Talk:Armie Hammer

Slated to play the Lone Ranger

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/usmovies.accesshollywood.com/casting-call-armie-hammer-star-alongside-johnny-depp-lone-rangerRyoung122 07:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

How he met his wife

Hammer did not meet his wife at a gas station. They met through mutual friend Tyler Ramsey (artist). I'm editing to correct the error. Muldo (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source? According to this, it was a gas station. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, Two sources. [1] and [2]. Both state he was introduced to his wife by Ramsey. Muldo (talk) 22:13, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, Details says he met her in 2006 at a gas station, and that they didn't start dating until 2008. One of your sources says Ramsey set them up on their first date, so that presumably would been in 2008. Does it really matter that much? I wouldn't really care if how they met wasn't mentioned at all in the article. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 04:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Ancestral irony

   I removed this same-day contrib from Armand Hammer:

[...] who ironically played Clyde Tolson, J. Edgar Hoover's deputy in the Clint Eastwood biopic called J. Edgar. In his biography of Hammer (the tycoon, not the actor) called "Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer," author Edward Jay Epstein reported that the tycoon had a multi-decade history of being scrutinized and suspected of Soviet ties by J. Edgar Hoover. Armie stated in an interview that he took the role to avenge that scrutiny.

It is (besides lacking verification) not about the entrepreneur, but about the actor -- in much the same way that an act of fan adoration is about the fan, not the actor. I can see an argument that this actor is more than an average fan of his ancestor, but i am not prepared to make an argument that his role as a fan of his ancestor is sufficiently notable for inclusion in the accompanying actor-bio. I leave it to others to hash that out.
   More significantly, the text i quote above was placed under our copy-left provisions by the IP-user 86.133.194.88 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), and any use of that text in an article must be attributed in the edit summary as having been contributed 06:32, 29 August 2012 and shortly thereafter at Armand Hammer.
--Jerzy•t 01:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Categories

He is listed in category "American people of Russian-Jewish descent", yes, his great-great-grandfather and great-grandfather were Russian Jews, but his other great-grandmother Olga Von Root was Russian and non Jew. So, I think it is better to introduce it in the category: "American people of Jewish descent" and "American people of Russian descent". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.187.72.210 (talk) 06:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

You make a good point. The category listings for ethnicity for this BLP are excessive and unproven. I am removing Cherokee Indian, Russian-Jewish, and Ukrainian-Jewish. Or descent, however it is currently phrased. If someone hasn't been raised as a Jew, which the subject of this BLP was not based on the various school names he attended, and his most recent Jewish ancestor was his great-grandfather, then he is not of Jewish descent. Also, the article credits him as being both Russian and Ukrainian, because no one knew exactly where his great-grandfather was from, so that isn't reasonable either. Finally, Judaism is passed Halachically through the matrilinear line, so the subject of this BLP is most definitely not Jewish. I am also removing him from the rather high profile spot he was placed in Wikiproject Judaism.--FeralOink (talk) 01:53, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Children

Can you exactly tell me the statement which says where names of children cannot be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.91.108.10 (talk) 18:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

As for putting children's names in the infobox, see the children parameter in {{Infobox person}}. As for putting them in the body of the article, that would be something you would have to get a consensus to do. Putting in their birth years is close to violating the privacy of the children when they are minors. Just because something is reported on a website or even in the legitimate press doesn't mean Wikipedia reports it. It has to be appropriate and encyclopedic. Here, including the children's names is not.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:20, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I noticed about the infobox. But Please tell me where does it say you can't add it in article? Do you know the children have been there in the article for days? As far as I know, consensus isn't just for adding something. It is you who needs to get a consensus because you tried to remove something that was there for long. I will be adding them back if you fail to present something that says you can't add their names or take a vote. 23.91.108.10 (talk) 18:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

1) WP:INFOBOX - names should only be included in an infobox if they are notable. That is, they have their own Wikipedia article.

2) WP:PRIVACY, WP:NOTATABLOID, WP:NOTABILITY, just off the top of my head - to protect minor children, non-notable child information is minimized in articles. If the child is independently notable, then they can be included. See Alexa Vega for an example.

Also, bold, revert, discuss. You made a change, it was reverted, you should then have gone to the article talk page to discuss. It is not bold, revert, revert, revert, etc.

It is understandable that as a new user these issues can be confusing. That is why you should discuss contentious changes on the article talk page. Please take some time to familiarize yourself with our various policies (links posted to your talk page). Also, please consider registering, as it will allow you access to more tools that can make editing here much easier. Cheers! --Ebyabe (talk) 18:31, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

None of the above articles you have shown say children names cannot be included, or at least I can't find anything saying it. So either lift a statement directly from it and show it. I already told you WP:PRIVACY is about other editors. Only WP:NOTATABLOID is about children, but it doesn't prohibit naming them and says you should be careful about it. You have failed to prove me wrong. 23.91.108.10 (talk) 18:36, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

I haven't found in anything you showed that children's names cannot be included. They have been there for days. I am not satisfied with what you say and have exposed you as in the wrong, I will be restoring them by tomorrow if you can't prove me wrong. 23.91.108.10 (talk) 18:44, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is considered a collaborative project. Your commentary does not appear to be in that vein. Please see WP:COLLAB. Thank you, and have a pleasant day. --Ebyabe (talk) 18:50, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Don't remove something there for days AGAIN after you are reverted. You likely wouldn't have discussed unless I reverted you again and again. 23.91.108.10 (talk) 18:53, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Being there for days is not enough reason to keep the contribution. Consensus is clearly against it per or guidelines and policies. I am also for exclusion.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:00, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Me too. Per WP:BLPNAME it's a consensus-thing ("subject to editorial discretion"). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Also, WP:MINORS applies. Basically, as per WP:BLPNAMES and WP:MINORS, the names of minor children should not be included in the encyclopedia, regardless of what other media coverage has done, unless there is a compelling reason, and strong editor consensus, to do so. Here, the consensus is clearly for leaving the names out – and include me in that consensus as well – as there is no compelling reason to include them in this case... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:43, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

"Abusive to multiple partners" is not supported by either of the linked sources.

Neither the IndieWire article nor the Deadline article currently sourced in this article mention anything about abuse. Nor do they mention anything about the number of partners involved. What they do mention is "disturbing sexual fantasies", "cannibalism", and "soured love affairs". I'm not saying that there aren't sources claiming that Armie Hammer was abusive to his partners. But if you are going to make a claim as heavy as that, there should be a linked source that supports that claim. Nikki Lee 1999 (talk) 07:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Cannibal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5C1:4500:BED0:D088:926B:942:19FB (talk) 22:48, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Change "Abuse and cannibalism allegations" to "Violence allegations" or similar

Wikipedia is not a news outlet. The title of the section is sensationalized and disrespectful to the people who have allegedly been abused by Hammer. It is not accurate, there has been no evidence to suggest Hammer has engaged in anything other than fetish roleplay, whereas there is real evidence of emotional and physical abuse. This article should not be locked either. The references to cannibalism should stay, but the provocative title should be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.99.45 (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2021

Change Year Active From PRESENT to 2021 PierreCherry (talk) 21:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. We usually change the year active when the subject announces retirement from the industry, which I don't think Hammer's done yet. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:11, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

'2011 marijuana arrest'

Is this section really warranted? I don't think one simple scuff with the law over a small quantity of marijuana is all that important. I can't help but wonder how many celebrities went through something similar and we don't bother with having a section on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Byelf2007 (talk • contribs)

Update: Guess we all agree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Byelf2007 (talk • contribs)

Non-Consensual BDSM

"Non-consensual BDSM" doesn't exist. If it is non-consensual, it is sadism, a paraphilia, a fetish, sexual abuse or assault&battery, plain and simple. "BDSM" is defined by being consensual. You can't use that term for anything else but a consensual activity. Grainsofsalt (talk) 10:10, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

All activities were consensual including a consensual "non-consent" role-playing. The three women all confirmed this only to regret it later or claiming they didn't like it but did it anyway with one of them even having a YouTube vlog explaining this is the way to keep a man in a relationship. Another kept messaging him years after, demanding more of the same just like she did for the durarion of their talks online. Including wantint to "chop his heads off and eat it" but only he's been called a cannibal over these fantasies that were never physically done. All this presented in full in conversations retrieved from the direct messages — or are we considering only the edited, one-sided version of them?

Consent can be negated before and during an act, not months or years later when one regrets it or feel ashamed someone may look at them the wrong way for partaking in BDSM and similar activities. 79.18.193.152 (talk) 04:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

BLP policy

The policy on biographies of living persons requires that we do not report allegations of criminal acts unless there has been a conviction. There has been disagreement among editors of this article about exactly how much reporting of such allegations we should do, and in what way, and what sources are or aren't adequate, but the policy is perfectly clear: we don't report them at all. JBW (talk) 22:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

This does not comport with WP:BLP. Armie Hammer is a public figure as he is not low-profile under WP:LOWPROFILE. WP:BLP only requires that Editors consider not including allegations of criminal acts unless there has been a conviction if a person is not a public figure, see WP:BLPCRIME, even for non-public figures editors should consider whether to not report at all but there is not a blanket policy. As Armie Hammer is a public figure the allegations are fair game and the question is how much reporting, the fairness of any reporting with respect to a presumption of innocence pursuant to WP:BLPCRIME and the validity of sources. Given this I plan to revert the deletion of this section in the next couple of days (recognizing that portions of the section may be otherwise violative) unless it can be explained how documenting the section and allegations as a whole violates WP:BLP. Knaro (talk) 2:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

It appears, based on your comments on other pages, that you've realized that you had a misapprehension of WP:BLP, therefore I am reverting this edit. Knaro (talk) 19:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

In September, perhaps as part of reporting about a forthcoming miniseries about this subject, more articles appeared that summarize these accusations, and there are more accusations. I had figured there'd be a legal resolution, which would absolutely prevail over mere accusations in a Wikipedia article. Instead, there are more sources (former romantic partners) with more accusations. It would be a good time to update this article with the most conservative summary of the accusations against this subject.

97.113.48.246 (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Some fact checking and clearing up for the abuse allegations portion

Apologies if I'm not formatting this correctly. The allegations section needs better sources and a clearer timeline:

Hammer did not date anybody for five months in 2020. He was in quarantine/lockdown in the Cayman Islands from March 2020 and returned to the US approximately June 2020 (as per his Instagram and Twitter). He arrived in Los Angeles on July 10 and his divorce was announced shortly afterward.

He dated Courtney Vucekovich from approximately July 2020 to October 2020 (3 months). He dated Paige Lorenze from approximately October to December 2020 (2 months). Article confirming October 1 break up with Vucekovich: https://pagesix.com/2020/10/01/armie-hammer-had-brief-romance-with-app-founder-courtney-vucekovich/

Hammer was photographed on a date with Jessica Ciencin Henriquez in late August 2020. She denied pursuing him any further in a September 2020 statement to People Magazine: ​https://people.com/movies/armie-hammer-seen-with-josh-lucas-ex-jessica-ciencin-henriquez-amid-split-from-elizabeth-chambers/

Henriquez later tweeted in support of the woman leaking DMs on January 11, 2021: https://www.etalk.ca/celebrity/2021/1/jessica-ciencin-henriquez-claims-leaked-graphic-dms-from-armie-hammer-are-real.html

Vucekovich gave an interview to Page Six on January 14: https://pagesix.com/2021/01/14/armie-hammers-ex-courtney-vucekovich-he-wanted-to-barbecue-and-eat-me/

Lorenze gave an interview to Daily Mail on January 22: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9172615/This-Armie-Hammer-branded-ex-girlfriend-Paige-Lorenze-using-cutting-knife.html (She would also speak to Page Six, Inside Edition, Kyle and Jacki O, Sofia With An F and Dr Oz).

Hammer had stepped away from the Gaslit series prior to the allegations, due to scheduling conflicts. This February 2021 article notes he and several others exited "months ago":

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/watergate-series-sam-esmail-armie-hammer-joel-edgerton-1234912162/

In March 2021, after a woman formally accused Hammer of rape, lawyers released a July 2020 WhatsApp message sent by the woman, requesting violent sex, which he declined:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9380711/Armie-Hammer-accuser-denied-raped-two-months-earlier-messages-show.html

Hammer returned to the Cayman Islands in December 2020 to see his children. He remained there until May 29 2021, when he flew to Florida to begin rehabilitation treatment on May 31: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/06/armie-hammer-has-checked-into-a-treatment-program

Editingtoolss (talk) 08:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

What are your proposed changes? Some1 (talk) 21:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

New information about the source of the allegations against Armie Hammer.

A couple of media outlets have reported that…

September 2022, Armie Hammer’s estranged wife allegedly used a friend’s email to communicate with journalists. A now former friend of Chambers, who allowed Chambers access to her email account, provided emails and screen shots of text messages, which show that Hammer’s ex allegedly posed as this woman and sent messages to press outlets using her account. CNN has also obtained screenshots of text messages between Chambers and her former friend discussing the impersonation. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/09/26/entertainment/armie-hammer-elizabeth-chambers/index.html

September 22, pagesix reported, that the woman behind the sexual misconduct claims against Hammer, shared unverified text messages purportedly sent messages by pressuring her into pressing charges so she could get full custody of their two children. https://pagesix.com/2022/09/26/elizabeth-chambers-allegedly-posed-as-friend-to-leak-armie-hammer-stories/amp/

I feel this information is relevant and could be a useful addition to the main page. Barkingbard (talk) 04:10, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Could you guys possibly exonerate him more?

The allegation section doesn’t read like a set of facts. It’s so obviously slanted. Some random anonymous unsourced person says Gloria Allred dropped the case because the woman would be committing perjury? I mean, come on. Be better and stop protecting the Boys Club. 2601:1C2:1701:4AB0:65EA:770:9D3B:5AC2 (talk) 16:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

All the accusations by Effie have been proved false to several degrees including her stalking him before and after any alleged relationship they may have had. And her lawyer did drop the case when she refused to take any legal action and only wanted to tell "her story" on social media. Another woman presented in the "documentary" never even ever met him in person but claimed she did. Other two influencers who jumped on the bandwagon contraddicted themselves several times and one provided pictures found on Pinterest and claimed were her wounds and lied on resasons she got into rehab by editing older posts on her social media accounts. There are even proofs that his ex wife and Effie talked extensively on how to best secure he lost any chance to get custody of his children before the news was fed to the tabloids so that the ex wife will get the best deal on the divorce. With several messages from Effie denying stuff she later said was true only to recant once again. Then started to slander and accuse people on social media who questioned the huge holes in her story when they double checked instead of running sensationalist click bait articles.

These informations have always been available — including the full direct messages on social media, snapshots of two of the accusers spotted at several red carpents and similar events or in locations closer to him for years. Sate your desire for destroying a person's life over false accusations elsewhere. 79.18.193.152 (talk) 04:14, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Reading over it now, it seems very slanted and biased. The writing seems to be written more like a press release or defense summary. Your Glutes (talk) 03:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Seriously - this page reads like it was written by his legal team. This is the first time I've ever seen a direct quote from someone's lawyers on a wikipedia page. This does not meet wikipedia standards. 97.126.101.240 (talk) 03:52, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Duh Rhodesmc123 (talk) 02:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Rewrite of the abuse allegations section?

The way it reads right now is seems non-neutral and not up to Wikipedia standards. Your Glutes (talk) 03:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. It's odd that the actual conduct he's accused of is not mentioned. MonMothma (talk) 18:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)