Talk:Hung Huynh

Untitled

Hey someone should write about how he will be competing in the Bocuse D'or competition. This is big stuff people, I would say its way more significant to even be mentioned as a candidate for this competition then it is to win top chef. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.186.50 (talk) 22:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

last i heard he was not selected for the Bocuse D'or team. I'm not sure how significent it is that he was a canate at one time for it. If you feel the need to add it go ahead (with cite of course).harlock_jds (talk) 10:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Removed irrelevant information

I have removed "He is openly bisexual" because it is irrelevant; Hung has never interviewed to that effect (the cited article is about Dale Levitsky, not Hung); and this Wikipedia article is far too short to include such tiny details as Hung's non-discussed sexual orientation. Softlavender (talk)

but the article is long enough to include the high school he went to? Serously this seems more like 'removing info i don't like' than 'removing irrelevant information'.

Please sign your posts using four tildes. I will delete the high school info (I don't know why it was there in the first place!). Softlavender (talk) 22:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry i forgot to sign. My main worry (i don't care either way) is because while we may find that he's bisexual irrelevant doesn't mean all editors agree. Since it was cited i didn't see any reason to remove it but i don't feel strongly enough to add it back in. harlock_jds (talk) 13:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

if you read the articale in full it talk about Hung and Dale (season 3) Josie and Carlos (season 2) and Tiffani (season 1) are ethier gay lesbian or bisexual (dave is not listed but should) read the last paragraph to see it --Spiderman2351 (talk) 00:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)spiderman2351

It's not relevant to the article as is. This is a tiny article about a minor chef. We do not include sexual orientation in small articles about chefs. If someone wants to expand the article greatly so that it's a full-length article detailing a lot more stuff about his career, style, cuisine, background, complete resume, and so on and so forth .... and then add a personal life section, then it could be relevant. As is, it certainly does not fit either the point, scope, or tone of the article. Softlavender (talk) 00:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

could it be included in the lead sentance as an additional aditive? Why is the fact he's Vietnamese American relevant and his bisexuality not?harlock_jds (talk) 11:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Nationality is always stated in the opening sentence of any article about any person. Sexual orientation is not. Plus, Hung has never stated he is bisexual. It's not relevant, especially in an article of this length, as I mentioned above. Softlavender (talk) 07:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hung actually has stated that he's bisexual. I couldn't find the video, but I found a blog entry (I know it's not technically a reliable source, but they live blogged a reunion episode and included screencaps and quotes from the broadcast.) I agree to the lack of relevance, but I just think that the facts should be straightened out. http://www.miamibeach411.com/news/index.php?/news/comments/topchef3-reunion/. 97.100.10.50 (talk) 03:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, if you listen to the actual tape (which was on the Bravo site at one point as I recall), which is his unaired audition interview (as far as I recall) for Top Chef, he is directly asked by the interviewer whether he likes boys or girls and he says simply, "I like both" (as far as I recall). Not to put too fine a point on it, but answering a direct question honestly in an unaired interview doesn't really constitute being openly bisexual in any noteworthy way, nor, again, is it relevant to the article, as you mention. But thanks for the mention, yes. Softlavender (talk) 04:00, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hung Huynh. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080706072931/http://www.tvguide.com/News/top-chef-hung/071005-06 to http://www.tvguide.com/News/top-chef-hung/071005-06

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 16:45, 6 April 2017 (UTC)