Talk:James Cameron

Put this picture of James Cameron. It is better than the old one in 1986! The event is : 2008 Canada's Walk of Fame. Thank you. http://www1.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/2008+Canada+s+Walk+of+Fame+4wNiX8OtJGGl.jpg

James Cameron has been to the Titanic site 33 times (so they say), apparently with a bicycle. Nowhere is it mentioned how he went although the article on Mir (1&2) indicates it. The Deepsea Challenger has taken a total of 13 dives, although it's not clear how many Cameron experienced. Temblast (talk) 23:52, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

You are welcome to add it to § Activism and other work. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I have noticed several editors add and subsequently remove the identifier of "sea explorer" or similar terms from the lead sentence and occupation field in the infobox. E.g.

James Francis Cameron CC (born August 16, 1954) is a Canadian film director, screenwriter, producer, and sea explorer.

I can understand why some may want to add this. He was the first person to dive to Challenger Deep since the Trieste in 1960, which was an incredibly dangerous and notable feat. He also visited the Titanic and Bismarck and pioneered underwater technologies and recording techniques to capture both expeditions in exceptional quality (Ghosts of the Abyss, Expedition: Bismarck). He has also explored marine life (not just shipwrecks) as in Aliens of the Deep. However, all these expeditions involved filmmaking, and the sea exploration part of this article is pretty short compared to all the film content. He just isn't known as a sea explorer by the public eye all that well. I'm personally undecided on adding this but want to hear other opinions. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 18:19, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

It should be added. His achievements outside of film would make him a notable person in and of itself. There should be some mention of his exploration in the lead. TBase2 (talk) 08:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

"he dived five miles deep"

What ever happened to the word, "dove?" 100.7.252.82 (talk) 16:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

That’s a type of bird. 2600:1700:7260:7ED0:B89E:A6F:CBE2:376E (talk) 05:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

He's listed as an author in at least 4 peer reviewed academic articles on deep sea research and microbiology. He should be described as a deep sea explorer. 74.62.14.26 (talk) 04:30, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't matter by what means his deep sea exploring was done, and it doesn't matter if he's not known "to the public" as a deep sea explorer (can the average person even name a single deep sea explorer?) 74.62.14.26 (talk) 04:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

It really comes down to how prevalent the "sea explorer" label is, in general, among all sources that cover Cameron. If only a tiny minority mention sea exploration, then it may not be significant enough for the lead. I'm impartial to its inclusion, however. Since there are reputable sources that cover it in depth, the onus may be on whomever wants to challenge inclusion to show why it's insignificant. Until then, it should probably stay in the lead. My 2¢ --GoneIn60 (talk) 04:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

It seems that consensus to include was reached in 2023, but that the article was never updated, so I'm going to go ahead and add "ocean explorer" to the lede. (My own contribution to the discussion would be to suggest that Cameron's work with the Deepsea Challenger, making him the first solo explorer to reach the Challenger Deep, would make him notable in that regard even if he were not also a filmmaker.) Cosmic Latte (talk) 18:11, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Actually, before anybody adds that, it might be helpful to consider the invisible comment asking editors to abide by MOS:ROLEBIO and introduce Cameron in the same way that reliable sources do. That being said, a quick Google search for "James Cameron ocean explorer" yields results that immediately call him "Filmmaker and National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence" (here) and "ocean explorer, filmmaker and technology innovator" (here). I don't think inclusion is too much of a stretch, and the 2023 consensus doesn't seem to think so, either, so I'll hold off on adding anything for at least a couple days, but consensus should probably override any implications by the invisible comment's implications that "ocean explorer" might not be one of Cameron's most notable occupations. Cosmic Latte (talk) 18:37, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and add the occupation, but I think that phrasing it as "deep-sea explorer" might be more helpful (MOS:ROLEBIO notwithstanding) because the ocean exploration article focuses on ocean-surface travel, while Cameron is notable for exploring the depths. Cosmic Latte (talk) 17:24, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

There's no mention of Cameron's interest in visiting space? He spent the summer of 2000 training in Moscow, and tried to visit the ISS space station, but could only get a lift to space, not the station, so he turned down the trip. He turned down the the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, and attended their funeral service. This odd coincidence is notable and should be included.

https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/316884/James-Cameron-trained-for-space-trip https://www.gq.com/story/james-cameron-profile-men-of-the-year-2022 GobsPint (talk) 03:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/wellington/james-cameron-officially-made-a-new-zealand-citizen/YLDIYUKAQZE7ZFBVIM4ITHACQ4/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=nzh_fb&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwQ0xDSwMLJ9NleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHutxW4Jnzv72_QcIaDxTZxXJdH_jjpaESO_oPQRXv_38L0x52Mi6cNL1c59v_aem_D4cRQ3Ml8HyvDJMFcmkdrg#Echobox=1755200487 118.149.69.213 (talk) 20:39, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

@Cosmic Latte: This comment does not reach the level required per MOS:NATIONALITY to include "New Zealand" in the lede. It should remain in the infobox where it already was, unless it can be proven that his NZ citizenship is "relevant to [his] notability", i.e. if he's being referred to as a "New Zealand filmmaker". AG202 (talk) 14:44, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

That makes sense, but wouldn't he be at least as notable, if not significantly more so, as a NZ filmmaker than as a Canadian one? For example, he did film some Titanic scenes in Newfoundland Nova Scotia, but as this source notes, he's been working on the Avatar franchise a full 20 years in NZ. If NZ is "his main production hub," as the source points out, then I'd say his NZ citizenship is most definitely relevant to his notability. Cosmic Latte (talk) 17:25, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

He may be doing work in New Zealand, but the biggest thing is if he's being referred to as a "New Zealand filmmaker". That article was written before he even got New Zealand citizenship, so I'm not sure how it's super relevant to this question at hand. Based on how I read MOS:NATIONALITY, we should see how RSs refer to him post-acquiring his NZ citizenship. If they refer to him as a "New Zealand [and Canadian] filmmaker", then we can put it in the lede. AG202 (talk) 18:13, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

All right, that makes sense. Cosmic Latte (talk) 18:26, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

I added a hidden comment to the lede regarding this issue, so but I'm going to WP:AGF with this edit, but I'm guessing it's still not enough and/or too soon to establish the notability of his NZ citizenship per se? Cosmic Latte (talk) 18:14, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

I tagged as a failed verification the statement that "Avatar and Titanic [are] amongst the three highest adjusting for inflation (Avatar being the highest and second-highest grossing film worldwide respectively)", because the source provided doesn't list any of these films in the top three at all. Was the source misinterpreted, or am I missing something? Cosmic Latte (talk) 19:37, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I've commented out the confusing text. Cosmic Latte (talk) 17:38, 1 March 2026 (UTC)