Jump to content

Talk:James Kirkwood Jr.

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

HIV status

[edit]

It has been suggested that the subject of this article is eligible for inclusion in the list of HIV-positive people. If you know of any reliable source that helps to clarify this person's HIV status then please mention it on the list's talk page. Trezatium 19:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a better idea. how about we find a reliable source that states he's gay? im a little tired of people being in that category without a reference. The problem i have with the above request is that we really should not be discussing HIV status before a reliable source is simply put in an article. then we can decide if the reliable source is truly reliable, and whether the persons hiv status is relevant or notable. otherwise its pure speculation and potentially libelous, though less so for deceased individuals.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
if glbtq.com is a reliable source, then we have a reference. personally, i want more before i add material.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that I personally qualify as a "reliable source," but I'm surely not the only person alive who recalls that James Kirkwood, Jr. was an out gay man in his lifetime and that his cause of death in 1989 was reported as AIDS at the time he died. Kirkwood is among those memorialized with an AIDS Quilt panel (more info here: http://www.aidsquilt.org/quiltfacts.htm). Of course that doesn't speak to his sexual orientation, but it certainly suggests that he was HIV-positive and died of complications of AIDS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beldujour (talkcontribs) 07:05, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on James Kirkwood Jr.. 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) 00:51, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
There are seven entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.
  • ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
  • LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
  • WP:ELMIN: Minimize the number of links.
  • WP:ELCITE ...and access dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section. -- Otr500 (talk) 12:11, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]