Talk:Harvey Weinstein

Unnecessary Language

In the section 2005-2017, "An analysis of Academy Award acceptance speeches from 1966 to 2016 found that Weinstein had been thanked or praised in 34 speeches—as many times as God, and second only to Steven Spielberg (with 43 mentions).", I feel like "-as many times as God," is unneeded and doesn't serve the neutral tone of Wikipedia. Do the rest of you agree? MLC 30975 (talk) 15:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Disagree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.249.41.163 (talk) 22:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Agree. It should read "an American former film producer." 196.2.13.245 (talk) 08:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Of course we agree. What does any god have to do with this? 37.47.130.239 (talk) 06:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

How could that not be relevant! 2604:3D08:5B80:B70:6BED:C571:6029:3D8A (talk) 00:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Lead sentence

I've changed the lead sentence to conform to the correct order of English adjectives (age comes before origin). Technically, this introduces an ambiguity as to whether he's a former producer or a former American. Since the latter isn't common wording, I went with "former American film producer", but if anyone objects, I'd recommend going with "former producer of American films" rather than the previous wording, as it sounds very wrong. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 14:11, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm just copying a comment that appeared to be posted on the wrong topic

> Agree. It should read "an American former film producer." 196.2.13.245 (talk) 08:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC) NomzEditingWikis (talk) 23:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on Harvey Winestein page 29 March 2024

Subject: Urgent Proposal for Revising Harvey Weinstein's Wikipedia Entry to Emphasise Convicted Sex Offender Status

Dear Wikipedia Editors,

I am writing to suggest an imperative revision to the structure of Harvey Weinstein's Wikipedia entry, advocating for the prominent positioning of his status as a convicted sex offender. This proposal is driven by several critical considerations:

Legal Precedence and Public Concern: The criminal convictions of Harvey Weinstein have had a profound influence on the entertainment sector, the dialogue surrounding sexual misconduct, and the judicial processes pertaining to such offences. The centrality of these convictions in contemporary discourse on sexual harassment and the #MeToo movement underscores the necessity of reflecting this aspect of Weinstein's biography with due prominence, given its considerable public interest and historical importance.

Commitment to Neutrality and Verifiability: Aligning with Wikipedia's dedication to neutrality, the proposed adjustment aims not to disproportionately highlight the negative facets of Weinstein's life, but to accurately present the legal and social consequences of his actions as substantiated by his convictions. The information concerning his convictions is thoroughly documented and verifiable, meeting Wikipedia's standards for reliable sources.

Advocacy for Victim Rights and Awareness: Accentuating Weinstein's status as a convicted sex offender is congruent with the broader societal endeavours to recognise and address the impact of sexual misconduct. It supports victims' rights by acknowledging the legal acknowledgment of their experiences and the repercussions faced by the perpetrator.

Adherence to Biographical Standards: Wikipedia's guidelines for biographies of living persons stress the importance of equitably representing different facets of an individual's life. Considering the severity of Weinstein's convictions in relation to his professional accomplishments, revising the article to foreground his criminal status would offer a more equitable and precise depiction of his public persona.

I propose that the introduction be amended to conspicuously include Weinstein's status as a convicted sex offender, succeeded by a comprehensive account of his professional achievements and contributions to the film industry. This approach would ensure an exhaustive and balanced biography that acknowledges both Weinstein's influence on the entertainment industry and the grave legal and ethical transgressions he has committed.

Implementing this change would significantly enhance the article's alignment with Wikipedia's foundational principles of neutrality, verifiability, and serving the public interest. I anticipate your consideration of this urgent proposal.

Kind regards,

Elizabeth G — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliizabeth G (talk • contribs) 01:54, March 29, 2024 (UTC) — Eliizabeth G (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

I propose that the introduction be amended to conspicuously include Weinstein's status as a convicted sex offender This is already the case. The lead sentence as of right now says he is an American former film producer and convicted sex offender and then two of the following three lead paragraphs are about his sex offenses while one is about what he's actually notable for, being a film producer. The lead is giving undue weight to the sex offenses as it is. Past discussions indicate that terms like "sex offender" and "convicted felon" are too loaded for the opening sentence. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

In theses times of identity affirmation, I think the lead sentence should inform that he is a Jewish American former film producer. 189.40.82.110 (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: I disagree with your assertion that including terms like "sex offender" or "convicted felon" in the first sentence is an inherent violation of NPOV or UNDUE. The biographies of people who had similarly notable careers and were later found guilty of serious offenses (e.g. R. Kelly and Jeffrey Epstein) describe their convictions in the first sentence. In fact, I believe it would be improper to exclude Weinstein's status as a sex offender, given that that the allegations against him catalyzed the global MeToo movement. Conifer (talk) 17:57, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Conifer, I just edited it out of Kelly and Epstein's opening sentences. The lead of this article is one paragraph on Weinstein's career and two paragraphs on his sex offenses. In my opinion, that's UNDUE weight on the crimes. And the editors who chimed in at the past discussions I linked above last week clearly leaned towards putting "convicted felon" or "convicted sex offender" in the opening sentence is UNDUE. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

If you'd like to edit the two paragraphs on his sex offenses down to one (or expand on his production credits?), please feel free. As for the discussions you linked: I understand the desire to avoid loaded terms like "convicted sex offender", but we're withholding important context from our readers if the first paragraph in the lede states nothing more than "Harvey Weinstein is an American former film producer."

How about adding two sentences, one describing his film career and one describing his record of sexual abuse? This would match the current setup at R. Kelly—a comparable example of someone who was undoubtedly influential in his artistic field prior to his downfall.

"Weinstein achieved success as one of the most influential film producers in Hollywood during the 1990s. He was later publicly accused by dozens of women of sexual harassment and rape, sparking the #MeToo Movement in 2017 and leading to his conviction on sexual abuse charges in New York and California."

Open to suggestions from you or any other editors on the proposed wording. Best, Conifer (talk) 18:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

R Kelly's lead looks too long. Five paragraphs is not advised.

This issue has gone on long enough on many biographies, so it needs an RfC that covers all pages. I'll be starting one at WP:BLPN later today, or tomorrow if I don't have the time. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Wonderful. I look forward to participating. Conifer (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

"Sex offender" is a perfectly accurate description of Weinstein, and it ought to be restored to the opening sentence. There is nothing loaded about it. The following paragraph/s in the lede explain his crimes sufficiently. Asperthrow (talk) 13:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes. For the reason that the California convictions of sexual abuse still have not been overturned, so this still makes him a sex offender unless and until those convictions have been overturned. This is notwithstanding the overturning of the New York convictions. The article already amply refers to both trials and the successful NY appeal and also the CA convictions etc. I added a quote which was in effect a summary from the NY ruling which explained in one simple paragraph why the appeal was allowed. I would propose to keep this rather than having multiple quotes, as this one quote properly summarises the case. I do however think the infobox needs to be updated to reflect that he isn't now serving any time for the NY convictions and to remove the counts he is serving for (as they currently include the NY convictions which have been overturned). UnicornSherbert (talk) 21:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography has an RfC

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Courtney Love quote

Any idea why the famous Courtney Love quote is not included here? It showcases how pervasive the knowledge of Weinstein's abuses where in 2005 well before he was indicted. Here's some RS: CNN[1], Slate[2], CBS[3], Billboard[4], and People[5].

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:BC4B:EDD7:9F02:52C9 (talk) 22:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)