Talk:Ezra Miller

Choking incident

Adding the choking incident that surfaced on April 1, 2020 as it there is no longer any doubt it was him and has been confirmed by a source at the location where the incident occurred. AChakra California (talk) 23:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

AChakra California, you've been repeatedly reverted on this matter for valid reasons. You've been reverted by Girth Summit, Eggishorn and me. You need to stop WP:Edit warring on this. Per WP:BLP, Wikipedia takes biographies of living persons very seriously and takes a conservative route on matters like these. As sources note, there are questions as to what happened and whether or not Miller was serious. Miller hasn't even yet commented on this. I have reverted you again, and will leave a note at the WP:BLP noticeboard on this topic for more opinions. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Found Ezra Miller’s agent. AChakra California (talk) 02:14, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I see that there is already a thread at the BLP noticeboard. I'll add on to it. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh good gravy, no. That is unacceptable on many levels. First, it's a rumor, and is reported as a rumor by the source. They are very careful to use words like "appears to be" and point out that any testimony is hear-say evidence. This is an encyclopedia, and we don't report rumors and gossip. Second, under BLP rules, this would fall under WP:BLPCRIME, unless it meets the requirements listed under WP:WELLKNOWN. The subject himself may be well known, but the incident itself has to be so widely reported that there is no longer any point in trying to protect his right to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. One source is not going to cut it, especially a gossip column. Third, even if it did pass WELLKNOWN, it needs to be put into balance with the rest of the article. That means weighing the coverage and the significance of this incidence in the scope of his entire life and career, and then determine just how much space to give it. So far, it doesn't even deserve a single sentence, let alone an entire paragraph. Unless there is irrefutable confirmation it actually was him and not some look-alike, and this blows up into some major media frenzy, it most definitely needs to stay out. Zaereth (talk) 18:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Zaereth, thanks for weighing in. A lot of sources are reporting on this, but I obviously agree that we should take a cautious approach on it. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 01:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Poking around for sources on this, what I see are ones like this which say "Ezra Miller [is] Not Being Investigated by Police" and at least initially caveat that the video only "appears" to be Miller. I notice that that particular source does go on to claim, without caveat, that "The video, which quickly went viral, shows Miller approaching a young woman [...] he then grabs her by the neck with his right hand and forces her to the ground", but I agree that the sourcing is still too weak to include such a claim in a BLP at this time. If Miller really did this, more definitive reliable-source coverage will most likely become available. -sche (talk) 17:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Leave it out. Even if true and reliably sourced, it's WP:UNDUE until a reliable secondary source outlines the event's long-term impacts. Obviously gossip media will report the incident but it's non-encyclopedic without a full analysis of what led to the event, and what effects it had. Johnuniq (talk) 07:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Variety, which is definitely not a gossip column, confirmed with sources present when the altercation took place that the incident was serious. They also identified the person doing the choking as being Ezra. The fact that Ezra has made no public statements regarding the incident, or that police wasn't called to the scene, or that the fan did not press charges, doesn't mean the incident isn't relevant. In fact, it's arguably the most relevant thing that has happened to Ezra's career in the last few months – certainly what brought them to the spotlight the most. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rainwalker1415 (talk • contribs) 07:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Rainwalker1415 (talk · contribs), this is a no per above. It matters not that Variety is not a gossip column. Keep it up, and you will be WP:Blocked. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 18:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey Flyer22, I just came back here and it seems Variety is all of a sudden reliable. How come? Anyway, glad to see the page now acknowledges the truth. Rainwalker1415 (talk) 20:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Flyer22 Frozen (talk · contribs), if you haven't read the link I shared: it's been confirmed by the establishment's owner that it was indeed Ezra in the incident. Neither Ezra nor anyone from their team has denied the episode or sought to defended themselves in any way, even though several months have passed. This being an encyclopedia, not a fan base, the facts should be reported. Edit: my contribution is still live because someone else, not I, added it back. If you keep removing it, I won't insist. But you still need a valid and up-to-date reason. Rainwalker1415

• Rainwalker1415, CuriousGolden: WP:BLP - please read it carefully. We are cautious about BLPs, and especially cautious about potentially contentious assertions. These sources are not good enough to support the content you added to the page. Variety are pointedly not stating this stuff as fact in their own voice - they are hedging, attributing statements to a bar worker, and acknowledging that there is confusion about the facts. Wegotthiscovered.com base their own story on Variety, flesh it out with some speculation and gossip, and add nothing of value. For us to include this, we need a serious RS asserting it as fact. If you can find better sourcing, come back here and discuss it, but if that is all there is then policy requires us to keep it out of the article. GirthSummit _(blether) 17:01, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

It's been eight months since this subject was last updated, and I don't feel like there's much debate over whether or not they did it at this point. I also think it's important to include or else people will use this outdated talk page as evidence in personal arguments, which I expect to arise with the release of the Snyder Cut. I don't have any sources at hand, but I know they're out there, just a little hard to find because, when you look up the event, you get mostly reports from April. Hahafunnyboy (talk) 18:35, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Why is there debate? It was obviously Ezra Miller, multiple sources have confirmed this, including an interview by the victim in the video. Forbes mentions the event as fact, not speculation. “Long term impacts?” The victim has spoken out about the abuse and the trauma its caused, what other long term impact do you need. Stop silencing victims. The incident is well documented, quite literally all captured on video. Who are you trying to protect here? Justfreddy93 (talk) 14:14, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2021

The grammar in this entry is incorrect. It repeatedly uses the word "they" to refer to only one person. (BLP violation removed) 2001:8003:326B:F101:E02E:D63C:14EF:C679 (talk) 13:17, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Miller uses they/them pronouns, which GQ stated is done "in a pointed refusal to be gendered." ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:28, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

BLPvio redacted. As I've said on other pages that get this sort of ER, we only need one declined ER visible to establish the precedent, so in the future I suggest people just remove ones along these lines. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 14:39, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2021

Ezra Miller was accused of choking a woman in 2020 and has yet to make a comment publicly. 67.243.157.65 (talk) 03:10, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry that no one addressed this earlier, but I just fixed this for you after being surprised not to see it on the page. It's a pretty major omission at this point, and regardless, this should not have been marked as "answered" without giving you an actual response. Beggarsbanquet (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2021

Sons of an Illustrious Father is now renamed as "Oddkin" and consists of only Larson and Miller now. Unclear since when or why, but the group's Instagram is serving as evidence. Sorry folks I'm not active on Wikipedia as an editor often so I am not sure if it's acceptable to propose an edit like this, please let me know if I can do better. Thank you.

References

Please edit date of recent kerfuffle

Noted on the article is that Miller was arrested in Hawaii on March 8, 2022. Correct date is March 28. 2603:800C:2400:207:A9AA:214B:B0D1:DAD6 (talk) 09:42, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 March 2022

Please correct the date of Ezra's arrest at the karaoke bar. It currently says March 8, 2022. It should say March 28, 2022. The article cited shows the date of the occurrence, for reference.

X: On March 8, 2022, Miller was arrested in Hawaii, following a physical confrontation with patrons at a karaoke bar.[52]

Y: On March 28, 2022, Miller was arrested in Hawaii, following a physical confrontation with patrons at a karaoke bar. The couple later dropped a petition for a restraining order[52] 72.234.106.220 (talk) 11:01, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:10, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2022

Under Personal Life > Other, in the last paragraph, Miller is misgendered. Change the final sentence to: "Shortly thereafter, a restraining order was filed against them by the couple they assaulted." 184.146.220.20 (talk) 19:12, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2022

change for clarity on who made bail the couple or miller. change

Shortly thereafter, a couple with whom Miller had been staying after making bail filed a restraining order against Miller, accusing them of assault.

to

Shortly after Miller made bail, a couple with whom Miller had been staying with filed a restraining order against Miller, accusing them of assault. 2600:6C67:4A7F:E45B:B591:9BCB:9332:C3D1 (talk) 01:01, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Good suggestion. I hope you don't mind that I dropped the second "with" from the change. -- Pemilligan (talk) 01:11, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Accusations of stolen music

Rollingstone article. Worth mentioning?★Trekker (talk) 21:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

They?

Are we really going to fucking refer to a single person as "they?" Insanity. 2A03:C5C0:107E:7501:D893:256:8E7C:54CA (talk) 14:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes.Unbh (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I understand that this is the current cause celebré but I have to say as far as reading the article it makes it entirely confusing. Is there a way to cut back on pronoun usage and use they’s proper name to make for easier reading? 71.190.233.44 (talk) 13:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

This would not be an issue to take up here, because current Wikipedia policy is that singular they is acceptable in the same manner as "she" and "he". --Roundish ⋆tc) 21:29, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Pronoun preference should definitely be respected, but it's not unreasonable to use names instead for clarity. Singular they can be clumsy and unclear.Unbh (talk) 03:11, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

No, "pronoun preference" should definitely not be respected when it contradicts the requirements of grammar, for the same reason that "height preference" should not determine how one reports the height of a person. Miller is a guy. The pronouns for referring to guys are "he," "him," "his." Using "they" etc. with respect to a singular is excusable, if it is, only when the antecedent is indefinite and could be either a male or a female. Wikipedia should correct its absurd policy. 2601:844:4180:BE70:D82:D944:FE83:5238 (talk) 22:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

I dislike the use of singular they. But if it's about respect for a person or respect for grammar then respect for the person wins out. Language, including grammar, is an evolving thing, Unbh (talk) 04:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

That of course is the accepted point of view. But since in this case "they" refers to a single person, "they *are*" with a plural verb cannot be correct. You should say, "they is." The acceptable contraction is they's, e. g. "They's very concerned with their pronouns." Wastrel Way (talk) Eric

While it may be acceptable it makes for clumsy reading and is confusing. I’m not suggesting get rid of the pronoun preference altogether, merely stating that the article would read better with the use of proper name as opposed to pronoun in many cases to increase readability. 71.190.233.44 (talk) 21:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Exactly this, which is why I returned the last pronoun edits to Miller since using names is obviously clearer in that context. Unbh (talk) 03:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

"singular they is acceptable", there is no such thing as a singular "they". This is insane world. In 1990 none of this existed. It's a social contagion. So many young people are being destroyed. WIKIPEDIA should not encourage this, it's is causing 1000s of suicides. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/09/14/more-than-half-of-transgender-male-adolescents-attempt-suicide-study-says/ Disciple4lif (talk) 07:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree. There needs to be some serious discussion about this, because the current "solution" of referring to a single individual in the plural form is less than ideal to put it mildly. Adriano 7 (talk) 12:44, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

There are more important things to discuss seriously than the preferred pronouns of minor celebrities and the consequent readability of wikipedia BLPs!

It's 2022, how are we still arguing over singular 'they'? The word has been used as a singular pronoun literally for centuries. Shakespeare had this figured out ya'll. This very website has an article about its use since the 14th century. Language also changes. Look at 'you' and our usage of thy, thine, and thou. This insistence on they being "only plural" is not only grammatically *incorrect* it's just a flimsy excuse to be disrespectful. JuniBug (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Singular they has only been a thing for a long time in certain contexts/usages though. It has expanded recently and, as you say, maybe the language usage surrounding it needs to change too. I think using "they is" etc. should be preferred for singular they. 64.72.57.87 (talk) 01:52, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

You will be pleased to hear that some 99.%+ of all people don't use they/them pronouns, so this will have virtually no impact on your existence. Have a nice day. Cortador (talk) 20:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ezra Miller article. This is not a forum for debating Wikipedia policies that apply to all articles. -- Pemilligan (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

What has this world come to? I literally came to this article to find out if "Ezra" is a boy's or a girls name. NOWHERE in the article is it to be found whether he is a man or a woman and I had to google to find out that he is a man! This is madness. rayukk | talk 01:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Luckily there's an article on the name that will help - Ezra (name). But to summarise for you, it's a name for everyone! Unbh (talk) 04:00, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Actor

why is Ezra Miller an actor when they don't define as male?

Because they act...Unbh (talk) 11:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

In the future, could we just remove anything along these lines? --Roundish ⋆tc) 15:21, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Actor is a term that can refer to any gender. Google and learn the term before spouting nonsense Justfreddy93 (talk) 14:16, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

plural for verbs

One can use whatever pronouns wishes, but a single person is one person, therefore whatever pronoun one might have, it is singular. English grammar uses singular for verbs when referring to a single individual. Imagine saying "An individual uses pronoun they, but they also use pronoun their. <- This sentence is talking about the same person or a different people? Grammar should be consistent. For example:

• Miller IS set to play the character
• They areIS set to play the character

Or:

• Miller uses they/them pronouns

should NOT be converted to:

• They use they/them pronouns

but to

• They uses they/them pronouns

We are not talking about multiple personality disorders here. The article is written in standard English, therefore standard English grammar rules should apply here. Pronoun preference does not mean that one sentence the action is done by a single entity, while the next sentence there are suddenly multiple entities doing said action. It is pretty sensible to assume that they in Miller's case is a singular pronoun, just like it and zir are.

2A02:2F0B:B20D:2700:1C18:AC45:9356:57EE (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Please calm down. You are complaining about English grammar, not the article itself, so this whole thing you are ranting about? - it is off-topic. At least in my opinion.

You are going to get nowhere down this avenue, because this isn't going to be changed, not before English is. --Roundish ⋆tc) 22:07, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

The poster is referring to proper English grammar. If using singular "they" then the verb is singular (as in Ezra's case), if using plural "they" (referring to multiple people) then the verb is plural. By using a plural verb with what should be a singular "they" then you are both misgendering Ezra and breaking grammar. Please stop advocating for misgendering Ezra. Also, this is not off-topic as that is pertinent to this article. — al-Shimoni (talk) 16:05, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Imeriki al-Shimoni, current English grammar is that the verb is plural... regardless of whether "they" is used as singular or plural. --Roundish ⋆tc) 22:43, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

This complaint is illiterate twaddle. Singular they has been in use for centuries, and it has always taken plural verbs. Example: "I don't know the person who lives upstairs, but they sure like to play their music loud." This sentence starts out in the singular, and makes it clear that we are talking about one person; however, it switches to singular they in the second clause, because the gender of the subject is unknown, and the second verb naturally takes the plural form. It would sound pretty strange if we replaced the 'like' with 'likes'. We're not going to start contorting the English language because some folk don't like the idea of people expressing a preference for singular they. Girth Summit _(blether) 23:03, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I hope this discussion (if we can even call it that) is done now. --Roundish ⋆tc) 23:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I imagine it's only a matter of time before people start giving their preferred verbs. That'll make it much easier! Unbh (talk) 02:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, singular they has been in use for centuries, but people only used it if the person they were referring to was unknown. Shakespeare would have never said or written "I ran into Ezra Miller today. They looked pretty messed up." Marrakech (talk) 21:49, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

A Comedy of Errors, Act IV, Scene 3

Though Shakespeare's women were boys dressed as girls, so he may or may not be the example you want here. Unbh (talk) 01:58, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

That's utterly irrelevant.★Trekker (talk) 00:01, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

No, it's not, not when people make arguments to Shakespeare and Dickens about this sort stuff.

Yes it is. Also sign your comments.★Trekker (talk) 11:25, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

. No, it's not.Unbh (talk) 11:52, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

More legal issues

I don't have time right now to evaluate whether to add this to one of the current sub-sections or start another, but this just came out today: Guns, Bullets, and Weed: Ezra Miller Housing Three Young Children and Their Mother at Vermont Farm - Sources claim the living conditions at the Flash star’s farm are unsafe for children, alleging there are weapons lying around and that a one-year-old put a loose bullet in her mouth. June 23, 2022 11:54AM ET, by Cheyenne Roundtree. As with the last Rolling Stone piece, it's being picked up by various news outlets. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 21:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2022

The following line: “ Since 2022, Miller has been the subject of several incidents relating to disorderly…” should be changed to “Since 2011”

The legal issues section of ezra millers page literally contradicts the above line: “ On June 28, 2011, in the midst of filming The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Miller was a passenger in a vehicle that was pulled over in Pittsburgh for a broken brake light; police discovered twenty grams of marijuana in Miller's possession”

An edit to say “Since 2011” would resolve this conflicting information. Justfreddy93 (talk) 14:06, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: A marijuana rap isn't the same as disorderly conduct, or grooming allegations. It appears the serious stuff started in 2022. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2022

The entry is grammatically incorrect by using "they are" when referring to a singular person. "Are" is properly used only for plural subjects. Correct grammar in this instance is "they is." 2603:300A:1D00:3400:D1B1:24BD:DEE6:5AA2 (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: [2] When “they” is the subject of a sentence, “they” takes a plural verb regardless of whether “they” is meant to be singular or plural. For example, write “they are,” not “they is.” The singular “they” works similarly to the singular “you”—even though “you” may refer to one person or multiple people, in a scholarly paper you should write “you are,” not “you is.” ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Ambiguity

I think that I understand this passage, but I do find it pretty hard to follow.

"In 2018, Miller showed support for the #MeToo movement and revealed a personal experience concerning a Hollywood producer and a director, both of whom were left unnamed: "They gave me wine and I was underaged. They were like, 'Hey, want to be in our movie about gay revolution?' And I was like, 'No, you guys are monsters.'" Later that year, they announced that they were in a polyamorous relationship with multiple people, including their bandmates in the rock band Sons of an Illustrious Father."

While I have no particular issue with us using the singular they in a case like this, I think it does require some special attention to be paid to issues of ambiguity. In this paragraph, the quote from Miller uses the pronoun 'they' in the traditional sense in that it refers to two people: a producer and a director. But then we suddenly switch (I believe) to using the singular they to refer to Ezra Miller. For a moment, I thought we were continuing the use of plural they and that the Hollywood producer and the director had announced that they (the two of them) were in a polyamorous relationship, etc.

I thought at first to simply change the final sentence to begin "Later that year, Miller announced..." but it actually still leaves the problem. Did Miller announce that the producer and director were in a polyamorous relationship?

Just to avoid any unwelcome political/moral debate here I'll just note that the same kind of ambiguity can easily occur with traditional use of he/she pronouns - it's just that it's easier to fix in no small part because people are so accustomed to it. As per a comment further up the talk page, about "they is" or "they are" - this relatively new and relatively rare usage gives rise to some grammatical puzzles that require a bit more effort. Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:43, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it would help to split the paragraph into two, or completely rephrase the problematic sentence: "Miller entered a polyamorous relationship later that year, which also included the actor's bandmates". —VersaceSpace 🌃 16:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC)