Talk:Jason Beghe/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Previously

Previously, this article said Beghe is a supporter of Scientology; however he has recently made a very critical video. May want to update the article to reflect this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07m-IvvpK2E —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.215.68.106 (talk) 10:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Has since been updated. Cirt (talk) 22:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Nice updates :O HaroldZoid129.15.131.248 (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. More to come as more info comes out in secondary WP:RS/WP:V sources. Cirt (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Source

  • Eramo, Steven (May 1996). "Fun-Loving Forest Ranger". TV Zone Special (21): 36–37.
Would like to try to get ahold of this source somehow, haven't really looked into it yet. Cirt (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually it looks like the journal title was just simply TV Zone. Cirt (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Okay it's called TV Zone, http://www.visimag.com/tvzone/ will look into this further. Cirt (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

United Artists

The article states that United Artists is controled by Tom Cruise. The referenced story at http://www.cbc.ca/arts/film/story/2008/04/08/valkyrie-delayed.html does not support this statement, nor do facts elsewhere at Wikipedia. It may be true, but still, it must be supported better or removed. The Wikipedia article on United Artists states:

Cruise, Wagner and MGM Studios created United Artists Entertainment LLC and, today, the producer/actor and his partner own a small stake in the studio, with the approval by MGM's consortium of owners.

This is not the same as owning it outright or having a controlling interest. Proxy User (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for pointing that out. Replaced with a better cite, and modified text accordingly. Cirt (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
That reads a lot better. It just sounded a bit POV, though when talking about Cruise and his "religion" it's hard not to... Proxy User (talk) 04:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Okay, glad that it reads better. Cirt (talk) 05:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Bunker

I wonder if this part of the Scientology section might be worded different? It seems to be more about Bunker than Beghe. I know it's sort of relevant, but we should be careful not to stray too far into other people's details while still telling the Beghe story...

Bunker's account was also canceled on April 17, and he believes this was due to copyright issues with a clip from The Colbert Report that he had uploaded.[39][41] Bunker said that those issues had been resolved, and that YouTube should have given him time to prove that before pulling the Jason Beghe interview.[39] Bunker believes that YouTube removed the Beghe interview after receiving pressure from Scientology.[39]

The sentence that follows the above snip is actually the most relevant, not Bunker's copyright issues with YouTube, which are only tangentially relevent to the Beghe story...

Bunker believes that YouTube removed the Beghe interview after receiving pressure from Scientology.

Maybe I'm wrong. Proxy User (talk) 04:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Eh, it's only 2 sentences for context, otherwise the bit that follows would lack context and be confusing to the reader as to what happened previously. Cirt (talk) 05:22, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Info removed from article re: attendance at 5/10/2008 Project Chanology protests

Jason has been seen amongst Anonymous protesters on 5-10-2008[1]

This info could potentially be added back into the article, were it to be sourced to a WP:RS/WP:V secondary source, per WP:CITE. Cirt (talk) 01:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm new to the exact rules of wikipedia sources, I hope this one is better? albeit an 'Anonymous" source, it's pretty convincing to me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by XtremeNL (talk • contribs) 01:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
No, that is also a violation of WP:NOR. We need a secondary source, i.e. newspaper article about the protest, a chapter in a book, scholarly journal article, etc. Cirt (talk) 05:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Uhm, I'm just citing that page about using primary sources;
  • only make descriptive claims about the information found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
  • make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.

I used a primary source and made a descriptive claim about the information. I don't see how that's breaking any rules. (Especially when it is a forum thread including pictures and video's of him being there. It's nonsense to call it non-verifieable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XtremeNL (talk • contribs) 12:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

No, using a messageboard forum is not an appropriate source to back up information. You are now jeopardizing this article's chances at passing its Good Article review, and I really wish you would remove that information please. Cirt (talk) 17:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

How are multiple pictures, video's and witnessess not an apropriate source? The fact that it's on the interwebs and not on a "secondary" source doesn't make it less of a fact. If you want I can post some blogs to? But really, that forum should be enough for anything as simple as his presence there; verifiable, and proper usage of a primary source. It doesn't even state anything about him actually activly performing in said protests, wich could be argued from the primary source, but that would not intrepetation. The fact that he was present there, is pretty much indisputable with all that hard evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XtremeNL (talk • contribs) 17:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The source cited was an internet forum, which is insufficiently reliable for any article and for a biographical article in particular. Whilst the information may well be true, it's currently really just gossip and so not suitable. The standards are so high for biographies because the risks are so great. CIreland (talk) 18:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Look further than "an internet forum" would it be better to directly reference the loads of pictures and video's? I'm not drawing any conclusions or anything, but how are pictures, video's and witnessess unreliable in asserting someone's presence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by XtremeNL (talk • contribs) 18:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Cirt and CIreland are correct. Using a forum, pictures on photo-sharing websites, and/or YouTube videos for references is not allowed.[here]
Furthermore, as this page is a biography of a living person, it is subject to the injunctions found on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, particularly the section about sources. The 3RR rule does not apply in this case; the material must be removed until a reliable source is found. [here] J.delanoygabsadds 18:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Firstly, because there is no editorial oversight of such sources to vouch for the fact that they are not faked or deceitful which, whilst unlikely, has occurred in the past. Secondly, the fact that it has not been picked up by, for example, the mainstream press, is indicative of the weight that independent commentators have attached to the occurence and, by extension, the significance that we, as a tertiary source, should attribute to it. CIreland (talk) 18:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

How´s this for a secondary source? http://www.prlog.org/10071042-actor-jason-beghe-visits-anonymous-cult-of-scientology-protest-in-san-francisco.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by XtremeNL (talk • contribs) 20:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Not really, for all we know, you wrote that yourself. Cirt (talk) 20:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Note

Still continuing to search for additional secondary WP:RS/WP:V sources, particularly past interviews, background info on early career/life, etc. Cirt (talk) 12:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Archived the peer review, contains some very good points, which will be addressed on a more long-term basis. Cirt (talk) 23:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Can someone tell me

Can someone tell me what the relevance of this passage is: "who convinced him to meet with Mark Bunker, a critic of Scientology known to the group Anonymous as "wise beard man"."

Mark Bunker is widely known as the founder of XenuTV and being an outspoken critic of Scientology, and documentary maker. There is no relevance in referring to him in this context as "wise beard man". You mine as well say "known to my Grandma as George". This is not a defining characteristic of Mark Bunker, its a mere mini-factoid. If this were an article about Mark Bunker it would have a place but as an introduction to Mark Bunker, who he is and his credentials it doesn't really make sense. Suggest it be replaced with something actually meaningful. Or if need be, the part about Mark Bunker be extended to another sentence, as critic and "wise beard man" smacks of 3rd grade book report. 143.85.192.241 10:24, 08 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done - removed the "wise beard man" phrasing. You are correct that it is more relevant in the article Mark Bunker than in this article. Cirt (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Something strange

Apparently Jason Beghe in 2005 completed "Staff Status I" and a "Keeping Scientology Working specialist course" [2] - the first one for sure is for Scientology staff, the second looks to be as well. He doesn't mention these things in his video interviews but from what I can find on Google, this sort of courses are only done once you sign a staff contract. Laval (talk) 19:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah okay. Cirt (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
If you didn't have anything to add to my comment, to perhaps clarify what that is all about, then you really did not have to respond with that kind of attitude. Geez. Laval (talk) 10:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
There was no attitude. Cirt (talk) 16:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Need help with quoting sources

"On May 10th Jason attended the Anonymous Global Protest, in San Francisco, where he addressed the crowd of protesters and talked about his experiences." was removed because I didn't get sources, but I don't know how to quote sources on the page. The sources I'd like to quote would be: http://www.prlog.org/10071042-actor-jason-beghe-visits-anonymous-cult-of-scientology-protest-in-san-francisco.html , http://www.pr-inside.com/actor-jason-beghe-visits-anonymous-cult-r584898.htm , or http://glosslip.com/category/jason-beghe/. I remember there also being alot of videos up on youtube about the protest that included him as part of the crowd, do I need to referece these too? (talk)

Unfortunately those aren't really the best of sources. See WP:RS and WP:V. Cirt (talk) 21:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Erring on the side of caution

After giving it some thought, I've removed a video file previously embedded on this page, diff. I wanted to err on the side of caution here, and would appreciate feedback from previously uninvolved editors. I'll defer to the consensus from the community about this. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 04:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Jason Beghe. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jason Beghe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Criticism of Scientology subsection

This is about 2/3rds as long as the Acting career section. Undue! He’s an actor! Far be it for me to suggest that someone who really has it on for Scientology wrote it, oh no. Boscaswell talk 08:26, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jason_Beghe/Archive_1&oldid=1098710377"