Talk:John Wayne/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Lung Cancer

Some trace his cancer back to his work in The Conqueror, filmed about 100 miles downwind of Nevada nuclear-weapons test sites. Several people who worked on this movie died of cancer. It has been suggested that the crew brought sand back from the site to use in the studio for other scenes and that this sand was radioactive.

However Wayne was reported to have been a chain smoker - four to five packs (75-to-100 cigarettes) a day for forty years.

Homosexuality

There has NEVER been any evidence at all in any memoirs about Duke by those that knew him, that ever even hinted that there was a suspicion of him being gay. Not even from people that had an axe to grind with him. It is laughable that anyone can cast innuendo and unsubstantiated gossip about a man that spent his life as an American icon of male sexuality. Incredible! Just as someone else on this thread so eloquently put forth.........if you have no facts I guess you can allege that every man in the world is a homosexual. It's childish and without merit. Rockshake 16:09, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

On 13 June - Powerpleb added:

"+ It has been alleged that John Wayne was homosexual although this is rejected by many of his fans."

I have trouble with the statement of him being gay as he fathered seven children. Rhymeless 07:51, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Lets just stick to the FACTS please, if you have evidence, present it, if not. Everyone in the WORLD is an alleged homosexual, like Hugh Hefner, Ronald Regan, etc. Besides, he would be BISEXUAL, not homosexual, just ask Michael, Patrick, and the other Waynes.

Ask Michael? He died in 2003.

I have read many books about Wayne (and those associated with him like John Ford) and talked to people who worked with him, and there is no evidence of him being homosexual or bisexual. According to film director and historian David Bradley. Wayne was easily dominated by women he was in relationships with, and never got over breaking up with Marlene Dietrich, but that does not establish him as being anything but heterosexual. And I am not one of those people who idolizes every aspect of his career; while I certainly admire his work on the screen, I acknowledge some of his less than admirable behavior like his role in the blacklist or his occasional racist statements towards African-Americans, and am not a fan of his right-wing Catholicism nor his ultraconservative politics.

Unfortunately this can't be used as evidence for Wikipedia or anywhere else, but I have it no the word of a man I trust that The Duke once chased him round the deck of yacht when he (my friend) was 18. (That makes JW bi, for what it's worth). PiCo 11:14, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Wayne was not a Catholic. He was probably best described as an agnostic.

JesseG 02:40, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

He converted to Catholicism on his deathbed.

I have only a personal source for this so it can't go in the article, but Wayne worked with a Christian Science practitioner throughout his illness.Chandler75

Many homosexuals have fathered many children in the past because they were in denial due to the former taboo in many societies many years back. It is also possible for homosexuals to have hetrosexual relationships by pretending that their partner is of the same gender. Secondly there is so much denial over John Wayne being gay because of homophoebic fans. Finally, I heard that his homosexual confession was written in one of his diaries and discovered after he died.

W wanderers 11:53, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

John Wayne was not Homosexual. There needs to be evidence for this. Also, John Wayne WAS, not just described as, a Protestant Christian. There was allegations that have been refuted by his family that he converted to Catholicism on his death bead. This is like saying Darwin converted to Christianity on his deathbed. It just does not work. --Sicamous 21:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Wayne was not a Christian, he never practised any religion at all during his lifetime and it is a matter of opinion whether his deathbed conversion to Catholicism was genuine. Patrick has said it was. (HarveyCarter 14:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

Roger Ebert writes, "imagine John Wayne in Red River, with a stirring beneath his chaps every time he looks at Montgomery Clift" (Roger Ebert's Movie Yearbook 2003, p.593)

Red River may be the first gay western, since it has the famous "Let me see yours" scene with the gay Clift and the bisexual John Ireland.

Get over it you denial freaks the Dupe was a closeted fag, like all male nazi's!

Penis size

It has been often alleged that John Wayne had a very small penis (about 3.5 inches when erect). Can anyone back this up with evidence?

Yes, that is why he was so insecure about his sexuality and set himself up as the self-appointed guardian of public morals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs)

NOTE previous poster (195.93.21.100) is a known troll who continues to push his anti-John Wayne position on these pages. The only reason he has not been indefinitely blocked is because he's on a static IP address that several others can use. His comments should be disregarded unless backed up by sources that adhere to WP:CITE. Batman2005 23:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Six kids is good enough for me. What is the point of such talk?--Jvortiz 01:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

What's the point? The point is that it's thrust into every dead celebrity article on Wikipedia. Everyone has a friend whose friend was chased by some celebrity (who on the other hand was trying to hide it). They all picked up people who could turn around and blackmail them or write a tell-all book after they died. Everyone kept a diary sure to be found and sold to the tabloids. Some of these people were gay and did a little acting on the side. I applaud people who are gay and live proudly as who they are, make no bones about it. I feel terribly sorry for people who have to spend their lives hiding their sexual identity, it must be awful. But there's no point in saying that was true of every single celebrity in Hollywood - especially after they're dead. Maybe they were all bi - I say more power to them, I hope they had fun.Chandler75 15:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Even if there were evidence, I hardly see how size of the Duke's sceptre (couldn't resist) matters in an encyclopedia article. On the other hand, if there were significant evidence supporting that he were homosexual -- obviously closeted -- that could possibly be significant. ThatGuamGuy 21:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)sean

His War Career

I'm the world's biggest fan of the movies of John Wayne -- I've essentially stopped going to movies since he made his last one, and of the perhaps 15 VHS movie tapes I own, 10 of them are pictures starring the Duke. But I also think that his career, or lack of it, in the armed forces, is germane to an entry about his life. I'm going to check on it in a moment, but I'm pretty sure that other stars such as Jimmy Stewart and Clark Gable had active roles in the Armed Forces, even on the battlefields.Hayford Peirce 01:30, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

what about the story that Rock Hudson, upon being admitted to an LA emergency room, was found to have John Wayne's Rolex watch inside his rectum? Truth or Myth? User:63.163.57.20 13:31, 22 January 2006 63.163.57.20 (UTC)

• Since you're good at making up stories, how about making up an actual logon? Wahkeenah 13:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

According to Michael Munn's book "John Wayne: the Man Behind the Myth," Herbert Yates, the head of Republic pictures who Wayne was signed with, lobbyied several times to attain military deferrment for him because he was Republic's only star and therefore primary source of income. He also relates that the last time Wayne was deferred, he was very disappointed because he felt guilty about not serving up until then. Also with few exceptions, like Jimmy Stewart who flew thirty combat missions, most stars that did enlist were typically placed in public relations positions where they went around making public appearances to boost G.I.'s morale. A worthy role, but not unlike making patriotic movies back home which were shown to troops when they were between deployments. Krstone 66.53.201.71 08:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I shouldn't believe that book if I were you, because Munn claims Stalin sent assassins to kill Wayne and goes on to claim James Stewart was a spy for the FBI.

• Hey, Stewart starred in a movie called The FBI Story. That's probably the guy's source. Wahkeenah 18:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

MUNN doesn't claim Stalin tried to have Wayne killed, he quotes Orson Welles as claiming it. Big diff.

Hack journalist Munn, who has published sensational "biographies" of about 20 conveniently dead stars, made up all that rubbish from Orson Welles.

Draft Dodger,or Not?

Draft dodger. Once defended the homosexuality of Rock Hudson.

The above sort of thing is, to put it nicely, ridiculous. When was he a draft dodger? What war? What difference does it make whether he defended Rock Hudson's homosexuality? Maybe this sort of information does have a place in a longer article about John Wayne, but just placed into contextless broken sentences, they express factoids that no one could be expected to take seriously. I don't think this is the way to write article stubs. Here is a bit about better stubs.

Per IMDB: "He did well at school both academically and in football. When he narrowly failed admission to Annapolis he went to USC on a football scholarship 1925-7" What draft-dodger would ever apply to Annapolis? The only film in which Wayne and Hudson played together was The Undefeated where they were retired colonels from opposite sides of the US Civil War. Eclecticology

Notice, also, that you wikified a number of words that actually have articles associated with them. If you knew what naming conventions we're following, you might have known how to link those words; you could also search (using the form at the bottom of the page) to find out what the exact names of the articles that you want to link to are. --Larry Sanger

---

My, that was ugly. Anyway, I've always heard him referred to as "the Duke" (or "The Duke"), generally not just "Duke", but that might have been different when he got the name as a child, as it's mentioned in the article. It should probably say "the Duke" in there somewhere, but I don't know if it should go in the childhood nickname mention, or as a later note that he became known as "the Duke". -- John Owens 04:54 May 8, 2003 (UTC)

Wayne may have never went to war, but for a man who was risking to lose his career and marraige it would be a tough decision for anyone. i think fans and non-fans can agree he was no Audie Murphy, but he made great movies. Muhammed Ali didn't go, pretty sure he is still viewed as one of the, if not the best, boxer in history. John wayne made some, no a lot of good movies, and lets just leave it at that. -Jake Carley

Career in danger? Marriage on the rocks? While this may not be an attempt to fully justify Wayne's choice, it is certainly an attempt to smooth over the fact that Wayne made money starring in war movies while his peers put their LIVES, not just their marriages and careers, in grave danger. If made for these reasons, Wayne's choice to not fight should not be ignored because it belittles the sacrifices made by WWII soldiers and their families. Yes, Muhammad Ali disobeyed the government as well, but Carley's comparison of Ali and Wayne assumes the comparable equality of reason for disobedience (Ali - refusal to fight for a racist society, Wayne - apparent popularity and profitability of war movies) and also equates the Vietnam War to WWII. -Matt Baker-

Other genuine Hollywood war heroes were James Stewart, Douglas Fairbanks Jr., and Eddie Albert.

Am currently reading Joe McBride's biography of John Ford, and it deals with the subject of Hollywood stars at war, or not. Previously I had understood that Wayne had tried to join up but had being refused a number of times due to physical problems. Apparently this was'nt the case; his careear was taking off (after a decade in the doldrums) at the outbreck of war and he did'nt wish to let his second chance go to waste. He recieved several deferments, and deliberatly did all he could do to stay out of service. In contrast, John Ford - who thirteen years Wayne's senior - was already a member of the forces at the outbreck of war, and saw action in several theatres, most notably Midway. Have to say that Wayne does not come out of this smelling of roses at all; McBride suggests that part of the reason he became such a superpatriot in later years was as a means of asserting his patriotism while at the same time deflecting attention away from his less-than-honourable conduct during the war. Kendrick's not far wrong when he draws similaritys between him and current chickenhawks; I guess it's only someone who's never seen the dogs of war on the loose that feels happy blowing rhetoric. Given Duke's positions on a number of subjects in later years, not to mention his many roles in war movies, I'm genuinely stunned by his actions and quite dissapointed. Fergananim 10:10, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

He was 34 in 1941! How can he considered a draft dodger? You think the Army will draft a 34 year old when there are hundreds of thousands of 18-25 year olds? Then by 1945 when the Military would have considered at 34 year old, he was 38. 67.10.247.73 04:46, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that John Wayne had a Selective Service classifications that prevented him from being drafted. I also agree he could have either at best just went ahead and enlisted or at worst insisted he be given a 1A classification - since he portrayed military persons in movies both before and after the war. Later when a different generation was of the age to be drafted and he was ineligible, he was critical. My father registered in the same time period and was classifed 4F, leaving him very dissapointed. Later he had another chance to be classified and further medical tests got him to be classified as 1A, upon which he was drafted. So, I would suppose an individual has some influence in the outcome of the classification but I have not seen any evidence that shows Wayne influenced the classification. Since he did not enlist then he is in this gray area between it. Wikipedia attempts to define Draft dodger. The The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition (2002) definition is "someone who is drafted and illegally refuses to serve". I don't see evidence that he was drafted and refused to serve. There should be a better term. Perhaps it can be said he was a hypocrite, since he made movies during the war, and appeared in uniform, and could have served in the military instead. I still have my draft card from the early 1970's but I'm still waiting for a letter...LOL. P.S. - if leaving a comment on a talk page, it would be good for users to identify themselves and not sign in anonymously. When it is anonymous the comments are not as credible. Mfields1 22:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes he was a draft dodger, just like his friend Ronald Reagan. If Wayne had wanted to serve, then he wpould have ensured he was taken, as Henry Fonda and David Niven did. Funny how the most pro-war celebrities never saw action.

Reagan "dodged the draft" by joining the army reserves in the 1930s, before the war. True, he never saw combat, but at the same time he was hardly a draft dodger.

Well, how many men with four children, an injury that ruined his athletic career at USC (he lost all money since he could not play on Howard Jones' legendary team (how could a future draft dodger have run out on that?), and a ruined shoulder (an injury that I do not see anywhere, but in the Maurice Zolotow biography, Shooting Star (1974) were accepted by the draft board in World War II? I keep seeing these emotional arguements about how Wayne did his best to evade every turn, but I do not see any citation of documents. At least there were documents to show the efforts George W. Bush made to steer clear of responsibilities in the Texas Air National Guard (intimating only that he evaded a tour in Vietnam, to Dan Rather's chagrin).--Jvortiz 01:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)jvortiz

None of those injuries existed, and being married with children didn't stop Henry Fonda (37) from enlisting,

You mean John Wayne anticipated getting drafted in World War II and gave up a football scholarship and four years at USC so he could dodge the draft over a decade later? What a visionary?Jvortiz 08:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

What a draft dodging coward, you mean.

Playing the lead

"According to the Internet Movie Database Wayne played the male lead in 142 of his film appearances, an as yet unsurpassed record." - surely Tom Mix (among others) exceeded this. Jooler 10:34, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• The IMDB page is somewhat confusing because it also says he played in almost 250 movies. However just below that it says that he holds a record for male lead roles, as you say, in 142 films. And only 11 films in his career were not lead roles. Well 142+11=~250.

Duke as I called him was a very good friend of mine. I met him at a party at Jack Bennys home one week end. Jack invited me after I met him at a Hollywood eatery one Saturday as a result of a friend of mine set up a joke on Jack. I had an old Maxwell car that I found and restored it according to a friend. It took me about a year to restore. When I was finished with it this friend called me one Saturday and told me to bring my Maxwell to the strip and park it in a spot where he was parked. He pulled out and I pulled in. In front of me was another Maxwell exactly like mine. I remember it was one hot day and Lou would not tell me who owned the other Maxwill. We waited for about an hour when Jack came out and stopped when he saw the two Maxis there, he flipped. They were identical in every respect. Jack came over to us when he saw us laughing about it. He invited us back into the rest. and we spent the rest of the day there. I'LL tell you one thing Jack was no cheapskate. Duke was a man's man in all respects. Jack called me two weeks later and asked if I would bring the Maxi out to his place. That's when I first met Duke.

"Racist"

In a very uncomplimentary light in the Public Enemy song Fight the Power (lyrics), from the 2002 album "Revolverlution". The lyrics state that Elvis Presley was an evil racist, then seems to lump Presley and Wayne together. Since Wayne married three Hispanic women and had many black friends such as Sammy Davis Jr, it does not appear he was racist.

The above passage comes from the Wikipage. It appears to be a merely unsubstantiated rumour, however it carries much more weight than some might assume (if IMDB is to be believed). Wayne has admitted that he was a "white supremacist":

"In a May 1971 Playboy magazine interview, on the subject of blacks making strides towards equality in the U.S., he stated that he believed in "white supremacy" until blacks were educated enough to take a more prominent role in American society."

And he has clearly commented on the Native Americans:

[On Native Americans:] "I don't feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from them. There were great numbers of people who needed new land, and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves."

Now, of course one must keep in mind that these quotes could have been taken out of context, but one must also at least make mention of them in the article. The first quote obviously demonstrates that Wayne was at least somewhat elitist (wanted to keep the vote from the 'lessers') and/or racist (wanting to keep the vote from the Blacks specifically), and in favour of a geniocrity (wanted only the intelligent to vote). I would have to say it is probably somewhere in between since he never made comment that he would be in favour of uneducated white people from voting, just African-Americans.

Looking at the time periods that these quotes were taken from might also give evidence, as Wayne's position may have been the defacto standard. That being said, I figured I out to stick this in.

---

Yeah, he was racist. Wayne's quote about Blacks becoming educated enough to participate in the political process is racist on its face. In the U.S. intelligence is not a prerequisite for political participation, which both I and the writer of the previous post assume Wayne meant by "a more prominent role in American society". Thus, the assertion that Blacks should not be able to participate in the political process until they reach some kind of set standard of education non-existent for whites is little more than a Jim Crow literacy test for an entire people. And keep in mind that this comment was made in 1971. Apparently the Civil Rights movement, which basically ended 200 years of de jure discrimination against Blacks, failed to persuade Wayne that Blacks were educated enough to participate politically. And simply because Wayne's position may have been the de facto standard of the time, a point that is arguable at best, does not make his comment any less racist.

Lastly, this quote: "Since Wayne married three Hispanic women and had many black friends such as Sammy Davis Jr, it does not appear he was racist," is the most ludicrous thing I've seen on a seemingly intelligent website. The assumption that whites who have black friends and marry hispanics are, as a result, not racist is ridiculous. This quote implies that, because Wayne liked Blacks and Latinos, he couldn't have been racist, when in reality whites have a history of liking minorities, but still being racist. (Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings,and Strom Thurmond and Carrie Butler are two examples that come to mind. Lincoln, the emancipator himself, liked Blacks enough to see the evil in slavery, but clearly stated that he was not, nor would he ever be in favor of equal rights for Blacks during a campaign speech in southern Illinois.) Racism itself is not necessarily a hatred of another race (which would preclude friendships and relationships with members of that race), but instead a simple belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability, and that one race is superior or inferior to another. This definition certainly allows for Whites to befriend and even have relationships with minorities, as long as the White subscribes to the belief that he or she is a better and more deserving person based solely on his or her race, as was the case with Wayne. -Matt Baker-

• His statement: "that blacks were not yet qualified to hold high public office because discrimination prevented them from receiving the kind of education a political career requires."; was not an indication that he was racist, but was a statement of fact as to how he felt the system operates. That system, favoring “white-Anglo-Saxon-male-Protestants”, is still firmly in place today. Women, along with all minorities, face the same problem of having the political knowledge, savvy and "where-with-all", to break the "male-WASP" hold on the White House. Now, Kennedy broke the Protestant barrier, but he was not far removed from this norm, and he used a massive amount of cash, political maneuvering and favors, and the media to do it. He won a close election over a television inept Nixon. Until a president from another group, of race or sex, attains the Oval Office, this problem will continue. This education process carries far beyond the classroom, to Madison Avenue, manipulation of the media, distribution of massive amounts of funds, to the formation and control of political machines. If “any” other group wants to achieve the address of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the must master all of these facets of political education.

• When can a man just state what the facts are, of how things are, without being called a racists? There have been no black Presidents, or Vice-Presidents, and under the present system there doesn't seem to be one on the horizon. Until any minority becomes "educated" to work the system in his favor there won't be one. This is just a statement of fact, and does not make me a racist. I would support Colin Powell, but I would not support Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. But, I don't see a "machine" getting behind General Powell at this time. I would have supported Powell over both Kerry and Bush in the last election. Hell, I'd support Russell Simmons or Sean Combs over those last two.

These quotes are undeniably racist: "I'm not going to give you those I-was-a-poor-boy-and-I-pulled-myself-up-by-my-bootstraps-stories, but I've gone without a meal or two in my lifetime, and I still don't expect the Government to turn over any of it's territory to me. Hard times aren't something I can blame my fellow citizens for. Years ago, I didn't have all the opportunities, either. But you can't whine and bellyache 'cause somebody else got a good break and you didn't, like these Indians are. We'll all be on a reservation soon if the socialists keep subsidizing groups like them with our tax money."

"Look, I'm sure there have been inequalities. If those inequalities are presently affecting any of the Indians now alive, they have a right to a court hearing. But what happened one hundred years ago in out country can't be blamed on us today."

Asked whether the Native American Indians should be allowed to camp on their land at Alcatraz: "Well, I don't know of anybody else who wants it. The fellas who were taken off it sure don't want to go back there, including the guards. So as far as I am concerned, I think we ought to make a deal with the Indians. They should pay as much for Alcatraz as we paid them for Manhattan. I hope they haven't been careless with their wampum."

These are all from Wayne's infamous Playboy interview from May 1971. It is impossible for anybody to seriously deny that the Duke was racist.

I doubt anyone can deny John Wayne was a racist, but that does not make it bad. Whats wrong with wanting only White Protestant men in government?--Sicamous 04:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Irish-American?

Wasn't John Wayne of predominatly Scots-Irish descent? Why is he listed as Irish-American?

• From Genealogy.com; what lineage they have, has decedents coming from both Ireland and Scotland.
  • FATHER: Clyde Leonard Morrison
  • MOTHER: Mary Alberta Brown

The Irish-Americans probably just claimed him first because they need a hero.

• From the Dictionary of American Family Names, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-508137-4:
  • Morrison: Scottish: patronymic from the personal name Morris.
  • Brown: English, Scottish, and Irish: generally a nickname referring to the color of the hair or complexion, Middle English br(o)un, from Old English brun or Old French brun. This word is occasionally found in Old English and Old Norse as a personal name or byname. Brun- was also a Germanic name-forming element. Some instances of Old English Brun as a personal name may therefore be short forms of compound names such as Brungar, Brunwine, etc. As a Scottish and Irish name, it sometimes represents a translation of Gaelic Donn. As an American family name, it has absorbed numerous surnames from other languages with the same meaning.

WikiDon 21:58, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

• From The Book of Ulster Surnames by Robert Bell, 1990 ISBN 0-85640-405-5:

• • Morrison: Morrison is found in all the provinces of Ireland but is common only in Ulster, particulrly counties Antrim, Down and Fermanagh... in Ulster it can be of Scottish or Irish origin although some may be English.
  • Brown: This is one of the commonest names on these islands [the British Isles]. It is among the forty most common in Ireland as a whole and among the ten most popular in Ulster... Browne with an 'e' is more common in the south of Ireland.

--Mal 14:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Cause of Death 1) Smoking or 2) The Conqueror

Okay, for the fun of it, I decided to test a theory. I picked another popular movie at random from about the same time period as The Conqueror, I picked the The Caine Mutiny. Of the 42 actors listed in the credits at IMDb for The Caine Mutiny, it only list the cause of death (or that have died) for 15 of them. Of those 15, 8 died of cancer, 1 of a brain tumor, and 1 of leukemia. That is 53% outright of cancer, and 66.7% of cancer related diseases.

• The Caine Mutiny (died of cancer related diseases):
  • Humphrey Bogart
  • José Ferrer
  • Tom Tully
  • E.G. Marshall
  • Warner Anderson
  • Claude Akins
  • Jerry Paris
  • Steve Brodie
  • Don Dubbins
  • Todd Karns
  • Tyler McVey

• Filming Locations for The Caine Mutiny (1954):
  • Los Angeles, California, USA
  • Naval Station Treasure Island, San Francisco, California, USA
  • Pearl Harbor, O`ahu, Hawaii, USA
  • Yosemite National Park, California, USA

I suppose Yosemite gave those people cancer?

WikiDon 23:41, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Nice original reasearch, but I know of no reputable source for either proposition. Fred Bauder 02:16, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Elvis was an artist. But that didn't stop him from joining the service in time of war. And that's why he's The King, and you're a schmuck.

Presley joined the Army during peacetime, because "Colonel" Tom Parker thought it was good for his image, and he has no place in an article on John Wayne.

You know of "no reputable source for either proposition" about this death? Uh how about wikipedia? The wikipedia site for The Conqueror says the duke may have died from filming the movie. At great length.

Real Quote?

Did John Wayne ever actually say "Get off your horse and drink your milk"? If so, when? Not Josh 23:12, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Reply: I don't know, but if he did say something like that it probably would have been in one of his "Laugh-In" appearances.

Duke or The Duke?

This footnote seems appropriate:

He was, and is, called "Duke" by his friends and when he was present; he was, and is, called "The Duke" when being referred to in third person on television shows, in magazines, or by people in casual conversation.

But is is attached to an introductory paragraph saying that he was nicknamed "Duke." But since this is an encyclopedia, it is closer to being a "television show or magazine refering to him in the third person" than to being a "friend of John Wayne" (let alone one in his presence, as he is completely dead). So he should be noted as "popularly called The Duke" in the article, with the footnote explaining "Duke" as a private nickname.

• In his early films, before acquiring the "John Wayne" stage name, he was billed as "Duke Morrison", not "The Duke". Wahkeenah 18:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

According to biographer, Maurice Zolotow, Morrison's dog was named Duke. Glendale firemen would call MRM (born: Marion Robert Morrison)"Duke" as well. The name became a school monaker when he fought it out with an antagonizer over his given name, Marion.--Jvortiz 01:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Flying Tigers

The Flying Tigers movie reference should point to the article about the movie (which doesn't appear to exist). Instead, it points to the American Volunteer Unit nicknamed "The Flying Tigers." The movie was fictional, and the movie reference should probably not point to the real unit. Rklawton 19:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

draft section

I've added a brief section detailing the controversy concerning John Wayne's deferment from the draft. It certainly needs tweaking/editing, particularly in terms of formatting the footnote. However, I am adamant that the mention of his draft status, and its relationship to his political and public personae, needs to be included at some point in the article. This article is perhaps a little to sympathetic to begin with. The draft issue is a well known point of discussion when it come to Wayne, it is verifiable, it is sourced, and I believe that I have written it out in a neutral way. Let me know what you think. Freddie deBoer 22:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think you have solved that problem. It's funny how the most pro-war celebrities (Wayne, Stallone, Bush, Cheney) are those who dodged the draft.

Unlike Bill Clinton, none of them actually broke the law to avoid combat. They simply followed the rules to their advantage. Many male university administrators chose "college deferments” back in the ‘60s and ‘70s rather than serve. And most women never served, even during war time, simply because they didn’t have to. Are they “draft dodgers” too? Rklawton 03:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Wayne was going on 35 when we were gearing up for war following Pearl Harbor, so he wasn't exactly prime draft meat. You may think Clinton broke the law, but last time I checked, he was never charged with such. As with folks like Jane Fonda, they weren't really interested in putting the war itself on trial. One thing Cheney, Bush Jr. and Clinton all have in common is the time-honored willingness of the middle-aged to send other people's kids to die in combat and shed crocodile tears over their loss. Wahkeenah 03:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

"crocodile tears" isn't very POV *grins*. Unlike the kids of Clinton's & Wayne's generation, the kids of our generation signed the dotted line before going over - every last, mother-loving one of them. God bless 'em. Rklawton 04:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I have no end of admiration for the kids who are willing to go to places like Somalia and Iraq, and take a bullet for us and the old geezers who sent them there. Wahkeenah 04:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, so Wayne was 34. Big deal. Clark Gable was 41 and went, Henry Fonda was 37 and went, James Stewart was 33 and went. David Niven travelled all the way back to London, despite the opposition of studio heads, to enlist. Face facts people: if Wayne had actually wanted to serve, then he would have. As it is he was a pathetic coward and an icon for racist armchair warriors everywhere.

Substitute Dubya, Clinton or Cheney in that last sentence and it's still mostly true. Wahkeenah 18:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Substitute it for Dubya and Cheney yes, but "the Duke" meant nothing to Clinton whose favorite film was High Noon, which the unregenerate Wayne was still denouncing as anti-American in his hugely controversial Playboy interview from 1971. It's funny that Wayne called Clinton's hero President Kennedy a "communist" when JFK actually served through WW2.

To Wayne almost everyone was a communist. He was part of that crowd that never got over the election of FDR and the implementation of the New Deal. Wayne's other big idea was the inevitability of a next world war showdown with the soviet union and communism. He considered JFK's actions during the cuban missile crisis to be a cowardly retreat but then again he considered every president since Hoover (except maybe Nixon) to be either a communist, communist dupe or coward. As far as seving in the military/JFK, serving in the military means nothing to people like Wayne. Military service, like going to church, is something for the "little people" to do to build up their moral fiber. Wayne didn't even respect Eisenhower. The only military people he respected were guys like Curtis LeMay and MacArthur who had the right political views.

That is right, Eisenhower was as moderate as they came and Wayne had no respect for him, although he did support him over Stevenson.

Wayne did admit to voting for FDR in 1936 ; however, given that Roosevelt achieved one of the most decisive victories in U.S. history in that election, there were certainly other Republicans who voted for FDR that year.

Suffice it to say that I liked Wayne as an actor and that was about it. Wahkeenah 23:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Frequent Whitewashing attempts

There is an IP address that has had a history of whitewashing this article, actually 2 IP addresses, whom I have good reason to believe to be the same person. These IP addresses are 69.255.5.175 and 69.255.18.225. He seems to be mostly removing stuff from song lyrics. --68.100.150.117 03:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Wayne and George Wallace

The article should say that Governor Wallace was a segregationist, as Wayne's support for him is significant in light of his own remarks about black people and native American Indians.

Namesakes

Aside from the Duke himself, 'John Wayne' seems to be an ill-omened name - c.f. John Wayne Gacy, John Wayne Glover, John Wayne Bobbitt, for instance. (News of the Weird keeps a partial list based on this.) I have no idea whether there's any statistical significance to that, but perhaps the article should at least mention that JW has several namesakes who are (in)famous in their own right? --Calair 05:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Rather than being ill-omened, its more that when a father gives his son a name like that, something is really wrong with the father and the family. It will only get worse from there. Wayne was a total fake and by observation the guys who buy into the Wayne character so much that they name their son after him tend to be big fakes too.

Actors are, by definition, fakes. The Duke had no monopoly on that phenomenon. I'm sure there are plenty of other John Wayne _____'s out there, but we only hear about the notorious ones. Also, John Wayne Gacy was a Junior according to his article. His father was born long before The Duke became a film actor. It's the newspaper editors who chose to mention his middle name, to try to make something of this coincidence. John Wayne Glover was born in Australia, before The Duke was well-known, so it's highly unlikely he was named for the actor. I'll concede that Bobbitt might have been. Accidents will happen. Wahkeenah 19:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

John Wayne Gacy's Father was "John S. Gacy". He was named after John Wayne. The father's name being John may have played into it, but it wasn't the whole reason for the name.

Googling finds 3 hits (plus duplicates) for "john s gacy" and several hundred for "john wayne gacy sr", so that needs documentation - will continue this over at Talk:John Wayne Gacy. --Calair 23:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I expressed things badly above; my (intended) main point was "there are enough famous John Wayne Xs that maybe this article should have a pointer to them". The question of whether the name's associated with violence etc. was what started me on that train of thought, but it's a secondary issue.

On that secondary issue: I didn't mean 'ill-omened' to imply a supernatural link, it's just less of a mouthful than 'commonly associated with violence and murder'. Yes, Gacy and probably Glover weren't named for the Duke, which rules out the 'naming kids after JW = macho father' theory, but he was certainly famous during their childhood years and that could possibly have had an effect. OTOH, I agree that there's a lot of room for observer bias here; without solid numbers, this is idle speculation.

(I'm pretty sure Glover was born in England, BTW - he emigrated to Australia as a grown man.) --Calair 22:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Rather than overtly drawing any sinister comparisons, which probably qualifies for disqualification (POV, Original Research, whatever) it might be sufficient to simply list "Other 'John Wayne ___'s'" and let the reader connect the dots. :) Wahkeenah 23:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Works for me. I'll do it as a separate disambig page rather than taking up space here. --Calair 23:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Kudos. And I had forgotten about Johnny Wayne, of Wayne and Schuster. Maybe they don't make up for the low-lifes bearing The Duke's name, but it helps. :) Wahkeenah 00:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Personally I fail to see why any father would name his son after that draft-dodging racist lowlife John Wayne.

Well, maybe if that father was also a draft-dodging racist lowlife, ja? Wahkeenah 02:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Controversies

The draft controversy section should be expanded to detail all the other controversies of Wayne's life, eg his support for blacklisting, his presidency of the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals, his 1971 Playboy interview, his remarks on blacks, native american indians, homosexuals etc. User:195.93.21.100 17:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

• A lot of actors say and do a lot of stupid things, and Wayne was one of them. How much space do we want to spend in this article dwelling on his personal shortcomings vs. his film career? Wahkeenah 18:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Since Wayne and his right-wing allies James Stewart and Ward Bond were at the height of their power during the 1950s, the other controversies are indeed relevant both as historical evidence and for a full portrait of the man, rather than the image. Since Wayne's entire career as a leading man was built on mixing politics with entertainment, it could be argued such an extension is more relevant here than with any other celebrity past or present.

Serials

"and serials for Mascot Studios, where he played the role of d'Artagnan in The Three Musketeers, set in modern North Africa, with co-stars Ray Corrigan and Max Terhune. In this same year (1933), Wayne had a small part in Alfred E. Green's succes de scandale Baby Face."

I'm watching Nightriders on AMC right now, and it is part of his role in the Serials from the 30's. It is by Republic, not Mascot and he is part of a group known as the "Mesquiteers" which is obviously based on the Three Musketeers but isn't the same as playing d'Artagnan. Also, it is a traditional western in the US...not North Africa. I've looked at the IMDB listings and see no roles at this time where he is listed as d'Artagnan. Is this some mistake? Vaginsh 10:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is. Whoever wrote that was way confused. Fred8615 20:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

We Were Soldiers

That 2001 movie was not a pro-war depiction of the Vietnam conflict, so I have removed that reference. Its star Mel Gibson is very vocally anti-war and even dodged the draft himself, just like Wayne. (User at IP 195.93.21.100)

Mel Gibson was born in January 3, 1956. The last man inducted entered the Army on June 30, 1973. By the time of his eligibility (1974) there was no longer a draft. He lived in Australia at the time, but would have been subject to a induction by the Selective Service. I've not seen any evidence that he was a draft dodger, but I would be interested if there is hard evidence. I've not seen evidence any of his older brothers were draft dodgers either. If charges are made there should be references cited. Mfields1 23:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Mel and his family moved to Australia in 1968 so all of the sons would not have to serve in Vietnam. Mel has frequently blasted Bush and the Iraq War. Are you Republicans so stupid you cannot recognize that "We Were Soldiers" is not a pro-war movie? "The Green Berets" was the ONLY pro-war movie about Vietnam. (User at IP 195.93.21.100)

Note to User at IP 195.93.21.100: Please create a log in instead of anonomously vandalizing pages within discussion. Look at the We Were Soldeirs page. If you can prove the Gibson family moved to Australia so Mel Gibson and his brothers avoided the draft then show the proof. The Vietnam War did not occur during either Bush term and it is irrelevant. The Iraq War is irrelevant to the movie We Were Soldiers. Mfields1 06:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually it is very relevant, because they were both illegal and obscene wars caused by American imperialism. Hutton Gibson was strongly against the Vietnam conflict and that is why he left Australia in 1968. Thus his sons would avoid the draft for a war which at that time seemed to have no end in sight. You need to stop trying to make Mel a Republican and realize that We Were Soldiers, with its graphic depiction of the violence and stupidity of war, was NOT a pro-war film. Mel Gibson is left-wing on most issues and would not wish to be a jingo icon like Wayne. (Anonymous User at IP 195.93.21.105).

This is not a political statement about Mel Gibson. These are facts about film themes. See these reviews:

• http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2002/02/15/we_were_soldiers_2002_review.shtml
• http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2006/4/26/64250/9094
• http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2006/4/26/64250/9094

IP 195.93.21.105: stop loggin in anonymously and vandalizing pages. Wikipedia is not about making political statements but you make this into a political statement. Your first paragraph on this page claims this was a 2001 movie. All the listings how this as a 2002 release. User at IP 195.93.21.105 should be less emotional about politics and more factual in your edits. I am issuing a first warning. Vandalizing edits is not allowed on Wikipedia. If you want to discuss this you need to register a name and take it to your user page.

The movie was filmed in 2001 and released in January 2002, you silly cunt. Btw, those reviews only prove We Were Soldiers was a tribute to the troops, not a justification for the war. Hal Moore actually said in the Making Of documentary how its purpose was to support the troops, but not the war. Mel's film has no place in an article about John Wayne, and you might as well say Rambo: First Blood Part II was a pro-Vietnam War movie.

User at IP 195.93.21.105 - I have tried to discuss this with you. I added the reference to the film We Were Soldiers and you continue to vandalize the article by removing it. You need to create an account. Wiki does allow people who are not logged in to edit but it is not the preferred way to work on Wiki. After your first complaint I made a wording change to keep the reference more nuetral. For some reason you are very protective of the film and/or Mel Gibson. That is not the point of the addition, but to balance and contrast the films The Green Berets which was made during the Vietnam War with another film about that War, which was made after the war. Similar comparisons can be made about films made during World War 2 about World War 2, with films made after the war was over. Filsm continue to be made today about all previous conflicts in human history, and for that matter some science fiction films are made which seem to show war in the future. The reference was not made in support of war; it is a terrible thing. In your original reason to remove the comment I added you wrote "That 2001 movie was not a pro-war depiction of the Vietnam conflict, so I have removed that reference." Then I edited it to state the movie was in support of American military persons (in contrast to many films about that war which do not depict them in a favorable light" and you still feel you have the right to remove my edits. Rather than continueing an edit war at this time I will ask for a third opinion. Unfortunately you are hiding behind an anonymous log in. IF you did not we could debate this point off this page. Mfields1 20:18, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Third opinion

Regardless of the view of We Were Soldiers with regards to the rights and wrongs of the Vietnam War, I don't think it should be in the article. The paragraph it was added to says that "The Green Berets (1968), the only film made during the Vietnam War to show American soldiers in a positive representation and support the conflict. [emphasis mine]" - asWe Were Soldiers was not made during the Vietnam War (and hence does not contradict or qualify that statement), nor does it involve John Wayne; it's irrelevant. If people really want to find out about other (possibly) pro-Vietnam War films, they can find out by clicking on the Green Berets link. --Scott Wilson 10:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Mel Gibson was only 23 when John Wayne died and just becoming famous with "Mad Max". The two stars have nothing to do with each other. Watching "The Green Berets" made me understand why Wayne died of cancer. He deserved it.

He deserved it? Do we need this on here? I mean really. I keep hearing preaching about NPOV this and NPOV that but then we see this. I don't get it. Why is this allowed? Were supposed to be discussing the article and edits for the article and turns into a personal and political battle. Just about any controversial page turns into this. Whats with you people. He deserved it. Only the great villians of the world 'deserve it' and then again who are we to say. A film actor that people apprently have mixed feelings over. How does this 'deserve' cancer. Stick to the holy grail of NPOV geez.--Xiahou 01:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Since Wayne was a racist, fascist McCarthyite who supported the Vietnam War, there were plenty of Hollywood people who were glad to see him go.

Draft Controversy? Not hardly...

That section was pure speculation, not a single source was quoted saying ANYTHING about there being a controvery in him not serving. Simply saying that since he didn't serve and other people his age or older with children served doesn't make it a controversy. The section was ridiculous, it contradicted itself and was basically pointless and non-important, one or two editors disagreeing with him not serving is not controversial. I've removed it until sources can be found to lend credence to this supposed "controvery" that was created by him not going to Vietnam. 75.2.20.119 23:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about? We're not talking about Wayne dodging the draft in Vietnam, we are talking about World War II. You have no right to remove well known facts just because you want to rewrite history. Wayne dodged the draft in World War II because he didn't want to risk losing his second attempt at becoming a star. Your change will be reverted at once. By the way, Wayne's failure to serve is certainly controversial because other draft dodgers like Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford didn't try to set themselves up as pro-war military heroes in later life.

That was my mistake saying Vietnam when clearly I mean WWII. If these are well known facts...then provide a source for them! If you can't then its speculation. I suspect if it was SUCH A WELL KNOWN FACT, that you can find some out there to support your point, if not, it reads like speculation is does not meet WP:CITE. Additionally, YOU can't create the controversy as its Original Research, Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford have no relation to John Wayne and shouldn't be included as referencing material. Wayne didn't DODGE the draft, he asked for and was given a pass. The option to ask for the pass was available to ALL persons who were drafted, not just to Wayne. Also, sign your comments.75.2.20.119 19:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Wayne certainly did dodge the draft, because he was required to serve and avoided it while better men died. John Wayne was a coward and everything he stood for was based on lies. Until he lost a lung to cancer in 1964, he wouldn't have qualified for a 4A deferment. By the way, don't bother removing the section again, because I will just keep reverting your changes.

Seems as if the anonymous IP user who refuses to sign his comments just doesn't like John Wayne and will go to all lengths just to slander him. Like I said previously (when I wasn't signed in) I have no problem including the information only if it is properly sourced. Meaning that there have to be sources talking specifically about the controvery and all of your little subjective comments like "cowardice" and the like have to be sourced or they'll be removed. Find the sources about him dodging the draft and it can stay in, if not i'll revert and as you keep doing it you'll be in violation of the 3RR and you'll be blocked. Batman2005 13:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see notice at top of this talk page. "well-known" does not meet WP:V criteria, with the exception of a very, very short list of items which are universally acknowledged, such as Water is wet. KillerChihuahua^?!? 13:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you KillerChihuahua, additionally, I did some research myself and the first 4 pages of a google search on "John Wayne+Draft Dodger" brought up only blog websites and personal opinions, not a single source from a magazine, newspaper, news outlet, etc. that mentioned this "big controvery" that the editors here are trying to push across. Batman2005 13:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

"Wayne did not serve during World War II, unlike his contemporaries William Holden, James Stewart, Clark Gable, Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda and many others. This has long been controversial, especially given his extreme right-wing pro-war activism in later life, and has led to accusations that he was a draft dodger. Wayne was throughout his life a very vocal supporter of the military, anti-communism and the Republican Party. During the Vietnam War he criticised young men who dodged the draft, calling them "cowards", and strongly criticised Jane Fonda and Donald Sutherland for their anti-war activism. Wayne was 34 years old when the United States entered World War II, and requested a deferment as a married father of four children. It is notable that numerous other married celebrities with children, like the 37-year-old activist liberal Democrat Henry Fonda, did serve with distinction throughout the conflict. According to a recent biography of John Ford, Wayne was worried that serving in the military would risk ending his career in Hollywood, and so he made sure he avoided the draft. Ford would frequently attack Wayne for his refusal to enlist, calling him a coward and comparing him unfavorably with actors who did not disobey the draft, such as James Stewart. While visiting US troops fighting in World War II Wayne was booed off the stage for being a draft dodger. Gore Vidal recalled all of his comrades would laugh at Wayne's pro-war movies like Back to Bataan and They Were Expendable. In one of his books, he nicknamed Wayne "The Great Draft Dodger". Many believe Wayne's embarrassment over his own cowardice caused him to assume the position of a superhawk in later life. He directed and starred in The Green Berets (1968), the only movie ever made to support the Vietnam War. In 1970 he financed a documentary, No Substitute for Victory, which alleged the United States was losing the Cold War due to a lack of willingness to fight."

There is nothing innaccurate about any of this. John Wayne was a racist, draft dodging, Nazi. Whether you can accept the truth about your fascist hero or not, it definitely belongs in the article because every John Wayne fan is aware of the controversy, and he was blasted for his failure to enlist until the day he died.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see WP:V, specifically, that WP is not about truth it is about verifiablity. This is not negotiable. You are now in violation of 3RR, and I will block if you re-add this information without proper sourcing. KillerChihuahua^?!? 14:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The draft controversy section was there long before this idiot removed it. What right has he to remove information just because it places his hateful hero in a bad light? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm reporting that as a personal attack. Batman2005 14:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

To deny there was a draft controversy is ridiculous. Wayne was savaged for failing to serve in WW2 when he made the pro-war movies "Big Jim McLain", "Blood Alley", "The Alamo" and especially "The Green Berets". Newspapers and liberal critics frequently published reports calling him a draft dodger. The article has to mention that otherwise it is not balanced.

Then rather than spending your time attacking people to the point that you get blocked...making ridiculous claims of a pending second world war and attacking his character...why don't you spend some time looking for solid, non-biased, verifiable printed sources that are readily available online that talk about this "big controvery" that you claim happened. If you cannot find any then it is not appropriate to publish the material here, as most of it is likely your obvious hatred for the subject. Batman2005 20:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Continued thanks KillerChihuahua, I understand its an AOL registered IP address, but there's got to be something that can be done about his continued personal attacks and adding of nonsense to these pages. On a side note, I find it humorous that he's talking about my Bob Hope quote while comparing everyone else to Nazi's. Batman2005 20:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Not much. Just revert and WP:DNFT. KillerChihuahua^?!? 20:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose. Batman2005 21:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I would like to point out that seeking and recieving a deferment, for whatever reason, is the only legal method of not being drafted, unlike skipping to Canada, or running to England and writing back about "loathing the military". That's dodging. John Wayne had an approved deferment, therefore, he was not a draft dodger. If you don't like that fact that someone has a deferment, that is your opinion, not a qualified, verifiable fact, and should not be on WP. If you don't like John Wayne, why don't you try and create your own ANTI-JW page, and post what you think is verifiable there, with a link to/from this page. User:Al fallujah 5 DEC 2006

I couldn't agree more. The government supposedly is very strict about whom it allows to be deferred. Wayne qualified, end of controversy. My grandfather in North Carolina was deferred for his valuable war skills--shoemaker. We never considered him a draft dodger and the Confederacy needed every man.Jvortiz 08:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Funny how he aggressively avoided service THROUGHOUT World War II, and then set himself up as a war hero once the conflict had been won by decent men like 37-year-old married father Henry Fonda, who would have qaulified far more than Wayne. (Gibsonism 16:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC))

Funny how all your accounts say the same things in the same articles. Please if your going to make statments like this do all of wiki a favor and cite where you supposedly keep 'hearing' this stuff. All of your sock account failed to do this and yet you keep putting the same things in over and over. Wiki is a serious project. If you love, hate, or are indifferent on the topic you still treat it neutral. If you have the information on the draft, height, etc. cite from reputable sources feel free to add it cited. So far all your accounts have failed to do so. till then uncited pov does not belong here or any other article. --Xiahou 18:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

PROTECTION...

As you can see this page has been protected. An AOL Anon was in violation of WP:3RR for reinserting unsourced material after being asked to provide sources regarding the "Draft Controversy" section. Here's my stance.

• I've found no sources that point to an actual "controvery" the entire section was loaded with POV and commentary, quite a bit of it by the IP user, but the fact is that I did a google search and found no reputable sources about a draft controversy.
• WP:CITE clearly states that sources should be provided for all material which could prove divisive. This is obviously divisive, the IP user provided no souces whatsoever, not even ones that meet the lowest wikipedia standards.
• I have no problem including it minus the IP users commentary and subjective language and with proper sources for ALL included material. If Gore Vidal used to laugh about John Wayne then we better have a source. And so on...

Lets discuss this like civilised people and come to a consensus that we can all agree on. Batman2005 14:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Marlon Brando said it's hilarious how the ultimate chickenhawk exponent of America's nuke-'em-all foreign policy died as a result of exposure to his beloved nukes. Just check his autobiography, "Songs My Mother Taught Me" (1994).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

NOTE Please be sure to look at this users edit history before taking credence in anything he says, its quite obvious that he's pushing his POV as well as personally attacking those who disagree with him. Were it not for him being from an AOL account he likely would be indefinitely blocked for these actions. Batman2005 14:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

+ io and oc

Please add io:John Wayne, and oc:John Wayne . Thank you.

Songs about Wayne

The list of songs should also mention "John Wayne Was a Nazi" by MDC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs)

Go away troll. Batman2005 04:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

How is that trolling? That is a song by the band (and it's one of their most well-known). The only thing I can say is the person didn't look too closely, since it's already there. The Ungovernable Force 05:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see this users edit history of pushing his pov all over this article, personally attacking users, violating the 3RR, etc. Then you'll know how it is trolling. Batman2005 13:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

It should be mentioned more prominently in the article, as everybody should hear the truth about Marion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs)

^^^^ Troll. Batman2005 23:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Draft controversy

Dick Cheney's article mentions how he managed to dodge the draft four times during the Vietnam War. Since Wayne was a self-elected Republican politician who was responsible for continuing America's disastrous involvement in Vietnam his refusal to serve his country in WW2 has to be mentioned in the article, along with all the other controversies such as his racism, his alcoholism, his wife beating and his active support for blacklisting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs)

Again, above user is a known troll. Batman2005 23:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Telling the truth is trolling huh? It may interest you to know that Admiral John Ford, known to Wayne as Pappy/Uncle Jack/The Coach, was so disgusted by Wayne's draft dodging that in 1945 he listed all of the actors military rankings after their names on "They Were Expendable". Of course, for Wayne there were none.

^^ Yes, you are a known troll. Batman2005 22:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Source? Reliable source? None. It will be reverted again as orginal research. You must have a source which meets WP's criteria. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

In the Zolotow biography, Shooting Star, he mentions Wayne's meeting with Ford prior to making They Were Expendable. He mentions how Wayne was so embarrassed by all the military careers in the room that he went and cried in the restroom. Ford, calling him "Marion", is the one who pepped him up. Of course, Ford, was famous for some of the most vile humiliation of many a person on his crew or troupe that he might have done it out of spite. I do not think so, however, when I consider the long career the two had with each other into the early 60s.Jvortiz 08:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Yet another Vietnam question

I remember seeing a film about Vietnam some years back (in the 8th grade in fact, it was around maybe 95 or 94), where a few veterans were talking about their experience in the war. One particular vet said that Wayne came to visit them after a particular offensive, he was dressed up in full cowboy gear, fake guns and all, and that when they (the soldiers) saw him they laughed at him and booed him all the way back to his helicopter. The reason for this being that in their eyes he was a phony. Just wondering if anyone else saw that, or if there's any validity to that story. Also, I'm not trying to insinuate anything here, and I'm REALLY not trying to start another debate about draft-dodging or anything like that, just wanted to see if anyone else ever saw the film in question. Levid37 00:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I've not seen the film in question, I have seen videos of USO shows and visits that he did with troops and in those he wasn't greeted with anything other than applause. The IP editor will likely weigh in with some patent nonsense about him being a facist nazi, or a communist, or satin himself. But to answer your question, i've never seen the film in question. Batman2005 01:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, this was over a decade ago, and it was a documentary that specifically played on the Channel One Network, before school started, and at the end of the day. It was a legit documentary from what I remember, not something that some kid threw together, but there's really no way for me to dig it up. I clearly remember seeing it, but I can't prove that it ever existed. Levid37 16:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

A recent PBS documentary on John Ford and Wayne's working relationship showed a small piece of one of Wayne's trips to Vietman. He was wearing regular fatigues, and not even his toupee, let alone a hat. The soldiers in the film seemed glad to see him. If this vet you saw was real, I'd bet good money he was lying about seeing Wayne in a cowboy outfit. Fred8615 19:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Wayne was once booed off the stage while visiting the troops during World War II because they were disgusted at how the chickenhawk Nazi had aggressively avoided service while sending young boys to their deaths. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs)

You know, that comment is so over the top that it almost has to be sarcasm. If not, it's usually preferred that you get your facts from somewhere other than a Public Enemy song buddy. Levid37 01:50, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Levid i'm afraid you're wasting your breath arguing with the John Wayne article troll. He is a troll known for pushing his pov at the expense of any reputable source. The only reason this vandal has not been indefinitely blocked for his inflammatory edits and vile personal attacks is because he is an AOL editor and thus gets a free pass. I would suggest not wasting your time with this "person" and just revert his edits on site as they're likely vandalsim only. Batman2005 19:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Draft controversy must be restored

Wayne's failure to serve his country during World War II is something that always comes up in biographies and programmes. It became a major controversy in light of his support for the Vietnam War and making "The Green Berets". The article must therefore mention this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs)

If you can find a particular biography with credible sources instead of just saying that they're out there then by all means put them in. Other than a documentary that I may not even remember correctly from over a decade ago, I've yet to see any credible biographies mention it. It seems to me that people only bitch about Wayne's service (or possible lack thereof ) in retrospect. Levid37 19:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

For such a MAJOR CONTROVERSY as the troll says, there are curiously NO sources that subtantiate it. Batman2005 19:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

So because some rabid Republicans here don't like criticism of the so-called duke, his draft dodging cannot be mentioned? Yeah, America is a real democracy under Shrub.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.100 (talk • contribs)

Who said I was a republican? Batman2005 14:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Quoting sick jokes about AIDS by Bob Hope, Hollywood's number 1 Republican, says it all.

Again, find proof that i'm a republican. Idiot. Batman2005 14:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

See when you make statements like that you're only showing your own close-minded ignorance. I never said not to put it in. Hell I'm not even a John Wayne fan. I just want to preserve what Wikipedia stands for. So I'll say it again. If you can find CREDIBLE SOURCES then by all means slap them in there. I find it interesting that most people who criticise celebrities often leave their comments unsigned. Wonder why. Levid37 17:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources in books, it's a bit hard to post them online. Wayne dodged the draft because he was a coward. It's a shame Americans don't know the difference between what's real and what is on the screen.

You say "coward" but the fact of the matter is, he was the SOLE means of support for a wife and four small children. The deferment was there, they didn't create it for him, and he certainly wasn't the only person who took it. Is everyone else who did a "coward?" My maternal grandfather got a deferment because he worked in the oil fields. Is he a "coward" because he took it? In the PBS John Ford/Wayne show I mentioned in another thread above, they had an audio excerpt of Wayne saying he did try to enlist, but wanted to be an officer. When the Army said no, he said he asked for the deferment. Many modern families have trouble living on enlisted pay. Even if Wayne had savings, would they have lasted for the 4 years of war? Given these facts, and the fact he was already 34 years old when the U.S. entered the war, I don't think any reasonable person can fault him for what he did. John Ford did give him some grief over it, but didn't stop using him in movies, or being his friend. Jimmy Stewart served and saw combat, but he and Wayne were friends too. And besides, the deferment he got did not mean he could never be drafted, just that he wasn't a "first stringer." The only people who like to bring up the draft controversy are those who only want to use it to discredit him as much as they can. I don't have any problem with the article mentioning the deferment, but beyond that is not justifiable. Fred8615 22:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

It's funny how 37-year-old married father of three Henry Fonda, an activist liberal Democrat, had no problems serving throughout World War II. And so many others - Glenn Ford, William Holden, etc. Yet Wayne was the one who attacked young men for avoiding the draft during the Vietnam War, and made "Big Jim McLain", "Blood Alley", "The Alamo" and especially "The Green Berets". I don't think mentioning the draft controversy discredits Wayne, because he did a good enough job of that himself.

According to Fonda's own Wikipedia article, he had two children during the war, not three. He was also made an officer. Big difference supporting a family of four (counting everyone) on officer pay, and a family of six on enlisted pay. And there's also this, again from Fonda's article: "Jane Fonda rejected her father's patriotism and his friendships with Republican actors such as John Wayne and James Stewart..." Your "liberal activist" apparently didn't have a problem with Wayne not serving. Fred8615 13:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• REMINDER this page is for discussing the article not the subject. This is a closed issue unless and until a reliable source is located and posted. KillerChihuahua^?!? 13:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Imdb says Wayne was a draft dodger.

IMDB is not a reputable source, it is a wikipedia type page in which any person can submit information that is then posted in the biographies or information about a movie. Sorry kid, but your hatred still isn't sourced, thus...no inclusion. Batman2005 17:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Every single book about John Wayne mentions the draft controversy in detail, as does imdb. If this silly site wants to be taken seriously it must present a balanced view of all its subjects.

Get over it, and yourself. IMDB is NOT a reputable source. You have been continuously shot down EVERY time you bring up some retarded argument about this subject. You are a troll and have more than worn out your welcome on this page. Batman2005 03:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

IMDB has a filter which checks all information submitted for accuracy. This stupid site can be edited by anyone. John Wayne dodged the draft in World War II, and even his fans accept that.

No, IMDB does not have a filter which checks all the information. Moron, shut up and find another page to troll.Batman2005 14:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Biography of James Stewart published 1996 says Stewart and Frank Capra were very angry at Wayne's attempts to have an actress fired from "It's a Wonderful Life" because of her left-wing views, especially since Wayne's 4F status enabled him to dodge the draft.

Blah blah blah, more of your unsourced nonsense. Batman2005 18:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

---

JOHN WAYNE: AMERICAN, by James Olson & Randy Roberts is the definitive Wayne biography, in my opinion. It covers in excruciating detail the draft controversy and recreates draft notices, letters between Wayne and the draft board, and between Republic Pictures and the draft board, as well as correspondence between Wayne and John Ford on the subject. I cannot imagine any more substantial citation for the details of this case. I'm traveling at present, but when I return home, I'll make the appropriate quotes and cites, if no one does so before then. Of course, someone who loves or hates Wayne more than truth will probably delete them within an hour, but at least they'll have been there for a moment.

Fight the Power

Hello,

This message is to the administrator of this page.

I made an edit to this page regarding song lyrics that include John Wayne, around July 25th - stating that Wayne was included in the Public Enemy song "Fight the Power."

I noticed that although my original edit was revised, the basic information remained intact and is still present.

I made the same edit on the Elvis page, but the administrator (named Hoary) deleted it. I asked him why he deleted it, and he responded in the discussion page.

At your earliest convenience, could you take a minute to look at the discussion page regarding this? I am pleased that you chose to include my edit on this page, as I am stating facts that might be of interest to the general public (which I am assuming is the objective of Wikipedia), and significant (as Public Enemy is one of the most influential rap artists of all time). Aside from the racism debate that is raging on the Elvis discussion page, I feel that facts ought to be stated, and I am quite interested to know your opinion on this.

Thank you for including my edit on this page, and I look forward to hearing your opinion.

Almighty2001

US postal service john wayne.jpg

This item has now been given a licensing tag. It is probably the most appropriate to use--not these senseless screen shots.

I have applied the Biography Actors Info Box. I will leave it to others to decide what roles to list on it. Check out Helen Hunt (of all people) to see good examples of how to use the box. trezjr 02:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Quotation...

• 1) The format is terrible.
• 2) It is not standard form to input random quotations into articles.
• 3) There is a wikiquote page with quotations attributed to John Wayne where this quote would be better served.
• 4) Having only one quote from John Wayne is pointless, if you want to input quotes, then add more than one under their own sub-section.

Removing again. Batman2005 15:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The format comes from a Biography administrator, not me. Same for placing in the article.

Have a good life; I'm resuming mine.

trezjr 16:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

What in the hell are you talking about? Batman2005 16:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

trezjr, stop adding the quotation into this article. Your were bold and made a change, it was then reverted (as per WP:BRD) you then, against policy, reverted the change and demanded a talk page discussion be started. I started one, you then AGAIN reverted to include the quotation without providing any compelling reason for inclusion in the article. I have provided FOUR compelling reasons not to include one random quote in the article, and have offered a compromise (by saying that it would be more appropriate to add a separate subsections titled "Quotes" and then list your quote along with other from Wayne, or about Wayne). You completely disregarded this option and against traditional style added your quote in the middle of a section. The burden is on you to provide a convincing argument for the quotation, if you cannot it will be summarily reverted. Batman2005 02:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, dude...

That last entry was for the benefit of an administrator. Take it for what it's worth.

My main beef was that twice you made the delete without contact. Posting on the discussion page...as you make the change...is not really discussion. Allow some time for a response.

In any event, the quote boxes you don't seem to like are being used by the WikiProject Biography, as I mentioned. It's not my invention.

I see no problem with a single quote, say if it is relevant to text in that general part of the article.

Just for the sake of argument, would you consider running it at the end of a chapter for a period of time and see what the consensus might be (your suggestion). trezjr 22:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I've done a quick look at quite a few biography pages, and I've seen ZERO with this quote box format. Additionally, as per my suggestion, there are a number of bio pages which list a series of quotations in their own subsection of the article. Listing one random quote is quite subjective of a thing. What is the criteria for selecting such a quote? why that one and not another? What if someone wants their favorite John Wayne, or Ronald Reagan, or Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela, Ghandi, etc. quote in there. Thus why listing them in their own subsection is a better alternative, and one more widely used by both Wikipedia and Wikiquote. Batman2005 01:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Movies with no deaths

The article mentions that "McLintock!" is the only John Wayne movie with no character deaths.

There are several deaths during the battle between the settlers and Indians. Maybe they don't count since they're not 'named' in the script. John1957

Turner Cassic Movies just showed the film last night. While the indians do shoot up the town, no one is killed. Fred8615 16:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I think BOTH of these arguments bring into play one of the most cardinal rules of wikipedia, no original research. If it is quoted somewhere saying that McLintock is the only John Wayne movie with no character deaths, then by all means include the material and provide the source. However, editors here can't "form their own trivia." If there is no source out there by some reputable media outlet talking about this trivia piece, it should be removed. I will add a "citation needed" template and give about a week for someone to provide one, then I'll remove it as Original Research/Unsourced. Batman2005 01:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

...all fine and good...

Your reasoning is all fine and good, but by that definition, every item in the Trivia section, not to mention almost every line in the article, should have its own citation. What if your source is another wikipedia article?

Is that really the prime directive of the wikipedia rules, as established?

This is a situation that, by this item alone, is small potatoes.

In actuality, by this standard, I bet you could eliminate 80 % of what is on Wiki. I just completed 2 weeks work on a bio of a living person from scratch. It got an A-class grade--there's only about 3 dozen of those out there--but I hade to citation almost every single paragraph.

How do you solve this growing problem?

Which, by the way, I've watched every single frame of that movie; no one is killed. trezjr 23:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

That is STILL original research. Trivia sections are highly unencyclopedic in most forms, including this one. If no source from a reputable work (media, television, newspaper, biography, etc) can be found, then it must be deleted. Yes, that is the "prime directive" of wikipedia. Verifiability. Solving the growing problem isn't my concern. Ending the discussion on whether or not people are killed in this movie is. The simple, correct, and most wiki-policy satisfying solution is to look for an outside source that specifically discusses this trivial bit and citing it in the article. If no source is found, then it must be removed as unverifiable. Simply saying that you have watched the movie and don't see anyone killed is subjective, perhaps another person sees somebody killed, or perhaps another person sees it totally differently, arguments ensue and we're still devoid of any reputable source. Thus why potentially divisive material, such as this, should be sourced. Batman2005 01:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Withdrawn

Based on this initial research, I'll withdraw the point... All Experts trezjr 12:20, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

That's just ducky, isn't it? According to some idiot at Wikipedia, we have to find a script; we have to find a magazine article; we have to find a newspaper article; we have to talk to legions of movie people who were there at the filming to see whether or not extra characters died in McLintock!...but when someone just WATCHES THE FILM to see for himself and makes the body count right then and there...why that's just unacceptable! John Wayne is in the film...oh, I can't mention that because it's speculation and original research based on the Wiki-standard of logic. 68.19.213.28 01:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Aside from the namecalling, that last feller does have a point. The film should constitute a primary source and qualify the "researcher" to make a valid point. But rules is rules.Jvortiz 09:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

F&G Part II

You miss the forest for the tree.

I could care less about the item.

What I am saying is what's to prevent someone from going in and tagging every item in Trivia and 80% of the article. trezjr 01:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Nothing, that's the point. If someone finds a certain piece of trivia that could be dubious and requests a citation, then it should be provided. Obviously the person should do some searching themselves first, but as we know, that's not always the case. If any users adds a tag for a citation, then it needs to be cited. I recently tagged quite a few things on the Alessandro Del Piero article that I was unsure on, and they were all cited properly or removed. Remember, verifiability is the key, and using reputable sources is key, if those two can't be done, then the information isn't credible. Batman2005 02:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

...sounds reasonable. trezjr 02:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I think so, now its just a matter of seeing if other people agree. Which, from my experience on here, if its a reasonable solution...they'll do the complete opposite. Batman2005 02:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

HOLY GOD...

The troll made a post that wasn't vandalism. I thought I felt the earth move. Batman2005 21:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Iconic Status

The section on iconic status is meant to further describe what is given only one sentence in the opening summary but is not further covered in the article. Wayne was (and still is) a major icon for patriotism and war heroism. More (or better) ways to describe (or demonstrate) that status could be given, but what is there does and should deal with any disparities between the idealized hollywood image and the actual facts. A key identification for being an "icon" is that there is an image that spans acting roles, such that the person is no longer an actor looking for good roles, but more of a "role" looking for good acting jobs to further promote that role. As I last left the iconic status section, my wording was not intended to degrade Wayne as a person, and was certainly avoiding getting into the controversial aspects (e.g. draft dodging, etc.). Rather I think it is reasonable to note in this article where the icon or fictionalized character of John Wayne stops and the real John Wayne begans. Hopefully, there should be no controversy that the iconic version of John Wayne (versus the real John Wayne the person) gives only a 2 dimensional view of heroism, military service and american ideals and that this heroic image was used for better or worse by Wayne and others as means to promote those same ideals through several decads (and wars). Whidbey 08:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

There is clearly an attempt by some to make the Iconic status section a pro or anti wayne character venue, and often very generalized opinion without references. Also the lack of discussion under this topic heading, means people aren't doing due diligence with their changes. This section has the purpose to describe that there was Wayne the historical, actual person and Wayne, an iconic image and fictionalized person. It should cover how that iconic status came about and how it was used, and as part of that description it should give examples of how the "two" Waynes differed. Very few reach this status of iconic image and there is always controversial aspects because the "fictionalized character" becomes a powerful image that is managed. Please don't try to keep managing the Wayne icon with pro or anti wayne information. Whidbey 21:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I have edited this iconic status section to include some previously removed information which was unjustifably removed. I also have removed some information that really isn't relevant (including some of my own) to clarify the topic of iconic status and to diffuse the concerns of those who may or may not consider John Wayne to have been a personably honorable and patriotic man (I am of no opinion on this, since I never met him). Instead the emphasis is that degree and type of patriotism demonstrated in the iconic image of John Wayne (the composite of his movie characters) was not part of the real John Wayne's life, so it can only be a matter of opinion as to whether he could have adequately fulfilled his iconic image if he had actually served in military action. He may have been patriotic and honorable in other ways, but it wasn't by storming the beaches or administering justice on the plains.

I do think it is highly relevant to discuss the results of Wayne's iconic image both to those who consider it helpful and motivating and those who found it unhelpful and even felt duped by it. Therefore insight to Oliver Stone, WWII vets and even Hirohito are relevant Whidbey 01:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

And a detailed description of the lengths Wayne went to in order to avoid military service is very relevant as well. No wonder Gene Autry was disgusted. (13:34, 13 February 2007 (UTC))

Minor Change

I moved Tyrone Power up from "less established stars like Tyrone Power and Eddie Albert", because this is an incorrect statement. According to Quigley's Annual List of Box-Office Champions, 1932-1970 Power was in the top 10 for 1938, 1939, and 1940. I would not call that less established. He was also 20th Century Fox Studio's biggest male star, and Henry Fonda was also under contract there.Chandler75

Fight the Power

This song has disappeared from the "Song Lyrics" section. It needs to be put back.

86.1.69.195 20:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC) How can the genral public not to mention the government talk of Wayne as a hero when he did everything he could to avoid the draft. The official explantion is that he was afraid that his viewing public would forget hime. But plenty of other actors joined up and were heroic, including James Stewart, a colonel in the US Air Force flying bombers. David Niven, even Glenn Miller, a musician who lost his life over the Channel and plenty of others. Who do people remember as the archetypal hero? John (yellow streak) Wayne. He was even awarded the Congresional Medal of Honour for his cinematic heroics !!!. Any comment?

He was given a special Congressional medal, NOT the Medal of Honor. Fred8615 13:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

It's hard to believe Wayne received the Congressional Gold Medal and not real heroes like James Stewart or Glenn Ford.

Chrono order

this piece would look a lot better if someone would edit it and put it in chronological order. there are dates jumping back and forth all over the place. i'd do myself if i can ever find the time.

this edit just means moving things around--not deleting anything.

i also love it when a person's contributions to popular culture outweigh his life's story (sarcasm, for those not paying attention).

trezjr 13:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I might be misreading where your sarcasm is being placed. Are you saying that it is sad when one's life story is not as big as the impact that their fictionalized role potrayals have become (e.g. larger-than-life)? If so, I agree. Such as in the case of that people can't expect Shatner to be much else other than Kirk. Or were you thinking it is sad that those contributing to this article are focusing more on the cultural affect of Wayne versus his personal life story? If the latter, I would disagree, Wayne made conscious choices to portray himself as a cultural icon, so it is part of his personal life story especially when his iconic image is inconsistent with his private life. In some ways, Wayne gave up the path of being known for his acting ability because he chose to represent something that was bigger than any one individual movie. Whidbey

I think it's fair to say that at some point in the 50s Wayne abandoned acting completely in order to play the same charcater in every movie, and did not properly return to acting until True Grit. (HarveyCarter 15:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

As the editor of the Shinbone Star said at the end of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend". When you have to compete with TV, keep the product what will bring in the most film goers. Hollywood was in a crisis in the late 50s and 60s. I consider the "character" Wayne who did not change in those years what kept his career going. However, can it be said that Captain/Admiral Rockwell Torrey was John Wayne, mostly behind a desk, behind the lines? There was a little acting sparkle. But Wayne did get bottled and labelled, I agree. It worked and he and all his production people and actors worked. It is what his audience wanted to see.Jvortiz 09:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It porobably helped that Wayne had lung cancer while filming "In Harm's Way", which contributed to his somewhat subdued performance.

Footnotes or notes

Just wondering why there are footnotes and notes? Shouldn't they be merged together? Thanks. Roaming27 08:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Triva

See Wikipedia:Trivia (a proposed but not accepted policy) for a discussion of trivia in articles. See WP:FAC for more discussion regading trivia sections. In short, if it is imporant enough to mention, it belongs in the article. Triva sections give the overall air of a fanzine or gossip rag. Finally, revisit WP:V, a completely non-negotiable policy regarding sourcing. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

That was not a Trivia section, it was a "Cultural references" / "Popular references" section, which thousands of wikipedia articles have. It's a listing of popular songs that are about the subject. Do you propose to totally remove such sections across the board (there must be a thousand at least) in the guise of a "proposed but not accepted" (more like disputed) policy on trivia? Blockinblox 01:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

No, I plan to remove unsourced content per WP:V, with the added impetus that it is completely irrelevant to an encyclopedic article about the subject. Please also see Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles, which is an accepted guideline on Wikipedia. KillerChihuahua^?!? 19:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

A large amount of information you removed demonstrates Wayne's role in American culture. You could argue that removing, for example, "Gary Burghoff sometimes mimicked John Wayne's voice and mannerisms in episodes of M*A*S*H, as his character Radar O'Reilly." is appropriate, but quite a few of those factoids are important examples of how America views Wayne. The fact that a punk rock band recorded a song called "John Wayne is a Nazi" or that Charlie Daniels sang about how he'd rather have Wayne as his president are important indicators of American culture. I'm also confused as to why you think a section on his political beliefs is unimportant, but that's a different issue. Stilgar135 23:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I think a lot of it is relevant, and encyclopedic, and should come back. It's acceptable to make mention of the numerous songs that talk about John Wayne, calling it "trivial" is one editor's judgement call. This was overkill, like using a bazooka to take out a fly. Or maybe we ought to have a dedicated article page for popular references to Wayne in film and song, see this article for ideas. Blockinblox 18:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:John Wayne/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Needs expansion, citing ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 23:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 23:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 20:37, 3 May 2016 (UTC)