This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dustin Hoffman article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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 sourced must 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   level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers 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 articles This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as High-importance). California: Los Angeles Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

I find the portrait picture " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dustin_Hoffman_cropped.jpg" of poor quality (grainy, poor contrast) and would suggest placing another picture that could be used under "fair use". Anyone got an idea? 71.98.73.148 03:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC) reply

I (mis?)remember Sydney Pollack saying that he'd gladly give back his Oscar for Tootsie, if only he could also give back the time he spent working with Hoffman. I've been unable to find again the interview/article/editorial where he expressed this opinion. Koyaanis Qatsi 01:43, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Try this link, It's there. http://www.nndb.com/people/882/000022816/

Yeah, I heard that, it was in a book I was reading. That wacky Pollack. But Jessica Lange was the only person to get an Oscar out of Tootsie. Perhaps the comment was made much later on, after Out of Africa. ...._{( Complain)}^{( Let us to it pell-mell)} 08:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Could someone edit this article for POV? It seems like the article writer just can't get over how great Dustin Hoffman is. I want facts, not typical Hollywood hyperbole, like "Immortal actor Lawrence Oliver" or "Hoffman didn't want to do big, mindless films." Just show me what he did and I'll judge for myself. -- Pathogen 18:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Agreed. I'm very close to putting this article in more standard bio format, eliminating all the little discussions of his films that more properly belong in each film's own article. Objections? -- Patchyreynolds 23:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Absolutely agreed. I was going to suggest deleting it altogether.... Movies should be linked to, not explained here. ---- David Be 16:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Hoffman was born in Los Angeles, California to Jewish American parents, Harry Hoffman and Lillian Gold (who were born in Romania but whose parents Max and Pauline were born in Russia).

Whose parents were Max and Pauline? His mother's? His father's? One of each? Why are the given names of his grandparents even worthy of mention? JackofOz 03:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Names of grandparents are not relevant enough to be on a bio unless they are notable). However, ancestry is relevant info. Article improving ( talk) 15:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I just watched Yours Mine and Ours starring Henry Fonda and Lucille Ball 1968 version. About halfway through when Henry Fonda approached the flight signaler to keep the mail plane from taking off so he could board and be with his wife (L. Ball) when she birthed. I believe that flight signaler was Dustin Hoffman. Sure looked like him anyways. Can anyone confirm?

I missed "American Buffalo" from 2007 in this list of Mr. Hoffman's filmography. Could someone add it?

He may haver been 5'6" in his early years but people shrink with age so unless a recent measurement can be provided this stat should be removed. Gillean666

Please note: This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.

What is it about then? Gillean666

His height is relevant to his bio and talk page, as he is significantly horter than average and that fact has been pointed out a few times. Article improving ( talk) 15:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Dustin Hoffman about 10 years ago on the Oscar telecast said he was 5'6 3/4" tall. I met him in 1984 and was less than a yard away from him and can attest that he is about 5'7" -- but that was 27 years ago! How time flies! And yes, his height was always a major thing about him. It was always mentioned, just as it was about Alan Ladd. He was unusual in that he admitted how short he was. Shemp Howard, Jr. ( talk) 01:13, 6 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Seeing as 'Straw Dogs" was made before Texas Chainsaw Massacre, it seems utterly pointless to say "Often (falsely) dubbed as England's answer to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre..." - unless one can offer some refeernce of someone saying that Straw Dogs was Engloand's answer to TCM. I've removed the point. -- TTKK 20:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC) reply

There's no reason for the Hoffman article to contain little paragraphs about each of his notable film, standing apart from almost every other cinema actor's article. Instead, he should have the standard filmography with separate mention made for only exceptional events in his career (e.g., a significant award, a move into directing, etc.). Any discussion of the individual film's plots, trivia, etc. should be on those individual pages. Any objections to my cutting those? -- Patchyreynolds 22:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC) reply

No objections, totally reasonable. -- David Be 16:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Agreed. This article also needs cleanup for Wikification, unsourced statements, and overly-effusive language. -- JD79 01:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Can anyone make an argument for maintaining the lengthy prose recitation of each film role Hoffman has taken? The filmography already accomplishes this. The career section does not exist to list every film (again) but to speak about notable roles, characters that proved of social impact, parts that have passed into film history, etc. Do "Mad City" and Sleepers" actually need to be mentioned in separate sentences? At all outside of the filmography? Much of the article--as it now stands--does nothing more than recite his filmography. Partly because of this, I think, topics that actually deserve a fuller unfolding--his renowned Oscar acceptance speech for "K vs. K," his famous difficulty during the production of "Salesman"--don't receive examination. Comments? -- Patchyreynolds ( talk) 16:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC) reply

All right, then. I'm about to do this. -- Patchyreynolds ( talk) 13:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Image:Marathon Man2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC) reply

In reading through the article, then consulting this page, I saw that there has been discussion about the extent to which details are taken and the POV since May of last year. I had a go at the article, and did some major surgery to the films section, mostly. It could stand more work, maybe paring down the films to the very major ones, and highlighting hits, misses and awards, leaving the rest to the filmography. I hope this doesn't cause too much controversy, but someone had to do it. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 08:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Image:All the President Men.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC) reply

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) 06:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Is there any reason why Hoffman's support for Scientologists in Germany is not mentioned here? Together with Goldie Hawn, Oliver Stone and other Hollywood stars he signed an open letter to the German government in the nineties, accusing Germany of discrminating against Scientologists. Very widely reported at the time and still occasionally mentioned in the press today. [1] Jayen 466 12:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Actually I remember that. He did indeed sign a letter supporting the rights of scientologists in Germany. If I recall correctly it was circulated by his friend Costa Gavras. There are a hell of a lot of things about Dustin Hoffman that are not in this article, and in my opinion that may well be one of the least important things about him that are not. -- TS 22:50, 31 December 2008 (UTC) reply

I've removed this from the "Personal life" section because it seems to have little or nothing to do with Hoffman's personal life. It seems to be a public statement made by Hoffman as a young actor in 1974:

In 1974, Hoffman on a talk show stated that the Oscars were "obscene, dirty and no better than a beauty contest." When presenting an award at that year's Oscar ceremonies, Frank Sinatra responded strongly: "And contrary to what Mr. Hoffman thinks, it is not an obscene evening. It is not garish and it is not embarrassing".

Ref: name=imdb-quote

• Memorable Quotes of the 47th Annual Academy Awards at Internet Movie Database.
• Retrieved 2008-01-23.

Perhaps it belongs elsewhere. Ideas? -- TS 22:03, 31 December 2008 (UTC) reply

I just rolled back a report of Hoffman's purported death. There was no source and there is nothing on Google News. -- TS 20:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC) reply

I took out a poorly-constructed phrase "who has won a considerable amount of major awards for his work" that was intended to replace the list of awards that Hoffman has won. The specific difference between the two versions was the sometime WP:PEACOCK phrase "award-winning." I simply don't see how saying "won a considerable amount of major awards" is at all an improvement over "award-winning" nor do I see that there's a difference between them regarding whether the phrase is a fluffing of an otherwise empty resume. In Hoffman's case, there is no danger of peacock here--the awards he has won help define him, and they are global in stature. These aren't gold stars for good behavior awarded by the grade school teacher's assistant; they aren't peacock terms. Binksternet ( talk) 14:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Given that your only interest is edit-warring, I filed a notice at the NPOV noticeboard, asking for assistance. Crotchety Old Man ( talk) 14:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Binksternet is correct, you are incorrect, and you are edit-warring as well. WP:PEACOCK refers to wikipuffery, not for legitimately notable accomplishments. Please stop adding the tags inappropriately to articles about actors. Per WP:MULTI, please hold further discussion at the WP:NPOVN thread you started. THF ( talk) 15:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC) reply

While here he also directed TWO FOR THE SEESAW. I was his stage manager, learned alot about what became my avocation, and had the feeling there was something special about him. Thank you. 65.164.217.149 ( talk) 19:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC) Rosemary Dimmer Coleman reply

Bravo! SoCoColl ( talk) 10:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Hook, Meet the Fockers, and Last Chance Harvey? Why are these listed among his "more important films"? Why those instead of Straw Dogs, Papillon, and Straight Time?

• I helped contribute to this list so I guess I should respond. If you notice, all of the films in the list are ones for which Hoffman either earned or was nominated for a major award (an Oscar, Golden Globe, etc.) This seemed to me to be an impartial way of formulating such a list. The list also begins with "Some of his more important films are..." The "some" indicates that this list isn't meant to be definitive or complete. Plumadesabiduría ( talk) 15:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Hook is listed among his most notable films, and I find that somewhat incongruous with the rest of the list. I know he was nominated for a Golden Globe, so according to the criteria mentioned above Hook should be considered "notable." However, I think it could be generally agreed that it was not one of his best films and doesn't deserve to be up there in the same company as these other remarkable (or "notable"--see definition) achievements.

This was recently removed from the article's lede:

• Dustin Hoffman attended game one of the NBA Finals between the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers at the Staples Center, and the camera was put on him during the "Kiss Cam" session. Hoffman's wife was sitting on one side, and actor Jason Bateman on the other. Hoffman and Bateman shared a passionate kiss to the roars of the crowd.

I agree of course that that does not belong in the lede of the article, if anywhere in it at all, but I thought it was a quaint little notice about Hoffman's well known humoristic antics even when off duty, so I added it here. He is one of the most personally charming people in the business. Cordially, SergeWoodzing ( talk) 13:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Wish I could find any reference anywhere to his performance back in either '69 or '70 on PBS. He was so stunningly original I, for one, could not forget him. He was a 'nobody' and look at where he went, where he went. The other actor was Orson Bean. It was set at some merry-go-round/carousel. Mr Hoffman's highly 'method' take was like nothing I'd ever seen and clearly is forever embedded. Wish I could see it again. Is it archived? What was it? 108.7.159.219 ( talk) 20:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)watcher88 reply

It was " The Star Wagon" Shemp Howard, Jr. ( talk) 01:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)\\ reply

Gene Hackman was expelled form the Pasadena Playhouse for lacking talent after 3 months. He did not stay there two years. Perhaps it was Hoffman who stayed there two years. Shemp Howard, Jr. ( talk) 01:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC) reply

There's nothing here on method acting, but Hoffman was one of the more renowned method actors in American film. 74.136.38.179 ( talk) 16:43, 8 May 2012 (UTC) reply

I understand he's a big NBA fan. 69.172.158.114 ( talk) 05:09, 15 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Rain Man won four Oscars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.64.217.66 ( talk) 15:21, 12 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dustin Hoffman. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080215132703/https://www.newsmeat.com:80/celebrity_political_donations/Dustin_Hoffman.php to http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Dustin_Hoffman.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121109035635/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/169937-Dustin-Hoffman-David-Letterman-Natalia-Makarova-Buddy-Guy-Led-Zeppelin-Are-Kennedy-Center-Honorees to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/169937-Dustin-Hoffman-David-Letterman-Natalia-Makarova-Buddy-Guy-Led-Zeppelin-Are-Kennedy-Center-Honorees

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 00:25, 18 December 2016 (UTC) reply

The lead sentence says that Mr. Hoffman is a "retired" American actor and directory. The info panel, however, says he was active from "1960-present". Which is it, and what is the source? -- Dan Griscom ( talk) 23:48, 13 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dustin Hoffman. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140502140738/http://ishtarthemovie.com/intheirwords-DH.php to http://ishtarthemovie.com/intheirwords-DH.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Dustin_Hoffman.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080111115345/http://www.stv.tv/content/out/film/videointerviews/display.html?id=opencms%3A%2Fout%2Ffilms%2Fvideo_interviews%2Fstv__Movies__Dustin_Hoffman_video_inte_20071214 to http://www.stv.tv/content/out/film/videointerviews/display.html?id=opencms%3A%2Fout%2Ffilms%2Fvideo_interviews%2Fstv__Movies__Dustin_Hoffman_video_inte_20071214

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: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:34, 26 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dustin Hoffman. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100506040410/http://www.biography.com/articles/Dustin-Hoffman-9341124 to http://www.biography.com/articles/Dustin-Hoffman-9341124
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120517035451/http://xfinity.comcast.net/slideshow/entertainment-celebroommates/13/ to http://xfinity.comcast.net/slideshow/entertainment-celebroommates/13/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Although (I think) Steve McQueen portrayed this French prisoner, surely Hoffman had a significant role also ? Boeing720 ( talk) 22:05, 20 October 2017 (UTC) reply

A colour shot is better than a b/w. (but I prefer both) Lenny was an important role for Hoffman. Boeing720 ( talk) 04:11, 25 October 2017 (UTC) reply

The photo is taken with a non notable person who has just had his page deleted that was added by a personal friend of his (declared COI). It is grainy and adds nothing to the article. If you wish add another but photos with people that are probably just fans and that are not mentioned in the article add nothing to the article itself. Domdeparis ( talk) 05:50, 25 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I don't agree. The photo is in colour and taken during the Lenny setting. I don't see the connection really, we could remove that other's name though ? Boeing720 ( talk) 06:27, 25 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I agree that this photo does not fit here. It is self-promo (by the help of a friend or something like that) Adville ( talk) 06:51, 25 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I doubt very much that it was from the set of Lenny as Hoffman had a beard for this film. And the film is a black and white film so it is probably more appropriate that a photo linked to this film is also in black and white. I will add the poster from the film which is much more informative than a photo taken with a fan where Hoffman looks rather uncomfortable. Domdeparis ( talk) 07:45, 25 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I'm truly sorry for asking for a source for that beard Boeing720 ( talk) 05:54, 28 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Don't apologise I'm going by the photos from the film. But it doesn't really matter the photo adds nothing to the article and is not sourced. Domdeparis ( talk) 07:08, 28 October 2017 (UTC) reply

We can't use primary sources (= the film itself) like that, can we ? A secondary source stating Hoffman had a beard is sufficient though...... Boeing720 ( talk) 01:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC) reply

There are also other perspectives. That shot is very typical for the first half of the 1970's. We have very few such photos in colour at all. It represents the time of the -73 Oil Crisis, the Apollo project, Watergate, Nixon, the Hippie movement, Vietnam, Salt/Salt II etc. Why waste it ? Boeing720 ( talk) 01:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I don't really know what you're getting at. The subject of the article is Dustin Hoffman not any of the other stuff, the photo is a supposed to represent him on the set of Lenny but there is nothing in the photo that suggests this. It is not a particularly good quality photo of him. The poster I added is much more representative of the section of the article. It is just a snapshot that could have been taken anywhere at almost anytime. Images have to have educational value and this doesn't. Domdeparis ( talk) 08:51, 29 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Well I kind of semi-object, I wish no quarrel. But for what ever reason it has been uploaded, that's not a valid argument. Not as I added it. Earlier half that shot was in the article (stating it was from "Lenny"). There is not so little I like about the image itself (and as we have few colour photos from that time). And I meant "It's a good shot, representing the time of matters like the -73 Oil Crisis, the Apollo project, Watergate, Nixon, the Hippie movement, Vietnam, Salt/Salt II etc. (Not any of those events themselves.) The image text is of no importance. But it's in my view sad if we can't use it anywhere. (period) Thanks ! Boeing720 ( talk) 10:18, 29 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I'm afraid I do not follow your logic at all. I'm saying that as per WP:IUP the photo fails the purpose of images which is "The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article. The relevant aspect of the image should be clear and central". I maintain that it does not increase readers' understanding of Hoffman and it's relevance is far from being clear. If ypu could find another article that mentions Hoffman and all those subjects and you can argue that this photo is relevant then go for it! Hoffman looking a little uncomfortable in a grainy snapshot I don't believe illustrates the section or any other part of the article unless you can find a reference why he is looking so uncomfortable in this shot and reliably source it. Domdeparis ( talk) 19:11, 29 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Dear Boeing, non of us have said the pictures are bad - as pictures and family album- but is does not fit in this article. Adville ( talk) 21:13, 29 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dustin Hoffman. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104213721/http://www.people.com/people/article/0%2C%2C20067777%2C00.html to http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20067777,00.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 02:55, 3 December 2017 (UTC) reply

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Dear editors,

My name is Jodi Gottlieb and I am Dustin Hoffman’s publicist. I am writing to you because this Wikipedia page currently contains a number of errors and some unclear phrasing which distorts the facts around some recent allegations against Mr. Hoffman.

Please understand that I’m not writing to you to try to argue the merits of each of the allegations. I understand and respect Wikipedia’s aims and ethics. I am simply reaching out in the hopes that the “Sexual misconduct allegations” section of the page can be cleared up so that the entry is more fair and accurate.

To do this, I am going to paste the problematic section here and explain my issues below.

In late 2017, seven women accused Hoffman of sexual misconduct or assault, including Meryl Streep,[67] Anna Graham Hunter,[68] Wendy Riss Gatsiounis,[69]Cori Thomas,[70] Melissa Kester,[70] Kathryn Rossetter,[71] and an anonymous woman. A woman who was a minor (17) at the time said Hoffman sexually harassed her and forced her to give him foot massages.[72] Hoffman's daughter's friend who also was a minor at the time (16), alleged Hoffman exposed his penis to her in a hotel room then asked for a foot massage.[73] One woman said Hoffman touched her naked breasts and inner thighs 6-8 times a week, against her will, during a specific microphone speaking part of a Broadway play that left her unable to stop him. She stated one performance he started putting his fingers inside her vagina during the same speaking part, and alleged another time he pulled her dress over her head, revealing her naked body to other cast members and causing her to miss her part and be reprimanded. She shared a picture of Hoffman grabbing her breast, which she says was against her will.[74] Two other women accused him of separate incidents where he inserted his fingers inside their vaginas unexpectedly and without permission when they were near him while wearing a skirt.[70]

1) In fact, in response to the article cited, Meryl Streep released a statement in late 2017 saying that that story was false. Here are three subsequent articles: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5057429/Meryl-Streep-says-Hoffman-grope-claim-not-accurate.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/meryl-streep-dustin-hoffman-offense-claim-inaccurate-article-1.3615843

http://www.eonline.com/news/892012/meryl-streep-says-she-s-accepted-dustin-hoffman-s-apology-for-1970s-groping-offense

2) The woman claiming to be Mr. “Hoffman’s daughter’s friend” was Cori Thomas, as the Wikipedia citation makes clear. The way it is phrased now makes it seem like it was a separate individual. It would be really important to rephrase it to make it clear that the alleged victim was Cori Thomas, not an additional person. More citations can be seen here: http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/dustin-hoffman-2-1202641525/

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/sexual-misconduct/dustin-hoffman-exposed-himself-when-i-was-16-says-playwright-n829951

3) The “[o]ne woman” who “said Hoffman touched her naked breasts,” etc. was Kathryn Rossetter, as the Wikipedia citation makes clear. The way it is phrased now makes it seem like it was a separate individual. It would be really important to rephrase it to make it clear that was Kathryn Rossetter, not an additional person. More citations can be seen here: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2017/12/08/dustin-hoffman-accused-groping-actress-night-after-night-offstage-death-salesman/935242001/

http://www.newsweek.com/kathryn-rossetter-dustin-hoffman-sexual-harassment-742925

4) While Kathryn Rossetter’s allegations are reprinted in detail, the page does not record the views of seven independent individuals on the production who said that she was not telling the truth. Even The Hollywood Reporter article – https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/new-dustin-hoffman-accuser-claims-harassment-physical-violation-broadway-guest-column-1062349 – that the Wikipedia page cites includes this: “…several other people who worked on Death of a Salesman, did not recall witnessing any of the conduct described by Rossetter and questioned her account. Those people include Hoffman’s brother-in-law Lee Gottsegen, actresses Anne McIntosh, Debra Mooney and Linda Hogan, actors Michael Quinlan and Andrew Bloch, and production stage manager Tom Kelly. ‘It just doesn’t ring true,’ says Kelly. ‘Given my position, it’s insulting to say this kind of activity would go on to the extent of sexual violation.’” In the interest of fairness and accuracy, that information should be added to the Wikipedia entry.

5) Although a great deal of space is given to detailing the allegations, the denial of Mr. Hoffman’s attorney – Mark Neubauer of Carlton Fields – who described them as “defamatory falsehoods” is not included. It really should be added for accuracy as well as moral and legal reasons. Here are several links – including some cited already by Wikipedia – where that comment was included: http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/dustin-hoffman-2-1202641525/

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/dustin-hoffman-denies-allegations

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-dustin-hoffman/three-more-women-accuse-dustin-hoffman-of-sexual-misconduct-variety-report-idUSKBN1E900V

76.94.70.129 ( talk) 20:17, 21 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Reply quotebox with inserted reviewer proposals and request for feedback 22-MAR-2018

Below you will see my proposal for how this section should be worded. Areas where issues came up are described in the notes section. Currently, the section in question has been deleted by another user — but this deletion doesn't solve the problem. I ask that any interested editors and the requesting COI editor review the proposal shown below. You are urged to provide feedback. Only the section requested by the COI editor was addressed. The second half of the section regarding Mr. Hoffman's reply was not addressed. Please note that unreferenced sections proposed by the COI editor will not be implemented unless references are provided. Spintendo      02:43, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

• Please also address the various apparent guideline violations given as the rationale for excluding. -- Light show ( talk) 06:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

The main guideline violation in the proposed claims underlined above in red is WP:NRVE. Spintendo      07:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

As stated in your link, Sources of evidence include recognized peer-reviewed publications, credible and authoritative books, reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally. Those would normally exclude celebrity gossip magazines, which the edited text relies on. Nor does that linked section override the various likely BLP violations noted above. -- Light show ( talk) 07:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

You're absolutely right. If the claims had appeared in the National Enquirer they would not have been used. Spintendo      07:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Note the guideline suggestion: If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out. Celebrity magazines are poor sources for an encyclopedia biography article. -- Light show ( talk) 08:09, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "celebrity magazines," I'm not familiar with that term, but Variety does have a good WP:RS status, as do many of the other sources used like Hollywood Reporter, a publication which reports on the film industry just as Aviation Week reports on the Aviation industry. The film and entertainment industries are just as relevant as other industries are. Even though they may seem less important, their revenues clearly indicate an important industry here. Many of these stories have been picked up and reported by Reuters and the like. Spintendo      16:36, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

The issue is not about banning a source. I just explained some of the relevant problems to newbie User_talk:Ektakhem, who is similarly focused on adding an accusations section.-- Light show ( talk) 16:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Dear Editors,

Thank you for rewriting this section to more clearly reflect the accusations. Please implement the rewritten proposed section. Below, I have provided references to address the “Not able to implement” section as well as a requested addition of Hoffman’s attorney’s statement.

I hope you will consider adding the following:

1. “Accounts of other people who worked on Death of a Salesman at the time differ, as they do not recall witnessing the conduct described by Rossetter. Those people include Hoffman’s brother-in-law Lee Gottsegen, actresses Anne McIntosh, Debra Mooney and Linda Hogan, actors Michael Quinlan and Andrew Bloch, and production stage manager Tom Kelly. "It just doesn’t ring true," says Kelly. "Given my position, it's insulting to say this kind of activity would go on to the extent of sexual violation."

Each of these people are named by The Hollywood Reporter as individuals who do not recall witnessing any of the conduct described by Rossetter and should be included to reflect the fair reporting and make the page more accurate. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/new-dustin-hoffman-accuser-claims-harassment-physical-violation-broadway-guest-column-1062349 http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-42291775

2. “Hoffman’s attorney has called the allegations ‘defamatory falsehoods.’ ”

Please consider adding this for accuracy and legal reasons. This statement can be cited with the following articles: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/dustin-hoffman-denies-allegations https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-dustin-hoffman/three-more-women-accuse-dustin-hoffman-of-sexual-misconduct-variety-report-idUSKBN1E900V http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/dustin-hoffman-2-1202641525/

I hope you will consider adding these elements to represent a more fair and accurate page.

Thank you, Jodi Gottlieb

76.94.70.129 ( talk) 00:16, 19 April 2018 (UTC) reply

It seems an omission to me that the allegations against Hoffman aren't mentioned in the introductory paragraph to this article. Sdkb ( talk) 04:59, 3 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Are they what he is primarily known for?

And should we add that to the lede of articles about all the other (thousands of?) men and women who allegedly have harassed people sexually?

If so, you're right. -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 13:16, 3 July 2018 (UTC) reply

We need more input on this before it's put back in the lead. An RfC perhaps? -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 14:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC) reply

@ SergeWoodzing: The only reverts to the edit including a mention of the allegations in the lede are from IP addresses, and based on the very similar summaries, I'm guessing from a single person (a person who also tried to delete the entire section on the sexual assault allegations). I'm not the only one who's been reverting those edits. This doesn't seem like a full controversy so much as a matter of cleaning up after someone who is trying to remove any material that reflects poorly on the article subject. If you think a RfC is called for, though, feel free to initiate one.

To address your questions from above, MOS:LEAD states that the lead of an article should "summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight". The allegations against Hoffman and other people accused of sexual violence/harassment in the #MeToo era all tend to have substantial sections in their article about the allegations (and properly so, given the number of secondary sources discussing the allegations), so appropriate weight would dictate that at least a brief mention of the allegations also be included in the lead section. To the extent that that may not be the case with some other articles, that might be a manifestation of gender bias on Wikipedia, but yes, I'd say it would be appropriate in most cases. - Sdkb ( talk) 10:48, 20 September 2018 (UTC) reply

@ SergeWoodzing: I haven't heard from you, so I'll be restoring the previous version of the intro unless you object and want to discuss further. - Sdkb ( talk) 07:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC) reply

I suggest we keep the allegations in the intro. MOS:LEAD states: "The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, [u]including any prominent controversies[/u]". At the same guideline, someone can read: "Reliably sourced material about encyclopedically relevant controversies is neither suppressed in the lead nor allowed to overwhelm; the lead must correctly summarize the article as a whole". So the real question is whether there is sourced materlial about the allegations. Seems to me by the previous discussion in this talk page, the answer is "yes", plus there is a whole section in the article which is fully cited. Τζερόνυμο ( talk) 08:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC) reply

3O Response: WP:WELLKNOWN says that noteworthy, relevant and well-documented allegations belong in the article. The question is whether they belong in the lead. I took at a few other articles. Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby have significant mentions of misconduct in the leads of those biographies (which were so notable that they have their own articles, Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse allegations and Bill Cosby sexual assault cases). Those had major media coverage and started social movements. Then you have Matt Lauer and Woody Allen. The lead of Lauer's biography article only briefly mentions allegations as it directly affected his career, and the lead of Allen's biography doesn't mention it at all (in both cases, the sections for those allegations are about 300–350 words). This article's allegations section is about 600 words or 10% of the article (though it has a lot of fluff and could probably be halved). Weight or relative emphasis suggests that the allegations should be included in the lead. I feel that it absolutely should not go in the opening paragraph as a defining characteristic of his life ( MOS:LEADPARAGRAPH). If it was a single accusation I'd advise against having it in the lead at all, but there are seven people alleging numerous incidents. It's unfortunate that the allegations section does not say how the allegations affected his broader life (as with Lauer). For my non-binding third opinion, I would suggest cautious treatment in a third lead paragraph, perhaps also including material from the Personal life section. – Reidgreg ( talk) 16:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Thank you! -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 17:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC) reply

There is no age of consent in New York for sexual harassment or foot massages. Nicmart ( talk) 03:06, 5 August 2018 (UTC) reply

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dustin Hoffman's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Biography.com":

• From Idris Elba: "Idris Elba:Singer, Actor (1972–)". Biography.com ( FYI / A&E Networks). Retrieved 2 August 2017. Idrissa Akuna Elba was born on September 6, 1972, in the Hackney section of East London, England. An only child of Sierra Leonean descent, Elba eventually attended the National Youth Music Theatre's training programs.
• From Dustin Hoffman filmography: Biography.com Editors. "Dustin Hoffman Biography". Biography.com. A&E Television Networks. Archived from the original on April 24, 2016. Retrieved May 5, 2016. {{ cite web}}: |author= has generic name ( help)
• From Edward Norton: "Edward Norton". Biography.com. Archived from the original on September 21, 2013. Retrieved March 7, 2019.
• From Joaquin Phoenix: Biography.com Editors (May 30, 2017). "Joaquin Phoenix Biography". Biography.com. Retrieved March 8, 2018. {{ cite web}}: |author1= has generic name ( help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:10, 23 May 2020 (UTC) reply