Talk:O. J. Simpson

Death April 10th 2024

https://twitter.com/therealoj32/status/1778430029350707380?s=46&t=Rtp2vyyLdGfBOgXPoTuzBQ 2601:184:417F:4170:E885:45:152E:AB5F (talk) 14:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

I am trying to discern what you would like included in the article. Are you providing a reference to his death via twitter or something else? I appreciate you including this information and also believe that a lot of reputable sources have reported the same information. Jurisdicta (talk) 15:13, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2024

Change all "is" to "was", and add a "Death" section Thegingiraffe (talk) 14:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

 Already done - in lieu of a "Death" section, the information about his death was added to the "Personal life" section Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2024 (2)

He died today on april 04 2024 194.182.143.10 (talk) 14:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

 Already done thank you! Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Moving personal life section below legal section

Thoughts on moving the "Personal life" section below the "Legal history" section? To me it seems a bit weird that his death is covered before his legal history. The only issue I can see with this is that the "Personal life" section includes his marriage to Brown, which could potentially cause some confusion. Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:05, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Biographies I've seen usually have "personal life" type sections before any controversy the individual was involved in. Putting the Legal History section before personal life makes it seem like the article is about the cases he was involved in rather than O.J. Simpson. This is just my perspective, but this is an article on him, not his legal cases. Berry (talk) 15:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2024 (3)

O.J. Simpson died on April 10, 2024. Life.aslivi (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

@Life.aslivi: Editors are updating the article. Thank you! GoingBatty (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Add "Music" section to "In popular culture"

Can a "Music" section be added to "In popular culture" with a reference to the song "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" by Good Charlotte? The line "Well did you know if you were famous you could kill your wife / and there's no such thing as 25 to life / as long as you got the cash to pay for Cochran?" is a reference to Johnnie Cochran successfully defending O. J. Simpson in his murder trial. Samerickson89 (talk) 15:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

We can't add every pop culture reference of OJ Simpson to this article, that one included. For starters there's far too many, and second the list would be totally arbitrary.--Rockchalk717 22:06, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2024 (4)

Change "Norberg" to "Nordberg" in the "Acting career" section.

OJ Simpson actually played Det. Nordberg (with a 'd' in the middle) and not Det. Norberg in the Naked Gun films. See here: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095705/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm

The character of Det. Norberg (without a 'd' in the middle) was played by a different actor in the TV series. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_Squad!#Cast Cuddles76 (talk) 15:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done – Muboshgu (talk) 17:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Can we say he did it now

Now that he's dead (rip to a real one) and WP:BLP doesn't apply shouldn't it should just say he did it? Dan • ✉ 16:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

We can continue to say he was acquitted in a court of law and held liable civilly. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. --150.143.27.147 (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Saying he did it isn't (from a legal perspective) an accurate statement. It can be stated it is opinion of some people the he did, but we cannot directly state he did it.--Rockchalk717 19:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:BDP is still policy. Sincerely, Dilettante 22:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

This juror admitted that most of them knew that he did it, but still voted to acquit for revenge: https://www.thewrap.com/oj-simpson-juror-not-guilty-verdict-was-payback-for-rodney-king/ ; this other claims that the jurors couldn't possibly make their decision so fast and they likely voted "with the heart", without considering the evidence. Just adding this could be enough, see if you maybe find better sources than the wrap (there's a video of the juror tho). 93.44.200.186 (talk) 05:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

• WP:BDP still applies and will for a while, but beyond that, we have to reflect the sources. Most of them don't just bluntly say he was definitely guilty in the article voice, so it's unlikely we'll ever do that, either. Beyond that, if you want to change the article you'd have to dig up the sources you want to use and articulate the specific change you want to make. --Aquillion (talk) 04:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2024 (5)

Found liable for double murder by a civil court 96.236.21.61 (talk) 17:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Accessibility

This article ran afoul of several accessibility issues, including MOS:COLOR, MOS:TABLECAPTION, WP:ALT, MOS:COLHEAD, and generally semantics issues per MOS:DTAB. I have changed this and quite frequently when I do, someone comes along and removes these with the weirdly hyper-conservative thinking, "I don't know what this is, so I'm removing it". Please do not undo any of these required changes and maintain proper accessibility and semantics in this and all other articles. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Broken sentence that needs rewording

"The verdict Following Simpson's acquittal, no additional arrests or convictions related to the murders were made."

Remove the verdict from this sentence 150.143.27.147 (talk) 06:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Looks to be gone.—Bagumba (talk) 08:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 April 2024

There appears to be a typo in this line from Personal Life, change 'hated' to 'had' :'In October, Brown called the police to report Simpson being violent again, after he allegedly found a photo of a man Brown hated dated while they were broken up.' 131.111.5.181 (talk) 07:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Opening Sentence

The opening would read better if the last part of the first sentence ("who was convicted of kidnapping and armed robbery") was removed and the first and second sentences were combined. As-is, too much weight is given to kidnapping and robbery, but those events are not primarily what O. J. was known for. Both the murders and the murder trials were much more important. 172.12.73.96 (talk) 17:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree and have removed it. I believe that Wikipedia editors as a whole are biased towards wanting to call someone who has been convicted of a felony a "convicted felon" in the first sentence, even in cases where they shouldn't. This is one such example as his conviction is low down the list of what he's known for. I kept the first two sentences separate, however. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Infobox image

Which of the following images would work best for the infobox? --150.143.27.147 (talk) 19:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Don't fix what ain't broke. Option 1, the status quo, works the best. Bremps... 23:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Also noting that Option 2 may run into WP:BDP issues until the Juice has been dead a hot minute. Bremps... 23:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

BDP aside, there's serious WP:NPOV issues using that mugshot in the lead when he was acquitted. —Bagumba (talk) 04:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

That only leaves Options 3 and 4 remaining, along with the status quo. Option 3 has a weird light/dark split along the middle of OJ's face. Option 4 is probably a copyright violation (see Commons page). I think this settles the debate. Bremps... 18:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Clearly 1 is the superior image... two is undo as a mugshot... three has odd shading to it.... and four is the lowest quality image I think I've ever seen. Moxy🍁 18:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Infobox picture choices

Cast your !vote

• 
  Option 1
• 
  Option 2
• 
  Option 3
• 
  Option 4

Another broken sentence that needs rewording

Before his murder trial, sportswriter Ralph Wiley claimed in 2002, White people considered Simpson a "unifying symbol of all races".

Should be - Before his murder trial, sportswriter Ralph Wiley claimed in 2002, white people considered Simpson a "unifying symbol of all races". 150.143.27.147 (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

It should be "Before Simpson's murder trial." If one writes "Before his murder trial," the sentence reads like it was Ralph Wiley's trial. KevinScott71 (talk) 02:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Short description

The short description says "American football player, actor and convicted felon" but the lead only says "American football player and actor". There should be some consistency here. 150.143.27.147 (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I'll remedy that – Muboshgu (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2024

I'd like to suggest more background for the 'Illness and death' section on Simpson's chemotherapy treatment, the time of his diagnosis, and his later denials that he had entered hospice care. I had attempted to suggest a larger edit yesterday but the talk page was protected and the alternative method of requesting edits was not working for me, but now most of what I intended to request has already been added in the meantime, so I'll simply suggest this small addition to the beginning of the first paragraph:

"In May 2023, Simpson reported that he had been diagnosed with cancer in "really recent years" and expressed confidence that he would beat it. He also said he was undergoing chemotherapy treatment and had begun smoking marijuana to help with nausea. In February 2024, Simpson denied reports that he had entered hospice care in a video posted on Twitter. In the video, Simpson stated "I don't know who put that out there [...] but I guess it's like the Donald says: can't trust the media! [...] All is well!" Simpson did not provide further details on his cancer treatment. Later that same month, it was reported that Simpson was undergoing treatment for prostate cancer."

150.143.118.239 (talk) 23:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Seems a bit WP:NOTDIARY.—Bagumba (talk) 07:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The Towering Inferno 1974

He had a minor role in the film. Needs to be added to his Film credits. 72.128.73.168 (talk) 10:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It was there originally. Seems to have removed for unexplained reasons. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 17:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Should be added back in. --150.143.27.147 (talk) 19:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Abuse of Nicole mentioned in lead?

Should this be mentioned in the lead or not? 150.143.27.147 (talk) 20:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Can you suggest wording you think should be added? It's only mentioned once in the article, in an article this long that normally wouldn't be due for the lead. Valereee (talk) 20:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

How should we treat Simpson's “culpability” in the murders; neutral or adamant?

A legal verdict is not required for scholars and historians to draw their own conclusions based on the evidence: they may conclude that a person that was actually acquitted of some crime was, in fact, guilty; or visa versa, they may conclude that someone who was convicted was, in fact, innocent. Although Simpson was acquitted in a trial, reliable sources, such as Jeffrey Toobin's book The Run of His Life: The People v. O. J. Simpson (1997), firmly establish that he killed Brown and Goldman. I think to say I think it is very easy to write it when the evidence is so overwhelming. It is WP:BLP's standard, which, obviously, does not apply to someone who died years ago. We quite frequently describe deceased people in ways that imply or presume guilt; once someone has been dead for long enough that there's no longer a BLP-level risk of harm, the standard shifts to the same one we use for everything else (ie. what do the preponderance of the best available sources use, with perhaps some additional weight needed if the claim is WP:EXCEPTIONAL.) Otherwise we would have to cover almost every historical figure's article with "alleged" this and that - especially murderous or genocidal dictators, heads of state, etc., who were often never convicted of any formal crimes. WP:BDP applies; while WP:BLP may apply for some period after death, that's exceptional, would only apply to contentious or questionable material about the subject that has implications for their living relatives and friends, such as in the case of a possible suicide or particularly gruesome crime and is comparatively brief. Well, I think it could be seen that those "living relatives and friends" might be just not wanting to believe it. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

reliable sources firmly establish that he killed Brown and Goldman I highly doubt that, as it's not for RS to establish guilt. We should continue to say what we say, which is that he was found not guilty in a criminal trial and liable in a civil trial. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I just thought that the discussion could be suggested in future, particularly as Wikipedia, from the mid-2010s, firmly embraced Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt and has no qualms about naming him as the killer, as officially concluded. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lee_Harvey_Oswald#Alleged 92.17.198.220 (talk) 20:44, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Two suspects of murder are not necessarily the same beyond that. We had a Warren Commission on Oswald. What sources say OJ did it? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I recently gave it away to a shop, but Jeffrey Toobin's book The Run of His Life: The People v. O. J. Simpson (1997) could be argued as one source. I obviously don't have the full argument he used on the page number but as quoted in this article: https://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/10/books/figuring-out-the-o-j-simpson-trial.html, "Mr. Toobin pulls no punches in this book. He is convinced that O. J. Simpson is guilty of murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Lyle Goldman, and he argues that any rational analysis of the events and evidence in question leads to that conclusion." At the very least, it seems that various theories (like "Jason did it" or "intruders did it" are regarded as fringes theories and hardly taken seriosuly), especially as no other "reliable" theory surfaced. There are no definitive answers to any of these questions. Whether one answers “yes,” “probably,” “possibly,” “unlikely, “implausible,” or “no” to these questions will often depend on whether one already thinks O.J. is guilty or innocent.92.17.198.220 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I have retitled the subject, as Simpson was found guilty of robbery.92.17.198.220 (talk) 18:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I am aware this could be a WP:CATV issue, and consensus is not to add Simpson to categories like killers and murderers, because he was acquitted. Obviously, it disappointing he can never be retried, but that's the way it is. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 19:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Pretty much that. It's not verified that he committed murder, and it's best to just stick with the facts: he was found not guilty in a criminal trial and liable in a civil trial. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

For the sake of a "test", I have done several edits to Ron and Nicole’s articles naming OJ as killer, after which it can than be changed to reflect a neutral stance, if in case one day, we do name him as the killer 92.17.198.220 (talk) 22:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

And someone else reverted them. —Bagumba (talk) 07:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Maybe we can make an FAQ above as to why the article is to remain neutral in regard to guilt or innocence. What we need is an edit filter on the page (and the article itself, I suppose) which, if the submitted edit contains the word "alleged", blocks the edit and throws up a message referring the editor to an FAQ above. I think it would need to apply to all of the peripheral articles too, like Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, not to mention the central article, O. J. Simpson murder case. Anything that's not protected at a given moment tends to get that kind of drive-by edit. There are some reasons why if someone else (or a group of someones) had been involved in the murders (either as the real/actual killer or an accomplice with Simpson), the LAPD would not have charged them. Many positing alternate theories argue that the either the LAPD framed Simpson or conducted a shady investigation that led them to miss evidence of other's involvement (it is also both suggested Simpson killed Brown and Goldman and the police still framed him by planting one or two pieces of evidence) or ignore evidence because they did not want to undermine their public position that Simpson acted alone. Last I checked, Wikipedia policy is not to proclaim guilt if a person if found not guilty by a court of law. That does not mean his is innocent as we all no, but it does not Wikipedia should not state that position. We can state that many people believe he got away with murder and that the president ate trial was more convincing of his guilt. We also have to acknowledge though that others feel differently and think he was framed or that he was at least not the sole perpetrator in the murders. While many people over the years have stated they believe the evidence points to Simpson indeed being the real murderer and having acted alone, some people have posited alternate theories for the murders in which either one or more other suspects committed the murders or in which Simpson did not act alone. I'm not defending any "fringe theories" regarding the Simpson case. As a matter of fact I am pretty sure that Simpson committed the murders, and that it is likely he had no accomplices but if we're going to have to divide how people feel about the case, in varying ways, it only makes sense that we should have FAQ detailing the neutrality towards Simpson’s guilt or innocence. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 19:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Ironically, the 2025 film "The Juice" is coming which will present a version of events in which Simpson did not commit the murders. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 21:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Discussion regarding List of unsolved murders (1980–1999)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_murders_(1980%E2%80%931999)#1990%E2%80%931994 Brown and Goldman appear in the 1994 article on "unsolved murders". user:Aquillion says that sources don't generally describe it as unsolved, but more generally, lists like this aren't generally linked as a see-also; this isn't an emblematic "unsolved murder" that would justify it as a core connected topic. In particular, "unsolved" appears nowhere in the article body. All else aside, this isn't a great see-also because it isn't central to the topic - we would need significant amounts of coverage describing it first and formost as an unsolved murder (with no qualifiers), and a significant amount of the body discussing how it's unsolved, before a generic list like this would make sense as a see-also. And it's just unlikely that that sort of coverage exists or would be WP:DUE. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 09:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC) More relevant for Talk:List of unsolved murders (1980–1999).—Bagumba (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

This will be the last time addressing the issue, and I suppose only time will decide, but with his recent passing, and with no evidence to support "alternative theories", it wouldn't be surprising if one day, Wikipedia officially breaks the issue and names Simpson as the killer. I think every person who will examine the case thoroughly will think he almost certainly did it. Not even a 0% chance that he didn't do it. Even if you were to argue otherwise, he might as well have been standing right next to whoever did it. The fact he never launched any official search for the "real" killer, and seemed content to try to enjoy life, even making "bad taste" jokes, clearing referencing the murders (His banana stabbing of Ruby Wax and "Juiced" reality show) really show how cruelly he treated Nicole's death. 2.100.74.138 (talk)

And reverted again., Stop doing this. Meters (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Infobox template

I switched the infobox in the lead to Infobox person back in December with the NFL player infobox module embedded. This was for two primary reasons: 1. Simpson is notable for many more things than his football career; and 2. Infobox NFL biography excludes a number of parameters, which would be useful for this article in particular. According to MOS:INFOBOXUSE, the purpose of an infobox is to "to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article. [...] The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." Facts like those about Simpson's marriages, have received wide, non-trivial coverage in reliable sources, and, as such, are included in the body of the article. There's no reason that this information, which is arguably of as much interest to readers as key facts about Simpson's football career shouldn't be included. User:Rockchalk717 has repeatedly attempted to revert back to the NFL player infobox, claiming that other information is "pointless" and not notable. To prevent an edit-war, I am seeking input to obtain a consensus on this subject. Rockhead126 (talk) 07:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

The problem is the Person infobox literally adds nothing worthwhile to the article. The person infobox only exists for if there's no other infobox that applies to the person. The way you are presenting the person infobox adds exactly zero to the article. Date and location of birth: covered by NFL infobox, date and location of death: covered by NFL infobox, college: covered by NFL infobox. So that leaves spouse and children. The spouse parameter is for notable spouses only (per the infobox page) and only one spouse was notable and that's the one he was accused murdering, and children quite frankly isn't that important of parameter. You keep using his murder accusation, his criminal conviction, and his acting career as your justification for inclusion of that infobox but aren't utilizing any parameters that would include it which doesn't make any sense. Your comments seem to be downplaying his football career. The man is a Pro Football Hall of Famer, College Football Hall of Famer, and a Heisman Trophy winner, the 3 biggest accomplishments you can have as a football player. He's considered one of the greatest running backs in NFL history. His NFL career is notable enough still this day (44 years after he played his final game) that the NFL infobox is sufficient. Yes his criminal record and murder trial contributed to his notability as did his acting career and his career as an NFL analyst but once again the way your presenting the person infobox mentions nothing of these things making its inclusion pointless.--Rockchalk717 15:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I have a suggestion. We use the criminal infobox, which is almost identical to person. Don't add the college parameter as that can be covered in the NFL infobox. In occupation parameter, we add professional football player, actor, NFL analyst. We include the conviction, we could also include the "known for" parameter and add the page link for the murder trial.--Rockchalk717 17:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Rockchalk717 and Rockhead126: I think you both make good points. I would support {{Infobox criminal}} {{Infobox person}} as the parent template, with {{Infobox NFL biography}} embedded. I was considering doing something along these lines myself. Much more than just being an NFL player, Simpson was an all-round celebrity, for better and for worse. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the input! The way I've added the criminal infobox I feel satisfies what me and Rockhead126 both want out of the infobox(s). It keeps a strong focus on his accomplished football career but does bring in what he's known for off the football field.--Rockchalk717 18:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Showing "Criminal charge" as "Kidnapping, armed robbery" could give the wrong impression for someone unfamiliar with the case that the murder was part of the same incident. —Bagumba (talk) 18:17, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Any ideas on how we can prevent that? Should we separate by year and have one for the murder trial and the robbery charge?--Rockchalk717 18:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I dont have any ideas offhand. I'm not that familiar with the template, nor edit too much on criminals. But I guess OJ is not the typical case, being more famous for acquittal than a different crime for which he was convicted. Worst case, the details are in the prose. —Bagumba (talk) 01:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

@Neveselbert: Did you forget this conversation took place or are you being intentionally stubborn?--Rockchalk717 19:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Rockchalk717: please revert. There's no consensus to use {{Infobox criminal}}, which is meant to be used only for individuals who are best known for their crimes, which is not really the case here. There's no reason to link San Francisco, per MOS:OVERLINK and WP:COMMONTERMS; the link should be removed. Nor is there any good reason to pipe ", Nevada" inside the link to Las Vegas (which probably shouldn't be linked either but, since it isn't delinked by WP:OVERLINKscript, I'll let this one slide). It's standard to include former spouses so long as {{Marriage}} is included, which means it's perfectly acceptable to include his first marriage in the infobox. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Both I and Rockhead126 support the use of {{Infobox person}}, while you're the only one supporting {{Infobox criminal}}. Per WP:BRD, you should revert your edits and discuss this matter on the talkpage. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Origin of the first name "Orenthal"

The article claims that his aunt gave him the name Orenthal, which she said was the name of a French actor she liked, without questioning this story, or giving the original source of the quote. The source given in the article is from 2000;[1] and there, the supposed origin of the name is only mentioned in passing. It is a widely reported claim (how much of that due to Wikipedia?), but there are reliable sources that contradict it, and those should be mentioned.

For instance, according to Sheila Weller, who is already cited elsewhere in the article, The received wisdom is that she thought she had heard that Orenthal was the name of a French actor, but Eunice Simpson has told a close friend that Orenthal was the name of a wellrespected local church organist.

The ultimate source for the "Italian actor story" seems to be an interview with Life Magazine that O.J. himself gave in 1967, in which he said the following: The only thing she [my aunt] ever told me about Orenthal was that it was the name of some French or Italian actor [...] I don't know, maybe she was loaded or something when she came up with it.[2] While I haven't been able to track down an online copy of the actual Life Magazine article from 1967 (it is subscription-based, here), the Daily News source should be good enough to change it to "French or Italian actor". Renerpho (talk) 20:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I added the Italian part here. The Life source was on Google Books.—Bagumba (talk) 07:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Renerpho (talk) 14:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Conviction

@Neveselbert:: Your edit added "Murder" to the charges. The problem is that "Criminal penalty" doesn't show which charges he was convicted of, so someone could mistakenly believe he was convicted of murder instead of being acquitted. Not sure how this can be best clarified. In {{Infobox criminal}}, there is |conviction=, described as Crimes individual was convicted of (Dates of conviction). However, this page is now using {{Infobox person}}.—Bagumba (talk) 04:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

That's a fair point, I'll remove it if it hasn't been already. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

According to the documentation for Infobox persons the "Criminal charges" entry is "For convicted criminals only". I removed the reference to the murder charge. Nxavar (talk) 09:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Father and mother

The ABC news announcement of O.J. Simpsons death says:

His mother, Eunice, worked as an orderly at a psychiatric ward, and his father, Jimmy Lee, worked as a cook and custodian in a private club.

This is never made explicit in the "Early life" section. I suggest that the first sentence of the section is changed to:

O.J. Simpson was born in 1947 in San Francisco, California. His mother, Eunice (née Durden), worked as an administrator at a psychiatric ward, and his father, Jimmy Lee Simpson, as a cook, Federal Reserve Bank employee, and a custodian for both a bank and a private club.

The ABC news source is already among the citations for the first sentence. Nxavar (talk) 06:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

info

I propose we refine the following: "His father was also a well-known drag queen in the Bay Area. Later in life, Jimmy Simpson announced that he was gay. He died of AIDS in 1986." I don't know how else to say this, but it just does not sound right. Pilotnance (talk) 16:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect information

He did not flee in his friends car, he fled in his own car which his friend was driving. 2603:8090:2900:1351:7449:D1C2:D403:D856 (talk) 22:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Simpson also owned a Bronco, but it was Cowlings' that was in the chase.[3] —Bagumba (talk) 10:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Typo?

"stated that his cremains will be given to his children"

Should that be remains instead of cremains? 75.142.254.3 (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Looks OK https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cremains —Bagumba (talk) 10:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

That's not a commonly known word though. Remains is much more widely known and thus easier for readers to understand. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, I had initially reverted it as a typo, but then saw it was used in the cited source. It was a learning point for me, which you might consider a positive or a negative. —Bagumba (talk) 14:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

I went ahead and added a wikilink. Cremains exists as a redirect to cremation, where the term is explained in the lede. Renerpho (talk) 01:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

100m time would be faster than Usain Bolt

This article states Simpson ran 100m in 9.53 seconds. Usain Bolt's world record is 9.58 seconds.

I strongly suspect this is the time for a 100 yard race. Stringer133 (talk) 14:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

It was in yards, yes. The cited source is obviously in error. Simpson finished 6th that day (16 June 1967). The race was won by Charles Greene, in 9.21s, which still stands as one of the fastest ever times over that distance, which is why the race is mentioned in the 100-yard dash article. Compare [4] for the full results. Renerpho (talk) 02:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Mike Gilbert

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mike_Gilbert

I have started a discussion as to whether Mike Gilbert is notable enough. Sports agent. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 19:33, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Unreleased film

Does anyone have any information on the unreleased film Nicole & O.J.? Moving to talk page there 92.17.198.220 (talk) 20:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

They have dropped the trailer; I have a feeling many boycotts are bound to follow. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 20:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Found another OJ Hertz ad on Wikimedia Commons

Can this be used on the article or is it another copyright violation? 150.143.27.147 (talk) 19:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I doubt it. I've went ahead and nominated it for deletion. If the decision is to keep it then we can look at including it in the article. Renerpho (talk) 00:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Category:African-American golfers

Can this category be added to the page? OJ played golf for a very long time and was very enthusiastic about the sport. 150.143.27.147 (talk) 19:37, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

No, as it's not an important, defining part of what he's notable for, as he wasn't a pro golfer, so it's WP:NOTDEFINING. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Section in the "In popular culture" section that needs updating

"In 2018, it was announced Boris Kodjoe would portray Simpson in a film titled Nicole & O.J. The film was never completed."

The film has been retitled The Juice and will be released in 2025, so it is no longer accurate to say the film was never completed. 150.143.27.147 (talk) 13:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 April 2024

The paragraph where Latasha Harlins's murder is discussed uses male pronouns for Soon Ja Du. These should be changed to female pronouns since Soon Ja Du is a woman. Belliette10 (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Jamedeus (talk) 18:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2024

In the very last sentence of the lede, the phrasing "lived in freedom" strikes me as bordering on bias.

My suggested revision:

He served his sentence at the Lovelock Correctional Center in rural Nevada until being released on parole in 2017. Simpson was granted an early discharge from parole in 2021. He died of cancer at the age of 76 in 2024. 2600:100A:B1CE:1EF1:0:24:60B1:F701 (talk) 05:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Done. It's possible the death doesn't even need to be mentioned in the lead per MOS:LEADBIO:

Unless the cause of death is itself a reason for notability, a single sentence describing the death is usually sufficient, and often none is included in the lead at all, just a death date.

—Bagumba (talk) 05:37, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

That was fast, thanks!

I see what you mean, but I think right now if the death isn't in the lede, you will get umpteen requests to add it, lol. Maybe after some time goes by? 2600:100A:B1CE:1EF1:0:24:60B1:F701 (talk) 05:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Pop culture section

Ban evasion by Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/UK Kennedy–Lincoln–Titanic IP
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I feel that the section in regards to Simpson and portrayals could be trimmed slightly or rewritten. For example, the sentence “BBC TV's documentary, O.J. Simpson: The Untold Story (2000), produced by Malcolm Brinkworth, "reveals that clues that some believe pointed away from Simpson as the killer were dismissed or ignored and highlights two other leads which could shed new light on the case."” doesn’t seem important to this particular article and fits more better on the “Alternate theories and suspects” section on the murder trial article. The mentions of OJ: Trial of the Century (2014) and O.J. Simpson Trial: The Real Story (2016), fit more suitably on the article too, as is The Lost Confession? (2018). I think a Concession is needed and only should mention portrayals of Simpson by actors, much like how the Nicole and Ron articles mention portrayals on film. Something like; ===Portrayals=== Simpson is portrayed by: Bobby Hosea (1995) The O.J. Simpson Story (TV movie) Gerald Rush (2004) Reenactment of the Century (short film) Cuba Gooding Jr (2016) The People v. O. J. Simpson: American Crime Story Gene Freeman (2019) The Murder of Nicole Brown Simpson Boris Kodjoe (2025) The Juice 92.17.198.220 (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC) Who portrayed him is trivial, short of it being an award-winning performance. Per MOS:POPCULT: Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. —Bagumba (talk) 15:37, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Square One TV

The OJ trial was parodied on the educational TV series SQUARE ONE TV in the form of a skit in which a carpenter is accused by his king of faulty measurements in building a new bed for the Queen. The carpenter's attorney proves his innocence by showing that the king's feet are bigger than the carpenter's feet (the actor playing the role of the king wore clown shoes for the role). The skit was meant to show why the original Royal foot - the length of a man's foot - was faulty.Glammazon (talk) 04:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Square One TV

There was a parody of the OJ Simpson trial in a skit where a carpenter is hired by a king who wants him to build a new bed for the queen and carefully paces out the dimensions of the bed on the floor of his palace. The bed turns out to be too small for the Queen, because the carpenter's feet are smaller than the King's, and the carpenter is accused of a math crime. Because, the King's feet are bigger than the carpenter's, his attorney is able to prove his innocence.Glammazon (talk) 04:29, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

"Convicted felon"

While it's true that he was convicted for the robbery, it's VERY misleading to put this in the lede even with a note, for obvious reasons. dekema (Formerly Buffaboy) (talk) 03:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)