Talk:Penn Jillette/Archive 1

Archive 1

Written Works

I'm new at this, so I thought I would check - Is there a reason that the three Penn and Teller co-written books are not listed under written works? Penn & Teller's How to Play in Traffic Cruel Tricks for Dear Friends Penn and Teller's How to Play with Your Food —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Princemuchao (talk • contribs) 22:35, September 18, 2006 (UTC)

They're on the Penn & Teller page. - Justin 00:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Cato

While he's in the category of people associated with the Cato Institute, it's not mentioned in his bio - He's a Fellow there, it's a libertarian thinktank. Presumably there's more to his libertarian activism to be covered. Rainman420 19:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Mother Theresa

Ok, let's try to be civil if we could. Also, where are we going with this? May I ask what the point of this exchange will be with respect to improving the article? Thanks, Deville (Talk) 23:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be no point. Magidin 01:50, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Partnership with Teller

Lots have people have said "why doesn't this article mention...", but why doesn't it actually say something about his partnership with Teller? It mentions he exists, but no dates, no how,no where, pretty much nothing. Eh? DJ Clayworth 15:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Because his partnership with Teller has a Wikipage all of its own, Penn and Teller. The information you inquire about is there. Magidin 15:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

polyamorous

why doesn't this mention his polyamorous lifestyle? he has alluded to this on adam carolla's radio show, and it's public information otherwise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.229.32.10 (talk • contribs) 01:06, July 30, 2006 (UTC)

---

why doesnt it say anything about him being in the band pigface? —This unsigned comment was added by 67.181.108.218 (talk • contribs) .

For that matter as well, before Pigface, he started a band known as Captain Howdy (named after the devil in The Exorcist); surely his musical dalliances deserve some mention...Gene S. Poole 03:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if this is worth adding or not, but a few times on Bullshit, Penn has referenced the fact that he has never had a drink in his life. Does anyone know 1) if he was kidding or 2) if there is a reason behind this? —This unsigned comment was added by 209.33.51.78 (talk • contribs) .

He's not kidding. Penn doesn't drink, doesn't smoke, doesn't take drugs. He has said something to the effect that he has no desire to alter his perception of reality. I really should dig up a quote but I'm lazy. Encouragingly, he holds these views while still defending the right of anyone to do the exact opposite. He doesn't agree with laws that limit our personal freedoms. —This unsigned comment was added by 67.67.196.248 (talk • contribs) .

I believe it's something about how "I'm only going to be alive for a certain amount of time, and I'd like to be here for it." DS 00:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Counting...

From the article (ephasis mine):

Speculation arises from Penn's red fingernail on his left hand. From a FAQ from Penn & Teller's official website, there are three common answers:

1. It means he once shot a man for asking personal questions.
2. When Penn first began performing, his mother told him to get a manicure because people would be looking at his hands. In response to this, Penn had all of his nails painted red as a joke. The one remaining red fingernail is in honor of his dear mother and also can sometimes provide excelent misdirection.

On the episode of Penn Radio which aired 29 November, 2006, Penn related the real story behind his red fingernail. It began as a joke with his mother. When Penn was 18 years old, his mother advised him to keep his hands looking nice, since he was then working as a magician and his audience would be looking at his hands. Penn colored the single nail red and showed it to his mother. He has continued to paint that single nail to the present. The color he uses is Jelly Apple Red (#054) by Essie.

I count two. The paragraph below the list is essentially the same as item #2 on the list, only with more explanation. Was there a 3rd before that got removed for some reason? Lurlock 14:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Prosopagnosia

Talked about his prosopagnosia 30 AUG 2006 on his radio show. I didn't add it to the article, since I don't know where to put it. The podcast is, or will be, on iTunes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.183.116.193 (talk • contribs) 19:13, August 30, 2006 (UTC)

[even though he has said he's not good at recognizing people's faces i don't think this qualifies as prosopagnosia, which is a much severe impairment in face recognition beyond the "im not good with faces"] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.141.66.169 (talk • contribs) 18:47, November 5, 2006 (UTC)

-I changed the claim that Penn has prosopagnosia in this entry to this:

It was widely believed and reported on the Internet that he suffers from prosopagnosia (a rare impairment of the ability to recognize faces), although in truth, he does not. He has, however, in an interview with TV Guide, stated that he has "a tremendously bad visual memory", and when asked about the prosopagnosia rumor, he replied "I don't have that. I think I have what they call 'stupid'."

in light of the December 18, 2006 interview with TV Guide and the recent things he's said on his radio show. --71.226.215.220 01:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

He said he didn't recognize his mom, and that he had been 'tested' in some way. Perhaps we should call him on the air. 76.209.152.77 02:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

As I read that TV Guide article, he is misunderstanding what prosopagnosia is like. It does NOT involve a "masking" of faces. We see faces normally, we just can't store them and/or retrieve them from our memories as effectively. This could have something to do with the common TV story and magazine article illustration of PA with a blurred or mosaiced face. That's not what it's actually like to see someone, although it's vaguely similar to what it's like to try to remember someone's face who isn't there. If you don't recognize your mom out of context, that's a giant flashing red sign that says "prosopagnosia". I used to claim I had a bad visual memory or think I just wasn't paying enough attention too, til I found out about PA. Andreac 18:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Jillette, not Penn

A reminder to editors: to help maintain the proper encyclopedic tone in this article, please refer to its subject by his last name, Jillette, not his first name (unless the reference is specifically contrasting him with the other member of "Penn & Teller"). - dcljr (talk) 18:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Intellectual property section

This new section is attempting to make the argument that Jillette is a firm believer in intellectual property rights, but it was done by citing a blog (apparently from Jillette) that makes no direct supporting statement (in a discussion about a plane trip):

I read and I typed. After doing that for a while, I put on my MP3s (only moral ones) stuck my earphones in and went to that weird half-sleep place where I listen to music.

• Jillette, Penn (14 June 2000). ""Plane Crash Penn"". Penniphile. PennAndTeller.com. Retrieved 2007-09-29. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

There is no context in this blog that indicates whether "moral" means "legally owned", "politically correct", "supporting my personal values", or any other of the many connotations of "moral". It doesn't matter if, knowing Jillette, we might deduce a particular meaning. We Wikipedians are not allowed to deduce or extrapolate meanings — we must cite clearly supporting statements for our prose.

Because of this continuing problem, I have removed the following text from the section:

… and speaks of having "moral" versions of media

I also note that, contrary to the most recent edit summary on this issue, he says "MP3" in this not-quite-supporting text, not "media". Please, folks, let's get our supporting evidence right before we write our prose. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I've found this cite; http://www.pennandteller.com/sincity/penn-n-teller/pcc/stealing.html It clearly lays out Penn's beliefs about IP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.234.59 (talk) 22:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

He stated on his radio show that people who downloaded his show who also subscribed to ShowTime already paid for it, but non-subscribers would not have. Anybody have an air-date? BillMcGonigle 20:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Citing sources

I've fixed several references in this article because they employed bare external links either with no supplemental information or only a prose description that didn't exactly reflect the actual source. There are two major reasons to use full citations, including authors, dates, works, access dates, etc.:

1. Bare links frequently cease to work. When this happens, editors will try to find other sources for the same information. This is much easier to do if specific information, like exact article titles and dates, are provided, instead of often-cryptic URLs and mere user descriptions of the content.
2. Providing these citation details in the References (or equivalent) section not only follows standard publishing practice, but has an extra import for Wikipedia. We do not have an editorial board to oversee our article content. We are the editorial board. Readers should be able to see at a glance the source of the information in the article, to enable them to weigh its merit for themselves. Hiding such information behind bare links reduces this opportunity and makes bias easier to incorporate in articles.

As a result of my fixes, it can be seen that two sources are YouTube videos of unclear provenance that are likely copyright violations, making the links from Wikipedia likely contributory infringement of the originals' copyrights. I will therefore remove those links and replace them with fact tags after the fix-up edit.

For more information on these practices and issues, please see Wikipedia:Footnotes, Wikipedia:Citing sources, Wikipedia:Citation templates, and Wikipedia:Copyrights. I welcome any questions on my talk page, too. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Jewish Upbringing?

I've looked around on Google for evidence that Penn Jillette was raised Jewish, although is now an atheist. I heard a guest on his radio show claim that he was raised Jewish, although there's no real verification or mention of this. The misperception that he is Jewish however, probably comes from all his Jewish friends in Hollywood, and that Teller was raised Jewish.

What is Penn's ethnic background? Can anyone verify?--Seth Goldin 23:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I know his family is from Newfoundland, and he has alluded to his ethnic background as "Newfie". Unigolyn 08:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

His famlies from Newfoundland? Never heard of that. All I know is he grew up in the Greenfield area of Mass. If you attend the Fanklin County Fair, held annually in Greenfield, you see a model his father made from like toothpicks. And my father's mentioned going to elementary school with Penn, and that was in Gill, Mass. Which itself is in the Greenfield area. -annonymous 11/17/06 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.222.146.215 (talk • contribs) 23:38, November 17, 2006 (UTC)

On his radio show, he mentions his ancestors being from Newfoundland, and being of mixed heritage. (on one episode of his radio show, he related a story of his mother warning him "I never want to hear you making fun of any nationality, because no matter which one it is, its in your background somewhere.") On the episode of his radio show which he talks to Judy Gold [[1]], he discusses there being only one Jewish family in his hometown of Greenfield, so I wouldn't believe that he was raised Jewish. On the shows where Gilbert Gottfried is the guest [[2]] [[3]] , he describes himself as a Gentile. I haven't heard the radio show where a guest described his upbringing as Jewish, but these are some events on the radio show that seem to contradict it. Andrew.langmead 04:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I posted that before he explicitly said that he was a gentile. A guest had mistakenly thought that he was Jewish. He is absolutely not. Of course he's an atheist, but I'm talking about ethnicity, like Teller.--Seth Goldin 05:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

On the radio show with Kinky Friedman, Kinky asks Penn isn't he Presbyterian, and Penn says yes, without comment. If he was being sarcastic he probably would have expanded on that. 216.107.222.222 22:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

CrimeFighter

Why was it all over the Internet that the reason he gave his daughter that middle name was so that she could say that her middle name is "crimefighter" if she was ever stopped by the police? In this way, the police would have sympathy for her and not give her a summons.Lestrade 02:58, 27 March 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

It's a story that Penn himself has told, tongue-in-cheek, of course. I heard it from him at The Amaz!ng Meeting 4 in Las Vegas, and I think he's also told it on his radio show. DHowell 05:24, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

He also mentions this, jokingly on the NPR show "Wait Wait, Don't Tell Me"; in fact, the article says that he mentions something about it being his wife's idea to have fun with her middle name but I do not remember that at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.32.40.169 (talk) 22:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Sock Book

He wrote a book called Sock, I saw it being sold at his show a few months back and my friend recently bought it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.92.125.12 (talk) 10:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Cato?

Does anyone have a source saying Penn is part of the CATO institute?Father Time89 (talk) 18:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Run DMC

Both Penn and Teller have appeared in Run DMC's video for "It's Tricky." I know we can't mention every appearance he's made but this one is pretty prominent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.219.133.241 (talk) 01:19, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Comedy Central voiceover work

And it is also worth mentioning that for years he was Comedy Central's only voiceover guy with both P&T appearing in many of the oddball segments that advertised the network... for instance, there was one where Penn opens up a trenchcoat to reveal Teller who also opens a trenchcoat to reveal the Comedy Central logo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.219.133.241 (talk) 01:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Excite.com

I changed the sentence that contained "now defunct search engine Excite.com" because there certainly is a search engine at Excite.com. All one has to do is go to that address.

24.124.100.166 (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2008 (UTC)Evan

removed "controversy" section

I'm removed this section; first Donohue (aka the Catholic League) seems to accuse everyone who's high profile of anti-Catholicism. If there is evidence of numerous mainstream media covering the story then reference it. If the death threat was seen as credible and covered by WP:RS then maybe but not with undue weight. Benjiboi 23:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

William A. Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, has accused Jillette of engaging in anti-Catholic bigotry after remarks Jillette made on his radio show after rumors began to spread that Paris Hilton was asked to star in a biopic about Mother Teresa's life. Jillette remarked on the April 5, 2006 episode of his show that Hilton shouldn't "lower herself" to play the nun, whom he believed had a "sexual kink" involving watching people suffer and die. He also said that Hilton should continue to make "good, wholesome, porno films", a reference to 1 Night in Paris.

After his remarks -- which echoed beliefs expressed in the "Holier Than Thou" episode of Bullshit! -- John London, another FreeFM host whose show followed Jillette's in many markets, offered listeners US$5,000 to "the person that kills Jillette", later upping it to 7,000 if he "suffers". Because of this threat, London, his co-host Chris Townsend, and his producer Dennis Cruz were fired from FreeFM.

Just because it was William Donohue who led the charge dose not make it wrong. I think that the evidince of his won convictions suggests that however he isn't a anti catholic, but a anti theist and that should be put into controversy for bigotry against theists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.115.95.208 (talk) 23:05, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Identity Season 2?

a second season of Identity? Where was that from? 199.80.112.226 (talk) 18:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Net worth?

Can someone add a blurb on his net worth? I got in a discussion about whether major Vegas entertainers were worth 8 or 9 digits, and was surprised to find it's not covered here. Might as well add it for Teller's page as well, which incidentally, is 1/3 stub, and 2/3 trivial nonsense. - 209.6.146.164 (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Penn Says Finished?

Has the Penn Says blog finished? It doesn't appear to be on crackle anymore. If that's the case the page should be updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.5.1 (talk) 04:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Where the heck did you get that idea? He posted a new video this morning: Not SkitSnack!. Not only is it going strong, but its availabe on both the Crackle site and on YouTube: On Crackle On YouTube and there's even an announce feed on Twitter: PennSays --Krelnik (talk) 12:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Worth Noting?

I don't usually deal too much with this kind of stuff, so I wasn't sure. Is it worth noting that he authored the forward to Greg Gutfeld's upcoming book The Bible of Unspeakable Truths?[http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unspeakable-Truths-Greg-Gutfeld/dp/0446552305/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I2PNF99HUDG0GP&colid=27K8YYZE1HOSJ] SpudHawg948 (talk) 09:23, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Involvement with The Residents

Should this article refer to Penn Jillette's involvement with The Residents, most notably his appearance as narrator for the live Mole Show? Since The Residents are artists of some significnce in their own sphere, it would seem worth mentioning Booleanmattock (talk) 00:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Red fingernail

Holy shit, how many times does the story need to be told in the same section? I lost interest in reading the article when I ran across the mother story three times in that section.

Please, take a stab at editing it to make it a better read. Kingturtle (talk) 15:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Gambling

I'm not sure what the source is of the 'never gambled' factoid, but I have personally witnessed Penn playing blackjack in a Las Vegas casino, furthermore he has publicly taken part in televised blackjack tournaments.

"All is presentation" - Derren Brown Recidivist23 (talk) 13:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

drug of choice

He has never used recreational drugs or alcohol. ...

He says that (repeatedly), but:

I fiddled with a cigarette on the bar and their ... servant ("servant" really doesn't bring up the full image) brought me a brand-new pack, opened, with a cigarette sticking out ready for me. He would have lit it for me too.

— "Siegfried, Roy, Montecore, Penn, and Leather Pants" in God, No! page 6

Now maybe he's in the habit of fiddling with unlit cigarettes, like Tony Baretta, but if I ever get the chance I'm gonna ask him whether the blanket statement ought to be qualified by "other than nicotine". —Tamfang (talk) 05:35, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Lots of magic tricks use cigarettes as props. (Fiddling with one is not smoking one.) If he did/does smoke his statement would be problematic if he were in the social sciences, where "ATOD" (for "alcohol, tobacco and other drugs") is used to emphasize that alcohol and tobacco are drugs. However, he is not in the social sciences and the term ATOD exists because most people do not generally include tobacco with "drugs" and he clearly distinguishes alcohol from "recreational drugs". Heck, if we want to get right down to it, Viagra is a recreational drug unless the man's partner is a postmenopausal woman. Does this mean Bob Dole's Viagra ads mean he supports recreational drug use?

Long story short, unless a reliable source clearly discusses whether or not he smoked/smokes, we have nothing to go on and nothing to say. - SummerPhD (talk) 12:01, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

He has stated repeatedly, in God, No!, the Showtime show Bullshit! and his various video blogs and radio spots that he has never smoked (tobacco), drank alcohol or used 'recreational' drugs.

He just revealed today on his webcast "Penn's Sunday School" that he used to occasionally bum (and smoke) cigarettes off the crew of his show (don't know if he meant the show at the Rio or the Showtime series). He said that when he realized he was smoking enough that he should really start buying his own, he gave them up. So it's not a correct statement that he has "never smoked tobacco". It may be correct to say he is not currently a cigarette smoker. Professor Hosquith (talk) 22:54, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Jilljet

I don't have the motivation to look it up, hopefully an individual here might be willing to do so. Penn was on the radio show Loveline sometime this current year. He stated that the reason for the name jilljet was because a person who helped him with the patent process of his product informed him he couldn't patent the word clit and suggested the name as an alternative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.17.166.150 (talk) 15:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Global warming

Under personal life we have something about global warming. I've been listening to God No! where he states strongly "I don't know" but says there probably is global warming, it probably is manmade, it probably can be stopped that the answer isn't socialism, but that he doesn't know. Dougweller (talk) 11:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Music videos

Let's do a fact check on the music video section, shall we?

• Ramones – "Something to Believe In"

Does Penn Jillette appear in a music video by the Ramones titled "Something to Believe In"? Yes. He does.

• Run D.M.C. – "It's Tricky"

Does Penn Jillette appear in a music video by the artists Run D.M.C. titled "It's Tricky"? Yes. He does.

• Katy Perry – "Waking Up in Vegas"

Does Penn Jillette appear in a music video by the artist Katy Perry titled "Waking Up in Vegas"? Yes. He does.

• Too Much Joy – "Donna Everywhere"

Does Penn Jillette appear in a music video by the artists Too Much Joy titled "Donna Everywhere"? Yes. He does.

• Rascal Flatts – "Why Wait"

Does Penn Jillette appear in a music video by the artists Rascal Flatts titled "Why Wait"? Yes. He does.

• Clay Aiken - "Clay Aiken by Penn Jillette"

Does Penn Jillette appear in a music video by the artist Clay Aiken titled "Clay Aiken by Penn Jillette"? No. He Does Not.

There is a a music video titled "Clay Aiken by Penn Jillette." That is the correct name of the work. (The previous title this article listed, "Clay Aiken", is incorrect.)

Penn Jillette does indeed appear in said music video. In fact, he is the only person who appears in it.

The music video is not by the artist Clay Aiken. Clay Aiken does not appear in the video. Clay Aiken dis not write or perform the music in the video. The only connection Clay Aiken has with it is the same connection Donna has with the Too Much Joy video "Donna Everywhere".

Penn Jillette wrote, produced, and performed the music video titled "Clay Aiken by Penn Jillette." The page in its present form lists the wrong artist.

Any questions? --Guy Macon (talk) 10:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Just that it's confusing at first sight, but now I understand it. If you'd explained your edit in the edit summary I would have understood. Dougweller (talk) 14:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Church of the SubGenius Membership?

Recently. User:Pburka removed the following pages from Category:American SubGenii.

Penn Jillette [4] (Mentioned here and here and here)

Rudy Rucker [5] (Mentioned here, here, here and here)

Nancy A. Collins [6] (Mentioned here, here and here)

John Shirley [7] (Mentioned here and here)

Bruce Campbell [8] (Mentioned here and here)

Del Close [9] (Mentioned here)

Paul Reubens AKA Pee Wee Herman [10] (Mentioned here and here)

Lon Milo DuQuette [11](Mentioned here)

These removals were perfectly reasonable, because the articles do not mention membership in the COSG, nor are most of the links I list above reliable sources. Because of this, I am putting out a call for citations to reliable sources that establish Church of the SubGenius membership for these and other celebrities. I suspect that a fair count will put the number considerably higher than the number of celebrity Scientologists. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Guy, why isn't http://www.subgenius.com/ts/hos_logs/Hour_of_Slack_1342.html a reliable source? It even calls him a minister in the church. We also have [12] listing "former Talking Heads singer David Byrne, Penn Jillette (from Penn & Teller) and Pee-wee Herman". Dougweller (talk) 09:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it is enough. The two parts of WP:BLPCAT that seem most relevant are "Categories regarding religious beliefs ... should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief" -- meaning that We need a citation where Penn Jillette himself says he is a member or strong supporter, and "the case for each category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources" -- meaning we need to add something about Church of the SubGenius Membership in the text with a citation supporting it. As I said before, I think that Pburka removing the category was entirely correct -- which is why I want to improve the article in such a way that the category can be re-added. So, does anyone know of have such a citation? One for Teller would alse be nice if we can find it. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

But this is described as a "parody religion" - it isn't clear that BLPCAT actually covers this, but I've asked. In any case, I can't see why we can't use the sources to say something about this in the article so long as we do this carefully. Jillette is an atheist, it looks pretty clear he belongs to the CoG, but that's not a real church or religion. Dougweller (talk) 08:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion, the part where WP:BLPCAT says "Categories regarding religious beliefs ... should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief" are more applicable in the case of a parody religion (or a controversial religion such as Scientology, for that matter). I think as a general rule we should not identify someone as being a member of the Church of the SubGenius based on the Church of the SubGenius saying that they are in an Hour of Slack broadcast. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

There shouldn't be a difference in policy just because something is a 'parody religion' rather than religion, or even just a social group. I would find it equally objectionable to be inaccurately listed as a Mormon, a Kibologist, or a member of ILGA. LK (talk) 23:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I've come to the conclusion that this is right, and we'd need Jillette to self-identify. Dougweller (talk) 08:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Height estimates

Penn is certainly enormous but he's not 6'9", he's about 6'6.5" or 6'7" but not 6'9". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.135.115 (talk) 21:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Theres no evidence for the 6'7 claim neither, i would peg him to 6'4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.145.38.52 (talk) 21:59, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Brad_Garrett#Height. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:14, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

STOP DELETING MY POSTS! this is a DISCUSSION PAGE to improve the article, so LEAVE if you cant handle my opinions! if i had a little respect for your behavior before i for sure have NONE now, dictator wannabes like you should neither be tolerated or accepted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.145.38.52 (talk) 14:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I have an alternative suggestion. Stop insulting people, stick to logic and evidence, and thus don't give anyone any reason to delete your flaming. Your current behavior is disruptive and does not work toward the goal of improving the article. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Where did i insult him?! he's the one who insulting me by deleting my posts for no reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.145.38.52 (talk) 20:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Neither one of you is following Wikipedia's behavioral standards. SummerPhD, you have been removing comments that do not meet our criteria for removal. See WP:TPOC for what can and can not be removed. 91.145.38.52, do not use phrases like "dictator wannabes." See WP:CIVIL for what sort of comments are acceptable. BTW, removing other editor's comments is worse than being uncivil. 91.145.38.52, if one of your talk page comments gets removed again, don't respond with insults. Drop me a note on my talk page and I will take care of the problem. Both of you should stop these behaviors now and concentrate on the content of the article.

Getting back to the discussion at hand, nobody cares about either of your estimates of anyone's height. What we need are citations to reliable sources. See WP:V. IMDb is not a reliable source. See Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites#IMDb. celebheights.com is not a reliable source, but it is a site that is worth checking when doing research to see if it links to a reliable source (it doesn't in this case). So, do either of you have reliable sources for his height, or should I remove the material? --Guy Macon (talk) 04:18, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I was unaware that the talk page guidelines had changed. Following an outdated guideline -- based on ignorance -- is worse than an on-going string of personal attacks (and claims of immunity via changing IP addresses)? In any case, now that I am aware of the changed guideline, I will of cource follow the guideline. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I apologize for a poor choice of words. By "worse" I didn't mean to imply anything other than the fact that when these things come up on the administrator's noticeboards they tend to not take action on civility issues unless they are becoming quite disruptive. Instead they tend to tell you to stop responding. I am not saying I agree with this policy, but there it is. That being said, this particular flamer is getting to be annoying, so I am going to stop responding and advise you to do likewise. If you decide that the disruption is bad enough to report on WP:ANI, please drop me a line on my talk page and so I can comment on the case. Getting back again to the topic at hand, do you have any citations to reliable sources for the heights of any of these celebrities? --Guy Macon (talk) 17:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find any that I consider reliable. In one of the other articles this guy has been active in (an actor/wrestler whose name escapes me at the moment), lack of reliable sourcing lead to a fairly creative solution where his purported height is listed as "billed" height. I can't seem to find anything reliable on this guy. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:10, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

First, im using any phrases i want so just STFU. (what are you, a opinion cop?) second, his height is based on estimations in the first place so what makes those estimations more worth than others?

and dont worry, i can remove the material myself with no reliable sources - as it was ADDED in the first place with no reliable sources... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.145.38.52 (talk) 12:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: your ongoing violations of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA, any user is allowed to politely ask you to conform to Wikipedia's behavioral standards and to warn you of the consequences if you don't. I have placed a warning at User talk:91.145.38.52 using Template:Uw-npa2. You can save us all some time if you follow the advice (either BGD or CAD) found at Wikipedia:Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you.

Re: "his height is based on estimations in the first place so what makes those estimations more worth than others", no such estimation may be used as a citation, and no statement in any Wikipedia article may be based solely on such an estimation. See WP:NOR. --Guy Macon (talk)

Really?! "no such estimation may be used as a citation"? IT ALREADY HAS so stop being a liar, as the claimed height for i.e Brad Garrett IS indeed based on estimations from a BLOG.

and i neither accept or tolerate that warning because i have the right to write my opinions, sadly if you take it personaly but im not surprised... as the admins/moderators always must have the final words (but that ends now) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.145.38.52 (talk) 21:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Before you wrote that, Guy had already removed the height you are complaining about. The warning was entirely appropriate. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I advise ignoring him. See WP:IAD. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:24, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

removed External links|date=July 2011 tag

I removed the tag since it's been there over a year. It's clearly not having the desired effect. Rather than re-adding the tag, if an editor really cares about this than just fix it yourself, ay? - 124.168.221.199 (talk) 17:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The maintenance tag indicates there is a problem with the article. That the problem has not been resolved in a given period of time does not indicate there is not a problem. If you wish to remove the tag, you will need to demonstrate that the issue is not a problem or resolve the issue. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:01, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I moved the following discussion here from User talk:SummerPhD because it is a continuation of the discussion above. It is desirable to discuss things in one place, not several. Original title was "Please be a little more careful when handing out advice." --Guy Macon (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Your recent comment on my talk page that I may have unintentionally removed a maintenance tag, and telling me to "give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary" was really poor. The edit summary says (removed {{External links|date=July 2011}} tag - over a year and it's still there? probably not doing its job). Please be a little more careful when handing out advice. - 124.168.221.199 (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Penn_Jillette#removed_External_links.7Cdate.3DJuly_2011_tag. - 124.168.221.199 (talk) 17:19, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The notice placed on your talk page was a standardized message used when editors remove maintenance templates from articles without resolving the issue, as was the case with your edit to Penn Jillette. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:06, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems lists the valid reasons for removing a tag. "It's been there over a year" and "Rather than tagging it, just fix it yourself" are not valid reasons for tag removal.

Furthermore, WP:BRD, WP:BB, WP:CON, and WP:EW explain Wikipedia's policy of leaving the article in the state it was in before the dispute while discussing a dispute.

I should also mention that the message that 124.168.221.199 replied to with the comment "Please be a little more careful when handing out advice" was a standard warning template that was carefully constructed by Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings There is a nice list of them at Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Note: I agree with Canoe1967's later removal of the tag in question after trimming the list of external links. His removal clearly meets the Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems standard of "Anyone who sees a tag, but does not see the purported problem with the article...". --Guy Macon (talk) 20:40, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

List peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!

• Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1

I've started a list peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, feedback to further along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1. — Cirt (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured List nomination for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!

1. List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
2. Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1

I've started a Featured List nomination for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.

Participation would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 15:30, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Edit War

It has come to my attention that my editing of this article has gotten me involved in an Edit War. I don't want any bad blood with anyone, I simply felt that since it was common knowledge that Penn Jillette was an Atheist, it should have been listed in the Religion section of the article. My apologies. (TheCorduroyEffect (talk) 16:00, 23 March 2015 (UTC))

It is also pretty well known that Penn Jillette is an atheist who strongly opposes any hint that atheism is a religion, and it is also pretty well known that one of the standard arguments that evangelic christian apologists use in an attempt to refute atheism is "atheism is just another religion. You need faith to believe that there is no God". That's why atheists in general and Penn Jillette in particular should not have the word atheist in an infobox category for religion unless there is a reliable source showing that they consider atheism to be a religion.

In addition, "religion = none (atheist)" doesn't tell the whole story. Yes, Penn rejects theism, but he also rejects all nontheistic religions and a wide variety of non-religious beliefs. "religion = none (atheist)" actually narrows down the meaning of "religion = none" to the point that is is a worse match for Penn's position. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:17, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Atheism is not a religion. It should remain listed as "none", while his belief system can be well discussed within the article body.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 19:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Our latest edit warrior on this topic is is Atshal. I have warned him on his talk page.[13] Twice he has repeated the claim that his position is "supported by extensive template talk" even after being reminded that the discussion at Template talk:Infobox person#Religion means what? was closed with the conclusion "The preferred phrase would be 'Religion: None'", and seems to be having trouble accepting the fact[14] that the consensus of editors here and at template talk is against him. As Penn Jillette himself says, "Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby." --Guy Macon (talk) 15:44, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I might add that the infobox talk pages have a long history of rejecting the arguments of various editors who insist on trying to cram more and more information into the infoboxes, using the same basic argument: "yes this is well covered in the article, but VITALLY IMPORTANT detail MUST be in the infobox as well because mumble mumble (waves hands)." Again and again, the overwhelming consensus has been to put only the bare minimum into the infobox and to expect the reader to read the actual article for the fine details and distinctions. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:22, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

The basic argument here is that atheism (and it is lower case) is not a religion. I describe myself as an atheist, but that is not my religion as I don't have one. "None" is the only appropriate description here, and that seems to be the consensus. --Dmol (talk) 20:48, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I have a friend who is an atheist but has a religion (Unitarian). He once told me that in a world filled with people who either have no god and no religion or have both god and religion, sometimes folks tell him that he cannot possibly exist. I asked him if the opposite was possible; someone believing in god but having no religion. We thought about it and concluded that if a scientist were to come up with repeatable scientific evidence that god exists he could believe in god without having a religion. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:13, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

There are many reasons for saying "Religion = None" rather than "Religion = None (atheist)" in Wikipedia infoboxes.

(Please note that nobody has a problem with the use of "Atheist" in the article text. This only concerns infoboxes.)

There are many reasons for saying "Religion = None" rather than "Religion = None (atheist)" in Wikipedia infoboxes. They include:

It goes against our manual of style for infoboxes.

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Purpose of an infobox says:

• "When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize key facts that appear in the article. The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance."

I might add that the infobox talk pages have a long history of rejecting the arguments of various editors who insist on trying to cram more and more information into the infoboxes, using the same basic argument: "yes this is well covered in the article, but this VITALLY IMPORTANT detail MUST be in the infobox as well because mumble mumble (waves hands)." Again and again, the overwhelming consensus has been to put only the bare minimum into the infobox and to expect the reader to read the actual article for the fine details and distinctions.

There is no consensus for it.

This was discussed at length at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 142#Changing "Religion = none" to "Religion = Atheist" on BLP infoboxes. Opinions were mixed, but the two positions with the most support were "Religion = None" or removing the Religion entry entirely.

A bit later, it was discussed at Template talk:Infobox person#Religion means what?. The result of that discussion in in the closing summary: "The preferred phrase would be 'Religion: None'."

More recently, I did a survey and found that hundreds of Wikipedia pages use "Religion: None" in the infobox and only five use "Religion = None (atheist)"

This reflects the strong consensus for "Religion: None" across multiple Wikipedia pages.

It attempts to shoehorn too much information into a one-word infobox entry

In the article, there is room for nuance and explanation, but in the infobox, we are limited to concise summaries of non-disputed material. Terms such as "atheist", "agnostic", "humanist", "areligious", and "anti-religion" mean different things to different people, but "Religion = None" is perfectly clear to all readers, and they can and should go to the article text to find out which of the subtly different variations of not belonging to a religion applies.

It is highly objectionable to many atheists.

Many atheists strongly object to anything that even hints at calling atheism a religion.[18][19][20][21][22][23][24]

One of the standard arguments that evangelic christian apologists use in an attempt to refute atheism is "atheism is just another religion. You need faith to believe that there is no God".[25][26][27][28][29][30][31] That's why so many atheists object to any hint that atheism is a religion and why before adding "(atheism)" there must be a reliable reliable source that establishes that the individual is [A] An atheist, and [B] considers atheism to be a religion.

In addition, "Religion: None (atheist)" usually fails to tell the whole story. Most atheists do reject theism, but they also reject all nontheistic religions and a wide variety of non-religious beliefs. "Religion = None (atheist)" actually narrows down the meaning of "Religion = None" to the point where in many cases the infobox entry is no longer accurate.

It violates the principle of least astonishment.

Consider what would happen if Lady Gaga decided to list "Banana" as her birth date. We would document that fact in the main article with a citation to a reliable source (along with other sources that disagree and say she was born on March 28, 1986). We would not put "Birth date = 1986 (banana)" in the infobox, because that would cause some readers to stop and say "wait...what? Banana is not a birth date...". Likewise we should not put anything in an infobox that would cause some readers to stop and say "wait...what? Atheism is not a religion..."

In my opinion, "Religion = None" remains the best choice for representing the data accurately and without bias. I also have no objection to removing the religion entry entirely. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Request for Comments

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

libertarianism

How, exactly, is Jillette's bio "part of a series" on libertarianism? Who stuck that onto the page? Turning Jillette's bio into an ad for libartarianism is not appropriate - "Skepticism" and "Atheism" are at least as important to him, and surely "Circus" and "Magic" even more so. 2604:2000:7130:8000:D990:1AD:2CDB:AD8F (talk) 13:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree with 2604:2000:7130:8000:D990:1AD:2CDB:AD8F on this one. As a temporary measure I replaced the libertarianism sidebar with atheism sidebar. Later today I intend to create a magic and magicians sidebar and applying it here and to to pages like Harry Houdini. BTW, all such templates should be listed at Category:Sidebar templates. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Bill Nye, the Science Guy show appearance

Why is his appearance on Bill Nye's show not listed? Here's a link from the light episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C1twpGrxWg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:C457:B035:C6D8:2ECD (talk) 03:20, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

A Half-Assed Discography

( owing to my originals being in a box somewhere. ) Here's at least 4 known releases - dates - are a whole 'nother speculation...

"Never Mind The Sex Pistols Here's Bongs Bass And Bob(What On Earth Were They Thinking?)"

by "Bongos,Bass & Bob".

Penn is "Bongos" , and sings most of the lead vocals.

---

"Tattoo Of Blood" by "Captain Howdy" ( Penn on vocals & co-writer of songs. )

Title relates to a form of "tribal","non-ink",related tattoo.

Penn is seen getting such a tattoo in one of the Penn & Teller books.

---

"The best Song Ever Written" by "Captain Howdy"

(45 rpm single on red vinyl, featuring Penn on the sleeve. )

---

"Money Feeds My Music Machine" by "Captain Howdy" ( Penn on vocals & co-writer of songs.)

Title is a line from the song "My Green Tambourine" by The Lemon Pipers.

---

There is rumour of a fourth "Captain Howdy" release , titled , "Sound The Alarm" , but I've never seen anything beyond a title. ( No track listing , company release , etc. )

Harvey J Satan (talk) 23:34, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Just added all of those. --Distelfinck (talk) 23:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

"Sound The Alarm" is by the "Captain Howdy Show", not by "Captain Howdy". So it's probably unrelated to Jillette. --Distelfinck (talk) 00:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Cheers! Happy to contribute! ( Good catch on "Sound the Alarm" ! ) Harvey J Satan (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Say what?

WTF is a "speed mariachi power trio" ? (First sentence under Career.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 (talk) 00:27, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like a description someone dreamed up. It was unsourced. Now "Bongos, Bass and Bob" is "a band". - SummerPhD^v2.0 05:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Inconsistency

In the section Early Life is the statement, "Jillette became disenchanted with traditional illusionist acts that presented the craft as authentic magic, such as The Amazing Kreskin ..."

"Amazing Kreskin" links to the article on Kreskin, in which we find this statement: "He [Kreskin] has always presented himself as an "entertainer," never as a psychic, who operates on the basis of suggestion, not the paranormal or supernatural."

Clearly one of these articles is wrong. Either Kreskin presented himself as an "authentic magician" or he didn't. If he didn't, I suppose it's possible that Penn may have been mistaken about his presentation -- which seems unlikely -- but if so, that fact should be mentioned. If he did present himself as genuine, then the Kreskin article is in error and needs to be corrected.

I don't know which is true, but it needs to be fixed. Right now the inconsistency casts doubt on the veracity of both articles. 70.89.176.249 (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

It's likely a matter of opinion in both cases and should be worded as such. Jillette may have felt that Kreskin presented it as actual magic and/or Kreskin may have intended to not present it as actual magic. What do the sources say? - SummerPhD^v2.0 05:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

From a letter Jillette wrote to The Skeptical Inquirer:

"I cringe at the memory of begging my parents to buy me the overpriced 'Advanced Fine Edition' of Kreskin’s ESP. For their hard-earned money, I got a pendulum (with cards marked 'Finance,' 'Travel,' 'Career,' and 'Love' -- this is science?), a board, some ESP cards, and a pamphlet -- all junk. The pendulum moved (ideomotor effect, like Ouija boards) and the other stuff just didn’t work. My parents sat with me many evenings and we tried to get some results. We were wasting our time.

After several weeks of disappointing 'experiments,' I stumbled across a book on 'mentalism' (I think it was Dunninger) and realized Kreskin had duped me. I felt humilitated and betrayed. It wasn’t until I was 18 that Teller, James Randi, and Martin Gardner restored my love of science. Since then, a good part of my career has been dedicated to making sure others are not bilked by scumbags like Kreskin."[32]

From the Chicago Tribune:

"Here is where Kreskin becomes adamant, and frankly, somewhat annoyed to be lumped in with psychics: He insists he possesses no paranormal or clairvoyant powers, can't see ghosts and can't channel the great beyond.

However, the course focuses on psychological methods such as jogging lost memories through relaxation techniques or detecting lies through body language and voice inflections.

'Bottom line is that the mind is a remarkable tool,' Kreskin said. 'We all pick up a lot more than we're consciously aware of.' "[33] --Guy Macon (talk) 16:24, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

From the box of Kreskins' ESP board game:

"Extra Sensory Perception is the ability to send or receive thoughts, using only your mind to do so. Do you have this supernatural power? Kreskin, the world’s foremost authority on ESP, thinks you do. You need only to develop it. This fascinating ESP game shows how!

Imagine the fun! Alone, or with a friend, or with a whole party of people, players can reveal their innermost thoughts on love, politics, or any other subject. Kreskin’s ESP game will give you the opportunity to reveal your ESP powers and explore the outer frontiers of the human mind in two scientifically proven ways.

Similar to an Ouija board, this game includes several tricks and a magic pendulum which can be used to determine answers to yes/no questions and even spell out words."[34]

So both parts of the "inconsistency" are true. Kreskin does indeed claim to possesses no paranormal or clairvoyant powers, Milton Bradley's game with Kreskin's name on it did indeed strongly imply that ESP exists and that the game would reveal them, and Penn Jillette was indeed fooled by the game as a child. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:24, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Fingernail

The article says "Note that in India a painted red fingernail on one hand (typically in children) indicates that one's vaccinations are up to date." I've never heard this. Does anyone have a reference to back this up?128.2.222.72 04:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Another American entertainer who sported a red-painted fingernail was Sammy Davis Jr. With him, it was a sign of membership in the luciferian 'Church of Satan' founded by Anton LaVey. Many references on the web confirm this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.72.111.114 (talk) 12:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Accusations of anti-Catholicism

This needs rewording. Calling Penn Anti-Catholic is like calling Richard Dawkins Anti-Catholic. Penn is, as he says, "beyond atheism." He is personally opposed to religion - all of it, not just Catholicism. If we're going to put a note specifically about the Anti-Mother-Teresa thing I think the heading should be referring to that specifically. Being against the sick beliefs of an individual is different than being against a religion.

Also, why was that thing about John London removed? He was the guy fired for making a death threat to Penn over this subject. [35] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.13.30.201 (talk • contribs) 03:35, March 9, 2007 (UTC)

There were, and probably still are, people opposed to Mother Teresa of Calcutta. More often than not, their opposition is based on faulty information, downright lies, or because of who and what she represents. The same can be said for anti-Catholicism. It was Bishop Sheen who said, “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate ‘The Catholic Church’, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.” --Nosehair2200 (talk) 11:28, 3 September 2023 (UTC)