Talk:T.J. Miller

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

R.I.P. Hud...[edit]

...best damn character in a fantastic film. WELL DONE, sir! 199.214.26.192 (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spacing of "T.J."[edit]

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)[reply]

Please see MOS:SPACEINITS. --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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: Bruney, Gabrielle; Gondelman, Josh; Miller, T.J. (3 September 2017). "Watch T.J. Miller Have a Check-Up with the Wikipediatrician (Wiki What? #1)" (Includes video). Esquire. -- BrillLyle (talk) 06:34, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All the refs write "T.J." This is not controversial. Jytdog (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article is too long[edit]

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)[reply]

Requested move 14 January 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Clear consensus against one, and a move review for J. J. Watt may be in order. (non-admin closure) JudgeRM (talk to me) 18:20, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

T. J. Miller → T.J. Miller – There is no consensus for always using spaces, nor for never using them. In this case, however, he is more commonly referred to without them.[1][2][3][4] Unreal7 (talk) 17:57, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the strongly-argued "Oppose" votes, the J. J. Watt → J.J. Watt nomination should have been closed as "No consensus", thus retaining the original "J. J." form. Since that close was less than three weeks ago, a move review is still a valid option. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 00:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 6 September 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. This move request seems like a clear example of how consensus can change over time. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 15:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

T. J. Miller → T.J. Miller – Miller states he does not have a space between the two initials of his name in a video where he is actually correcting mistakes on his Wikipedia page. He is not joking, just states that he goes by T.J., not T. J. or TJ -- see link in prior section and in talk page box which refers to current press. Here it is: Bruney, Gabrielle; Gondelman, Josh; Miller, T.J. (3 September 2017). "Watch T.J. Miller Have a Check-Up with the Wikipediatrician (Wiki What? #1)" (Includes video). Esquire. BrillLyle (talk) 06:42, 6 September 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. DrStrauss talk 17:58, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Todd Joseph is T. space J. per MOS:INITIALS, which is part of WP:MOSBIO. We need a consistent style across Wikipedia to prevent duplicate article creation and mislinks among other reasons. This is life, any publishing project has a MOS. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:02, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Want to add after cleaning up about 2/3s of the citations on this page that every single one of the citations lists his name as T.J. Miller. The only time spaces are used is in Wikipedia. Whether or not it's a naming convention on Wikipedia, this is someone's name, for goodness' sake. It should be correct here. -- BrillLyle (talk) 09:24, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:INITIALS primarily relates to titles and leads, you don't seem to be taking account of the reason publishers and websites have manuals of style. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:15, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:INITIALS clearly says that it doesn't apply if the person has a preferred style or reliable sources use another style. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That isn't what it says, see below In ictu oculi (talk) 09:46, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Use initials in a personal name only if the name is commonly written that way. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies for when to use full names and other formats.
An initial is followed by a full point (period) and a space (e.g. J. R. R. Tolkien), unless:
  • The person had or has a different, consistently preferred style for his or her own name. In that case: treat as a self-published name change; examples include k.d. lang and Jeb Bush.
  • An overwhelming majority of reliable sources do otherwise for that person (see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks); examples include CC Sabathia.
In article text, a space after an initial (or an initial and a full point) and another initial should be a non-breaking space: J. R. R. Tolkien (or use the {{nbsp}} template).
  • Oppose. As above. This is purely a matter of style and ours is to use the spaces. I personally (if I was writing outside Wikipedia) would use spaces and no full stops, but that's just my own style. Here we aim for consistency. Mr Miller's own preference is, with all due respect, irrelevant. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:05, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:INITIALS says that a person's "consistently preferred style" should be followed. How does that make his preference irrelevant? --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per MOS:INITIALS. MOS:INITIALS clearly carves out exemptions for when "The person had or has a different, consistently preferred style for his or her own name" or when "An overwhelming majority of reliable sources do otherwise for that person ", both of which apply in this case. WP:COMMONSENSE should apply as well, as this is how the person choses to represent their name. It's no different than MC Hammer, k.d. lang, or CC Sabathia. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    ) 15:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per the very clear public request to fix per the subject's preference. Sadads (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This does seem to check out. Nearly every article about him reads "T.J.", so I'd say this qualifies under the "has a different, consistently preferred style for his or her own name" exemption. Nohomersryan (talk) 01:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above support reasoning, especially the MOS allowing for the subject's preferred styling. There are also comedy specials listed on the page which use the non-spaced form. A redirect with the MOS style would bring those using spaces to this page. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:07, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per subject's preference. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 01:30, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per !votes by In ictu oculi, Necrothesp and No such user both now and/or in the January discussion. We have had these discussions before, including a lengthy one at the above-mentioned Talk:J.J. Watt#Requested move 2 December 2016, where persuasive arguments against unspaced initials were submitted by Amakuru, wbm1058 and others. Before voting to create a precedent on the basis of how spacing of initials is rendered in the wild, where a variety of forms appear without any consistency, and open the gates for the return of J. J. Watt and various others, the detailed points made in that discussion should be considered. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 05:10, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. In my oppose vote on the move of J. J. Watt, I said I'd be open to self-published name arguments, and this appears to be the quintessential case of a self-published name. We have a reliable source, Esquire, publishing this self-published name. At this point I would only be persuaded to follow Wikipedia house style if evidence were presented that Miller did not consistently use this self-published name. "Wikipediatrician", lol, good publicity for both Miller and Wikipedia. But is that Wikipediatrician a volunteer or a paid professional? He certainly presents himself in a professional manner, as do most Wikipedia administrators. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Do those that purport to know the BLP's preference on the matter realize that the video from which they are basing their opinion is itself a joke and not to be taken seriously? Though I rather suspect Miller is laughing at all of this. And I want to be perfectly clear. He's not laughing with you. He's laughing at you. And that's just sad.That man from Nantucket (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine, let him laugh. But a decision still has to be made which way to style it. And like any reputable publication, we have house rules to determine that. It may seem pointless and trivial, but you still have to decide one way or the other. Now the only question is whether his comment about the lack of a space was a joke or not... but since many other publications, even those which normally use spaces, actually omit the space for Miller, it would appear there is more to this than just him having a laugh at the expense of Wikipedia.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I was asked to comment on this, having previously !voted in the J. J. Watt discussion, but I'm actually going to go the other way. In general, I am a big supporter of following the MOS in cases like this, unless there is a very compelling reason not to. However, having looked at it, I think this case actually does differ from J. J. Watt, in that there is an eerie consistency between reliable sources, as well as the video mentioned above (which, even if it is a joke, at least appears to be reflecting an intention at some level on the part of the subject). suggesting that the spaceless T.J. is a proper stylistic decision by the artist, honoured by sources. Thus it is in the same ballpark as MC Hammer, k.d. lang, or CC Sabathia as mentioned above. Note in particular the difference between these two articles from the same publisher, ABC News: "Critics' Choice Awards Host and Actor T.J. Miller Arrested 2 Days Before Show Airs", "JJ Watt on raising $27 million for Harvey relief efforts: 'Humanity steps up for each other'". For Miller, they have gone with his personal style, whereas for Watt they have not honoured the supposedly uniform spaceless style. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 09:49, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move per above arguments. The subject has a preferred style, and we should use it.  ONR  (talk)  00:30, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - he clearly wishes to be T.J., not T. J. Unreal7 (talk) 15:28, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not an admin, but I would like to see if this can be resolved -- one way or another. It seems to me that there is consensus to take the space out, to make the name T.J., and that this is a stated preference of the subject. Please advise. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 06:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit]

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 Mrazzle (talk) 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)[reply]

I want to also add that I do not even care for this actor, and wouldn't spend time editing his page if not for the fact that he is the subject of the page, is clarifying inaccuracies, and for some reason editors are disregarding the corrections. I think this is wrong. I also think that I am suitably neutral as I am not a fan, so I should be able to make corrections and not have them be reverted like they have been. Please let me know that I can make changes to correct this entry. T.J.'s page should reflect what is correct. -- BrillLyle (talk) 06:54, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support this was not paid editing and it's an important principle of WP:BLP that live subjects must be allowed to correct, or have corrected inaccuracies. I would encourage the next editor to remove that inappropriate tag ASAP. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed removed. If other facts come to light to suggest it was paid editing then we can reconsider. ed g2s • talk 13:16, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for this. Really appreciate it. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The basis for claiming as a fact that there is no paid editing here is unclear to me. But in any case, a subject editing their own article - directly or through an obvious proxy as was done and demonstrated in the facebook ref provided, is definitely conflict of interest editing. I don't think there is need for any templates like template:COI or template:autobiography as the article has been substantially worked over since the conflicted editing took place. But a COI tag (distinct from the paid tag) would definitely have been appropriate an earlier point in time.
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

WikiWhat[edit]

He was in this:

https://www.facebook.com/wikiwhat/

Victor Grigas (talk) 23:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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: Bruney, Gabrielle; Gondelman, Josh; Miller, T.J. (3 September 2017). "Watch T.J. Miller Have a Check-Up with the Wikipediatrician (Wiki What? #1)" (Includes video). Esquire. 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)[reply]

Reliability of Esquire/Wiki What as sources[edit]

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)[reply]

use as spam[edit]

So the use of the wiki what ref here:

Todd Joseph "T.J."[1] Miller (born June 4, 1981) is an American actor, comedian, producer, and writer.[2]

References

  1. ^ Bruney, Gabrielle; Gondelman, Josh; Miller, T.J. (September 3, 2017). "Watch T.J. Miller Have a Check-Up with the Wikipediatrician (Wiki What? #1)" (Includes video). Esquire.
  2. ^ Ryzik, Melena (April 20, 2016). "Q. and A. With T.J. Miller: 'Silicon Valley' and the Mucinex Phlegm Ball". The New York Times.

is spam. Even the real source provided there (as well as every other ref in this article) spells the name "T.J.". the ref adds no value and is just spam. Happy to take this specific use to RSN. Shall we? Jytdog (talk) 02:22, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:BrillLyle you are reverting without discussing. Please explain the value, supporting content, that this brings. As I said, happy to bring this specific use to RSN. Jytdog (talk) 02:29, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jytdog: Sigh. I am not. You are deleting content without being constructive. Please stop this. You are accusing me of nothing. This is you.
If you can't read the 2 threads on this talk page about the issue of T.J. vs. T. J. then that's an issue for you to resolve. It was an active point of discussion. I did a ton of work to clean up the citations -- which established he goes by T.J. and there should be an exception made to the style of his name. Issue resolved. Please stop bringing this up. It is resolved.
And please stop with the vendetta against Wiki What? You are embarrassing yourself and you are making Wikipedia look like we have zero sense of humor. Also if you challenge Esquire magazine one more time, it's you who looks dumb. I just can't go through this with you again and again. The noting that this article is part of the news is a common and -- in the interests of transparency -- important fact that needs to be preserved on the Talk page.
I am so tired of this argument. You are wrong and you need to stop this behavior. Get some help dude. -- BrillLyle (talk) 02:31, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying. We disagree. (We actually agree that every ref verifies "T.J.") Such disagreements about sources are what RSN is for. Shall I bring a thread there about this specific use? Jytdog (talk) 02:38, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jytdog: Actually NO, I do not want to take this to another notice board. I understand that you derive pleasure from harassing people and deleting content on Wikipedia. You are driving me off and making my experience unpleasant, that's for sure. You need to stop and get some personal help. This kind of behavior is why Wikipedia editors stop editing. And you are enjoying this. It's unacceptable. I don't care how many contributions you make. Please take a moment and consider how your actions are not productive and are unpleasant for others to deal with. You are responsible for your behavior here, and it is time for you to take some action to fix your problems. I am hating this and all of the interactions with you. It's just rotten. Again: get some help. BrillLyle (talk) 03:16, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We have a dispute. We need to work it out. How shall we do that? Jytdog (talk) 04:11, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jytdog: We don't actually have a dispute. We have an editor -- namely YOU -- who is deleting content. Please don't make this appear reasonable on your part. Your behavior here is a problem. You hurt Wikipedia and your behavior drives off editors. I am unwilling to enable your personal issues here. I am also unwilling to spend a huge amount of energy fighting your behavioral problems. I know you derive pleasure from this behavior but it's not my problem. You need to back down and stop deleting content. And re-examine how you interact with people on Wikipedia. You violate the basic rules here constantly -- you can't seem to help tagging my Talk page with notices threatening me with getting banned as an editor. Ironical as you are the one who should be banned. I have had it with you and your problems. Again: Get some flipping help and deal with your issues. I am not interested in engaging with them here. -- BrillLyle (talk) 05:00, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

am bringing the sentence above to RSN; I don't see how else to resolve the dispute. Jytdog (talk) 05:14, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

done Jytdog (talk) 05:22, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Heritage[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Lead[edit]

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)[reply]

Request to lock[edit]

I predict possible vandalism will occur once more people learn of the Amtrak incident. Sovietmessiah (talk) 20:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article has since been protected. StewdioMACK (talk) 08:23, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rude transphobic editorial language in paragraph about Miller’s misbehavior[edit]

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)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:T.J._Miller&oldid=1209070483"