Talk:Jason David Frank/Archive 1

Archive 1

WPBiography Rating

I rated this article as Start class. It has substantial spelling and grammatical errors, not to mention a confusing section on a feud with a hip-hop singer that reads like a MySpace comment. User:WarriorPoet

Poor and Confusing Trivia

Trivia points like "He is also one of the most famous rangers to date." Are confusing and irelevant to the actor and are only relevant to the characters that he portrays. These either need to be reworded or removed. Trivia like that should be put in the profile for "Tommy". User:Rusty1989 7/17/06

• Then why not do it yourself? SilverThorn

Native American

Is he part Native American, because he doesn't appear to be fully Native American? Michael 08:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Mother's maiden name was Sater. Doesn't seem Native American at all. Mad Jack 17:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't dispute this fact at all. Jack, many times, Native Americans have surnames that are completely Anglo-Saxon due to the fact that many have married people of European descent, as well as the fact that many names have been Americanized. I don't know how much of Frank's descent is Native American, but I wouldn't automatically deem it false. Michael 22:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, "Sater" I think is a Jewish last name. So is "Frank" - if we go by the most famous person to bear that name (Anne). Maybe his character was supposed to be Native American (which is definitely possible - but obviously doesn't mean the actor is) but he himself isn't? Is there a good source out there for his "Native American"-ness, so to speak? I haven't looked for myself (too lazy :) )Mad Jack 01:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, Frank would typically be German (therefore lending to Jewish, as the middle name David would). Sater also sounds as if it could possibly be Jewish, but that's one of the slightly more ambiguous ones...Though it's not much, this was on "You Tube" in some person's comment-that he is 3/4 Native American and 1/4 Greek, which is mentioned on this website. [1] I couldn't find much on the site. You might want to look. The sit is pretty weird... Michael 01:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

1/4 Greek! Now I know that's not true - if he had any Greek ancestry at all, the chaps over at List of Greek Americans would've snapped him up and had him listed by now, not to mention added to the category. The Greek page is my litmus test for knowing a celebrity is not Greek - if they don't know about him - the celeb themselves doesn't! OK, I promise I will look around the net tomorrow, but this is starting to smell to me like something where, say, someone assumed he was Native American because he played a Native American. Mad Jack 01:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I found it - look under "Info", then "Biography" and then "Misc". It says "Heritage: I've heard quarter Greek " ! "I've heard" by some webmaster doesn't really pass the reliability test. But like I said, I'll look into his background later. Mad Jack 01:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, that's not his official site? I wouldn't have known. That website is pretty much a complete mess. Everything is overlapping, and links, for the most part, are not accessible. Michael 01:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Did you ever find anything on him? Michael 04:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, no sorry, I didn't. When I get off the Italian's back and start deleting people from the Native Americans category, I'll get to Frank and probably delete him off it. :) Mad Jack 04:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh...That's just splendid... Michael 04:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

LOL! What's the problem, though? We don't even seem to have a reliable source that says he has any Native American ancestry, much less that he is a "Native American". I thought you were all for deleting content that was completely unverified Mad Jack 06:20, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

But if there's reason to believe there may be some (which I have), I tend to be a bit less stringent. Look into it when you get the chance, though. Michael 06:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Based off what you said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Greek list editors added him to the list based off this conversation. Michael 06:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

No, they haven't yet. Psst.... I just found out that Sylvester Stallone may have a Greek great-grandparent (his mother isn't Italian - a mix of Jewish, French and Greek, it seems) - don't tell anyone, though, or the Greeks might adopt him. Mad Jack 07:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure they've already sent people out to monitor this conversation if they're that...zealous... Michael 21:08, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

His mother's maiden name is Soter. His maternal grandfather was born in Greece. His family moved to the US around 1915 and shortened their name from Soteropoulos to Soter. Jason's grandfather was born Vasili Soteropoulos and his name was Americanized to William (Bill) Soter. Bill Soter was the youngest son and the next-to-last child in a very large family. Jason's maternal grandmother is Polish and the ancestry on his father's side is Italian, I believe. I'm not sure about the Native American ancestry on his Dad's side, but I know there is none on his mother's side.

What does everyone mean he doesn't "look" Native American? Do you mean the stereotypical darkened skin, look straight black hait type? I have friends who are half and quater Native AMerican, sometimes even mixed tribe, and they look as white as my all-white causcasian friends. SilverThorn

Power Rangers; Wild Force

Shouldnt there be a mention to who he played in the Wild Force episode Forever Red? I know we all must know who he played i mean its obvious but should it still be recorded?IamCool316 03:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that should be mentioned here, that is more of something to put on the Tommy Oliver page. Chakra Das

Well it is a character he played. He had a cameo role in Wild Force and if memory serves me right he was credited for it too. IamCool316 22:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Oddly, his page lacks much of anything on his time on Power Rangers. Ironically, this is not true of the other originals (St. John, Johnson, Jones, Trang, or Yost). JPG-GR 04:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

None of them played as none of them played the color red!! Charlene Copley 08:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Feud with John Tui

What kind of crap is this? -Chris —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.254.16.201 (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

I had Read some where there was a Little Beef Between John Tui and Jason Because John Tui did not want Jason to be on Power Rangers SPD. Tui Stated that Jason was old and washed up and when i put it in both there Article some Punk ass comptuer Geeks took the shit off stop fucking with shit

Rapper

I Got more Sources that Jason was going to put out a Rap Album sometime in January But some Computer Nerd Took the Crap off again leave shit alone —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.210.229.230 (talk) 02:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

Hey, man, unless you can point out where this stuff is located on a reputable website to validate its authenticity, and help to correct the grammer and spelling of the information, the information will only be considered as gossip and thus unvalidated. Unvalidated stuff has no place on an encyclopedia.Daijinryuu 09:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Price is Right info

1. What pricing game did he play? 2. What did he do in the Showcase Showdown?--BigMac1212 03:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd like to see a citation. Taric25 17:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

June 23rd MMA match results?

I've been looking all over the place for the results to the match that was supposed to happen on Saturday. The venue's official website (The Williamson County Pavilion, wctb.org) has no listing for such an event happening. MatthewMeta 17:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

-Theres word going round that he backed right before he was to go out (which I think is shit.)Don't quote me on that though. Jessi aka riseabovethis (Aug 20, 08 1:06 am est)

"American Karate" article - why was it deleted?

Why was the American Karate article turned into a red link? Angie Y. 17:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Repeating the announcement

so JDF is with MMA. I get it but what i don't get is why we have it repeated. The original announcement was on Aug 21. I checked the sources on the Sept articles. They aren't new sources. Just recapping and quoting the original release. They don't mention any specific up coming fights just that again he has signed with Suckerpunch. I'm going to merge the two sentences. If he announces his first fight date that's something new but as it is it's just idiocy.198.96.34.35 (talk) 14:38, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

'On August 21, 2009, Frank announced having signed with the SuckerPunch organization.[6] It was announced on September 2, 2009 that Frank is ready to become a professional Mixed martial arts fighter.[7][8]'

Professional or Amateur?

Thus far, his two fights have been at Lonestar Beatdowns. If you go to the website for the Lonestar Beatdown (found here), the posters for these events say they are run by the United States Amateur Combat Association. That would seem to indicate that he is fighting as an amateur, not as a professional. Fanpuck33 (talk) 06:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

That is true, his fights so far have all been amateur ones. However, he is scheduled to make his pro debut on May 22 at UWC 8: Judgement Day. Trunks8719 (talk) 19:03, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

On the UWC website it states in an article that he is 3-0 and that it will be an amateur fight not professional. It also mentions that Jason plans to turn professional in the near future. (found here) It will be a special attraction fight for promotional purposes and will be in the beginning of the show not the main card (found here) Solidmemory (talk) 00:47, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Martial Arts fight in September.

What's going on with that. I read a fight got cancelled July 2011 and his next fight would be September. So far no one posted any new information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.69.234 (talk) 04:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Where's the Belcher fight?

I notice on Alan Belcher's page it notes the following fight:

Win 5–2 David Frank Submission (punches) XFL: EK 19: Battle at the Brady 3 February 18, 2006 2 1:37 Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States

This would have been a professional bout. Why does it not appear on Frank's wikipedia page?

Are David Frank and Jason David Frank the same person? If not, the link on Belcher's page ought to be altered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evansgambit (talk • contribs) 20:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Current weight

Although we can reasonably assume he was within the light heavyweight range back in December 2010 when he was scheduled for a fight at that weight class, I wonder what has happened in the 4 years since then. Just how current is the 214lbs he is listed as being? Can we get a reference for it please?

I ask because he just challenged CM Punk to a fight, and Punk stated that he would definitely not be light heavy-weight, that he would probably be middleweight or even as low as welterweight. So unless JDF is thinking Punk will bulk up to fight him (and Punk seems to have trouble putting on muscle compared to other wrestlers) this might mean that JDF is lighter these days, perhaps below 200.

If we can get a reference for his weight, we can see if any more recent references exist for it. Ranze (talk) 16:10, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Super Power Beatdown

The info about the two episodes Frank did on Super Power Beatdown was taken off. Why was that? Jedi Striker (talk) 00:43, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

His faith as a Christian

Do we really need to mention someone's faith, unless it is like a big part of who they are, like Richard Gere or Madonna? Some guy with the same IP but no username keeps adding, "He is a devout Christian" near the top of the page. Jason's big things are being the former Ranger Tommy Oliver and his martial arts. What's your opinion? Charlene

There's no reason why it couldn't be in the article, except, that, it's not cited to a reliable source. Mad Jack 06:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, he did create a clothing line called Jesus Didn't Tap. That would seem to indicate his faith is a pretty important part of who he is. He can be heard talking about it in the second half of the interview found here. Fanpuck33 (talk) 06:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't that count as an advert for the clothing line? Also, awful, insensitive name. It's hard to tap out when your arms are nailed down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.141.52.251 (talk) 02:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Hahaha, that's what I was thinking! lol

I would think Jason David Frank himself is a reputable source. If you watch his Q&As from past cons, he talks about his faith repeatedly. Southernsmiles (talk) 13:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Copycatting

If anyone knows much about JDF, can he/she rewrite this article in original content? So far, most of this stuff comes of of the official website for Rising Sun Karte Academy. Daijinryuu 10:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

This article definitely needs to be rewritten. Southernsmiles (talk) 13:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Children

the reason for the editing confusion a few edits back is the infobox says 2 kids, the article lists 3. Someone tried to make the articles match the infobox. If anyone knows which is actually correct help us out and fix it.198.96.34.35 (talk) 14:48, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

He has a son named Jacob. He talks about this son on the talk show Regis a long time ago. He has a daughter named Skye. There's a picture of the two of them on his official Facebook page. He has a daughter named Jenna. She's in most of his My Morphin Life vlog videos. Whether these are biologically his, I don't know. But these three are confirmed as a part of his life. Southernsmiles (talk) 13:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Intended edit summary for 06:29, 12 January 2019

1. You’re confusing Wormhole and History
2. Tommy didn’t make any appearance whatsoever in History
3. Jason David Frank wasn’t even asked to come back for Wormhole
4. In Wormhole, Tommy is voiced by Jeff Parazzo and never appears unmorphed--Fradio71 (talk) 06:32, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Native American

Wcześniej w artykule była informacja: "is of both Apache and Navajo Native American descent", ale nie wiadomo dlaczego ktoś ją usunął.

According to this interview he did in 2009, he has no Native American ancestry. I believe he says it in part 3 or 4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj4q77Aph6M —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.13.106 (talk) 04:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I know this is a decade late, but first he claims Native American ancestry in the 1990s and now in the 2000s-10s, he doesn't. I hate it when people claim to be something they're not. He does resemble a Mestizo from Mexico, but he might found out something about his heritage at the time of the interview. 2605:E000:100D:C32F:FC2C:3C87:9E6D:7D17 (talk) 16:39, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

death

can we get a personal life and any details on his death I need a reliable source that says he committed suicide 159.118.236.219 (talk) 14:49, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

His trainer posted on Facebook that he had died and this is someone who knows the guy personally. However, I've yet to see any major news source confirming. DarkLordMordred (talk) 15:47, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

With something as serious as death, we really need more confirmation before we decide to include it. We don't necessarily know how close the trainer is to JDF, and all of the sources I've seen at this time are too small and niche to be considered reliable with something like this. I'm not saying if it's true or false, just that we need more confirmation.CarterLennon (talk) 15:58, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Lock it up

We need to protect this article until we get some confirmation of his death. 173.218.98.78 (talk) 16:05, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Put in a report if you think it is warranted. Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 16:06, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Yahoo is reporting his death.--Folengo (talk) 16:14, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022

Died: November 20,2022 209.149.216.89 (talk) 16:42, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done We're waiting for a reliable source to confirm. gobonobo ^{+ c} 16:44, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022 (3)

He died! 69.222.134.208 (talk) 17:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@69.222.134.208: Already done by another editor, however, next time please provide a reliable source and put you request in a "change ______ to ______" format. Most editors will decline your request if you don't do it that way.--Rockchalk717 17:25, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022 (2)

Jason David Frank died 11/19/2022. 72.240.16.170 (talk) 16:51, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

[[subst:ESp|ad}} MadGuy7023 (talk) 17:26, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Death

Very early reports, but appears to be confirmed. Death by suicide, not sure if it was today or yesterday.[2][3] - Floydian ^τ _¢ 17:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@Rockchalk717: since when is TMZ unreliable for celebrity deaths (link to WP:RSN discussion)? Also, define "Major news outlet". - Floydian ^τ _¢ 17:14, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@Floydian: Per WP:TMZ most editors consider it low quality. There is no consensus on reliability but it's typically avoided. Major news outlet is pretty self explanatory, but if you insist on an actual definition, most national news outlets (CNN, ABC News, Fox News, New York Times, etc.) or local TV stations and newspapers, like the KTLA source that was added by another editor.--Rockchalk717 17:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

So the Fox News of LA is more reliable than the outlet that purely focusses on celebrity news? Doesn't make sense to me, but then again I don't normally work on celebrity articles so I'm wholly uninformed. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 17:28, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@Floydian: Based on Wikipedia policies. But for full disclosure, based on my personal opinion, not really. TMZ has been busted for reporting on rumors on multiple occasions. That's what most editors use as their reasoning, so I just go ahead and err on the side of caution and stick to it being considered unreliable despite my personal opinions because I enjoy TMZ, I even did their tour they offer in Hollywood once, but I ignore my personal opinions when I log in on here.--Rockchalk717 17:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Can we use his full name?

The article says "Frank died on November 20, 2022.[33]"

We're not even sure about the date yet... but it's not right if you only say, "Frank." It should say "Jason David Frank." 173.218.98.78 (talk) 17:49, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

It's common parlance in English to refer to a person by their last name on repeated occurrences. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 17:51, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@173.218.98.78: Per WP:SURNAME, a person should be referred to be their last name after the initial mention of their full name. The only exception is if someone has a single name as a stage name, like Eminem for example.--Rockchalk717 19:18, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022 (4)

He isn't dead. The citation isn't reputable. 77.137.79.42 (talk) 18:37, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@77.137.79.42: A multitude of major outlets have confirmed his death. Going forward please make sure your request are in "change ______ to ______" format. Most editors will deny requests that are not in that format.--Rockchalk717 19:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022 (5)

The cited source does not confirm suicide - therefore the cause needs removing or citing correctly. 95.150.126.60 (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@95.150.126.60: I removed this a little bit ago before even seeing this request.--Rockchalk717 19:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022 (7)

add his cause of death sucidie 2600:1700:BD60:1600:892A:20A2:C361:C609 (talk)

@2600:1700:BD60:1600:892A:20A2:C361:C609: Denied. No reliable source exists (TMZ is not considered reliable) confirming it was a suicide.--Rockchalk717 22:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022 (6)

IS: My Morphing Life 2014–present SHOULD BE: 2014-2018. + Insert Pretty Signature Here + 19:48, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Not done. Provide a reliable source saying it ended in 2018.--Rockchalk717 22:43, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 November 2022 (8)

At the end of the Personal Life section, “In” should be edited to “On” 2600:1012:B1C4:7CE9:3987:FF6C:F34E:B4A1 (talk) 23:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The last sentence says "Frank died in November 2022, at the age of 49." That appears grammatically correct to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

TMZ - Death by Suicide

As usual, TMZ was the first to report his death and the cause of death. They are reliable source when it comes to celebrity deaths at least. They're reporting that he died by suicide. 73.65.212.57 (talk) 21:26, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

@73.65.212.57: WP:TMZ. We avoid TMZ as a source. There is no confirmation from anybody other than TMZ that it was suicide.--Rockchalk717 22:08, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Let's try to add more sources, probably at least 3 or 4, because this is a suicide case. Preferably if there is any statement from the local police department. Chongkian (talk) 00:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Age Inacuracy

"Jason David Frank is a 6th Degree Black Belt as of 1998 with over 25 years experience in the martial arts." That's interesting. He was born in 1973, so that would mean that he was battling the Putty Patrol straight out of the womb.

• Ever think this needs to be reworded, as in "with 25 years overall in experience? The dude is almost 33 years old, he's been practicing since he was like 4 or 5 I heard. SilverThorn

This guy is not 33 years old. Alkqn (talk) 02:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

R.I.P. Jason David Frank

We said goodbye to Jason David Frank. He is a beloved actor and martial artist. We will always remember him. he will always remain in our hearts. 82.46.63.220 (talk) 15:52, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

We need something more concrete, like a credible news report, before editing this page accordingly. Aresef (talk) 16:04, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Remembering Jason David Frank 1973-2022 as Tommy Oliver from Power Rangers

To the Wikipedia staff and users. I heard the news on Wikipedia that Jason David Frank the Power Ranger actor and martial arts fighter who I've met at Salt Lake City Utah FanX convention, has died this year in 2022. I want to let everyone on Wikipedia know that his death by hanging has been very hard on me and I'm shocked that he took his own life. I don't know what to say anymore.

I met Jason David Frank about 2 to 3 times face to face at Salt Lake City Utah FanX convention in my Lord Zedd costume even though I was a random stranger to him. He didn't talk to me very much when I talked to him at the table booth. It was an honor to be able to talk to him even though he was silent to me. I'll never forget what he did for my childhood and inspired me to take Tai Kwon Do at my school academy which I won up to a yellow belt and got me excited to exercise my body and inspired me to make my own superhero stories. May he rest in power. CrosswalkX (talk) 13:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Death

Can we confirm he took his own life? 90.254.56.77 (talk) 00:39, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@90.254.56.77: As soon as a reliable source (NOT TMZ) comes out saying so, then yes. Until then, no.--Rockchalk717 00:54, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

The Guardian claims that "multiple sources" are claiming it was suicide. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 01:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Floydian: We don't edit based on unnamed sources. I've seen multiple places say that exact same thing. Unless one of these news sources state who specifically has said this, it being a suicide should be left out. And even then it needs to be a family, his rep, or a law enforcement statement.--Rockchalk717 02:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

That 'multiple sources' words are just a repetitive from various medias citing one another. We need the official press-release statement from his management, close family or local police department for the exact cause of his death. Chongkian (talk) 06:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Chongkian: @Rockchalk717: - I've found one source, E! News Online, dated yesterday which states: "The cause of the star's death was not made public."[4]

I have no clue how TMZ or other sites would be able to obtain alleged suicide information if that's the case... Clear Looking Glass (talk) 07:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Clear Looking Glass and Chongkian: Exactly. I primarily edit sports pages and we exactly the same thing with transactions. By excluding the suicide we're not necessarily TMZ is wrong, just that we need a better source saying it was.--Rockchalk717 14:11, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

No, sorry, this isn't correct. First, Chongkian, you do not need an official statement from his management or close family; that's a higher standard than used for any other fact.Second, as to "TMZ is not a reliable source"—that's not an official policy. In fact, in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources (an essay), TMZ is listed, and it is explicitly stated that (1) there is no consensus as to whether TMZ is a reliable source, and (2) it is recommended to explicitly attribute information to TMZ if no other source is available. That is not the same as "do not use TMZ as a source." Relatedly, if other reliable sources treat TMZ as a reliable source or refer to "multiple other sources" without identifying them, I'm not actually sure it's a Wikipedia editor's place to say "not good enough." That doesn't work in practice: News organizations aren't always great at noting that their information comes from third-party sources, even unnamed third-party sources, so, notably, the rule weirdly punishes a source for listing where it obtained information. If you guys want, we can do a RfC on this.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 23:06, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@50.86.94.196: That is not correct, we 100% do need an official statement from his management team or law enforcement. Even if TMZ was considered a reliable source, the TMZ article claims they got their information from "law enforcement sources" but didn't name a name. We don't report on anonymous sources on Wikipedia and that's what TMZ is saying they have.--Rockchalk717 00:27, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

I feel it needs to be made 100% clear though, we're not saying TMZ is wrong and that it wasn't a suicide, what are saying is need a better source than TMZ.--Rockchalk717 00:30, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Show me the policy that imposes a wholesale prohibition on sources that rely on anonymous sources. Where does it say that? Or, better, where does any policy say that a cause of death must come from an "official statement from [a] management team or law enforcement." My concern is that you are saying we need an official statement/better source/source that doesn't rely on anonymous sources, when the question is really what does Wikipedia policy say?--50.86.94.196 (talk) 00:46, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@50.86.94.196: WP:RSBREAKING which literally says "distrust distrust anonymous sources" and to give time "for investigative authorities to make official announcements".--Rockchalk717 03:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Two big examples of why these policies exist (or at least why we avoid TMZ) are the deaths of Michael Jackson and Kobe Bryant. In both instances TMZ thought being the first was more important than being right, and in the case of Kobe Bryant, they broke it before Kobe's family had even been informed which really pissed off law enforcement and his family. Doesn't matter if it's a death, sports transaction, or whatever per that policy, no citations based on anonymous sources.--Rockchalk717 03:48, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

You're misleadingly quoting RSBreaking to imply that official statements are required: By that logic, if there is no official statement, Wikipedia couldn't include the information. That's obviously nonsense. The portion of the article you're quoting is describing good practice for journalists that warrant sometimes waiting a day or two after news breaks. It has been 5 days since the TMZ report; we're out of the day-or-two territory. And that portion absolutely does not say that Wikipedia can't rely on a reliable source that itself used anonymous sources. You've made that policy up in your head, perhaps because you think it would be good practice. But what you think would be good and what Wikipedia policy requires are, clearly, two different things.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 07:58, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@50.86.94.196: You're seriously accusing me of misquoting that policy when I literally copied and pasted from the policy? That policy isn't advice tor journalists I'm not sure where in the hell that is coming from. That entire page is about identifying reliable sources. I'm done discussing this with you when you clearly and obviously have no clue what you're talking about and your RFC is gonna end with the cause still not being included. You have a multitude of experienced editors who have commented on this talkpage and have reverted the actual page to remove TMZ and you keep pushing for TMZ to be accepted as a source.--Rockchalk717 14:37, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

The idea that an official statement is required from a primary source seems a bit extreme. Journalism itself relies on anonymous sources and the ability to protect anonymous sources. Much of the secondary information we receive from [name your favorite news source] is brought to us by virtue of anonymous sources talking to reporters/journalists. The difference between a reliable/credible source and one that is not is independent verification--did the reporter do their due diligence in obtaining independent verification from multiple sources? The argument that TMZ is not credible because they don't independently verify their information may be valid; the argument that we can only edit based on primary source information--and not on secondary news reports--is not. Vthrowaway (talk) 18:56, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@Rockchalk717: I didn't say misquote; I said you were quoting the passage out of context, and I added context. I also would second everything Throwaway said. And if you're trying to angrily dismiss the RfC, I get it, but so far, while obviously it's consensus and not voting that matters, by my count, a majority of editors seem to be saying to include the information. (And I have no preference as to whether TMZ or the Guardian is cited.) I understand emotions can run high on these types of things, so I'm perfectly happy to cease discussing the issue in this section and just let the RfC play out.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 20:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Why was wife Tammi Frank removed from the page? She is still his wife..

Please add back his personal life his former partners. Tammi Frank was his 2nd wife and Shawna Frank was his first wife. 98.127.134.78 (talk) 12:30, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@98.127.134.78: Her name was removed because she is not a notable person. Non-notable people shouldn't be mentioned by name on Wikipedia.--Rockchalk717 00:22, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Non-notable people shouldn't be mentioned by name on Wikipedia. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 04:03, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know about that. Certainly non-notable people aren't put in the Infobox, but I think that there's nothing wrong with mentioning them within the text of an article about a notable person. At least, I don't know of any Wikipedia guideline that prevents it. Needs to be looked at on a case by case basis, I think. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 17:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

People who have not been established as notable, and people who have been established as not-notable are frequently mentioned on Wikipedia when the mention is relevant to an article on a topic which is notable. This is normal and entirely within policy and guidance. If Jason David Frank is notable, and it is relevant that he had a wife or two, they may be mentioned by name in the article about him as long as their names are reliably known. and have been cited in acceptably reliable sources. It is the subject of an article that must be notable, the content must be relevant. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 10:24, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 18:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

RFC: Cause of Death

TMZ has reported that, per anonymous "law-enforcement sources," Jason David Frank died by suicide. It appears TMZ is the only source that basing this claim on its original reporting. Several other outlets have also reported that Frank died by suicide, but they attribute the information to either TMZ (as with Consequence, Page Six, and Yahoo News, to name just a few), or, in the case of the Guardian, "multiple reports". Should the article state that Frank died by suicide at all, given that only TMZ has originally reported the cause of death?--50.86.94.196 (talk) 01:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Update: The suicide news has also been reported—independently—by MMA Fighting, though it too relies on anonymous sources. "Jason David Frank — best known for his role as Tommy, the original Green Ranger — in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, has died at the age of 49 by suicide. Multiple people close to the situation confirmed the news to MMA Fighting on Sunday."--50.86.94.196 (talk) 20:18, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

• Yes. User:Rockchalk717 has suggested that TMZ is not a reliable source and that, even if it is a reliable source, Wikipedia does not include claims attributed to anonymous sources. As to the first point, though an essay, I think Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources advises a correct approach when it comes to TMZ: explicitly attribute the reporting to TMZ. (That essay also states that there is no consensus as to whether TMZ is a reliable source or not.) I also don't think the second point has merit: while anonymous sources might be an indicator of non-reliability, they're also, necessarily, employed quite frequently in both political and crime reporting, and, at least to my knowledge, no Wikipedia policy imposes a wholesale prohibition on relying on sources that themselves rely on anonymous sources. User:Rockchalk717 has also stated that "we 100% . . . need an official statement from his management team or law enforcement" in order to include the cause of death in this article. Again, to my knowledge, no Wikipedia policy would support that claim, and the plethora of articles on suicide victims that explicitly discuss the cause of death without an "official statement" from family or law enforcement would suggest that the principle is not enforced in practice.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 01:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
• I saw other reports he and tammi got into an argument and he hung himself in the bathroom Tammi called police hours after not hearing from JDF.47.205.254.217 (talk) 03:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@47.205.254.217: Just like the suicide itself that is unconfirmed report from TMZ based on their "law enforcement sources" AKA anonymous sources.--Rockchalk717 03:41, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:RSBREAKING and WP:TMZ.--Rockchalk717 03:35, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  WP:TMZ, an essay, does not say not to cite TMZ. Rather, it says: "Because TMZ frequently publishes articles based on rumor and speculation without named sources, it is recommended to explicitly attribute statements to TMZ if used. When TMZ is the only source for a piece of information, consider also whether the information constitutes due or undue weight, especially when the subject is a living person." As to WP:RSBREAKING, it says: "It is better to wait a day or two after an event before adding details to the encyclopedia . . ." . It has not been "a day or two": It has been eight days since Frank's death and five day's since TMZ's report. The event is no longer breaking news, and, notably, no retraction or correction has been issued.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 07:50, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

TMZ does not retract stories even when proven wrong. Them not publishing a retraction isn't very surprising. I apparently (once again) need to make it clear that myself and other editors aren't saying that he didn't die by suicide, just that we need a source that isn't widely accepted on Wikipedia as unreliable. Any experienced editor will avoid TMZ.--Rockchalk717 14:49, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

• Why not just wait until some cast-iron reliable sources report the cause of death? After all, this is an encyclopedia, not a news medium. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:54, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  I'd be open to considering whether or not the cause of death is notable (although given that so many sources picked up on TMZ's reporting, I'd lean towards saying it is), but I think the notion that many/any "cast-iron reliable sources" are going to be investigating and reporting on the suicide of a former star of a kid's tv show is a bit fanciful.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 09:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

• Well, if no reliable source (which TMZ is pretty obviously not for anything important like a cause of death) confirms this in its own voice then it shouldn't be included. Rockchalk717 is wrong that we require sources to cite their own sources, but is right that this particular source is unreliable. Maybe we'll have to wait eight years, rather than eight days, for a reliable source to write about this, or maybe it will never happen, but we should not write about it on the basis of such an unreliable source. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:29, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  Would you think that an MMA Fighting (part of SB Nation) citation would be sufficient? [5] (Notably, it does have some of the same "problems" that the TMZ source has, in that they rely on anonymous sources.)--23:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC) 50.86.94.196 (talk) 23:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@50.86.94.196 and Phil Bridger: Don't twist my words, I did not say we require sources to name their sources, just that we should shy away citing sources that use phrases like "sources say", especially early after news breaks. I'm not sure about SB Nation honestly. I feel like I've seen it go both ways. I think when I was new to Wikipedia I tried to use it as a source and got reverted by admin, but I know I've seen others use it and I have seen MMA fighting specifically used in UFC articles. With there being a secondary source that has not edited or retracted the article I do feel more comfortable including the suicide.--Rockchalk717 05:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought that was what you meant when you said "no citations based on anonymous sources"—I also may have lost track of what you were saying with what some other users / IP editors were arguing. My mistake. It sound like we're relatively close to a consensus on this! If you'd prefer, I'm still okay explicitly attributing the factual claim to reports by those sources (a la WP:TMZ, but obviously for TMZ and MMA Fighting), if that would ease your concern about sounding too definitive.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 14:16, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

• I would suggest avoiding TMZ, per is not that reliable, and attribute the comment to The Guardian. That is a weak recommendation since, afaik, as the statement is not strange or weird.Cinadon36 09:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  I realized the original question I posed was unclear: The question isn't really whether to cite TMZ or another source (although I do think citing the Guardian would work here); the question is "Should the article state that Frank died by suicide at all, given that only TMZ has originally reported the cause of death?" --50.86.94.196 (talk) 09:20, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

• The article should reflect what reliable sources say. The Guardian is a generally reliable source, so that should be sufficient for including cause of death in the article. If necessary, then in-text attribution to The Guardian and TMZ should address any concerns. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  I very much agree with this, and I think this comment sums up my view better than I have.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 20:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

• References based on anonymous statements are unreliable, regardless of the source that publishes them (never mind undefinable bogus terms such as "generally reliable"). However, one may add the fact that sources have published anonymous statements, but not in a way that materially affects the wikitext. I suggest a footnote, right after "as of [use template {{as of}}] (date) the cause of death was undetermined." The footnote could state, "However, entertainment/gossip news site TMZ, quoting anonymous sources, has reported that the death was a suicide.[add reference]" The use of {{as of}} in wikitext is important: the info should be edited as soon as a cause of death is established. 65.88.88.201 (talk) 17:31, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  Generally reliable means something specific on Wikipedia. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:58, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  Means nothing. The link for "generally reliable" points back to WP:RS, a self-reference. The "explanation" is based on reputation, itself a subjective quality based on evaluations that may have nothing to do with the specific citation. All references are specific, and very rarely conducive to generalization. "Reputed" past reliability, is not a predictor. Actual, rather than reputed, "reliable" sources simply do not exist. What may exist is a reliable reference, and that requires more work than relying on some "general" guidelines or a list. 65.88.88.201 (talk) 19:47, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  The self-reference is intentional, it's Wikipedia policy. You seem to be arguing that Wikipedia, contrary to its policies, shouldn't require reliable sources, because "'reliable' sources simply do not exist." While a quixotic view, that's fine, but it has nothing to do with this conversation.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 20:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

  I see. Wikipedia policy says that acceptable sources should be generally reliable. The only clue to a definition of "generally reliable" is a link back to the policy. Of course this is intentional: "generally reliable" is undefinable, a useless term in practice. It is correct to say that reliable sources do not exist, but reliable references certainly do. And that is why the present case has to be examined on its merits, like every single case. Anonymous sources are unacceptable as article-building references; however they may have a place in an article depending on the context, and after their provenance is emphasized. 64.18.11.69 (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Tammie Frank, who was married to Jason, gave the details on what happened the night he died. She said that he did in fact commit suicide and said what went on between them before it happened. Jason David Frank's Wife Reveals 'Power Rangers' Star Died by Suicide: 'He Was Not Without His Demons' And1987 (talk) 00:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Update: The suicide news has also been reported—independently—by MMA fighting. "Jason David Frank — best known for his role as Tommy, the original Green Ranger — in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, has died at the age of 49 by suicide. Multiple people close to the situation confirmed the news to MMA Fighting on Sunday." I suspect that this RfC should remain since Rockchalk has taken the position that a source that cites anonymous sources is inherently unreliable and unfit for citation, but it seems to me that not very many have echoed that view.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 20:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

• Wait. Because of the potential for emotional harm to the subject's family and friends if incorrect information is posted here regarding the circumstances of his death, posting those circumstances should wait until the story is more fully told in the press. At that point, it can be stated what is known about the circumstances, with citations given for the specific details that have been reported. I'd give it at least two weeks. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 15:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

  Are those factors generally considered pertinent? I feel as though you're creating a higher standard for "upsetting facts" that isn't supported by WP:RS. If anything, the fact that Frank has died lowers the standard, since WP:BLP no longer applies. We now have one source that's almost certainly considered reliable (MMA Fighting, part of SB Nation) and one source that's at least of disputed reliability (TMZ) reporting his suicide, and we have several reliable sources that have reported on the fact that his suicide has been reported on. I think that meets the RS standard.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 16:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

  I would just like to point out that WP:BLP also applies to the "recently deceased". See this section. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:56, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

  My mistake! Noted. To clarify: I'd still think that the MMA Fighting + TMZ sourcing (plus the Guardian?) is enough --50.86.94.196 (talk) 18:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

• The Guardian is a scrupulously reliable source, and sufficient without getting into the reliability of "MMA Fighting" or "TMZ" and their reliability. That being said, given that even The Guardian equivocates, I think the best approach is to write "According to The Guardian" and then exactly quote what The Guardian says. --Jayron32 12:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

  I'm okay with that, good suggestion. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 16:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

  Well, The Guardian's "scrupulous reliability" is a matter of opinion, not fact. I have come across several instances of unreliability (i.e. inaccurate, irrelevant, non-timely, or biased reporting). In most such instances there were subsequent corrections, but those were far less prominently displayed, and often after the news cycle or topical interest had moved on. Some group of people or all the people may develop a consensus that the property is reliable, but that doesn't make it so. Not only is it not perpetually reliable, there is no way to predict reliability of this or any other source based on past performance, regardless of expectations. OTOH, the suggestion to use "according to" and quote the press report is imo excellent, and should be a norm. There is also a case to be made that in specialized reporting (like something related to MMA fighting), the specialist news properties may offer not only better, but also more accurate coverage than the general press. I would not overlook them out of hand. 65.88.88.201 (talk) 20:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

  Reliability =/= perfection. If your standard is "only sources which have never said anything that was later shown to be wrong at any time, even once" than Wikipedia would have zero reliable sources to work from. The Guardian is generally regarded (not by me, or you, or any one person in this discussion, but in general, out there in the world, by people whose job it is to assess these things) as one of the most reliable news sources in the English speaking world. When I say it is "scrupulously reliable" I am saying that it's as good as we're going to get, which it is generally agreed to be. The standard of "I found something wrong a small countable number of times" is not a reasonable standard by which to judge reliability. --Jayron32 13:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

  Jayron32, the only issue I have with your suggestion is that I think the wording would end up a bit clumsy without much benefit. That is, it seems to me that the options are rough variations of: "TMZ and MMA Fighting reported that Frank's died by suicide." vs., what you suggest, "The Guardian reported that 'multiple reports' said that Frank died by suicide." Sure, the Guardian is a reliable source. But is the latter sentence more reliable? By my mind, no. It says that multiple unnamed reports indicated Frank died by suicide, whereas the former specifies two reports that said Frank died by suicide. If, in the article, we were trying to verify that there were multiple reports, then sure, the Guardian might be preferable. But that's not really what we're trying to do, right? (It's also worth pointing out that ... based on every other outlet to report on this story ... it seems extremely likely that the Guardian is referencing the TMZ and MMA Fighting reports, so leaving the names of those sources out would effectively use ambiguity to falsely bolster the underlying claim. I should also add that I do think MMA Fighting, independently, meets the reliable source standard, so I'm not sure clumping it in with TMZ is descriptively accurate.)--50.86.94.196 (talk) 16:20, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

  There are no reliable sources. There are only reliable reporting instances, that may be cited. The ideological position of conferring blanket a priori reliability to any source is irrelevant in the citation of fact, and has no place in an encyclopedia. A source cannot be "mostly" or even "overwhelmingly" reliable. It is either reliable or it is not. As far as Wikipedia citations are concerned, no one can be certain that any specific citation does not belong to the hypothesized (fantasized is better) "miniscule minority" of unreliable instances. The supposed minority of unreliable reporting that has been determined according to "general" (?) evaluations - Jayron32 uses versions of "general" 3 times above, and it is still as opaque and vague as ever. What are these evaluations? Basically hinging on reputation, as in, a bunch of people think that way, so it must be true. Or, people have heard so from somebody they trust and believe it equally blindly. Or, they think that past performance guarantees future behavior. Or, they are simply lazy and biased. This nonsense sums up so-called "reliable" sources. 65.254.10.26 (talk) 00:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

  I wonder if Wikipedia contributors ever question where the term and concept of "reliable sources" came from. Is it just the invention of lazy journalists? Is it there to confer legitimacy and implicit trust to the judgement or scruples of journalists, especially when their sources are anonymous? Is it the creation of academics dealing with ideal, non-factual theories of journalism and media behavior? Whatever the (unimportant) answer may be, it can mess up the creation and evolution of proper encyclopedic articles, as it is evident from this discussion. The Guardian has been an accurate, timely, and objective reporting source. And also, it hasn't. Predictions of where the next Guardian-based citation is going to belong are futile. Like every citation, it must be examined on its merits and in its context. As stated, the concept of "general" reliability is a useless fantasy. All citations are specific. 71.105.141.131 (talk) 01:38, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Comment At least at this time anyway, it doesn't seem like there's a consensus either way for inclusion of the cause. I did come across this article this afternoon. I'm not familiar with this website so I can't comment on the reliability either way, but it does state that an autopsy was performed and an official announcement would be made at a later date. I'm not saying this means it shouldn't be included, but just adding another point for people to consider.--Rockchalk717 19:12, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd agree with that assessment: perhaps there's not consensus as to the citation used, but almost every user here has agreed it should be in the article. So far, I see 4 editors (Jayron, Thebigguyalien, Cinadon36, and Qflib) in favor of a Guardian citation; 1 editor (65.88.88.201) in favor of a MMA Fighting citation (I think?); and 1 editor saying TMZ alone is not sufficient and possibly leaning towards non-inclusion (Phil Bridger, who never responded after the MMA Fighting update). I'd lean towards agreeing with the other IP, but I'm happy enough with the Guardian suggestion that I'd certainly prefer that in favor of nothing.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 19:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

That's what I meant. Just spaced when I typed that what this rfc was about.--Rockchalk717 19:32, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Ah, understood!--50.86.94.196 (talk) 19:34, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Well this RFC is over. His ex-wife Tammie has confirmed it was a suicide: [6]--Rockchalk717 04:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

What makes his ex-wife a reliable source? · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 05:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Just as a side point: Is she his ex-wife? Until you are actually divorced, you are legally still spouses. She filed for divorce, but as far as I understand the marriage hadn't yet been officially dissolved. (Note that the linked E News story refers to her as his wife.)

At this point, there are two sources that have reported Frank died by suicide (MMA Fighting, TMZ); there are several sources that have picked up reports from either those aforementioned sources or unnamed other sources (Yahoo News, the Guardian, Page Six, Consequence), none of these sources, some of which are of undisputed reliability, have issued retractions; and, finally, there is People Magazine, doing an interview with Frank's wife. At some point, I think we have to take a gestalt approach here, because any quibbles with individual sources (and I haven't heard any serious critique of MMA Fighting, except that it's niche?) pale in comparison with the overall weight of the evidence.

That said, I think the current iteration of paragraph summing this up is a little clunky. The "It was determined he died by suicide." line, especially, is odd and uses passive voice to mask an unknown subject (determined by who?). I also think there are a few details in there that aren't really notable (does it add much to know that she went to get snacks?). Those extra details also might excessively privilege Tammy's account; not that I'm suggesting it's wrong, but given the reports that hotel staff had to intervene in arguments between the couple, I would think skepticism might be warranted. I'd suggest:

Frank died in Texas on November 19, 2022, at the age of 49.[3][41] Subsequently, TMZ and MMA Fighting OR: multiple organizations reported that Frank died by suicide.[Cite to TMZ & MMA Fighting AND/OR the Guardian] On November 30, Frank's wife, Tammie, confirmed that Frank had died by suicide, explaining that he had been battling with depression and mental health issues.[cite to People Magazine interview].

--50.86.94.196 (talk) 06:36, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Pbsouthwood: (Facepalm) She actually is/was his wife. I messed up when I typed that. Second, it's an official statement from the family which is what we were waiting on, just like we were waiting for an official statement that he had died. @50.86.94.196: Saying "multiple sources" reported something is newspaper wording, and Wikipedia is not a newspaper. We just need to stick with the facts and the facts are what is in the article now.--Rockchalk717 14:24, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I think a pretty clear plurality (if not majority) wanted the "multiple reports" wording for the Guardian, and to be clear: no editor agreed with you that an official statement from family was necessary or definitive. I do think it's important that we do away with the notion that families control Wikipedia articles, even when familial statements are at odds with anonymous sources. You were waiting for an official statement/interview from family. (Put it this way, if the New York Times reported that "Trump did X, according to anonymous sources in his administration" ... but Donald Trump Jr. said "I was there and no he didn't"; the solution wouldn't be "well leave it out of the article entirely.") And the current version of the article contains several facts that are only questionably notable (and arguably undue weight). Wikipedia might not be a newspaper, but it isn't a tabloid either--50.86.94.196 (talk) 15:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

You're reading something I'm not in these comments. I see people supporting Guardian as a source but nothing saying they want the multiple sources wording. Inclusion of the details of the night of his death is not "undue weight". Maybe the attempts at a reconciliation with his wife is unneeded, at least in the death section anyway, but the rest of it isn't undue weight.--Rockchalk717 15:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

And yes nobody else was waiting on an official statement, that is fair, but there is no better source than an official statement from his wife confirming it was a suicide.--Rockchalk717 15:18, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Referring to the people who wanted to quote the Guardian. Either way, I offered two different options—one with that language and one not!--50.86.94.196 (talk) 19:08, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I have trimmed some of the excess details that I personally don't feel are very relevant to his death.--Rockchalk717 20:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

• Comment: TMZ is pretty unreliable. They reported, for example, the death of Kim Jong-un [7]. And never corrected or retracted. For WP:BLP, which applies to recently deceased, it's a big no. MarioGom (talk) 08:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose for now except as attributed possibility (ie not fact in WP:VOICE). Presumably a coroner is going to investigate and record a cause of death based on all the available evidence, until then no source is in a position to know - the most WP:RS source is simply making conjectures. Pincrete (talk) 14:12, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

  Sources may be in a position to know, but we don't know that, and we are not in a position to assess or decide whether their knowledge is accurate. Other than that nitpick, I agree with Pincrete on what we should do, Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 10:31, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, what? This is a weird informational nihilism approach to Wikipedia. The sources that have reported this are reporting it as fact; a few specifically reporting that he was found hanging. Yes, it's theoretically possible that he tripped into a noose that just happened to be there, but it's not our job to conduct a peer review of the sources. This is a fact reported by multiple reliable sources—even if you leave out TMZ you have MMA Fighting and People Magazine's interview with his wife. That's all there is to it. That said, I'm fine adding "according to," similar to what I suggested above.--50.86.94.196 (talk) 01:48, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

It's interesting that the section of the page in question continues to be edited by various people, and often in ways not consistent with this discussion. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 20:30, 11 December 2022 (UTC)