Talk:Paul Hogan

message: Isn't it redundant to begin the sentence as, Paul Hogan (of Crocodile Dundee fame)? After all the film Crocodile Dundee has already been mentioned, and it is no longer a surprise as to what Paul Hogan is associated with.
:I felt it was redundant too but am also wondering what he said on 60 Minutes vs. Vanity magazine and if the fragmentation means that this section of the article was vandalized. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 05:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think those are jokes. Vanjagenije 12:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just removed "Maniac Warriors" from the Paul Hogan filmography, as it is an obvious mistake. As to which film "Maniac Warriors" refers to, there is also confusion. Most websites state that "Maniac Warriors" is a variant title for the 1988 Canadian C-flick and "Road Warrior" rip-off "Empire of Ash" (later released as "Empire of Ash II" in order to fool some suckers to buy the VHS twice). However, at Allrovi (which is the only place claiming that Paul Hogan has acted in it and the only site with a separate entry for "Manic Warrior"), the cast and crew list actually corresponds with the cast & crew of the 1990 follow-up "Empire of Ash III" (also known as "Last of the Warriors" - which is the title it appears under at Allrovi). Pictures of the VHS covers support that: the cast on the 1988 Empire of Ash cover and the Manic Warriors cover is topped by Melanie Kilgour and Thoms Schioler, while the cast on the 1992 "Empire of Ash III"/"Last of the Warriors" is topped by Melanie Kilgour, William Smith and Ken Farmer. So, it's obvious that the Allrovi entry refers to the wrong film but, more importantly, it's also obvious from all four covers that Paul Hogan isn't in any of the two films. If he was, his name wouldn't only top the bill, it would be displayed in larger letters than the film titles! Thomas Blomberg (talk) 10:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: 60 Minutes interview

message: I removed 2 unreferenced and unlikely statements.  One was that the Croatian singer Oliver Dragojevic is his half-brother, by his father's second marriage.  The other was that Hogan acted in the film Marsal (1999).  A check of the IMDb does not list Hogan in this film.  A check of the internet does not support either statement.  If they are true, I hope someone will restore them, with references. MacPhilbin 14:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think those are jokes. Vanjagenije 12:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just removed "Maniac Warriors" from the Paul Hogan filmography, as it is an obvious mistake. As to which film "Maniac Warriors" refers to, there is also confusion. Most websites state that "Maniac Warriors" is a variant title for the 1988 Canadian C-flick and "Road Warrior" rip-off "Empire of Ash" (later released as "Empire of Ash II" in order to fool some suckers to buy the VHS twice). However, at Allrovi (which is the only place claiming that Paul Hogan has acted in it and the only site with a separate entry for "Manic Warrior"), the cast and crew list actually corresponds with the cast & crew of the 1990 follow-up "Empire of Ash III" (also known as "Last of the Warriors" - which is the title it appears under at Allrovi). Pictures of the VHS covers support that: the cast on the 1988 Empire of Ash cover and the Manic Warriors cover is topped by Melanie Kilgour and Thoms Schioler, while the cast on the 1992 "Empire of Ash III"/"Last of the Warriors" is topped by Melanie Kilgour, William Smith and Ken Farmer. So, it's obvious that the Allrovi entry refers to the wrong film but, more importantly, it's also obvious from all four covers that Paul Hogan isn't in any of the two films. If he was, his name wouldn't only top the bill, it would be displayed in larger letters than the film titles! Thomas Blomberg (talk) 10:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Relations & Filmography

message: :Image:CrocDundee.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:CrocDundee.jpg

message: Hogan, I believe, increased his wealth and fame with a long-running series of TV commercials for cigarettes. As I'm not a TV watcher, and because I have no reference to this, perhaps someone might like to add it if it is true. I'm pretty sure I have seen such commercials, perhaps in the 1970s. I think the brand was Winfield. Alpheus 12:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well Hogan did appear in a long series of print and television advertisements for Winfield cigarettes ("Anyhow, have a Winfield"). Many other celebrities of the day such as Stuart Wagstaff, Tony Barber, Graham Kennedy also appeared in commercials for cigarettes. Kennedy was dressed as Bligh in adverts for Wills Extra Mild I think it was. Wagstaff plugged Benson & Hedges. How notable is any of this? Format (talk) 21:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

text: I endorse the views above, including not sure where it gets us.  Hogan's advertising was certainly successful as in his contribution was memorable. I don't know whether more people bought his cigarettes as a result but ... brand recognition certainly increased - both of Winfield and of him. --Matilda talk 17:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not personally disagree with Proxxt's points and never meant to suggest that the advertisements themselves weren't notable or iconic (see BUGAUP). But the original poster asked why an article on Hogan does not have a point on how he increased his wealth and fame with a long-running series of TV commercials for cigarettes, under the heading Tobacco industry links. That is different from why no mention of the Winfield adverts, and I was responding to the comment made, not the general idea that Hogan did ads for Winfield. (And to me the term Tobacco industry links sounds more serious that simply being paid to advertise cigarettes - and no I don't smoke.) A lot of the discussion is getting into original research - if we want to say the adverts contributed to his fame and the development of his persona we really need a reference for that. My point is that plenty of celebrities appeared in cigarette commercials - but often that fact in itself is not notable. If we can get some quotes from said celebrity on it as in the article on Stuart Wagstaff, that would be a different matter. Format (talk) 18:50, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Sorry! Should have checked article - Matilda has addressed this nicely. Now if we can get references about impact of the adverts on language and Hogan's fame I agree they would be good to have in the article too. Format (talk) 18:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tobacco industry links

message: Did he divorce his first wife after only 28 years of marriage or was she his wife between 1958 -1990? I don't think both pieces of information can be quite correct. Gwladys24 (talk) 09:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Marriage 

message: Paul Hogan makes it clear in the DVD for the movie "Charlie and Boots" that his job on the Sydney Harbour Bridge was as a rigger, not a painter. ("Riggers look down on painters!" he quips at one point.) He doesn't make an issue of it, though (in part because he seems to have gotten tired of explaining the difference to people); and there is a joke at the very end of "Charlie and Boots" which relies on the audience's (mis)awareness of him being a painter.
Stephen129.78.64.102 (talk) 04:11, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hogan was a rigger, not a painter 

message: The main page refers to "Charlie and Boots" being "shot in Echuca in the state of Victoria, and in surrounding areas". In fact it was also shot in parts of the States of NSW and Queensland as well. (Source: the extras on the movie's Region 4 DVD.)
Stephen129.78.64.100 (talk) 04:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Charlie & Boots" shooting locales 

message: Possibly a silly question but is the recently added photo actually Hogan? It looks like a wax work to me. Nickm57 (talk) 09:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like a wax work to me too, although less so than the real Paul Hogan.  The clapperboard looks bogus and it looks very "tourist attraction" to me.  Unfortunately when you follow its history back to FlickR it doesn't say where the photo was taken.  It's quite a good likeness, but I don't know if it's appropriate to use it.  Rossrs (talk) 09:45, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yep - it is a waxwork. HAve a look at the other FlickR photos in the same sequence - they are other very bad waxworks at some B grade tourist attraction somewhere. So Ive removed the photo. Nickm57 (talk) 09:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Had another look, and yes there are.  I didn't notice before but it also says that it is "tagged with wax".   Doesn't sound like much fun, does it?  Rossrs (talk) 10:05, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The Photo?

message: It seems these got lost during a bout of vandalism by in October, and weren't properly reinstated during the repair work. I don't see any issue with main "Personal life" part, but maybe someone more familair with the case can point to any more developments on the "Tax problems" front? Nick Cooper (talk) 09:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life/Tax problems 

message: It seems to be the done thing to include any reference to Family Guy where the given article has been referenced. Paul Hogan was referenced on an episode of Family Guy so I totally think this should totally be put on this article. It would be hella good.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.93.65.82 (talk) 09:26, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Family Guy reference

message: If this story in Huffington Post is true, it seems relevant:
Paul Hogan, 'Crocodile Dundee' Actor, Allegedly Missing $34 Million Hidden In Overseas Account
:Crocodiles used to be his biggest worry, but now it's cash.
:"Crocodile Dundee" actor Paul Hogan is allegedly missing $34 million he hid away in an offshore tax haven, and he says he thinks his tax adviser, Philip Egglishaw, is to blame.
:Swiss newspaper Le Matin Dimanche reports that Hogan's millions have been in a Swiss bank run by the Geneva firm Strachans for almost 20 years, according to a report published in the Sydney Morning Herald. But he cannot get his hands on it.
:In court documents filed in California District Court, Egglishaw -- who is a partner at Strachans -- is accused of having "absconded with or spent all" of Hogan's millions.
Maybe he's just trying to confuse the tax people.  It should be verified before it becomes part of the Bio.  HowardMorland (talk) 03:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Swiss bank account story

message: There are ongoing efforts to change Hogan's DOB on this page - to 1940, usually by the one obsessive IP address or using new user accounts. For the record, according to the National Library of Australia and IMDB he was born in 1939. I'm not aware of any controversy around his DOB or reliable sources that say otherwise.Nickm57 (talk) 06:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Still happening.Nickm57 (talk) 07:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: And again.Nickm57 (talk) 21:53, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  And again. --  Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 07:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of Birth

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Paul Hogan. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071104153701/http://www.atme.org/pubs/archives/77_1898_11926.cfm to http://www.atme.org/pubs/archives/77_1898_11926.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100905201623/http://www.today.msnbc.msn.com/id/38986923/ns/today-entertainment to http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/38986923/ns/today-entertainment/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110109163615/http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/blog/article/112376/crocodile-dundee-star-to-sue-australian-government.html to http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/blog/article/112376/crocodile-dundee-star-to-sue-australian-government.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:59, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: I made this a separate entry because the last, brief comment on this was made seven years ago. The section on his tax "problems" seems far too long, since a simple reading of the sections shows he has no real "problems." Some of his personal funds might be missing, but he was not arrested or charged with anything, as far as I can see from the section. It simply says this and this and this but also nothing happened. So I suggest the section should be trimmed significantly.AlexanderSoul (talk) 21:33, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks anon IP for bringing your comments here. Its where they belong. However, I don't have a stance, other than, the material cited is already on the public record - anyone can find it with or without a WP article. However, as I have already indicated, I also tend to believe the tax section is too long. Perhaps IP person, you could make an account for yourself, and work constructively on the article. Then everyone benefits. Nickm57 (talk) 11:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tax problems section