Jump to content

Talk:Carlos Mencia/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Footnote 1: San Francisco "Chornicle"?

Self-explanatory. 153.106.4.94 07:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Honduras

He said he is from Honduras.User:alfredosolis

placing 14th in SS

source for 2007 standup showdown: http://www.comedycentral.com/events/susd/index.jhtml -kaizen @ feb 2

Theres been some debate about whether or not his 2007 SS placement is relevant to the article. I feel that if his 2006 standing is present, theres no reason to not cite the latest and most recent Standup Showdown rankings. A wikipedia article is about presenting cited facts and letting the reader judge, not about balancing something so that everyone is happy. How listing his 2007 standing with a citation constitutes vandalism is totally beyond me. If anything this is censorship by just one person. -kaizen @ feb 12

Copyvio

Some of this text is copied verbatim from the Comedy Central website. Admittedly, there isn't a lot of information about Mr. Hordell circulating around, but could something at least be written that is a bit more original? --Grain king 9 July 2005 04:18 (UTC)

Seriously, seriously needs to be NPOVed. This reads like an advertisement, not an encyclopedia entry. blahpers 16:10, 2005 July 10 (UTC)

I blanked the article, attached the copyvio tag and added the article to the copyright problems page. TaintedMustard 00:25, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

The article has been reverted to the first version with no copyright violations (per instructions on WP:CP). There were multiple copyvio's from multipls sites. --Duk 01:00, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Major Edit

I just wrote the page from scratch. No more copy-vios or stubs. Plus, it's in sections with pictures now. Be Bold! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:50, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

good job, dude :) Project2501a 12:03, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
nice work man! - MordredKLB 18:09, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Recent Vandalism

There has been an anonymous editor who has been editing the page in the following ways:

User 68.159.25.80 Has been repeatedly vandalizing article, please stop. We work hard on this to keep users like you from ruin,ing it.


  • Changing Mencia's birth name from Ned Mencia to Ned Holness.

To the above, isn't his father's birth name Holness (as per your article?) Does this mean "Mencia" is just picking which family name he'd like to be called? Where's your source, anyway? That npr.org article?

  • the NPR article is there only to source that his father was of german descent, not on the debate about the "correct" last name

To date, no information, no cite, no source, and no verifiable proof of any kind has been offered to prove that his birth-name is Holness.

It should be noted that I have been in contact on my talk page with someone (also anonymous) with possible evidence. This information is still awaiting confirmation. If the information is accurate, Mr. Mencia's birth name will remain Ned Mencia, but information will be added to the effect that he was informally known as Ned Holness.

How about this "confirmation" for Ned. On his own webpage on comedy central there is a link to his interview with nightline .Nightline confirms his name is actually Ned Holness and Carlos Mencia is just his stagename. faber1096, 05 Dec 2006

His birth certificate says Ned Mencia but throughout his childhood he called himself Ned Holness. We usually write the birth name on top and Ned Mencia is his birth name. In the eyes of the law, Ned Holness is just a nickname like Carlos Mencia. Gdo01 05:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
(Information confirmed and added just now. See http://www.carlosmencia.com/oldwebsite/stories.htm --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:23, 1 August 2005 UTC)
  • Adding a sentence usually stating that Mr. Mencia is not Mexican but is half-Honduran (through his mother) and half-German (through his father).

There is no evidence in any direction that Mr. Mencia's father, Roberto, was German. Additionally, at no point in the article does it claim that Mr. Mencia is Mexican - indeed, Mr. Mecia has gone out of his way in interviews, on his website, and on his show to point out that he was born in Honduras. Adding a statement saying someone is not something when no-one said they were smacks of an alternate agenda. As does the final thing the anon has been leaving...

Why does the article mention that Mencia's mother is Mexican? Is there any reference to this? Is this what Mencia himself claims? What was a single woman from Mexico doing in Honduras in the 1960s?--Pozole 03:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Claiming Mr. Mencia chose or was given his stage name because it sounded more hispanic.

This is entirely unverifiable and possibly slanderous and obviously has been removed each time.

It appears that the person(s) making the edits has an agenda they are trying to push. This is not acceptable for a neutral article. Or they are trying to disseminate innacurate information - also blatantly unnacceptable. As such, changes in these directions have been treated as vandalism.

To the person making the edits, feel free to create a user account and sign in. Let us know if you've got any verifiable independent proof, and we'll try to work any findings into the article. Thanks for your time.

--Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:23, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

His IMDB bio says he was born Ned Holness and was given to his aunt and uncle to raise at the age of a few months, and that they changed his name. Is the IMDB bio credihle? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.35.93.97 (talk • contribs) 07:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC).

The info above and sources stated clearly indicate otherwise, and come from Mencia himself. Imdb, just like Wikipedia, is based on user provided material, and is not an authority in anything. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:04, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I was at a comedy show in which he admitted he changed his name to Carlos because no one would "buy" a Mexican comedian named Ned.

Are you kidding me? I found a bunch of websites proving his name is Ned Holness. Check these out Of course, you wouldn't believe me, but I heard him say it on Nightline. --66.218.22.187 04:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

On an episode of his show MInd of Mencia, he does a skit where he is a historian named Ned Holeness. And he has pointed out he is from Hondouras, but since his is from East L.A everyone has thought he was Mexican.71.250.193.6 18:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Allegations of plagiarism

There is a new video on youtube in which Carlos and Joe Rogan yell at eachother on stage, then several other comedians allege Carlos Mencia steals jokes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnTRSetqvvQ&eurl= Are the finally enough accusers to mention this?

The YouTube link is down (due to copyright claim by Mencia?) use Joe Rogan's Link to Google Video.

I have included an mp3 of a primary source indicating information from a primary source about material stealing. Several million people heard this. Why is it being edited out? Unsigned comment from User:Pozole.

There are many problems involving this situation. There seems to be two anons / distinct groups of anons going back and forth on this issue. There are problems in the contributions from both sides, including blatant POV and outright vandalism.
Some things need to be established if we are to find balance here. It goes without saying that there are other comedians who have accused him of plagiarism. Is this enough to warrant inclusion in the article? On face value, it is difficult to say. This is a small group of colleagues who may or may not have other agendas. As yet, it is not yet (as one anon is fond of putting it) collectively believed fact.
And therein lies part of the problem. As noted by the anon above, all the sources are primary. What is needed is someone else mentioning it. And not a blog or some random website; someone reputable. Who decides reputability? If the source is reputable, it decides for itself. The New York Times is reputable. Some comedian's fansite is not.
Once this simple goal is achieved (along with our friend, the Neutral Point of View), then any reversions would obviously be unnacceptable. In the meantime I'll hang back and keep the proceedings neutral.
I also invite the anons to register accounts, as this comes with many advantages, and allows a greater depth of participation in article editing and interacting with the community.
--Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:59, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
The primary source here is George Lopez. Where this clip is being hosted should not reflect that it is from a nationally aired radio show that is in every major U.S. market. Obviously the allegations of Mencias alleged plagiarism are of some notability vis a vis his career to warrant another radio show interviewer (Opie and Anthony) to address the issue and include the rebuttal from Mencia/Holness.
Here is a summary from a major Howard Stern fansite corroborating the story. It is a non Joe Rogan affiliated site:
http://www.marksfriggin.com/news05/9-26.htm
"George talked about his feud with Carlos Mencia who George claims has stolen some of his material in the past. He said that Carlos pretends to be Mexican but he's not sure that he actually is. George got pissed at him and punched him at a comedy club at one point because he was sick of him stealing his stuff. Howard thought that George was the type of guy who wanted to see other Hispanic guys in the business but George said that's not true, he doesn't want to see anyone make it without struggling like he did."
On Mencia's visit to the Stern show, the Lopez feud and the allegations of stolen material were again addressed.
http://www.marksfriggin.com/news05/7-18.htm
Comedian Carlos Mencia Visits. 07/19/05. 9:10am
"Howard heard that he has a feud going with George Lopez. Carlos said that he's been accused of stealing jokes like Taco Bell jokes and stuff like that. He said he went to Sam Kinison one time and Kinison told him to forget about people accusing him of stealing stuff if he didn't do it."
Please suggest a non POV way to include this section. (Unsigned comment by User:66.215.18.54, AKA User:Pozole)
It's not necessarily an issue of POV, but of the notability of the accusations. I'm not denying that there are those who are accusing Mencia of plagiarism. And I could frankly care less if he did or didn't. But this article has an established history of severe POV and credibility issues, and in order to get something to stick, any source of any accusation needs to be reputable, or the accusation needs to be widespread (which it is not yet by a longshot). --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:39, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Joe Rogan has accused Mencia of joke theft after Mencia exposed him on the radio for pacing back and forth while he performed and later admitting to a group of other comedians that Mencia was a great comic. The only response Joe had for this major embarrassment was to accuse Mencia of stealing jokes a week later. He has zero credibility in this matter, and no other credible sources to corroborate this. He also claims that Mencia is half German (ever see a picture of Carlos?) and not at all Mexican (when his mother is Mexican), considering there is no truth to this, it further calls into question Rogan's credibility.
Yes, as opposed to Mencia's corroboration on this story, which was just awesome.71.197.208.203 01:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
The same applies to George Lopez, who in the radio interview with Howard Stern, falsely claims that Mencia is half German. This also throws any credibility he has out of the window.
These are the only two established comedians making claims of joke theft, and both have been proven as blatant liars about Mencia's background. Furthermore, Mencia issued a challenge on air to both comedians to name a single joke that he took, if he indeed stole material. Neither has named a single, solitary joke.
To include references to Rogan or Lopez, particularly in the context of "joke theft", is about as relevant as posting that Allen Iverson is a washed up basketball player because two obscure sports analysts said so during an interview. (Unsigned comment by User:65.0.96.77)

To be fair, Rogan did respond to Mencia's accusations of the events at the Comedy Store by releasing this video of the event in question: http://www.joerogan.net/joeshow/CARLO.wmv

Um... Joe Rogan and George Lopez have been on TV a lot longer than Mencia has. So if those guys are "obscure," then what the heck does that make him? Not to mention the fact that your "corrobation" for your accusation that Rogan and Lopez are "proven liars" is hardly substantial. Basically, what we have are two conflicting stories. On one hand, you have Rogan and Lopez, who claim that Mencia is a hack comedian who steals jokes and is the scum of the universe. OTOH, you have Mencia, who insists that he is God's gift to comedy and that Joe Rogan once approached him outside of a comedy club and said as much. Oh yes, Mencia's story sounds very plausible in that case. Very plausible indeed. Furthermore, the act of joke theft is verifiable, on tape, available online. http://www.redban.com/video/ned2.mov Schrodinger82 09:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

It's a he-said/he-said, not a verifiable fact, not a story being reported on by anyone other than the people who created the story in the first place. It is conjecture, and thus has no place. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 10:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Whether or not the accusations are true is not verifiable. Whether or not the accusations have been made, is. These accusations have been made by highly successful comedians who have been on TV for far more years and on far more popular shows than Mencia has (The George Lopez Show, News Radio, Fear Factor, the Man Show.). They have also been made on public on shows that dwarf "Mind of Mencia" in terms of ratings. To call Mencia "very controversial" while leaving out the one source of actual controversy is disingenuous. Controvery is defined by some form of public dispute. I have yet to see a public dispute form as a result of a notable figure who protested the show for being "politically incorrect." I have seen a public dispute form because of accusations of plagiarism.
Self-published sources
Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources. Exceptions may be when a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field, or a well-known professional journalist, has produced self-published material. In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by credible, third-party publications. However, exercise caution: if the information on the professional researcher's blog is really worth reporting, someone else will have done so.
"Professional" within the world of standup comedy.
http://www.sheckymagazine.com/2005/11/mencia-comedy-central-joe-rogan.html
http://www.laughmachine.com/2005-09-28/joe-rogan-vs-carlos-mencia.html
Self-published sources in articles about themselves
Self-published sources and other published sources of dubious reliability may be used as sources about themselves in articles about them. For example, the Stormfront website may be used as a source about itself in an article about Stormfront, so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by reliable, third-party published sources.
Carlos Mencia himself has commented on this issue publicly on the airwaves, and on his own website.
http://www.joerogan.net/albums/roganaudio/mencia.mp3
http://www.carlosmencia.com/forums/index.php?s=80f2c565479ccf427df6e3f926b18c25&showtopic=95
Both of which fit the standard of self-published sources about themselves. Furthermore, the fact that the radio hosts brought it up themselves suggests that this was considered worth addressing Schrodinger82 20:14, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

So basically, even though the accusations of plagiarism are pretty much the only thing that this "controversial" comedian has done to generate any actual controversy, and even though you can verify you can verify these accusations from notable comedians who have had more success than than Carlos Mencia has had himself, we're not going to include any mention of it unless we see a report of these accusations on the front page of the Times. Look at the George Lopez page on Wiki, where the accusations he makes against Carlos are mentioned. Look at the discussion page, is there anyone disputing the notability of that? So apparently the fact that George Lopez makes an accusation is notable, but not the fact that Carlos Mencia, a much less notable comedian, has been accused of something. A notable comedian (George Lopez) has made these accusations publicly on a notable program (Howard Stern). To me, that deserves at least a mention. Schrodinger82 09:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


Carlos Mencia was born on October 22nd 1967 in San Pedro Sula, Honduras. His mother, Magdelena Mencia, is Honduran and his father, Roberto Holness, is German. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0578788/bio

IMDB is as unreliable as Wikipedia is. Both sites can be edited by normal people and there is no fact checking other than by other people. Gdo01 18:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

NPOV

Well I have linmked proof that the plagiarism issue has been discussed in various interviews with Mencia/Holness and notable and neutral individuals such as Howard Stern and Opie & Anthony. User:Pozole

Joe Rogan made a comment on Opie and Anthony after being embarrassed by Mencia, George Lopez made a comment to Stern after no longer having the best Latin-interest show on television (also stating that he doesn't want any other Latino comedians to get shows). These are the only two comics in the world making plagiarism accusations (after losing face). If people are going to put slanderous comments from washed-up entertainers, every wiki on this site relating to a public figure will be changed daily.
To the person attempting to predict that Mind of Mencia won't be picked up for a second season, Comedy Central already picked it up. That shouldn't have been a surprise considering they extended this season three more shows than the originally planned 10, after seeing how great the ratings were. (Unsigned comment by User:65.0.96.77)


"Controversy"

"Mencia's comedy has been considered by some to be very controversial."

Do we have any actual verifiable information that the show has generated any real "controversy" whatsoever? Just because Mencia promotes himself as a controversial comedian doesn't mean he is one. While it might certainly by true that his material might be considered "by some" to be "very controversial," I'm pretty sure that it is also true to say that his style of comedy is "considered by some" to by "very unfunny," "very unoriginal," and "very plagiarized from more famous comedians." Yet I doubt that any of those adjectives will make it onto this site, even though any of those comments would be easier to source with notable media figures. In fact, the greatest source of legitimate controversy have nothing to do with "political incorrectness," and more to do with the accusations of plagiarism, this discussion page included. Which strangely, is no longer mentioned in the aritcle at all. -Schrodinger82 09:05, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Bullocks. Most people have never heard about those accusations from those two comics (see the rest of this talk page as to why that information is not being included). Most people, however, that have heard of Mencia, know any controversy lies in his subject matter (in part because that is how he is specifically marketed). --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Simply adding the phrase "most people" to a statement doesn't make it true. First off, Lopez made his accusations on Howard Stern. According to a google search on Salon.com, Stern averaged 8 million listeners per week. According to Mediaweek.com, Mencia's show averaged only 1.4 viewers per week. So unless Stern was in a serious ratings slump the week that Lopez went on, I'm willing to bet that at least as many people heard those comments as the number of people who watch "Mind of Mencia" itself. Secondly, just because they market the show as controversial, doesn't mean it is. Marketing doesn't always deliver as promised. They can market a Paulie Shore movie as the greatest comedy ever written and the blockbuster hit that we've all been waiting for, but I wouldn't put that down as fact, unless we had some actual data to back that up. Can anyone cite any notable accusations of controversy, that meet the same standard that you are holding the accusations of plagiarism to? -Schrodinger82 10:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
What he says is not important. If it were, it would surely cause controversy. 71.198.169.9 11:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't find him offensive or controversial because of his material, but because of his lack of imagination and talent. It's astonishing how he thinks he is so daring and cutting edge, and yet he's so behind the times. I mean, his latest episode contained a parody of Brokeback Mountain, and he presented it as though it was a daring and original idea. Most other shows (and, yes, most other shows have done a BBM parody), retired their BBM parodies over a month ago. And it's also interesting how his self-righteous bigotry (he makes anti-Arab comments in almost every episode) are excused because of the fact that he is Hispanic. Whatever the case, the best thing to do is just change the channel and remember this show will probably be gone soon. Most likely, the only reason it was picked up for a second season was because Dave Chappell didn't return. And let's remember, a "hit" for Comedy Central is hardly a rating blip for most networks. -- Andrew Parodi 15:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


Considering Joe Rogan is more of a tired out, washed-up, very over-rated "comedian", I would be almost certain that the accusations he's making on Mencia stealing other comedian's jokes is out of pure jealousy. And about the whole Ned Holness update: He's said it himself before ... on NATIONAL TELEVISION. He's not hiding anything. It's just that Carlos Mencia is his stage name. Nothin' wrong with that.

Enough

Every other day for ten months I, and others, have been constantly reverting the same unverified crap from, likely, the same anon contributor. Coupled with near-daily anon vandalism and anon POV pushing, I have semi-potected this article. Great work. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

LOL! Ten months??? Someone spends too much time on the Internets. Get a life plz. --71.102.176.102 02:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
We all know he is not funny, it is basically a fact, why not put it in the article? --72.68.3.18 17:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Please don't push your POV here. If he wasn't funny, why does he have his own show that has been running for two years? Wikibout-Talk to me! 18:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Because Comedy Central thinks it makes money. That's like asking why Fox canceled Arrested Development and created Skating With Celebrities.--72.68.3.18 22:15, 2 July, 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, he's not funny. He just sucks total ass. Jolb 21:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, no a number of comedians, including Lopez, Rogan and "The Amazing Racist" have made accusations about him. So don't just talk about Rogan.

We all know he is not funny
On the contrary, I think he is very funny. 76.4.197.45 18:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)Atomachona

Removal of "controversial" template

I hope it won't offend anyone that I removed the "controversial topic" template. After reading this discussion page, it doesn't appear to me that the discussion has become any more controversial than any other discussion of a Wikipedia article. If you want to see what a truly controversial topic looks like, read the pages on God Hates Fags, Cindy Sheehan, or The Muhammad Cartoon Controversy. As is noted on the main page of this Carlos Mencia article, it is mostly Carlos Mencia himself who claims he is controversial. He obviously uses that for a selling point, and it seems to me that labeling this discussion page and this article "Controversial" is only playing into his hands. Lastly, I think that in order for a topic to be "controversial" it has to have some sort of societal impact. As of yet, I would be hard-pressed to find anyone who thinks that Carlos Mencia has had a cultural impact of any kind. -- Andrew Parodi 02:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure God Hates Fags is controversial, except when you're talking to an actual member of the WBC. I haven't met one person who agrees with Westboro's (Phelps'?) philosophies. 152.23.196.162 18:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Replacing deleted section and sentence

I replaced the deleted sentence and paragraph. If you look over the biographies of most entertainers, you will see that most allow for a section pertaining to the criticism the given entertainer has had to endure. It is only fitting that Carlos Mencia would have such a section - particularly as he is a comedian who likes to fancy himself "controversial". So, I have replaced the previously deleted section and sentence. -- Andrew Parodi 08:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that the controversy is a he said/he said, perpetrated by two individuals who likely have their own agendas. It has not been reported by one single respectable media outlet. Anywhere. At all. It is two commedians, and their fans, going around saying one thing, and nothing more, and as such, does not belong. I could care less if there is criticism, but it needs to be relevant and not just perpetuation of rumor-mongering. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:13, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
The reason it hasn't been reported by anyone is because both comedians are b-list or c-list at best. They are not high profile comedians. However, it is hardly "rumor mongering" when I provided a link to the statement by Joe Rogan, as published on his own site, wherein he refers to Carlos Mencia as a "fake Mexican" and accuses him of stealing jokes. I am going to replace the portions you deleted. My edits were completely within keeping of Wikipedia's guidelines; they are NPOV and they have supporting evidence. -- Andrew Parodi 09:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
You just proved my point: It's from "Joe Rogan, as published on his own site"! It is a he said/he said - not a fact, not collectively believed or accepted by anyone other than the people perpetuating it. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
By that same estimation, all criticism is "he said/she said". Are you suggesting that pages should not contain any reference to artistic criticism? -- Andrew Parodi 09:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Here is the crux of the problem: Wikipedia:Verifiablity: "One of the keys to writing good encyclopedia articles is to understand that they should refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have already been published by reputable publishers." See also the Self-Published sources section. This stuff clearly violates our standards of verifiability. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

When quoting a given individual, I can't think of a more reputable publisher than the individual's own website whose domain name is that own individual's name. What you are basically saying is that Joe Rogan is not reputable with regard to what Joe Rogan himself says. I don't think that's a fair statement for you to make. The policy that you copied and pasted did not say that what is quoted must be from a mainstream newspaper or magazine, but a reputable publisher. In this instance, Joe Rogan is his own publisher and is publishing his opinion, which is what criticism is. I think that Joe Rogan is pretty reputable when it comes to things said by Joe Rogan.
YES! But not on things related to Carlos Mencia. Who is the subject of the article. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I have read the page Wikipedia:Edit war and I am going to do what it suggests: wait another 24 hours before I replace what you have deleted. In the meantime, I have placed the NPOV tag at the top of the page because I think you are making some very POV decisions in deleting what I had contributed. -- Andrew Parodi 09:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
With regard to self-publishers, here is the text you refer to:
Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources. Exceptions may be when a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field, or a well-known professional journalist, has produced self-published material. In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by credible, third-party publications. However, exercise caution: if the information on the professional researcher's blog is really worth reporting, someone else will have done so.
Joe Rogan falls under the category I italicized. He is a well known comedian, deemed notable enough to have his own Wikipedia page, commenting on a field within which he himself is a professional. -- Andrew Parodi 09:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
"... professional researcher in a relevant field, or a well-known professional journalist." Rogan is not a professional researcher - he simply practices in the same field. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
A good example: When discusing criticism of an actor in a film, one would quote Armond White or Roger Ebert - not Pauly Shore or Carrot Top. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Joe Rogan is a professional and the entry I linked to contained research wherein he provided links to Mencia making the referred to statements. Further, this was reported in third-party sources, and I provided links to them. I will be back in 24 hours to replace what you have deleted, but I have to give this a rest for now. I certainly have bigger priorities than Joe Rogan and Carlos Mencia. -- Andrew Parodi 09:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Verifiability: "Articles should rely on credible, third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." You do not have these sources, because they do not exist. And my biggest priority in this case is Wikipedia policy. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


Joe Rogan makes an accusation of plagiarism: Verifiable fact. George Lopez makes an accusation of plagiarism, on a radio station listened to by millions: Verifiable fact. Carlos Mencia is asked about these accusations on a radio program listened to by millions: Verifiable fact. Carlos Mencia responds to those statements in front of millions: Verifiable fact. Carlos Mencia responds on his own website: Verifiable fact. As for standards of verifiability, wikipedia also has a section for "Self-published sources in articles about themselves," so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by reliable, third-party published sources. The fact that this issue has been discussed in several radio shows and brought up in interviews makes it notable. So yes, guys like Carlos Mencia and Joe Rogan can be used as sources for articles on Joe Rogan and Carlos Mencia. The purpose of the "Self-published sources" clause is so that people don't cite Joe Rogan's blog as an authorative source for, say... Postmodernist literary analysis. It's not to prevent Joe Rogan from being used as a source for Joe Rogan. I do think that the accusations of plagiarism need to be re-written to be more NPOV. But there shouldn't be such a struggle to keep it on in the first place.. - Schrodinger82 09:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

An accusation of plagiarism from a well researched article appearing in a publication with editorial control and fact checking is notable - two people saying one thing a while ago and the other guy denying it is not notable. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Not notable according to who? You? Plenty of people on this board seem to think otherwise. The comedians themselves seem to think otherwise. The websites dedicated to reporting news in the world of comedy seem to think otherwise. The Radio Hosts who brought it up seemed to think otherwise. - Schrodinger82 10:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

You are inventing your own policy. -- Andrew Parodi 09:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

LOL! Wikipedia:Verifiability is my creation too! I guess policy is only convenient when it goes your way, and when it doesn't, then, jimminy jillikers!, the admninistrator who has been here for sixteen months made it all up! LOL! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Just like the administrator made up the "Self-published sources in articles about themselves," rule, right? - Schrodinger82 10:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Also quite hilarious, as it ignores the actually relevant "Self-published sources" section. Additionally, and I don't know how I lucked into this, but everyone else keeps making my argument for me: the sub-section you cite allows for inclusion of anything Rogan writes... in the article on Rogan. Not Mencia. Please actually read the page rather than highlighting and shouting. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 10:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Would you mind explaining to me how "Self-published sources in articles about themselves" isn't relevant when dealing with self-published sources in articles about themselves? Not to mention that the "Self-published sources" article itself states, "In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by credible, third-party publications." The last time I checked, but Rogan and Lopez have both had their work featured in credibly, published, third-party publications within their relevant fields (e.g., entertainment publications). It doesn't say anything about how the specific claim has to be featured in "credibly, published, third-party publication" because, duh, if it were, then you wouldn't need the self-published source. You could simply consult the "credibly, published, third-party publication," and ignore the self-published guy entirely.
Hence, the "self-published" source clause is a way of justifying the source, rather than the claim. And Rogan and Lopez meet the justification as a source. Once the self-published source has established credibility within their relevant field, then they can be used as such. Again, Joe Rogan and George Lopez are commenting about the going ons in the world of comedy. As to your condescending statement, "Please actually read the page rather than highlighting and shouting," why don't you try actually reading my claim before you shout it down? Because what I've already pointing to were two verifiable sources where Mencia himself comments on this matter. So since Mencia himself has commented on this matter about himself, verifiably so, then it is perfectly acceptable to include such information in the article about him. That thereby addresses the one and only critique of the highly relavant clause that you've chosen to ignore up til now. - Schrodinger82 10:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

You're obviously on a huge ego trip with this one as you continually make condescending remarks toward those of us who disagree with you. I have put in a request for comment from others. In the meantime, I must sign off now -- and PLEASE, I humbly request, PLEASE stop sending me personal messages on my discussion page. If you have anything to say to me relevant to this topic, please say it here where more people are likely to see it. Thank you. -- Andrew Parodi 10:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Addendum. Please stop signing my name to the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, art and literature. Editors are instructed to NOT sign their names to those pages. It is perfectly apparent to anyone who looks in the history of that page that I am the one who made the comment. Please cease and desist. Thank you. -- Andrew Parodi 10:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Here is how I would revise it:

In a 2005 interview by Howard Stern, George Lopez claimed that he and Mencia were involved in a physical altercation at a comedy club. Lopez alleged that Mencia appropriated 13 minutes of Lopez' material without permission for his HBO comedy special.[1] Lopez told Stern, "It's not really a fued, I mean, I think I won." Shortly afterwards, comedian Joe Rogan wrote a post on his publicly accusing Mencia of being a plagiarist, alledging that Mencia stole jokes from a number of comedians including Paul Mooney, Dave Chappelle, Richard Pryor albums, and Jeff Foxworthy. [2].

Mencia responded to these charges while being interviewed on The Opie and Anthony Show, stating that Joe Rogan had fabricated these allegations out of jealousy [3]. On his own website, Mencia denied plagiarism, arguing that the material in question was too generic to be attributed to any single comedian. [4] Additionally, he confirms Lopez's statement that their is no feud between them.

More recently, Mencia has been accused of stealing material from comedian Ari Shaffir . [5] - Schrodinger82 10:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

For months people have been putting their won POV into the issue, vandalism, and racism. That... is the best written summary of the case I have seen, and as a temporary fix, it is more than sufficient. Just ditch the Ari Shaffir part (as that fails WP:V doubly), and pop it into the article. I shan't revert. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 10:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The assertion that Wikipedia is based on community consensus is defied by your dictatorial pronouncement that the above written paragraph meets the standards for a "temporary fix". We are much obliged to know it has meet the standards of the consensus of a community of one. But then I must extricate myself from this debate for the moment as it is driving me to distraction. -- Andrew Parodi 10:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Cool. Glad to see we're all in agreement then. - Schrodinger82 10:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

"Proponent of his controversy"?

Can someone clarify to me what the following sentence means?

It is fair to note that Mencia himself is the main proponent of his controversy.

I had interpreted that this means that it is Carlos Mencia himself who is the main person who claims that Carlos Mencia is controversial, and I added a following sentence to clarify this interpretation. As that following sentence was removed, I am considering that perhaps my interpretation of this sentence was incorrect. Does anyone have an interpretation of this sentence that they'd like to share? Andrew Parodi 14:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

While I didn't ad that line, I think it is fairly straight forward, and provides good balance. It provides the summation of the paragraph, which starts with "Mencia's comedy markets itself..." Anything further would just repeat what was just said. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 03:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
It appears to me that it is vaguely worded. To say that he is the proponent of his controversy could be interpreted a few different ways; it could easily be interpreted to mean that he simply has a controversial act -- that he is the proponent of his controversial act. It appears to me that what it is actually attempting to say is that Carlos Mencia himself is the main person who finds Carlos Mencia controversial; he is the main proponent of the idea that Carlos Mencia is controversial. I think, if indeed this is what that sentence intends to say, the sentence either needs to be revised with more precise wording, or it needs a follow up sentence to clarify the meaning. -- Andrew Parodi 05:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
It's based on the fact that the advertisements promote the show as "OMG!!! This is the most offensive show ever, so watch it now before we get sued off of the air!" and try to present the subject matter as controversial. Unfortunately, the key sticking point to being controversial is whether or not you can generate actual controversy. Which, you know, he hasn't. Fact is, most people just don't care about Mencia enough to complain about how offensive he is. - Schrodinger82 11:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Another thing: In order to be controversial, one must be original in some ways. Does he really think he's controversial to engage in Arab-bashing and to refer to every Arab man on his show as "Achmed"? This whole country went through an anti-Arab phase back in 2001. Does he really think he's controversial to have a Parody of Brokeback Mountain? Just about every other show had a parody of Brokeback Mountain ... a month ago. His show is incredibly behind the times and seems to be in a completely different world from the rest of what is going on right now. Lastly, I might add that he is hardly controversial because hardly anyone knows who he is. Andrew Parodi 23:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

That is certainly a matter of opinion, of which I have none in this case, however he is popular enough that Comedy Central has committed to a second season. Billion dollar corporations don't give valuable air time to, nor produce television series for, unknowns. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Comedy Central is desperate. They recently lost what was one of, if not THE, biggest hit in their channel's history: Chappelle's Show. Carlos Mencia's show is pretty much the same format as the Dave Chappelle show; I doubt they would've ordered another season if Dave Chappelle hadn't walked away from his show. -- Andrew Parodi 04:47, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

_____________________________

Is it necessary to repeat the comment about wetbacks in two different sections of the article. Just seems like a waste repeating the same comment twice?? - 2nd April 2006

That's true. I didn't add the second reference, by the way. I simply copyedited it. I learned through a somewhat ugly experience that making edits to this page can turn ugly -- so I didn't take it upon myself to remove what someone else added, but to copyedit it and expend it for clarity. I'll leave it to someone else to decide whether that sentence should be removed entirely. Andrew Parodi 23:37, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Mind of Mencia?

There isn't a SINGLE reference to Mind of Mencia on this ENTIRE page. Someone please rectify that ASAP! On an episode of Mind of Mencia he does a skit where he is a historrian named Ned Holeness. 71.250.193.6 18:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC) Batman2005 03:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a reference. Check the Discography section. --Tuspm 01:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, does that discography cover...the television show? No. Batman2005 01:19, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Mencia vs. Mencía

The proper Spanish spelling of his name is is Mencía. Has he ever spelled it like that? "Mencia" would mean that the emphasis would be on the first syllable--"MEN-ci-a" rather than "Men-CI-a." Trackstand 14:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm totally with yah. Yes his surname is Mencía, however he does not use that spelling. He’s anglicised himself. He goes by Mencia, which sounds complete different in Spanish when it lacks the accent, though he still pronounces it just the same. --Noé Æ 06:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
He's also not Spanish. VelvetKevorkian 01:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Phrase

Which part of the article would be best to add his phrase "If you ain't laughin' you ain't livin'"? I've heard him say it at least 4 times, so I think it is notable enough to be added. Wikibout-Talk to me! 06:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I've added it under comedy, but anyone can feel free to move it. Wikibout-Talk to me! 21:04, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

German American

Why was Carlos Mencia removed from the German American category? 75.3.49.50 05:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Notes, Answers, and Questions

Mencia was removed from the German American category because of false information someone (who was obviously not a fan) inserted about his mother (with the last name "Mencia") being German. The same person or persons included that his birth name was Ned Holness, and that someone in Hollywood suggested he change his name to "Carlos Mencia" to make it sound more authentic. In actuality, and according to IMDB.com, he was renamed Carlos by his family members who adopted him. Therefore his 'stage name' is actually his real name.

Consider changing 'stage name' to 'birth name' and adding in notes about Carlos being his actual name. Zchris87v 12:33, 10 July 2006


No, his real name is Ned. He's said that Ned didn't go over so well growing up, so he went by Carlos. Ned is still his legal name. Also, the information is not necesarily by someone who's not a fan. His IMDB bio originally claimed he was half-german half-honduran, so people who read that before it was changed may believe it's true. I'm not entirely sure it's not/

Carlos Mencia is a stage name adopted in the 1990's and invented by owner of the Comedy Store, Mitzi Shore. Mencia's mother is from Honduras, but his father is German and as such he should very much be included among German Americans. This is well known among comics who work at the Comedy Store. Ned is indeed his real first name. I believe that Mencia is also a fictional stage name but I've not verified that thoroughly enough to assert it. Magnus 15:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be asserting it a whole lot right now...

Both his IMDb page (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0578788/bio) and Joe Rogan (http://www.joerogan.net/main.php?archives=1&article=53945) reference him being German-Honduran. Also, just a simple run through the BS filter: Does "Holness" sound like a Mexican, Honduran, or German name to you? Now while I only studied German for two years, it sounds pretty darned German to me. It seems to me the fact that he's German-Honduran is non-controversial.

False information needs to stop being reentered

http://carlosmencia.com/content/bio.php

Common sense will tell you that Carlos Mencia's official website's biography should take precidence over all other internet hearsay.

He was born Ned Mencia.

He was named Carlos Mencia by his foster parents, he did not give himself this name as a stage name.

His mother was born in Mexico, not Germany.

He is 17th of 18 children, not 20.

His ancestry is well documented and he is half Mexican, despite the false claims made by Joe Rogan on his website to the contrary.

The only person who knows for sure about Carlos Mencia's history is Carlos Mencia and his family, and that is the information that should stand until birth records or other legal documents can be referenced that say otherwise.

I ask the admins to help protect Wiki from hearsay and slander.

---Didonato 19:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Received your e-mail, Didonato. Even though I am not an admin, I will do everything I can to stop this. --Tuspm Talk | Contribs | E-Mail Me 14:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I apoligise for reverting your edits. I was under the impression that they were false. Wikibout-Talk to me! 02:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Carlos Mencia's website should not be thought of as a gospel of truth, as it is in his best interest (and by proxy his career's est interest) for everyone to believe he is Mexican through-and-through. Thus, anything that you read on his website should be taken with a grain of salt. Vyarnect 17:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


Exactly. He has been successful as portraying himself as a Mexican, and if he really is German/Honduran and not a bit Mexican (which would not surprise me), then there is no way he'd actually admit to it until it was somehow proven in a published work. Unfortunatly, it doesn't seem like anyone has done this yet, although I suspect it will only be a matter of time before the world's most unfunny comedian is exposed as a fraud and a thief. Fermentor 08:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

He has admitted several times on his show that he was born and lived in Honduras before coming to the United States, he has never outwardly claimed himself to be a Mexican, but rather a "Beaner", a racial epithet for Hispanic Americans. Bmg916 16:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

12th worst comedian ever

I added this because it was the cover feature for Maxim Magazine and it was removed. Do not remove something that has been certified by a citation. Hypermagic

It has been moved and rounded out. Wikibout-Talk to me! 04:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Rounded out criticism

"He was recently voted the 12th worst comedian of all time by the editors of Maxim Magazine.[4], although television viewers themselves had voted him into the top 10 of Comedy Central's "100 Funniest Stand Up Comedians" list of active stand up comics for the last two years straight."

This is the section in question, the section in italics has been removed and reinserted at least twice. It would be best if a few users gave their opinions on it being there, rather than having this go into a revert war.

My opinion is that it rounds out the criticism. Even though it is the criticism section, it still belongs there as it is more helpful there than anywhere else in the article. Wikibout-Talk to me! 17:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

If only there were an objective way to measure suckiness, so we could put that in the criticisms =( Roffler 22:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
That is clearly not everyones opinion. Please hold your POV and actually help out the article. Wikibout-Talk to me! 03:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
What is this "100 Funniest Stand Up Comedians", anyway? I've been watching Comedy Central since it's premiere in the early 90s, have seen all of the lists that they air from time to time, and do not remember this one at all. There was "The Comedian's Comedian" and a few others and the only thing Mencia ever appeared in was placing second to Dane Cook in the "Comedy Central Presents" showdown. Either someone presents some kind of evidence of this list or I think it should be deleted. It's only fair.--Hypermagic 07:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm removing it. I don't think it exists. I never bothered to verify it until now. It has been slightly rounded out now. If anyone can show it does exist, put it back in and post here. Wikibout-Talk to me! 00:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
It exists, For at least the last two years, Comedy Central has listed the top 100 funniest stand up comics that still do shows and allow visitors to comedycentral.com to vote. Two years ago, Mencia was in the top 10, this last time around he made second place (to Dane Cook). Hypermagic is aware of the voting showdown, the title doesn't immediately reveal how they promoted it (to vote on the "funniest stand up comedians" from an initial list of 100).

While it's fine to list the Maxim article as a legit reference, at the same time I say "Who the hell are they to rank the worst comedians of all time?" First, the entire list is populated by comedians who have been in the spotlight the past 20 years or so, so to say these are the worst of all time is certainly debatable. To me, these are just the opinions of a very few specific people whose opinion of what is good and bad is no more valid than yours or mine. I put much more stock in the Comedy Central poll (which undoubtedly had hundred or thousands of people voting) that put Mencia in the top 10 of the current comedians out there. The Maxim slideshow reminds me of the Blender magazine article a few years back that listed The Doors as one of the 50 worst bands of all time. - Purplepat, 12/1/06

Dick Cheny

someone changed the picture to dick cheny and did some other stuff to the page also. i must admit it was rather funny but somebody needs to change it Burger king 16:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)burger kingBurger king 16:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Huh. Someone thought it was funny, eh? Personally, myself, I thought it was genius. Pure genius. The end.

Sekort Sev Lewt 18:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)--Sekort Sev Lewt

Rumor

On my newsgroup, there's a copy of a story going around that mentions that Mencia might be gay. I didn't see anything listed in the main article about a wife, so should I hunt the article URL down? Or is this old news already?

He's married, I don't know why it isn't in the article. Wikibout-Talk to me! 03:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Some More Notes

Of course, I was surprised that even though Mencia states openly in alot of his comedy that he's Roman Catholic (humorously talking about in an episode of Mind of Mencia about the passion of the Christ), I was surprised it wasn't on the wiki, and it has been added.

EDIT: It's still lsited that Mencia takes the the name "Carlos" as a stage name. Should be changed asit is his adopted name.

IronCrow 07:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Timing During Chappelle Show

The paragraph surrounding the timing between his show coming on and Chappelle's show going off are worded in such a way to imply that he was brought on as a replacement for Chappelle. Dave's contract renewal is publicized in August of 2004, before the end of the year Comedy Central was in talks with Mencia for his own show. Mencia's official newsletter went out early March 2005 announcing that his contract with Comedy Central was finally in stone, with similar announcements following by Comedy Central. Chapelle was still filming until the last week of April before he left for Africa. All someone had done was post the actual start date of Mind of Mencia (summer 2005) and the last airing of the last episode of Chappelle's last season (2004) and made it seem like Mencia was a replacement. Granted Mencia's show is in the style as Chappelle's, I don't think you can deny that, but Comedy Central was talking to him and inked his deal before Chappelle went crazy.

Question on "Holness" background

The name got me curious as to its origin so I did a Wikipedia search and there are articles on Matthew Holness, Adele Holness and Nicole Holness --none of whom appear to be Honduran or Mexican. Thus what is the ethnic origin of the name and was Carlos' dad part whatever that is? --A Good Anon 04:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

His father was German. Magnus 15:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Cite?

Biography

Hi everyone, I was just browsing the page on Carlos Mencia today and I thought I should let you know that the biography section currently reads:

"Mencia was born in ashland. His best friend was scott robbins a amazing guitarist that is awesome. Penis"

I don't know if anyone was aware of this, but if this issue has been discussed before then I apologize for bothering you guys. Keep up the good work and take care :)

66.53.213.21 01:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


Mexican at all?

I've read numerous articles claiming that his mother was german, although may have been a resident of mexico at some point. 71.87.7.14 01:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

He's half-German, half-Honduran. Zero Mexican. VelvetKevorkian 01:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Stop making excuses!

Okay, I put this bit of info in the Criticism section:

He was also rated the 38th most loathsome man in America.

I also put in a citation but anyway, the first time I put that there, it was removed because someone thought I was bashing on mencia. I put it back in and then it was removed again because someone else was questioning whether or not it was a real publication. As far as I'm concerned, these people are finding any excuse they could to remove this. Just stop making lame excuses and leave it! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.96.210.48 (talk) 18:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

calm down. I was the one who questioned whether or not it was a real publication, but if you check youll see that i never removed it. However, I do have doubts that BuffaloBeast.com is a worthwhile source to be quoting, especially when you wont name the source in the actual article - kaizen@feb11

I find the list dubious and not important since practically every celebrity, politician, host, or commentator who had something happen is on the list. I'd have to ask: What newsmaker didn't make that list? Gdo01 18:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Comedy Store Outburst

Is it worth mentioning his filmed argument with Joe Rogan at the Comedy Store this past Saturday (02-10-2007) in the criticism section? Joe has an article up on his site about the whole deal: http://www.joerogan.net/main.php?archives=1&article=53945 They argue over whether or not Ned has been stealing material, and in the video provided at the bottom of the article there is even some specific references given. 24.177.164.184 23:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Follow-up Link : Joe Rogan Banned from the Comedy Store --Chris Heath 14:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
For copyright reasons, wikipedia does not allow Youtube videos to be used as references. That includes instances where a video from Youtube is simply being linked to or hotlinked. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KimboSlice (talk • contribs) 16:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC).
That makes zero sense. Wikipedia should not be concerned with others violating copyrights. This should be a repository of accurate information. If the video is on Youtube then there should be a link. If the video is later taken down from Youtube for whatever reason then remove the link. However Wikipedia has nothing to do with the original copyright violation is only providing information. Should we take down a link to a video of a policeman beating someone because there might be a copyright violation? I know this isn't the same thing but any form of censorship is too much for me. --Hadees 20:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Ned Holness

In an interview, Mencia states "I thought my name was Ned Holness, up until I was 18." interview Also, though there is no evidence supporting that Ned Holness was his birthname, the green card is not evidence either way, since a green card name can be changed after a legal name change. See changing name on green card. So at a minimum, in his own words, he believed his name was Ned Holness until he was 18. --RandomStuff 18:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I just don't understand why it's apparently unacceptable to point out that Holness isn't Honduran, Mexican or any Latin American background. It's German and the Holnesses we have on this site are all from England or Germany. Does that somehow make him less funny? It's an interesting point that goes beyond that question --it would be just as interesting if it were found that Arnold Schwarzenegger's father were called Klaus Fujimori. --Bobak 23:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I frankly don't care where his father is from but the fact that there is no source for where he is from is the problem. Theres lots of claims that he is German and the name is at least Anglo-Saxon but that doesn't mean he's German. If he's German, where was he born? If he's Honduran, where was he born? This would put to rest the whole thing. I'm sure that Berlin, Honduras doesn't exist. Gdo01 23:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Why does there have to be an entire section of the article dedicated to a surname that isn't even legally his? We have a citation from his official site stating that he was born Ned Mencia. We have a Washington Post article which states that his mother is Mexican and his father is Honduran. Those who dislike Mencia have been insistent over the years in trying to change how his birth name is displayed on Wikipedia. They settle for adding the only thing that they can actually prove, that his father's surname is Holness and that Carlos nonlegally used the name to honor his father. In an Opie and Anthony interview he has clarified that his great grandfather was from the Cayman Islands between Honduras and Cuba. So what's the point of dedicating a chunk of someone's bio to a name that's legally not theirs?KimboSlice 01:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
The matter is simple: as an accurate biography, it is pointing out, as Mencia has stated publicly, that he believed his name to be Ned Holness until he was 18. This is an interesting FACT, and has nothing to do with his race. It is worthy of inclusion, and I repeat, has nothing to do with where he is from, that is a different discussion. --RandomStuff 18:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

It does not matter whether his father was born in Honduras or not; he would still be an ethnic German or Englishman. Unless, of course, he was also part Honduran (sort of like how Edward James Olmos is part European, Jewish, and Mexican). There are many people of pure or partial European, African and even Middle Eastern backgrounds born throughout Latin America. The fact that Ned's father bares an German (or English) surname coupled with the fact that neither the Germans nor English had influenced any part of the cultures throughout Latin America indicates to me that the only way this man acquired his name was through birthright.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carlos_Mencia/Archive_1&oldid=1145703298"