Talk:Michael Richards

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Revisiting Laugh Factory incident section[edit]

For sure, the main focus of Michael Richards Wiki entry should be the Laugh Factory incident. Where he grew up, Seinfeld, other acting work is all secondary in nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

-- Why in the world should his article be mainly about something that happened one night vs. his role on a series which lasted many years which had a huge impact on popular culture. The laugh factory incident should definitely be mentioned but to make it larger than the rest of the article? Something that happened several years after his career was already dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The section on the 2006 incident was three times longer than the section on his two television series. Classic WP:UNDUE. It had a lot of bloated language and unnecessary detail. Now that this has had time to be put in better perspective, I have trimmed it while retaining the consensus-based meaning per WP:BRD. Comments welcome. Jokestress (talk) 19:49, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

For anyone confused, I think it's safe to say that's comments above are pretty obviously sarcastic in nature.

I agree with discussion in archive 4 that the Laugh Factory incident continues to receive undue weight, and might be better suited in its own article rather than a biography.

As a separate matter of style/presentation, I don't know if the incident is necessary to include in the lead paragraph (of a biography article). Even if consensus deems it significant enough, those paragraphs need only to concisely refer to the incident section below. Currently, it is referred to in the 3rd lead paragraph with excessive detail (for a lead paragraph). I propose instead:

When Seinfeld ended, Richards returned to stand-up comedy. In late 2006, he made headlines from an incident at a comedy-club[1], and subsequently announced his retirement from stand-up in 2007.

Please note that this is not an attempt to whitewash information--all the relevant information can still remain in the section below (or in it's own article if such is warranted). However, the lead paragraph should be succinct and focus on the career milestones of the individual; it therefore needs not go into the same explicit detail as the article section. (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

The first sentence to this section characterizes the audience members as "hecklers" and links to that article. This directly contradicts the passage that follows giving one of the audience member's accounts--he says they were possibly being a little loud ordering drinks, which is not heckling. Also the cited sources use language like, "noise that Richards interpreted as heckling". So unless there is some source stating clearly that there was heckling, I propose this ambiguity should be conveyed in the article.Snarfblaat (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I undid the edit by removing the mention of the audience incident from the lede. There has been a lot of discussion in the archives on the due weight; omitting it entirely and unilaterally isn't the solution. The lede doesn't even read properly as edited, since it still contained references to the "laugh factory incident" after the description of the incident was wiped away.Snarfblaat (talk) 21:42, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Ann Talman[edit]

According to the two links, respectively from People magazine and the Los Angeles Times, it is said that Richards was in a relationship with a third woman by the name of Ann Talman? Would this info be suitable to mention on the "Personal life" section?

Here are the two links: People magazine, Los Angeles Times Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 23:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The general issue has been raised repeatedly in various contexts; see for example [1]. As Jimbo Wales said in that discussion, we do not "chronicle every single twist and turn of celebrity romances". I have done a lot of BLP cleanup, and removal of content like this has been, more than 95% of the time, noncontroversial. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 23:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Michael Richards. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

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

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)