Talk:Kelly Preston

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

January 26, 2006[edit]

I though the revert by James084 went back a bit too far, so had the side effect of undoing valid changes. I refixed the disambig target, and put back in the children names. The only change that was left was the reference to Secret Admirer. While she did have a part in that, and it was a sex comedy, I don't know if it was a starring role or what her part involved. (So technically that edit could be true, I just don't know, hence why I'm am not putting that back) MartinRe 20:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am taking out the paragraph about her son Jet's alleged autism because:

a) The sources are 'Hollywood Interrupted,' a celebrity gossip blog and 'Operation Clambake,' an anti-Scientology message board, neither WP:V or WP:RS.

b) No one knows whether Jet actually has autism. No RS has been established for it.

c) It is derogatory.

If anyone wants to revert this change, let them provide a reliable source. If no such source is provided, the person who reverts this change can expect a warning notice: Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not add unreferenced or inadequately referenced controversial biographical information concerning living persons to Wikipedia articles. Thank you.

S. M. Sullivan 00:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)S. M. Sullivan[reply]

Mark Ebner is an award winning investigative journalist. Just because he writes about Hollywood doesn't make his website "gossip". His article is credible; the "Kawasaki syndrome through carpet cleaning" that Travolta is telling isn't. I am therefore restoring it. --Tilman 07:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No more putting the paragraph about some guy thinking their son is autistic. That's for gossip blogs, not for wikipedia. When there is a credible source that says he is autistic, when there is any genuine news about it, we can put that there, but not gossip. Johnpedia 06:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the discussion on my discussion space... the defects have been corrected, the current version is ok according to WP:BLP. As I said before, this ain't gossip. When I think about it, John and Kelly's story about Kawasaki syndrome, THAT is gossip. --Tilman 06:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tilman, if you will take a look at WP:V, which is wiki policy, not a guideline, it states that blogs are largely not acceptable as sources. "Self-published sources such as blogs should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer. See WP:BLP."

It might pass notice if the material were not derogatory and potentially libellous. S. M. Sullivan 23:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Daily News, which took up the story, is not a blog. --Tilman 08:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You really really really need to go get some kind of life. This is just so pathetic of you to continue coming bacl here and restoring it and being so passionate about it. And they never said their son got that syndrome from carpet cleaner. Their son was breathing in those carpet cleaner fumes AT THE HOSPITAL where he was being treated for his snydrome, if you read correctly. But please just go get a life. 24.69.67.173 07:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So they took the carpet to the hospital for him to cuddle and it was cleaned there again??? --Tilman 16:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what Travolta himself had to tell: 

Travolta's law 

The Irish Times
10.4.1999

(...)
He first became actively involved in campaigning to highlight the
overuse of chemicals and toxics three years ago after Jett almost
died from a seemingly innocuous incident.  

"We had a new carpet and had it cleaned," he recalls. "They'd used
chemicals on it and it hadn't fully dried out and there were a
couple of times when Jett had played with his toys {on the carpet}
or picked up food that had fallen on it.  

"He had this terrible reaction where his body swelled up and he had
a temperature of like 104 or 105. He almost lost his life. I went
crazy, I was going out of my mind with worry.  

"We rushed him to hospital, and fortunately a Japanese doctor
identified the problem which was a reaction to the chemicals.

(...)

--Tilman 16:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Descent[edit]

When you say "Is of English and Hawaiian descent." What exactly do you mean? She has an English father and a native Hawaiin mother or...? 194.46.226.39 00:49, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surname contradiction[edit]

Under early life it says "Preston was born as Kelly Kamalelehua Smith in Honolulu, Hawaii." and in the right panel it says she was born "Kelly Kamalelehua Palzis". Is this an error? 76.112.118.250 (talk) 22:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly an error. The article says her adoptive father had the surname Palzis, which means she was not born with that name. 208.254.206.114 (talk) 05:48, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why this page says she was born with the last name Smith then later says she was born with the last name Palzis and THEN says she took the surname Palzis from the stepfather who adopted her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.251.204.45 (talk) 14:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

worse yet, it says she used palzis' name AS HER STAGE NAME PRESTON. say whu...??
and where's the mother's maiden name? those are usually given in articles like this. what SHE a preston, and the girl used *that* as a stage name (despite the smith birthname and/or palzis adoption)? or was she REALLY born a palzis (real father's name), and the STEPFATHER'S NAME (and her stage name) was actually preston? which leaves "smith" for the mother's maiden name, i suppose.
someone pls find out!

still no good! was her mother's maiden name "smith" and the late father "preston" or vice versa? or neither, and kelly just took that as random stage name? REALLY confusing saying "preston changed her name to [palzis]" etc before even establishing whether she WAS "preston" at that point!

oh, and LOSE the lehuas trivia! do we also need gaelic backstory on name "kelly" as well?! 66.30.47.138 (talk) 01:42, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scientology[edit]

How long has she been a Scientologist? What religion was she before? F W Nietzsche (talk) 00:11, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Preston's other child?[edit]

Why does this biography of Kelly Preston exclude the fact that she had a son with Kevin Gage. This fact used to be reported on all profiles of Kelly Preston but has since been cleansed from many profiles. You can still see the fact at, among others: http://celebsplash.com/Kelly-Preston-/Kelly-Preston.html Wiki needs to investigate this. If she has another child, it should be in her profile. If this child is mentally retarded and/or has cerebral palsy this should also be indicated as it is relevant given the controversy surrounding the health of Jett Travolta and the cause of his death.124.186.70.61 (talk) 07:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A couple things. I can't find a reliable source that says this. It was corrected on IMDB a long time ago and the only places that mention it online are sites that are less than stellar and much less than reliable. There is no indication that this was anything more than a vicious rumor that went around some time ago. It's quite relevant that Gage's bios point out specifically that he and Preston had no children. Secondly, your musings about mental retardation or cerebral palsy and the "controversy" surrounding Jett and his death have no place here. There is no controversy about his death of which I'm aware, only news hawks trying to drum up something in the face of tragedy. Please provide a reliable source for a child belonging to her and Gage before trying to reinsert such in this article. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

archive of IMDB bio for Kevin Gage before it was changed (2005): http://web.archive.org/web/20041230101953/www.imdb.com/name/nm0300824/bio another source that still refers to Kelly Preston having had a son with Gage is : http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:tv95uE2Fxi8J:www.e-hawaii.com/stars/index/kelly_preston/default.htm+kevin+gage*son+with+kelly+preston&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=17&gl=us&client=firefox-a 124.186.70.61 (talk) 14:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB biographies are written by users, there is no verification check to confirm what is put in there. Wikipedia does not accept content sourced from there. For all I know, you put it in her and his bios on IMDB a few years ago when that rumor started circulating. I'm not saying you did, I'm just saying anyone could have. It has no meaning, it isn't verifiable there. The second page you posted comes from the IMDB bio, look at it again. In fact, everything I looked at last night after you posted was rooted from that biography. The other source that "still refers to Kelly Preston having a son with Gage" is an archived (cached) version. It isn't going in. It isn't verifiable. Gage's own webpage addresses this and says they had no children. Because you choose to believe an internet rumor doesn't make it suitable content here. I've read up on this, it's a pet project for anti-Scientology groups to slam Preston and Travolta. It has no place here and is a violation of WP:BLP to include this, which means it can't go in. Wildhartlivie (talk) 17:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wedding stuff[edit]

This possible "two weddings" thing is interesting. I hope someone can find some good sourcing for this. I haven't been able to find any yet, though it's in multiple Internet bios on the Preston and Travolta. Perhaps the intense focus on the couple given the son's death will shed some light on this. If true, my suspicion is that the supposed "first wedding" may have been invalid if France (or the local jurisdiction) did not recognize the individual minister, or France (or the local jurisdiction) did not recognize Scientology as an official religion. Does it now? Anybody know? Beansandveggies (talk) 02:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Gage marriage years[edit]

I'm finding several Internet sources saying Preston and Gage were actually married from 1986-1988. This time frame makes more sense, given what I've read about her subsequent relationships with Clooney, Sheen, and then marriage to Travolta. In fact, when Preston met Travolta in '87, Travolta says she was already having problems in her marriage. Obviously, this would make more sense if the marriage was already one year old, as opposed to brand-new. Anyhow, anybody know the truth on this? Beansandveggies (talk) 02:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't try to synthesize conclusions from sources. Because they were still married doesn't mean they were still together and time frames are hard to figure. Another problem that comes up is that a great many internet sources copy information from others, so mistakes get perpetuated. I'd point out the comments above that because one source at some point said that Preston and Gage had a child, suddenly a lot of sites said the same thing. Then it just doesn't go away. The Kevin Gage website said they dated for a couple years before marrying. That widens the time frame, I've known marriages to fall apart soon after the wedding, even for people who were together a very long time. The Yahoo! biography on Preston gives the 1987-1989 time frame and my experience from there is that it is quite reliable. Meanwhile, what I'd really like to see happen to this page is that the career section get some proper attention. It is virtually non-existent. I'd caution a little bit on the about.com pages. Often, they aren't accepted as completely reliable. One thing I'd point out is that it says that Preston's birth name was Palsiz, which isn't correct. The parts that come directly from published sources, such as Redbook, etc., are reliable, but those should be the reference, not about.com. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Beansandveggies; I was just about to post the same here. Clooney appears to have given Preston his famous pot-bellied pig in 1988 (he kept it after they split up, see Max (pig). IMDB has 1986–1988 for her marriage to Gage: [1]; so have a number of online sources: [2]. OPf more interest, however, is that reliable sources, incl. the Chicago Tribune and The Mirror, say her marriage to Gage lasted from 1985 to 1987: [3] Jayen466 12:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Casino Jack[edit]

First off,is this the proper way to bring something to your attention? I am sorry for my past postings. I should have looked into the proper way to do things. Kelly is in the movie "Casino Jack",which just rapped in Toronto. I don't know why alot of media sources haven't picked up on it? Maybe the movie studio wanted to keep a rap on it because of kelly's situation. Imdb lists her in the cast,but as rumored. However,Kevin Spacey confirmed she was his co-star on his twitter page. I only found one website that says she signed to be in the movie,that is cinemablend. I don't know if that's enough,but I felt like i needed to bring it to your attention.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new.php?id=13183 Penny47 (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this would be a proper way to ask such questions. We usually do not add upcoming films that are listed only as rumored on IMDB, or are not listed at all without reliable sources. I don't believe that Twitter would be regarded as a reliable source because it violates the WP:ELNO policy regarding social and forum sites and I'm not convinced cinemablend is considered reliable either. I don't doubt that Preston is in the film, but we can wait until something more mainstream publishes that. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure a more reliable source will come in the next few weeks. There is a video posted on youtube. The person who posted it says it's Kelly Preston and Kevin Spacey filming a scene from "Casino Jack,but I can't tell for sure it's Kelly in the video. I'll continue to look for a more reliable source. Penny47 (talk) 00:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undoubtedly. It will start having more publicity soon, I would imagine. YouTube has it's own RS problems, since a lot of the time, content is under copyright and we can't use it here. Keep looking! Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB must have found a reliable source. They no longer list Kelly Preston as rumored,they list her in the cast.They don't give a source however. http://us.imdb.com/title/tt1194417/ Penny47 (talk) 00:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it's listed there, it can probably be safely added. IMDB probably got confirmation from the production company. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Parents[edit]

The way the current Early Years section reads, it's confusing about her parents. Her biological father drowned, correct? Then she had an adoptive father AND a stepfather? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.198.46 (talk) 21:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This needs to be explained. It sounds to me like Smith was her father. After his death, her mother married Palzis who adopted Preston shortly afterwards. They divorced and her mother married Carlson. Therefore Palzis was her stepfather who became her adoptive father, and Carlson was her subsequent stepfather. Is that correct? Jim Michael (talk) 16:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The one correction that needs to be made is...Peter Palzis,Kelly's adoptive father, worked for the agricultural firm....not her birth father who drowned when she was 3. Kelly moved to Iraq when she was 5,because of Peter Palzis'job in the agricultural firm. He helped them to become better at growing sugarcane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Penny47 (talk • contribs) 12:14, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

still doesn't explain who "preston" is!
bio says she took palzis' name AS HER STAGE NAME PRESTON. what thu...??
(this section largely a dupe of above one, btw -- can we merge?) 66.30.47.138 (talk) 10:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Sheen incident[edit]

Story is given that Kelly Preston broke up with Charlie Sheen shortly after he accidentally shot her in the arm. This was a rumor that went around for a long time, but Charlie Sheen has since come public with the true events:

In 2001 Sheen told Playboy magazine that it was a "complete accident. I wasn't even in the room. She picked up a pair of my pants. ... A little revolver fell out of my back pocket, hit the bathroom floor and went off. It shot a hole through the toilet and she got hit in the leg with shrapnel."

--Sourced from CNN.com

My recommendation is to either implement a past relationship category on this page, or to simply remove the reference to this incident entirely

173.33.166.140 (talk) 08:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the statement in the article is sourced, and despite the spin Sheen put on it was investigated in regard to how it is presented. Your recommendation is wrong. This is actually contained in a Relationship section and it is sourced. It should not be censored by removing it. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you read the source, It corroborates exactly what Charlie Sheen said. Quoted from Source: "Significant Others Companion: Charlie Sheen. briefly engaged in 1989; suffered accidental gunshot wound in 1990 reportedly when she moved a pair of jeans belonging to Sheen which had a gun in one of the pockets; later sold 2.5 carat engagement ring Sheen gave her and split the money with him."

The Source says the exact same thing that Charlie Sheen himself quoted in the CNN article, yet on her article page it says "When Sheen accidentally shot her in the arm", implying that he literally pulled the trigger and shot her in the arm. The language should be changed to accurately reflect that he did not in fact shoot her.99.245.159.14 (talk) 09:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which may well have been lifted from his self-serving statement. Meanwhile, his official CBS biography states that he shot her. [4] I would tend to think if his employer's statement was wrong, he'd make an effort to correct it. The CBS bio profile has replaced the Yahoo link. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So rather than just make the article correct based on the sources given, you'd rather just find a new source altogether? Multiple sources have corroborated the account, and it was sourced on this very page. Rather than clean up the language to make it more accurate, you'll go witch hunting for a new source to prove that he shot her? He did not shoot her. Period. I don't understand why you are making such an effort to prove he shot her, when by his account AND the victim's, he did not. CBS is clearly the page that is wrong, not the yahoo or CNN article or the other multiple sources corroborating the account. If you can show concrete evidence that he shot her, then fine, but if you cant, then dont you think the consensus should be followed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.159.14 (talk) 19:55, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't muddy the waters. The point is that there is an official biography from his employers that supports the statement. Sheen would have a decided personal interest in spinning this to his advantage, thus the CNN article falls under self-interest. It's very difficult to verify what Yahoo bios are based on, maybe the CNN self-serving statement. And where is there consensus that this isn't true? Your opinion. That's not consensus. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The CBS Bio is literally the only place that I've seen that says "Charlie Sheen accidentally shot Kelly Preston". Every other source tells the events exactly like the yahoo article or the CNN article. So, I am basing my findings on a.) The accounts of the people ACTUALLY involved and b.) credible news sources, and you are contending that because Charlie Sheen hasn't said anything about what's on his CBS biography page, it must be true -- which is all opinion. For all you know, hes never read the thing. Fact of the matter is the account from the person actually involved in the incident should be sourced before some silly CBS bio page that isn't even meant to be necessarily historically accurate. You're using YOUR opinion and YOUR belief to claim what is and isn't true based on conjecture and assumption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.159.14 (talk) 01:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you are basing it on comments made by Sheen, a clearly self-serving issue. Hasn't it occurred to you that one source copies the other? So far, the only other sources you have come up with are based on that interview. You haven't come up with something verifiably independent of Sheen. And start signing your postings by using four tildes. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:42, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you don't believe that a person who was involved in the incident is a credible source for what really happened, the fact still remains that you have no proof to prove that he DID, other than a CBS biography page that has 5 words on the subject: "Sheen accidentally shot Kelly Preston". TO me, this is nowhere near sufficient enough evidence to have it point out on a wiki page that is meant to contain fact only. Unless you can find specific evidence ie. proof of a police report, eyewitness statements(which you actually know corroborating the statement I deem to be true), or something else to back up your claim other than some foolish Television biography page, then this is basically equivalent to libel, and should not be put into a wiki as fact.99.245.159.14 (talk) 05:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, do not make legal threats or you will wind up blocked. The statement is sourced to a valid and verifiable independent source. And once again, you have failed to produce a reliable source besides ones that rely on the statement by Sheen, who has a vested interest in putting himself in a positive light. You have no authority to deem anything true, Wikipedia is based on verifiablity, not truth as you believe it. I'm growing tired of this discussion. I say the same things each time:
  • 1) The statement is validly sourced.
  • 2) The source is independent of Sheen's publicity support.
  • 3) No independent third party verifiable source has been presented to support the other view.
  • 4) Wikipedia content is based on verifiability and not "truth".
  • 5) To continue to post the same arguments ad nauseum is unproductive.

Thus, if you cannot produce an independent reliable third party source that says otherwise, the current reference stands. And I will not respond further without this. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to miss the point entirely, and contradict yourself. You claim that the important thing here is verifiability, yet you have no verification for your point of view. Your contention is that it is verified that Charlie Sheen shot Kelly Preston based on the fact his CBS.com biography page mentions it in passing, and I'm saying that is NOT enough to verify this event took place. Secondly, is CNN not a reliable source anymore? Do you not think the journalist who was writing the article about Sheen looked up and verified the quote was true before she decided to publish it? SO basically you are questioning the journalistic credibility of a CNN.com reporter, yet a single sentence on CBS.com biography page is enough to prove to you that it is fact? Are you kidding me? The point is, if you are going to say that the sources I have given you are not enough to corroborate what Charlie Sheen said, then the same must be said that his CBS bio page is not enough to verify that he did shoot her, either. One sentence on a TV website biography page is NOT enough proof to put something into a wiki page as fact. Therefore, the entire reference should be removed from the page entirely until there is more verification available on said matter. There is no logical reason for you not to see this and comprehend it. Ill repeat it again, just in case: A CBS.com biography page is NOT enough to VERIFY this event took place.99.245.159.14 (talk) 07:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pfft. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed exact DOB of minor[edit]

The year should suffice it seems. --Tom (talk) 16:22, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First paragraph says October 13. Info in the box says August 17. The Wikipedia October 13 page points to this page. Which is right? Typofixer76 (talk) 22:00, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Son Benjamin[edit]

The son Benjamin is in a section titled "Son's Death" (Jett). I think he should have his own section. Or the section needs to be renamed. How about: "Children"? Green Morning (talk) 22:01, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Children of celebrities do not usually have their own section unless they are celebrities themselves. Jett's death, although extremely tragic, falls under this. I am sure the Travoltas would not want to open Wiki and find undue emphasis of this tragedy in their lives. Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 22:52, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I like your solution. Thanks, Green Morning (talk) 03:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kelly Preston. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Early Years section - off topic text[edit]

  • (the middle name "Kamalelehua" means 'garden of lehuas' in Hawaiian - a lehua being a well known Hawaiian flower)

MOS says not to make side comments in parentheses. In addition the content seems off topic, trivia and I vote for its removal. Any insights or thoughts from others?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably right. Debresser (talk) 08:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
i agree, it's pointless trivia. however, what WOULD be nice is a comment as to whether one or the other parents were, in fact, (part) HAWAIIAN. or whether this was another case of haole wannabes "appropriating" a local name. esp during the hippie 60s. 66.30.47.138 (talk) 10:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kelly Preston. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 00:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Place of death?[edit]

I am still in doubt in whether Houston, TX is actually the place of her death. It seems that articles such as this one state that her family "thanked all the doctors and nurses" at MD Anderson Cancer Center, which is in Houston. However, the datelines of most articles state Los Angeles. Can anyone confirm whether which one seems the most reliable? ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 06:21, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This could be a case of both being true. Travolta's Instagram that is cited in our sources does thank MD Anderson Cancer Center. However, there are somewhat weak sources that state one of her homes was in California. It is possible that she left the center and returned home before passing away. For now, I would recommend excluding the location of death, listing LA if enough sources lean that way, or listing both locations with a note that it isn't fully confirmed. (Granted, BLP may prevent us from doing the second or third.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Super Goku V (talk • contribs)
She died in Florida according to The New York Times here. --Danielvis08 (talk) 11:41, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Preston[edit]

Kelly was a Delta Gamma at the University of Southern California. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.204.99.174 (talk) 16:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And? Wyliepedia @ 07:25, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Preston, 2 living children[edit]

Her oldest son Jett died aged 16 from a seizure in 2009.

I tried to amend it for you however you don’t appear to allow edits anymore directly on your pages/articles. Fnia (talk) 14:07, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article has restricted edit access due to past vandalism. You may edit the article and see if your revision gets approved, though I do not see any location in the article that needs to be amended. --Super Goku V (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cause of Death - include in infobox? Your thoughts please.[edit]

I added, using the standard Infobox template, cause of death. I've had it reverted twice, with no discussion.

Let's discuss here.

I believe this is important, and it has been widely discussed in the media - including the public announcement by her husband.

— ERcheck (talk) 02:26, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As per the template documentation, this parameter should be included only when significant to notability and not when a routine illness - this case clearly falls into the latter camp and not the former. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:35, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
— Nikkimaria - I do not agree that it is not significant. It is not a "routine" illness. It is a major cause of death among women in the U.S., and many speak out to raise awareness. Her family felt it significant enough to reveal it after her death. — ERcheck (talk) 18:34, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is not significant to her notability. While you are unfortunately correct that it is a major cause of death among women in the US... that's kind of what "routine" means. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also respectfully disagree. It is notable that she died of breast cancer, given that it is such a major cause of death amongst women worldwide. I believe it is notable that this is what she died from. It is unacceptable, in so many ways, to consider that death from breast cancer is not important or a notable thing that can happen to women. I don't understand why it is something we should be keeping quiet... - Chris.sherlock (talk) 08:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. While it is a major cause of death amongst women, it is in no way "routine"! Celebrities have been shining a light on breast cancer, because it is important to raise awareness to aim for early detection. That her family publicized the particular cause of death, including mentioning MD Anderson, means that it is significant / notable. Let's let others weigh in. — ERcheck (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note, Congressman John Lewis' infobox includes his cause of death (pancreatic cancer). He is notable for his work in the U.S. Congress and as a civil rights leader. His cause of death - well publicized - is included in the infobox. — ERcheck (talk) 19:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that it was removed in this edit. Instead of cherry-picked results, I attempted to use Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox_person to get non-bias results. The results are sadly bias towards alphabetical order, but I will attempt a different method if this is still a problem. From the 50 articles listed there, around 5 were living and around 45 were deceased. Out of those about 45 articles, only 2 were noteworthy: Alexander Graham Bell and Albert Camus. For Bell, there is a few notes at the bottom of the infobox with one being about two of his children dying shortly after birth. For Camus, his death is listed in the infobox as a Car accident, making it the only article out of the 45 articles to list the cause of death. Thus, to User:ERcheck, what reasons (notable and not) are there for listing the cause of death? --Super Goku V (talk) 22:27, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would Oppose inclusion in the infobox. She is known for being an actress and model. If she had had some philanthropy or activism regarding breast cancer then I might be convinced, but lacking that, her disease is not significant to her notability. Elizium23 (talk) 00:02, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose since she kept it quiet. Yes, it is a major cause of death. A compromise might be a category at the top of the page, which I would support including. The current category Category:Deaths from breast cancer generates a list of persons, seems appropriate, and might be helpful for analysis.Fred (talk) 22:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gotti[edit]

Gotti with John Travolta was not a mini-series that was a feature film release. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.122.216.158 (talk) 22:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

accidentally/allegedly[edit]

The edit User:Maxikray made contains incorrect statements. Firstly, before the edit, the wording was correct - the shot was accidental, not alleged. Even the source TMZ added by the user says: "Kelly Preston ... confirming he did not pull the trigger during the infamous 1990 shooting incident ... and insisting the whole thing was a "complete accident." Secondly, based on the text of the source, Preston never claimed that Sheen did not shoot her; only that the shot was unintentional, accidental, as it was mentioned earlier, before the edit. Therefore, the statement "Preston claimed that Sheen did not shoot her" is false and the entire edit should be canceled, because it is actually misleading and worsens the quality of the article. --92.255.216.62 (talk) 17:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiian name[edit]

Just wanted to point out that her middle name doesn't mean "garden of lehuas" in Hawaiian. It would need to be spelled Kamalalehua to mean that. 50.113.31.29 (talk) 09:38, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kelly_Preston&oldid=1209865196"