Talk:Olivia de Havilland

message: *No: MOS guidelines would imply that she should be described as an American actress. Per MOS, it would be: the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if the person is notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable. --Light show (talk) 20:49, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, she and her sister were born in Japan, and, as far as I can tell, never ever lived in the UK.  Thus they were British under "jus sanguinis" only, and did not act as British citizens.   Collect (talk) 16:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:OPENPARA advises not to mention birthplaces or prior nationalities in opening sentences unless relevant to notability. Here I don't see that they are. Jus sanguinis is a method by which citizenship is transmitted at birth, and those receiving citizenship in that way are just as much natural-born citizens as those born in the country—not a lesser form of citizenship or anything like that. —  Cliftonian (talk)  08:41, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that is what I wrote. Collect (talk) 13:40, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case I misunderstood you, sorry. —  Cliftonian (talk)  15:36, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is the first mention so important? British, American, what's the difference? "We are one people separated by a common language," as the wag said. But seriously, folks, as long as the details of where she was born and lived - and how she identifies - are made clear a bit further down, don't we have better things to do? --Uncle Ed (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Since she hs lived in Paris for over 60 years, wouldn't it be appropriate to call her American French? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:26, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: French?

message: I see thirteen none free images in this, none of which are particularly illuminating. This should be cut down to possibly one or two. I'm not sure what the plans are for this article, but whatever they are the non-free images have to be dramatically reduced. (If this goes through to FAC, for example, the image reviewers such as  will be sure to insist the axe is wielded; even without FAC, there still needs to be a cull). - SchroCat (talk) 15:50, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: Apparently she was in some long running fued, with I think her sister?, according to Beeb Radio 4 PM. scope_creep (talk) 16:30, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Feud? Indeed! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:31, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Fued

message: I think that the personal life in such detailed fashion doesn't fit into an opening section, especially since her private life (except the feud with her sister) was never that relevant to the public. --Clibenfoart (talk) 08:56, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life in opening section 

message: This is the information that the section "New life in Paris, 1953–1962" gives; it should say "played (or portrayed) by Alan Ladd".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.144.205.11 (talk) 15:36, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Confederate soldier named Alan Ladd? 

message: change
They moved into a large house in Tokyo, where Lilian gave informal singing recitals for the European colony.
to
They moved into a large house in Tokyo, where Lilian gave informal singing recitals. Mxmbt2 (talk) 00:15, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Done — MRD2014 (talk) 23:52, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2019 

message: The Wikipedia article on Olivia de Havilland states she won the Oscar for Best Actress for "Hold Back the Dawn" in 1941. This is incorrect. Olivia's sister Joan Fontaine won the Academy Award that year for Alfred Hitchcock's "Suspicion." The two were pitted against each other in the same category that year. This circumstance added to the legend of their sibling rivalry. Olivia won her first Academy Award for Best Actress in 1946 for "To Each His Own." Her second Oscar came three years later for "The Heiress" a film adaptation of the book "Washington Square."
Shaun L. Creighton  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.107.184 (talk) 08:49, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academy Award in 1946 for "To Each His Own." 

message: Can I ask why the image was changed by an anonymous user with 2 contribs and not reverted? The previous image was perfectly fine. Shouldn’t the image be one taken during her career (1930s-80s as stated) rather than over a decade after? The current image is also not of the best quality and is rotated in an unusual manner. SpaceFox99 (talk) 06:24, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: "Be bold," as Wiki guidelines suggest. It's easy enough to restore the earlier edit, and you are quite right that the 2001 photo cannot be used twice in the article. An important point is to include an edit summary (justification for the changes you make), which the editor who replaced the long term photo did not do. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 12:32, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Better to have a career image, not a retirement one. Quality is not the main thing, relevance is. Some of us have begun to discuss image quality as if we had any amount of free (free) images to choose between. We do not. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:24, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition, to make it clear, I was not the OP, but another user who asked for an image of her at her peak career. Roif456 (talk) 14:11, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Just saying, I've changed the image to a version with less noise a days ago. That's why the image is same, but looks different. Roif456 (talk) 03:17, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Well, someone insisted, that the current image is better, even if we were bothered to find a higher quality alternative. Again, that discussion about the same image you mentioned also happened a few months ago, but they said that the current was better as according to them, it shows her at her starting career. Nevertheless, I think the previous image was better (the one you mentioned) since it shows less noise, and nothing about a quality picture captured from a scanned book. Lemonreader (talk) 08:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image change? 

message: It belongs in the lead  but keeps getting removed. The woman has lived in France for decades. That is a much more vital fact of her life than some of the fan-site trivia in the lead now. Put it back! Or I will. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: French residence

message: Death date is July 26, not 25. Ryoung122 20:31, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Check your calendar. The 25th is a Saturday, no matter where you are. AMCKen (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death date 

message: Change word “thee to the” in the following sentence. 
She was also thee last of the major last surviving stars from the Golden Age of Hollywood Cinema, until her death in 2020. 96.228.19.52 (talk) 23:38, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: . ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:56, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2020 

message: Hi! Would it be better to call Olivia "one of the last major stars from the Golden Age Of Hollywood", as opposed to stating that "she was the last major surviving star"? Actors Sidney Poitier and Sophia Loren are still alive and are the last two living Golden Age "Screen Legends" from AFI's list.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Clear Looking Glass (talk • contribs) 05:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "The Golden Age of Hollywood" is an infuriatingly vague term as it can span anywhere from the silent era to the 1960s. I think it would pay to be more specific in the case of Olivia de Havilland and take into account that she was the last major star of the 1930s (bearing in mind Poitier and Loren weren't established until years later in the '50s). In fact, as far as I can tell, de Havilland was the last major figure of the 1930s. Truly the end of an era. Crisso (talk) 16:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Last major surviving star". 

message: While she received a well-deserved standing ovation at the 75th Academy Awards, it was not six and a half minutes as stated in the first paragraph under the heading "Retirement and remembrance, 1989–2020". Unless the broadcast has been altered, the ovation was just under a minute. May I suggest changing "earning a six-and-a-half-minute standing ovation upon her entrance" to "earning an extended standing ovation upon her entrance".
: Olivia de Havilland entrance 75th Oscar's
Bartolo Falstaff (talk) 06:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I remember watching it live back in 2003 and it was definitely not 6.5 minutes. So yes - it definitely should be changed to reflect that. Crisso (talk) 17:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  . Crisso (talk) 17:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  6 1/2 minute ovation 

message: References to David Selzick request for Gone With the Wind acting contract does not explicate which production company asked Jack Warner to yield. Kindly explicate. GenacGenac (talk) 14:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It was Selznick's own production company, Selznick International Pictures. Basically he was it. Crisso (talk) 17:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appeal to Warner for GWTW contract 

message: I would like to submit that Olivia de Havilland received an Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters from Mills College in May 2018. (Link: https://www.mills.edu/news/videos-webcasts/mills-college-commencement-2018.php)
Thank you! 24.4.196.38 (talk) 23:05, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: . ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2020 

message: Olivia_de_Havilland was not the last golden age of hollywood star, she was the last surviveing cast member of gone of the wind.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjv40950 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  error  

message: When I click on “Full List” next to “Awards“ nothing happens. Shouldn’t it then take me to another page? Thank you— wasn’t sure where to mention this. Sweetpeagirl (talk) 09:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link? 

message: On Sunday the media reported that de Havilland had died the previous day i.e. Saturday. As such much of the media has recorded her date of death as July 25th (per the EW article currently in the article, but also BBC America, Golden Globes along with many others. However, it seems The New York Times reported she died Sunday along with a few other American outlets. Britannica seems confused, recording July 25 and July 26. I decided to track down the original statement and it seems ambiguously worded: "Last night, the world lost an international treasure, and I lost a dear friend and beloved client. She died peacefully in Paris". In truth it could be either date. Should we record both dates? . Betty Logan (talk) 09:38, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Until there is something more official we could follow their lead and say "during the night of 25-26 July..."? There will be an official one at some point, but this seems to be best for now. - SchroCat (talk) 10:40, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That's my take on it. Hate to be ghoulish but it's only a matter of time before a photo of her headstone pops up on the Commons. Betty Logan (talk) 10:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  If a headstone is the only written date we can find anywhere, it's better than nothing at all. But headstones should normally be used only to confirm details found in written documents, as it's far from unknown for headstones to be dead wrong (no pun intended). --  Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 01:51, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

text: Sunday in which time zone? Once there is an official stance, it will be the day the French authorities put on the death certificate. - SchroCat (talk) 18:19, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The news of her death broke on the evening of Sunday in Europe. The agent also told the German press agency "dpa" (time zone: one hour earlier than France) that it was Sunday, so she obviously stated Sunday to media outlets on both sides of the Atlantic.  --Clibenfoart (talk) 19:47, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: All the sources I'm finding (CNN, NYT, The Guardian, Variety, Los Angeles Times, The Hollywood Reporter, ABC News) all state Sunday. The only cites I've found saying Saturday seem to be less than reliable sources, or wonky sources in general, like Dailymail or Forbes. It looks very clear cut it was Sunday, especially when the citations saying Sunday are sourcing her agent. Rusted AutoParts 01:14, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

text: Entertainment Weekly also published another article about Havilland that says she died July 26. Rusted AutoParts 01:19, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

text: I think Clibenfoart has put forward the most likely explanation but is there any way we can check this for sure? Betty Logan (talk) 10:45, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I genuinely feel it can be tied into the overwhelming amount of sources that supports the 26th. As I illustrated above, the more considerably reliable sources have corroborated the 26th, whilst the 25th seems to only be supported by more tabloidish sources. Rusted AutoParts 17:46, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If we are going to go with the Sunday date can we at least include a note explaining the discrepancy? Betty Logan (talk) 18:39, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Don’t see any issue with that. Do we word it like “some outlets reported her date of death as Saturday” or “some outlets misconstrued her date of death as Saturday”? Rusted AutoParts 19:13, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think something along the lines of "de Havilland died at night in her sleep which led to some media outlets reporting she had died the previous day". It doesn't have to be exactly those words, but it explains the confusion over the dates. Betty Logan (talk) 19:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I’ve added a note though it currently looks malformed. Fee free to adjust the wording. Rusted AutoParts 22:54, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of death? 

message: I see that there was a prolonged discussion regarding her citizenship, unfortunately, none of them were able to answer these two questions: First, under the 1914 British Nationality and Aliens Act she ceased to be a British subject when she was naturalized as a U.S. citizen, so is there any proof that she gained the status of a British citizen (aside from the Damehood argument)? Second, where is the source or proof that she obtained French citizenship? If none of these questions can be answered I suggest the citizenship information be removed from the infobox as they can't be verified, and the only proof of citizenship was her well-documented naturalization as a U.S. citizen. 184.148.38.90 (talk) 20:42, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further discussions regarding citizenship in the infobox