This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
I'd say Chortle meets the reliable source criteria. It's been around for some 15 years now, has editorial staff, not just a forum or blog, and it appears to be a serious and respected source for British comedy. They also have stuff on Antopolski. Use? Not use? What's the opinion here? Yintan14:53, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Yintan: IMHO: Use. Although it would be good to trace back to the original date and reviewer's name within the site for better referencing. i.e. [1] The problem I'm running into with this subject is many of his credits have not been updated onto the internet for easy access from the time of their origin since many are late 1990s or early 2000s. They are either used in past tense releases without definitive links as to when and where they happened, or linked to the subject themselves. But I'm still digging! Maineartists (talk) 15:23, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Input would be helpful: I have come across "trivia" in press releases that the subject played "Jesus Christ" in the film The Da Vinci Code. I have searched high and low through full cast lists from IMDB to Ranker and I cannot find the subject's name let alone the part of Christ in this film. Is this a joke? or do I need to purchase the movie and watch the end credits? It certainly would be a notable inclusion if true. Thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 19:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a joke. But Christ's part in the film is very small and he doesn't speak. Let's call it a cameo. I've seen this mentioned in a few articles as well but am still looking for a proper source. Yintan19:23, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen it mentioned as well, but not in "articles" separate from the subject stating the claim. The verified complete list of 59 named actors even at sites such as IMDB that include "party guests", "student", "policeman", "passerby" (remaining cast) et al do not include a significant name such as "JESUS CHRIST" (the central character of the film) and a well-known actor such as Dan Antopolski. There should be more solid evidence in a simple google search than "trivia". IMHO. Can you please provide a few "article" links here? Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 19:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Yintan: Now I am doubting. Please ask the subject regarding this: [2] QUOTE: "In November Daf (sic) was flown to Malta to film Jesus's lavish wedding scene for The Da Vinci Code though this was then cut from the theatrical release." Please be aware, I have just viewed the film. Thank you. Maineartists (talk) 23:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Maineartists: Considering that the same text also says he "looks proud and pleased in his uncut, fleeting appearance as a thorn-crowned Jesus" and that it looks like temporary 'lorem ipsum' filler material to me (the site is under construction), I wouldn't take it too seriously. But I'll ask. You didn't see any Jesus at all in the film? Yintan04:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Yintan: OK. Let's put this topic to rest and move on. After 3 viewings, I have at last located "Where's Jesus?"; and now fully understand why the subject is not credited or recognized by the film or its associates. Here: [3] is the verified complete cast, including uncredited cast members; which the subject is not included. (and yes, we can trust IMDB on this one) We cannot list in a table or even within the article that the subject "played the role" or "appeared as" Jesus Christ in the (2006) film The Da Vinci Code. There is no definitive corroborating evidence to back this claim by way of a reliable source except that which stems from statements made by the subject himself; based on the knowledge of what transpired in his blog here: [4] and then "grapevined" throughout the years. Since the "fleeting image" of Jesus (which is super imposed as a quick dissolve over a crucifix above Silas's bed is not substantial enough for crediting; we can only recall the filming, cut scene and image told by the subject with perhaps a "citation needed" or careful wording that clearly states that this is an account. I'm sorry; I really tried to go to bat on this one. My intent here is to create a rock-solid article that no editor can contest. This inclusion as a credit is not one of them; but as an account may be plausible. Best. Maineartists (talk) 23:11, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Yintan: Thank you! What a considerable effort in bringing this article under control! There are many new features that are a welcomed "sight", i.e. "hidden section lists". The hardest aspect of launching such a tremendous overhaul is watching all the "Monday morning quarterback" editors swoop down and start to pick apart your hard work. So, I'll go first. I'm so sorry, but I must challenge the retained reference #1 "What's On / Theatre and Comedy". It is not a reliable source since it is clearly a promotional advertisement in the "Classifieds / Entertainment" section of the "Observer" for an appearance of the subject himself, and merely states gathered information from sources that cannot be confirmed by citing this source. (see Da Vinci Code) We cannot use it as a primary source for the career of this subject. For example: This [5] is more a reliable source for The Dare Devil than reference #1. Would you mind terribly if I went in and did a little clean-up myself? so that no other editor can challenge or contest questionable content or resources? I didn't get a chance on your talk page since I was working on another article myself. If so, I must remove reference #1 as a self-promotional press release. Best. Maineartists (talk) 14:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Yintan: I've added a few more resources to the "list" sections; but in doing so I realize that this has presented a rather 'undue weight' appearance within the article in regards to references. Is there any way of creating a "career" section that might include some of the more notable listed works in prose to off-set the "resume-style" list format? Best. Maineartists (talk) 02:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Maineartists:I think it's best to leave only the shows that are Antopolski's (and/or where Antopolski is a member of the ensemble, like Jigsaw) and get rid of the rest. Especially in the radio section. Appearances in shows like 28 Acts in 28 Minutes and similar "guest spots" shouldn't be listed, in my opinion. I'll make a start. Yintan08:09, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yintan 18:31, 2 December 2016 (UTC)