Talk:James Stewart/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Stewart was essentially Scottish American

Stewart was a Presbyterian (ie, origin Church of Scotland) of Scottish descent. His mother was a Jackson which, like Stewart, is a Scottish surname. Unlikely he had any significant English ancestors, and he certainly had NO Irish in his ancestry (otherwise he would be a catholic, wouldn't he?) (And one gets a bit sick of these ethnocentric Irish constantly making spurious claims on the ethnic origins of famous people around the world, based far too often on pure speculation and wishful thinking. Furthermore, they also have the audacity to falsely define protestant Ulster Scots as Irish - and Wikipedia should take measures to impede the continuation of this shameless practice which is far too common and does nothing to promote confidence in the authenticity of their biographical articles.) Stewart was a proud Scot in the US and was happily married to another Scot/American called McLean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.240.137 (talk) 17:54, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Jackson is an English surname, not Scottish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.175.13.142 (talk) 00:29, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Stewart was of Irish descent, not Scottish descent. (79.67.126.161 (talk) 14:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC))

There is absolutely no rationale for suggesting that anyone would NOT be Irish if they are not Roman Catholic. The Republic of Ireland has approximately 78% of its population declaring themselves as being Roman Catholic, and 5.6% as being various Protestant denominations. Northern Ireland has about 41% declaring Roman Catholic and 42% declaring various other Christian denominations. This means that, of the population of Ireland of what .. 6.6 million?.. only about 4.5 million declare themselves to be Roman Catholic. For other Irish Christians, the figure is around a million. That's a little under one in six of the population who are not Roman Catholic.

Further to that, 10% of people in the Republic of Ireland declared no religion at all, 2.6% gave no answer in the Census of 2016, and 3.7% were other non-Christian religions. In Northern Ireland,

About 87% of the population of the Republic of Ireland declared to be Irish nationals, with 13% of the population having other declared nationalities (though this is by no means cut and dried with regard to Irish ethnicity - some of those may have been born in Northern Ireland, for example). Of these emigrant populations, most appear to be Polish (who would be overwhelmingly Roman Catholic), then British (around 10% of the population of the UK is Roman Catholic) and other Eastern European countries which would have substantial Roman Catholic and Orthodox religions amongst them.

Around 90% of the population of Northern Ireland were Northern Irish born. Of the remaining 10%, the largest contingent were English, with about 60,000 English residents. Then there are the 30-40,000 people born in the Republic of Ireland, then the Polish and Scottish.

To jump to the conclusion that one cannot be Irish if one is not Roman Catholic is not only inaccurate and highly subjective, it is also extremely offensive.

I am reminded of what Graham Norton had said when this preposterous suggestion was put to him by a film star from the USA. The film star suggested that he was automatically Roman Catholic because he was Irish. Norton corrected him by telling him he was actually Protestant.

Furthermore, James Stewart has ancestry from Northern Ireland. His maternal great-grandparents were John McConnell Wilson and Ruth Goheen. John McConnell Wilson's parents were Robert Wilson and Sarah McConnell from Tyrone. That means he has roots from Northern Ireland, often labelled Ulster-Scot, Scots-(Scotch-)Irish or just Irish.

Stewart himself seems to have been more aware of his Scottish ancestry, probably magnified by the fact that he married another Scots-descended person.

The fact that Stewart had ancestors from Northern Ireland is not mentioned in the article as it currently stands. Perhaps it should be.

--90.253.59.118 (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

[Stewart's] Objection to Profanity?

On two separate occasions, I heard an anecdote about Stewart's later career -- namely, that he had accepted some of the 'corny,' 'poorly-written' Westerns because "They were the only scripts without indecency or dirty words in them." Typically this would be dismissed as 'trivia,' but I think it speaks to his character -- will try to hunt it down (possibly from an earlier edit of this very article). Sskoog (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of profane profundity... and Jimmy's poetry. One of the best -it was on Johnny Carson/the Tonight Show, too.. maybe theres a youtube video available- was the one entitled.. "The Top Step in the Hotel in Junin" by Jimmy Stewart. Had Carson, etc crying from laughter. 2602:304:CDAF:A3D0:8880:939B:D609:97C6 (talk) 01:06, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: article not moved Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

---

James Stewart → Jimmy Stewart – I have never heard of this actor being referred to as James Stewart.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose – Yes, that was my initial reaction too. See Talk:James Stewart/Archive 2 for extensive past discussion of the issue. But then I looked at the article and found no fewer than five or six images with "James" in them, vs. none with "Jimmy". On that basis, I have to oppose. Wbm1058 (talk) 17:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. Nothing has changed since the last move request. Binksternet (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. I'm still not getting a significant amount to warrant a change, and thus I prefer the status quo. Looking at any Google search, there will be a mixture of both "James" and "Jimmy". As seen in the various free images currently on commons (such as here and here), he was frequently credited as "James". He is also referred to as "James" on IMDb, New York Times, TCM, on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, the TV special The American Film Institute Salute to James Stewart, Encyclopedia Brittanica and others. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences posted a video on their official You Tube Channel of "James" receiving an honorary Oscar. Therefore, I prefer to maintain the status quo and consensus that was achieved in the previous move request. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose He was credited in every single film as "James Stewart". --Loeba (talk) 19:42, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Exactly. This would be like moving John F. Kennedy to Jack Kennedy because of what his friends and family and many others called him informally. Not necessary. We have redirects from Jack Kennedy and Jimmy Stewart. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:49, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. He is credited as "James Stewart" in the opening credits of every single film he ever appeared in. See here for previous discussion on the issue. Nothing has changed since then. Ejgreen77 (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - per his biographers, sources, everything In ictu oculi (talk) 00:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. This is a joke right? James Stewart is the name used on his film credits and is far more commonly used everywhere than the affectionate Jimmy. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Strategic Air Command career

According to Eric Schlosser, "Command and Control", Stewart became deputy director of operations at SAC around the late 1950s. This sounds like a surprisingly senior appointment for someone who wasn't a full-time military man and maybe the article should mention it? Barnabypage (talk) 07:33, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

On the subject of his military rank, the opening paragraph states that he rose to the rank of Brigadier-General, but he is shown as a Major-General in the side-panel listing his awards. Which is correct?46.7.85.68 (talk) 12:53, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Note on Stewart’s Final Rank: (Changed 4 October 2016) I have corrected this before I was a registered user and am doing so now that I am sense having found the issue resurfacing. Please know James M. Stewart, the actor and Air Force officer, was never a Major General (O-8.) This is a common misbelief/misunderstanding but one which Stewart himself addressed and explained in a documentary (It’s a Wonderful Life: The Jimmy Stewart Story) hosted by Johnny Carson which can be found on Youtube. Around 35 minutes into this 90+ minute feature Stewart explains he was on the campaign trail for then ex-governor (not yet president) Ronald Regan who mistakenly introduced him as a rally luncheon as “Major General James Stewart.” When Regan later found out Stewart was in fact a Brigadier General (O-7) and ask Stewart why he did not correct him Stewart sheepishly said something to the affect of “it sounded so good I hated to change it.” Therefore he was a Brigadier General upon retirement and remained so. It is incorrect then to say he was “promoted to Major General by President Regan” for several reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctordrew (talk • contribs) 21:19, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

The citation for James Stewart's final rank is a link to another Wikipedia post about the L.A. Times. Citations should be sources. This is the link for that article: http://articles.latimes.com/2003/mar/30/entertainment/ca-smith30 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:245:C100:F500:1872:8C13:B1A:3400 (talk) 15:47, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Starr Smith's book Jimmy Stewart: Bomber Pilot, cited in the bibliography, concentrating on Brig-Gen Stewart's air force career, written by a wartime comrade of Stewart's and with a foreword by Kelly Stewart Harcourt, makes clear in the list of promotions on p.273 that Stewart's last promotion was to Brigadier-General on July 23, 1959. In response to a previous query, note that on pp.197-200 Smith explains that, at the time of Stewart's nomination for flag rank by President Eisenhower in 1957, 'Stewart's reserve, or M[Mobilization]-Day, assignment was deputy director of operations for Strategic Air Command, a vital defense position.' He would, however, only do two weeks' active duty a year, besides any other spare time he cared to commit, and would actually 'understudy' the full-time officer in that role. (See p.6 of this Air Force document on the reserve program. https://www.arpc.afrc.af.mil/Portals/4/DRIO/RIO-History-of-the-IMA-Program.pdf?ver=2017-04-04-144539-657 ) Due to objections by Sen. Margaret Chase Smith (R-Maine, also a USAF Reserve officer), on the grounds that 'popularity should not be the yardstick by which we promote officers,' the promotion was denied at that time. Stewart was then appointed deputy director of the Secretary of the Air Force Office of Information, a PR role felt to be more suitable, and the Senate including Smith approved him as Brigadier-General in July 1959. The supposed promotion to major-general by President Reagan, though claimed in one or two sources, appears to be fictitious. Khamba Tendal (talk) 21:15, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on James Stewart. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120113011141/http://www.anthro.ucdavis.edu/faculty/stewart/ to http://www.anthro.ucdavis.edu/faculty/stewart/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:03, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Cary Grant's opinion

The lede should be a brief summary of Stewart's life and career. Cary Grant's opinion is not notable, as it is only one person's personal view. (79.67.126.161 (talk) 14:41, 17 December 2015 (UTC))

In my opinion, Cary Grant was a moderately notable figure in the film industry, and thus his statement has sufficient weight as that of an expert in the field, and not just the opinion of "one person." Collect (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I would hardly describe Cary Grant as "moderately notable", considering he was one of Hollywood's leading men for about twenty years. --90.253.59.118 (talk) 13:05, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Final Resting Place conflicts with "interred" in Death section

"resting place" on side panel says "Forest Lawn, Glendale, California" which I'm assuming was not his vacation home, but rather the "final" resting place where he was buried/interred. In the Death section, it states "Stewart is interred at Palapala Ho'omau Church Cemetery near the town of Hana, Hawaii"

No citation exists for either statement (in this wiki entry).

Pagelm (talk) 22:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@Pagelm: -- Fixed. Forest Lawn in Glendale is correct. I added references, too.

Billmckern (talk) 02:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

James Stewart vs. Jimmy Stewart

He never went publicly by Jimmy Stewart. I think he should be called James Stewart minus the following sentence that says he was called Jimmy Stewart. Just because the press called him Jimmy Stewart doesn't mean he should be called that on his WP page. It's an encyclopedia. Richard Nixon was called "Tricky Dick" by the press, and other famous people have been called various things. I think it should list his full legal name, and that's it because he didn't use that name professionally. He might have used that nickname privately among friends, but that's not what should be used in an encyclopedia.NapoleonX (talk) 19:15, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the idea that "he never went publicly by Jimmy Stewart", I don't think that applies very well to when he starred in The Jimmy Stewart Show and when he wrote the book entitled Jimmy Stewart and His Poems. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Noting RfC on military careers

James Stewart/Archive 3
Service / branch	United States Army Air Forces United States Air Force Reserve
Years of service	1941–1968
Rank	Brigadier General
Commands	703d Bombardment Squadron Dobbins Air Force Base
Battles / wars	World War II Korean War Vietnam War
Awards	Air Force Distinguished Service Medal Distinguished Flying Cross

There is currently a discussion and an RfC on Mel Brooks's article about his so-called "military career," noted by an infobox module. Since his military service, similar to that of Don Rickles, was for a few years and before their actual careers began, inserting a massive module in the standard infobox, as in this article, seems both misleading and erroneous. For Stewart, his "military career" module takes up about 2/3 of the infobox, while the essence of his notability is for being an actor. --Light show (talk) 01:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about that change. Stewart's military career was much more substantial and notable than Mel Brooks's. Stewart rose to colonel in active service, received two Distinguished Flying Crosses, was deputy commander of the 2nd Combat Bombardment Wing in Big Week, etc., and later became a brigadier general in the reserves. That's no joke. Yes, that's not what he's primarily known for, but it's OK for Wikipedia readers to learn things they don't already know when they see an infobox in an article. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:38, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree. I looked for a field that would allow a mention of his military service in the infobox but couldn't find one. But unlike the other actors who had "Military career" modules, Stewart's lead includes text that states his notable military career. The article also has a section about his service. However, his occupation in the infobox is for being an "actor," yet the military module was using up 2/3 of the infobox. --Light show (talk) 02:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Removing the information wholesale is inappropriate as well. If Stewart had been a B-movie actor, his military service would have made him notable in and of itself. I will agree that the infobox can be trimmed. I have inserted what I believe is an appropriate trimming. Remove the images and reducing the awards to his top two military awards were the easiest changes to make. To reinsert just make the appropriate syntax changes and copy/paste.EricSerge (talk) 12:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think it was undue emphasis to include the previous (more detailed) version in the infobox. Stewart had a highly notable and distinguished military career – even if he hadn't been an actor at all, we would probably have an article about him on that basis alone. There is no reasonable comparison to Mel Brooks, who we would not know about at all if his notability depended on his military credentials. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

In balance with the full bio, giving more than 10-15% of the infobox to his military service would distort the the infobox in a number of ways. Naturally, there's no comparison to Mel Brooks, although they were both initially drafted. But over 90% of the article concerns his acting and non-military life. He made 92 films during his 60-year acting career. He spent about 6 in the active military, with about 20 in the reserve. He in fact didn't even like discussing his military service, as he thought of himself as an actor.

Devoting 2/3rd of his infobox to his military service would be misleading. His infobox size and detail for military service should not be the same size as Chuck Yeager's, for example, which it would be, even without all the illustrations. Even devoting over 1,700 words to his "Military service" section in the text seems over-weight compared to his acting sections. IMO, on first impression of the enlarged infobox, many readers would assume he was a career soldier who did some acting on the side, which is the opposite of his real career. --Light show (talk) 19:55, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

If we were talking about 2/3 of the article, I'd agree with you, but I don't think we need such close inspection of what percentage of the infobox is devoted to what. And the film-related content of the infobox could use some expansion as well. For example, we could add "awards = " and list some film awards. In fact, I just did that. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:15, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on James Stewart. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111002221003/http://www.princeton.edu/~triangle/content_page/history.html to https://www.princeton.edu/~triangle/content_page/history.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.airfields-freeman.com/AZ/Airfields_AZ_Phoenix_NW.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thisdayinaviation.com/20-february-1966/?ModPagespeed=noscript

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 13:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Units

This topic pretty clearly has strong national ties to the US, considering that Stewart was a US citizen and known for Hollywood performances. Therefor US customary units are primary, as specified by [[WP:UNITS and WP:STRONGNAT. I am correcting this. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:17, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on James Stewart. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110318134905/http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=1670 to http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=1670
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090713012850/http://www.485thbg.org/485th_Stories.htm to http://www.485thbg.org/485th_Stories.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080624022534/http://jimmy.org/scoutaward to http://www.jimmy.org/scoutaward
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061115092214/http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Jimmy_Stewart.php to http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/Jimmy_Stewart.php

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 08:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Republican... or Democrat?

According to this article, Stewart was a Republican. However, the article also suggests that he was Democrat. He supported Democrat candidates towards the end of his life. Should he not be listed as a Democrat in the categories at the end of the article? John Wayne, for example, was a Presbyterian all his life, until he converted to Roman Catholicism on his death bed. He is listed as a Roman Catholic, but also as a former Presbyterian, if I recall the article correctly.

Should Stewart not be listed as a Democrat and former Republican? --90.253.59.118 (talk) 13:12, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Can you find any reliable sources that say one way or the other? The only source in the article is newsmeat.com, which only shows that he donated mostly to federal Republicans, with 2 exceptions over 17 years. I don't think that tells us enough. Station1 (talk) 18:22, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Struggle with PTSD

Other media make reference to Stewart's struggle with PTSD as a result of a horrendous military disaster: "Stewart felt responsible for the death of his men and especially one bloodbath where he lost 13 planes containing 130 men who he knew well. Stewart's anguish is laid bare for the first time in author Robert Matzen's Mission: Jimmy Stewart and the fight for Europe, published by Paladin Communications."

Should this information be included in this article? Santamoly (talk) 23:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

References

Wiki isn't supposed to rely on the Daily Mail, and Matzen's book, the actual source, may be a little over-coloured. One can't say that Stewart suffered PTSD unless a reliable source says that he was treated for it or those close to him said he showed signs of it, which does not seem to be the case. The Gotha mission of 24 February 1944, in which the 445th Bomb Group lost 13 of 25 B-24s dispatched, including 7 out of 8 from Maj Stewart's own 703rd Squadron, was one that Stewart himself did not fly on, though no doubt he was appalled to get only one crew back. (It was just the wind: because of an unexpected wind, the bombers reached the fighter-rendezvous point 11 minutes early and proceeded without escort, which was fatal.) It's true that, as Matzen claims, Stewart's film performances were darker and less light-hearted after the war, but one would need a well-grounded citation to link that to his war service. His reluctance to talk about the war, at least to those who weren't there, was quite normal for anyone who had seen action and does not really mean that he was 'flak happy' or unbalanced as Matzen and the Mail seem to suggest. Khamba Tendal (talk) 00:03, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Military service

Does anybody else think that the military service section of this article is much too long? It's about 2,000 words and the page itself is only 8,000 which means that the military service section alone makes up 25% of the article. This is unnecessary. His military service is, of course, important to include in this article but should not be given such undue emphasis. He is most notable because of his acting career, not his military service.

Having worked on this article for a few weeks, it's become clear that this article is more of a hodgepodge of information from random editors rather than a strong article with consistent and coherent organization or prose. I am going to continue trying to improve this vital article and would appreciate any help trimming the military service section, adding citations, and combing through the article for repetitive elements while improving organization and prose quality. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:11, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

that's right

...military section can be shortened. Indeed, many words about his military service, yes, but the section lacks substantial information, anyway: how many missions he flew and with which outfit exactly ? --2001:A61:2B66:7E01:9CBB:1839:2698:574 (talk) 09:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

date of enlistment

The third paragraph says he enlisted "soon after the United States entered the Second World War in 1941" -- the U.S. entered the war in December 1941 -- but elsewhere the article says he enlisted in February 1941 and reported in March 1941. So one of these must be wrong.Iglew (talk) 12:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Childhood photo

I think a photo of him as a child would improve the article, but I have had a difficult time finding one without copyright. Please upload one if you can find one! Skyes(BYU) (talk) 17:24, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:James Stewart/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 04:43, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I will review this article. Thank you.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 04:43, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Passing comments...

• "At first, he had trouble being cast in Hollywood films owing to his gangling looks and shy, humble screen presence. [40] His first on-screen performance was an unbilled appearance in a Shemp Howard comedy short called Art Trouble in 1934.[41] His credited first film role was the Spencer Tracy vehicle The Murder Man (1935).[42] Rose Marie (1936), an adaptation of a popular operetta, was more successful and led to his Stewart's casting in eight films in 1936.[43][44" -reps of first!!

• I'm more than happy to receive criticism and make changes to this article, but I don't understand what you mean by this one, would you mind clarifying? Skyes(BYU) (talk) 16:46, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Repetition of the word "first".

• Done. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 16:29, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

• I'd like to see more quotes from critics of his performances.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:55, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

• Do you mean you would like to just see generally more quotes from critics (good or bad), or do you mean you want to specifically see criticism of Stewart's performances? Skyes(BYU) (talk) 17:00, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Good or bad criticism of his performances. I think it could do with some quality quotes of some of his more notable performances to reinforce the article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:08, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

• I added some quotes for his best and most well-known performances. Let me know if you would like more. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:39, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

My comments

General

• Too much overlink of films and other celebrities/people. Just linking them once is enough (Link in the lead as well if you have mentioned them). De-link the rest.

• I think I managed to remove most of the excess links. Also, after reviewing the infobox, the information appears in the article and is referenced. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:32, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Lead

• "The characters he appeared as spanned a wide range of subjects and appealed to large audiences." — Maybe rephrase it as "The characters he played spanned a wide range of subjects and appealed to large audiences."
• Wikilink "MGM" and expand it to its full-form like say "Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM)" since you are mentioning it for the first time. Do the same as well when you mention it for the first time in the body of the article (If you haven't done so already).
• Wikilink Broadway, Frank Capra.
• "he is most known" can be rephrased as "he is mostly known".
• I hope you have the proper references for the details in the infobox. Just clarifying.

• All done. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 19:42, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
• Hello, @Ssven2:, do you have any more suggestions or criticisms for me? Skyes(BYU) (talk) 17:35, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I'll look further into it tomorrow. Sorry if I'm slow at the review.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 18:01, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

No worries. I just wanted to check in. Take your time. Thank you. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:30, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

When I said, "no worries, take your time", I meant to take a week or two to complete the review if you need it. Out of courtesy for nominators, I always complete my GA reviews within one week (if I can't for some reason I make the waiting period explicitly clear). You expressed interest in this page. You even went as far as to contact me on my talk page to ask if you could review the page but it's been over two months and you have barely reviewed past the lead section. I know this article is long and it's okay to be "slow", but slow is different than doing nothing at all.

I have a serious goal to get this article to FA and used this review as a formality to get some feedback as I've been told this article is already nearly at FA standards. I'm not trying to be abrasive, I just have serious ambitions about this article and I don't have the patience to wait around for months to get feedback. I will give you a few days to resume the review, if not I will either request another reviewer or list this review for deletion and direct this article towards more efficient preparations. I do appreciate the criticism offered because it did improve the article; however, it's important to be courteous to nominators by completing the review in a reasonable amount of time. Thank you. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:16, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

@Skyes(BYU): I am sorry, my friend. I am unable to complete this review and I've been rather busy too irl. I hope you bear no ill will against me for this because I really wanted to do this review but am unable to do so owing to life outside of Wikipedia. Please do accept my sincerest and deepest apologies. Btw, the article looks really excellent. Just needs a bit of copyediting and a source and image review.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 09:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Ssven2, no worries. I just hope it is not a euphemism for "I quit forever". Skyes(BYU), feel free to request a new reviewer here. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:14, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Ssven2, no problem. I hope everything is going okay for you. I really appreciate your help and good luck! Skyes(BYU) (talk) 17:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Skyes(BYU): Hi. Do you still need a new reviewer? AIRcorn (talk) 08:19, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Technically yes, but since my previous reviewer dropped out, I have been working with another editor outside of GA to get my article to featured article standards. We are still working on the article and haven't quite finished it. I'm not sure if we were planning on continuing with the GA review or not.Skyes(BYU) (talk) 22:48, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

• @Aircorn:, if you want to review the article, I would be happy to have you review it. The work I've been doing on it has kind of died down within the last month. But if you're interested in the work we've done to the article as a reference, here is the sandbox on which the article was discussed and improved. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:26, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

• Okay. I will try and get through it sometime in the next few weeks. AIRcorn (talk) 21:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

@Skyes(BYU): Hi, asking again if you want a new reviewer? If you want to work on this to FA instead, you can withdraw it, but if that editing has died down, I'd be happy to take on reviewing Jimmy's article! Kingsif (talk) 12:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kingsif:, we almost finished editing, we are just down to the lead section. Someone previously expressed interest in doing a GA review, but I haven't heard from them since. I don't really care whether it's an FA or a GA review at this point; I just want the article to get reviewed since a lot of work went into it. I would be happy to have you review it! Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:15, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Skyes(BYU): Is the current version the one you want reviewed? Kingsif (talk) 18:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kingsif:, yes, please. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:57, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

New reviewer

Sources

• Earwig's copyvio tool has chosen to be down today, so I'll do my best with the sources.
• First comments are the harv refs that point nowhere:

• Bigham 1994 doesn't have a ref
• Horton, Robert (March 1990). "Mann & Stewart: Two Rode Together". Film Comment. 26 (2). ProQuest 210251212 and Parish, James Robert; Bowers, Ronald L. (1973). Taylor, T. Allan (ed.). The MGM Stock Company: The Golden Era. New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House. ISBN 0870001280 aren't cited

• Is there a reason that some of the Citations, including ones with a last name, have the full citation (e.g. Crowther, Bosley (December 22, 1950). "The Screen In Review". The New York Times: 19., but there's a lot)? Could they all be moved to use the same format consistently

• I've read this a couple times and I can't figure out what you mean here. Would you mind clarifying? Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• @Skyes(BYU): In the citation list, the first (AFI...) has its full citation, but the second (Fishgall 1997, p. 19) is just the short ref and links below. I know there's lots of different ref styles, but why wouldn't AFI, e.g., be in the Bibliography? Kingsif (talk) 18:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

If I am understanding what you mean, the way I normally do my pages when there is a mix of web and book sources is that I use the sfn style for anything with page numbers that must be distinguished like books and journals and I will put the full citation in the bibliography. Other things like newspapers and websites, I don't usually bother to put in the bibliography because I usually only cite them once or twice and they don't need to be distinguished from other citations because there are no page numbers. I have looked at other featured articles and some also use this like Katharine Hepburn. Additionally, the editor I have been working with is experienced in working with featured articles and seemed to be okay with my citation style. This is pretty much how I have been doing things for the past few years but let me know what you think. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

No, it's fine to do that, I was just wondering. There's no formal stance on it (and certainly not at GA), just wanted to make sure it was intentional. Kingsif (talk) 19:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• Some of the citation refs with multiple sources don't have a space between comma/semi-colon and name, if you wanted to fix that
• Sources all appear reliable (using Headbomb's tool and manual check)
• Quite a few are also books, so I'll do a:

Random selection - source check

AFI  Done (used once - has info - no copyvio) Fishgall 1997  Done (115 uses; some of the pages aren't available on archive preview, but since the others are good I'll take it) Eliot 2006  Not done (source is offline, not on Google books and no other evident archives/previews) Smith 2005  Done (29 uses, some of the pages not available, otherwise is good) Eyman 2017  Done (45 uses, "-") Dewey 1996  Done (most pages only available in snippets view so less context, but they all seem good) Thumim 1991  Question: (not sure what this is referencing - that No Highway was big in the UK but not US? It only says it did well in the UK) So because of COVID-19, I am now doing my Wikipedia work from home rather than the library so I no longer have access to these print sources. However, a few months ago, I went through this article with a fine-toothed comb to make sure that every piece of info in the article was reflected in the citations. I'm pretty sure the only reason I introduced the Thumim citation was to cite the UK reception and everything else was in the Fishgall source. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC) That's all good then. Kingsif (talk) 19:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC) Crowther 1954  Done (used once - has info - no copyvio)

• Looks pretty good, will AGF on hard to access sources. The online ones look good.

Lead

• Long, but so is the article. May be a bit too long, but seems fit for purpose
• and had his first postwar role was as George Bailey should remove 'had' or 'was'
• Lead moves from discussing Academy Awards to Oscars without clarifying that they're the same thing. I guess most people know, but to be sure it can be clarified as "Academy Award (Oscar)", or only use one name
• It has gained in popularity - this might read better as "'increased' in popularity", but not actionable
• Lead doesn't mention explicitly how many, particularly Oscar, award noms he had. Could something like this be added if deemed important enough?
• Since his filmography has its own page, perhaps it could be linked in the lead - the "his films" in with most of his films becoming box office successes might be an appropriate phrase to add the link
• an honorary Academy Honorary Award seems redundant, especially since it's already been introduced as an honorary award
• Rest good, nicely written

Illustration

• Infobox:

• Good amount of and choice of parameters/info
• However, 'Awards' is listed twice, linking to the same page. Perhaps only list it once (above the military service section), or make multiple pages. Alternatively, move the relatively short military decorations to that section on his bio and link to the section in the infobox.
• Would 'European Theater of Operations' be more appropriate in parentheses after WWII rather than with a plain text *?

• Photos:

• Lots of correctly licensed PD images
• Most are used well

• I don't see a use for the image from The Far Country - it gets only a brief mention, and Stewart's work with Mann is already shown with Winchester '73 being pictured

• I added this because the editor I was working with asked me to add another image of Stewart in a Mann film since Mann made up a significant part of Stewart's career. While I would have preferred to find an image from a different film, this was what could find. (it was scanned directly from my university's James Stewart Collection). This was the only image of a Mann film I could find. I can remove if you really don't think it belongs here. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 19:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• Captions mostly used well

• Could use more detail for why the image from Harvey is used (presumably, requesting the role?)
• And for Rear Window (uncovering new depths)
• And Anatomy of a Murder (first BAFTA)
• Question on the use of periods at the end of captions that are only one sentence, I thought MOS was not to do that

• According to WP:Manual of Style/Captions: 1) no period after lone fragment 2) period required after complete sentence 3) periods required after all fragments and sentences when used together

• Theatre and radio are presented as a list and table, respectively. Could Broadway not be a table; also, have you thought about moving both to the filmography page (which now hold theatre, radio, discography, etc. - could be renamed as 'performances' if wanted)

• I hadn't really considered it. I don't really mind either way. Do you think it would be better if they were taken off his bio page? Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure it matters, I'm fine with them here. Kingsif (talk) 20:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

See also

• I feel this, which is just List of film collaborations, should be moved to the filmography page, since it is most pertinent to that

Early life

• About the dashes between dates, I don't think there should be spaces between numbers and the dash. (Apply this to lead, too)

• Made fixes, though the space between the dates and the dash in the first sentence of the lead should be correct per MOS. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• A shy child, Stewart spent much of his time after school in the basement working on model airplanes, mechanical drawing, and chemistry - I can't tell if this should be "mechanical drawings" or not
• Otherwise good.

Career

• Taking a review break. Kingsif (talk) 20:31, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

• in a Shemp Howard comedy short Art Trouble - shouldn't this be the Howard short?
• For the Divided by Three mention, perhaps move "in the fall" to the start of the sentence. As it currently starts, it sounds like either it's going to discuss reviews of the plays mentioned in the sentence before, or that reviews have just been mentioned, but it's neither, introducing a new topic.
• I'm confused how Stewart got the part in Vivacious Lady after critical success in Of Human Hearts if both were released in 1938 but Vivacious Lady had been worked on for years?

• The chronology of the 1938 films was incredibly confusing to sort out. TrueHeartSusie3 challenged me to get the chronology straight which I did, and I believe is correct. What I think happened here becomes a bit more clear when reading the note1, but perhaps it isn't as clear as it should be. Ginger Rogers and Stewart were dating so she suggested that he be cast as in the film. He got ill right after and production had to be shut down. Then he began working on Of Human Hearts and Vivacious Lady resumed production without him. I believe his success in Of Human Hearts allowed Rogers to convince RKO that Stewart needed to be recast into the film. I found a New York Post article that kind of clarifies this. Do you think I should reword/restructure this section to make that detail more clear? Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• Yes, some clarification needed, if you can. Kingsif (talk) 22:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• In the paragraph about the Philadelphia Story, it doesn't actually say which Oscar he won, and since his awards are in a separate article, it's a bit unusual. James Stewart's article should mention in body text that he won the Best Acting Oscar.

• reported for induction as private in the Air Corps - should it be "as a private"?
• After spending over one-year training pilots should say "over a year"..
• and was sent to England as part 445th Bombardment Group to pilot a B-24 Liberator in November 1942 - changes to read "as part of the 445th" and "Group, to pilot a B-24 Liberator, in November" (the commas to indicate he was sent to England, not flew the plane, in Nov '42)
• Shouldn't military titles (Second Lieutenant, Major, Colonel) be capitalized? It's inconsistent in the article, any way

• According to WP:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Military terms, the titles are only capitalized when used in conjunction with the holder's name as a proper noun. Otherwise, they are left uncapitalized. I will go double-check in the article to make sure this is consistent. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks. Kingsif (talk) 22:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• The word Westerns should have a capital W, every time
• In It also marked a turning point in Hollywood, as Stewart's agent, Lew Wasserman, brokered an innovative deal with Universal, in which Stewart would receive no fee in exchange for a percentage of the profits as well as cast and director approval, the "as well as cast and director approval" sounds like the deal meant he got paid in being approved of by his colleagues, rather than he got to be involved with hiring and casting
• "Indian agent" either needs a wikilink or to change to 'Native American'. Not even for political correctness, but because even with the context, I thought of India until the end of the sentence
• The sentences about The Man from Laramie and the one Who Knew Too Much seem arbitrarily stuck on the end of the paragraph - up to now, the article is really strongly written, so they especially need to be rewritten for better flow
• Same issue with the Quigley poll mention at the bottom of the '50s subsection
• "Eastern attorney" - East Coast perhaps? Eastern sounds like it should refer to the hemisphere

Personal life

• Made a few minor tweaks, generally looks fine otherwise

Acting style and screen persona

• Quote box good
• Italics for 'Hank and Jim' title
• The sentence Stewart was the classic everyman, because he was someone with whom the audience could identify with as contrasted with other Hollywood leading men of the time such as Cary Grant who represented what the audience wanted to become reads quite awkward, as well as being a bit repetitive of the sentence before, and could do well to be rephrased.
• The structure of this section is a bit weak. It starts out strong, the first five paragraphs have good flow. I think this was the section being worked on? Could use improvement. What particularly jumps out is the "Good American" paragraph, which should maybe be incorporated earlier, more with the everyman paragraph.

Comment: I just noticed this, sorry I've been lagging behind lately! I have a new (hopefully improved) version of this section in my sandbox that Skye and I have been working on, just forgot to add it. I'll add it now, feel free to revert if this was not ok.TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

• Thanks, more notes, then:
• Stewart's co-star Kim Novak stated of Stewart's acting style that for emotional scenes, Stewart would access emotions deep inside of him and would take time to wind down after the scene ended. - This sentence may use the word Stewart too much. It might not even need it at all. Some cut back would be nice.

*May want to alter the quote in However, during his career "Stewart encompasses the furthest extremes of American masculinity, from Reaganite militarist patriotism to Hitchcockian perversity." to get the tense consistent. *The opening According to film scholar John Belton, rather than playing characters in his films repeats the "According to X" from the paragraph above - and this instance I feel would work better rephrased anyway. *The last paragraph puts commas directly before quotations even when it makes no sense - could these be reviewed and removed.

• Section much better, TrueHeartSusie3, just these comments. Kingsif (talk) 21:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Legacy

*I just noticed there's an audio clip. Can it not be inserted as media rather than a link in parenthesis? It might work better in Acting style and screen persona section? Something to think about... *Although this sentence is also very awkward - the drawl has been mentioned earlier, and it's certainly more significant than a passing mention at the end of a paragraph *Is there any reason why BYU has Stewart's personal collection? It seems like it should be mentioned if so, since he otherwise has zero connection to it

• I think I addressed these, but you might want to go and check. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:24, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Awards + filmography

A short mention of some of his notable awards and films could be used to give a bit of content here.

• This was included in an older version of the article, but as I recall, TrueHeartSusie asked me to remove it because it was too repetitive of information already in the article. I can add back if you think it's necessary for GA. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

• on hold Kingsif (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@Skyes(BYU): Kingsif (talk) 15:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kingsif:, I think I've addressed/responded to all of your comments. Let me know what else I can do if anything was not properly addressed. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Skyes(BYU): Looks good! Kingsif (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Cause of death?

The NYT reported[1] that the AP reported the cause of death was pulmonary embolism. Do we know for sure it was a heart attack and not a pulmonary embolism, presumably that progressed from a deep vein thrombosis (DVT)? (I'm currently revamping the DVT article, and I'd like to make sure I get things right.) Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

According to two biographies published after his death, it was a heart attack caused by a pulmonary embolism. "at the age of eighty-nine...an embolism lodged in his lungs. The clot caused a heart attack that killed him instantly" (Eliot 2006, p. 409). and "James Maitland Stewart died in his home of a heart attack brought on by an embolism on July 2, 1997" (Eyman 2017, p. 311). Typically, I find print biographies are generally more reliable for life details. His biographies, as I recall, don't mention DVT, but they obviously aren't meant to be medically technical. Hope that helps a little! Skyes(BYU) (talk) 20:42, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

It helps! Thank you very much Skyes(BYU). Biosthmors (talk) 02:27, 20 February 2020 (UTC)