Clint Eastwood has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 30, 2011 Good article nominee Listed March 22, 2011 Peer review Reviewed
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 8, 2004, and May 31, 2020.
Current status: Good article

This  level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers / Musicians / Politics and Government This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance). California: San Francisco Bay Area Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is a selected biography on the California Portal. Politics: American / Libertarianism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as Mid-importance). Pritzker Military Library Low‑importance This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum and Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors on April 26, 2011.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors Westerns: Television / Biography Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Westerns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Western genre on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WesternsWikipedia:WikiProject WesternsTemplate:WikiProject WesternsWesterns Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Television task force. This article is supported by the Biography task force.

Under "Personal Life," Sondra Locke's husband, Gordon Anderson is described as "an unemployed homosexual." The 3 sources cited actually list his occupation as sculptor. The page should be updated to reflect Anderson's correct occupation. Blammyyy (talk) 20:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By all accounts, Locke financially supported Anderson their entire marriage. Eastwood once said, "She's married to someone who doesn't work. So what does that do? That makes me the sole provider." Anderson's nominal profession was that of a sculptor, but he hasn't been employed in nearly 60 years, assuming he's still alive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.29.121.51 (talk) 05:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I find it hard to imagine that there is no mention of CBD in the article on Clint Eastwood. The amount of press coverage of controversies and lawsuits on these conjoined topics is staggering. I came here looking for a more sane and factual, less market-driven take on the matter than I could get from Google, and instead, found nothing. --Haruo (talk) 20:33, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend changing "to Ruth (née Margret[b] Runner; 1909–2006)" to simply Ruth Eastwood (née Margaret Ruth Runner). She was born Margaret per all reliable sources, not Margret. Only the California Birth Index ([1]) which is not reliable and which is replete with misspellings (including her mother's maiden name, which was McClanahan not McClauah), misspells the name as "Margret". 65.88.88.56 (talk) 21:36, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recommendation has no merit and is pompous to boot. Her birth name is Margret. The California Birth Index proves that. Period! That her mother's maiden name may've been mistranscribed is irrelevant. (It's perfectly feasible that a midwife in 1909 might misspell the mother's maiden name, but spelling an infant's name wrong on her own birth certificate? Get real.) Furthermore, the CABI is 100% acceptable on Wiki for vital stats pertaining to deceased individuals, and Ruth has been dead since 2006, so you're wrong on that count as well. Birth certificates/registrations are the only way to verify this information. She never went by Margret (or "Margaret" as you assert) during her adulthood—even her marriage license at 18 gives her name as Ruth—so any sources claiming she was born "Margaret" would've drawn their conclusions from hearsay rather than official documentation. Just what reliable sources are you referring to, by the way? Books about Clint? Every one of them is riddled with profound factual errors (the most noted, of course, is that they all claim Locke was years younger than she was). Given the revelations that have surfaced in the information age, it'll be interesting to see if any of those uninvested, undiligent authors decide to republish their books with the appropriate corrections. God knows they have a lot of correcting to do! PromQueenCarrie (talk) 05:59, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are ill-mannered and incorrect in almost everything you posted. 65.88.88.56 (talk) 22:03, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far as birth names are concerned, a state birth registration is unimpeachable except in cases where it's been retroactively edited due to adoption, Cher being a prominent example [2]. You're not going to win this argument, so please stop wasting everyone's time. PromQueenCarrie (talk) 03:34, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did he die 192.140.249.148 (talk) 13:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. Maybe he is trying for centenarian, semisupercentenarian, or supercentenarian. Peaceray (talk) 19:48, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Notpromotional, I would want to know who is lying by omission? Wehave to adhere to biographies of living persons rule. Atlantablackstar is only relying on RadarOnline and writes "If rumors of him dating again are true". Since when is the latter a credible resource. It seems like a tabloid in vein of Sun. See photo of Eastwood near (garbage?) bin above in the article. I find this fact unproven. The fact that there are no reliable sources like Variety or Deadline writing about this fact makes it suspicious. I am not convinced Eringer is reliable source, him writing "In fact, they tell me he was in last week, twice, and already has a new girlfriend" seems more like gossip and not what actual renowned, reliable journalist would say. And website, roberteringer.substack.com? Could there be any reason source like Guardian does not write about it except if it is wrong? BilboBeggins (talk) 21:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radar has proved itself to be the most reliable source for Eastwood news, actually. They were the first to report his most recent divorce as well as the deaths of two of his exes, among other exclusive stories. His daughter Kimber and grandson LT have given Radar interviews before. Eastwood has always had a passive-aggressive relationship with the mainstream press. Notpromotional (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not what WP:Reliable source rule says. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He did talk to Deadline. BilboBeggins (talk) 22:32, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kathryn Eastwood recently said on camera that Clint doesn't believe in vaccines and doesn't get them. Another editor removed this information because it didn't come from Clint's mouth, which is frankly hilarious. Anybody who knows anything about Clint knows that he never says anything substantive in public. The man still won't even say how many children he has, nor will he identify the mother of his daughter Laurie, so why would you expect him to discuss his medical choices? If Kathryn's statement isn't true, Clint is allowing it to go uncorrected. PromQueenCarrie (talk) 22:04, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have any third-party source saying this about himFMSky (talk) 13:45, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]