Talk:Jim Parsons/Archive 1

Archive 1

Additional source

Parsons' CBS bio I'll add the source and copyedit when I can. Tealwisp (talk) 01:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Stage appearances

One editor removed this section entirely. I noticed but didn't revert because none of the entries in the section was sourced. However, another editor reverted. I've added a tag to the section. It needs sources to remain.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Religion

Are there any reliable sources that state the article subject's religion and/or ethnicity? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:46, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

There is AFAIK no public statement on article subject's religion. This site http://www.flixster.com/actor/jim-parsons claims that he is catholic but gives no source. He graduated from the University of San Diego, a Roman Catholic university. In an interview http://shows.ctv.ca/TheBigBangTheory/article/Big-Bang-Theory-star-Jim-Parsons-on-his-newfound-fame-his-Emmy-nomination-and-being-typecast#c_0 he states that he prays sometimes. His father's funeral service was held at Trinity Lutheran Church (Klein, TX) http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl/obits_3371347/milton.html and his mother taught prekindergarten in a private Lutheran school http://classroom.kleinisd.net/webs/jparsons/meet_the_teachers.htm But that is all sparse and indirect information and as long he does not make a public statement this question remains open. And even if his religion is known it is a question of relevance for the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.217.1.6 (talk) 16:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Mboisson, 19 September 2011

In personal life : He is openly gay and engaged to Todd Spiewak. Source : http://www.queerty.com/big-bang-theorys-jim-parsons-is-engaged-to-boyfriend-todd-spiewak-20100908/

Mboisson (talk) 12:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Not done: I do not believe that that source is reliable enough to make an edit like that on a BLP, especially since it seems to source the National Enquirer. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 13:58, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Adding Muppets (2011) to Filmography

Imdb reports that he played "Human Walter" in The Muppets.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1433588/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.54.3 (talk) 08:20, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Poptower

There was a discussion in Ptwiki about the site and we found the site to be non-reliable. Mainly due to terms of use stating that the site is not responsible for the published information, but also due to excessive popups and to copied material from other sites. See [1] and [2]. As such, I've removed this from the article: " His hobbies include playing the piano and watching sports, especially tennis, baseball, and basketball."

Chico Venancio (talk) 23:46, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 February 2012

There's nothing about him <blp issue>... WTF? 68.217.121.159 (talk) 03:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

 Not done You are welcome to see the section #Sexuality. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Voice actor in Kick Buttowski: Suburban Daredevil

Jim Parsons provided the voice of Larry Wilder, in episode 20 (Season 2), "Poll Position / Jock Wilder's Nature Camp" of Kick Buttowski: Suburban Daredevil 173.238.166.40 (talk) 00:22, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 April 2012

Please change the birthplace information to Spring, Texas, as Parsons has stated that he was born and raised in Spring

Calliope4 (talk) 13:18, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

 Not done Can you provide a source? Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 August 2012

I would like to add two movies to his filmography, because they are both confirmed and it would be helpful if it was changed. Brielleparsons (talk) 00:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

 Not done. What movies?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

the two movies are Happy Smekday! and The Normal Heart.

 Not done. According to IMDb, The Normal Heart is in pre-production. We don't add pre-production films to filmographies. They have to have progressed to filming. IMDb says that Happy Smekday! is filming, but I can't find any evidence of that. If you can find a reliable source that says filming has begun, we can put it in.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 January 2013

Jim Parsons has also been nominated for a 2013 Golden Globe. The result is pending with the awards on the 13th January 2013 in LA, CA, USA. Source - Golden Globes nominations page. <http://www.goldenglobes.org/2012/12/nominations-2013/> Emmajanef. (talk) 20:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Done --Jnorton7558 (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Sexuality

http://www.queerty.com/big-bang-theorys-jim-parsons-is-engaged-to-boyfriend-todd-spiewak-20100908/

Don't know if Queerty is enough for "proof", I'm sure the National Enquirer isn't normally considered proof, but both his sexuality and his engagement to his boyfriend could be added to the page 87.194.86.204 (talk) 21:47, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the LGBT category, but re-added it, is there another, maybe better source you could find for it though? --186.87.18.30 (talk) 01:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Nothing I would consider a proper source, most just reference the National Enquirer as a source.

http://celebgalz.com/jim-parsons-girlfriend-kaley-cuoco-cuoco-parsons-updates-photos/

And there's a whole load (like perez hilton's site, the examiner, et al) I didn't even bother posting as I know they're not sourceworthy. Could the NE be considered sourceworthy as it's not a story about "aliens stole my husband" or some other rubbish like that? :-) 87.194.86.204 (talk) 11:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, National Enquirer / Queerty / Perez Hilton are NOT sources. This may be true but there's no realiable source yet. Stu21202 (talk) 18:04, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

What about this?

http://noypistuff.blogspot.com/2010/10/jim-parsons-and-todd-spiewak-to-marry.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.26.173.142 (talk) 02:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Blogs are almost never considered reliable sources. Evil saltine (talk) 15:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I would say that maybe the post on Current's website might be legit. Of course, it still might not. And since AE had trouble getting his publicist to confirm it, it will probably continue to be a mystery. --Janers0217 (talk) 18:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Current cites another page which itself cites the National Enquirer, so I wouldn't consider that reliable. Evil saltine (talk) 15:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Most unreliable sources state that Parsons would got married after Christmas, something that at this point, would have to been covered by many reliable sources. Could left this topic in the closet until Parsons, if he is LGBT, wants to come out? Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 19:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Please remember that WP:BLP applies to talk pages as well. Evil saltine (talk) 15:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

That's why I said if he is LGBT, I am not confirming it nor dening it. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 19:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I understand; I didn't mean to direct that at you specifically. Sorry if I was rude. Evil saltine (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that I was listening to an interview with him on NPR... Fresh Air, maybe? where he discussed coming out. Almost like 99% sure. Xadnder (talk) 02:28, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

This one? Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:38, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

No comment (not even minimal) on Jim Parsons's sexuality in this article feels like a straightwashing. Straight celebrities frequently have comments on their relationships (and marriages) whether or not the celebrity is willing to make any public comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.25.202.120 (talk) 14:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

It looks like for a celebrity to actually "be" gay, they have to go on talk shows and yell at the cameras or have an interview with a famous magazine.

This is as absurd as saying that Anderson Cooper is heterosexual; they just haven't "come out" in a public display. If someone actually took their time to do some research, they would know all of this, but of course there is always heteronormativity and the idea that being labelled as "gay" constitutes an attack. Von Karma (talk) 19:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, Von Karma. If the argument for including references to the romantic lives of heterosexuals is that this encyclopedia should contain as many useful facts as possible (we can debate the utility of including this information another time, I suppose) then why then shouldn't this apply for homosexuals as well? Why is the burden of proof so much higher for gays? Considering the lengths that some straight stars go to keep their personal life private - no mentions of loved ones or family or romantic lives at all in interviews, no photos in magazines, etc. - shouldn't the same standard be applied to them before information is included on their pages? In other words, why don't straight actors have to prominently proclaim their heterosexuality in the press before it can be discussed here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.240.111.123 (talk) 17:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Just being gay is (arguably) not notable. The most up-to-date news I found says the marriage was called off. If Parsons were in fact married, it would be good to include a brief mention ("In [year] Parsons married [person], [brief description of person if no wiki link is available]. The couple live in [city]."). Without him being married I don't see how any of this is notable enough to include anyway. I also found no reliable source confirming any of these rumors; everything is on blogs and/or traces back to the National Enquirer.

As a fan, I wish him all the happiness in the world with a husband, wife, teacup poodle, or whatever. That he doesn't seem to deny the rumors confirms them to me, but of course that's not enough to merit inclusion. My feelings on the subject are really irrelevant here anyway. 208.107.152.253 (talk) 03:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Is the NYT considered a reliable source? See p. 3 of article: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/theater/jim-parsons-prepares-for-his-lead-role-in-harvey.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1337795475-BCUwfXY7UqiHeb4aM4KlQw — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.111.254.17 (talk) 17:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Is a person's sexuality so important that it must be mentioned in the article? I mean would you mention the sexuality of the person in every biographical article on wikipedia regardless of whether they are homosexual or heterosexual? I think it's stereotypical in this case. His sexuality should be removed as it has no relevance.(Jatinbhatt blap (talk) 20:42, 23 June 2012 (UTC))

It's not stereotypical, it's important so that we can place him in the correct categories such as Category:LGBT_actors, etc. Cancerbero 8 (talk) 15:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

In that case, we should have a category of blonde people, left handed people and so on. (Jatinbhatt blap (talk) 08:42, 15 September 2012 (UTC))

The New York Times's article referenced to the announcement of Parsons's sexuality does in no way actually confirm it, nor does it mention it at all in fact. There is no point in having it written in, let alone the article linked. There are few who will actually click through to read the original article so there is little point in even having it included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeyceekah (talk • contribs) 09:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Page 2, fifth paragraph from the end: "Mr. Parsons is gay and in a 10-year relationship". Theoldsparkle (talk) 13:36, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 February 2013

As an addition to the 'Television' section, Jim Parsons also appeared in the Family Guy episode Joe's Revenge in 2012, in the role credited as 'Gay-Jacker'. Tylero2011 (talk) 23:54, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

 Not done You would need to provide a reliable source. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Finding it tricky to find an allowable source (i.e. not imdb or tvrage or youtube clips), I only realised it was him as I saw his name in the end credits (he only has one line). He's credited on the Wikipedia page of the actual episode in the sidebar. I'm not sure how that was cited but that's the credit in question. Tylero2011 (talk) 02:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 April 2013

Jim Parsons did an episode of Kick Buttowski: Suburban Daredevil on episode “Jock Wilder’s Nature Camp” which premiered on Saturday, February 4, 2012. He plays the voice of Larry Wilder, the overly cautious brother of the Camp Director Jack Wilder, who teams with Kick Buttowski on a wilderness adventure. This needs to be added to Jim Parsons Filmography. Here is a link to my resource for this request, [[3]]

Blakebusby4ua (talk) 18:06, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Done Mdann52 (talk) 13:55, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request 29th April 2013

Jim Parsons was nominated for a People's Choice Award 2013 (lost). http://www.peopleschoice.com/pca/awards/nominees/

He was also nominated for a Screen Actor's Guild Award 2013 (lost). http://www.sagawards.org/awards/nominees-and-recipients/19th-annual-screen-actors-guild-awards

He has been nominated for a Broadway Audience Choice Award (pending). http://awards.broadway.com/nominees/

Jimfangirl (talk) 01:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)Jimfangirl 02.51 (GMT) 29/04/13

"came out as gay" not in citation given

Can you add a Template:Failed verification on the sentence "In 2012, he came out as gay, having been in a relationship for ten years."? In the article linked, it does not say that Parsons "came out" or made any statement at all about his sexual orientation. It just claims that he is gay. --208.80.119.68 (talk) 23:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I read the article and it's not clear-cut to me. The article never says that Parsons said, "I'm gay." At the same time, it's fairly well implied by the context and, in particular, because it was an interview. There's a quote from Parsons (not about being gay) followed by this:

"The Normal Heart" resonated with him on a few levels: Mr. Parsons is gay and in a 10-year relationship, and working with an ensemble again onstage was like nourishment, he said.

On the one hand, it sounds like the article author is saying that Parsons said both things in support of it resonating with him. On the other hand, it doesn't quote Parsons and the "he said" at the end of the sentence could apply only to the part about working with an ensemble. Frankly, I'm not quite sure what to do with what we say in the article, so I've left it alone. I'd be interested in hearing what others think.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

• Now, it's correct...saying he said he's gay. – Teammm ^{Let's Talk! :)} 00:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I still don't think the article says that Parsons said he's gay. Reading the sentence (Mr. Parsons...) out loud as a normal person would read it, it sounds like two sentences with a big pause in the middle connected by an "and". The "he said" at the end does not sound like it encompasses the part before the "and". --208.80.119.68 (talk) 02:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Then why he permited to be called "gay" by the NYT, and say nothing about that after a whole day. The message is implicit but clear in their interview. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

How about we simply say "He is gay and as of 2012 he has been in a relationship for 10 years" ie exactly what the source states. Siawase (talk) 12:24, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

The issue is not whether he is gay and in a relationship (that is supported by the source); the issue is whether he stated so himself, which is a big deal (I'm not convinced that is supported by the sources). Since he is (supposedly) gay, he wouldn't object to being called gay, and wouldn't make a big deal about whether he said it or not; but that does not mean he said it. --208.80.119.68 (talk) 18:45, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree with 208 and with Siawase. We can say he's gay in the body of the article based on the NYT source. However, we should not put him in gay cats without a clear self-identification - and this was not that. By the same token, we should not say he came out or that he revealed, or even my last word he said, because it's not clear what he said. Unless I hear some persuasive argument to the contrary, I will change the body of the article per Siawase's wording and remove the gay cats.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:02, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like double-speak to me. If it's not OK to put him into any gay categories (because he has never publicly outed himself), then how can it be OK to say he's gay in the body of the article? Categories must be supported by article text, which in turn must be supported by reliable external citations. If a reliable citation is available, then we can both mention his sexuality in the article and put him into a gay category. If there's no reliable citation, we can do neither. It's an all-or-nothing thing. There's no way in which one of these would be OK but the other not. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 04:51, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

The standard for inclusion of the material in the body is the usual standard, which is that it must be relevant and reliably sourced (as well as other limitations like WP:UNDUE, WP:COATRACK, etc.). WP:BLPCAT has a higher standard for including the cats. It isn't "double-speak". BLPCAT even explains the basis for the policy.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:35, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

I struggle with this, I must say. Are you saying we could conceivably write volumes about his homosexuality on the basis that there are plenty of reliable sources about it (assuming there were), but we can't put him into any gay categories until he says the exact words "I am gay"? What if he publicly refers to some man as "my boyfriend" and is seen holding hands and kissing him, but never says the precise words "I am gay"? What if he marries a man, but never says the words "I am gay"? OK, I'm stretching the point here. Obviously, entering into a same-sex marriage would constitute "publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question", so that would be clear. But short of that, it's often as much about what people don't say as about what they do say, that leads the rest of the world to form pretty definite ideas of their sexuality. I know, I know, we can't use nods and winks and knowing looks as the basis of WP articles, but ... -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 06:22, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Not everyone who are in a same-sex relationship are gay, even if they are in a same-sex marriage, so we absolutely cannot use that as the lone criteria for inclusion in gay categories. (Other possible orientations/identifications include bisexual, queer, and deliberately unspecified.) And it has happened before that the media, even usually reliable sources, have declared someone X sexual orientation, only for that person to identify differently when something is published where they define themselves in their own words. In the prose we can reflect the nuance of these things, but categories have no room for nuance, so out of respect for the individual/BLP they should only be used when the person has clearly self-identified.

"we could conceivably write volumes about his homosexuality on the basis that there are plenty of reliable sources about it (assuming there were), but we can't put him into any gay categories until he says the exact words "I am gay"?"

This is exactly right, Wikipedia can and does (while accurately reflecting the sourcing situation) include high quality media coverage of same-sex relationships and sexual orientation even when the subject hasn't commented themselves, while eschewing inclusion in categories, see for example Jodie Foster#Personal life and Anderson Cooper#Personal life.

See also Sexual orientation#Sexual orientation distinguished from sexual identity and behavior, where categories on Wikipedia strictly follows self-identification, not behavior or presumed orientation.

And with all that in mind, re the prose in this article, we could add a "Per the New York Times" here to make clear to the readers where the "he is gay" originates. Siawase (talk) 12:37, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I propose we replace the current sentence in the article with:

In a report about an interview with Parsons in May 2012, The New York Times said Parsons is gay and has been in a relationship for the last ten years.

I also propose deletion of the gay cats pursuant to WP:BLPCAT as there is no clear self-identification.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

To add another opinion, I disagree. The relevant category inclusion criteria is "the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question". I read the NYT quote, "Mr. Parsons is gay and in a 10-year relationship, and working with an ensemble again onstage was like nourishment, he said", as applying "he said" to the entire sentence, so Parsons publicly (by knowing he would be near-quoted) self-identified as gay. The whole question is whether or not this interpretation is correct. I believe it is, since (1) the article discusses interviewing Parsons, (2) if "he said" applied only to the ensemble clause it would have preceded "working", and (3) the alternative is that the journalist outed Parsons against his will, which would be completely unacceptable for a paper as respectable as the NYT and would call for immediate action which doesn't seem to have taken place.

I prefer your rewritten version to what's there, though I would make some other changes. I dislike his personal life section having a single sentence, though. The section should be expanded soon or the info should be moved elsewhere in the article. Anyway, my version:

In May 2012, The New York Times reported that Parsons was gay and was currently in a ten-year relationship. 75.76.162.89 (talk) 04:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I disagree with your parsing of the NYT sentence, but what comes out of our disagreement is important because it strengthens the argument that the self-identification is unclear. As for your proposed sentence, it's far simpler than mine, which I like. The only reason I made mine as complex as I did was to get in the interview context, but without saying that Parsons himself said it. If we were to go with your sentence, I would change it in a couple of ways (I hate the word currently, and in this case, it's unnecessary because of the date):

In May 2012, The New York Times reported that Parsons was gay and in a relationship for the last ten years. 75.76.162.89 (talk) 04:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I prefer "was gay" rather than "is gay" even though I used "is" in my first version. I believe "was" is grammatically correct and doesn't imply that it's no longer true. However, because I believe there are Wikipedians who prefer "is", I used it.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:07, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

And why we don't contact Patrick Healy, and ask him the original script? Interviews are done in this way not the way the NYT published it. There is a chance that Healy asked Parsons something about his relationships and Parsons said "Well, I'm gay" or something similar. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:22, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It would have to be published though, so they would have to put a transcript/clarificiation up on the ny times site. An emailed reply doesn't satisfy WP:V/WP:RS. Siawase (talk) 09:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it does, Healy made the interview, Healy is reliable enough. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

As for the sentence disagreement, I suppose getting into a long-winded digression on the precise parsing of the NYT sentence is unhelpful. If you want to tread lightly on a BLP article, fair enough, the categorization can wait for further confirmation.

As for the modified sentence, I like your updated version. At this point someone with editing privileges should put it in the article, as at least four people have had the chance to comment on it and it seems stable. [As a very minor note, I used "was" instead of "is" since strictly speaking sexual orientation can be fluid--people may self-identify as one thing and change later on, which according to a study I read about recently is somewhat common among "lesbians" (for lack of a better term). The only conclusion that can be drawn from the NYT source is that he was gay at the time of the interview.] 75.76.162.89 (talk) 04:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I've updated the article and removed the cats.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Was there a consensus to remove the cats?Rusted AutoParts 15:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Yahoo! considered this interview as a come out [4] and BTW you can google his boyfriend name and see tons of images of them together:)Ladsgroup^بحث 18:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

P.S. so did Perez Hilton [5]:)Ladsgroup^بحث 18:54, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

So many reliable references considered this interview as a come out. I did a little search. If you want i can search further. huffingtonpost:[6], USA magazine:[7], LA times:[8],Vancouversun:[9], New york daily times:[10],CBS news:[11], People magazine:[12], MSN news:[13], E!:[14] Removed.:)Ladsgroup^بحث 19:29, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, here's the history of whether Wikipedia should report that Parsons came out. As you can see above, there was a long discussion about how to word what happened and whether to include LGBT cats per WP:BLPCAT. The discussion ended on May 30, 2012. I waited a couple of weeks to make sure there was no more discussion and concluded a consensus had been reached about both and edited the article accordingly. I logged what I did on June 14. There was no objection until July 3 when Rusted Auto Parts inserted the cats. I reverted him and pointed him to the Talk page. He asked if a consensus had been reached, and no one responded. Along comes Ladsgroup who inserted the cats with a reference. I reverted because the reference adds nothing as it merely reports on the NYT interview. Ladsgroup reverted again, this time adding 12 references that are essentially same as the first - all simply report on the NYT interview. Ladsgroup also wrote this really odd sentence: "This interview is considered as a come out." Sounds like a sports play.

It seems to me there are a couple of issues that I suppose need to be discussed. First, is there a reason to change the consensus reached before, or was I wrong to conclude there was a consensus? Second, if the NYT interview is insufficient for Wikipedia to state that Parsons came out and self-identifies as gay, do all these other secondary sources (12 and I have no doubt Ladsgroup, in his zeal, could find more :-) ), saying that Parsons came out change the equation?

In the meantime, because this is a BLP issue and because of the previous discussion, I am going to revert so we go back to the safer status quo. If there is a consensus to change it, fine, but it can wait until such a consensus is reached. I ask other editors to respect that position and be a little patient during the process. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I can't understand when 12 (and counting :D) references says Jim Parsons came out (They implied NYT reference but they said "he came out") why you want to remove it. WP:V says "No matter how convinced you are that something is true, do not add it to an article unless it is verifiable" there is so many mainstream references implied "he came out" so please don't judge what references said i.e. when references say "he came out" we must consider this interview (NYT is a primary references and per WP:PRIMARY and we have no right to judge what it said) as a came out not anything else. we do not say is he gay or not we say he is out of closet or not

About the category I say it's not Category:People self-identifying as gay! it is "Category:Gay people" (or one of subcats). He is out of closet (No matter he came out or being outed) if it's not true, he would sent a massage NYT to remove the interview or do something similar

about the sports play! OK I'm not a native English-speaker so I don't how to rewrite that sentence that not seems sports play! please rewrite it.

There is no consensus about that (And there was not, too) i mean i can't see anything similar to a consensus. If you are agree we can request a mediation:)Ladsgroup^بحث 22:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:BLPCAT actually means exactly that, Category:Gay people is nothing more and nothing less than Category:People self-identifying as gay. And all the commentary calling it a coming out is exactly that, commentary and opinion pieces. They have no more information that the original NY Times article. They didn't talk to Parsons. They're simply offering their opinions on the NY Times piece. Question is if their opinions carry enough WP:WEIGHT to be included here, and I would lean towards a "no" on that. Siawase (talk) 22:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Sorry, all of the sources just parrot each other and rely on the NYT. As for your language skills, I know that if there's a consensus to say that Parsons came out, it can be rewritten. Indeed, we would rewrite that part, eliminating your sentence. No offense, by the way, I just found it amusing. As for self-identification, please read WP:BLPCAT, which is policy. I think mediation is a bit premature. Let's see whether we get any comments. If nothing happens soon, I'll post something at WP:BLPN in an effort to attract more experienced editors who usually have opinions on these things. Please be patient, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

In the NYT reference is written:

Mr. Parsons is gay and in a 10-year relationship, and working with an ensemble again onstage was like nourishment, he said.

And there is no sentence ending mark between the gay statement and "he said" statement that means he said he is gay (it's an indirect speech if i'm not wrong) :)Ladsgroup^بحث 23:01, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

If you would read through the May discussion, you'll see we parsed that sentence to death and concluded that it was not self-identification as gay.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:09, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I read it but your argument is there is big pause in middle of sentence! if there was such a that pause there must be ";" or "." sign too. you must judge by punctuation marks not meaning. If there is doubt about he stated they "I'm gay" phrase. we can call the writer by e-mail or official tweeter or facebook (if there is) and ask him/her "Is your meaning of 'Mr. Parsons is gay [...], he said' is he stated 'I'm gay' or something similar in your interview?". and by the way Parsons didn't object on NYT and 12 other mainstream media why he want to object Wikipedia? That's why WP:BLP is written:)Ladsgroup^بحث 23:31, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

There is a comma before the "and working" (grammatically, the comma is not even required except perhaps to make it clear that he didn't "say" the first part). We don't know what Parsons did (re objection). Feel free to write the NYT, but I doubt you'll get a response, and even if you did, how would we cite to it?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

maybe he did not stated "I'm gay" phrase but maybe the author asked him that he can state in the article Parsons is gay or not and Parsons did not object and we can consider those same. So I'll ask "Is your meaning of 'Mr. Parsons is gay [...], he said' is he stated 'I'm gay' or something similar in your interview or you said you'll write in your article that he is gay and he did not object?" and if there will be an answer there is no need to cite (Did you see OTRS?) or I see too much WP:WL:)Ladsgroup^بحث 23:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a lot of speculation on your part.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:08, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I think we can't continue. I'll ask on WP:BLPN:)Ladsgroup^بحث 00:17, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

The result of the WP:BLPN discussion was that the subject's sexuality merits the weight that it currently has: about one sentence. Even twelve cites don't support an additional category, extra editorializing, or extra weight to the topic biographically speaking.

Having said that, the "Personal life" section is in poor shape. Currently, it states where the subject lives and that he is gay. Having virtually an entire section (whatever it's named) dedicated to the topic might indicate a WP:WEIGHT problem, but that wasn't part of the BLPN discussion, and I can't find a better place to put the information. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 00:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Tbhotch (talk · contribs): that looks much better. JFHJr (㊟) 01:12, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

About this "He has skipped "I'M GAY" for cover of Time magazine"[15] that Ladsgroup keeps trying to insert[16][17] Aside from how meaningful it is to bring up things he didn't do, if you read the source it comes to the conclusion that Parsons doesn't want a big coming out. So how about we just let him be quietly out without putting extra weight on his sexuality with commentary and editorializing? Siawase (talk) 19:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Given that it's been over a month since the NYT article was published, and eleventy gazillion other news sources reported that Parsons had thus come out as gay, and Parsons has apparently felt no need to issue any kind of correction on the matter, it seems highly unlikely that he could possibly have any issue with Wikipedia saying the same thing (via the categories) that eleventy gazillion other news sources have already reported without his objection. If people want to be such sticklers about it, okay, it's not that big a deal, but I'm just saying that at this point it appears to me that concerns about applying the categories are pretty much divorced from practical reality. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:08, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

This article from 5 days ago states "Anderson Cooper, Neil Patrick Harris, Jim Parsons and Matt Bomer have all spoken openly about being gay." Perhaps we can be done with this silliness now. --j⚛e decker^talk 17:42, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

So I suppose we should remove all the actors who are part of the LGBTQ community from the relevant characters because it'd be adding undue weight? Oh, guess I better go an remove those categories on Cooper's article. He has no problem with his sexuality, how is categorising the article adding undue weight? Has anyone seen the Elizabeth II article recently? James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 2:22pm • 04:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Categorizing Parsons as part of the LBGT community based on the assertions of one article seems like a stretch. While he hasn't come to deny the claim, it seems like a lot of subsequent articles (such as that from the Huffington Post) are simply using the claims of the Times article's reporter to state factually that Parsons is gay (and if that's grounds enough to categorize and label things, then every wild assertion made by a reporter for any press medium should have a category - I hear Mickey Rourke was abducted by aliens and Joe Scoop of the LA Blab seems to be certain of it/etc.). It seems like a large assumption to take as fact based on the writing of one reporter in an article from 2012 and it speaks a lot toward how no other journalist appears to want to broach the subject with the actor to either confirm or deny it so there isn't just the one "smoking gun" type of article backing up the now generalized assumption. --99.186.110.193 (talk) 07:31, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

If you are a celebrity, and one of the most prestigious newspapers in the world interviews you, and they publish an article in which it is clear that you cooperated with the reporter, and the article says that you are gay, and many, many other media sources around the world take that as confirmation that you are gay and republish it as such, and a year later, you have never been seen to have given the slightest indication that the article was incorrect, and it is common knowledge -- correct or not -- that you are gay: there is no reasonable basis in the world for you to possibly be upset or offended if Wikipedia places you in a category that implies you are gay. Maybe you're not gay, but you've sure as hell shown that you don't care if people think you are. Theoldsparkle (talk) 17:01, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Personal info

The personal section appears to rely entirely on poptower.com - hardly ideal. Can nobody find a published interview to cover this sort of celebrity trivia? Ash (talk) 23:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC) Maybe it should be mentioned that his ancestor was Louis-François Trouard, architect to king of France Louis XV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:3984:AEE0:FC10:68C7:BAA:5956 (talk) 08:46, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Nissan Commercials Spokesperson

Jim Parsons, in-character as Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory, has been acting as a spokesperson in commercials for the 2014 Nissan Micra. The commercials in question are up on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=trueview-instream&v=npriO8XGI7g and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsWZ9G_OcxE 206.116.198.22 (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Awards and nominations

2012 Golden Globe Awards Best Actor– Television Series: Musical or Comedy => didn't nominated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/69th_Golden_Globe_Awards || 2011 TCA Awards Individual Achievement in Comedy The Big Bang Theory Nominated => it's 2012 not 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/28th_TCA_Awards Kobe Lai (talk) 17:33, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Done though it seems that years on Award Shows can vary.... --Jnorton7558 (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2014

In the last paragraph of Jim Parsons "Career: Breakthrough role in The Big Bang Theory" section it is said that he was nominated for the Emmy Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series every year from 2010 until 2014, but his first nomination actually happened in 2009. Source: http://www.emmys.com/awards/nominees-winners/2009/lead-actor-comedy Cargonat (talk) 16:12, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Done Jnorton7558 (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2014

In the section Breakthrough role in The Big Bang Theory

In paragraph 4, there is an error in the line ...Parsons was nominated for Emmy awards in 1009,.... Please change 1009 to 2009.

Thanks. Jagandecapri (talk) 16:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done - Thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 16:33, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for catching my apparent fat fingers :)--Jnorton7558 (talk) 03:56, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Heading text

Seanaod (talk) 12:10, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: According to the page's protection level and your user rights, you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 13:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

. Shayma95 (talk) 10:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Denied as you haven't said what you would like to add to the article. I am therefore taking this as a test edit--5 albert square (talk) 11:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2015

Please update Mr. Parsons' age as he has just turned 42 today. Thankyou 182.68.43.216 (talk) 14:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

A template is already in place that automatically calculates age, so his age is already updated. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2015

He also played "Oh" an alien who's leader invaded earth in a children's film called "HOME." Gg.ornithology (talk) 21:16, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Already done This information is already in the filmography table. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 21:31, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2015

1. A year ago, Jim Parsons has become the official face of Intel, appearing in numerous social media and TV commercials. http://celebritytoob.com/celebrity-news/intel-hires-jim-parsons-face-new-campaign/

2. He is one of the cast of 2015 movie "Visions", playing doctor Mathison http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2954474/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.247.224.28 (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Jim Parsons. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090217221127/http://www.winnipegfreepress.com:80/entertainment/the_tab/the_buzz-39481582.html to http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/entertainment/the_tab/the_buzz-39481582.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110717042618/http://www.theusdvista.com/mobile/news/alum-sparks-big-bang-at-the-emmys-1.1602499 to http://www.theusdvista.com/mobile/news/alum-sparks-big-bang-at-the-emmys-1.1602499

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2016

Jim Parsons played in the movie "Visions" in 2015 as Dr. Mathison. This was not on the list. 24.246.181.196 (talk) 14:14, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

 Not done yet, a citation would be needed for this Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:17, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Jim Parsons. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090718001718/http://cdn.emmys.tv:80/awards/2009ptemmys/61stemmys_noms.php to http://cdn.emmys.tv/awards/2009ptemmys/61stemmys_noms.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131229130205/http://www.saintmarylancaster.org/projects/JIM%20PARSONS%20WEBOGRAPHY%20FOR%20LANGUZGE%20ARTS_files/Page317.htm to http://www.saintmarylancaster.org/projects/JIM%20PARSONS%20WEBOGRAPHY%20FOR%20LANGUZGE%20ARTS_files/Page317.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090207064628/http://www.cbs.com:80/primetime/big_bang_theory/bio/jim_parsons/bio.php to http://www.cbs.com/primetime/big_bang_theory/bio/jim_parsons/bio.php

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:37, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Please assist to update list of awards received by Jim Parson in 2016

Hi. Just to inform you that Jim Parsons received 2 awards other that stated in wiki as at 20 April 2016.

Please update, Jim Parsons won 1. Kids’ Choice Awards 2016 - Favorite Male TV Star – Family Show Source: http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/kids-choice-awards-2016-complete-list-of-winners-w167038

2. TV Land Icon Awards 2016 - IHOP Fan Favourite Character Icon Award Source: http://www.iol.co.za/tonight/news/tv-land-icon-awards-winners-announced-2010937

Really appreciate for updating. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilisusanti (talk • contribs) 06:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 Not done I don't know what to say about iol.co.za, but Us Weekly (aka Us Magazine) is a gossip magazine that is not reliable by any reasonable measure. Snuggums (talk / edits) 11:54, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jim Parsons. 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/20110306050530/http://theoldglobe.org:80/information/latestnews/latestnews_page4.aspx to http://theoldglobe.org/information/latestnews/latestnews_page4.aspx

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) 12:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jim Parsons. 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://archive.is/20120720093927/http://stage.variety.com/review/VE1117917809.html to http://stage.variety.com/review/VE1117917809.html

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) 15:55, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Gasser meaning obscure

The meaning of 'gasser' in the For link at the top of the article is obscure:

"For gasser driver, see Jim Parsons (drag racer).

The Wikipedia page for gasser is titled: "Gasser (car)"

I will change the For link to read :

For the gasser (car) driver, see Jim Parsons (drag racer).

Phersh (talk) 05:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2020

As far as I know, sheldon cooper is not in family guy and so why is he listed as one of the tv series done by Mr parsons 77.96.168.2 (talk) 18:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

The characters was apparently a part of one show. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, Sheldon and Leonard were just briefly featured in one Family Guy episode as linked above, with Parsons and Johnny Galecki reprising their Big Bang Theory roles for the guest appearance. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:32, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2020

Received a B.A. to earned a B.A. 72.68.99.12 (talk) 04:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done GoingBatty (talk) 04:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2020

Jim Parsons voiced two characters in called Stan and Syd in Pete the Cat in 2018. He was in 2 episodes. 2.27.98.126 (talk) 07:26, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 08:12, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2021

In the personal life or when discussing his collage career please mention that he is a brother in the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity. 2601:46:4400:ECF0:FD35:425A:A252:BE1 (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 02:50, 9 June 2021 (UTC)