Talk:Deez Nuts (satirist)

RITDH Endorsement should be included

I don't know how to do it, but it's worth mention that Deez Nuts received the endorsement of Jimmy McMillan, founder of The Rent Is Too Damn High party. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/08/21/433550005/creator-of-the-rent-is-too-damn-high-party-endorses-candidate-deez-nuts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.74.119 (talk) 04:36, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Picture of Brady Olson uploaded to Facebook

Brady Olson updated his cover picture (on Deez Nuts 2016) to a picture of himself. Should this be added to the page? Doubletriplereversepsychology (talk) 21:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The Daily Beast

The Daily Beast isn't a reliable source lmfao 70.198.132.114 (talk) 01:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

• Its not the best, but its fine for this.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 15:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

User draft

Amusingly, the person who filed the Deez Nuts statement of candidacy with the FEC created a draft page for the candidate -- User:Bolso18/Deez_Nuts_presidential_campaign,_2016 on August 11.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 15:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Meme

According to the interview with Rolling Stone, Olson named the candidate after the same-named meme. Would it be good if someone would describe how the meme was created? Even a fun fact: In an article issued by The Guardian about Deez Nuts the same-named Aussie hardcore band declared their endorsement for Deez Nuts. [1] --Goroth (talk) 16:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

It's originally from a track on Dr. Dre's album "The Chronic": Deeez Nuuuts. This ought to be mentioned, in my opinion. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 19:49, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Deez Nuts also refers to a viral video from Vine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshiman6464 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... this incredible moment needs to be preserved forever --2610:10:20:212:0:0:0:1250 (talk) 18:31, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

OK, the above reasoning is not very specific, but I am also contesting speedy deletion. This subject has received a lot of coverage, and anyone else polling at 9% would also have a Wikipedia article. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:32, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

That IP speedy nomination was ill-considered. Somebody bitter will probably commence an AFD, but the content will remain somewhere on the project.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 18:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Ineligible

I have restored "ineligible" to the infobox twice lately, and I won't do it a third time in the next few days (see WP:3RR). But NOT having "ineligible" next to "running" makes the infobox misleading at best. Please do not remove "ineligible" from the infobox unless you change the infobox wording in some other way to make it clear he is not eligible for the office. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:47, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I've thought about this a bit, having nothing else to do, and I'm not sure "ineligible" is a good one-word summary. He can't serve as President, that's for certain. However, US Presidential elections are kind of baroque; one does not vote for a candidate directly, but for a slate of electors who then vote for a candidate. I'm not certain there's any prohibition on a person under 35 staging a candidacy for the purpose of gathering a slate of electors, who could then vote in favor of some eligible candidate rather than for the one they were in principle selected for. It is profoundly unlikely that he would gather any electoral votes, of course, and he is currently ineligible to serve, but I don't think Wikipedia can say conclusively that he's ineligible to run. The same reasoning applies to Waka Flocka Flame. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 20:09, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree - it's a distinction without a difference. Barring a legal fluke, I can't see any state letting him file and name a slate of electors if he wasn't eligible to hold office, nor can I see any state allowing any registered political party to name electors who promise to vote for an ineligible candidate. As far as Waka Flocka Flame, I the only mention of his candidacy on the article page that I could see (as of a few minutes ago) was a Category: entry. If it gets mentioned in the article, the context will have to make it clear to all readers, including those unfamiliar with US law, that he is not eligible to run. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:38, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I mentioned Waka Flocka Flame because there's a controversy about listing him, or not, on the campaign page. It's the same issue; he's too young to serve, but there's resistance to removing him. Mr. Olson has actually done more campaigning, with better results, than Mr. Malphurs has. In any case, I'm not saying he should be treated as a candidate on par with Clinton and Trump, only that a one-word summary of "ineligible" in the infobox isn't a good fit. But it's certainly not worth an edit war, for anyone. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 20:56, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps something instead of "running" - like "running (stunt/publicity)" - where "stunt/publicity" is a template that adds them to an appropriate category. For example, the template's default category could be Category:Non-serious political candidates and a Category= parameter to change that for specific candidates, such as Category:United States presidential candidates, 2016 (non-serious candidates) which would be a sub-category of both Category:United States presidential candidates, 2016 and Category:Non-serious political candidates. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:44, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I've asked for help on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics#How to mark "joke" candidates in info-boxes. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:49, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Everyone is eligible to run. Just not to serve. Jameswrjobe53 (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

"Eligible to run" in any meaningful sense of the word means "eligible to have votes cast for you counted" - in states where write-in candidates must declare ahead of time, eligible to be an officially declared write-in candidate and/or eligible to appear on the ballot. I don't know of any state that lets candidates ineligible to server appear on the ballot (unless they became ineligible or were discovered to have been ineligible after a cut-off date) or to be an official write-in candidate. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 04:24, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

A couple elections ago either the Socialist Party or Communist Party candidate was ineligible to be elected due to him not being a natural born american citizen but he appeared on ballots in some states, but he was not allowed to appear in ballots in all states so he was replaced by a different candidate from his party in states that didn't allow him on the ballot Jameswrjobe53 (talk) 15:15, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I found the individual I was talking about. From Roger Calero's wikipedia page: "In 2004, Róger Calero was the SWP candidate for President of the United States and received 3,689 votes, with Arrin Hawkins running for Vice President. Because he is not a natural born citizen of the United States, Calero is ineligible to become U.S. president under the United States Constitution, meaning that even had he won the election, he would not have been permitted to serve, and so James Harris, the Socialist Workers' Party presidential candidate from 2000, stood in on the ticket in nine states where Calero could not be listed, receiving 7,102 additional votes." Jameswrjobe53 (talk) 18:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I did not know that. If lawmakers in those states didn't rewrite their rules after that election it makes me wonder why. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:39, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

"Nuts"

Is it really necessary to reference the candidate as "Nuts", as if it's a real person, when describing their views/opinions? Why not "Olson", as Nuts isn't a real person and Olson is the individual's views being described? This article seems to take the satirical nature of this "candidate" way too seriously. Thechased (talk) 23:50, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

The article is referring to the fictional character created by Olson, Olson himself is not running for president. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.101.152.13 (talk) 00:25, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I think either one is fine, but he really is better known as "Deez Nuts" at this point. All the same "Nuts" isn't a surname; if I could edit the article I would have already changed the references in question to read "Deez Nuts" instead. That's a change I would support making. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 02:17, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

All I know is this is the best written Wiki article ever. Whomever did this, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.25.144.254 (talk) 14:50, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I know it's a fucking classic... 5.81.1.23 (talk) 22:44, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Clark Kent goes by "Clark", Hulk Hogan goes by "Hogan" and Bruce Wayne (who doesn't have his own article) goes by "Bruce Wayne", in the spirit of Bob Dole. I'm not Bob Dole, but if I were Bob Dole, I'd say Bob Dole prefers plain "Nuts". Every word rule about a fictional character should match the rule for an actual character, because aside from not existing, they're the exact same thing as people. They have fake births, fake jobs, fake deaths and fake surnames. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

It's a bit strange that this is even a discussion. "Nuts" doesn't exist, he's a fictional character. I can't imagine why Olson would be referred to as such. Olson is doing all this, not some imaginary character. I mean, even if you looked at it as a nickname of sorts, that most people know, is Trump referred to as: "The Donald" on his Wikipedia page? It doesn't seem like any sort of standard practice to me to refer to a person by a pseudonym. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.182.5 (talk) 02:00, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

It's more than a nickname, it's a separate persona. Olson is merely the boy behind the curtain, and unlike Nuts, is not recognized as a Presidential candidate by the FEC. Per the infobox, this article is about a candidate, not his puppetmaster. His success so far is directly attributable to his name, rather than the ideological platform Olson drafted for him. Without Deez Nuts, Olson simply isn't notable. It's like how we have an article for Bernie Sanders, but not Sanders' campaign manager, Jeff Weaver. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:30, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

In 2016, Jeff Weaver was elected to Wikipedia. In 2017, he's still here. Congratulations are certainly in order to his entire team. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:13, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Early voting results

Is there any way to get the early voting results for the candidate? Early voting results have been said to influence undecided voters, so it would be good to have those before Election Day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.92.50.150 (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2018

He was the most popular candiate among the younger generation THXTLXRD (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:59, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Olson or Olsen

Seems the article uses both spellings, but only one (which?) is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.226.82.214 (talk) 06:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)