Talk:Bob Hope
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An event mentioned in this article is a May 6 selected anniversary (may be in HTML comment)
[edit] 100th Wishes
Let's all hope that Hope lives to celebrate his 100th birthday. Only 37 more days to go! Anyway, did anyone catch the special on NBC about Bob's 80+ year career in the entertainment field? Longevitymonger April 22, 2003
[edit] Poor Health as 100th Nears
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
[edit] Notes on Death
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 their 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
- An interesting sidelight: his New York Times obituary carried an interesting by-line: Vincent Canby, who died three years before Hope. -- Someone else 04:29, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
-
- It is not unusual for the Times to collect tidbits and anecdotes about a person while he is alive for the purposes of preparing an obituary. They have a big database containing information about celebrities so that when they finally pass away (it has to happen eventually), they can print the article.
-
-
- It's not unusual for most organizations to prepare obituaries for the famous. It is unusual that when they are published, the only byline goes to a dead person. -- Someone else 18:47, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- There can be little doubt an editor at the NYT smiled as he released the obit under that byline. Wyss 18:10, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] POV text
I removed the below paragraph from the article:
- Hope's humour rarely took any risks and while he is famed for his performances for the US military, very few of the young men ever found him very funny. One exception to this took place in Korea. Hope came on stage before a hillside audience of about 15,000 GIs and opened with a question about Korea's famous odor: "What is that SMELL??" he asked. All 15,000 voices shouted out the answer: "SHIIITTT!" Hope paused and then said: "I know...but what do they DO to it?!.....That audience found him very funny.
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)
[edit] Sir Bob Hope?
Can Bob Hope use 'Sir' in front of his name instead of KBE after it? Although an American citizen, he was born in England.
- Before 1 January 1949, naturalisation as a U.S. citizen caused automatic loss of British nationality. He became American in 1920, and although he was under 21 at the time, he probably lost his British nationality on the basis of his father's loss of British nationality. Laws on citizenship were very different at the time. JAJ 15:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, he couldn't, as JAJ says. But even if he could, he would have used the KBE as well. It's not an either/or situation. -- Necrothesp 15:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spirit of Bob Hope
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)
-
- I put it in the memorials section. In truth it does seem to fit his cultural legacy somehow. Wyss 01:13, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Question of POV text
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 think you would need more than one linked article to support your characterization of the claims as "well-documented." MisfitToys 19:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
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)
-
- In the common view, Hollywood stars having affairs is hardly indicative of a "dark side". Being a poor tipper is not exactly encyclopedic info, and someone who donates millions of dollars can't be called "stingy". If this info is included, it should be attributed to a source ("According to Joe Smith, Hope gave small tips and played around with starlets"). -Will Beback 23:41, 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
- Please do not insult your fellow editors by implying we are stupid children. -Will Beback 01:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
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
- I read the sources provided, but I see scant mention about stinginess. I do see a lot of other material which isn't in the articles, which makes it seems as if the editor was cherry picking (or perhaps, rotten-tomato picking). I didn't see anyone saying that this info was censored, or that it was "the result of the public's conflation of the beloved Hope media and the man himself." -Will Beback 07:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
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
- Er, trust me, there's no conspiracy here to protect this celebrity's public memory.
- Philandering is a PoV term, implying moral judgement and has no place in an encyclopedia (even as a verifiable quote it'd be dodgy).
- So too with stinginess. Many people are careful with their money, it's a very unremarkable trait. On the other hand, Hope contributed vast amounts of his time to arguably philanthropic causes. If you want this word in the article, you must find a verifiable quote in a reliable secondary source.
- Good faith (even if biased) content disputes aren't vandalism. Wyss 15:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
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
- I was talking about all the time he donated to the USO.
- Bob Hope has always bored me to tears. I mean, eye-watering, brain mushing numbness.
- I haven't touched this article so I don't know what you mean by "compromise of watering down what I wrote."
- You seem to have misunderstood what people mean here when they use the term "good faith."
- Give me some enough source material and I could make almost anyone look like a jerk.
- Your contributions tend to read like those old "Jimmy Fiddler in Hollywood" columns I've run across. That's problematic in an encyclopedia. Wyss 16:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
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 was talking about Jimmy Fiddler's writing style. Anyway, if a celebrity's life is encyclopedic enough for inclusion here, there is more than enough material relating to their professional career for an encyclopedic biography that isn't written with the same unsupportable rhetoric and filler as a gossip column, never mind Mr Fiddler's obsolete turns of phrase. I would add, the article can include references to personal relationships, so long as they're mentioned objectively and drawn from reliable secondary sources. I should add that your contributions now and then do seem objective and cleanly written, although you might want to consider integrating them more seamlessly into the text. Wyss 17:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
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)
[edit] Re-write
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)
[edit] Bob Hope's Name
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"?
[edit] KCSG
- In January 1998, the Pope on a visit to Los Angeles awarded the KCSG in recognition of services to Catholic causes to 67 people. Of those 67, 3 were non-Catholics - Bob Hope, Roy Disney, and Rupert Murdoch.For a reputable source, please see this excerpt from the January 3 1998 edition of the Los Angeles Times, " Pope Honors Rupert Murdoch, Roy Disney, Bob Hope" Bwithh 01:36, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hope had converted to Catholicism.
[edit] comic
FYI, DC Comics published "The Adventures of Bob Hope" from Feb/March 1950 to 1968. The comic was edited by Jack Schiff.
[edit] Siblings
The article mentions that Hope had 7 other siblings, what were all of their names?
[edit] Salt and pepper shakers
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)
- The "Salt and pepper shakers" vandal is active again. For anyone with Bob Hope on their watchlist, please keep an eye on this page for any recurrence of this nonsense. 23skidoo 18:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] was he a christain?
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
[edit] Edits from Banned User HC and IPs
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:
- AOL NetRange: 92.8.0.0 - 92.225.255.255
- AOL NetRange: 172.128.0.0 - 172.209.255.255
- AOL NetRange: 195.93.0.0 - 195.93.255.255
[edit] Post-Nominals
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)
[edit] Roger Tréville
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).
[edit] History of Eltham?
"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)
-
- If you check the history, it used to read: Note: "The London Borough of Greenwich was part of Kent until 1941, when there was an administrative shake up" which is incorrect. I just made it accurate rather than deleting it - if you want to take it out , that's fine. Lion King 16:37, 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)
-
- No need to apologise, your statement didn't strike me as being harsh, I just thought that it warranted an explanation from me. I quite agree, my initial reaction was to delete it! Cheers, Lion King 18:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not a character actor
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)
[edit] Referencing
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)
[edit] Blogs used as citations
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)
[edit] Edits to Hope's religion
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)
- Any change to his religion should be backed by a citation that he was Latin rite. Ronbo76 06:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Children were adopted
204.193.198.243 22:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)annie
It is my understanding that all Bob and Dolores Hopes' children were adopted.
- Yes, that's right.[1] I've adjusted the text. -Will Beback · † · 22:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Lived 95 or 100 years?
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)
[edit] WP:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers priority assessment
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)
[edit] Merger_proposal
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? TINYMARK 17:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep I say the short subject page should stay where it is. The reason I created it in the first place was that the page looked messy and it could just as easily be found by linking to it. I am prepearing the article to be nominated for GAstatus after I finish doing the cleanup. I will eventually put the link back into the body of the article and get rid of the sub paragraph header. That is the move of a good article. So, for that reason, I oppose the merge. Canyouhearmenow 12:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

