Talk:Macaulay Culkin

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as High-importance).

Career

Doesn't anyone notice that the "career" subsection apprears twice? I'm not too sure on how to edit properly so I won't try to fix it... 74.101.227.231 03:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC) J[reply]

court hearing

this april 6th court hearing for drug charges, that date has passed, does anyone have the knowledge on what happened or whats in progress so this page can be updated?

The hearing was postponed, I fixed that.--Patrick 13:36, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why dont you fade? Everything Inane 01:12, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's cool that the Will & Grace part was mentioned. Please note that this part may also be indicative of Culkin's sexual preference. While the role that he played was not... homosexual, the series is gay every episode. 66.41.212.243 12:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation proved that Culkin wasn't a drug addict, and he received a suspended sentence.

How can an investigation prove such a thing? You kidding me right, plus it was not only mary j. and zanax that they found in his staff...

The article says he started his career in the early 90's, but Uncle Buck came out in 1989 and was his first big gig, although not the lead character.

Junior

Is it right that Culkin is about to publish a book named Junior? and if so, why isn't it mentioned in the article?

He has published a book, and I'm about to make a page about it, and update this page. --Hugh 06:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've made the page, and linked to it in the career section. --Hugh 08:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mug shot

I removed his mug shot photo, because it isn't a flattering picture of him. He's an actor first and, I'm sure, there are better photos of him out there. TripleH1976 Mon 23:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a note, so long as there is a free use image out there, no matter how unflattering, (the mug shot) there's no real acceptable rationale for putting fair use images up. Having no images is a fair compromise, but I'll return the favour and remove any fair use images placed in the article. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why this is the case. Surely a photo of a subject is not a priori interchangable with any other photo of the same subject. As noted, the intent may be to illustrate Culkin as a movie actor, for which a mug shot is not appropriate. Moreover, this is not common practice on Wikipedia; many celebrities have mugshots, however most articles use a publicity photo. Also note that a mugshot is not necessarily free (public domain); its status is disputed [1]. I don't see your reasoning here. --TeaDrinker 02:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a Home Alone Picture--Rubberchix 17:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This image is a violation of WP:FU and the image's license. --Yamla 17:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oh i didn't know, i got it off the home alone page --81.110.2.1 16:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notable roles

We need to decide what is and isn't a notable role for Culkin. I have issue with some that are included and wonder why some are excluded. For instance, is the sequel to Home Alone really all that notable? And why isn't Party Monster added? -- it was his return to acting. -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 13:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further inspection, I'd put forward that, of those listed, only Home Alone is notable. -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 14:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If "Party Monster" is listed, why is "Saved!" not listed? I know more people that know of his work in Saved! than Party Monster, and Saved! had a wider release. --DisneyFreak96 00:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you define as a notable role? He starred in Home Alone 2, and, as I recall, it did fairly well. So how is it not a notable role? If you think the list is missing an important role, feel free to be bold and add it, but I would hesitate before removing films from the list.--Agent Aquamarine 13:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Married before

Dudes wasn't he married to his high-school sweetheart at 17? ~ufoolme can anyone fuck me 4 free

I recall this as well. Mcflytrap 17:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Private Life

The article notes "Culkin was ranked # 2 in VH1's list of the "100 Greatest Kid Stars", the highest ranked actual human being.". That seems a little harsh to Gary Coleman, who was ranked #1. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bartoncasey (talk • contribs) 05:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Fixed. Probably a case of sneaky vandalism.--Agent Aquamarine 22:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To me, calling that section "Personal Life" as opposed to "Private Life" seems more sensible, especially seeing as though it's on Wikipedia it's not particularly private anymore! I'll change it tomorrow if nobody disagrees. Sven945 15:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have included the fact that Macaulay and Mila Kunis had to leave Israel in 2006. It was listed here on Wikipedia at the time it happened and sources for it can currently be found on google news (if you sift through all the recent articles). Also, I have included the idea of him being gay. If anyone believes this is purely hearsay, search for Macaulay Culkin on the Yahoo search engine, the first option you read is 'Macaulay Culkin gay', so then click on that and explore the basis for reports that he is gay. Whoever said my information was not properly sourced should definately check out the above sites.

The idea that he is gay can be directly attributed to him starring in 'Party Monster'. Michael Alig, the character he played, is a homosexual and the film is filled with homosexual references. --Endlessdan 18:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent photo...

my gosh can't someone find a more recent photo!!! you would think the info box would try to showcase the most recent photo available of a person.

trezjr 02:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can't use the most recent photo available. WP:FU requires that we use only freely-licensed images to depict living people. --Yamla 02:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, so find one that meets that requirement!

trezjr 03:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a better photo, you can buy the right of a recent one with your own funds and give it to wikipedia. Code-Binaire 12:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We COULD but who really wants to spend thier timr buying a photo of actor JUST so you can pt it on wikipedia?? Lord Cuthberton —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:52, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage

Yeah someone said he was married to liz Hurley which I find to be outrageous, so I changed it back. PS. Culkin is a possibly the worst actor in the US —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.132.68.120 (talk) 10:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

"At the height of his fame"

I reverted an edit twice inserting the caption "Macaulay Culkin at the height of his fame, 1991." on the picture as pov. The original text read "Macaulay Culkin, 1991." I think the former is not supported by the text or references, and constitutes a novel synthesis per WP:OR. While it is true that his best known movies were from this time frame, it is not clear that this is what is intended by "fame." If the intent is to note that this is not a modern photo of him, there is probably a better way of saying it (since his being washed up, as the caption seems to imply, is really an opinion). --TeaDrinker 18:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protection against vandalism

This article is attacked and vandalised so often that it is a clear candidate for protection. You should not allow edits from unregistered users, those are the ones that cause most of the problems. I hope some of the executive editors will notice and do something about it. Eriks 06:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]