Jump to content

Talk:Clyde Tolson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Homosexual?

[edit]

The content of this article is in considerable dispute. Can someone shed some light on the pros and cons? -- Zoe

There's nothing in this article, except the explicit statement of being "gay" that isn't already in J. Edgar Hoover in a more useful form. I think I can NPOV it a bit. Ortolan88

But friends and relatives of both Hoover and Tolson deny that either one was gay, nor that they were lovers. -- Zoe

They've had their hand in between? Doesn't really matter unless it is true that Hoover was also attending gay parties in NY and was blackmailed by Meyer Lanski with photos. (Mentioned in the movie "The Curse Of J Edgar Hoover". Maybe they were both impotent, who knows and who cares? 121.209.56.25 (talk) 02:01, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tolson clearly looks gay. No doubts about that. Their relationship was way more than how far good buddies would take it. At least Michael Jakcson had been seen with "some" women. These two, where are their women? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.89.86 (talk) 01:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How, pray tell, does someone LOOK gay? Because he doesn't fit your stereotypical and bigoted norms about how a man should look? Because you're predisposed to see him in a certain light? I'm surprised that your comment has been up lo long without someone challenging it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.235.228 (talk) 19:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best known as what?

[edit]

The beginning of the article uses the phrase "he is best known as" and lists a couple of things. I think it's safe to say that he's actually best known for the claims about his relationship with Hoover. If those of you who insist that you don't believe those claims win out, then I think there's an argument for changing the wording there. If anyone at all out there knows who he is, it's for the "closeted homosexual lover" angle, and not for his profession or position in the FBI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.235.228 (talk) 19:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Right-wing?

[edit]

I removed phrase "right wing extremist" from sentence about Tolson's alleged comment about Robert Kennedy. If true, his comment is no indication of "right wing" or "left wing" political views. Many people of all political persuasions, including Lyndon Johnson, despised Robert Kennedy.--FelixCab (talk) 18:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What alleged comment about Robert Kennedy? Was it removed? There's very little in the article that explains who Tolson was or what he thought about anything. He comes across as a cypher. Pascalulu88 (talk) 23:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who got his money?

[edit]

If he got Hoover's money who got their estate? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.206.165.32 (talk) 04:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That should be state don the article if known. He died less than 3 years after Hoover, so it is almost certain that most, if not all, inherited from Hoover would have remained in his possession until he died. Did Tolson's brother inherit it? F W Nietzsche (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wife

[edit]

What was the name of his wife? Did he have any kids? Wintceas 18:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who said he was married? Kraxler 00:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
His wife's name was Edgar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.70.120 (talk) 18:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of him ever having married, nor fathering any children. He was likely homosexual. F W Nietzsche (talk) 08:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Death

[edit]

Location? Cause? F W Nietzsche (talk) 08:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Before restoring a list of film trivia, I would comment Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content. At least find some references for the appearances before adding a random list of movies and actors. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:07, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So I guess we should delete Cultural_depictions_of_Abraham_Lincoln then? Regarding references, any of those can easily be verified by IMDB; it's not controversial material or anything. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If they are not referenced and trivial, yes. Otherwise we get every "Family Guy" cutaway joke and late-night comic reference. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural depictions of Abraham Lincoln. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A movie/novel depiction is much different than a Family Guy or song single-mention. I certainly don't support the latter. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:24, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Someone requests a third opinion editor at the 3O noticeboard. I'm here as an uninvolved editor to give a neutral opinion on the dispute and help achieve resolution. Firstly, I think the Cultural depictions of Abraham Lincoln is irrelevant, as it is not the page we are discussing - whether the popular culture section should be included in this article needs to be determined on its own merits (though I think the AfD was unnecessary. WP:IPC is a helpful guideline, which seems to suggest that any notable films/programmes where the subject of the article features prominently (rather than as a passing reference) can be mentioned. Also, the in popular culture section does not make the article an unreasonable length, so the content would have to be excessively trivial to be removed. Any film which is reasonable notable and which Tolson is featured more than just in passing, I would suggest is included. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:30, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"In passing" is key. What's the criterion for including a film mention? The film "J. Edgar" has a non-trivial amount of screen time devoted to Tolson and fictionalizes his life relativley little. But the TV series "Dark Skies" and "Millenium" are evidently set long after his death and seemingly have nothing to do with the historical FBI. If Homer Simpson quips "Hoover and Tolson" when he sees a pair of FBI agents walking together, is that a reference? I'd like to see a reference saying that the Tolson character is a significant part of a film or other pop-culture performance before it gets added back to the article. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree that we should stick to cultural depictions where Tolson is more prominently featured than a passing reference (i.e., the Simpsons episode example would be a strong example of too trivial). Given that:
  • The 2011 film J. Edgar (definitely)
  • The 2011 miniseries The Kennedys (not sure...doesn't appeared to have prominent billing)
  • The 2009 film Public Enemies (not sure, not first billed)
  • The 2008 short film Size Ten or G-Men (doesn't appear to be notable)
  • The 2003 satirical radio play "J. Edgar," (most likely; anything featuring Hoover prominently will probably also do so with Tolson)
  • The TV series Millennium (TV series) (one episode)
  • The TV series Dark Skies (one episode)
  • The 1995 film Nixon (probably, first billing [1])
  • The 1992 TV movie Citizen Cohn(not first-billed on imdb, but prominently mentioned in article...borderline)
  • The miniseries Robert Kennedy & His Times(one episode)
  • The 1984 TV movie Concealed Enemies (not first billed, hard to say)
  • The 1977 film The Private Files of J. Edgar Hoover'(definitely; first billed)
Comments? OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:59, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've not seen any of those films or TV programmes, so can only really suggest what kind of guide I would use. There's a helpful guide in WP:IPC which says "look at whether a person who is familiar with the topic only through the reference in question has the potential to learn something meaningful about the topic from that work alone". If you cannot learn anything substantial about Tolson from watching a film/TV programme, then I would not include it. Otherwise, it is significant coverage, so probably can be included. It is a crude measure and there will be exceptions, but I think it's a helpful starting point. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:12, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, a substantial biographical depiction of Tolson is possibly useful (such as in the recent film "J. Edgar" which is how I got to this article in the first place), but a fictional one-episode walk-on by a character named "Tolson" should not be included. If we have to watch the movies to decide how much screen time Tolson gets, isn't that "original research" ? Of course, everything at the movies is fiction, but aside from making up all the dialog, the facts of Tolson's life were not fictionalized in "J. Edgar". --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:28, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If there is just a character called Tolson, then that's a trivial reference. If it is biographical, then it should be included. I think, however, that most fall somewhere in between. I would say that if a character can be identified as Clyde Tolson and he plays a significant role (that is, he is involved in the plot, not just mentioned in passing), he can be included. I would not call this original research, as we are not bringing new, unsourced facts - the films themselves are sources anyway. There is, I think, a grey area when it comes to determining whether a certain film is notable or significant enough to include, as deciding notability could be deemed original research. However, as there tend not to be reliable sources written on whether a film reference is notable enough for Wikipedia inclusion, this might be an appropriate time to ignore all rules. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Walk-ons in fiction should be particularly avoided, then, if the WP:IPC guide is followed; we don't learn anything about the historical Tolson when we see him debating how to handle the brain-sucking alien menace from Rigel. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think I agree (though I don't know the film to which you refer). If it is not a historically accurate film (either slightly or wildly inaccurate), I would lean towards not including it. However, if it is a major part in the film and the character is obviously Tolson (rather than an allusion to him), then I would call it a notable reference, as they have taken the character and given him a major part. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Domestic Partnership?

[edit]

Whether or not Tolson or Hoover or both were gay, they didn't Iive together. Living together is the definition of domestic partnership, right here on Wikipedia's pages. Therefore, they are not and weren't domestic partners in that sense in the time that they lived. That designation didn't even exist in the US until after they both passed away. The connection to Hoover is made with no proof, so this being in the info box is incorrect and inappropriate.WPaulB (talk) 20:52, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clyde Tolson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clyde_Tolson&oldid=1252187555"