{{FAC}} should be substituted at the top of the article talk page

Schwarzenegger was awarded a "Doctor of Humanities" from Cleveland Chiropractic College in 1999. The honorary diploma was presented by Dr. Carl S. Cleveland III, president of Cleveland Chiropractic College, Kansas City and Los Angeles. The diploma recognizes Arnold's many humanitarian efforts and his support of fitness and health-related endeavors, such as the Inner City Kids program and the Special Olympics. -- Dr. Gohan

"I am very honored to get this honorary chiropractic degree, this is totally unexpected," Arnold commented. "I'm proud of this. It will get a special place in my office and I will be hanging it up so everyone can see." -- Arnold Schwarzenegger

Saying his father was a "Gendarmerie-Kommandant" it's not really correctly translated to call him a "policeman", but rather the boss of a police-station. I know, that's quite a minor point, but nevertheless my first contribution.

• Not all of us know what "Gendarmerie-Kommandant" means. Would you mind adding what that would mean in this article? Thanks. Revth 06:57, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

True Lies was a spoof of the roles he had played before. I seem to remember that the critics actually liked it when it came out? --sodium

I recall a review describing it as misogynist rubbish

Are you thinking of Last Action Hero - as the spoof on roles played before.

The article had a number of epithets which really cannot be squared with the NeutralPointOfView. It is wholly within our purview, however, to have a section about reviewers' evaluation of his acting ability; it is also perfectly fair play to mention how various films were reviewed.

I didn't know what to do with the following: "A number of unsavoury rumours appear to have have kiboshed his nascent political ambitions which once seemed to reach as high as you could go." What nascent political ambitions? What rumors? --LMS

What nascent political ambitions? He was considering a run for Governor of California.

What rumors? That he was a womanizer and had emotionally abused his wife

Here's the story: http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3a9c08d556f1.htm

The rumors were scurrilous and politically motivated and have no place in an encyclopedia except possibly under the heading propaganda. --MemoryHole.com

I can't believe that anyone quotes the New republic and anything that it prints. The only people who don't likee Arnold are those who would love to see socialism here in the USA. The difference is that in Europe, the socialists have found ways to eliminate grass roots movements, such as abolishing referendums. Socialists are fascists in sheeps clothes. Go to europe and try voicing your opinion. They have it so great. Yeah right...--Tomtom 21:26, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The bypass surgery comment may be fair but age? render unto us a break - the man is only 54! - clasqm

The point is that Schwarzenegger isn't the same physically/athletically as he was in the early days--age is definitely a factor. -- TheCunctator

Although many people have accused True Lies of being somewhat misogynistic, there are many people, myself included, who think it's one of his best films. The film is clearly intended NOT to be taken seriously. --John Knouse

For fans of big stupid fun movies, check out Hercules in New York. It comes on TBS periodically, and is emphatically bad.  :-) --KQ

I added a link there if anyone wants to check. Ellsworth 21:14, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Zoe, are you sure all these celebrity images you are uploading are not copyrighted?

Yes. They're fair use from book jacket covers, as I've said on the upload and the Image page. -- Zoe

I think Zoe means "No. They're fair use from book jacket covers." If they were "not copyrighted" (i.e. public domain), then "fair use" wouldn't need to be invoked at all. I have indicated the distinction on Mr. Schwarzenegger's image description page. I think it would be best if people were careful to use the terms "public domain" or "copyrighted but considered fair use" on image description pages, in order to make it clear which they mean. -- Oliver P. 16:08 May 14, 2003 (UTC)

I don't understand how clearer I can be, I said they were fair use. I also said they were from book covers, so I figured that was sufficient for what I needed to say on the image page. -- Zoe

Well, I was just pedantically correcting your "Yes" to a "No", because it's not true to say that an image being used in "fair use" is "not copyrighted". And the image description page didn't contain the words "fair use". It does now, because I added the words. So everything's okay now. :) -- Oliver P. 09:17 May 15, 2003 (UTC)

Schwarzenegger has decided to run in the recall election. The article has been updated to reflect that. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3128015.stm.

-- hoshie

The article still needs some updating, since there are places that say "He is considering running" and "He may have political aspirations". -- wwheeler

Be bold! --Menchi 01:49, Aug 7, 2003 (UTC)

Has True Lies 2 already been filmed? or will he have to film in it while he is govenor? dave 17:51, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I know this is asking much, but does someone have Robert Altmans The Long Goodbye on convenient media. There is a bodyguard in the film (an unspeaking part) whom Elliott Gould as Philip Marlowe forces to undress (at gunpoint) with his mate. If I am not misremembering, he looked uncannily like the young Arnie. As always, there is a good chance I am talking through an undiscovered ventilation hole under my headware. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick

• According to IMDb he was "One of Augustine's hoods " in The Long Goodbye(1973) although it was uncredited. M123 16:57, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Those of you working on this article might want to incorporate aspects of the following news item: [[1]]. 205.155.15.1 17:26, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Recently the Sydney Morning Herald unearthed a quote from Mr Swarzenegger from 1975, in which he stated he admires Hitler, on the grounds that he was a little man who rose from nothing to be somebody. Political naivete of course, but in the light of the recent election, maybe worth mentioning in the article if the original source and quote can be found. GRAHAMUK 12:12, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Last I heard, the original quote couldn't be found, so it was relegated to a rumor to discredit Schwarzenegger. I guess it could be lumped into a section citing all the things that arose to discredit him at the last minute (such as the groping, the gang-bangs, etc.). —Frecklefoot 17:13, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

In the section where Schwarzenegger (hmm, I guess I should now say Governor Schwarzenegger 8^) explains why he joined the Republican Party, Adam Carr parenthetically added:

(In fact, at the time Schwarzenegger came to the United States, Austria was governed by conservatives, and had been since 1945. Austria did not have a socialist Chancellor until 1970.)

Now I know very little about Austrian modern history, so I await the opinions of others, but this is very much at odds with the Politics of Austria article. In that article, it states the Austrian government was a coalition between conservatives, socialists and communists from 1945 till 1947, and a coalition between the conservatives and socialists from 1947 until 1966, when the socialists held power in their own right, then variously socialists alone or conservative/socialist coalitions until 1983. (Schwarzenegger left Austria in 1968.) Furthermore, until 1955 a substantial part of the country - including Schwarzenegger's home - was occupied by the Soviets. Now Adam did refer to the Chancellor of Austria as well as the government, and that part seems to be true - but rather misleading as it seems that under the socialist/conservative coalition, they always had a conservative Chancellor but a socialist President. To cut a long story short, it seems that this remark is quite wrong. But I know very little about Austrian politics, so I'll leave it for comment for a while. -- Roger 10:11 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Roger is correct that the Austrian Socialist Party was a junior partner in Austrian governments from 1947 to 1966. However:

• In 1966 the conservative People's Party won a majority in their own right, before being defeated by the Socialists in 1970. So Austria did not have a socialist government, in any sense, in 1968 when Schwarzenegger left for the US.

What I was objecting to was "governed by conservatives ... since 1945".

• The presence of SPO ministers in the government did not make Austria a "socialist country." The 1947-66 governments pursued policies which in European terms would be considered centrist - I suppose to an American Republican they might seem "socialist."

OK, but a socialist/conservative (and sometimes communist) coalition over part of the country, and Soviet interference in the rest, is hardly "governed by conservatives ... since 1945", either. And the Austrian doctrine of Proporz means that the SPO always controlled at least a few ministerial positions, in particular the Minister for Labour and Social Affairs. (On a peripheral issue, the Schwarzenegger quote doesn't actually say "socialist country".)

• The Presidency of Austria is a ceremonial post so the party background of its occupant is not really relevant.

The admittedly terse reference I read on the matter suggests that although he customarily does not use them, the Austrian President actually has immense powers, including the powers to dissolve the Nationalrat, sack the Chancellor, indefinitely delay Acts, pardon criminals, and, in a state of emergency, to rule by decree for up to four weeks. (See also Thomas Klestil.) In practice it seems that the only such power that has actually been used is dissolving the Nationalrat, which has been done twice, both times with the Chancellor's approval. In contrast, although the Chancellor's role is very similar to that of a Prime Minister, he actually has very few constitutional powers. For example, he cannot even sack one of his own cabinet ministers! As a practical matter, the SPO/OVP split of President and Chancellor probably guaranteed the continuation of the custom of Proporz, which meant the socialist party controlled industrial relations.

• If Schwarzenegger's home was in the Graz area then he was in the British Zone of Occupation, not the Soviet Zone. In any case the occupation ended when he was seven.

OK, my map was rather small scale, so mea culpa. My point was that having a large chunk of your country occupied by the Soviets is not really compatible with "governed by conservatives".

Anyway, feel free to remove the paragraph if you feel it is misleading - it is a very minor point. Adam 11:46, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

OK, I've probably already given it far more time than it deserves, but, grrrr, it's taking me so long to save this edit the main page will have to wait. -- Roger 13:46 09 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Do we really need Arnold's nickname, "Arnie", in the first sentence of this page? George W. Bush's page doesn't say "George 'Dubya' W. Bush" the first time he is referred to. -- Mattworld 21:03, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

No. ThereIsNoSteve 21:06, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Surely Arnold is far behind, say, Dolly Parton, or at least behind silicon-enhanced-porn-stars in the chest department? Who certified him as "world's largest chest" and is it not at least sex-specific??? -- Someone else 03:14, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This guy has him beat [2], and also if the award were "largest muscular chest" numerous others would also surpass him. Maximus Rex 03:21, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

OMG! Yes, it did seem somehow wrong, though I would not have thought of Robert Earl Hughes as a competitor!!!! I don't think Schwarzenegger was particularly noted for having a large chest among bodybuilders. -- Someone else 03:25, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Security at the event was extreme so I wasn't able to get any photos of Arnold, but these other ones may be useful. However, I'm at work right now and don't have the software needed to crop and resize these images. If somebody else can do this before I get home then that would be great. Otherwise I'll get to it latter tonight. Image:Newsvans at Schwarzenegger inauguration_.JPG, Image:Arnold Schwarzenegger inauguration-crowd.jpg, Image:Arnold Schwarzenegger sexual harassment protestors.JPG. --mav 21:31, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'll crop them. rv if not correct. JDR

Cool, thanks! But somebody elese beat you to it. --mav 22:47, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I put back the links to the Los Angeles Times stories about allegations of sexual harassment, which were removed by another user. The LA Times is a leading newspaper, and the sexual harassment allegations were one of the most contentious issues in his campaign for governor. Many people have formed opinions about the Times' reporting on Schwarzenegger without having actually read it. I think including them is appropriate, and I don't know why they were deleted. If someone thinks they present a one-sided POV, the solution should be to offer a countering report, not to delete these.

The article states, "meanwhile, he earned a B.A. from the University of Wisconsin, Superior where he graduated with a major in international marketing of fitness and business administration in 1979." Is there really such a thing as a degree in international marketing of fitness and business administration? Or did he double major in "international marketing of fitness" and "business administration"? If that's the case, my question now becomes- is there really such a thing as a major in international marketing of fitness?

The only major I can think of that even comes close is Sports Management. His official biography contains no mention of a degree or college education whatsoever. IMDb says he got one in "international marketing of fitness and business administration", but IMDb's trivia bits are notoriously incorrect. This says he majored in "internal marketing of fitness and business administration". I'm guessing he received his degree in Business Administration, and he chose to focus on international fitness marketing while he was there.

I would recommend removing any degree titles until we can determine what it was for sure. Maybe say "...where he graduated in 1979 after studying business and marketing"? Even then, we don't have any really good sources available to verify that, though. Beginning 05:29, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

I doubt the last added statement is NPOV. His comment WAS received well by many, and simply saying that it wasn't is not NPOV. I thought it was funny and many political correspondents shrugged it off as "so he has a sense of humor, so what?". -- Alterego

I removed the previous sentence because that one seemed NPOV to me. It seemed to have this "he's doomed" tone to it, and how do we know what's going to happen? However, even though personally I think the controversy is way overblown -- which should hopefully override your doubts about my own personal POV -- you can't possibly be denying that it didn't cause a major uproar if you've been following the coverage.

I'd be fine with changing it to "some", but you can't discuss the remark without discussing who it actually offended. That's why it's newsworthy to begin with --the number of people who got ticked. Gay advocacy groups, as well as women's groups and Democratic higher-ups in California, have gotten very worked up over this one. It was a lead story on most opinion programs this week, and most of the coverage I've come across (including on NPR, in the AP, and in the SFChronicle) used the word "many". I didn't feel that I was being NPOV; I felt (and feel) that I was reflecting the story itself. Beginning 19:27, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

• Outside of CA, esp San Francisca, LA and Sacremento, and other places on the left coast, who really cared about his remark? Let the arrows fall. We laughed about it at the Convention. So what.--Tomtom 21:33, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• As a heterosexual, I thought the comment was amusing, but I did a straw poll with several homosexual men I knew and none of them saw anything for them to be offended about. (Chicago). The last comment is definitely not NPOV and needs to be altered. -Joseph 15:10, 2004 Aug 21 (UTC)