Talk:Sharon Stone/Archive 1

message: I suspect the image shown in the article is a copyvio.  The image's page has absolutely no copyright information.  I suspect KF just lifted from somewhere off the Internet.  Can anyone confirm or refute? —Frecklefoot 15:33, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)
:Thank you for raising this question. I uploaded that image of Sharon Stone on 26 December 2002, that is a loooong time ago in Wikipedia time. Back then I didn't even know the meaning of fair use (cf. Talk:Sharon Tate).
:Telling me that "those with a history of violations may be temporarily suspended from editing pages" is just a bit too much: Being suspended for something I did one and a half years ago when I had just discovered the upload button? You must be joking! 
:If it makes you happy, please delete all my old uploads. I don't mind, I don't care. All the best, <KF> 21:22, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright

message: Why is she categorized as LGBT?  I see no source for this, other than that she played a bisexual serial killer, and received an award from the NCLR.  Cleduc 21:13, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Sexuality

message: Faye Dunaway of her generation?  Isn't that a bit subjective?
:The role that made her a true star, the Faye Dunaway of her generation, was that of Catherine Tramell, a brilliant coke-snorting bisexual mind-game playing serial killer in the sexually-charged Basic Instinct (1992). Stone went to considerable trouble to obtain the part for which she was far from first choice. Stone had to wait and actually turned down offers for the mere prospect to play Catherine Tramell. Several better known actresses of the time such as Geena Davis turned down the part mostly because of the nudity required. In the movie’s most notorious scene Ms. Tramell is being questioned by the police and she crosses and uncrosses her legs revealing the fact she wasn't wearing any underwear. Nothing was left to the imagination. Stone claims to have been tricked into the stunt and considered a lawsuit.
:That paragraph is very biased. It needs citing for saying that "she considered a lawsuit" and that Greena Davis "turned it down mostly because of the nudity required". Also, the first sentence is long and reads very poorly.
-- 
I think you are the one that read poorly ...--69.37.90.237 18:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objectivity 

message: It's not Simon Peres, it's Shimon Peres.
The red flag raised over the objectivity and accuracy of comments made about Ms. Stone's being "the Faye Dunaway of her generation" underscore what is perhaps Wikipedia's biggest problem, that of objectivity and accuracy. The webmasters at Wikipedia (and this is solely my opinion, you are free to diagree) remind me of parents who allow their kids to run rampant while either being too distracted with other things to notice, or worse, turning a blind eye. I wouldn't be surprised to find we've all encountered factual inaccuracies and biased entries on this site.
One of Wikipedia's great strengths (and great appeal) is the ability to edit articles. Naturally, this strength becomes a weakness when anyone can change a corrected aticle back into an incorrect version. This, of course, is incredibly frustrating for posters interested in maintaning accurate articles. All of it leaves me wondering, "Who's minding the store?"
Well... who, then? Who's culpable? Who, exactly, is the final authority? Admittedly, I'm speaking out of ignorance here. If Wikipedia has watchmen guarding the towers, someone should lend them a hand. I've cleaned up articles myself, but like so many Wikipedia adherents, I too have a full-time job and can't maintain the type of vigilance necessary to ensure the objectivity and accuracy any encyclopedia needs. 
Any suggestion? And by that, I don't mean ad hoc attacks or knee-jerk comments. I mean actual, helpful suggestions as to how the problem must be addressed.
Thanks.
I think you are confusing style with objectivity.  Its about a movie star for Christ sake you twit.  Get off your high horse.--69.37.90.237 18:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  objectivity and accuracy 

message: I deleted the quotations of Sharon's speech at Israel. I can't see how that gibberish can contribute to the article. I left the link though, for those who may want to read the quotations. Prickus 14:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2004 - present 

message: RfC was posted on May 20, 2006 re. whether the "uncrossed legs" screenshot should be included. This section is purely for a comment by outside editors - not for debate and dispute by those already involved.
It should be included as it is a famous scene and the only way to judge it is by seeing it. It is not comparable with porn, as it is a scene of dramatic sexual tension in a narrative. The small size of the thumbnail is not at all revealing anyway, and the rather dark enlargement hardly more so. Tyrenius 17:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the scene is a notable one — but you can just as easily take a screencap of her a few seconds later, with her legs crossed. The scene would not be less recognisable. ~ Flooch 23:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the above, perhaps a screenshot of her just after, news sources do it all the time and it conveys the same idea and is just as memorable. I think the picture of her with her legs open is unnecessary. --Zer0faults 12:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that a) a screenshot of that scene adds to the article, and that b) it should not be this particular image. The issue here, I think, is intent: most people will be prepared to see a revealing photograph on a page about genetalia, but would not be prepared to see female genetalia on a page about an actor. It's arguable that one familiar with Sharon Stone might expect something of the sort on a page about the actress, but if a person knew much about her, they may not be looking her up in an encyclopedia, anyway. An image of her in that scene with her legs crossed would be appropriate, or even better may be this image with the area between her legs edited to be darker or blurred (I think that there is an image tag for edited images, yes?) Verloren Hoop 19:36, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I think that's the wrong way to view it because some topics are inherently adult in nature.  The appropriateness of an image should be judged in regards solely to the topic at hand if justice is going to be done to it.  Many of us feel that displaying the image is warranted because the actress has built her career on that one scene - it is integral to the context of Sharon Stone.  Personally I'd rather show the whole clip of her uncrossing and crossing her legs but that would violate fair use.  The decision has already been taken not to censor Wiki, so the only question that remains is does that particular image contribute to the article?  I personally think it expands upon the textual description, and the arguments against its inclusion don't really make a case against that - they're pushing the 'taste' issue which is the least important in factual documentation of anything. Argol910 13:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The leg crossing picture WAS the existing image until someone disapproved of it and replaced it with a facial shot.  A large portion of the text is devoted to the leg crossing scene and the purpose of the image is to illustrate that.  Choosing another image from the interview is good old fashioned censorship because it actually has nothing to do with the scene itself. If you are discussing a scene, then show an image from the actual scene being discussed, not one that comes before or after it and has essentially nothing to do with the text.  I cannot believe anyone can seriously suggest that the facial image provides better illustration than the leg crossing image.  The leg crossing image provides a much better illustration of the textual description so the article is better for it, and to be fair you can't actually discern her genitalia or any pubic hair from the thumbnail anyway!
213.122.11.23 12:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Would this be an effective compromise? Max22 12:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment 

message: Tregoweth's objection to the screencap of Sharon Stone flashing was the 'principle of least astonishment' - that you don't 'expect to see such an image on the profile.  However, he has now started to remove a link to the image which clearly indicates the image's content.  This clearly removes the choice of the reader to see the image themselves and surely moves over into censorship.  Does anyone else object to a link to the image, or should I initiate proceedings against Tregoweth for vandalism?  213.122.4.145 21:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How many people object to a link to the disputed image

message: Took out unsourced, irrelevant part about Jon Stewarts alleged opinion that she was trying to promote her movie when she protested for peace in the middleast. This would be better under Jon Stewart's allegations/opinions then a Bio for Sharon stone. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.192.106.231 (talk) 06:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jon Stewart 

message: Several online sources claim Sharon Stone was the actress in that well-known "Me & My RC" commercial, delivering pizza on a skateboard. Can this be verified? Roz666 00:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RC Cola commercial, circa 1975 

message: I included her golden raspberry award for worst actress but it was deleted because it "wasn't an achievement". As per the Template:Infobox actor it should be included regardless of whether it's an achievement (many actors have refused oscars because they don't believe it's an achievement). The page isn't supposed to be a shrine to her achievements. Any objections? Gr8lyknow 09:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Razzie Win 

message: I removed this image from the article since her pose in the image is weird and silly - not suitable for serious enclypedia. Neither is she recogniseable from the image, nor is there any interesting context. The Merciful 18:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a horrible photo, and very unflattering.68.144.31.71 06:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I removed [[:Image:SharonStoneCannes.jpeg]] 

message: Is the brithday message meant to be there? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sharon_Stone&diff=197309032&oldid=197271350 JTBX (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Never Minds just a vandal. JTBX (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthday?

message: I requested that administrators temporarily protect this page from anonymous edits, due to multiple repeated attempts by anonymous users to simply erase the fact that Sharon Stone has been nominated for numerous "Razzie" awards. These nominations and awards, while not flattering to her, are a valid part of her mark on the world and are worthy of inclusion. The section is well referenced, so it is not subject to rapid deletion under the "biographies of living persons" guidelines. I've added a complete listing of her "positive" awards as well in order to better reflect neutral point of view, so there's no violation there either.
Whoever you are, if you feel this content is legitimately problematic under Wikipedia's guidelines, come out of the shadows and discuss your thinking. If you just are a Sharon Stone fan and don't like the fact that she's had so many Razzie nominations and awards, then your issue is with the Razzie award voters, not with the Wikipedia article that fairly reports the situation. Rnickel (talk) 16:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-Protection / Razzie Awards 

message: The Reno, Nevada article lists that Stone has a residence in Reno.  Can anyone confirm or refute this?  The Jade Knight (talk) 10:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Residence? 

message: "As a teenager, she worked at a fast food restaurant and she was a big fan of Megadeth.[3]"
This makes no sense. SS was born in 1958. Megadeth formed in 1983. Their first album wasn't released until 1985. 
She was 25 when they formed and already doing TV. She was in movies when they released their first album. This is just wrong.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.105.70.136 (talk) 18:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fan of Megadeth? 

message: I removed the following entry:
Stone's stardom was such that she received top billing over Gene Hackman, Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio when cast as a gunslinger for Sam Raimi's 1995 western The Quick and the Dead.
If you can cite a reference regarding this, go ahead and replace it. However, I doubt you'll find a reference that states this is significant, because Crowe and DiCaprio were little-known (in the U.S., in Crowe's case) at the time of that film. It's pretty much a meaningless statement. Not to mention that, as co-producer, Stone likely had the authority to give herself top billing. GuySperanza (talk) 06:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Quick and the Dead" 

message: I've removed this as Wikipedia is not a gossip magazine and I don't see how a custody battle deserves its own paragraph. --NeilN talk to me 04:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parenting controversy 

message: Over the years, there have been numerous cycles of inclusion/removal of Sharon Stone's Razzie awards. The latest removal came when the whole awards section was removed and incorporated into filmography, but minus the Razzies. My question is, are Razzie awards notable or not? Not once has the question actually been discussed; it's always just a deletion by some circuitous means. If they're notable, then for God's sake let's leave them in, and if not, then let's take them out, but this government by sneakiness has got to stop. 
For the record, here was the latest list of her Razzies in case someone wants to have a go at putting them all back in:
*1988 - Allan Quatermain and the Lost City of Gold (1987) Razzie Award Worst Actress1987 Razzie Awards
*1994 - Sliver (1993) Razzie Award Worst Actress1993 Razzie Awards
*1995 - The Specialist (1994) Razzie Award Worst Actress (Won)1994 Razzie Awards
*1995 - The Specialist (1994) Razzie Award Worst Screen Couple (Won)
*1997 - Diabolique (1996) Razzie Award Worst Actress1996 Razzie Awards
*2000 - Gloria (1999) Razzie Award Worst Actress1999 Razzie Awards
*2004 - Catwoman (2004) Razzie Award Worst Supporting Actress2004 Razzie Awards
*2004 - Catwoman (2004) Razzie Award Worst Screen Couple
*2007 - Basic Instinct 2 (2006) Razzie Award Worst Actress (Won)2006 Razzie Awards
—Rnickel (talk) 00:36, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Razzie Awards 

message: A simple google search will verify that she has breast implants, think it would be relevant to list, maybe also with estimated year it occurred.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.182.136.3 (talk) 08:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Implants 

message: Sharon took a risk to show panty-less self in the film Basic Instinct.  Sharon Stone was still accepted in the film industry, since what she did was moving toward the pornography industry.  Sharon Stone showed her beauty and showed a talent for acting, and including acting in controversial roles such as in the film Basic Instinct.  Sharon Stone has done well, showed her beauty, showed her acting, and is now a recognized talent in the entertainment industry.
Well, it's indisputable she showed something.--Buckboard 08:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sharon Stone's Beauty And Eternal Wisdom 

message: There have been a several edits repeatedly adding the claim that Stone is of Irish and English descent: .  The claim is backed up with this source: http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=dowfam3&id=I251968.  The source is a geneaology website, and while I have no problem with the website as a reliable source, it is does not directly corroborate the claim about Stone's heritage.  It is a collection of records that enables the reader to trace her ancestry.  On that basis you can piece together Stone's lineage by searching through her ancestors' records, but I believe this contravenes Wikipedia's policy on source synthesis: WP:SYNTHESIS. The policy states: 
Since the source does not explicitly make a claim about Stone's lineage, the claim is synthesis on the basis it is pieced together from many ancestry records, and cannot be verified by a reader without tracing her ancestry.  I have no objection to including her lineage in the article, but it should be corroborated by a self-contained statement in a reliable source to avoid the synthesis. Betty Logan (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ancestry/lineage 

message: In an interview Stone recently denied having been married to George Howe Englund:
Stone tells CNN host Piers Morgan, "No I wasn't (married three times). But they say that... They say I was married to this guy that I was never married to or don't even really know.
http://www.imdb.com/news/ns0000002/?date=2011-02-25  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.130.4.242 (talk) 13:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stone denies third marriage 

message: It appears that there is no mention of the fact she appeared and was credited in appearing in Police Academy 4: Citizens on Patrol released in 1987.  See wikipedia page for the movie (or watch the movie :-)for confirmation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigmudcake (talk • contribs) 08:58, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sharon Stone was a credited actor in Police Academy 4  released 1987 

message: I don't know how anyone who reads that "karma" quotation could think that Stone has a 154 IQ.  Further evidence that the number is apocryphal is the fact that she lied about membership in Mensa and attending a Mensa school.  The IQ reference should be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.53.226 (talk) 14:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It maybe should be mentioned that she claims to have a high I.Q. and to be a member of Mensa, as she's well-known for making these claims. However, at least one other celebrity who claims to be a member of Mensa (I think it was Asia Carrera, I'll leave it for somebody else to dig up that reference) has stated that Stone's name is not on the membership list. GuySperanza (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

text: Women are unable to receive IQ levels beyond a certain level. SundayRequiem (talk) 04:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  High IQ? 

message: The information on the Advertising campaigns article on the RC Cola page in Wikipedia, I noticed a very big error. Sharon Stone was not the actress who rode the skateboard in the RC Cola commercial titled, "Me and My RC".  The actress who was riding the skateboard was Kelly Moran. Sister of Erin Moran of Happy Days. I know for a fact that Kelly has in her possession proof of her being the RC Cola Skateboard girl in that commercial. The article needs to be corrected immediately as this incorrect information is very damaging to Ms. Moran's career. Furthermore, what was the fact/basis of using Sharon Stone's name? Gary Fredrickson (talk) 16:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no reliable citation found online to support the above. Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  On Wikipedia, actually _being_ the primary source counts for less than a link to some random click bait.137.205.183.109 (talk) 14:10, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  RC Cola Skateboard Commercial  

message: I have nominated List of awards and nominations received by Sharon Stone for featured list status here. I'd appreciate it if any of you could take a look and leave your comments. Aoba47 (talk) 21:45, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of awards and nominations received by Sharon Stone 

message: File:Sharon Stone by Gage Skidmore.jpg
File:Sharon Stone by Gage Skidmore 2.jpg
File:Sharon Stone by Gage Skidmore 3.jpg
File:Sharon Stone by Gage Skidmore 4.jpg
File:Sharon Stone by Gage Skidmore 5.jpg
I've uploaded several photos from an appearance by Sharon Stone yesterday. I wasn't sure which was best, but given the fact that the lead image previously was a decade old, from 2007, I thought it would be best to go ahead and replace the photo with a much newer one that reflects her current appearance. Above, please see several other photos from the same event. Calibrador (talk) 15:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm definitely not very happy with 1,3, and 4. 2 and 5 is kinda so so. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead photo 

message: I wish to know why the Personal life is not sorted in chronological order? The order seen here look really arbitrary, if not a result of manipulation.--Csmth (talk) 06:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to know why there are no mentions of Wes Craven? Bulbous (talk) 03:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I noticed in the bio box that it says 3 adopted children with Bronstein.  They divorced in early 2004 and the two young children were adopted after that and only have the last name Stone.  Or did I miss something?216.73.231.4 (talk) 00:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why nothing about the Stone's stroke  - subarachnoid haemorrhage  -   The actress suffered a stroke in September 2001 which left her bleeding into her brain for 11 days ( http://www.contactmusic.com/news-article/stone-speaks-of-stroke-horror ) - and her long and painful, was divorced by her husband during the recovery, but successful recovery? She talks about it during the interview with Larry King http://rt.com/shows/larry-king-now/sharon-stone-744/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarioTW (talk • contribs) 07:17, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: She was born in Meadville, PA  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:540:C400:8C80:FC01:BBB3:D83F:C8B1 (talk) 04:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth 

message: Well you know it was very interesting because at first, you know, I'm not happy about the way the Chinese are treating the Tibetans because I don't think anyone should be unkind to anyone else. And so I have been very concerned about how to think and what to do about that because I don't like that. And I had been this, you know, concerned about, oh how should we deal with the Olympics because they are not being nice to the Dalai Lama, who is a good friend of mine. And then this earthquake and all this stuff happened, and then I thought, is that Karma? When you're not nice then the bad things happen to you?[92] 
One of China's biggest cinema chains reacted to Stone's comments by declaring it would not show her films in its theaters.[93] The founder of the UME Cineplex chain and the chairman of the Federation of Hong Kong Filmmakers, Ng See-Yuen, called Stone's comments "inappropriate", and said the UME Cineplex chain would no longer present her films.[93]''
Is reference #92 necessary?  It's dead and redundant.  Doesn't #93 serves its purpose?
Second, should "Karma" be capitalized?  It's lower case in the quotation and in WP.  Gprobins (talk) 13:53, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant Reference? 

message: * 
** 
: .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 06:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  CelebritiesFans 

message: * 
** Literary and Cultural Heritage Map of Pennsylvania 2007-12-13
: .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 08:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literary and Cultural Heritage Map of Pennsylvania - The Pennsylvania Center for the Book 

message: Sharon Stone starred in Beyond The Stars with Martin Sheen and Christian Slater in 1989. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_the_Stars  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.93.65.200 (talk) 04:54, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move Sharon was in that is not listed 

message: Is Angela Rayner Growlergate notable enough as showing the influence of Sharon Stone internationally? 
twitter Sharon%20Stone%22%20%22Angela%20Rayner%22
https://abcnews.go.com/International/sexism-row-erupts-uk-parliament-basic-instinct-article/story?id=84311807
Anyone who knows how to edit can find lots on this in England. 
Htrowsle (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angela Rayner