Talk:Bill Murray

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bill Murray 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: 90 days

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.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy Top‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Cape Cod and the Islands Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Cape Cod and the Islands (assessed as Low-importance).

Cult following[edit]

Just curious ... Murray has quite a bit of a cult following (i.e. he has achieved substantial popularity and following outside of just having been in some popular films). I'm surprised that the article does not at least mention this. For example,

[Why is the Internet obsessed with Bill Murray?]
[The Dao of Bill Murray]
[The Big Bad Book of Bill Murray]
[T-shirt meme]
...

-- MC

Fun fact[edit]

Did you know that Bill was the only choice for Garfield? If he had said no, they would've gone with a Bill Murray impersonator. It's true! I heard it on a documentary I was watching on TV this morning!

I know that Wikipedia is supposed to be a serious place but every once in a while I like seeing these little jokes in the talk pages as long as every single article doesn't have one PlasmaticGrain (talk) 14:36, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"It is prohibited to add the term actor and voice actor in the initial parts of an article."[edit]

@179.52.205.145: IP, please explain the assertion above on which you are basing your removals of content from this and other articles concerning voice actors. What is the policy you are referring to, and where does it appear? Are you disputing that Bill Murray is a voice actor and a comedian? General Ization ^Talk 05:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PGfan900: Inviting you to this conversation, since you are the editor who contributed the content that the IP apparently feels should be removed. @NinjaRobotPirate has pointed out on my Talk page that "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content," so please explain here why you feel the information should be included. I'm equally interested to hear from the IP why they think it should not. General Ization ^Talk 05:23, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the thing is that when I review all the articles of English actors is that I realize something, the initial term as they now call it "actor and voice actor" did not go there in some initial sentences, nor in the data infoboxes of information, but some users insisted that those articles that I mentioned before should be re-added the same terms of actors as in previous editions, because one of them already ventured into the dubbing of animations and video games, notably they have made voices of animated characters up to the date, that is, only a brilliant person like TyMega or Bigshowandkane64 added two terms at the same time, as well as adding so many occupations without having indicated news sources to support some of the arguments, has given us all a headache here. 179.52.205.145 (talk) 06:19, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying that you decided that should be a policy, and to apply it to other editors' edits as well as your own, is that correct? Do you understand that that is not how things work here? In articles (such as this one) where the subject is clearly documented as having worked in and been notable for both acting and voice acting, there is no reason that both occupations should not appear in the lead. General Ization ^Talk 12:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing that proscribes having both "actor" and "voice actor" in the lead. Whether it has both really depends on what best suits the actor in question. What is the proportion of each and how notable is both in the actor's career? Otherwise, "voice acting" is clearly just a subset of "acting".

Personally, I would say in Murray's case he is far more significant as a actor than voice actor, so adding "voice actor" to the lead sentence doesn't inform the reader of anything much notable, and is just unnecessary clutter for a concise lead. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Escape Orbit: I'd contend that voice acting is a rather specialized subset of acting. When I see that someone is described as an actor, I have no reason to assume that they have been or would be notable as a voice actor unless the article describes them as such. Murray's filmography lists him as playing a featured role as a voice actor in no less than 5 productions since 2000, so I think it's reasonable to attribute this skill and experience to him in the lead. I agree that each actor's experience and product should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, which is why I'm objecting to the IP's self-developed "policy" of mass-removing the term (and others, such as "comedian" from this article) from more than 75 articles over the span of 2 days. General Ization ^Talk 13:24, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@General Ization:, you have not understood my point of view, you say that I have self-developed a policy of mass elimination of other articles to what I edited so as not to generate more confusion if I do not try to create policies that prevent an obsessive user from adding so many occupations and no one else have indicated references that are worth it, such as, for example, Scott McCord becomes a musician himself but in that case I have not found that on Google for the Internet although apparently not because it was edited in IMDb, well, no there is notability to confirm if some of them are notable or not the works for they role in animations, video games or that they are singer-songwriters, musicians even pianist, well there are many what I mention and then we leave it like that. 179.52.205.145 (talk) 16:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that you are unable to find sources that describe Bill Murray as a voice actor and/or a comedian? I could easily point you to quite a few. Also, if you think another editor is "obsessive" (which I contend you cannot know, especially if you have not discussed their editing with them), you can have a conversation with them rather than reverting their edits without proper review. See WP:HARRASS. General Ization ^Talk 16:57, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Alternatively, you could inquire at the Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard as to what our actual policies are, and/or whether another editor is not following them.) General Ization ^Talk 21:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feuds[edit]

So with the feuds sub article on the page I was wondering if it is really that necessary to showcase them to those who worship him like the pope or Jesus Christ Kirbopher2004 (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Divide to reduce length?[edit]

I just made some editing suggestions and found this article very slow-loading because of its length. Would it benefit from being split into a separate Filmography article, for example? – AndyFielding (talk) 07:28, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]