Jump to content

Talk:Michael J. Fox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMichael J. Fox has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 12, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
September 9, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
September 10, 2010Good article nomineeListed
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 9, 2023.
Current status: Good article

Fox did not return to acting

[edit]

Several users keep randomly adding in 2024 to present in his years active section in his infobox, I removed it for a reason because it was added in without a reliable source to confirm it. I’m gonna ask you guy’s politely to please stop adding it back without a source first. It even states in his career section that he’s retired from acting. 2607:FB91:1CCB:C9FE:5DC1:9447:C644:FFE0 (talk) 01:28, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fox's children

[edit]

I’m obviously missing something. Why are his children’s names (especially birthdays!) notable? Seasider53 (talk) 23:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are notable because they are his children. Not his distant relatives or best friend or something. His literal children. This alone makes them notable enough to have their names in the article.
And their birthdays are, if anything, more notable. Even if you don't want to put their names in the article, you could still put their birthdays in. Usually, whenever a celebrity has a young child, we only state their birthdays and not their names, usually to protect their privacy. But seeing as Fox's children are grown, it would be understandable to name them.
This is what I think, but I'm not infallible, and I want to see what other Wikipedians will say too. Thanks, CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 21:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My preference always tends towards removal of names in these cases. As per WP:BLPNAME; "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons". Unless related family members have become notable in their own right, or their parents have actively placed them in the public eye, there is little justification for naming them. Their existence, and possibly date of birth, however, has significance to the article subject.--Escape Orbit (Talk) 09:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say just year of birth is preferable in these instances. Month and day seems like unnecessary details. Seasider53 (talk) 09:56, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]