verifiable: big thumbs up. One last thing to fix, though: I would remove the two novels by Wilder in the new "Bibliography" section; they aren't likely to be used as references in the future and they only cause confusion with the new inline citations that only list "Wilder, page #" -- it's hard to differentiate which one of Wilder's book is the reference. If there is another work (book, article, etc) by Wilder used as a source in the future, you can disambiguate by changing the refs to "Wilder (year of publication), page #". That won't take long to fix, however, so I'll go ahead and pass this baby. Again, I greatly enjoyed reading it; might I look forward to reviewing Radner's GAN next? :) María (habla conmigo) 23:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

not dead

I edited the page because it was said wilder was dead , he is not dead ! see- http://www.genewilder.net/

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/contributor/1800012918/bio

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/748314/Gene-Wilder

http://www.starpulse.com/Actors/Wilder,_Gene/index.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-remington/happy-birthday-gene-wilde_b_106512.html

I hope this is enough to recognise he is very much alive.

It's fine. Someone vandalized the page and posted a phony reference. It's been removed. Thanks for the note! Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I heard he died today. It that true?Tallicfan20 (talk) 00:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Not that has been released to the news. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

It is true as of today sadly. Danbert8 (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography

Wildhartlivie writes "novels included in main body of article, these books are references for article" but answers.com says "A list of the works of a specific author or publisher" I think all works should be listed together, it only makes sense that this section is the bibliography section. The footnotes section is for citing references. Check Nick Hornby for verification.

Also, the Radner citation should not be here unless Wilder is credited in the publication.

Iamdooser (talk) 15:37, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

First of all, this has been designated a good article, which has passed a fairly in-depth examination and it is inappropriate to come in and start reverting things that were changed back because you found a definition on answers.com that supports your position. In fact, what answers.com says about anything is irrelevant to how it is laid out on Wikipedia. It is also poor to suggest to a long time Wikipedia editor to go check dictionary.com. Bibliography says "Bibliographies range from "works cited" lists at the end of books and articles to complete, independent publications." This is precisely how this section is used - to identify the publication from which bibliographic inline citations are made in the article. The Radner book is a work that is cited in the article and is also appropriate in this section. Many terms are used interchangeably on Wikipedia, including "Notes", "Footnotes", and "References", or "Works cited", "Bibliography", or "Publications". Since Nick Hornby is currently listed as a start class article, I would suggest that referring to it as a shining example is incorrect. And thanks, I'm fairly familiar with what a footnote section is for. Wikipedia allows for a variety of citation styles, which may involve a combination of inline citations as well as parenthetical references. The style guideline is then to maintain "a separate bibliography/references section that gives full publication details for frequently cited sources, then you only need to cite the author, short title, and page number in specific notes."

But to appease you, let's look at what dictionary.com has to say about the word Bibliography: Besides your use of it, it says "2a. A list of writings relating to a given subject: a bibliography of Latin American history. 2b. A list of writings used or considered by an author in preparing a particular work." And since all answers.com does is copy other definitions, I won't repeat the definition. By your own assertion of sources as to the definition of "bibliography", the way it is used here is correct and your reason for reverting is wrong. Wildhartlivie (talk) 16:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

not having a section to explicitly cite/list Wilder's written work (i.e. his novels) is inconsistent with the remainder of this 'good' article. you write that "novels [are] included in main body of article". so are his films. but films are also listed, so as for easy navigation. this is not true for the novels. why not? also, when visiting an author's wikipedia entry, it is beyond reasonable to assume that his/her written works would appear in a section labeled 'bibliography' as per the word's multifaceted definition. Also, it is redundant and confusing to have both a references and bibliography (in the sense of "these books are references for article" meaning of the word). The word used: references, further suggests that they should appear under the references section. no? Iamdooser (talk) 02:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

His films aren't covered in their entirety in the main body of the article, while the books are. Your beef isn't with this article, it's with the Wikipedia policies governing section titles. Please note once again, guidelines encompass using listing of works cited in the article, which are included in the bibliography section. The references section is for the listing of inline citations, bibliography is for outlining the works referenced by parenthetical references. I recognize that the use of the word bibliography as it is used on many Wikipedia articles chafes you, but it is valid. I'd be glad to include a sub-section after the film, television and stage work on authorship, but there's no good reason to change what is called the bibliography section to include fictional novels that aren't cited through inline referencing. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

"I'd be glad to include a sub-section after the film, television and stage work on authorship" I'm wondering why this hasn't happened yet, as opposed to deleting my additions I'd assume a re-organization would have been more appropriate. Iamdooser (talk) 14:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Because you were more concerned with educating me on what answers.com says a bibliography is and how its use in the article was wrong? Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm speaking of the first time you deleted my entries. Can this portion of the discussion be removed now that it's solved? Iamdooser (talk) 14:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

trading places

I seem to remember reading that he was offered a part in Trading Places but turned it down because they would not employ Richard Pryor. The roles eventually went to Dan Ackroyd and Eddie Murphy.82.42.126.68 (talk) 18:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

References

Various footnotes simply cite "Wilder" and a (page) number. However, the "Publications" section lists five publications by Wilder (although only one of them is listed under "Bibliography") and another co-authored by Wilder. This seems somewhat confusing. Is there a clearer way to represent this? —sroc 💬 07:34, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Religion

The infobox specifies "Religion" as "Unspecified" but includes a footnote quoting him as saying: "Well, I'm a Jewish-Buddhist-Atheist, I guess." Isn't it contradictory to say it's "unspecified" if this is what he has specified?

Or should this simply be omitted from the infobox? See WP:BLPCAT: "Categories regarding religious beliefs or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources." —sroc 💬 07:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)