Talk:T.J. Miller

message: ...best damn character in a fantastic film. WELL DONE, sir! 199.214.26.192 (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  R.I.P. Hud... 

message: I cannot be alone in finding this styling of the name bizarre, am I? I've never seen a space put between the letters "T._J." before; I've always understood it to be "T.J.", as in all other names of this sort. His own name listed on twitter is "T.J." (with no space). I'm seeing a number of articles in this style too... can someone point me to the discussion that resulted in this style? Shadowjams (talk) 19:53, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see MOS:SPACEINITS. --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Shadowjams is not alone. T.J. Miller has also questioned the spelling of his own name. https://www.facebook.com/wikiwhat/videos/110458719651405/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrazzle (talk • contribs) 11:28, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  So T.J. Miller himself said in the Esquire piece that he doesn't use or like the spaces in his name. So this is the reason to change the page name. As well as to reflect what he self-identifies as his name. So should Wikipedia ignore what he states is a fact? I don't understand why Wikipedia should be inaccurate. And Miller was not joking when he said he's a comedian, not an actor. He states this, is not joking when he says this fact. Again coming straight from the subject of this page. It is very common for comedians not to consider themselves actors. So this should be changed to reflect T.J.'s wishes. See video and article here:  -- BrillLyle (talk) 06:34, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

text: All the refs write "T.J."  This is not controversial. Jytdog (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spacing of "T.J." 

message: This article reads like an advertisement/resume rather than an encyclopedic article.  Further, it's longer than his obscureness justifies.  His career is worth maybe one or two sentences.  There's no need to go into depth on someone who did maybe one movie that wasn't very popular or critically acclaimed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.169.241 (talk) 16:12, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is too long 

message: Please see discussion here: WikiWhat, where the editor defends his tagging of this article as paid editing, which I believe is wrong and inaccurate. 
The subject of the page, T.J. Miller, in no way paid the comedian and Wikipedia editor, Josh Gondelman aka  to edit the page for him. So tagging this page as being part of some sort of nefarious paid editing experience is WRONG, is factually inaccurate. 
Additionally, as the subject of a Biography of Living People (BLP), Miller is allowed to make changes with the help of a Wikipedia editor, especially to make corrections to his page if there are facts that are incorrect. This type of editing should be encouraged, not discouraged by putting an inaccurate tag on this page as well as others who participate in Wiki What. It is inappropriate and inaccurate to claim this is a situation where there is paid editing. The effect of adding this tag is essentially vandalism, and can be seen as a negative experience to editing Wikipedia, and could discourage outreach and engagement. The tag should be removed immediately. -- BrillLyle (talk) 06:51, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks so much for this. Really appreciate it. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

text: Additionally while we do appreciate when subjects let us know that facts are incorrect, for things that are more general descriptions, the subject's self description is not more important than what independent sources say.  The community has had a recent series of extensive discussions about this (far more loaded subject matter, but the principle is the same) here and here for example. So the claim in this edit note is wrong. Jytdog (talk) 20:18, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  As I stated in the discussion on the COI notice board, I disagree completely with your assessment of the situation here. I am actually getting quite annoyed. This is not constructive from an editing perspective, and I think it hurts the contribution of content to the encyclopedia. It also shows an absolute lack of a sense of humor -- which is why I think Wiki What? is sort of wonderful. It is gently humorous about Wikipedia editing. There's no Machiavellian thing happening here. I am really disheartened by this new analysis. I'm just shaking my head here in exhaustion. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 23:35, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't take reality TV as reality. This is a cynical exploitation of Wikipedia for celebrity PR, which Hearst Digital Media clearly describes here - they produce the video series and then promote it in Esquire, which they also own.  I have no idea on what basis you have made these strident claims that there is no COI or paid editing here.  These claims appear to be utterly baseless. Jytdog (talk) 03:04, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paid editing tag should be removed from page 

message: He was in this:
https://www.facebook.com/wikiwhat/
Victor Grigas (talk) 23:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes Victor. It is noted at the top of this talk page and has been the reason for recent flurry of edits / improvements to his page. Here's the Esquire article:  The comedian said that John Bradley-West from Game of Thrones is up next. And I know he did a Kate Upton one. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 23:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiWhat 

message: I opened a discussion about using Esquire/WikiWhat-facebook as sources for this article at RSN here -- Jytdog (talk) 02:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Reliability of Esquire/Wiki What as sources

message: Content about his parentage is unsourced.  Do not add unsourced content to an article about a living person. Jytdog (talk) 04:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of deleting, I tagged it with citation needed. It is more productive. He has discussed his background before. It just needs a source. BrillLyle (talk) 04:55, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not OK to add unsourced content to a BLP article.  It has nothing to do with "productive". I am standing down now, however... Jytdog (talk) 05:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heritage 

message: In my view it is not common to have a laundry list of every film in which someone has appeared in the lead.  Highlights, sure.  I left some summary content, but we don't need a sea of blue laundrylist in the lead of any article. Jytdog (talk) 15:28, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: I predict possible vandalism will occur once more people learn of the Amtrak incident. Sovietmessiah (talk) 20:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has since been protected. StewdioMACK (talk) 08:23, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Request to lock

message: While the majority of the paragraph outlining Miller’s transphobic aggression toward a critic is fine, the final sentence and summation of the affair is offensive and bigoted trolling.
“…Miller had sent a transphobic email to film critic Danielle Solzman. Solzman posted a screenshot of the email months prior on Twitter, with Miller's name removed. She feared that Miller would take harsh legal action against her. Miller, in the email, continuously referred to Solzman by her deadname, and also called her multiple slurs and called her male. It was reported that Miller's tirade was in response to Solzman criticizing the use of the term "Tranny Dumpster Sex" on his website. Miller was subsequently cleared of all wrongdoing in the matter by common sense, as Daniel is in fact a man.[50]” 2601:601:957F:60A0:34F2:F1C3:6B28:592B (talk) 02:11, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rude transphobic editorial language in paragraph about Miller’s misbehavior