Audrey Hepburn 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 July 5, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed October 6, 2011 Peer review Reviewed December 24, 2011 Peer review Reviewed December 14, 2021 Good article nominee Listed
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 4, 2017, May 4, 2019, May 4, 2024, and May 4, 2025.
Current status: Good article

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

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers / Royalty and Nobility 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 Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance). England High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Fashion Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion 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.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. LGBTQ+ studies This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies Women in Green: 2021 This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Green project in 2021. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in GreenWikipedia:WikiProject Women in GreenTemplate:WikiProject Women in GreenWomen in Green Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women Women's History High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Archives: 1, 2, 3
	This page has archives. Topics inactive for 180 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III.

The article photo appears to be colorized. I question if the colorization is acceptable re MOS:COLORIZED? 2601:982:8380:35F0:CCE:2830:CFEF:C774 (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I really don't see a compelling reason to write |partner=Robert Wolders (1980–1993; her death) instead of simply |partner=Robert Wolders (1980–1993) in the infobox. MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE states, "The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Some infoboxes need to use more than a handful of fields, but information should be presented in a short format wherever possible, and should exclude unnecessary content", and I don't consider the fact that AH dated RW until her death a key fact. Pinging @Mb2437, who obviously disagrees with me. Thedarkknightli (talk) 18:39, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simply, the span is definite. "–1993" means it could have ended before her death. Marriage templates cover this in a similar way, either ending with their partners death or not being shown as ending at all ("1980–" would be a violation of MOS:DATERANGE). Less information does not mean to open the door to misinformation. Either way, it is only two words that clarify this. The immediate question I asked was whether or not they broke up, hence why I added it. Being a partner at the time of death is a key fact in many cases; wills often reflect this, of which Wolders was a key beneficiary to Hepburn's estate. MB2437 19:40, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]