Jump to content

Talk:David Cross/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

criticism part

The part about recieving criticism from handicap advocacy groups needs some sources, becuse I've never heard about this, ever.

I've asked the user who contributed the information to provide a source. --TheMidnighters 00:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Replace picture?

since the picture is an AD still thats a flashback within the show, it doesnt acurately reflect how tobias looks for most of the show. change?

Sure, if you like. --Jacj 17:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Isn't that a picture of Tobias after he got his hairplugs in Season 3?24.57.193.217 16:40, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
No, it's a flashback of a time when Maeby came to work with him. --TheMidnighters 16:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Feel free to include a new picture, but remember that the article isn't about Tobias; it's about David Cross. Thus, it doesn't really matter whether it's a flashback. Superm401 - Talk 01:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Furthermore, the picture is of little use in this article, since photos of people should be for identification purposes. Cross is heavily disguised in this image, and as such it's not really appropriate as the main picture in the article. -- MisterHand 01:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the image to another (less disguised) screenshot for now. --TheMidnighters 13:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

My America

"David is also a columnist for Vice Magazine, and his latest CD, Shut Up You Fucking Baby has been nominated for a Grammy award." - Music for America interviews David Cross. Here are 1, 2, 3 sample columns I found. Could be more, I didn't search very hard. Also, these are from a few years ago, so perhaps it is more accurate to say he used to write a column for Vice. And it should be attached to an existing paragraph rather than on its own. Laszlo Panaflex 01:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm Not There

Does anybody know what David's role will be in the upcoming independent movie,"I'm Not There: Suppositions on a Film Concerning Dylan"? I've heard some speculation that he has a minor role as Allen Ginsberg, but have yet to find anything concrete. Anybody else have any luck? Laugh-O-Gram 21:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


Emmy-winning?

The first sentece says that David Cross is "Emmy-winning" but it is not revealed where he won an Emmy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.239.232.196 (talk) 09:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Discography - missing album

His '99 album "The Pride Is Back" is missing..though its in the wikiquote section.--Sean.ridgeley 14:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The Pride is Back is the title of his second HBO special. It was never released as an album. --TM 17:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

wasn't he on the colbert report

I swear he was.

The article discusses his role on Colbert in the Biography section, and lists it among his Television credits. aren't you a moron. I swear you are.
Not only is it likely that this was not added until after his post, but bashing, especially anonymously, is prohibited on this site. Clinton (talk) 01:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Early Life

The early life section is very informal, should it be changed? Clinton (talk) 01:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think the section needs a bit of trimming, rewording. I know(/think) most of the material is from Mr. Show: What Happened? but not all of it is particularly relevant (yearbook question, partying, etc), and, as you pointed out, several sentences are written in an informal, unencyclopedic tone. --TM 04:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The first line about being, the son of Susi reads somewhat akwardly to me. A computer retailer in 1964? What computers were available for retail sale in 1964? The cite is pretty weak as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.153.122 (talk) 01:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite template

That template has been there for a while now but it seems like noone ever described what needs to be rewritten or justified the template so unless anyone can come up with a reason for why it's there or state what sections need to be rewritten I plan on removing it in a while. --TM 06:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Tom goes to the Mayor

He was also on Tom goes to the Mayor, another adult swim show.67.177.170.106 (talk) 07:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)dmos

David's Situation

There needs to be a mention of Cross's new HBO sitcom with Bob Odenkirk, "David's Situation," which is currently in production. --Gundersen53 (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


I think there may be too many links to other articles--it's a bit overwhelming to try to read when every other word is blue and underlined. Anyone agree? Mrestko 00:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I think all the links are appropriate. It's not like the same article is mentioned several times and linked in all of them. He's done a lot of stuff and those things should be linked. --waffle iron talk 00:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Certainly many of the links are appropriate, but I think that quite a few are unnecessary. For example: Bob Odenkirk is linked to twice; Stephen Colbert probably doesn't need to be linked to since there is also a link to his show, The Colbert Report; I don't think there need to be links to DVD, MTV2, Xbox (twice), PC, and PS2--it's unlikely that these links are necessary because most people reading this article are probably already aware of these devices. There are several other links I feel are unnecessary, but I don't want this post to become tedious. All in all, I think that loosing a few links would help the readability of the article without detracting from the content. Mrestko 00:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Well those seem reasonable to remove. I think we could also lose the one sentance paragraph that lists movies he's been in. There is already a list below. --waffle iron talk 00:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
I just removed that paragraph I mentioned. Feel free to make your changes to further discussion. --waffle iron talk 00:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I made some changes. The article still looks a little cluttered though--some of the paragraphs should probably be rewritten since a lot of content is already in the lists at the bottom of the article. But that's it for right now... Mrestko 01:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't really care about the color of words. Links just make research easier. --Macarion 04:24, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the "former Jews" category, because of the problems outlined at its deletion vote. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Category not yet deleted, added back --Macarion 18:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Even if the category remains, you would need to cite a reliable source that identifies David Cross as a "former Jew", and saying a Wikipedian heard him call himself that at a show is not a reliable source. Meanwhile you have grossly violated 3rr with (so far) 6 reverts. And are you the orignal editor who placed the category here under ip 75.3.49.50 ? --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 19:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Ironic given that Cross does a great routine on how Judaism is the only religion where you cannot get out of it, no matter what you believe. Laszlo Panaflex 01:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Like Baruch Spinoza? /me rolls eyes. 66.215.162.112 (talk) 05:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I've re-removed the category, pending citation. Tomertalk 19:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Improvisation of lines? (Trivia)

Can anyone verify that he improvised many of his lines? The "Trivia" section of the AD page says that contrary to popular belief, almost none of the dialog was improvised.

I'll remove the line until there's a source. --TheMidnighters 06:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

The best I can say is, on the commentary tracks on the AD DVDs, one of the actors on the show (not Cross) mentions how most of his one-liners were improvised. Obviously, not accurate enough to use as a source, and I'm not going to rewatch three seasons of commentary track to hunt down the exact quote. BUT he certainly did improvise at least parts of it, so I'd remove something specifically saying he did not improvise much. Needs commentary & sources to site his over the top anti-American attitude and his socialist beliefs. The man is a traitor and should be tried for treason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.169.189.225 (talk) 20:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Left-wing Political Commentary and Satire

The phrase "left-wing," as defined by this very wiki, has nothing to do with Cross's standup routines. If you'd like to keep the term "left-wing" in the article, please provide a reliable source. As I'm sure we're all aware, original research (listening to the standup routines) doesn't cut it.

This is a biographical article as such, there are special rules that apply. For a refresher on these easy rules, see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Here's an excerpt, free of charge:

"This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. [...] Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially [but not essentially] if potentially libellous." --Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

(I doubt the "libellous" bit would apply, but the "poorly sourced" part is totally apt.)

Here are two easy options: we can provide an acceptable citation, or delete the controversial (read: wrong) material. The phrase "left-wing" will now be removed from the article until a iron-clad citation appears (which I'm looking forward to; comments are always welcome!).

Your pal in Jesus, Mark Forest (talk) 05:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Added a reference. --TM 07:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
It is quite obvious that he has liberal viewpoints, however, whether or not they have anything to do with an encyclopedia article on him, I'm, unsure. 98.198.83.12 (talk) 10:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Jewishness

This guy is Jewish. When I tried say he was Jewish, people removed it. Some of the categories this article has are Jewish categories, so why can't we say he's a Jew? I'm just looking out for my people.Jimjones5 02:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Cross says that Judaism is the only religion where you cannot get out of it, no matter what you believe. You may insist he is Jewish, but he has made his Atheism clear. Laszlo Panaflex 01:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
I completely agree with Laszlo Panaflex--if you've ever listened to David Cross, he talks at length about his religious status and general disbelief in religion. As an encyclopedic entry, it would be incorrect to label Cross as Jewish when he as clearly renounced any belief in that religion. Mrestko 02:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
P.S.: I just discovered this link on the bottom of the main article page: Cross On Atheism. It clearly documents Cross's Atheism and should end this discussion. Mrestko 02:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Judaism, like another Wikipedia article says, is also an ethnic group and culture. He is Jewish because he's ethnically Jewish. Plenty of Jews are agnostics and atheists. Somatomy 03:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
So his own opinion does not matter? He does not self-identify as Jewish, so is it hoisted upon anyway? It would be correct to say he is of Jewish ancestry, as he does in a quote on the page, but to say in the first line of the article that he is Jewish misrepresents him and his views. Laszlo Panaflex 05:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. I can't find anything where he considers himself Jewish and it does seem that he doesn't. It should be said somewhere in the article that he's of Jewish descent though, I think (although the subcategories he's in indicate it). Somatomy 05:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
His ancestry is not relevant. It doesn't seem to influence him as a person other than as a joke in some of his bits. This article is about him and his career as an actor and comedian, not the geological and religious background of his ancestors. Mrestko 07:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
He's not a rock. Arniep 07:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I know this is obscure, but I think Mrestko is talking about the rabbi in the middle ages who created a golem in Jewish folklore. If this guy was David Cross's ancestor, that means that he may be a descendant of the person who built the first robot. The story isn't true though like the rest of the religion, so I don't know why Mrestko even brought that up. Somatomy 07:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, that was a typo-I meant geographic background (referring to the geographic origin of this ancestors). Mrestko 15:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
His ancestry is a fact about him. If he were black, it would be mentioned somewhere. I see a lot of articles that mention Irish and Italian ancestry. Articles generally do mention ethnic background. Somatomy 21:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe people still don't get this. He's not a fucking Jew. He's white. I don't know why you people still argue this to the death. --Macarion 22:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Just what the hell is that supposed to mean? Most Jews are white, the Ashkenazi are anyway.L0b0t 02:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
So he's just generic white with no ethnic background beyond that. You're right, I didn't get it. Thanks for explaining it. Somatomy 04:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Somatomy. All that's needed is a sentence summarizing all this discussion, that although he is of Jewish descent he is an avowed atheist, a fact complicated by Jewish tradition stating that if your mother's Jewish then you're Jewish. Maybe including his own summary of this situation from Shut Up You Fucking Baby would be best. Thoughts? --TM 13:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I added a quote summarizing his opnion of the relationship between his atheism and his Jewish ancestry taking lines from track 2 of Shut up etc., "Lunch with Frankenstein" between about 6:00 and 8:30. --TM 13:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I approve of this. Somatomy 20:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I think that quote needs to come from a source. I only found one page that had a quote like that and it conflicted with yours. The page isn't up though (njatheist.org), I was only able to access the cache. The "can't" was in there but some other stuff was different. Somatomy 07:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

You can't just make up some random rule about your religion

"Oh, if you talk to me, you're a Jew"

No, it's a religion like all the others, people get to decide what they are, not some arbitrary tradition --Macarion 03:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not an "arbitrary tradition",to be a Jew one has to meet three criteria: circumcision, a micvah (ritual bath), and a Bar or Bat Mitzvah. If you have done these three things, then congratulations you are a Jew and all the nay saying in the world won't change that fact. The thing about ones mother being Jewish only refers to the Israeli "Right of Return" where anyone with a Jewish mother is considered Jewish enough to emigrate to Israel.L0b0t 13:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Actually, Jewish law says that if your mother is Jewish, you are Jewish, regardless of any other factor. It has nothing to do with emigration to Israel. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Exactly, thank you --Macarion 18:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't know why Lobot was saying that. I wasn't bar mitzvahed, I'm an agnostic leaning towards atheism, and I'm against organized religion, but I'm still Jewish. Somatomy 18:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
You still don't seem to understand that it's not just a religion, it's also an ethnic group. For example, if someone's background is Russian Jewish, he doesn't lose the "Jewish" part of his ancestry if he becomes an atheist. He's not suddenly just Russian or white. Jews are a specific kind of white person ethnically and Russian Jews are a specific kind of Russian ethnically. Somatomy 05:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Not all jews are white, many Mizrahi Jews for example are darker skinned, and I believe there are Jews from Ethiopia who most people would describe as black. Arniep 19:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
That depends on what you consider white. Yes, the Ethiopian jews aren't white. But middle eastern people are considered white by many including myself. They're very similar racially to Southern Italians and Greeks. I was talking about the Jewish ethnic group though. The Jewish ethnic group is white. Somatomy 19:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I believe genetic tests have shown that the Ethiopian Jews also originate in the male line to the Israel/Palestine area. Arniep 20:34, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean "in the male line?" Somatomy 21:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
The male Y-Chromosome is genetically very similar to other Jews, Palestinians and Kurds. Arniep 21:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

If a black woman becomes a Jew and has a son, is that son automatically a Jew, even though he doesn't share the same ethnicity as the real "ethnic Jews"? --Macarion 21:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

You keep missing the point, Macarion. You seem incapable of understanding what I've been trying to say. I'm not talking about the "mother being jewish" rule at all. Somatomy 23:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, one and all, for preparing the above comments, which I will be lifting whole for a new routine I call, "People on the internet are more fucking stupid than anyone ever imagined." You will not be credited or listed in the thank you section of the CD, but you are free to go around saying, "hey, I'm one of the stupid fucks he's talking about!" David Cross 01:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I wonder if it's really him!!!

I really doubt it's David Cross, but I hope it is and I hope he's not joking because being in his next CD would be cool. I'm a big fan of his. I'll wish I hadn't been using my fake Wikipedia name. It's not David Cross though, I'm guessing. Besides its being unlikely in general, that profile was just created today. Somatomy 01:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not all that unlikely, a few people have edited/commented on their own article, some even try to make it less unflattering (either Milli or Vanilli did it I think). And having a discussion with points as brilliant as "I can't believe people still don't get this. He's not a fucking Jew. He's white." being associated with you would probably be enough to warrant a comment. --TM 03:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I still think it's much more likely that someone else was watching this argument, created the username last night, and posted it as a joke. I don't think it was Macarion though because it was too well-written. Whoever did it is a fairly convincing David Cross. Somatomy 07:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
We were all Hindus once upon a time, so why not say he's a Hindu and be done with it.

83.70.248.72 00:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

This is an old, tired discussion but to add: One can be Jewish and something else, as Judaism does not mean JUST the religion; it is an ethnic group as well. I find it funny that Cross has even stated what he did about Judaism being the "one religion you can't get away from," because being Jewish does not mean being part of the Jewish faith - he should know that. 98.198.83.12 (talk) 10:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

ok, is woody allen a jew? if wiki says he is..its either wrong..or this is wrong..because he is also "ethnically jewish" and culturally.....but he is a agnostic if not athesist....so whats that mean?

Heritage

Resolved

Fact. David Cross is a descendant of jewish heritage. This he can not deny. It's in his genes and can't be disputed. To say he is a jew is not discussing his religion. It's discussing his ancestors. These are facts that can't be changed or disputed.

Check links below. Some of them are dead.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.65.163.231 (talk • contribs) 06:36, 19 June 2010

Fact. David Cross being Jewish is in the article. This you cannot deny. It's in the "Personal life" section and can't be disputed. To say it's in the article is not discussing possible changes to the article. It's discussing what's already there. These are facts that can be changed or disputed.
Check links given as sources. None of them are dead. (Now if only I could figure out if he's dating Amber Tamblyn...) - SummerPhD (talk) 15:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Adam Carolla podcast citation

These need to have timestamps of where Cross ostensibly confirms these things. Otherwise it's like citing a book but not citing the page number. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Which, ironically, is the case with the cited book Mr. Show What Happened? Don't they teach proper footnoting and research techniques in schools anymore? --Tenebrae (talk) 18:46, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Template?

There is a ragged semi-consensus that cast of shows not appear in templates. There are good reasons for it (too many names in too many templates, with actors pages having dozens of tv show templates), but it also means that William Shatner and Chevy Chase's names dont appear on the Star Trek and SNL templates. nothings perfect. Due to that policy, Template:Mr. Show is now really nonexistent, now that all the cast names were removed. I think that David probably can have his own template, which would make this silly little template live a little if renamed. It could have his cd's, dvd's, run ronnie, mr show, list of mr show episodes, and could list bob as cocreator. Anyone else like this as a way to link a few more articles together?(mercurywoodrose)75.61.137.132 (talk) 07:31, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Awards section

I notice a distinct lack of an awards section, both personal and in film. This must be in jest.70.145.18.48 (talk) 06:54, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

So add something. -- Pemilligan (talk) 02:50, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

"Personal Life" section needs correction

He is dating actress Amber Tamblyn.[10]

Dave Cross is Gay. This illusion of a faux girlfriend is a publicity sham that we as a society do not need. Dave deserves better - and so do we! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theaternearyou (talk • contribs) 23:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

You need some references from WP:RS that say he is "gay". He says here [1] he's "fucking" her, heck even his bio on Barnes and Nobel says this [2]. That's a pretty bizarre way of "coming out". Ttiotsw (talk) 06:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
I actually found that to be a little funny. 67.77.70.139 (talk) 05:05, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


Gay or not, he is married now, to Amber Tamblyn, daughter of Russ. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/07/david-cross-amber-tamblyn-married_n_1946793.html

Also, he is a Red Sox fan; his dog is named Ollie Red Sox. I'm not saying that a Red Sox fan cannot be gay [3], but it does lower the odds slightly. Bustter (talk) 10:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Publicly declaration of Cross' intense dislike of bands like Creed?

I think the following should be removed:

"He has publicly declared his intense dislike of bands like Creed, Evanescence, P.O.D., and Staind—once saying in his act, "I would rather hear the death rattle of my only child than listen to that fuckin' shit")—as well as the decision of so-called "alternative rock" radio stations to play them and other similar bands.

I think this because what he says is clearly in jest. Creed vocalist Scott Stapp contributed a comedy routine at the end of the disc that the above is taken from (track two). In the hidden track David Cross meets Stapp in an awkward situation after what is said in track 2. Therefore what is said in track two must be a joke. Stapp and Cross must get on together in real life for something like this to happen.. so presumably he doesn't hate that sort of music?

Also the sentance "He has publicly declared his intense dislike of bands like Creed, Evanescence, P.O.D., and Staind—once saying in his act..." is just stupid. He has publicly said this once, and he did go on to say what he said, but he's only said this once, the article makes it seem like he's said it several times, and it's true.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.225.12 (talk • contribs)

How is it clearly in jest? Stapp didn't "contribute" a comedy routine at the end of the disc: Cross and Stapp met at a televised celebrity poker game, not some home game composed of friends. And since the bit about the music he hates is in his act, it has been repeated publicly many, many times. Cross has always been very open about aspects of American culture and celebrities he dislikes in his stand up, on Mr. Show, and elsewhere. --TM 20:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Presumably, if Stapp appeared on a hidden track at the end of the cd, he is either completely stupid, or on more than just "friendly terms" with Cross. Presumably Cross was just joking? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.225.12 (talk) 17:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Stapp does not appear on any David Cross album. In the hidden track in question, Cross relates the anecdote of his awkward meeting with Stapp (described above). They did not get together and record a comedy routine or whatever you seem to think this hidden track is. --TM 22:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Does his dislike of these bands even have a worth being mentioned on an encyclopedia? 98.198.83.12 (talk) 10:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Only if Cross and Stapp are being gay together. Bustter (talk) 10:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:David Cross/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This is a loosely organized article that could use some more depth (and references). It's got some trivial information, but doesn't go into a lot of detail about the context of the subject -- Cross is a very influential and dissonant comedian who has influenced much of the younger generation. I'm pretty sure there is a lot more info we could incorporate into the article. /Blaxthos 19:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 19:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 12:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on David Cross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:16, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit-warring

An edit was reverted to the status quo, yet that editor has begun edit-warring rather than following WP:BRD. This editor's claim that Wikipedia suddenly forbids even naming the children of celebrity subjects whom the parents themselves announced to media is false, and claiming that this WP:BLP policy is false. I ask that editor to follow BRD and discuss.--Tenebrae (talk) 22:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Name and bithdate of child

Consensus is clear that we do not name non-notable children or give their exact birth dates unless there is consensus that it is necessary for full understanding of the subject. There is no consensus on this page, and thus the addition of the child' name or exact birth date is BLP violation. See WP:BLP , WP:NONAME and Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons#Names_and_birth_dates_of_non-notable_children_(again) Meters (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Neither consensus nor WP:BLP give a blanket prohibition against giving these basic, normal biographical details. Indeed, you've had to cite essays such as WP:NONAME because what you claim is not policy. And I believe we're both aware that one does not change non-violative status quo without talk-page consensus.--Tenebrae (talk) 22:56, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
I never said it was a blanket policy that we could not mention this information. I said that we had not met the requirements to mention it here. I also quoted policy, not just essay, and and I also took this to the policy's talk page before making this edit. Meters (talk) 22:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
We don't change non-violative status quo, and any professional can tell you that this information clearly is needed for a proper understanding of an article subject. I'm not going to give a class, but for a single example of what is taught at the college level: The date of a birth indicates the timeframe of a pregnancy, which absolutely impacts on the subject's career. There are many, many more examples of the relevancy of this information to any proper biographer. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant — these factors objectively exist and to unilaterally say they are not necessary for full understanding of the subject is personal opinion, not policy. Before changing status quo, you needed to reach consensus to change it. Instead, you edit-warred.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:27, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
You edit warring complaint was immediately closed as no violation,. hence I was not edit warring. Please stop claiming that. If you wish to open a discussion as to whether his child's name and birth date is essential to a full understanding of the subject, then feel free to do so. Meters (talk) 23:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
You might take into consideration the fact that my post above, six minutes after the admin posted, was written before I read what the admin said. I think for all our differences about policy you can see that I've tried to follow protocol.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

Regarding the status quo children's names and birthdates: As noted by the admin here, the "best course of action is to show, on the article's talk page, that the name is so widely published in multiple sources that the privacy exemption no longer applies." This can easily be shown. The question is, will editor Meters, who changed the article, accept anything other than his WP:OWN version.

This information is widely disseminated globally to millions. No one could argue that the names and birthdates of a subject's children are not, at the least, pertinent to a subject. And biographical norms dictate their inclusion. So I ask Meters in all seriousness: Is there any standard that you will accept?--Tenebrae (talk) 23:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

There are other types of BLP information that are widely published that we do not include in Wikipedia. I don't see why this one should be any different. There is no mention in the policy WP:BLP about an exemption for naming children in cases in which the information has been widely published, just when the information is required for a full understanding of the subject. I don't see that, and I don't see any discussion of that here. I'm not owning the article. I'm simply trying to follow policy. I raised this general issue at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Names and birth dates of non-notable children (again) and there was no mention of including such information if it was well publicized. Meters (talk) 02:24, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Let's separate the conditions at WP:BLPNAME, which reads "may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject."
Can we at least agree that the cited television interview and available RS newspapers and RS national magazines constitute reliable sourcing? --Tenebrae (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Cross/Archive_1&oldid=1092070762"