Talk:Richard Burton/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Racism and anti-semitism

In addition to his admissions of bisexuality, surely the article should mention Burton's overt racism and anti-semitism? (92.11.142.51 (talk) 19:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC))

For goodness sake, go away. Deb (talk) 19:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Why? Haven't you read what Marlon Brando had to say about Burton's extremely racist behaviour? (92.11.142.51 (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC))

Brando's dead, so he can't be sued for libel. Wikipedia can. Deb (talk) 21:07, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Burton was both a racist and an anti-semite and there are lots of sources to prove it. And since Burton is long dead, none of his relatives can sue this site. (92.11.142.51 (talk) 21:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC))

Ah, the anonymous "lots of sources" again. Deb (talk) 11:44, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

No, there are plenty of sources such as Brando's own autobiography in which he records Burton's extremely racist words, or Burton's brother Graham Jenkins' book "My Brother Richard Burton" in which he recalls Burton deliberately using the N-word in South Africa to cause offence. It might also be worth pointing out that filming "The Wild Geese" in South Africa under the apartheid regime was incredibly controversial in itself. (92.12.54.231 (talk) 14:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC))

Everything Burton did was controversial, and deliberately so. It got him lots of publicity. Some people even believed he meant it. Deb (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to start new sections in the article entitled "Bisexuality" and "Allegations of Racism and Anti-semitism" in order to present a balanced picture of the subject. (92.10.219.56 (talk) 15:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC))

Or that might imbue these particular bugbears of yours with an additional significance far beyond what they deserve. Surely a section headed "Controversy" is quite adequate to contain all the accusations made about Burton both during his lifetime and since his death? Deb (talk) 17:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Somebody needs to fix awkward phrase

"his entire spinal column was coated with crystallised alcohol and had to be rebuilt in a delicate operation (to be replaced by his friend Richard Harris)" Sounds like the spinal column was replaced.

I think it was then (in April 1981) that his kidneys and liver were found to be damaged. (92.11.170.208 (talk) 18:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC))

old vandalism still intact about spine and "crystallised alcohol"

{{editsemiprotected}} spine was coated in "crystallised alcohol"? This was vandalism from 20 March 2009 and is still there. The earlier version, that he left the play early due to a back injury, is all that is needed.

Not necessarily vandalism; there are some Ghits on this; nonetheless, since I find it very dubious (alcohol simply does not crystalize at body temperature), and it is unsourced,  Done. Tim Song (talk) 20:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

There's a particular vandal who really likes this article, so it probably was vandalism - any unsourced negative statements added here should just be reverted post haste. Mind you, I managed to miss that particular item myself. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:18, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually it is true, read Penny Junor's biography. Burton's spine had to be rebuilt in April 1981 because it was entirely coated in crystallised alcohol. His liver and kidneys were found to be damaged at the same time. The mythical "back injury" was the official explanation at the time, in an attempt to disguise the true severity of his illness. (92.11.33.26 (talk) 19:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC))

Just needs a citation. Deb (talk) 14:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I think the biographies by Graham Jenkins and Penny Junor mention this. It's well known that Burton considered retiring completely after the operation, since he could no longer get insurance for movies. The surgery was for degenerative disease of the cervical spine, affecting all the cervical vertebrae, but it was indeed his alcoholism whichg had caused this.(LouisWalshFan (talk) 14:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC))

I checked Junor's biography, she mentions that Burton's spinal column was "entirely coated" in crystallised alcohol, and that he could only have the operation after putting on weight at the hospital, since during the "Camelot" tour his weight had dropped from twelve stone to an alarmingly low nine stone. (92.9.166.4 (talk) 02:18, 30 October 2009 (UTC))

I don't mean that I want the citation, I just mean that it should be added to the article. Deb (talk) 12:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

The article can't be edited at the moment. (92.15.7.98 (talk) 20:33, 31 October 2009 (UTC))

I've taken the protection off so you can edit it if you wish. If you registered as a user, you would have been able to edit it any time. Deb (talk) 19:29, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I see the mythical "back injury" information is still there. Why does the article still contain false information? (RossMacCormick (talk) 19:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC))

Because you haven't removed it! Deb (talk) 19:54, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

If it is in the sources mentioned above, which I don't have access to, it should be cited. I'll add some tags. – ukexpat (talk) 18:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

The Golden Turkey Awards

"The book awards the fictional "Golden Turkey Awards" to films that the Medveds feel are poor in quality, along with directors and actors judged to have created a chronically inept body of work. Readers will not necessarily agree with all their choices; however, the book almost exclusively showcases low-budget obscurities and exploitation films. A notable exception is the selection of Richard Burton as the worst actor ever, notwithstanding his star status and seven Academy Award nominations for acting; the authors justified their choice by assessing the cumulative merit of his good performances as being far outweighed by the sheer number of bad performances." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.178.228.88 (talk) 07:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Pain in the neck

It is said that Burton had a severe pain in the neck and had to wear a neck brace while rehearsing for "1984". Does anyone know what was wrong, did he have throat cancer? (RossMacCormick (talk) 13:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC))

Semi-protected?

Is this article semi-protected? I wasn't logged in and noticed that I couldn't edit anything. Shouldn't there be a template to that effect if it is? - DevOhm ^Talk 14:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is and no, you shouldn't - you should get a message when you try to edit it. Deb (talk) 12:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Plot details of "The Robe

The Marcellus character (Burton) is not converted by his wife (Jean Simmons). She actually follows his lead. I am changing the page to correct it. --Tony (talk) 20:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes

This article is one of a number (about 100) selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Penfding changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC).

Knighthood?

Why does the article say he was awarded a knighthood? Also, it is the government that gives honours, not the monarch. (92.11.217.30 (talk) 17:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC))

Thanks for pointing that out. The inaccuracy seems to have been introduced during September and evidently no one noticed! Deb (talk) 19:19, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you know whether it was Harold Wilson or Edward Heath who appointed Burton as a CBE? (92.9.89.93 (talk) 13:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC))

No, but I'd guess it was Wilson, as he'd have had the New Year's Honours and Queen's Birthday honours in which to do it. Deb (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Strictly speaking such honours are conferred by the monarch on the recommendation of the government of the day. – ukexpat (talk) 18:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

The monarch cannot refuse any request though. (92.12.20.228 (talk) 23:17, 11 March 2010 (UTC))

One other thing - Burton was conferred Commander of the British Empire, which is an honour but not a knighthood. Ellsworth (talk) 02:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

That would be Commander of the Order of the British Empire. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Quite. That is why I am reluctant, as an amateur Anglophile, to edit on the topic. But I figure, be bold and someone will get it right! Ellsworth (talk) 03:47, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

This talk page is too long

I added {{tl|archiveme}} to the top of the page because the page is obviously too long. --Gh87 (talk) 06:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done Automated archiving implemented. --Kslotte (talk) 11:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Role in Monty Python and the Holy Grail

IIRC the Green Knight whose arms and legs were hacked off, but refused to 'yield' was played by a different Richard Burton who was a local [Silversmith] ? John Cleese mentioned it in his DVD voice-over ... Worth disambiguating, if not notable enough to be worth creating his own page ? --195.137.93.171 (talk) 01:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Can't see any reason for mentioning this here or giving him his own article (unless he did something else of note). Deb (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Bisexuality

Why is Burton's bisexuality not mentioned at all in the article? The article is apparently tagged under the GLBT collection. Burton admitted to being bisexual in an interview, he didn't 'try it once and didn't like it', he chose to have many same gender sexual experiences, at a time when it was illegal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.251.171 (talk) 22:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

We can't include any mention of this without a reliable source saying he was, at one point or another, bisexual. Do you have a source? - SummerPhD (talk) 00:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

More directly, Richard Burton: prince of players by Michael Munn clearly states quite the opposite:"'I gave it a try once.... Intimacy with a man. How can you know you don't like caviar if you never tried it?' He didn't like it." p. 25. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

It's well known that he had sex with Philip Burton, the gay teacher who adopted him, and Emlyn Williams. (HantersSpade (talk) 20:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC))

Which, if sourced, still would not make him bisexual. A reliable source saying he was bisexual would make him bisexual. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's nonsense - Philip Burton was a teacher and would never have risked such a relationship. Deb (talk) 08:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

It was very different in those days. Even Burton's family knew the relationship was sexual. Philip was considered an outcast because he was 40 and had never married. There was also much speculation over Richard's relationship with Brook Williams.(92.7.16.142 (talk) 12:37, 26 March 2011 (UTC))

Here's a radical suggestion: How about if we discuss sources for these claims, rather than this pointless "Nuh-uh!" "Yuh-huh!" "Is not!" "Is too!" back and forth? - 13:40, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Philip Burton was a highly respected man locally, and also worked for the BBC. Deb (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Still no source provided for any of this. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

This page is for discussing improvements to the article. Without sources, we have nothing to add. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Graham Jenkins' book mentioned that the entire family were very suspicious of the true nature of the relationship between Richard and the middle-aged homosexual Philip Burton. (92.20.40.157 (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC))

I have read the book. For a start, Philip Burton was not middle-aged - he was in this thirties, only twenty years older than Richard Jenkins, not even old enough to adopt him legally. It may well be true that Philip was gay, and it may equally be true that the family were suspicious of his motives, but to assume that he took advantage of his position to seduce a heterosexual youth who was one of his pupils is quite without foundation. Deb (talk) 08:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Philip Burton was 39 or 40, that counts as middle-aged. Was Brook Williams the man Richard was referring to in his 1975 interview? (92.7.19.128 (talk) 17:06, 27 March 2011 (UTC))

No idea. But Philip would only have been in his early thirties when he started teaching Richard. Deb (talk) 18:27, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Crystallised alcohol...

Can this be reworded? I see that this has been discussed previously and it was apparently left in because of a reference in a biography by Penny Junor. 'Cristallisation of the entire spinal column by alcohol' is not a known medical entity, regardless of what a biographer may have written. Perhaps rewording could be placed making this phrase seem less definitive. News articles from the time stated he had a cervical laminectomy due to severe degenerative changes, which makes much more sense medically. I don't see how mention in a biography, presumably by someone who is not a physician, should merit this misinformation staying in here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebengreene (talk • contribs) 18:42, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

As it stands, the citation isn't even specific enough to source what's here. It needs a page number at the very least. I wouldn't be opposed to removing it if it is not improved. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 17:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I've removed it. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 04:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Burton, Richard (Cleopatra).jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Burton, Richard (Cleopatra).jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Death

I believe it is important to mention that not only did his final wife ignore the wishes of him to be buried with Elizabeth Taylor, but also his dearest wish to have been buried in Wales where he was born. Burton's family was outraged at the fact that she chose to have him buried in Switzerland instead of back home in Pontrhydyfen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.131.134 (talk) 15:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Evidence? Deb (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Some people really can't get over the fact that Burton and Taylor were divorced, TWICE and Taylors (dubious) wishes had no bearing on his final wife. Nor should they. She was buried in a Jewish cemetery in the US and he in a Christian graveyard. Taylors wishes were irrelevant in this case. She was not his wife after all! "Burton's family was outraged at the fact that she chose to have him buried in Switzerland instead of back home in Pontrhydyfen" where he had left in the 40s and CHOSE to live in Switzerland. Manxwoman (talk) 16:11, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Any possible moves of this page

Need to be discussed first. I'm just a "pass by" admin here. :) So I don't have any opinion on any actual moves. But moving this to Richard Burton (disambiguation) caused 800 pages or so to point to the wrong page. That's too significant for it to be without discussion. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 09:34, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

You're right, and it has been discussed (at length) previously so there is a precedent. Deb (talk) 10:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Previous discussion is at Talk:Richard_Burton/Archive_2#Requested_move. William Avery (talk) 11:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

• I think the notability of the explorer/writer is greater. He is normally called Richard Burton, and writers feel no need to distinguish him from the actor.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Many people would agree with you, but, until you request the page move and begin another debate so as to assess whether there is consensus, you will not be able to move the page. Deb (talk) 16:39, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I personally think "Richard Burton" should be a DAB page, and both the actor and the explorer should be differentiated in the title. But yes, it needs to be discussed, and if agreed on it needs to be properly organised (with a bot, I imagine) so that all links to the pages go to the right place. --Lobo (talk) 17:01, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

suffereed ongoing back pain and a dependence upon pain

"suffereed" is a typo and "dependence upon pain" should be "dependence upon painkillers" presumably, but not knowing if that's true or not I figured just to mention it here rather than to make the edit...

"...notoriously heavy drinker, Burton suffereed ongoing back pain and a dependence upon pain..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.235.46 (talk) 13:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Accuracy and encyclopedic tone

There is a lot of good, well-cited information here, but also uncited, fannish gossip. For basic biographical facts, I would suggest starting with Burtons official bio, and his official website: http://www.richardburton.com/burton_biog.pdf. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:05, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Going by the usual considerations of what constitutes a "reliable source", I'm not sure that the website would be considered a suitable reference. Deb (talk) 21:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh, for subjective matters, I'm completely in agreement. For basic things like the spellings of family members' names and when they were born, the official site seems like the horse's mouth. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:20, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Burton's ambiguous attitude to Churchill.

In the section "Personal Life", final paragraph it states that there is a citation needed "Burton got along well with Churchill when he met him at a play in London,[citation needed] and kept a bust of him on his mantelpiece."

The source of this is I believe Burton's interview with Michael Parkinson in 1974. You can see the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcSuQf4RZWs

In this Burton recounts his meeting with Churchill while playing Hamlet at the Old Vic and he appears to recall the meeting with fondness and speaks about Churchill in a respectful manner.

Maybe somebody could update this if they agree it is correct. I am not able to amend the article myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.51.238.15 (talk) 11:34, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

You would be able to edit if you were an autoconfirmed user with an account instead of an anonymous IP. We would love to have you as a regular contributor. Deb (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

This is a link to the Parkinson interview conducted in 1974. In it Burton clearly had fond memories of Churchill and did not show any sense of disrespect or animosity as suggested by the information stated in this section: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcSuQf4RZWs. This section requires some revisions. Sylvia Ford (talk) 07:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

It certainly needs more references. I suspect some of the content (such as the alleged sonnet-quoting contest with Robert Kennedy) come from Burton's autobiography, but the articles on Churchill may be more difficult to trace.Deb (talk) 10:07, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Grammy Award Winner (1975)

This section needs fixing:

Grammy Award for Best Album for Children for narrating an adaptation of The Little Prince in 1976. 99.129.112.89 (talk) 00:59, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Hollywood Walk of Fame

Burton was honored Posthumously with Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame on March 1, 2013 [1] This should be acknowledged on the front page. Sylvia Ford (talk) 19:08, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Burton died at age 58 from a brain haemorrhage

should read: Burton died at age 58 from a brain hemorrhage — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.55.184.78 (talk) 20:35, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

No, that is an American spelling.Deb (talk) 17:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 September 2013

The beginning of the second paragraph is in present tense. Please change it to "Burton REMAINED closely associated in the public consciousness with his second wife.........." DevashishAgarwal (talk) 07:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Why? He still is. Deb (talk) 09:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Godawful Intro

Why list all of his Oscar nominations? That is for a separate section. And what does his having never been formally trained have to do with anything being Hollywood's highest paid actor? There were many superstars lacking training. What is formal training anyway? Jack Nicholdson was never "formally trained."Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 02:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 October 2013

Under stage productions please change the date beside Equus to (1976) It should read: Equus (1976) Steranko99 (talk) 08:22, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Done by FruitMonkey (talk · contribs). Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 14:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Bad introduction

The introduction is unencyclopedic and full of POV. Also Burton was not the highest paid male actor in the late 1960s - Sean Connery, Paul Newman and Steve McQueen were. (92.11.201.66 (talk) 18:41, 20 November 2013 (UTC))

You're right, it's dreadful. It hasn't always been like that; I'm not sure who changed it. Deb (talk) 15:49, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Wagner biopic: reviled or praised?

It's currently referred to under "3.3 Later career" as "critically reviled", and under "3.5 Television" as "critically praised". "alyosha" (talk) 20:21, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Both comments were not specifically accurate or properly sourced, so I reworded the section and added a reference.DocFido (talk) 21:17, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hollywood Walk of Fame

For his contribution to motion picture, Burton has a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame located at 6336 Hollywood Boulevard, http://www.walkoffame.com/richard-burton. This should be clearly stated in the "Awards and Honors section." Sylvia Ford (talk) 11:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I added the information under "Awards and Nominations"GretDrabba (talk) 13:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Burton Was Never Offered LAWRENCE OF ARABIA

He was considered box office poison in Britain and in Hollywood (20th Century-Fox die not renew his contract) after LOOK BACK IN ANGER flopped. Sam Spiegel would never have offered it to Burton -- the film had one of the largest budgets in history. He signed Top 10 box office star William Holden to THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, and wanted Brando (whom won an Oscar in Spiegel's ON THE WATERFRONT), as did David Lean, for the title role. Brando was in the Top 10 Box office stars in 1958. No history of the film says that Burton was even considered for the role, nor do his diaries. This is inaccurate and I am deleting it.Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 02:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

If there is no independent evidence that a statement is true and it is likely to be challenged, it should be removed from the article. Deb (talk) 17:41, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Burton was never offered the lead role in "Lawrence of Arabia". Apart from Peter O'Toole, Marlon Brando and Albert Finney were offered the part, but not Burton. (92.11.201.66 (talk) 18:39, 20 November 2013 (UTC))

In 1958 Burton indeed turned down the lead in "Lawrence of Arabia." There is no such claim as him being a box office poison (that was Katharine Hepburn and Brando from the 1950s till the 1970s) , by the 1960s he was the highest paid actor in Hollywood and ranked among the top ten box office grossing actors. In Britain he remained a top draw in British cinemas till the early 1970s [see notes for his filmography].

By the late 1950s, Burton made his frustration with Fox a no secret in Hollywood circles. Fox as always failed to grasp his talents and confined him to character and costume roles which he didn't enjoy and was seeking a way out of his contract with them {see Jean Howard's Hollywood: A Photo Memoir," Abrams 1989}. "Look back in Anger," was not a flop by any means and more importantly it was a critical triumph for Burton, and this is a very well known fact. The picture was an independent British production released in the US through Warner Bros. Sylvia Ford (talk) 09:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Casting did not begin until early 1961 for "Lawrence". Burton was never the highest paid actor in Hollywood in the late 1960s, that was Steve McQueen. "Look Back in Anger" was a critical and financial disaster, not least because Burton was far too old for the part. (92.11.200.84 (talk) 15:57, 14 February 2014 (UTC))

The above IP post is from banned editor User:HarveyCarter and should be ignored. Binksternet (talk) 03:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

• highest paid actor of the 1960s. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:39, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Health

The health section focuses almost exclusively on alcoholism and its related after effects. It omits the fact that Burton was also a hemophiliac and suffered what is referred to as the MILD form of Hemophilia A (hemophlia A is a genetic deficiency in coagulation factor VIII; the MILD form is extremely difficult to diagnose and is often linked to slow clotting due to other issues such as diet and other weaknesses, some of which Burton suffered from). During one of his marriages with Liz Taylor, during a fight at their home, Burton punched the TV screen, shattering it, and cutting his hand. They were not able to stop the bleeding and the hemophilia condition was diagnosed at the hospital where he sought successful treatment. Because the MILD form is often evidenced by slow coagulation, but coagulation nonetheless, it often goes undiagnosed until there is a severe accident such as the TV screen accident. It is not unusual that a MILD hemophilia A patient would have played rugby because in his young adulthood the diagnosis was not yet known, and he apparently escaped serious injury that would have uncovered the diagnosis. He and Liz Taylor subsequent to the TV screen accident established a not for profit foundation to assist other hemophiliacs. That foundation became dormant after his death and it is thought that it ceased to exist after Liz Taylor's death. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.68.200 (talk) 16:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Filmography missing Where Eagles Dare (1968)

Yeah the subject is pretty much the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.24.195.116 (talk) 21:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Childhood and Education

I've added some specifics to where he was schooled in his early years and where he lived in Port Talbot.

Burton attended Eastern primary school whilst he lived with his Sister on Caradoc Street in Taibach. I've also named Port Talbot Grammar school instead of 'grammar school'.

Gareththejack (talk) 14:46, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

American ? ?

Should he be in the category American Actors? SoSivr (talk) 03:43, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Can you see any reason why he should be? Deb (talk) 11:48, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

No. He was born, raised and educated in Wales. He never held American citizenship. Incidentally, Elizabeth Taylor's citizenship is a bit more complicated. She renounced it and reacquired it when she married John Warner. Gareththejack (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

In the article page he is introduced as a WELSH actor SoSivr (talk) 12:30, 9 January 2015 (UTC) And the same page is a member of (Category:20th-century American male actors) . . . SoSivr (talk) 12:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Which page are you talking about? I don't see any category that relates to American actors. Deb (talk) 12:53, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

POV?

It sounds strange that an actor was noted for his "acting talent"? (86.137.48.98 (talk) 22:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC))

Not one of the highest paid

Burton was never one of the highest-paid stars, and in any case his viability as a box office attraction ended after "Where Eagles Dare", his last successful film. (217.42.27.166 (talk) 12:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC))

Parents marrying in a pub

I know it has two citations after it, but can it really be true that his parents married in a pub, the Miner's Arms? Until only about the last 20 years or so, all marriages in the UK had to be conducted either in a place of worship, or in a register office. It wasn't possible to get married in a pub back then, unless it was a common marriage ie a non-legal ceremony. If this is the case, it should be stated that it was a non-legal marriage ceremony. 19:40, 25 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.147.105.226 (talk)

Place of birth

Burton was born in Pontrhydyfen, Glamorgan, Wales. The County of Neath Port Talbot was not created until 1996! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.99.55.233 (talk) 12:43, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Eddie Fisher

It was Fisher himself who claimed Burton tried to seduce him in his two memoirs. (86.137.48.211 (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC))

Image from The Robe

The image File:Richard Burton - The Robe.jpg is being removed as not being PD but it clearly is PD. The explanation given here did not explain it either, nor could it since even We Hope allowed it. An editor can not simply remove an image saying it's not PD based on their opinion or personal uncertainty. Please note also that it's being used in about 50 articles worldwide. And review Film still for copyright explanations of publicity photos. The U.S. has clear copyright rules about what's PD.--Light show (talk) 10:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

If you read the TP discussion at the link you see "File:Richard Burton - The Robe.jpg No PD proof" in my signed post, so saying I "allowed it" is a misstatement. File:Frank Sinatra Von Ryan's Express.jpg is along the same lines, but it has full front & back archived as well as a date of publication. Newspaper archives can be searched to see if a newspaper published it. That would give a date and a copyright check; if the newspaper was not renewed the license could be changed to PD-not renewed. I can check one of the large archives and take care of that at Commons if it's found. This will keep my friend user:Ssven2 from spending time on discussions like this. Surprised to hear the pontificating about copyright in light of recent events. We hope (talk) 14:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@Light show: I think my statement confused you. What I meant to say is that there isn't any proof that the image is PD. I feel it is best if you pinged We Hope or any other user who handles images regarding this, Light show. If the image from The Robe is alright to be used, I will install it back myself.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 10:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

In the U.S. there are very clear laws about what is PD. There is no assumption that every (pre-1976) photo without a notice is automatically either owned by the government or a person; quite the opposite. We require proof that it was copyrighted before anyone can claim a right over it. You should take your questions to the Commons. Again, it is wrong for an editor to remove a PD-licensed Commons image from an article claiming they personally don't see any proof.

As for We hope, who always comments while waving their hand-sewn Abf flag, consistently amazes me in their inability after all these years to understand basic U.S. copyright law about publicity stills, writing things like, ...if the newspaper was not renewed the license could be changed to PD.

A publicity photo mass produced by a U.S. studio is "published" when created, not when it was printed in some newspaper. The newspapers just get these as freebies to reprint stories about new movies, but the newspapers did not take this photo and never owned it: Read the law and if unclear, simply ask at the Commons Village Pump. And note per the link, A public performance or display of a work does not of itself constitute publication. Generally, publication occurs on the date on which copies of the work are first made available to the public. --Light show (talk) 18:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

There's no dating shown anywhere on the photo. No one is implying the newspapers "took" the image, but they PUBLISHED many of them. This Einstein photo was in danger of deletion until publication by someone else was established. You're giving evidence that you still won't or don't understand the criteria for uploading for WMF projects-not even after the recent discussions. We hope (talk) 19:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

It's a publicity still for the film, obviously for the same date, and which as common knowledge about the film, does not need to be restated or printed. It's implied. --Light show (talk) 19:25, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

And you never take off your "know-it-all" boxer shorts. Despite that, the photo is OK after PROOF of PUBLICATION and has been re-licensed as copyright not renewed. We hope (talk) 19:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@Light show: This is the exact point that you continually misunderstand. We do not assume that works are in the public domain without evidence. The law may allow us to make that assumption in certain cases, but the policy of the projects is to require evidence to establish PD status. When you find an image, you are not seeing (rather obviously) all of the available information about that image, you are seeing an example of a specific copy. For 'any' published and copyrighted photograph, there undoubtedly exist (or once existed) pre-publication copies that did not include copyright information.... the mere existence of such copies, and their escape 'to the wild' decades later, does not place a work in the public domain.

Frankly, I would think that the fact WMF legal told you that you are wrong about the level of evidence required, years ago, would be sufficient. Revent^talk 19:48, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, by requiring a proof for a negative or non event, you're essentially creating a standard that's impossible to meet, per your comment, We do not assume that works are in the public domain without evidence. However by claiming that clear copyright law is irrelevant, you're simply enforcing British law over U.S. law. It's really that simple. Before 1989, a U.S. photo that is PD in the U.S. is universally PD. And anyone who relies on that fact, gets banned. --Light show (talk) 20:25, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

As you implied that I am ignoring what "legal" said, that is not true. Here's what they wrote and what MRG said about it:

From legal: It is likely that promotional materials, including production stills or posters released to promote a movie, released before 1978 are in the public domain. Public domain status can be ascertained by asking several questions: Did the image contain a copyright notice? How was the exact image released? Was the image release “general” or “limited?”

From MRG: They feel we are generally safe with the images as long as we can answer those questions. We need to know the specific details of the release and whether or not a copyright notice was included. Given no copyright notice and "general" release, we should be okay.

--Light show (talk) 21:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

• I restored the PD image. However, the newest version has all the original dust and scratch marks which should be removed again. The contrast is also a bit flat. --Light show (talk) 06:47, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

@We hope and Light show: I checked the refs for the image, which is the Brooklyn Eagle. The newspaper folded up in '55 and its properties are in PD. So, the image is OK to be used, I suppose. Thank you for your time, We hope and Light show.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 08:07, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Welsh language

The article does not make it fully clear that he was a Welsh speaker. I think he spoke English at home, but went to a Welsh-speaking school. If I remember rightly, I saw him saying this on television. He seemed to be very proud of his bilingualism, naturally enough. Can anyone document this? 12:30, 29 March 2017 (UTC)Seadowns (talk)

Hi. I'm not sure this is correct. I know he went to the same grammar school as my mother, which was certainly English-speaking, and the article says he went to Eastern Primary School, which as far as I know was English-speaking, but it's possible he spoke Welsh in his home village of Pontrhydyfen. He would of course have learned Welsh as a second language at school but I'm not sure that he was fluent. Deb (talk) 12:33, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

The books by Bragg and Alpert mention (not directly though) he was educated in English-medium schools but he spoke Welsh at home. Deb has correctly pointed out that fact.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 07:24, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

It seems my memory is wrong about where he spoke Welsh, but the main point is that he could speak it, which I think might be made explicit. It adds something to him, as he seened to think himself. Seadowns (talk) 22:25, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Add film

Where Eagles Dare is a British 1968 World War II action film starring Richard Burton, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.123.176 (talk) 23:10, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

The film is already mentioned.--Auric talk 23:13, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2017

Please change "Richard Walter Jenkins Jr." and "Richard Walter Jenkins Sr." with "Richard Walter Jenkins"; the suffixes "Sr." and "Jr." did not exist in the United Kingdom at the time. Indeed, Burton's own birth certificate gives his name as "Richard Walter Jenkins".

Please change the embedded quote "twelve-pints-a-day man" to "a twelve-pints-a-day man"

---

213.205.251.36 (talk) 12:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Partly done: I've done the second part of your request as it is a CE only. Leaving open the first part for now. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

 Question: I think we need a source for the statement that Jr. and Sr. "did not exist" in the UK. Jr. is sometimes missing from birth certificates from some of those that use them, so the image doesn't help much. Is there an official source on UK names? I'm not aware of any regulations except on name changes. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:48, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

This text is taken from the Wikipedia article suffix: "In Britain these [suffixes] are more rare, but when they are used the abbreviations are "Jnr" and "Snr", respectively."— Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.251.240 (talk) 09:04, June 23, 2017‎

A few things, A: That text does not appear anywhere on the article for suffix. B: Even if it did, it would not support removing the suffixes entirely, as you first asked for. C: Wikipedia articles are, and I know this sounds odd to say, are not generally considered reliable sources for edits on other Wikipedia articles. Since anyone can edit an article, an editor can put an incorrect "fact" in one article and then use it to mislead on another. We have policies about WP:verifiability and reliable sources that can further explain what I mean. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Eggishorn: Well, the biographies don't mention the suffixes "Sr." and "Jr." as well. I wrote it to differentiate between the father and son.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 16:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ssven2:, Using Jr and Sr as you did is a widely-accepted convention and I don't think such usage is problematic. The IP editor made the claim that Jr and Sr "did not exist" in Great Britain and that is a claim I think needs support. In other words, there are sources (chiefly etiquette manuals) that support using Jr and Sr and omitting them requires a contradicting source. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Philip Burton years

The article says Burton began smoking and drinking while working at the Co-op. However various biographies state he was aleady smoking cigarettes before his 8th birthday in November 1933. (Timon18 (talk) 13:23, 5 July 2017 (UTC))

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2018

Hi. This is my second account, I forgot the password to my first. I had contributed information regarding the estate of Richard Burton - this was reverted by ScrapIronIV who believed it to be irrelevant. I had begun to talk to them on their TalkPage but can no longer access my previous account to continue such a talk, and they have not responded either. I am requesting their reversion (dated 12 September 2018) be reverted on the basis of a clear consensus among editors that this IS a relevant detail. Below are a few examples of other people like Burton (similar in profession, era etc.) with the same details: - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Tallulah_Bankhead#Retirement_and_death - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr#Later_years - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Marlene_Dietrich#Estate - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Judy_Garland#Death - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Vincente_Minnelli#Death - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Greta_Garbo#Death - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Marie_Dressler#Death - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/John_Garfield#Death - https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Joan_Crawford#Death_and_legacy Many thanks and good wishes, Charlie Additional note: Am I supposed to provide any more detail to this, if so please do let me know (I'm still getting the hang of bits and pieces on here. Thank you :) Charlieh55Part2 (talk) 10:31, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Could you please be more specific about what was in the edits you made? Deb (talk) 11:21, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@ Deb - it was the estate values :) - thank you L293D Charlieh55Part2 (talk) 13:40, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Description of Burton

What is the rationale for referring to Burton as a "wastrel"? This seems like a highly subjective description of his life and career, and one that conflicts with the fact that he was one of the most famous and acclaimed actors of his generation.

I think you're right (but please sign your posts). The citations seem to be dead. I've heard the word "waste" used in connection with Burton but usually referring to the fact that he rather wasted his talent. It's rather an archaic word too. So let's find a better one.Deb (talk) 09:42, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Regarded as acclaimed?

He *was* one of the most acclaimed actors of his generation. He was also widely regarded as one of the greatest actors of his generation. What is intended here? E A (talk) 12:35, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2022

The final 2 sentences under "Personal Life" say this:

"His father, also a heavy drinker, refused to acknowledge his son's talents, achievements and acclaim.[356] In turn, Burton declined to attend his father's funeral after the elder Burton died from a cerebral haemorrhage in January 1957 at age 81.[357]"

I have two concerns about these. Firstly, the cited reference for the final sentence is bald and states that Burton said his father "would be shocked if he knew I had travelled more than seven hundred miles to go to his funeral". It's wrong to suggest that it was a response to his father's lack of acknowledgement etc.

Secondly, Burton's father did not use the name Burton but continued with Jenkins for his entire life.

To remove these errors and improve the sentence, the final sentence could read something like this:

"After his father died from a cerebral haemorrhage in January 1957 at age 81, Burton declined to attend his funeral." 2600:1700:EA01:1090:C000:DA6C:7452:1BB2 (talk) 05:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done Amadeus²² 🙋 🔔 16:00, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2022

In the section that describes Burton's role in the movie The Robe, it says Variety magazine termed the performances of the lead cast "effective" and complemented the fight sequences between Burton and Jeff Morrow.

The word "complemented" should be changed to complimented. 172.221.243.53 (talk) 20:47, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: This article uses British English, it is correct. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:05, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Casa Kimberly

Should Casa Kimberly be linked or mentioned anywhere in the article? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

That's not Yvonne Furneaux in 'wurthering heights'

the actress in the photograph and Burton's co star in the television program is Rosemary Harris. you can watch the whole program on you tube. Yvonne is not in the cast. 2600:1700:E120:3D70:F54D:45F6:4D59:2CBE (talk) 04:38, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

missing credit

Night of the Iguana 1964 RonLopez123 (talk) 21:32, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

We show "Selected works, based on award nominations" in the main article. The full list is at Richard Burton on stage, screen, radio and record. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:09, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Please add Night of the Iguana, 1964

Before adding protections and templates, please millennial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Literaturegirl (talk • contribs) 02:50, 2 December 2023 (UTC)