Talk:George Reeves/Archive 2

message: I suggest that the relevant urban legends be placed into appropriate sections, rather than into a separate section.  For several reasons:
#Each urban legend needs a reference (snopes.com serves as a pretty good reference)
#It makes the relevant sections more interesting.
#The article is actually less readable with a separate section.
I'm going ahead and adding the legend about his death into the section on his death.  Snopes.com actually has a great entry about it.TheRingess (talk) 22:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And I'm going to delete the stuff in the opening graph about his death and Hollywoodland, which I've done before.  The information belongs in the body of the text, not the opening paragraph.  You won't find anything like it in a biography of George Washington, George Burns or George Lincoln Rockwell, so why should George Reeves be any different?Ted Newsom 06:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll hear no counter argument from me.TheRingess (talk) 14:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urban Legends 

message: I'm going to remove the two refernces to hs other films from the opening paragraph, with due respect to Reeves.  The films are mentioned in the body of the text, which is appropriate.  SO PROUDLY WE HAIL is, at the end of the day, an obscure and forgotten wartime flag-waver; Reeves's part in FROM HERE TO ETERNITY is minor.  He is not remembered for, nor was his particpation notable in, either of these films. (And others, please note-- I'm announcing this here and explaining it, rather than unilaterally making a change and hoping I get away with it... hint hint nudge nudge.Ted Newsom
I'm amused by the comments in the history tab, when 1:30 am became 2:00 am in the "Death" section.  Apparently somebody (not me) is trying to get specific and somebody else is objecting.  Not sure what the issue is... the official police report itself gives time of death as "prior to 1:20 am", which is when officers arrived to find Reeves had been "dead for some time."  I'd like to know what these "sources" are that make 2 am seem definitive.  Until then, you won't find me changing that part! MikeH0714 21:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrections, etc. 

message: In this particular article, it is stated that George Reeves willed everything to Toni Maddox. However, in the entry for Hollywoodland, the "Historical inaccuracies" section reports that this is an urban legend. One of these must obviously be incorrect.
128.165.175.172 14:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency 

message: I removed this from the article:
[NOTE: From Lou Koza: It should be noted any and all details throughout this Wikipedia essay is subject to various accounts and depending on who provided information and who can be trusted to tell the truth at any given time is open to interpretation. Most especially, in detailing the hours of which the tragic moment occurred. Various newspaper accounts have the death happening at 1:00am, others as much as 2:30am. The police report states between 1:30am to 2:30am. Some, like me believe George died on 6/15/59 approx. 11:05PM. Also, are the varied accounts of who was where in the house at the time. In May 1989 Leonore Lemmon gave an extended interview of the events surrounding the night of June 15-16, 1959. In her statements she claimed she and George had gone out to dinner. This is supported by Merrill Sparks, the piano player in the restaurant as detailed in Jan Alan Henderson's book, "Speeding Bullet." Mr. Sparks would repeat his account for Bill Ritter of 20/20. There he saw George and Leonore in the restaurant while he played the piano for the patrons. In fact, he said George was at arms length away listening to the music while Leonore was working the bar. At one point, unable to hear them, he stated they were arguing. He said, it was something about Tijuana. Later, during his break which he described as "a little after ten" the two while waiting for their car continued to argue. Although, according to Mr. Sparks, Leonore was doing most of the talking. Mr. Sparks could hear what they were arguing about. Soon they drove off. Unless they stopped off at another place, the two would arrive home no later than 10:30 worse case, since George's Benedict Canyon Drive home was about three miles distance. Robert Condon was not with the couple. Leonore claimed when they arrived home they went to bed. Soon after, she went down the stairs to the living room because George had rejected her. She noticed the outside light over the front door was off and turned it back on. She wondered why it was off and told her interviewer (May 1989) that George always left the light on during the night, and as an after thought years later wondered if George turned it off planning to do her in too. That moment she turned the light back. Soon, Bill Bliss arrived to the party, the one that never started. She invited "Bud" as he was known for in for a drink. Various accounts of her description has George coming down stairs, then not coming down. The story as detailed in the reports is he came down from upstairs because he was agitated at the arrival. After apologizing to the "guest" he soon went upstairs. According to Leonore, ten minutes later while she and Bud were sitting on the couch they heard a gun shot. "ah, that George is going to shoot himself." she would say in jest. Then another ten minutes goes by and it's too quiet upstairs she says, "Bud, go up there and see what he's doing." Bliss returns with a descrinption of what he saw. Reports in newspapers is he called the police immediately, asking them to come over because his friend is dead. At this time Leonore follows with the reason it took long to call the police. Carol and Bob had entered the living room from the guestroom (the room above the garage). Leonore took one look at her and realized she had to get Carol out of the house because she didn’t want her husband to find out Carol was at the house. In addition, Carol wore only a bed room nightie. Carol had arrived earlier while George and and Leonore were out to dinner. In doing so, she arrived with no other clothes other than the nightie. Leonore called Polly Adler to help with the situation. Perhaps one reason was to bring clothes for Carol. Leonore states she spoke to Polly, others state Polly was in Europe at the time. Nonetheless, Polly did not arrive. Leonore then got her own clothes for Carol to wear. She would describe Carol as looking like a baggy pants clown since the garments were too large on her. The four would later corroborate their story of that night to the police. Interesting to note is Carol would state she was not in the room when George and Bill argued. Carol's 1959 statement would inadvertently support Leonore's May 1989 claim that Carol was with Bob on the guest room, "getting friendly." As it stands this is the only explanation ever given for the time lapse before the police were called and when they eventually arrived. Leonore's claim that Carol was already at the house when Bill Bliss arrived is contrary to what was told to the police and reported in the June 16, 1959 newspapers. Are we to believe the Leonore of 1959 or the Leonore of 1989? Some would be satisfied that by 1989, Leonore's memory was questionable and far from reliable due to her bloated alcoholic state and therefore her testimony is of no value. At 68 years old, she appeared 88. Nonetheless, throughout her hour long interview she was candid and spoke freely. And yes, had a drink. She was flushed as a result, spoke sarcastically, but bounced back in a straight forward manner to continue and eventually finish on a high note. Throughout, she was at times having difficulty with some details, but eventually for example remembered "that dummy what's his name" was William "Bud" Bliss. She was sharp and adamant to her interviewer not to include Richard Condon, since it was his brother Robert who was at the house. Some of the details are sketchy, some well remembered. Some details are inconsistent and some same as told in 1959. Including her not being clairvoyant in predicting George’s death act.
From the time described as 6/15/59: "A little after ten" to 6/16/59 2:30am is filled with an enormous amount of varied accounts. Many open questions arose throughout this case. One is, if we are to accept the theory of the gun retaining no finger prints belonging to George because it was recently oiled, why then was the hand not checked for oil? Some would want to know about powder residue remaining on the hand. We won't know because the police didn't do a full investigation before the body was embalmed and prepared for the wake viewing. Why?
In summary, there is much of George's life and death that is told, but not always is it accurate. Not everything you read and hear is absolute. There is no absolute defined account of the events leading to the death of George Reeves. That includes any and all details stated herein.]
If it can be sourced, please add it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David.atwell (talk • contribs) 20:54, 28 July 2007
Lou, bless you, you're really not getting it.  This essay of yours is not "sourced" in the Wikipedia style, and it keeps getting bounced.  It is "POV," that is, "point of view," so it keeps getting bounced.  It's too long proportionate to the entry, so it keeps getting bounced.  And the only thing that's going to happen is other people are going to keep bouncing it-- rightly so.  Maybe you should start a related entry on "The death of George Reeves" or something.  There's a specific way to put this into the style that fits, which you haven't done, regardless of the detail in the essay.  It would probably be a lot easier-- and less frustrating for you-- to provide a link to some other site or address where people can immerse themselves in the minutea of the case, rather than state it in pretty interminable form here.  Your heart is in the right place, I know.Ted Newsom 23:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced information, removed from article 

message: This business about Jack Larson waffling seems silly.  First or all, it has nothing to do with the entry. More importantly, it's untrue and/or using an out of context quote to make him look like he's been in the "It was moider!" crowd.  If a TV editor took the middle sentence out of this : "I've always felt the same way about George's death and I've never varied.  Somebody told me he'd been murdered for an inheritance.  That made no sense at all."-- it makes the quote "sexier," but it also makes him appear to say something 180 degrees opposite every public statement he's made since 1957.  That's just silly. Ted Newsom 23:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you would like to put it back and give it a citation, fine by me.  I don't buy anything just because it's in Speeding Bullet, by any stretch, but that would be a legitimate WP citation.  As it was, it was uncited and thus justifiably removed.  I personally haven't seen any actual evidence that she paid for the entire house.  All I've seen is people (including Henderson) assuming she did. Monkeyzpop 17:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Back-and-forth additions & subtractions 

message: :Eternity director Fred Zinnemann, the screenwriter Daniel Taradash and others have maintained that every scene written for Reeves' character was shot and included as part of the released film. Zinnemann has also asserted that there were no post-release cuts, nor was there even a preview screening. Everything in the first production draft of the script is still present in the final product seen ever since 1953[14].
Can someone clarify this?  Does this mean that the oft-repeated story (and as shown in Hollywoodland) is false?  Does it mean he wasn't shot for the film?  What?  Tempshill (talk) 07:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It means the oft-repeated story is false.  Reeves was NOT cut out of "From Here to Eternity."  Every scene ever written for his character is still in the film.  Monkeyzpop (talk) 07:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear "eternity" section 

message: It was my understanding that fair use images of people who are dead were acceptable.  Even if not, the "artistic interpretation" is embarrassing and ought to be removed. An image of Reeves as Superman should certainly be included, since that's definitely unreplaceable with a free image. john k (talk) 01:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - there should be no obstacle to including an image of Reeves on this page as fair use. Even if no suitable image can be found, I think a blank box would be more appropriate than the current one, which is just bizarre. Terraxos (talk) 01:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Agree - get rid of it, it stinks and it's freaking me out. 91.106.153.58 (talk) 21:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artistic interpretation? 

message: The discussion of powder burns says
Laymen have commented on the fact that no powder stippling from the gun's discharge was found on the actor's skin, leading them to believe that the weapon would therefore have to have been held several inches from the head upon firing. In reality, forensic professionals concur that powder stippling is left on the skin only when the weapon is held several inches from the skin, while a contact wound (which skull fracture patterns clearly reveal Reeves's wound to be) results in the powder being propelled into the interior wound track.[23]
The Straight Dope reference [23] supports only the first comment on the gun being held away from the head, but not the "forensic professional" statement that powder burns are not left by a contact wound. What is the source for this? Kewalsh (talk) 01:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straight Dope Reference on Powder Burns 

message: Speaking of urban legends, I grew up hearing that the actor had had himself frozen after his death.  Yet, there is no mention whatsoever of that here, even if it is an urban legend.  What gives?Godofredo29 (talk) 18:52, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The urban legend is about Walt Disney, not Reeves; but Disney was cremated, not frozen. Reeves was not frozen either; his body is in a mausoleum. George was kept on ice for awhile after he died, during his mother's investigation of the shooting, but once that came to nothing, they put him in the crypt, at the same temperature as anyone else there (see the findagrave link at the bottom of the article). Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 18:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urban Legend 

message: I am not a member and don't want my IP made public so I hope someone interested will update his filmography for me.  I found a trailer/clip on Youtube from the movie The Ladies Must Live from 1940.  He played the part of George Halliday. In the clip you see him just for a second and it looks like he has a pencil mustache.  You can find it if you go on Youtube and use the key words:  George Reeves The Ladies Must Live.  I don't know if a video posted on Youtube would be regarded as sufficient documentation that he actually appeared in this film but it certainly looks like him.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.165.228 (talk) 15:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Ladies Must Live 

message: Quote: George was born five months into their marriage.
Quote: George's father married Helen Schultz in 1925 
Quote: Helen's marriage to Frank lasted 15 years and ended in divorce while George was away visiting relatives.
None of this makes any sense, that is unless his father was a bigamist! If George was born in 1914 five months into the marriage, and his father re-married in 1925, George would have been 9 at the time, so there for their marriage couldn't have lasted 15 years, unless he re-married with out getting a divorce.  I'd be interested to hear any info.Oraya68 (talk) 00:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors with dates of parents' marriage 

message: Does anyone else find it odd that a Wikipedia article about a Hollywood actor has no picture of this actor, but instead features a picture of ANOTHER actor portraying the actor?
I am not an editor and so I don't know how to go about finding a suitable copyright-friendly picture of George Reeves, but if someone can find one of Ben Affleck AS George Reeves surely there must be pictures of Reeves that are suitable enough.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.91.27.50 (talk) 21:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photograph? 

message: I've deleted (twice now, so far) edits which are presented as rectification of imbalance in the article, but which are themselves promotional of a specific point of view WP:NPOV, are rife with original research WP:OR, and, when cited, are cited based on unreliable and biased sources WP:SOURCES.  As to the latter, WP guidelines call for editors to "Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy," guidelines not fulfilled by the scant sourcing in these edits, which are primarily the reprinting of unexamined, biased, and un-fact-checked opinion. The points made in these now-reverted edits can be made without issue if they are restructured not to promote one point of view, if they are sourced to credible sources, and if they in no way consist of original research or editor's opinion or speculation.  Proper attention to copy editing, spelling, etc., would also be valuable.  Thank you. Monkeyzpop (talk) 23:03, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV, original research, unreliable sources 

message: The findagrave.com website relates that Reeves first was in a movie calloed "Ride, Cowboy, Ride" in 1939, prior to "Gone With the Wind," also 1939.  The Wikipedia article says "Gone With the Wind" was his first onscreen role.  The filmography here does not mention "Ride, Cowboy, Ride."  Anyone know the truth?  L. Thomas W. (talk) 14:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Findagrave is not a reliable source, but IMBD -- which is also not too reliable and often contains errors, but is usually more or less correct -- says here that Gone With the Wind was his 5th role. So the article is probably wrong. Herostratus (talk) 14:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: GONE WITH THE WIND was his first film role.  It started shooting in January 1939 but wasn't released until December.  In the meantime, he filmed several small roles in other films which were released while GWTW was still in production.  So GWTW was his first film, but his fifth released film. Monkeyzpop (talk) 16:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for clearing that up. Herostratus (talk) 04:41, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ride Cowboy Ride 

message: People on booze are 60 times as likely to commit suicide, and cocaine addicts are 60 times as likely to commit suicide.  If a person does both, it creates cocaethylene which provides a sense of euphoria but which makes one highly susceptible to suicide.  Was a toxicology test done on Reeves after the death?  Did he do cocaine?  It may have been a suicide induced by alcohol...  108.237.241.88 (talk) 02:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your inquiry, but this is not a place for original research nor is it a forum. Regards. DonQuixote (talk) 02:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drinkers 60 times as likely to commit suicide 

message: The findagrave.com website relates that Reeves first was in a movie calloed "Ride, Cowboy, Ride" in 1939, prior to "Gone With the Wind," also 1939.  The Wikipedia article says "Gone With the Wind" was his first onscreen role.  The filmography here does not mention "Ride, Cowboy, Ride."  Anyone know the truth?  L. Thomas W. (talk) 14:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Findagrave is not a reliable source, but IMBD -- which is also not too reliable and often contains errors, but is usually more or less correct -- says here that Gone With the Wind was his 5th role. So the article is probably wrong. Herostratus (talk) 14:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: GONE WITH THE WIND was his first film role.  It started shooting in January 1939 but wasn't released until December.  In the meantime, he filmed several small roles in other films which were released while GWTW was still in production.  So GWTW was his first film, but his fifth released film. Monkeyzpop (talk) 16:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for clearing that up. Herostratus (talk) 04:41, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ride Cowboy Ride 

message: People on booze are 60 times as likely to commit suicide, and cocaine addicts are 60 times as likely to commit suicide.  If a person does both, it creates cocaethylene which provides a sense of euphoria but which makes one highly susceptible to suicide.  Was a toxicology test done on Reeves after the death?  Did he do cocaine?  It may have been a suicide induced by alcohol...  108.237.241.88 (talk) 02:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your inquiry, but this is not a place for original research nor is it a forum. Regards. DonQuixote (talk) 02:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drinkers 60 times as likely to commit suicide 

message: As I write I am watching "Jungle Jim" on TMC.  Why is this film not listed in George Reeves' filmography? Caeruleancentaur (talk) 01:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a complete filmography. IMDB has one: ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jungle Jim? 

message: The cause of death in the info box read gunshot wound, undetermined, which is incorrect. George reeves death was ruled a suicide, and I changed the info box to read suicide. It doesn't matter if anyone believes he did, or didn't commit suicide, his death was labeled as such, so I believe it should be listed as such. 
2601:483:100:CB54:8D02:F1B8:162F:8792 (talk) 19:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info box  

message: The article states that there is lingering controversy concerning the cause of death of George Reeves. The infobox gives "suicide" as the cause of death. If Reeves died of a gunshot wound and his death was ruled a suicide, it's logical to believe that the would was self-inflicted.
If there is no certainty that the gunshot wound was self-inflicted, then "suicide" should be removed from the infobox as the cause of death.  Anthony22 (talk) 17:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The coroner's official cause of death was indeed "suicide". There is little doubt that Reeves' career was on the skids, but his friends, amateur investigators, and the media have persisted in raising doubts about the the official investigation and its conclusion. It's a convoluted matter. As an encyclopedia, it's probably best for Wikipedia just to describe the case and the controversy and not to take a stand. Here's a 2006 Guardian story about the matter. -- WikiPedant (talk) 20:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was the death of George Reeves a suicide, an accident, or a homicide? 

message: Bud Collyer first portrayed Superman from 2/20/1940–3/1/1951 on radio serials. 
Kirk Alyn portrayed Superman in movie released  January 1948.
Source:  Wikipedia 
68.255.164.250 (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Superman 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion