Jump to content

Talk:Amy Adams/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Mormon

This article belongs to two categories, Latter Day Saints and Mormon actors, that I think is unjustified. Though she says she was raised LDS (a.k.a. "Mormon") for the first 12 years of her life, she doesn't say she practices it anymore. Therefore, I think these two categories should be removed. I'll take care of this in a sec, if anyone disagrees, please discuss here. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:56, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I have re-removed the Mormon Actors category. As you noted, she is from a Mormon history. Her roles and history seem to indicate that she would likely no longer self-identify as Mormon (though, of course, doesn't guarantee it, which is why she's not in the Ex-Mormons category either). Until someone can provide citation, that should remain off the article. A Mormon family is not enough. -Porlob 18:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Birthplace

She says she was born in Vicenza, 142 km far from Aviano, where of course she lived, so she wasn't born in Friuli, but in Veneto...

To clarify the previous editor's unsigned and undated comment, the article claims she was born in Aviano (in Friuli-Venezia Giula), but the reference has her saying she was born in Vicenza (Veneto). The claim dates from a good faith edit done on 14 July 2008 by Lilygnat. On balance, I'm going with the reference, which happens to agree with the infobox, on the basis that Adams should know where she was born, and probably tells the truth in interviews, and the interview was doubtless transcribed truthfully, and... :) Of course if someone can find a reference for the Aviano claim, that would be interesting too. Pingku (talk) 15:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Adams has told Jimmy Kimmel that she had spent some early time in Aviano, and that in fact inspired the name of her recently-born daughter Aviana. For some reason, the interview is no longer visible on the official YouTube channel of Jimmy Kimmel Live as before. I suppose she said she was raised and not born in Aviano...perhaps I forgot what I heard...Anybody know where that interview can still be found, so things can be clared up? -anonymous editor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.240.250.119 (talk) 13:18, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Birthdate

IMDB.com shows she was born in 1974. What is the correct year? RyguyMN 04:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Madagascar 2

Hello, everyone, I removed the credit for Madagascar 2 - haven't found any references for that one. If you have a source that confirms Adams' involvement in the movie, please re-add it. Best regards, --Plumcouch Talk2Me 13:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Amy "Lou" Adams

I removed her middle name. If someone has a non-gossip source for it, please re-add it along with the reference. I believe someone mixed her up with this Amy Adams: http://www.ebookmall.com/ebooks-authors/amy-lou-adams-ebooks.htm Best regards, --Plumcouch Talk2Me 00:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I removed "Lou" again. Readers can submit information to IMDb.com. It is impossible to determine if "Lou" was added by a regular user or a member of Adams' representation. Therefore, I'm going to remove it until we have a source from either a respectable magazine or an interview. PS. Also in regards of above reference. (See the e-book author.) Best regards, --Plumcouch Talk2Me 22:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Wow, so many of them. Thanks a ton. I will talk to some more experienced editors for their opinions on reliability of those sources, especially given the circumstance that there is another "Amy Lou Adams". Thanks again, anon, and best regards, --Plumcouch Talk2Me 17:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
None of the sources listed above are reliable sources (i.e. a reputable newspaper, magazine or website) which can be used to support that it is her middle name. Many of the above sources can be freely edited by the public and some of them have contrasting information like the birthdate. -- Ladida (talk) 03:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
The credits on the website of The Chromium Hook do in fact list her as being named "Amy Lou Adams." ----DanTD (talk) 13:49, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Blacklist revert?

I tried to revert the vandalism, and got

"This is a talk page. Please respect the talk page guidelines, and remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes (DaRkAgE7 (talk) 22:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)). The spam filter blocked your page save because it detected a blacklisted hyperlink. You may have added it yourself, the link may have been added by another editor before it was blacklisted, or you may be infected by spyware that adds links to wiki pages. You will need to remove all instances of the blacklisted URL before you can save. If you are attempting a section edit, note that this block may even be due to spam links in other sections. Blacklists are maintained both locally and globally. Before proceeding, please review both lists to determine which one (or both) are affecting you. You can request help removing the link, request that the link be removed from the blacklist, or report a possible error on the local or global spam blacklist talk page. If you'd like to request that a specific link be allowed without removing similar links from the blacklist, you can request whitelisting on the local spam whitelist talk page."

I don't know why I can't revert it, but this "blacklist" or whatever has never caused me problems before, and since I don't know what it is, I can't fix the page. The Blacklist seems to be counterproductive. ~~ DaRkAgE7 (talk) 22:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The blacklist is intended to stop link-spamming activity to problematic sites. If you read the warning fully, it should have mentioned the blacklisted domain. You can de-wikify the URL or simply remove it, after which the edit should go through. Dancter (talk) 23:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Ethnicity

Amy has red hair and a name that is definitely not Hispanic. Consequently, shouldn't she be categorised as an Irish-American? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.211.191 (talk) 16:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

she wasn't born with red hair if she was we have no prove yet early movies of hers show she has blond or brown haired so find info that proves youe segestions before you edit thingsVeggiegirl (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there:
1. Learn how to spell and construct a sentence; and
2. Look up "sarcasm". Quickly.
86.17.211.191 (talk) 02:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

That is uncalled for, 86.17.211.191. First off, for starting a nonsense discussion and, second, your attitude towards another here. --Soetermans (talk) 23:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Marriage Date

The date I am reading this is May 17, 2008. It states that she "...was married on July 4, 2008". Crystal ball perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.59.100.89 (talk) 02:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

FYI, this alleged marriage is a fraud either way. ----DanTD (talk) 13:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Please remove the Power Rangers reference at the last table!

Someone is editing this page and putting she is Master Guin on Power Rangers -.- I've been looking for this, and it's just vandalism. I've removed that from the upper part, but I don't know how to remove that from the table at the botton. Could someone do it, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.41.98.158 (talk) 20:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

What about the line on her marrying Spongebob Squarepants "star" Doug Lawrence on July 4,2008? That clearly looks like vandalism to me. As for the alleged connection to the Power Rangers franchise, she actually turned down the role as the Pink Ranger. ----DanTD (talk) 19:10, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Italian

if she was born in Italy shouldn't we say she is "an Italian born American actress" lots of other actresses on there are added like that o we know how long she lived thee before she movedVeggiegirl (talk) 13:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so... Not in the intro at least. The fact that she was born in Italy has nothing to do whatsoever with her being a film actress. There was a similar discussion going on at Kate Hudson about her Jewishness (see discussion. --Soetermans (talk) 09:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, still on Sienna Miller's page it says American born English actress but she moved to England when she was just one year old so why can't she be called just an 'English actress'? If Amy Adams can be called an American actress legally Amy should have Italian citizenship and well as American so why can it say "Amy Lou Adams is an Italian born American actress...", just like Emma Watson's does. Does anyone actually know when Amy moved to America? It doesn't say. Maybe its worth finding out, it might help. Natalie Portman also wasn't born in America as like Nicole Kidman wasn't born in Australia. I'll see if I can find out when she moved to America that might help then. She wasn't natrualised as American as both her parents are American, if anyone moved to America under 18 years of age with American parents they'll become a citizen right away I think?Veggiegirl (talk) 23:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The difference here is, I guess, that Amy Adams is American by her parents' citizenship, even if she did ever live abroad. She was born there, but has little Italian going on. Still, I don't know the exact rules and laws on the subject.
P.S. Sienna Miller's page does say she is English, nothing else mentioned. The other examples are more or less useless: Watson is born to English parents, Kidman and Portman: dual citizenship. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 07:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Lead section

According to Wikipedia:Lead section, the lead section "should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article". The length of the lead should be two or three paragraphs long. Also, the phrase "perhaps best known" is discouraged since it is a personal opinion. Please see Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Good article criteria for more information. Regards, Ladida (talk) 02:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

As a result of various IPs/new editors not discussing changes to lead and continuously reverting it, the article has been protected. Please discuss here the rationale for altering the lead. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the Enchanted Box at the end of this article (the Amy Adams article) - does it need to be here? An Enchanted Box at the end of an article about Amy Adams seems superfluous and not truly representative of her body of work.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.36.13.78 (talk • contribs)

I also wondered about that when I saw it. She is one of the entries in the box, though, and the purpose of navboxes is to navigate among the listed articles. It would be made more difficult to do so if it was removed from this article. Powers T 13:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:EMBED navboxes should only include links that would otherwise already be included in a perfect version of the article. So the question you need to ask is, would you expect to see all those links on the Amy Adams article if it were complete. If the answer is yes then its a valid navbox to be on the article. If the answer is no, then you should remove the navbox. -DJSasso (talk) 21:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure how strongly that recommendation applies to navboxes. Certainly its application is not widespread, nor do I think you'd find wide consensus for its application to navboxes like {{NY-FedRep}}, {{U.S. state templates}}, or {{Disney}}. Powers T 13:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

"Domestic Partner?"

I know this more of a gripe for the template, but WHAT THE???? 207.238.52.162 (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Try reading about it: Domestic partner. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Number of Academy Awards and others

The last line in the second paragraph asserts that Amy Adams' role in 'The Fighter' earned her a third academy award. As of today, January 30, 2011 the 2011 Academy Awards have not been decided. I think the the writer meant that she earned her third Academy Award nomination. 67.71.84.129 (talk) 06:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Amy Adams is listed as receiving an Academy Award nomination for Enchanted. This information is not true. It is also listed in Amy's filmography a 2012 film titled "The Master" and many awards listed next to it. Most of the listed awards are also fabricated as the 2012/2013 award season has yet to begin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petriasfan (talk • contribs) 05:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Structure

The current structure isn't logical. Either the content from "Personal life" needs to be integrated into the "Life and career" section, or a separate "Early life" section needs to be created (i.e. Early life-Career-Personal life). Which do you prefer? Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 12:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done -- The later. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

New NEWS today, for future editing

Throughout the social media, "She is a classy lady; more in Hollywood should be like her!" 

Headline-1: Actress Amy Adams Gave Up Her First Class Airplane Seat For A Soldier

QUOTE: "Five-time Oscar nominee Amy Adams displayed some very un-Hollywood behavior Friday on a flight from Detroit to Los Angeles. Adams, who was born and raised on military bases, gave up her first class seat for a solider who was sitting in coach. ESPN personality Jemele Hill witnessed the act of kindness and tweeted about the incident to her 244,000 followers:..." -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 15:53, 28 June 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.

Good pictures and portrait-photos

The pictures are great, but unfortunately (currently) the picture entitled, "Adams at the Man of Steel première, June 2013" appears twice, immediately with each other, in the two consecutive sections. Is there another good picture that can be substituted? -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 22:11, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Filmography

There is a main-article link to a filmography. Four editors have removed a POV partial list that one editor keeps reverting. When three different editors are removing something for being redundant, unnecessary and POV, it's edit-warring for one editor to keep restoring it.

--Tenebrae (talk) 02:36, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

The best way is to have prose following the "Main" template (WP:PROPERSPLIT, WP:SUMMARY). --Musdan77 (talk) 05:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Why would you split this anyway? --karlel
It was already split off to the separate filmography page. Usually, the reason for that is because it becomes too large for the bio page. Please sign your posts by typing four tildes. --Musdan77 (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Simplifying opening paragraphs

A strict interpretation of the rules means I must take this issue here. Please note my intention to clean up Amy Adams' opening paragraphs. The opening is not the place to list her entire career - there are parts for that later on. Opening should be along the lines of "She is known for X and received awards and nominations for Y". MasonBanks (talk) 06:27, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for taking it to this page, but what is supposed to happen is that you come here to discuss your proposed changes and reach a consensus. Not come here, while once again re-adding your changes to the article at the same time. L1975p (talk) 13:36, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The "most/best known" is obviously POV as well. From whose perspective is she best known for those roles? Certainly not mine (I know her from The Fighter, Sunshine Cleaning, Enchanted and Doubt). Nymf (talk) 17:50, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Objectively its going to be her most high profile roles. No one will dispute that her Oscar nominated performances, breakthrough role or performance as Lois Lane is going to be her best known. Whatever you call it, this page's opening is a mess and it needs to be cleaned up. MasonBanks (talk) 23:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm fine with some info being removed from the lead, such as some of the BAFTA/GG stuff or the info about being in TV roles and B movies, but it is only your point of view that the five films you listed, including Catch Me If You Can & Big Eyes, are her most well known roles, when other people might know her more for The Fighter or Doubt etc. Your edits also included a sentence at the start of the second paragraph, that didn't actually make sense. L1975p (talk) 23:46, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Would rephrasing it to "she is known for" as opposed to "best known for" be better? I've mentioned The Fighter and Doubt later on is all. Alternatively, we could lead with the Oscar nominated movies and then add in the second paragraph that she is known for films like Enchanted, Catch Me If You Can, Man of Steel and Big Eyes? MasonBanks (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 03:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
By the way, I disagree that the lead needs re-writing at all. A slight variation of the current lead is what was in the article when it passed GA. Several featured articles follows the same style (see Kirsten Dunst, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Reese Witherspoon, etc) which explains how the person came to be notable. Nymf (talk) 12:40, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Image copyright - possible violation

The recent image of the article subject that was added, reverted out, and readded (and then reverted back out per WP:BRD) is a possible copyright violation. The editor adding it back in seems to think the editor who added it originally is the copyright owner. I see nothing that indicates such. I am hoping the editor including the image here will take part in the discussion and clear things up. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:22, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

User:Calibrador uploaded it. He's the one who takes the photos every Comic Con. Rusted AutoParts 16:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
The photo was taken by professional photographer Gage Skidmore and uploaded by a Commons account named "Empty Hearse". Are you of the knowledge that any of the accounts associated with the photo (Musicinsummer, Calibrador, or Empty Hearse) are of the original photographer? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Calibrador is User:GageSkidmore, and if you look through his history, you'll see he's the uploader. Here's an older version of his user page. Rusted AutoParts 16:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
That's good to know. Regardless, the uploader of the image that was added today is not Calibrador. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:36, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: I've traced the origin and it looks ok to use. This is a crop of this which is sourced to this which has an appropriate CC-BY-SA license. --NeilN talk to me 23:49, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok - thanks for looking into it, Neil. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 23:53, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Amy Adams. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:17, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Who would want to keep you off the page entirely? Not me! Stay. -- AstroU (talk) 14:23, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Amy Adams (ADHD)

I'm not sure about the current statement in the article saying Adams was "diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)". This statement is not actually support by any sources in the article, and I have not been able to find any legitimate and reliable sources to support this claim. I have a suspicious feeling that the websites claiming Adams has (ADHD), got the information from Wikipedia to begin with. Having (ADHD) is a serious matter, and if someone has it, it need to be added to the biography. However, if someone do not have (ADHD) and if no reliable sources can be find to support the claim, it need to be removed. Any thoughts? User:Rootone (talk) 13:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, it's been removed as unsourced. There have been IPs adding and reading that same unreferenced content for the last month or so. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 05:40, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Amy Adams revealed having ADHD in an interview with Craig Ferguson (not 100% sure it was him, but I think so), in 2012 ou 2013. If someone can find the interview, it should be added to the article. I have issues finding it, but I clearly remember watching it live, so any help would be appreciated. The claim doesn't come from Wikipedia, and wasn't made up. 141.135.99.147 (talk) 01:30, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Without a reliable, secondary source to support the Adams having ADHD, there's nothing we can do about adding it. Your recollection isn't completely certain to begin with, and even if you remembered it correctly and without a doubt, it would still be original research. Original research doesn't meet the threshold of inclusion. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Grammatical error and overcrowding with images

Rootone, please understand that in this edit you are making a jarring error. My version of the sentence reads, "She reprised the role of Lane in the 2016 superhero film Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice", which is written in the past tense, as is the rest of the lead, while you seem to think that "In 2016, she reprises her role as Lois Lane in the superhero film Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is better for a reason I can't ascertain. Also, the 2008-12 section of her article already has 2 images, but you are adamant on over-crowding it with one more. Why? Please discuss here before reverting. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 12:13, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Rootone's phrase kinda works, if you fix the tense now that the movie has come out: "In 2016, she reprised her role as Lois Lane in the superhero film Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice". But I do think yours is the stronger statement. Tabercil (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amy Adams. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:09, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Amy Adams. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Amy Adams. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

IPs edits

142.161.81.20 seems intent on adding an unnecessary template (calling it a portal) in addition to tagging live urls as dead. When the page was protected for vandalism, the IP disputed it. I'm not sure why the protection was removed since the IPs contribution and intent to edit-war wasn't constructive. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:31, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Anarchyte yes, I did redo one of the IP's edits as that was a constructive one. The rest, however, were not. Adding destructive templates to a recent FA-class articles without so much as providing a reason, and then warring when reverted, merits some action. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:38, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree the template is unwarranted, but I no longer believe semi is the best way to go about preventing it's addition. I've asked them to stop adding it and rather discuss it here, so we'll have to wait for their reasoning. Cheers, Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Makes sense. Thanks. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:44, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Not what is stated

Before I point out where some editing should be done I'll call attention to where it says to be bold. In other words it says to go for it. However when someone shows or demonstrates where an article can be improved they are met with anything but a welcome. Now it's redundant to say someone is raised as a Mormon in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. You would use either the church reference or the Mormon one, not both. Certainly not in the same sentence. It takes nothing away from the quality of this article to say that some of the language used on this page could be improved. Bleucheeses (talk) 07:50, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

First things first, constructive improvements are always welcome. However, edits in which a user leaves no edit summary, but removes the "www" from two references, splits up a paragraph, and begins two sentences in the article's very first paragraph with "she is...", aren't what we call WP:BOLD. Moreover, when reverted, the editor accuses me of WP:OWNING the article and leaves a message on my talk page, in which he vaguely taunts my writing abilities, while not once explaining his edits. Now that the user has (finally!) posted on the talk page, he still hasn't explained those edits. Instead, he has commented on something else. Alright, so let's address that point. Bleucheeses claims that saying someone is raised as a Mormon in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is redundant. No one has pointed that out in the article's FAC, mind you, but let's ignore that. The assumption made by this user is that readers of this page will all be familiar with the Mormon faith, which is an unfair one to have. Plus, our Wiki article on Mormons says that "Members of the LDS Church, also known as Latter-day Saints, constitute over 95 percent of Mormons", so there still exist some Mormons who don't belong to the church. Hence, the statement is not so redundant after all. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 10:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Bleucheeses you haven't explained a single one of your edits, and yet you continue to revert. Unbelievable! --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:45, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


You have REFUSED to look at the edits or consider anything said to you. You take umbrage at being shown simple things and insist you are right. You try to make people post where you want and how you think they should - even on user pages, talk pages. I don't know if you realize it or not - you don't run anything. Reverts? I have not reverted anything, merely place an edit somewhere - and very minor ones at that. You even try to force people to talk to you. GET A CLUE. Also read each edit. Bleucheeses (talk) 07:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Again, instead of commenting on the person, comment on the content. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
I have commented on the content. You continue to try to prove others wrong and don't listen. You are the one getting into multiple conflicts - go read your pages. You are a person, you are in error. Address what I said about each edit and link. Stop trying to tell people what to do constantly. Bleucheeses (talk) 07:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
No you have not commented on the content. Not once, instead you are directing one personal attack against me after another. Did you respond to my message above, dated, 26 May? No. Did you leave an edit summary for your recent reverts? No. Have you since explained why you made those reverts? No. But have you been calling me names and harassing me on my talk page? Yes, you have. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

If I quote over and over where I addressed content, will you admit you are incorrect? Bleucheeses (talk) 07:17, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

No, I am not 8 years old to admit I was "correct" or "incorrect", and I presume neither are you. So instead of these childish taunts, explain your edits for a change. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:20, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
More assumptions, now you think you know how old someone is. The question was if I quote each place I addressed content if you would agree you are wrong about saying I don't talk about content. Bleucheeses (talk) 07:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
LOL instead of all these unnecessary diversions and more childish taunts, talk about content already. Go ahead. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:23, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Take one thing at a time. Do you know what www is? It means world wide web and in 99 percent of the time it's not needed or used. It is superfluous, I think you have heard of that word. That is why removal of www is a good practice; it also shows people it's not necessary - kind of like phones don't have dials. They have buttons. Now do you understand? Bleucheeses (talk) 07:41, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
What??? --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Like I said www in a link, for example https://costco.com or https://www.costco.com - now do you see? Bleucheeses (talk) 07:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Tutorial/Citing sources and tell me where it says not to use "www". Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:45, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Again with the citations and using Wikipedia sites. Some things are understood or just done. How ABOUT you go look at other articles and see how people have done what I said. Bleucheeses (talk) 07:47, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
No, we follow policy. "See how people have done what I said" is not a policy. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:49, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
I just edited that page; it's now being considered as policy. Bleucheeses (talk) 07:49, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Update: Bleucheeses has been indefinitely blocked. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 08:32, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Article quality

This is a decent article, but regular editors should remember to assume good faith and remain open to improvements by others. --John (talk) 08:12, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Of course it may need improvement, but there may be disagreements in the process. Tag-bombing when a regular contributor doesn't necessarily agree with a change is not assuming good faith either. I massively respect your edits, John, but I may disagree with some of them. It doesn't mean that I am undermining your contribution. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 08:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2019

Change "Christian Bale and her teamed for the third time in Adam McKay's political satire Vice (2018)," to "She and Christian Bale teamed for the third time in Adam McKay's political satire Vice (2018)," because the grammar of the current text is incorrect ("her" cannot be a subject). Elliepbrown (talk) 17:56, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done, thanks! ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 20:56, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Discussion: Minor issues

Hi @Krimuk2.0:, Few Issues

  • I think awards and acting credits are two different subjects and hence they should be separate sections. Reasoning "no good reason for two one-para sections" is not strong. In fact these topics are big enough to have their own wiki page. I think importance not size should be the criteria here. Both topics are important enough to have their own section. Size is small only because there exist main pages for each of them and only a summary is appropriate here.
  • Regarding summary , its very subjective. For example Award section can be reduced to one line "Received 6 academy awards nomination and 9 golden globe nomination , winning two of them" as other details are in main page.(I like the current version in awards but just arguing about subjectivity here). In acting credit section, I had included west wing and office etc in summary, as even though Amy's roles are small but shows were renowned and popular; and I think even if somebody doesn't go to main page they should get a gist of her TV career too.
  • One previous edit, I though friendship with emily blunt was also mentionable as friendship evidently seems long lasting (sunshine was 2009,time article by blunt for adams was 2014, this year also they seem friendly on award shows interview) and she did contribute to get her a good project.so I though one line could be given to this.

what do you say? Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 17:24, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

The idea is that since there are already two separate pages for her acting credits and awards, we don't need more than a very brief summary in this article. Which is why, one very brief section is sufficient, in which we only mention her most notable works, as per sources/awards attention and not per our personal taste/opinions.
As for the Blunt friendship, I repeat that it's quite minor. She's friendly with a lot of people, and has tremendous goodwill in the industry. Unless they repeatedly work together (as she has with Christian Bale), I don't see why this particular friendship needs to be singled out.
Hope this helps. Cheers! :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 14:53, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Some Tv series that she was part of, are very famous(office,Buffy,west wing). In my online amy adams stalking process I found no other documented longtime friendship (friendly gestures on one or two occasion are many) and here it helped in getting good work too. Anyway I will not push it more. Bye. Cheers! :) Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi again @Krimuk2.0:, following change is discrimination against 'noses'. I protest though meekly :). https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Amy_Adams&type=revision&diff=886097999&oldid=884524386 Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 14:34, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Haha, I don't have a problem with it, but that part was removed after this discussion: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Amy Adams. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 15:06, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
:) you have done good work on this article @Krimuk2.0:. Saurabhbhardiya (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Lead section

An IP has been adding the Sunshine Cleaning role in the lead despite not being notable to be included there. Should we keep it in or leave it out? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:47, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Not an important film in her career. Not among her biggest hits neither did she get any awards attention for it, so it doesn't belong in the lead. Thanks for keeping an eye out. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 17:54, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Table of films + tv please

Clearly some love struck person(s) have made this page. Some of us just want to see a nice friendly table of her appearances, like most celebrities' pages have. Chop chop! 24.205.83.137 (talk) 09:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I do think that could be useful. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
It can be found at List of Amy Adams performances, which i've just linked under "Career", but I do think a selected Filmography section could be warranted, if other editors concur.--Bettydaisies (talk) 01:44, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Errata

In section "2008–2012: Ingénue parts and expansion to dramatic roles." The film Night at the Museum was filmed in Washington D.C. The name Washington by itself is a state. It's common for the news and movies to call D.C. "Washington"--very dramatic--but at least those examples are in context. In reading articles, it causes momentary confusion. It's either Washington D.C. or colloquially D.C., never plain Washington. (:thumbsup:) 2603:8001:4502:D2E9:90BD:393D:E62C:5CC5 (talk) 20:29, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request, 12 February 2021

"Interest is once again growing around Amy with her set to return to her musical roots with the long-awaited Enchanted 2 (reprising her famous role) and Dear Evan Hasen as Cynthia Murphy."

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Elizium23 (talk) 03:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation page link

Is there any reason why there's no link to Amy Adams (disambiguation) at the top of this page? Readers could well arrive here while looking for someone else - for instance, New Zealanders like me could be after this article. MW691 (talk) 11:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, there is a reason. No one had put in in the article yet. I did, and you could have just as easily done it yourself. Gamle Kvitrafn (talk) 20:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Filmography?

Why doesn't an actor have a filmography showing the films she has been in? Banaticus (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

She does - it is at List of Amy Adams performances - as is clearly linked in the article - Arjayay (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
I don't know that a hatnote under an "Acting credits and awards" subheader is really a clear link to a filmography. Banaticus (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
I have no strong opinion on that, but it is exactly the same as when it was promoted to Featured article status on 19 October 2017, as seen here. So the FA scrutineers deemed it correct. - Arjayay (talk) 10:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Forgot to ping Banaticus - Arjayay (talk) 10:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that a featured article is the absolute best it can ever be, that no further edits could ever be desired? Banaticus (talk) 23:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2023

Amy Adams place of birth is Aviano not Vincenza (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/16/t-magazine/amy-adams.html) Ny climber (talk) 18:15, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done Xan747 (talk) 18:51, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2023

US Army installations are called posts, not bases. 75.231.136.78 (talk) 13:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:32, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amy_Adams/Archive_1&oldid=1171769681"