Talk:Hedy Lamarr

message: see this link -https://www.intomore.com/culture/the-beautiful-possibly-bisexual-actress-who-helped-invent-wireless-technology/
shouldn't this be mentioned?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.144.46 (talk) 18:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia guidelines place a high bar on stating an individuals sexual preference, both in terms of relevance and quality of sourcing. Neither the above website nor the highly-speculative documentary Bombshell rise to that. There is mention of same-sex encounters in her supposed autobiography, however, Lamarr herself sued her ghostwriters over claims made in the book. Unless better sourcing can be found, no, speculation about her sexual preference should not be mentioned. Peter G Werner (talk) 16:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  possible bisexuality 

message: Simple mistake; Ms Lamarr was not considered a great actress, but rather a great beauty 38.77.40.75 (talk) 04:12, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hey Lamarr article 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:57, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: If this is bogus, why quote from it so often? 125.209.157.246 (talk) 06:15, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alleged autobiography? 

message: This section is not internally consistent. It states that she and her husband adopted James. Later we learn that James was her biological son born out of wedlock. I suggest restructuring this section ordered by date of marriage, divorce, or birth. Rklawton (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Marriages and children

message: Ruth Barton's 2010 book makes a very short reference to Lamarr accusing a repairman that she had been dating for some months of raping her at gunpoint. I have no idea of how to put this in the main page but it does show Lamarr in a totally different light. On page 217. The coverage is very brief but it is backed by other sources I've seen. Why this keeps getting overlooked make me question if some volunteers don't want to include negative information. 
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Hedy_Lamarr/ypCyObpZaGoC?hl=en&gbpv=0&kptab=overview 92.40.5.83 (talk) 17:35, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  False rape allegation, Lamarr loses suit.  

message: The fact that she was inducted into the "Inventors Hall of Fame" is enough for her to be considered an "Inventor" by Wikipedia.  If you have a problem with that, take it up with them.  It's not Wikipedia's job to 2nd guess the decisions made by these types of organizations.
2600:1700:10DE:30C0:350D:51D1:C028:353B (talk) 22:53, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add "Inventor" to First Sentence in Lede 

message: It seems odd to specify that she was born in 1914, not 1913, without giving any context as to why that's significant. It would be pretty weird if every biography opened with "she was born this year, not that year." I see that some references give 1913, but it should be explained in the article, I shouldn't have to go search for it. Philologick (talk) 05:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth year 

message: The way the text ends implies that the technology developed by Lamar and Antheil never saw any use after the fact. This feels contradictory to Antheil’s article where it is given mention that the technology was implemented in at least one instance in 1962.
In addition, while I understand that the mention of her involvement in the eventual development of Wi-Fi is because that claim is currently being disputed, given the amount of attention regarding that idea I believe it should at minimum be given a comment in popular culture. At this point it at least bares mention Weevilabout (talk) 01:08, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text in Invention section is misleading