Talk:Scott Glenn

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scott Glenn article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 12 months

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pittsburgh Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pittsburgh and its metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Date of birth

As there are two sources one of which is very often used, the date should stand until disproven. IMDB is a prominent enough media that Scott Glenn or his agent have ample opportunity to correct it.

If you want to change the date, please provide a source for your new date. If you want to delete the date, then prove that the date is unknown by citing a reliable source that says e.g. Scott Glenn keeps his date of birth secret. Natalie Schafer was famous for this. Vincent (talk) 16:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You seriously do not understand how this works. Per Wikipedia policy, the burden is on you to provide reliable sources for his date of birth. We have a reliable source for his age; if that is the only information available in reliable source, that is all we put in the article. The IMDb is not a reliable source. It is user-generated content and is explicitly named in WP:RS as unreliable. MyHowBook.com is also unreliable, as I pointed out to you on your talk page in explicit detail. The site is based on user submissions is not written by professional journalists. WP:BLP disallows these kinds of sources, and if you continue violating it by adding this poorly-sourced content, I will bring this up at WP:ANI and ask for you to be blocked. We simply DO NOT add poorly-sourced content to biographies of living people. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vfp15: Wikipedia doesn't use information from unreliable sources for BLP, period, and shouldn't for other articles in general. If there are no reliable sources that assert his date of birth, then the information is left blank. There is no policy that requires us to "prove that the date is unknown" in order to remove unreliable information. Your complaint at ANI against NinjaRobotPirate is undue and I think it would be better for if you try and walk that one back, lest you draw a lot of negative attention. -Indy beetle (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, you need to chill and accept the concept of best available source. BTW, I read the NY Times article and an age in years between two commas is not the source of fact I'd expect to check all that carefully. Vincent (talk) 17:50, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, you need to look at other articles. If you are so concerned with quality, then get a bot to remove all unsourced or poorly source dates of birth from all articles. Then I might take your "concern about quality" seriously. Vincent (talk) 18:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vfp15: I'm confused that you have admonished me to "chill" (perhaps that was for NRP?), I don't think I've been particularly fiery. I think you should read the essay on Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Pointing to other longstanding violations of policy is not a way to solve this dispute. It would be great if we could clean up all the unreliable BLP info out there, but we're not discussing fixing the whole of Wikipedia on this talk page. We're discussing this article right now. Resorting to Whataboutism will not salvage your argument. This is a matter of policy. -Indy beetle (talk) 18:24, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

British Film Institute website gives Born: 26 January 1942, Pittsburgh, Pa.--Shirt58 (talk) 08:21, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe we should just remove it, then. AllMovie says 1941, BFI says 1942, Vulture.com says 1939–1940, and The New York Times says 1938–1939. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:30, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone provide a reliable source that Scott Glenn ist born? (And did not fall from heaven?) Otherwise delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.82.39.0 (talk) 10:11, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

this January 30, 2016 article lists him as 75, including in the article title (despite the mis-typed url saying 76): https://www.gq.com/story/actor-scott-glenn-76-year-old-badass Wikidude10000 (talk) 22:52, 28 June 2018 (UTC)\[reply]

also, this one: http://www.realclearlife.com/movies/76-year-old-actor-scott-glenn-continues-win/ Wikidude10000 (talk) 22:55, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, and various other articles give different years. That hardly proves anything. Why choose one date over any other? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:31, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I found a Theodore Scott Glen in the 1940 Census in Pittsburgh. He is listed as a year old and his parents are Elizabeth and Theodore.2600:387:1:809:0:0:0:4A (talk) 05:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC) https://www.ancestry.com/1940-census/usa/Pennsylvania/Theodore-Scott-Glen_zqyw0/amp[reply]

Unfortunately, this isn't usable. First, ancestry.com is not a reliable source. Second, we can't use primary sources: "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth". If you want to perform your own research, analyze primary documents, and reveal the truth to the world, you can do that in a blog post. You can't do it on Wikipedia. We call that original research, and it's forbidden. Sometimes that means that information that is probably true is kept out of an article. I know this is frustrating for some people, but it's how Wikipedia works. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:30, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How is Ancestry not reliable? Also, we would need to clean up other famous articles from using primary sources.2600:1700:551:EED0:8166:14F7:BBEE:B6A0 (talk) 17:48, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of continually re-adding your claim, please wait until consensus is reached. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:51, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't we need to clean up other famous articles using sources such as the 1940 Census? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:551:EED0:8166:14F7:BBEE:B6A0 (talk) 19:04, 28 June 2019 (UTC) Also, Ancestry is putting data on the 1940 census. This isn’t user generated.[reply]

These public records seem to be reliable.https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QJ6V-5KPH 2605:6001:E7C4:1E00:854E:C7D:E60D:C5DC (talk) 01:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With the amount of records present, this wouldn’t be considered original research — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.187.211.251 (talk) 01:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources can not be used in a BLP. See WP:BLPPRIMARY. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:NinjaRobotPirate Primary sources can be used if it's backed up by a secondary source which it is in this case. Therefore I think we should use the 1939 date. Also, we used a primary source (birth certificate) to determine the birth year of Doris Day and Carly Simon. DrKilleMoff (talk) 01:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources are all over the place, and policy is quite clear about primary sources. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:44, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From the source you linked to a couple of years ago. "Where primary-source material has been discussed by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to rely on it to augment the secondary source, subject to the restrictions of this policy, no original research, and the other sourcing policies.[c]" I think that is the case here. We have both a secondary source and a primary source for public records which supports the 1939 date. According to wikipedias policy that combined can be used as a source. DrKilleMoff (talk) 02:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What reliable source is discussing this primary source? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily News Article. DrKilleMoff (talk) 13:14, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cleveland.com says 1939 and Rotten Tomatoes says 1939. Mike Allen 04:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that all recent articles say 1939. The latest article that gave 1941 was published in 2017, six years ago. That along with the census report should clearly give overweight to 1939. DrKilleMoff (talk) 17:16, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There is some missing information in the article about Scott Glenn. The date of birth is incomplete so I would like to add the year of birth. January 26, 1939 Silvia Balboni (talk) 02:27, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 30, 2016: Scott Glenn is a 75-Year-Old Knife-Fighting, Spear-Fishing Madman | GQ - 75
August 2017: How 76-Year-Old Actor Scott Glenn Continues to Beat the Odds - InsideHook (link) -76
late 2020 - 'Greenland' actor Scott Glenn says NYC gave him 'The Right Stuff' (nydailynews.com) - 81

will the long nightmare of a year get narrowed to at least two possibilities now Wikidude10000 (talk) 09:18, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Date of Birth

1939 or 1941 seems to be the more common years cited. The Washington Post here says 1941. What I would do is state 1939 or 1941 but then add a footnote that some sources give different years. I remember there was an issue with Timothy Dalton for many years but we at least stated 1944 or 1946 in the text. I think we should do the same here rather than nothing. Isn't there an online record or directory in which you can confirm? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can't just cherry pick one (or two) dates and say "that seems the most likely". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

age evidence pile

add one to the 1939 pile

https://www.upi.com/amp/Top_News/2024/01/26/UPI-Almanac-for-Friday-Jan-26-2024/9131706233544/ Wikidude10000 (talk) 08:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]