This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Tom Holland is part of WikiProject Musical Theatre, organized to improve and complete musical theatre articles and coverage on Wikipedia. You can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Musical TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject Musical TheatreTemplate:WikiProject Musical TheatreMusical Theatre
Tom Holland is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DanceWikipedia:WikiProject DanceTemplate:WikiProject DanceDance
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dyslexia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.DyslexiaWikipedia:WikiProject DyslexiaTemplate:WikiProject DyslexiaDyslexia
Other talk page banners
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report8 times. The weeks in which this happened:
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I'm also questioning how notable this piece of trivia is; compiling a long list of a person's likes and dislikes in their article isn't very helpful to the casual reader. Liu1126 (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I restored the 2019 views sourced to The Sunday Times, New Music Express, [1] etc. Contrary to the removing edit summary [2], I did not find that the content was a "set up to make the actor look bad"[*], or evidence that "his statements [...] were heavily misinterpreted". [*] If content makes the subject look bad, that is not in itself a just reason for removing it. signed, Willondon (talk) 18:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
this page reads like a fan read a biography and is trying to promote him. Full of fluff. Example - did he really mature faster than his peers?
This isn't the place for such nonsense. Needs a rewrite. Kateofumbar (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. The invisible comment beside the |partner= says "(unmarried long-term partner: DO NOT use for fiancé(e)s, spouses, or anyone subject is intending to marry)". However, Taylor Swift is a Featured Article and her partner of one year is in that infobox. Tom and Zendaya have been together since 2021, even if they break up, they are still worth the mention in the quick facts. dxneo (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, According to the parameter description of Template:Infobox person and the hidden comment, there is no issue with mentioning the partner in the infobox. However, I’m noticing that many experienced editors are reverting it. I wonder if they have read the parameter descriptions thoroughly before reverting! — Cerium4B—Talk? •15:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MarioProtIV, Amaury and MPFitz1968, not sure if you've actually parameter description at Template:Infobox person, but it say "if particularly relevant, or if the partner is notable; "partner" here means unmarried life partners in a domestic partnership (of any gender or sexual orientation), not business partner. Use the format Name (1950–present) for current partner and Name (1970–1999) for former partner(s)." Note that there's also |spouse= which is different from |partner= So, why do y'all insist on removing the partners? dxneo (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The quote you used explained the reasons. Particularly look at what a domestic partnership entails. A key point is who live together and share a common domestic life which is not shown in the article - referenced info indicates they were not living together. Looks like they regularly dated each other and finally decided to get married. Classic old-fashioned courtship behavior. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Right now Zendaya is his fiancee. Whether they actually get married (they probably will, but couples do call off engagements from time to time) the partner category is meant to cover something else. At least at one point there was a note saying do not put someone here if there is any talk of them ever getting married. It is meant for something else and should never have been tagged under this. Closely related to this, not every time dates someone new do we need to include that even in the ariticle, but things in info boxes have a much higher inclusion criteria than things in articles themselves.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Intercontinental couples have unusual or unfamiliar living arrangements compared to single domecile couples but surely buying a house together is *literally* the meaning of domestic? Parsons nose (talk) 08:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It would indicate living together if they had actually bought a house together. Sources I've seen say it was rumored they had but they denied it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 09:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tom and Zendaya originate from different countries. So naturally they spend time together and individually, and own individual properties, in both those countries. But outside of work and travel commitments, they live together – they lived together in London while he was in the theatre last year, and he lived with her in Boston while she was filming back in the fall. And so on and so forth.
The denial you refer to is from 2022. It is rumoured that they have purchased additional property since then – but they are unlikely to ever make this public.
They also share dogs. They’re engaged. They’re domestic partners by any reasonable standard. There’s no reason why these two should be different from other well-known engaged couples. Is there hard evidence all those people own property together?
It will be interesting to see if they continues living separate lives, meeting up occasionally, after they get married. As for what goes in this article, it is a WP:Featured article that currently meets the highest standards of Wikipedia, and people would like it to remain as such. Following the manual of style is expected. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see the merit in your assertion that these people 'live separate lives' and it's interesting that you seem to think you know more about their lives than they do. Potentially some bias showing here too. But I'm going to leave this discussion as it's clearly not a productive one. Jt65478 (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reading this comment makes your personal bias, already evidenced by the moving goalposts earlier in the thread, apparent. And yet you remove other people's edits for not being adequately sourced.
what part of living together in multiple different cities over the last few years, owning dogs together, tom referring to 'our house', and being engaged indicates that they are living seperate lives? for anyone without personal biases, that indicates a domestic partnership. 2001:8003:5849:2A00:1DCF:FC20:184B:F2FD (talk) 20:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what part of living together in different cities over the last few years, owning dogs together, tom referring to their house as 'our house', and being engaged indicates that they are living seperate lives? for anyone without personal biases, that indicates a domestic partnership. 2001:8003:5849:2A00:ADDD:53CD:EB82:E6AA (talk) 23:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noticed that reference 140 says article was retrieved 1/6/2024 when it should be 1/6/2025, unless the editor is a time traveler! Knowk (talk) 23:01, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I'm also questioning how notable this piece of trivia is; compiling a long list of a person's likes and dislikes in their article isn't very helpful to the casual reader. Liu1126 (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Sorry! for our mistake, and thank you for pointing out the issue! — Cerium4B—Talk? • 20:50, 8 January 2025 (UTC)