Talk:Ryan O'Neal

message: A picture would be useful here, I think.Zigzig20s 01:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture? 

message: I removed this section because it is a word-for-word copy from the AP story. That is to say, copyright violation. Proxy User (talk) 21:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 incident 

message: The image :File:Paper Moon screenshot.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --18:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Paper Moon screenshot.jpg

message: I was startled to see that a significant proportion of this article is devoted to his legal troubles over the last two years. This would be warranted if O'Neal was noted for his legal troubles (as was, for instance, Lawrence Tierney). Failing that, I think this presents a serious issue under our policies. Reference can be made to his arrests and legal issues, but in much less space given the limited size of this article, the fact that this is a BLP, and that these issues are unrelated to his notability. I have, meanwhile, removed the legal issues segment in its entirety. Please discuss here before reinstating any of this removed material. Stetsonharry (talk) 19:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think that would be fine. It certainly can and should be mentioned, but not at the length as was previously. Stetsonharry (talk) 13:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this and find the expanded section on Redmond O'Neal to be even more inappropriate, as Redmond is not a public figure.  Ryan's other children have had brushes with the law and other serious issues not directly related to his notability, and so those issues are not discussed here.  That they are discussed elsewhere at Wikipedia is a result of non-inherited notability, as both chose to pursue acting careers and celebrity in their own right.  Redmond is a private citizen and apart from the event involving his father deserves the same privacy as any other 24-year-old.  Abrazame (talk) 09:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:BLP]] and [[WP:WEIGHT]] issues

message: Here is the criteria for "C" class articles:  "The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research." (More is at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment.)  In particular, there is no requirement that an article needs to have "a proper lead section" to be "C" class.  And an article with 15 footnotes, as this one has, is almost certainly not "start" class.  Accordingly, I'm reverting this back to "C" class as an assessment of quality.  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 21:55, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "C" class 

message: I was watching old reruns on THE UNTOUCHABLES on Metv.com the other night and there was a brief flash of Ryan O'Neal playing a walk-on part of a bellhop at the very end of the show. His whole part lasted about 10 seconds and he was uncredited at the end. The date of the show was 1960. Unfortunately, I did not get the title of the episode. I was thinking this may be his earliest tv appearance??  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.8.180 (talk) 22:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earliest TV appearance??? 

message: Hi Robert, I'm concerned that all this court history isn't about the subject. How do you feel about it? I think it could be WP:COATRACK, and raises NPOV and weight concerns, being about events that the BLP subject didn't participate in. I'm going boldly to delete most of it, but please let's take it to WP:BLPN if you support it. The first sentence, "On August 4...", I'm not sure about: I think that would merit discussion at BLPN too. All the best, Spicemix (talk) 13:43, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. This is the best I can come up with on the fly right now (may return here later)  while doing diligence to your question. Would that I were the pundit you give me credit for. I think that, as discussed above (at==WP:BLP and WP:WEIGHT issues==), "cutting out the level of detail" re Ryan's own brushes with the law, is probably best. We shouldn't sugar coat the reality but no need to provide more than the minimum, and there must already be some mention on Griffin and Tatum's pages already. As far as things "[O'Neal] didn't participate in", that refers to Redmond, I presume, as he doesn't have (and I would posit doesn't need or merit) his own page so I am not sure what degree of coverage of that unfortunate young man's problems should be included on Ryan's page, especially since some is undoubtedly already present on Fawcett's page. Very sad all around. Quis separabit? 18:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Robert. For me the question is whether we should associate the son's life with the father's. As WP:BLP is strong on protecting people in doubtful cases, I feel that content is better left out. If I were Ryan I'm fairly sure I shouldn't feel comfortable with it, because his son's actions aren't his legal responsibility. Cheers! Spicemix (talk) 14:21, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent content

message: Stage 4 cancer is not early; it's as late as you can get. The very sourced article says as much too. Per Wikipedia:Interviews#reliability, "Interviews are generally reliable for the fact that the interviewee said something, but not necessarily for the accuracy of what was said". IE He might have said it, but he doesn't know what he's talking about. I don't think a statement as significant as metastatic cancer being early and having a good prognosis is something that should be in an encyclopedia. So I removed the statement he made of the assessment of his condition. MartinezMD (talk) 23:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Status needs update to stage 2 2001:569:BB58:7B00:A852:302F:1039:408E (talk) 05:49, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide a link to a reliable source for this content. General Ization Talk   05:51, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I found one and made an update.MartinezMD (talk) 12:40, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prostate cancer 

message: Among the categories at the end of the the entry are "American sailors", "Phillips Academy alumni" and "United States Navy officers". The entry itself shows no indication of any of these. A cursory scan on the Internet shows no support. I suggest they should be deleted. JohnHarris (talk) 00:49, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur and removed them. I looked further and found those additions by a anonymous vandal IP and subsequent editors left them in place.  MartinezMD (talk) 00:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unwarranted Categories? 

message: The evidence most strongly suggests his birth name is Charles Patrick Ryan O'Neal:
* Allmovie 
* California Birth Index 
Arbor to SJ (talk) 06:21, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Other sources using "Charles Patrick Ryan..." as birth name:
** Turner Classic Movies 
** TV Guide  (wayback machine indicates as far back as 2011) Arbor to SJ (talk) 06:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyway, this is a long way of saying that I agree that neither birth nor death records, especially as they were previously used, should be employed as a source if there is any way around it. My suggestion going forward would be to take a page from WP:WSAW, a good recent essay on this, which would be to review the non-public/non-primary sources currently available that are reliable to see if they favor a particular name, and note a dispute in prose or with a footnote. I would say the existing sources under those parameters favor Charles Patrick Ryan O'Neal, but I would favor a note, perhaps as an aside or footnote in early life, that other reliable sources disagree. This is literally a case where equivalent reliable sources (i.e. Variety is on the level of The Hollywood Reporter as entertainment industry sources) are reporting conflicting facts. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 01:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth name 

message: {{subst:trim|1=
im a professional blogger i want to add some important aspects related to ryan kindly accept me!
: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Liu1126 (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2023