This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Winona Ryder article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	Winona Ryder 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 May 8, 2007 Peer review Reviewed January 13, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
Current status: Good article

This  level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers 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 High-importance). Minnesota Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance). Kabbalah Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kabbalah, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Kabbalah 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.KabbalahWikipedia:WikiProject KabbalahTemplate:WikiProject KabbalahKabbalah Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. 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

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: May 29 to June 4, 2022

She claims this along with a fictional 4.0 GPA, but as a member of the class of 1989, I can tell you she dropped out of our school several years before we graduated. There are newspaper articles with a list of class graduates from June 1989 and she is not listed. I know she claims this herself, but it is not true and is not supported by any independent evidence. I don't know why this continues to be allowed to stay in the article. Here's the top students that year whose GPA was above and below the one she claimed: https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=PAC19890527.1.13&srpos=1&e=------198-en--20-PAC-1--txt-txIN-Lisa+Ricci----1989---

Here is a full list of graduates of the class of 1989. Winona Ryder is not among them: https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=PAC19890527.1.13&srpos=2&e=------198-en--20-PAC-1--txt-txIN-Erik+Tellander----1989---

Therefore, I am removing this false claim from the article.

And now someone added a reference that she was bullied in high school and that people called her a witch? Not true. But of course this is just another part of her self-created myth about her childhood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.203.107.191 (talk) 21:56, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There’s nothing mentioned in the Wikipedia article about her mother’s ethnicity other than American. Why not? M555333555M555333555M (talk) 23:40, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Judaism usually focused on the mother, unless its Reform Judaism. So, I find it strange that all the emphasis is on her father’s ancestry but nothing about her mother other than the surname, which is also not explained in the Wikipedia article. M555333555M555333555M (talk) 13:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it's strange. Only her father's ancestry is mentioned. Her mother was non-Jewish. She as much non-Jewish as Jewish. Therefore, at least include her proper descent in the bottom-tags. 128.62.67.154 (talk) 20:10, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any suggestions for improving the early life section, please let us know what should be changed and provide the necessary sources to support this change. Mellk (talk) 05:58, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think Winona Ryder’s Jewish, I was just wondering why the info was only one-sided, that’s all. M555333555M555333555M (talk) 16:51, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The cited sources refer to her father's side. If you can find sources that elaborate on her mother's background, feel free to mention them. Mellk (talk) 16:53, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Sundayclose (talk) 17:32, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Mellk (talk) 17:40, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Ryder met Johnny Depp at the Great Balls of Fire! premiere in June 1989. In February 1990, the 18-year-old Ryder began dating the 26-year-old Depp after they were reintroduced by a mutual friend. They became engaged in July of that year, but split up in June 1993." the assertion that depp waited until she was 18 is not supported by either of the linked sources 130.180.88.101 (talk) 14:52, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do the math using her date of birth. It's not complicated. Sundayclose (talk) 17:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

if the sources supported that they waited until february 1990, then they would also support that ryder was 18, sure. but since they don't, they don't. 130.180.88.101 (talk) 14:59, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plis 186.4.78.5 (talk) 23:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source that actually says that? The article currently mentions several movies she was in that were directed by Burton, and that she "has credited her career to director Tim Burton", but that's not the same as claiming that she is "known for her collaborations with Tim Burton". She has an extensive filmography, much of which did not involve Burton. Meters (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The current article displays five pictures of Ryder. The first picture is decently recent (2024). The others are from 1986, 2009, 2012, and 2010 respectively.

I find this concentration of the 2010s unfortunate. And the only picture of Ryder before 2009 is all the way back from 1986. It is also a group photo, which doesn't display Ryder's likeness nearly as clearly as the other ones. (It is also black and white, which in itself doesn't need to be an issue).

Don't we have more pictures from the archives. If we settle on five pictures for this article, I would suggest

• replacing at least one, preferably two, of the 2009-2012 pictures with one from, say, the 90s or 00s
• replacing the 1986 picture with a single headshot to clearly display Ryder's likeness when she was a teenager
• I have zero issues with the lead photo. It is recent and very clear.

Of course, the article length can easily support a sixth picture, so "5" is not a number set in stone. CapnZapp (talk) 13:58, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Most of her photos available are from the 2010s. There are only 6 from the 2000s, as you can see in the subcategories of her profile on Commons. Remembering that Wikipedia only accepts photos in the public domain or with a commons license. Theys York (talk) 16:41, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose any changes unless more free images are made available. Given the constraints of copyright, I think the current images in the article are appropriate. I also oppose adding more than the current number of images. Wikipedia is not a gallery. Sundayclose (talk) 17:25, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please do this ~2026-50326-5 (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Take three seconds to look at the section immediately above. Sundayclose (talk) 01:44, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]