This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Hope is still mentally fine but has poor eyesight and poor hearing from what i have read
PMelvilleAustin 09:42 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
Well, only 19 days to go until his 100th birthday! Longevitymonger
Ladies and Gentleman, its official now, Bob is a centenarian!!!!!!!!! Longevitymonger
Sadly, Bob Hope, quite possibly the world's most famous entertainer, is dead at the age of 100. During his 100 years and 60 days of life, Hope did almost anything imaginable, starring in movies, television specials, award ceremonies and entertaining troops overseas. He even found time to write nearly a dozen books and play (according to one source) over 2000 games of golf. Hope will be remembered for his quick one-liners and irrepressible sense of fun. Most of all, his trips overseas during WWII, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, as well as Desert Storm have given our soldiers a look at what they're fighting for: the American way of life. Bob Hope will be eulogized as an American Institution, and fittingly, he was awarded over 1000 awards for his character, humor and compassion for other people. Thanks for the memories Bob! Longevitymonger
I removed the below paragraph from the article:
The paragraph is very POV and is totally unsupported by the research I've done. I've found universally that his visits were always very appreciated and always lifted the GI's spirits. While the annecdote above may be true (don't know, I haven't encountered it before) it is not typical of Hope's humor. — Frecklefoot 13:30, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
FWIW, this article gives another anecdote of Bob Hope being unappreciated by the troops while in Vietnam: http://everything2.com/title/Thanks+For+the+Memory —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.119.5 ( talk) 00:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Can Bob Hope use 'Sir' in front of his name instead of KBE after it? Although an American citizen, he was born in England.
The fact that the US considered him to have lost any UK citizenship is irrelevant: the UK recognises dual-citizenship and as this is a UK honour, UK rules apply.
As he was a minor when his family emigrated he was not a UK citizen in his own right (although he had the right to become one had he wished at a later date by virtue of his birth in England). As he never exercised this right, this was an honorary award and this is the reason why he did not have the right to use the "Sir" but as already pointed out, could use the KBE initials after.
Nicknames are also not a problem: there are any number of British actors and actresses with honours who use "Sir" and "Dame" followed by their stage name. 77.101.233.240 ( talk) 01:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
There has been some wrangles about this on Wikipedia before. Actually, at the time he was born, with some very minor exceptions all children born on British soil automatically were British subjects, although this has since been changed. Whether he lost this later could be more complicated. As a general rule I would say that if someone did not use the title "Sir" himself we should not add it. Some people might regard it as a breach of American etiquette for a US citizen to use a foreign title, even if they were technically entitled to do so. PatGallacher ( talk) 17:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Just to correct the comment regarding Paul McCartney above. 'Paul' is Paul McCartney's real name and always has been. His full name is James Paul McCartney. He's just (like a surprising number of people) called by his middle name. John2o2o2o ( talk) 12:58, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
I took a picture of this aircraft. Is there a way we can use it in this article? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 17:53, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
There is a line between POV and well-documented facts that I try not to cross. Bringing up the issue of Bob Hope's personal reputation is difficult, in that those who admired Hope's immense talent - and I am one of them - often prefer not to know the off-stage side of him. Nearly 30 years after Bing Crosby's death, it is not taboo to acknowledge that Bing was, shall we say, not a nice person. In Hope's case, there are two ways of looking at it: 1) We need 28 more years to dare speak the truth, or 2) Let's grow up and face facts: like many comedic geniuses, he had a dark side. So, what shall it be? User:Professor Von Pie
I have no problem with adding information which doesn't correspond with the public image, but you have to do it in an NPOV manner. Don't just say "he was stingy and mean", give DOCUMENTED examples. User:Zoe| (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Listen, if I found and submitted a notarized photo, signed by God himself, of Bob Hope kicking Mother Teresa in the ass, it would make not an iota of difference to certain people-- nothing will be tolerated about Bob Hope except very nice itty-bitty sound bytes suitable for an 8th grade book report. Listen, kiddies, there's this thing called acting. You see, it means a person pretends to be something to entertain others. Are you with me? But often, in reality, the pretend person is not exactly the same as the real person. For example, the real Jack Benny was not a cheapskate; the real Red Skelton was not stupid; the real John Wayne never served in the military. If you're having trouble, refer to the nearest adult... it could be a parent or teacher... and so it is not sacreligious nor unpatriotic to speak the truth about the real Mr. Bob Hope, who was substantially different than the performer. User:Professor Von Pie
I didn't imply stupidity, but there is a childish, Santa Claus-like aura about this article and a few others that makes me wonder if there should be some sort of age/educational requirements for contributing and editing, although certainly that would be hard to enforce. I have provided ample evidence and played by the rules, but the article keeps getting vandalized, and I consider removing, altering, or defacing the truth vandalism. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to be a source of information, not fairytales or mere warm and fuzzy feelings. I'd never dream of inserting lies into an article and I don't see how anyone would, in good conscience, remove the truth. User:Professor Von Pie
Yep, the stinginess is in there, and re: cherry-picking, one could say the same of the whole article in general, that only patriotism and generosity have been selectively used; the Hopes' decades-long marriage and religious piety mentioned, but no mention of philandering. So, cherry-picking goes two ways. And the person saying that Hope's story is censored as the result of the public's conflation of the beloved Hope media persona and the man himself-- that is ME saying that, in an attempt to thwart vandalism. I am telling the person about to vandalize a paragraph her/she doesn't care for: I know what you're about to do, and I know why-- you cannot separate myth and imagery from reality, and it is not my fault I wrote the truth, it will be your fault for trampling upon it. User:Professor Von Pie
No, I never said there was a conspiracy. A conspiracy must involved two or more people. The redaction and censoring of the Hope article is done completely on an individual basis. No, I never put the word philandering in the article, only the discussion; but even if I had, according to dictionary.com, it means engaging in multiple, casual affairs. That suits Mr. Hope to a T. It is no more judgmental a word than adultery. Stinginess and mean-spiritedness? His niggardly attitude toward his writers and mistresses, refusal to pay $250 for the use of a song, his callous AIDS joke as thousands lay sick and dying... I referenced everything. By the way, there is a reason that the Hopes, Gateses, Jobs and Waltons give away huge sums to charity; it is called tax deductions. And no, "good faith" is YOUR POV, Wyss, I wouldn't even dare assume the good or bad faith of anyone but myself. And your compromise of watering down what I wrote... an effort to pacify those who don't want their world rocked by the facts of life... it won't even last throughout the day; it will be expurgated. User:Professor Von Pie
Sorry, Wyss, I confused you with Will Beback, who toned me down so as not to cause wikis rushing to their medicine cabinets for smelling salts. Gosh, if the thought of Bob Hope being not a nice man makes people faint, they better not look up Marlon Brando's article-- it might suggest he was chubby.
I think that Hope was uproariously funny in his prime, but that's not the point. I know what good faith means, but it can mean 14 different things to 14 different people. Anything about Hope, Crosby, Sinatra, etc. is going to seem like Jimmy Fidler et al.; what source do you expect-- Field & Stream? User:Professor Von Pie
I saw this defense of criticisms, but no criticisms -
"Although Hope was frequently criticized, most fans agree the accusations have no real merit and were only caused by jealousy of his immense wealth or resentment of his Republican political beliefs."
If he was frequently criticized, what about; and saying that it was because of "jealousy of his immense wealth or resentment of his Republican political beliefs", seems POV, as is "most fans agree" - fans are probably not the most objective, by definition. - Matthew238 05:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
This read like a gushing handout from his agent, written by a 1950s gossip columnist or whatever. I have left every bit of content intact but mostly re-written the article to conform to encyclopedic standards of objective tone and standard English (WP not a tribute site, gossip column, tabloid or blog). Wyss 01:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
The article could use one or two quotes about the delivery style of his comedy and maybe a reference to the docking fortune he made from investing in California real estate (notably housing tracts and rental properties in the San Fernando valley) during the 1930s, 40s and50s. Mary Miles Minter had invested in LA real estate before him and many celebrities later followed the example. Wyss 01:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I've added references to these things and more, along with some corrections. Wyss 01:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The article states that he was born Leslie Townes Hope, but makes no mention of how he came to be known as "Bob". How did he come to be known as "Bob"?
FYI, DC Comics published "The Adventures of Bob Hope" from Feb/March 1950 to 1968. The comic was edited by Jack Schiff.
The article mentions that Hope had 7 other siblings, what were all of their names?
From Ancestry.com:
You have saved this record to My Ancestry (Shoebox). You have saved this record to My Ancestry (People I'm Looking For). This record has been added to your shoebox. 1920 United States Federal Census about Leslie B Hope Name: Leslie B Hope [Leslie T Hope] Home in 1920: Cleveland Ward 19, Cuyahoga, Ohio Age: 11 years Estimated Birth Year: abt 1909 Birthplace: England Relation to Head of House: Son Father's Name: William H Father's Birth Place: England Mother's Name: Ann Mother's Birth Place: England Marital Status: Single Race: White Sex: Male Year of Immigration: 1908 Able to read: Yes Able to Write: Yes Image: 225 Neighbors: View others on page Household Members: Name Age William H Hope 48 Ann Hope 40 Frederic E Hope 22 Wm J Hope 18 Leslie B Hope 11 Sydney Hope 13 George W Hope 9 Lucy E Hope 5 Wang Lee 20 Louis San 27 Chung Rim 29 Ernest Deckman 42 George Alam 39 William Howard 63
View Original Record
View original image Stutzey ( talk) 14:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)Stutzey
From Ellis Island records:
Mother: First Name: Avis Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 31y Gender: M Marital Status: M Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0008
First Name: James Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 14y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0010
First Name: Jack Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 4y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0012
First Name: Ivar Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 16y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0009
First Name: Fred Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 9y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0011
First Name: Sidney Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 1y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0014
First Name: Leslie Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 2y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0013
Milton Hope was born in the US.
1. Ivar (Born 1892) 2. James (Born 1894) 3. Fred (Born 1899) 4. Jack (Born 1904) 5. Leslie (Bob)(Born 1906) 6. Sindney (Born 1907) 7. Milton —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.91.209 ( talk) 00:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
If the Ellis Island website lists his age as 2, on entry in 1908, then why is his date of birth given as 1903? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miker2001 ( talk • contribs) 23:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
So, I do not know what happened to my responce or corrections to this but Milton was Ivors son George Percy Hope was the youngest. Basically all records are not 100% right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.131.164.113 ( talk) 16:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following line: "During his retirement, he concentrated on his interest in collecting salt and pepper shakers." This exact same line also appeared (unsubstantiated and apparently untrue) in the article for Glenn Ford. If someone can provide a source to confirm this was the case, by all means put this line back, but otherwise I'm erring on the side that this might be some sort of weird nonsense added to this (and possibly other?) articles. 23skidoo 14:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I am still wandering if he really was christain. My Mom says that he is one, but nobody ever says if he is one or not. If you know the answer please reply Thanks, MaxMap
1) HarveyCarter ( talk · contribs) and all of his sockpuppets are EXPRESSLY banned for life.
2) Be on the look out for any edits from these IP addresses:
According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles), "Post-nominals should not be used for non-Commonwealth or former British Empire citizens, as their use outside a Commonwealth context are rare." While of British birth, Bob Hope became a US citizen at a young age, and so it's probably inappropriate to give an honorary KBE such prominence in the opening paragraph. It's discussed in the body of the article, after all. PyTom 19:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Roger Tréville was 103 years old. He is oldest actor http://imdb.com/name/nm0874576/ http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Tr%C3%A9ville http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Tr%C3%A9ville —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.30.172.74 ( talk) 07:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
"Eltham was a civil parish of Kent until 1889 when it became part of the County of London, and in 1899, formed part of the Metropolitan Borough of Woolwich. The metropolitan borough was abolished in 1965, and Eltham became part of the present day London Borough of Greenwich"
The above paragraph makes no sense in an article about Bob Hope--if someone wants to know more about where he was born, they can go to the Eltham page, where the exact same paragraph already exists. A Runyon 07:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I did see that...and I agree that you made it accurate, but it's still a tangent that has nothing to do with Hope himself. Sorry if my statement above seemed a bit harsh, but this is one of my pet peeves about Wikipedia--sometimes unnecessary information gets added to pages and makes them bloated and hard to read. A Runyon 18:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I've removed Bob Hope from the category American character actors. I don't think he fits the definition of Character actor, his early career in theatre having been too brief and his movie career having led to stardom too quickly for him to have ever established himself in character roles. Whyaduck 06:21, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
The horrible referencing style should be fixed. Theres no references in all sections but two and it's inconsistent. Missy1234 21:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Blogs are not recommended links for articles as per WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided. Recommend those links be deleted. Ronbo76 05:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
There is a edit war discussion on at Talk:Roman Catholic Church about Latin versus Roman Catholic. Hope's article has read Roman Catholic since almost day one. Ronbo76 06:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
204.193.198.243 22:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)annie
It is my understanding that all Bob and Dolores Hopes' children were adopted.
There is a discrepancy between the dates of Bob Hope's death at the beginning and the end of the article. At the beginning it states he lived 95 years and died in July of 1998. At the end it states that he lived 100 years and died in July of 2003. I think Wikipedia needs to do some editing. 69.109.120.40 05:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
As he approached 100, there were rumors that he may have been two years older than he had admitted all along, and so might have already achieved 100 by that time. WHPratt ( talk) 17:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC) [Sorry -- put that in the wrong section, and so have moved it.] WHPratt ( talk) 14:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Per debate and discussion re: assessment of the approximate 100 top priority articles of the project, this article has been included as a top priority article. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 06:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I recently undid a well-intentioned merge. Bob Hope short subjects is just a list, and could just as welll be part of this article. Thoughts anyone? TINY MARK 17:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The Films section has a huge space after the title due to the table on the right. Anyone know how to correct this? Isnotwen ( talk) 18:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Clearly states that country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless relevant to subjects notability. Could someone please provide a coherent explanation as to why Bob Hope's birth place is important to his notability, as I would be really interested to hear it. Ernest the Sheep ( talk) 21:25, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
It clearly says "Ethnicity or sexuality shoudl generally not be emphasized", it also clearly says "nationality" should be listed.
Because Hope was clearly born in England, it should be mentioned, and because he became notable as an American, editors have used the "American-born Australian" to cover both specifics - her country of birth and from where she became notable. Please leave it as editors have determined. Thank you. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 00:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Except the MOS:BIO states that citizenship should be covered in the lead. Dual citizenship, one by birth, one by choice, is a fact that cannot be deleted. This has nothing to do with his notability, it has to do with his birthplace. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
There has been some extremely negative information posted, for which no citation is given. I believe this needs to be addressed. 78.26 ( talk) 22:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
As a result of some research, I found the copyrights for these images were not renewed. Full details can be found on the file. Because of this conversation, am changing the licenses of the images in the NBC Parade of Stars portfolio to public domain-copyright not renewed. We hope ( talk) 19:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
A "too many cooks" syndrome has set in and a change in formatting is necessary. I have made a start. See what you think. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 12:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC).
Vietnam Vet. Please don't leave out the visit to Vietnam where he was booed by all the GI's there and was never invited back and never went back. Iaai0110 ( talk) 17:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Bob Hope did at least one complete "spoof" boxing match with Rocky Marciano. As Hope came out of his corner he was wearing a very large pair of fake spectacles and walked right past Marciano who was convulsed with laughter. AT Kunene ( talk) 13:35, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
The "boxing record" section of this article is almost completely meaningless. I don't see how this record adds any useful information to the article because it combines real and staged fights, and in half of the listings, either the opponent's name or the result is unknown. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
At the time he was born England had had a reasonably well-established system of compulsory registration of births, marriages and deaths for some decades. These records can be easily checked in the General Register Office. It seems unlikely that Hope could have falsified his year of birth by 2 years without getting caught. This looks like unsubstantiated tittle-tattle which should be removed unless better evidence can be found. PatGallacher ( talk) 01:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Online English birth records easily available online at http://www.freebmd.org.uk show that the birth of a Leslie Towns Hope was registered in Lewisham in London in 1903, apparently some time in July, August or September. We only have the index available online, not the complete birth certificate, but this is surely him, the family could have delayed registering the birth by a few weeks. Dare I say it, this could cast doubt on some other aspects of Marx's tittle-tattle. See above about the boxing. PatGallacher ( talk) 11:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but these online records at [2] do look like me like a perfectly reliable source, they include e.g. a photographic copy of the index of births in Lewisham in 1903. They have already been used without anyone complaining at e.g. S.O. Davies. It is unclear to me why this is inferior to the US census records used at Joan Crawford. PatGallacher ( talk) 21:53, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I have had a look at WP:RS about reliable sources, this does not rule out primary sources under all circumstances, I think we can use them for such basic information as somebody's date of birth. See also Mick Mannock, James Connolly, and Breaker Morant, there could be a few others, which use this or similar sources. PatGallacher ( talk) 22:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Here is the link [3]. Scans are available, I recommend PDF. If you read what I wrote properly, you will see that I was actually saying that he appears not to have falsified his date of birth. I will deal with the issue of who suggested he did later. PatGallacher ( talk) 22:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
The claim that he was actually born in 1901 appears to come from Arthur Marx's biography, see this version of the article [4]. It is significant that there is evidence against this claim. PatGallacher ( talk) 01:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Just to correct the statement above. There was a VERY WELL established system of compulsory registration of births, marriages and deaths in England and Wales in 1903. (It had been established in 1837). of course, a small minority of people still did not get registered, but Mr Hope was certainly registered.
In order to stop the nonsense as above, why does someone with sufficient interest in this just buy a birth certificate and be done with it? You have the reference details. It's not rocket science (honest!) John2o2o2o ( talk) 13:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
My dear Chaps and Chapettes, this discussion is further to the one above, under the exact same heading. In that above discussion it appears to have been agreed, pursuant to MOS:BIO, that Bob Hope's place of birth should not be included in the opening sentence of his article. To quote Wikipedia Manual of style "the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless relevant to the subject's notability". As is often the case with Wikipedia, over time, other editors will come along and revert previously agreed to edits, often without any discussion. So I am now, at this present moment, signalling my attention to revert to the edit previously agreed as being in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. Namely, that Bob Hope is an American comedian. His English birth will, of course be mentioned further along in the article, just not in the opening sentence. However, if someone can furnish a valid, logical explanation as to why Bob Hope's English birth is important to his notability, then I will obviously reconsider my plans. Any argument, however, would need to amount to more than just saying he was English born, therefore it should be mentioned (in the lede). I look forward to any discussion. Thank you. Theodore D ( talk) 19:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
I spent quite a bit of time going through the article and improving the referencing—including the use of cite templates. No other editor has complained about my work, and in fact, one editor even continued their use. Accordingly, I do judge there is a (albeit small) consensus for their use. Just a few minutes ago, user Bzuk decided that he did not like their use, and has started to remove them, however he is doing so in a very strange way (by removing only part of the cite template syntax, e.g. here). I would request that he stop the removal and reinstate the article to the consistent state I achieved so that the community here can discuss the future use of the cite templates. GFHandel ♬ 20:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
They are malformed with titles not properly identified; it actually takes much more work to modify the templates than to properly write out the citation. The MOS style and Harvard Citation were already established before the recent changes which were entirely arbitrary and undiscussed. FWiW, I have changed a few within the templates to show the different output, but as I have mentioned, they read perfectly before the changes. The article uses a standard: Author, Title, (Place)publisher, Date style but when the templates are outputted, the main title of a work, i.e., article title (in a journal) are not identified, neither is the subsidiary title. The citation by template reads: "Comedian Bob Hope dies". BBC News. July 28, 2003. Retrieved September 23, 2011, while writing out the citation creates: "Comedian Bob Hope dies". BBC News, July 28, 2003. Retrieved: September 23, 2011." The later shows main title in quotation marks with publisher/source in italics, and linked to the date of publication. FWiW, the article was stable prior to a massive change to cite templates. See: WP:Retain, WP:Own and WP:CITEVAR. Bzuk ( talk) 21:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC).
It is still the old IT precept of "garbage in, garbage out," and if you don't know what the parameters of the fields in a template do, then errors do come out. Introducing the old canard that cite templates are either preferred, mandatory or provide meta data for some mythical, mystical future time, is being introduced. FWiW, I only wish that the cite templates could be seen as "bullet-proof" and accurate but that isn't the case, note the many offshoots of templates to cover print and non-print media. Not that I am a Luddite; I have been a reference librarian for years and have pioneered the use of electronic data processing in conversion of traditional libraries, but MARc record templates are "bullet-proof", wiki versions, not so much. Bzuk ( talk) 23:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC).
I can see the work of bots may have some value, however, there is a difference of opinion in that introducing templates "improves" the citations. If the consensus is to change to this format, so be it, but that wasn't the case, a day or so ago, when massive changes took place without any deliberation or discussion. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 00:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC).
I agree with the positions taken by GFHandel, Mally, and Dianna. The edits I saw adding cite templates were useful, and those removing them, were regressive. If there are any issues with proper use of the templates, I can help with that; I do so every day. This is an important article and should not be held back by retaining poor practises from years ago. IMNHO, this has nothing to do with personal preference. It is all about appropriate structure for an online database that contains an encyclopaedia. Br'er Rabbit ( talk) 00:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
In response, my last edit before the changes were on July 14, and that was the same day that the changes began; in total, 43 revisions of the citations. FWiW, note cite templates are not mandated nor recommended for everyone. Bzuk ( talk) 01:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC). BTW, doesn't a call for consensus, at least have a reasonable period for a resolution, typically a few days. Bzuk ( talk) 01:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I just restored the remaining Cite templates to how they were earlier today—at least as a consistent starting point. I'm aware that the Cite Book template can probably be improved, but I'm hoping that will resolve itself when I can get {{ sfn}} going (I just don't have much time at the moment). Thanks to all who commented here, and let me say that my faith has been restored by the confirmation that the Cite templates are efficacious. GFHandel ♬ 01:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: MathewTownsend ( talk · contribs) 22:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)
I feel that the fact that the article is not ordered chronologically is a fundamental failing. The reader gets no feel for how his career grew, what let to what, because the different facets of his career were intertwined. e.g. we don't learn he boxed at age 19 until the end of the article.
Also the "Critical reception" section (which should not be subsumed under career, IMO, but should sum up his total impact) doesn't explain his extraordinary popularity among the American public. To host 14 Academy Awards is extraordinary - a feat that will probably never be repeated. Also the tremendous breath of his endeavours should be mentioned. He was called the "King of Comedy", "King of the one liners". These sites may not be reliable sources but they give more of a flavour of his extraordinary career. [5] and this is an example of how this extraordinary career developed [6]
I suggest Katharine Hepburn as a good model to follow for ordering the career.
The TOC is fundamentally flawed, and a hodgepodge and not ordered chronologically, e.g.:
For example, Vaudeville is not given a section as part of his "Career", yet it was fundamental to it, and its influence runs through the whole 70 year career. The "USO" should not be a whole section of his career - it was something almost all Hollywood stars did at the time as an out growth of their celebrity and their support of the US troops. The USO article mentions Mickey Rooney and Irving Berlin, yet their articles don't have a whole section of their career for the USO.
Though I appreciate the good work put into the article, I feel it has major flaws and must fail it.
MathewTownsend ( talk) 15:09, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your thorough work on the review. The article is better off for having gone through the process, and I appreciate your assistance. -- Dianna ( talk) 19:12, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm quite fond of Bob Hope's comedy and a few of his movies, but never-the-less there is a lot of what most would view as negative facts that aren't to be found here. It is my understanding that Hope became EXTREMELY wealthy investing in land during WWII in California, and specifically buying land lost to the US citizens of Japanese heritage who were tossed into concentration camps after Pearl Harbor. I'm not sure if the sellers are relevant, since he was just capitalizing (pun) on what was happening, but I do recall that during the Carter and Reagan years, his name came up in that context. I just heard a (Terry Gross) interview today on NPR where the author claims that Nixon briefed Hope on various military decisions during the VietNam war. (Whether this was due to his audience/popularity or perhaps due Hope being a large contributor wasn't mentioned (I speculate here). It seems that there is lots of evidence to conclude that his wealth is of note, imho, yet I didn't see any references to it. He was also notable (possibly only for those of us of a certain age) for his Pro-War stance in the Vietnam years, as well as his bigoted "comedy" in his later years. (Anti-gay, anti-feminist, etc.) We're all children of our times, so I'm not sure how relevant this is to his biography, but he had a national audience and probably should be viewed as a "culturally significant" persona. In the NPR show, his biographer (Zoglin) mentions that it is remarkable that although (he claims) Hope was 'the founding father' of stand-up comedy, yet had been 'forgotten' by the 1970's (possibly due to his content in his later years?), especially by comedians starting out then. 173.189.73.230 ( talk) 01:41, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Was Bob Hope also gay? The gay community seems to take it as a given: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3btgSGYshE Does anybody know anything about this? Or did the studios keep Bob Hope's gay side completely out of the media? It would be a shame if he was gay and it doesn't appear in his Wikipedia bio. 88.105.91.58 ( talk) 18:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
In Soviet Russia, the Oscars Host You
http://time.com/3715747/bob-hope-russian-reversal/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.195.108.189 ( talk) 05:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I ATTENDED A PACKED HOUSE AIR FORCE REUNION SHOW AT MADISON SQUARE GARDEN IN 1946 (OR 1947 ?). IT WAS PUT ON BY BOB HOPE, JERRY COLONNA AND FRANCES LANGFORD. HOPE AND COLONNA OPENED THE SHOW BY DESCENDING FROM THE ROOF OF THE GARDEN BY PARACHUTES SUSPENDED BY ROPES TO A SCREAMING AUDIENCE. NEEDLESS TO SAY IT WAS A SPECTACULAR NIGHT. THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. I HAVE NO BACKUP OR REFENCES. HANK BENTLEY benttree720@gmail.com I tried to establish an account but failed in the attempt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.12.150.54 ( talk) 17:49, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
The article states Marriages
Hope's first short-lived marriage was to his vaudeville partner, Grace Louise Troxell, whom he married in January 1933[82] and divorced in November 1934.[83] In February 1934,[84] Hope married Dolores (DeFina) Reade, who had been one of his co-stars on Broadway in Roberta.
How could he marry Delores in February 1934 when he wasn't divorced from Grace until November 1934 ? 78.100.53.94 ( talk) 21:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC) Regards CSM
Why is the Dorothy Lamour photo place in the section on "Extramarital Affairs". The implication of the placement being that he had an affair with her, but nothing appears in the content about that. If it's just to illustrate the general idea of 'affairs' that would be an inappropriate use. The photo should be moved. BashBrannigan ( talk) 04:05, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I see from the above discussion, #Sir Bob Hope?, that there is some question as to whether or not he retained his status as a British subject when he came to the US as child. Most countries don't impose this on children and children may have a birth right to a nationality but they generally need to actually affirmatively claim it when they reach majority. It appears Hope never did so and only was legally an American citizen. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
In what way is he an American subject first and foremost? He had dual nationality, was born and raised until the age of 5 in Britain and his parents were both British. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.213.86 ( talk) 07:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Is it really ideal for the infobox image of Hope, who was in his day one of the biggest stars, to be a photo where he's with somebody else? The brave celery ( talk) 00:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:11, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
It has been confirmed he never married Dolores. ( 86.148.226.57 ( talk) 15:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC))
Why is his marriage to Dolores referred to as alleged at two points in this article? In other sources, it is not listed like that. I feel like this needs more explanation and if none is available, should be removed. Dhawk790 ( talk) 20:55, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
I noticed it lacks a section on Hope's political views. I had to go elsewhere to find the info on his conservatism that is part of his downfall. For example, this NPR piece:
"On how Hope alienated younger audiences
Bob Hope was the establishment. Bob Hope was friends with Nixon. Bob Hope was speaking in favor of the [Vietnam] War. Bob Hope was expressing that kind of backward, suburban, WASP view of minorities, homosexuals, the women's movement. Even his comments on the women's movement were very condescending. He did a special in the '70s on the women's movement and it was so silly, so backward. And [in his act] the woman who had some big political office was dusting the chairs in between her meetings. It was just awful. He got mail ... from feminists.
He was clueless at that time. That was why that generation of comedians turned off to him. ... It's hard to be [a] comedian and be part of the establishment because comedians, their job is to satirize and to poke fun at the powerful people. And this is something that Bob was — one of the powerful people. So just as a comedian, he became less and less relevant." https://www.npr.org/2014/11/24/366137941/the-rise-and-fall-of-comedian-bob-hope
--~~
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Hope is still mentally fine but has poor eyesight and poor hearing from what i have read
PMelvilleAustin 09:42 Apr 29, 2003 (UTC)
Well, only 19 days to go until his 100th birthday! Longevitymonger
Ladies and Gentleman, its official now, Bob is a centenarian!!!!!!!!! Longevitymonger
Sadly, Bob Hope, quite possibly the world's most famous entertainer, is dead at the age of 100. During his 100 years and 60 days of life, Hope did almost anything imaginable, starring in movies, television specials, award ceremonies and entertaining troops overseas. He even found time to write nearly a dozen books and play (according to one source) over 2000 games of golf. Hope will be remembered for his quick one-liners and irrepressible sense of fun. Most of all, his trips overseas during WWII, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, as well as Desert Storm have given our soldiers a look at what they're fighting for: the American way of life. Bob Hope will be eulogized as an American Institution, and fittingly, he was awarded over 1000 awards for his character, humor and compassion for other people. Thanks for the memories Bob! Longevitymonger
I removed the below paragraph from the article:
The paragraph is very POV and is totally unsupported by the research I've done. I've found universally that his visits were always very appreciated and always lifted the GI's spirits. While the annecdote above may be true (don't know, I haven't encountered it before) it is not typical of Hope's humor. — Frecklefoot 13:30, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
FWIW, this article gives another anecdote of Bob Hope being unappreciated by the troops while in Vietnam: http://everything2.com/title/Thanks+For+the+Memory —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.119.5 ( talk) 00:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Can Bob Hope use 'Sir' in front of his name instead of KBE after it? Although an American citizen, he was born in England.
The fact that the US considered him to have lost any UK citizenship is irrelevant: the UK recognises dual-citizenship and as this is a UK honour, UK rules apply.
As he was a minor when his family emigrated he was not a UK citizen in his own right (although he had the right to become one had he wished at a later date by virtue of his birth in England). As he never exercised this right, this was an honorary award and this is the reason why he did not have the right to use the "Sir" but as already pointed out, could use the KBE initials after.
Nicknames are also not a problem: there are any number of British actors and actresses with honours who use "Sir" and "Dame" followed by their stage name. 77.101.233.240 ( talk) 01:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
There has been some wrangles about this on Wikipedia before. Actually, at the time he was born, with some very minor exceptions all children born on British soil automatically were British subjects, although this has since been changed. Whether he lost this later could be more complicated. As a general rule I would say that if someone did not use the title "Sir" himself we should not add it. Some people might regard it as a breach of American etiquette for a US citizen to use a foreign title, even if they were technically entitled to do so. PatGallacher ( talk) 17:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Just to correct the comment regarding Paul McCartney above. 'Paul' is Paul McCartney's real name and always has been. His full name is James Paul McCartney. He's just (like a surprising number of people) called by his middle name. John2o2o2o ( talk) 12:58, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
I took a picture of this aircraft. Is there a way we can use it in this article? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 17:53, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
There is a line between POV and well-documented facts that I try not to cross. Bringing up the issue of Bob Hope's personal reputation is difficult, in that those who admired Hope's immense talent - and I am one of them - often prefer not to know the off-stage side of him. Nearly 30 years after Bing Crosby's death, it is not taboo to acknowledge that Bing was, shall we say, not a nice person. In Hope's case, there are two ways of looking at it: 1) We need 28 more years to dare speak the truth, or 2) Let's grow up and face facts: like many comedic geniuses, he had a dark side. So, what shall it be? User:Professor Von Pie
I have no problem with adding information which doesn't correspond with the public image, but you have to do it in an NPOV manner. Don't just say "he was stingy and mean", give DOCUMENTED examples. User:Zoe| (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Listen, if I found and submitted a notarized photo, signed by God himself, of Bob Hope kicking Mother Teresa in the ass, it would make not an iota of difference to certain people-- nothing will be tolerated about Bob Hope except very nice itty-bitty sound bytes suitable for an 8th grade book report. Listen, kiddies, there's this thing called acting. You see, it means a person pretends to be something to entertain others. Are you with me? But often, in reality, the pretend person is not exactly the same as the real person. For example, the real Jack Benny was not a cheapskate; the real Red Skelton was not stupid; the real John Wayne never served in the military. If you're having trouble, refer to the nearest adult... it could be a parent or teacher... and so it is not sacreligious nor unpatriotic to speak the truth about the real Mr. Bob Hope, who was substantially different than the performer. User:Professor Von Pie
I didn't imply stupidity, but there is a childish, Santa Claus-like aura about this article and a few others that makes me wonder if there should be some sort of age/educational requirements for contributing and editing, although certainly that would be hard to enforce. I have provided ample evidence and played by the rules, but the article keeps getting vandalized, and I consider removing, altering, or defacing the truth vandalism. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to be a source of information, not fairytales or mere warm and fuzzy feelings. I'd never dream of inserting lies into an article and I don't see how anyone would, in good conscience, remove the truth. User:Professor Von Pie
Yep, the stinginess is in there, and re: cherry-picking, one could say the same of the whole article in general, that only patriotism and generosity have been selectively used; the Hopes' decades-long marriage and religious piety mentioned, but no mention of philandering. So, cherry-picking goes two ways. And the person saying that Hope's story is censored as the result of the public's conflation of the beloved Hope media persona and the man himself-- that is ME saying that, in an attempt to thwart vandalism. I am telling the person about to vandalize a paragraph her/she doesn't care for: I know what you're about to do, and I know why-- you cannot separate myth and imagery from reality, and it is not my fault I wrote the truth, it will be your fault for trampling upon it. User:Professor Von Pie
No, I never said there was a conspiracy. A conspiracy must involved two or more people. The redaction and censoring of the Hope article is done completely on an individual basis. No, I never put the word philandering in the article, only the discussion; but even if I had, according to dictionary.com, it means engaging in multiple, casual affairs. That suits Mr. Hope to a T. It is no more judgmental a word than adultery. Stinginess and mean-spiritedness? His niggardly attitude toward his writers and mistresses, refusal to pay $250 for the use of a song, his callous AIDS joke as thousands lay sick and dying... I referenced everything. By the way, there is a reason that the Hopes, Gateses, Jobs and Waltons give away huge sums to charity; it is called tax deductions. And no, "good faith" is YOUR POV, Wyss, I wouldn't even dare assume the good or bad faith of anyone but myself. And your compromise of watering down what I wrote... an effort to pacify those who don't want their world rocked by the facts of life... it won't even last throughout the day; it will be expurgated. User:Professor Von Pie
Sorry, Wyss, I confused you with Will Beback, who toned me down so as not to cause wikis rushing to their medicine cabinets for smelling salts. Gosh, if the thought of Bob Hope being not a nice man makes people faint, they better not look up Marlon Brando's article-- it might suggest he was chubby.
I think that Hope was uproariously funny in his prime, but that's not the point. I know what good faith means, but it can mean 14 different things to 14 different people. Anything about Hope, Crosby, Sinatra, etc. is going to seem like Jimmy Fidler et al.; what source do you expect-- Field & Stream? User:Professor Von Pie
I saw this defense of criticisms, but no criticisms -
"Although Hope was frequently criticized, most fans agree the accusations have no real merit and were only caused by jealousy of his immense wealth or resentment of his Republican political beliefs."
If he was frequently criticized, what about; and saying that it was because of "jealousy of his immense wealth or resentment of his Republican political beliefs", seems POV, as is "most fans agree" - fans are probably not the most objective, by definition. - Matthew238 05:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
This read like a gushing handout from his agent, written by a 1950s gossip columnist or whatever. I have left every bit of content intact but mostly re-written the article to conform to encyclopedic standards of objective tone and standard English (WP not a tribute site, gossip column, tabloid or blog). Wyss 01:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
The article could use one or two quotes about the delivery style of his comedy and maybe a reference to the docking fortune he made from investing in California real estate (notably housing tracts and rental properties in the San Fernando valley) during the 1930s, 40s and50s. Mary Miles Minter had invested in LA real estate before him and many celebrities later followed the example. Wyss 01:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I've added references to these things and more, along with some corrections. Wyss 01:05, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The article states that he was born Leslie Townes Hope, but makes no mention of how he came to be known as "Bob". How did he come to be known as "Bob"?
FYI, DC Comics published "The Adventures of Bob Hope" from Feb/March 1950 to 1968. The comic was edited by Jack Schiff.
The article mentions that Hope had 7 other siblings, what were all of their names?
From Ancestry.com:
You have saved this record to My Ancestry (Shoebox). You have saved this record to My Ancestry (People I'm Looking For). This record has been added to your shoebox. 1920 United States Federal Census about Leslie B Hope Name: Leslie B Hope [Leslie T Hope] Home in 1920: Cleveland Ward 19, Cuyahoga, Ohio Age: 11 years Estimated Birth Year: abt 1909 Birthplace: England Relation to Head of House: Son Father's Name: William H Father's Birth Place: England Mother's Name: Ann Mother's Birth Place: England Marital Status: Single Race: White Sex: Male Year of Immigration: 1908 Able to read: Yes Able to Write: Yes Image: 225 Neighbors: View others on page Household Members: Name Age William H Hope 48 Ann Hope 40 Frederic E Hope 22 Wm J Hope 18 Leslie B Hope 11 Sydney Hope 13 George W Hope 9 Lucy E Hope 5 Wang Lee 20 Louis San 27 Chung Rim 29 Ernest Deckman 42 George Alam 39 William Howard 63
View Original Record
View original image Stutzey ( talk) 14:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)Stutzey
From Ellis Island records:
Mother: First Name: Avis Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 31y Gender: M Marital Status: M Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0008
First Name: James Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 14y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0010
First Name: Jack Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 4y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0012
First Name: Ivar Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 16y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0009
First Name: Fred Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 9y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0011
First Name: Sidney Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 1y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0014
First Name: Leslie Last Name: Hape Ethnicity: England, English Last Place of Residence: Bristol, England Date of Arrival: Mar 30, 1908 Age at Arrival: 2y Gender: M Marital Status: S Ship of Travel: Philadelphia Port of Departure: Southampton Manifest Line Number: 0013
Milton Hope was born in the US.
1. Ivar (Born 1892) 2. James (Born 1894) 3. Fred (Born 1899) 4. Jack (Born 1904) 5. Leslie (Bob)(Born 1906) 6. Sindney (Born 1907) 7. Milton —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.91.209 ( talk) 00:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
If the Ellis Island website lists his age as 2, on entry in 1908, then why is his date of birth given as 1903? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miker2001 ( talk • contribs) 23:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
So, I do not know what happened to my responce or corrections to this but Milton was Ivors son George Percy Hope was the youngest. Basically all records are not 100% right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.131.164.113 ( talk) 16:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following line: "During his retirement, he concentrated on his interest in collecting salt and pepper shakers." This exact same line also appeared (unsubstantiated and apparently untrue) in the article for Glenn Ford. If someone can provide a source to confirm this was the case, by all means put this line back, but otherwise I'm erring on the side that this might be some sort of weird nonsense added to this (and possibly other?) articles. 23skidoo 14:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I am still wandering if he really was christain. My Mom says that he is one, but nobody ever says if he is one or not. If you know the answer please reply Thanks, MaxMap
1) HarveyCarter ( talk · contribs) and all of his sockpuppets are EXPRESSLY banned for life.
2) Be on the look out for any edits from these IP addresses:
According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles), "Post-nominals should not be used for non-Commonwealth or former British Empire citizens, as their use outside a Commonwealth context are rare." While of British birth, Bob Hope became a US citizen at a young age, and so it's probably inappropriate to give an honorary KBE such prominence in the opening paragraph. It's discussed in the body of the article, after all. PyTom 19:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Roger Tréville was 103 years old. He is oldest actor http://imdb.com/name/nm0874576/ http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Tr%C3%A9ville http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Tr%C3%A9ville —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.30.172.74 ( talk) 07:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
"Eltham was a civil parish of Kent until 1889 when it became part of the County of London, and in 1899, formed part of the Metropolitan Borough of Woolwich. The metropolitan borough was abolished in 1965, and Eltham became part of the present day London Borough of Greenwich"
The above paragraph makes no sense in an article about Bob Hope--if someone wants to know more about where he was born, they can go to the Eltham page, where the exact same paragraph already exists. A Runyon 07:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I did see that...and I agree that you made it accurate, but it's still a tangent that has nothing to do with Hope himself. Sorry if my statement above seemed a bit harsh, but this is one of my pet peeves about Wikipedia--sometimes unnecessary information gets added to pages and makes them bloated and hard to read. A Runyon 18:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I've removed Bob Hope from the category American character actors. I don't think he fits the definition of Character actor, his early career in theatre having been too brief and his movie career having led to stardom too quickly for him to have ever established himself in character roles. Whyaduck 06:21, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
The horrible referencing style should be fixed. Theres no references in all sections but two and it's inconsistent. Missy1234 21:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Blogs are not recommended links for articles as per WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided. Recommend those links be deleted. Ronbo76 05:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
There is a edit war discussion on at Talk:Roman Catholic Church about Latin versus Roman Catholic. Hope's article has read Roman Catholic since almost day one. Ronbo76 06:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
204.193.198.243 22:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)annie
It is my understanding that all Bob and Dolores Hopes' children were adopted.
There is a discrepancy between the dates of Bob Hope's death at the beginning and the end of the article. At the beginning it states he lived 95 years and died in July of 1998. At the end it states that he lived 100 years and died in July of 2003. I think Wikipedia needs to do some editing. 69.109.120.40 05:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
As he approached 100, there were rumors that he may have been two years older than he had admitted all along, and so might have already achieved 100 by that time. WHPratt ( talk) 17:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC) [Sorry -- put that in the wrong section, and so have moved it.] WHPratt ( talk) 14:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Per debate and discussion re: assessment of the approximate 100 top priority articles of the project, this article has been included as a top priority article. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 06:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I recently undid a well-intentioned merge. Bob Hope short subjects is just a list, and could just as welll be part of this article. Thoughts anyone? TINY MARK 17:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The Films section has a huge space after the title due to the table on the right. Anyone know how to correct this? Isnotwen ( talk) 18:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Clearly states that country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless relevant to subjects notability. Could someone please provide a coherent explanation as to why Bob Hope's birth place is important to his notability, as I would be really interested to hear it. Ernest the Sheep ( talk) 21:25, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
It clearly says "Ethnicity or sexuality shoudl generally not be emphasized", it also clearly says "nationality" should be listed.
Because Hope was clearly born in England, it should be mentioned, and because he became notable as an American, editors have used the "American-born Australian" to cover both specifics - her country of birth and from where she became notable. Please leave it as editors have determined. Thank you. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 00:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Except the MOS:BIO states that citizenship should be covered in the lead. Dual citizenship, one by birth, one by choice, is a fact that cannot be deleted. This has nothing to do with his notability, it has to do with his birthplace. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
There has been some extremely negative information posted, for which no citation is given. I believe this needs to be addressed. 78.26 ( talk) 22:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
As a result of some research, I found the copyrights for these images were not renewed. Full details can be found on the file. Because of this conversation, am changing the licenses of the images in the NBC Parade of Stars portfolio to public domain-copyright not renewed. We hope ( talk) 19:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
A "too many cooks" syndrome has set in and a change in formatting is necessary. I have made a start. See what you think. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 12:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC).
Vietnam Vet. Please don't leave out the visit to Vietnam where he was booed by all the GI's there and was never invited back and never went back. Iaai0110 ( talk) 17:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Bob Hope did at least one complete "spoof" boxing match with Rocky Marciano. As Hope came out of his corner he was wearing a very large pair of fake spectacles and walked right past Marciano who was convulsed with laughter. AT Kunene ( talk) 13:35, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
The "boxing record" section of this article is almost completely meaningless. I don't see how this record adds any useful information to the article because it combines real and staged fights, and in half of the listings, either the opponent's name or the result is unknown. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
At the time he was born England had had a reasonably well-established system of compulsory registration of births, marriages and deaths for some decades. These records can be easily checked in the General Register Office. It seems unlikely that Hope could have falsified his year of birth by 2 years without getting caught. This looks like unsubstantiated tittle-tattle which should be removed unless better evidence can be found. PatGallacher ( talk) 01:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Online English birth records easily available online at http://www.freebmd.org.uk show that the birth of a Leslie Towns Hope was registered in Lewisham in London in 1903, apparently some time in July, August or September. We only have the index available online, not the complete birth certificate, but this is surely him, the family could have delayed registering the birth by a few weeks. Dare I say it, this could cast doubt on some other aspects of Marx's tittle-tattle. See above about the boxing. PatGallacher ( talk) 11:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but these online records at [2] do look like me like a perfectly reliable source, they include e.g. a photographic copy of the index of births in Lewisham in 1903. They have already been used without anyone complaining at e.g. S.O. Davies. It is unclear to me why this is inferior to the US census records used at Joan Crawford. PatGallacher ( talk) 21:53, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I have had a look at WP:RS about reliable sources, this does not rule out primary sources under all circumstances, I think we can use them for such basic information as somebody's date of birth. See also Mick Mannock, James Connolly, and Breaker Morant, there could be a few others, which use this or similar sources. PatGallacher ( talk) 22:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Here is the link [3]. Scans are available, I recommend PDF. If you read what I wrote properly, you will see that I was actually saying that he appears not to have falsified his date of birth. I will deal with the issue of who suggested he did later. PatGallacher ( talk) 22:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
The claim that he was actually born in 1901 appears to come from Arthur Marx's biography, see this version of the article [4]. It is significant that there is evidence against this claim. PatGallacher ( talk) 01:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Just to correct the statement above. There was a VERY WELL established system of compulsory registration of births, marriages and deaths in England and Wales in 1903. (It had been established in 1837). of course, a small minority of people still did not get registered, but Mr Hope was certainly registered.
In order to stop the nonsense as above, why does someone with sufficient interest in this just buy a birth certificate and be done with it? You have the reference details. It's not rocket science (honest!) John2o2o2o ( talk) 13:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
My dear Chaps and Chapettes, this discussion is further to the one above, under the exact same heading. In that above discussion it appears to have been agreed, pursuant to MOS:BIO, that Bob Hope's place of birth should not be included in the opening sentence of his article. To quote Wikipedia Manual of style "the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless relevant to the subject's notability". As is often the case with Wikipedia, over time, other editors will come along and revert previously agreed to edits, often without any discussion. So I am now, at this present moment, signalling my attention to revert to the edit previously agreed as being in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. Namely, that Bob Hope is an American comedian. His English birth will, of course be mentioned further along in the article, just not in the opening sentence. However, if someone can furnish a valid, logical explanation as to why Bob Hope's English birth is important to his notability, then I will obviously reconsider my plans. Any argument, however, would need to amount to more than just saying he was English born, therefore it should be mentioned (in the lede). I look forward to any discussion. Thank you. Theodore D ( talk) 19:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
I spent quite a bit of time going through the article and improving the referencing—including the use of cite templates. No other editor has complained about my work, and in fact, one editor even continued their use. Accordingly, I do judge there is a (albeit small) consensus for their use. Just a few minutes ago, user Bzuk decided that he did not like their use, and has started to remove them, however he is doing so in a very strange way (by removing only part of the cite template syntax, e.g. here). I would request that he stop the removal and reinstate the article to the consistent state I achieved so that the community here can discuss the future use of the cite templates. GFHandel ♬ 20:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
They are malformed with titles not properly identified; it actually takes much more work to modify the templates than to properly write out the citation. The MOS style and Harvard Citation were already established before the recent changes which were entirely arbitrary and undiscussed. FWiW, I have changed a few within the templates to show the different output, but as I have mentioned, they read perfectly before the changes. The article uses a standard: Author, Title, (Place)publisher, Date style but when the templates are outputted, the main title of a work, i.e., article title (in a journal) are not identified, neither is the subsidiary title. The citation by template reads: "Comedian Bob Hope dies". BBC News. July 28, 2003. Retrieved September 23, 2011, while writing out the citation creates: "Comedian Bob Hope dies". BBC News, July 28, 2003. Retrieved: September 23, 2011." The later shows main title in quotation marks with publisher/source in italics, and linked to the date of publication. FWiW, the article was stable prior to a massive change to cite templates. See: WP:Retain, WP:Own and WP:CITEVAR. Bzuk ( talk) 21:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC).
It is still the old IT precept of "garbage in, garbage out," and if you don't know what the parameters of the fields in a template do, then errors do come out. Introducing the old canard that cite templates are either preferred, mandatory or provide meta data for some mythical, mystical future time, is being introduced. FWiW, I only wish that the cite templates could be seen as "bullet-proof" and accurate but that isn't the case, note the many offshoots of templates to cover print and non-print media. Not that I am a Luddite; I have been a reference librarian for years and have pioneered the use of electronic data processing in conversion of traditional libraries, but MARc record templates are "bullet-proof", wiki versions, not so much. Bzuk ( talk) 23:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC).
I can see the work of bots may have some value, however, there is a difference of opinion in that introducing templates "improves" the citations. If the consensus is to change to this format, so be it, but that wasn't the case, a day or so ago, when massive changes took place without any deliberation or discussion. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 00:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC).
I agree with the positions taken by GFHandel, Mally, and Dianna. The edits I saw adding cite templates were useful, and those removing them, were regressive. If there are any issues with proper use of the templates, I can help with that; I do so every day. This is an important article and should not be held back by retaining poor practises from years ago. IMNHO, this has nothing to do with personal preference. It is all about appropriate structure for an online database that contains an encyclopaedia. Br'er Rabbit ( talk) 00:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
In response, my last edit before the changes were on July 14, and that was the same day that the changes began; in total, 43 revisions of the citations. FWiW, note cite templates are not mandated nor recommended for everyone. Bzuk ( talk) 01:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC). BTW, doesn't a call for consensus, at least have a reasonable period for a resolution, typically a few days. Bzuk ( talk) 01:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I just restored the remaining Cite templates to how they were earlier today—at least as a consistent starting point. I'm aware that the Cite Book template can probably be improved, but I'm hoping that will resolve itself when I can get {{ sfn}} going (I just don't have much time at the moment). Thanks to all who commented here, and let me say that my faith has been restored by the confirmation that the Cite templates are efficacious. GFHandel ♬ 01:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: MathewTownsend ( talk · contribs) 22:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)
I feel that the fact that the article is not ordered chronologically is a fundamental failing. The reader gets no feel for how his career grew, what let to what, because the different facets of his career were intertwined. e.g. we don't learn he boxed at age 19 until the end of the article.
Also the "Critical reception" section (which should not be subsumed under career, IMO, but should sum up his total impact) doesn't explain his extraordinary popularity among the American public. To host 14 Academy Awards is extraordinary - a feat that will probably never be repeated. Also the tremendous breath of his endeavours should be mentioned. He was called the "King of Comedy", "King of the one liners". These sites may not be reliable sources but they give more of a flavour of his extraordinary career. [5] and this is an example of how this extraordinary career developed [6]
I suggest Katharine Hepburn as a good model to follow for ordering the career.
The TOC is fundamentally flawed, and a hodgepodge and not ordered chronologically, e.g.:
For example, Vaudeville is not given a section as part of his "Career", yet it was fundamental to it, and its influence runs through the whole 70 year career. The "USO" should not be a whole section of his career - it was something almost all Hollywood stars did at the time as an out growth of their celebrity and their support of the US troops. The USO article mentions Mickey Rooney and Irving Berlin, yet their articles don't have a whole section of their career for the USO.
Though I appreciate the good work put into the article, I feel it has major flaws and must fail it.
MathewTownsend ( talk) 15:09, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your thorough work on the review. The article is better off for having gone through the process, and I appreciate your assistance. -- Dianna ( talk) 19:12, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm quite fond of Bob Hope's comedy and a few of his movies, but never-the-less there is a lot of what most would view as negative facts that aren't to be found here. It is my understanding that Hope became EXTREMELY wealthy investing in land during WWII in California, and specifically buying land lost to the US citizens of Japanese heritage who were tossed into concentration camps after Pearl Harbor. I'm not sure if the sellers are relevant, since he was just capitalizing (pun) on what was happening, but I do recall that during the Carter and Reagan years, his name came up in that context. I just heard a (Terry Gross) interview today on NPR where the author claims that Nixon briefed Hope on various military decisions during the VietNam war. (Whether this was due to his audience/popularity or perhaps due Hope being a large contributor wasn't mentioned (I speculate here). It seems that there is lots of evidence to conclude that his wealth is of note, imho, yet I didn't see any references to it. He was also notable (possibly only for those of us of a certain age) for his Pro-War stance in the Vietnam years, as well as his bigoted "comedy" in his later years. (Anti-gay, anti-feminist, etc.) We're all children of our times, so I'm not sure how relevant this is to his biography, but he had a national audience and probably should be viewed as a "culturally significant" persona. In the NPR show, his biographer (Zoglin) mentions that it is remarkable that although (he claims) Hope was 'the founding father' of stand-up comedy, yet had been 'forgotten' by the 1970's (possibly due to his content in his later years?), especially by comedians starting out then. 173.189.73.230 ( talk) 01:41, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Was Bob Hope also gay? The gay community seems to take it as a given: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3btgSGYshE Does anybody know anything about this? Or did the studios keep Bob Hope's gay side completely out of the media? It would be a shame if he was gay and it doesn't appear in his Wikipedia bio. 88.105.91.58 ( talk) 18:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
In Soviet Russia, the Oscars Host You
http://time.com/3715747/bob-hope-russian-reversal/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.195.108.189 ( talk) 05:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I ATTENDED A PACKED HOUSE AIR FORCE REUNION SHOW AT MADISON SQUARE GARDEN IN 1946 (OR 1947 ?). IT WAS PUT ON BY BOB HOPE, JERRY COLONNA AND FRANCES LANGFORD. HOPE AND COLONNA OPENED THE SHOW BY DESCENDING FROM THE ROOF OF THE GARDEN BY PARACHUTES SUSPENDED BY ROPES TO A SCREAMING AUDIENCE. NEEDLESS TO SAY IT WAS A SPECTACULAR NIGHT. THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. I HAVE NO BACKUP OR REFENCES. HANK BENTLEY benttree720@gmail.com I tried to establish an account but failed in the attempt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.12.150.54 ( talk) 17:49, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
The article states Marriages
Hope's first short-lived marriage was to his vaudeville partner, Grace Louise Troxell, whom he married in January 1933[82] and divorced in November 1934.[83] In February 1934,[84] Hope married Dolores (DeFina) Reade, who had been one of his co-stars on Broadway in Roberta.
How could he marry Delores in February 1934 when he wasn't divorced from Grace until November 1934 ? 78.100.53.94 ( talk) 21:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC) Regards CSM
Why is the Dorothy Lamour photo place in the section on "Extramarital Affairs". The implication of the placement being that he had an affair with her, but nothing appears in the content about that. If it's just to illustrate the general idea of 'affairs' that would be an inappropriate use. The photo should be moved. BashBrannigan ( talk) 04:05, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
I see from the above discussion, #Sir Bob Hope?, that there is some question as to whether or not he retained his status as a British subject when he came to the US as child. Most countries don't impose this on children and children may have a birth right to a nationality but they generally need to actually affirmatively claim it when they reach majority. It appears Hope never did so and only was legally an American citizen. Geraldo Perez ( talk) 19:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
In what way is he an American subject first and foremost? He had dual nationality, was born and raised until the age of 5 in Britain and his parents were both British. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.213.86 ( talk) 07:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Is it really ideal for the infobox image of Hope, who was in his day one of the biggest stars, to be a photo where he's with somebody else? The brave celery ( talk) 00:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:11, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
It has been confirmed he never married Dolores. ( 86.148.226.57 ( talk) 15:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC))
Why is his marriage to Dolores referred to as alleged at two points in this article? In other sources, it is not listed like that. I feel like this needs more explanation and if none is available, should be removed. Dhawk790 ( talk) 20:55, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
I noticed it lacks a section on Hope's political views. I had to go elsewhere to find the info on his conservatism that is part of his downfall. For example, this NPR piece:
"On how Hope alienated younger audiences
Bob Hope was the establishment. Bob Hope was friends with Nixon. Bob Hope was speaking in favor of the [Vietnam] War. Bob Hope was expressing that kind of backward, suburban, WASP view of minorities, homosexuals, the women's movement. Even his comments on the women's movement were very condescending. He did a special in the '70s on the women's movement and it was so silly, so backward. And [in his act] the woman who had some big political office was dusting the chairs in between her meetings. It was just awful. He got mail ... from feminists.
He was clueless at that time. That was why that generation of comedians turned off to him. ... It's hard to be [a] comedian and be part of the establishment because comedians, their job is to satirize and to poke fun at the powerful people. And this is something that Bob was — one of the powerful people. So just as a comedian, he became less and less relevant." https://www.npr.org/2014/11/24/366137941/the-rise-and-fall-of-comedian-bob-hope
--~~