This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

2003-2005

Can this entry actually get MORE fannish? I don't think so —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.116.23 (talk • contribs)

Can you make even less of a valid point about this article? I don't think so.

I heard on the real spiel show here in Australia, that kevin smith wrote the original Scream movie. Can someone check this?

Well, I'm pretty sure he owns and operates the store. Anyone know for sure?
Tualha 07:23, Nov 12, 2003 (UTC)

Fixed it so the picture of Smith doesn't hog the page up. As far as I know, he does own and operate Secret Stash. Although, he'd obviously have people working in it for him. --Kross 21:24, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

2005-2006

RE: Ownership of Secret Stash

According to the following links, Smith does actually own and operate Secret Stash:

I'd say that this is sufficient evidence, and that any changes that were made due to lack of knowledge on this issue can be changed. --Imaek 23:49, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

He does own Secret Stash. Listen to any of the commentaries on the DVDs he references it multiple times including both the location in Red Bank NJ and the phone number. Similarly, you can find evidence at his person website [1] .

NPOV?

From the article: "His films are known for their distinctive vision and dialogue, but are sometimes criticized for crude humor, limited attention to plot development, and technical amateurishness."

I think this gives the initial impression that his work is crappy, and could be rewritten in a nicer way. Suggestions?

--Kooky 02:33, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Well it is technically true -- his films are sometimes criticized for that. However it would be nice to see mention of the fact that his films are also highly cerebrial, and that, while resorting at times to crude humor in order to appease the average movie-goer (who is not generally gifted with the most acute of minds), the films consistently mock the use of said crude humor, often in the same line of dialogue that such humor is used. In doing so, those few audience members who are bright enough to "get it" are treated to post-modernist, self-referential jab at the film's own assanine tactics. And while those of us who don't appreciate a post-modernist approach to anything, and cringe everytime the fourth wall is broken (like myself) may not find much humor in such blatantly self-conscious maneuvers, even they have to admit that the deftness with which Keven Smith manages to pull this off in his relentless prosecution of multi-layered humor, is something very few other filmmakers could ever hope to aspire to. The intelligence of his films is very difficult to ignore. --Corvun 15:26, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

First sentence

The first sentence describes Smith as a "screenwriter, film director, comic book writer, and creator of View Askew." First of all, shouldn't the word "actor" be in there somewhere? I realize he is no Sir Laurence Olivier and that most (but not all) of his appearances have been in his own films, but IMDB does list 15 appearances (some still in production) so I think his description also should include "actor." Does anyone disagree? Zeutron 21:36, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

So why didn't you just insert the word actor instead of typing all this? Travislangley 09:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Why type that in response to a person who has made 14 article space edits total, posted his message a year ago, and hasn't edited on Wikipedia in 9 months?

Also, a short link to Be bold is a bit more friendly ;)

-- That Guy, From That Show! 10:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

wikify

I think this article needs some serious wikification. I mean, the second half of the article is mearly called "Miscelleneous Information" and is filled only with disorganized, bulleted, paragraph-long factoids. The whole page needs to be completely restructured, chronologically or by themes, so that it can become an actual article. Maybe wikification is the wrong word, but this text needs a lot of work. -- Rmrfstar 14:23, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Yea, its pretty messy right now. I do have a copy of "An Evening With Kevin Smith", and can also use "Snowball Effect" to put everything in order. It'll take a long time though. I'l try working on it in a few weeks.Cinema Void 18:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Comics

I think his comics writing career merits a separate sub-heading. Sure, everyone knows him as an award-winning filmmaker, but he's also a critically acclaimed comic book writer. Comic fans know him well for things like Green Lantern, Spider-Man/Black Cat, and numerous other series. Can anyone provide a more accurate section on his comics, before I just go ahead and do it? - Darkhawk (16 Mar/06 @ 17:26 EST)

He's never written Green Lantern, you mean Green Arrow. Elijya 05:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Primary Picture

Can we change that? Kevin ALWAYS has a beard, and it makes no sense for the primary picture to be of likely the ONE time in the past 15 years that he has been clean shaven. Elijya 05:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, frankly I don't even believe that to be a real picture of Kevin Smith, I think if anything its a fan dressed as Silent bob (lacking a beard)

OK how is it that we don't have a single picture of Kevin Smith in here? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 06:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

It might be long but

Kevin should have this much info he is a great filmmaker who needs allot of info on the 40+ movies he has worked on. Ralas in Chains

"ending of Spider-Man's marriage" Huh?

From the article at present:

Kevin Smith was also approached and offered a chance to write an ongoing Spider-Man book in 2002, but turned down the request when he was told that as a condition of taking the assignment, that Smith would have to have his first Spider-Man story feature the ending of Spider-Man's marriage to his longtime wife Mary Jane. Allegedly Smith, whose reputation in the comic world had become a very negative one due to his lateness problems and his killing of Karen Paige, knew that his name would be mud if he took the book and ended Spider-Man's marriage.

I remember the exact opposite - that Smith would be responsible, as part of a run on Spider-Man, for **reuniting** the then-seperated SM & MJ. His lateness on SM/BC meaning he wouldn't be writing an ongoing Spider-Man (or his also-announced ongoing Black Cat title to follow SM/BC) meant JMS did it in ASMv2 #50. If the source isn't cited, I'll remove it in a couple of days... - SoM 08:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Miscellaneous Information: "Bussing"

The Misc Info section includes this line: "Not long after Clerks., Smith pitched an idea called "Bussing" about bus boys, described as "Clerks in a restaurant". "

"Bussing" means "kissing," while "busing" is the correct spelling of the present-tense verb "bus." I didn't correct it on the chance that "bussing" is what the film was actually going to be called, but if that's not the case, can we please change it? It's an embarrassing misspelling. Mitchell k dwyer 19:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

His screenplay was called "Bussing". He even concocted a fake movie poster for it, which hangs in one of his stores: [2]. Right or wrong, that's how he spelled it.

Not that it matters, but both spellings are acceptable. And, actually, "bussing tables" gets more hits on Google than "busing tables". -- ChrisB 21:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Early Life

The section "Early Life" contains the following: Smith has . . . a brother, Donald, to whom Smith attributed the appearance of homosexuals or homosexual behavior in his movies. Could this phrase perhaps be translated into English by a phrase such as "Smith has . . . a brother, Donald, on whom the behaviour and appearance of homosexuals in his movies is based" or ". . . who serves as the source of the movies' portrayal of the behaviour and appearance of homosexuals"? If not, then perhaps someone would be so kind as to clarify the idea that the cited text is meant to convey. Hi There 10:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Awkward Start

I don't know if something was lost in an edit, but right now the Bio section begins with "Afterwards, Smith took a job in a convenience store." After what? This topic sentence makes no sense. --feitclub 15:50, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

I think that was after he got outta high school. That is if what he said on "An Evening With Kevin Smith," is correct. Magnus 20:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Kevin Smith married to Jenifer Schwalback(sp) not Starfleet Ensign Ro Lauren.

I just noticed that it says he's married to a fictional Star Trek character on the page and even has links to the character's own wiki page. When I went to edit/correct this, I noticed that his real wife's name is listed in the html and not Ro Lauren's. This is over my head so i'll leave it to you more technically competent wikis out there to fix.

Desmoove 16:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)D

2007

2-shot

What is this "2-shot" that kevin smith has apparantly trademarked. "2-shot" in film terminology is basically a shot focusing on 2 characters rather than one. What is this referring to in the "Mae Day" section? Paradox CT 07:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Smith Wiki Project

Anyone interested in getting a Kevin Smith/View Askew WikiProject started up? Go to the WikiProject page and search for "Kevin Smith." DodgerOfZion 21:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

37

It has been mentioned that the number 37 is significant to Kevin Smith (in his Catch and Release wardrobe, and during a recent SModcast regarding his 37th birthday). Does anybody know what is up with this and would it warrant a section in the bio? Treygdor 00:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Try looking up 42. Darrenhusted 00:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a View Askewniverse motif, although the 37 in Catch and Release was due to him using his own wardrobe through much of it. --DodgerOfZion 22:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Pardon the language following here, but, the number 37 refers to Clerks(1) where they discuss how many they've had sex with. - "37?! - My girlfriend 's sucked thirty-seven dicks(!) - In a row??" - - - Watch the movie and see for yourselves, people. - First Clerks movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.194.197.132 (talk) 02:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Criticism

this needs clean up...

His films are known for their distinctive vision and dialogue, but are sometimes criticized for crude humor, limited attention to plot development, and technical amateurishness. Some critics believe that Kevin Smith can respond to criticism in very blatant ways ^[1], especially in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, where the catalyst for the story begins Jay and Silent Bob trying to get even with kids that wrote negative reviews about them on a website similar to Rotten Tomatoes.

Cstella23 13:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I think throwing it out would be the best thing, "Kevin Smith can respond to criticism in very blatant ways" is just poor. Darrenhusted 15:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I think there should be a section noting his critics and how he responds to them, BUT the section as it is above is tantamount to worthless. Cstella23 18:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Haha this article is longer than the article on "God"! Damn, you wikipedians really crack me up.--68.90.61.133 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 07:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Filmography

This section was getting ridiculous. I moved it to its own page, where it can hopefully get cleaned up a little. As for the selected filmography on this page, I think it should be kept to feature films he's written and directed. Pele Merengue 17:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

smoking

About the lack of citation for the smoking thing: he tells the story in the special features for the Clerks DVD. I have no idea how to cite that, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.203.101 (talk) 12:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

CAST

Perhaps in the table of actors/actresses and the movies they starred in, it might be a good idea to add double x's to those who played two roles, such as Ben Affleck and Jason Lee in "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.210.4.193 (talk) 22:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Other projects and media appearances citations

I've noticed that a lot of the information in this section (Other projects and media appearances) is basically stuff pulled straight out of the two "An Evening with Kevin Smith" Q&A movies. However, not knowing how to do the cite tag properly for video information, I really can't help on this matter. Anyone with a copy of either should just add them. Most of the information in that section is taken from the first one (Superman, Tim Burton, etc.) LanceHeart (talk) 00:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

2008

Science fiction fandom

Smith has been put into this category, but I'm not sure he really qualifies. "[O]nly those professionals who have substantially supported the amateur hobby should be included." Unlike Roger Ebert, Smith has not (as far as I know) published or even locced any science fiction fanzines, attended any science fiction conventions as a fan (WizardWorld is a commercial comics show, not a convention), etc. Should I remove the tag? --Orange Mike | Talk 14:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

New VA project

Hey all, I recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject View Askew, and plan on getting cleaning this article up, any interested editors can add their name to the project on the project page. Thanks, Skeletor2112 (talk) 12:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

No Date

Wrong Person!

Kevin Smith mentioned in the article from Orange, Texas, is the wrong Kevin Smith. The Kevin Smith from Orange, Texas, is an African American male who was a star football player at West Orange-Stark High School, as well as a star football player for the Dallas Cowboys.

Primary disambiguation

I've undone the moves because this is a clear case of primary dismbiguation. This Kevin Smith is by far more notable than the others. violet/riga (t) 18:09, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't think notability is the only criteria. I cannot find any Wikipedia guidelines for this case. For me the other two Kevin Smiths are more notable. If I do a search on "Kevin Smith" I would get the Kevin Smith page. I would then have to click on Kevin Smith (disambiguation) and then on Kevin Smith (New Zealand). This is not a very efficient way of using Wikipedia. Alan Liefting 00:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

This Kevin Smith is by far more notable, as demonstrated by a google search. Type it into google and the first page is full of sites for this guy (including our own) without mention of the others. Primary disambiguation is a very common thing on Wikipedia. A few examples off the top of my head would be cricket, MTV and frog. violet/riga (t) 07:23, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Adding in my voice here. I'd agree with violetriga that this is a clear case of primary disambiguation.--Redirectorial (talk) 09:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Makes much more sense this way around, I was very suprised when this page was disambiguated in the first place, now it has its own set aside disambiguation page all is well in the world.Londo 06 09:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Red State

According to Wikipedia:Notability (films), Red State (2008 film) shouldn't be a stand alone article. There is a section in this article about it, and I think the contents of the main article should be integrated into the "Red State" section under "Forthcoming films". The Red State article should be redirected to Kevin Smith#Red State. Tell me what you think about this. Djbj16 (talk) 15:40, 21 June 2008

Support - non-notable, may never be made. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I think Red State should have its own stand alone article now. Kevin Smith said pretty much he is making it before "Hit Somebody" yet that movie already has its own stand alone article. Oh yEs itS caRly (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC).

It is at Red State (2011 film) now. Sigh... Debresser (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 16:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Trimming.

This article needs a major trimming. If anyone would like to help me please reply here or on my personal talk page. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 20:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I Agree and disagree - It is a little much for somebody just wanting to find out a little more, I am a big fan but have not read the whole article. However it is a testament to how prolific he is in many media formats and how much he contributes to his fans and what he is a fan of.

It would be a shame trim 194.72.35.118 (talk) 11:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC) Andy, Sheffield, England

I am trying to at least find references, and partially trimming. But if someone could help, that'd be great. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 05:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Dogma-J&SB controversy

After the controversy surrounding Dogma, Smith said he wanted to make a movie that couldn't be attacked for its content. Focusing the spotlight on two characters who'd appeared in supporting roles in his previous four films, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back featured an all-star cast, with many familiar faces returning from Smith's first four films. The $20 million film earned $30 million at the box office and received mixed reviews from the critics. It was meant to be the film that closed the book on the "Askewniverse" - the Jersey-based, interconnected quintet of movies written and directed by Smith.

It should be brought up Jay and Silent Bob wasn't a break from the controversy and they still got shit from GLAAD for being homophobic. Kevin Smith even had to pay a fine for it.ChesterG (talk) 17:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

This is not worth noting, not to mention blatanly false. While it is true that GLAAD complained about KS, the organization holds no authority whatsoever. They are unable to fine anyone for any reason.Wyldstaar (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

C-Class rated for Comics Project

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 15:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

3 images of kevin smith

why do we need so many images of kevin smith? isn't the first one enough? i have heard of people idolizing smith, but this is ridiculous. Jackass110 (talk) 04:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Most FA or GA articles have more than one image. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Couple of Cops

I don't think that the thing about WB changing the title back is right. Filming is going on in Queens this month and i've seen several signs addressing it as "Couple of Cops." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.106.216 (talk) 00:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

It's sourced, which means we keep it. Most sites are referring to it as "Dicks". Perhaps they're just doing what they did to Z&M but taking out the "Make a Porno" title for ads and such. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 01:24, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Harley Quinn Smith

To be honest, Im only really bringing this up because I think its an interesting rule. Apparently, his daughter should not be mentioned, as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP#Privacy_of_names ;

"Gossip Magazine has reported that actor John Doe and his wife Jane have a three-year-old daughter named Booboo Happy Flower. In spite of the entertainment value of the name, this does not make the child notable in her own right. She is only in the media because she is related to Doe and for the novelty of her name. The fact that her name has appeared in one or more celebrity magazines, newspapers or websites may be an instance of self-promotion or scandal-mongering, and does not make her notable. Thus, her name does not belong in an article on John Doe." Physischitzo 11:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree, and her name, from what I found, is only mentioned once. However, it is based on a reliable source, it helps to show that he is influenced by comics and such, and she has appeared in at least two of his films. I'd say this makes it more than just a passing "oh he has a daughter". Just my opinion. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 09:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The line about the source of her name lists a specific Batman book, "Mad Love", and sites a reference. Yet, said reference says NOTHING about the origin of her name.

If you're going to list something as fact, then sight a source that backs you up. It's too easy to just throw up any link to anything that remotely has to do with the subject, yet doesn't speak to the info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.39.180 (talk) 19:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

At least referenced in Gotham Girls at the end of Season 2 Episode 4, where Harley Quinn is shown as a toddler. A cop hearing Poison Ivy calling the name and asks who "names their kid Harley Quinn". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.210.59.26 (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

The Weight Thing Will Be Big

The SouthWest Airlines pilot's decision to deny Mr. Smith passage on their plane is an important story from the standpoint that airplanes are the first squeeze-point where "too big" will need to be enforced. ADA rules have given us far bigger doors and toilet facilities, but corollary action will not be made on aircraft. He's a celebrity, of sorts. So what is his height and weight?Homebuilding (talk) 03:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessarily been stated. And, as far as I can tell, he says he isn't what they consider "overweight", and he passed their tests yet they still made him get off the plane and then lied about several things that happened. That seems to be what the big deal is. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 03:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

This whole aeroplane seat incident is just one event, unpleasant as it may be have been at the time, in this guy's life. It is NOT worthy of inclusion in an encyclopaedia. It should be deleted for not complying with Wikipedia's notability criteria.80.230.31.29 (talk) 06:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, please do not re-title sections created by others. Secondly, please add your comments to the bottom of the section. Thirdly, it is very notable. It has received numerous forms of media attention, it has reliable sources, and it very much deserves a mention. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 06:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Not only did it get media coverage, but Smith himself spent an hour and a half talking about it on a Smodcast entitled Fuck You, Southwest Airlines. Darrenhusted (talk) 13:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced dubious claim

The article says Smith has stated that he regularly buys 2 seats because he is anti-social, rather than because he is obese - does anyone have a source or is this just vandalism?Autarch (talk) 19:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a direct quote from his twitter feed and also during the Smodcast he confirms that he doesn't like to talk to strangers. Darrenhusted (talk) 19:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I've cited the Smodcast where he mentions this. (Deftonesderrick (talk) 21:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC))

Commentary

I've noticed that besides being well known for his own commentary tracks on his films, smith has popped up doing commentary on other people's film's Several films that I have that Smith had no involvement with have him on the commentary track. Trey Parkers orgazmo, Donnie Darko, even a british sitcom I have from Edgar Wright called spaced has him on it. I'm sure he's done many more. It would be fantastic if someone put together a list of all of them, possibly in its own little table graph on the filmography page, but at the very least it should get a little paragraph in the "other film involvement" section I think its notable since he really is considered an innovator in terms of film commentary and is very associated with it. his recent release of cop out for instance in blue ray contains a "hosted feature" which even made news on its own in film review magazine type circles. I remember he didn't do a commentary track for his movie Zack and Miri and that even made news. 24.207.131.20 (talk) 04:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Kevin and Scott Mosier did a commentary track together for the movie Road House. They were both kids when it came out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyldstaar (talk • contribs) 01:16, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Retirement

I know that I removed the note about Smith retiring and said I was just moving it, but after looking around, I can't find a reliable source that verifies this. Sure, I can find lots of blogs and other reliable sources that claim he said that, but until I see a reliable source, I'm uncomfortable adding it. If anyone sees it, I recommend adding it to the end of the "Work as director" section. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:48, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Smith has mentioned this numerous times on his podcasts, I'm sure you could find one to quote 130.68.225.64 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:09, 9 September 2011 (UTC).

A subsection has been created, but one editor keeps removing it because he doesn't like the tone of the quote. Neutrality, anyone? Hearfourmewesique (talk) 19:40, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

There was no need for a subsection for his retirement, let alone one placed after TV, comics and acting work, rather than in the Filmmaking section, in part because the Filmmaking section already mentioned his retirement, a point that Bencey already mentioned to you. He did not say that he did "not like" the tone, but such material should not have been added from one hostile journalist's opinion, and he's right. Relating some of the material Chris reported, what his sources said, etc., would've been valid, but an entire direct quote of his own personal opinion, one that's hardly empirical, instead of sticking to the facts, was not the way to go. While Bencey was correct in that one journalist's analysis of Smith's recent behavior and retirement should not have been given the undue weight of a direct quote that it was given, he should not have ignored all the information from that source as he did, nor have edit warred with you. He should have discussed it here, and so should have you, but neither of you did. (And no, misquoting or mischaracterizing Bencey's edit summary doesn't count as "discussion".)

I removed the direct quote by Chris Lee, but added the more relevant info from his column in more summarized fashion to the Filmmaking section, and included both the information Lee related and Smith's stated positions for balance. Nightscream (talk) 23:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Your edit is fine, and thank you for it. However, let me emphasize this:

When a profound filmmaker like Smith decides to retire after a fruitful career, it is definitely notable enough for a subheading.
Retirement usually comes after TV, comics and acting work... at least chronologically.
Bencey added the "already mentioned" sentence after this whole thing started. This is manipulative, to say the least – he fallaciously tried to point out that I "missed" a sentence that was nonexistent prior to my intervention.
Wikipedia does not directly discourage quotes, as long as it's not a blatant WP:COPYVIO.

Hearfourmewesique (talk) 12:55, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Not necessarily. It grows naturally out of the material detailing Red State and Hit Somebody, and works fine like that. Even if it did qualify for one in this particular case, you didn't give it its own heading. You gave it its own section, and placed that section after the TV, acting and comics sections, which makes no sense. His retirement from filmmaking should be placed at the end of his filmmaking section.
Oh really? Tell me, how many people with Wikipedia articles have done work in filmmaking, TV, acting and comics, and have retired, such that there can be an established practice as to how their articles are "usually" arranged? These sections are not arranged chronologically in Smith's article, since Smith bounced back and forth between working in these different arenas, so why would his retirement from filmmaking be placed anywhere other than at the end of the filmmaking section? You propose having a filmmaking section, then a comics section, then a TV section, then an acting section, and then indicate when he retired from filmmaking, even though he's continuing to work in those other areas? How does this make sense?
Nope. The end of the filmmaking section mentioned his retirement at least as far back as March. And even prior to that, before the sections were reorganized, it was in the other sections, having been added on January 30.
I didn't say or imply anything about directly discouraging quotes. You'll notice that my edits themselves contain some direct quotes. The issue is where and when should they be used, how often, how large, who should be quoted, and whether the quote in particular is both relevant and is afforded proper weight. By these criteria, including Chris Lee's quote was in appropriate, because it constituted a characterization, rather than any empirical conclusion about Smith's behavior, or a analyses of his body of work as a whole. Relating what those closest to Smith said was relevant. Relating Smith's response to this point was relevant. That's why I included those things, which were not in the article. But giving a direct quote to Lee's characterization was not. Nightscream (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

...I am very impressed with this Nightscream work here in wiki. Blondeignore (talk) 01:37, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

"Spoilers" for the section, "On The Internet"

Kevin just started a new original series on Hulu.com called "Spoilers". This should be written and cited in the section "On The Internet". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.95.11 (talk) 16:56, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

What kind of reliable secondary sources reported on this that you can link us to? Elizium23 (talk) 17:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Jay and Silent Bob's Super Groovy Cartoon Movie (2013) Directed by Steve Stark and written by Kevin Smith

The duo are releasing another film, one of the last ones for Kevin Smith, entitled .Jay and Silent Bob's Super Groovy Cartoon Movie sometime in 2013.

Sources: http://seesmod.com/groovymovie/ https://twitter.com/ThatKevinSmith/status/307536848895479810

Edit request on 23 September 2013

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit semi-protected is being considered for merging. ›

"Smith is also the owner of Jay and Silent Bob's Secret Stash, a comic book in Red Bank, New Jersey." should read "Smith is also the owner of Jay and Silent Bob's Secret Stash, a comic book store in Red Bank, New Jersey." 174.102.21.98 (talk) 15:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! Rivertorch (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Controversies

I have tagged the Controversies section as having undue weight. There are also sourcing issues and possibly BLP concerns. Four paragraphs devoted to a single incident, and most of it sourced to blogs? Not encyclopedic, not good. I'm bringing this to the talk page in the hope that regular watchers of the article will respond. Rivertorch (talk) 18:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I think you should outline your case if you're going to be the one to place the tag there. Can you offer examples from that section that illustrate three problems you described (weight, sourcing, BLP)? Nightscream (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Sure. I'm not a big fan of separate controversy sections, but where they exist they should be proportionate to the notable aspects of the subject's public life. Nearly one-fifth of this article is devoted to the controversy section. While I am new to the article and was until today unfamiliar with Mr. Smith, I saw what looked like some red flags. I question whether devoting so much attention to these two controversies isn't undue weight. The sourcing issue looks as if it should be self-explanatory to any experienced editor: there are two blog sources [3][4], two dead links to what appears to be a primary source[5][6], and a link to the subject's YouTube profile page. If I've misread it, please say so, but that's not the sort of sourcing I'd expect to see in a controversy section. The possible BLP issue isn't really anything specific but merely a function of the other two issues. (We're supposed to be extra careful about sourcing and undue weight with BLPs, I do believe.) I'll take a closer look at it tomorrow, but I had hoped that someone more familiar with the article would comment in the meantime. Rivertorch (talk) 21:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

-- You not knowing Kevin Smith makes it clear why you don't feel the "Controversies" section is needed. Bottom line - It's needed and well placed. This "undue weight" notice should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.239.130.49 (talk) 08:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Argumentum ad hominem. Rivertorch outlined his reasons for the placement quite well, and they had nothing to do with "not knowing" Smith, which is irrelevant. Keep in mind also that he said he was unfamiliar with Smith "until today". Having read the article, it can now be said to be acquainted with him, so this is moot. Focus on the arguments, and not on the editor, please. Nightscream (talk) 06:41, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Just posting to point out that the criticism of Rivertorch was not an Argumentum ad hominem. Saying something like "you're a communist and therefore unfit to comment!" would be an ad hominem. Questioning someone's knowledge of a topic is not an ad hominem when their knowledge of the topic is of immediate relevance to their argument. I'm inclined to disagree with 67.239.130.49, but also Nightscream's incorrect and pretentious use of logical fallacies. 69.196.172.140 (talk) 05:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Wrong. When one proposes an idea that you feel is factually incorrect, or poorly reasoned, the proper approach to address it to falsify it by explaining how it's incorrect as a question of fact, or how its reasoning is not sound. When you instead attack the supposed "knowledge" of the person making the argument, as a substitute for this, then you are indeed engaging in an ad hominem argument.

This is especially the case when the personal accusation is an assumption, rather than something you've illustrated with evidence or reason. The statement "You not knowing Kevin Smith makes it clear why you don't feel the "Controversies" section is needed" is indeed an hominem argument, not only because it sidesteps Rivertorch's arguments, but because that assertion is an assumption. In order for you to be able to conclude this, you have to eliminate other possibilities, like the possibility that Rivertorch genuinely thinks that too much disproportionate space is given to that material, or that the reliability of two of the sources cited for it is in question, as he/she indicated. To do this, you would have to first explain how you know that Rivertorch's concerns about undue weight and reliability are not sincerely held. You would also have to explain how he/she is ignorant of Smith when he/she has presumably read the article, given that, as I pointed out above, Rivertorch said that he/she was unfamiliar with Smith until today.

The bottom line is, you have not falsified Rivertorch's arguments, you have not explained how you know his/her arguments are motivated by ignorance, or even how you know that he/she is still ignorant of him, and thus, your comments are purely personal, as are your silly little accusation of "pretense" on my part. Thus, your statements are knee-jerk personal assumptions, or in other words, ad hominem arguments. Nightscream (talk) 18:18, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

A sentence eeds changing but I'm not sure how.

Due to controversy surrounding the original title, it was changed to A Couple of Cops,[26] before reverting its original title, A Couple of Dicks, due to negative reaction,[27] before finally settling on the title Cop Out.[28]

This is slightly confusing to me, especially the text in between footnote 26 and 27. The whole sentence needs to be re-written but I'm not sure about the sequence of title. Maybe it's a quibble but maybe someone could take a crack at it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.205.62.6 (talk) 02:22, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Yoga-Hosers

Here's all the information on the film, so his page needs to be updated accordingly. source 2601:C:780:234:307D:1FB5:1A8A:36A3 (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Kevin Smith voiced M.O.D.O.K. at The Marvel Experience.

Here are sources: source1 and source2. Npamusic (talk) 02:34, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kevin Smith. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:24, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kevin Smith. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:53, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Kevin Smith. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Section for cancelled projects

I'm proposing that a section/subjection should be added specifically about Smith's cancelled projects. Because he has amassed so many over the course of his career, this would be a useful section that would also clean up the "As a filmmaker" section, which is kind of a mess honestly. You could add Clerks III, Mallrats 2, Hit Somebody, the TV show Hollyweed, the Hollywood Babble-On TV show, his Green Hornet and Superman adaptions... As a comparison, filmmakers like Tarantino and Del Toro who also have many unfulfilled projects have a section like this on their page. --Invader Phantom (talk) 15:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Religion

Smith reaffirms time and time again that he believes in God. His doubting the Cstholic Church is not proof that he is an atheist. The wuote that was quoted even proves that he is "spiritual". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:7203:B700:123:24B7:87BC:3670 (talk) 04:40, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Frequent collaborators

Hey!

I just made a new list of Kevin Smith's collaborators.
It would be nice if you helped me citing more sources as references. And any other improvement that the list would need, I would be glad to receive it. --Sebastián Arena... 22:56, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Is the Public Appearances section necessary?

The Public Appearances section under Career contains a whole paragraph dedicated to a single event. The notability of this event isn't really clear (it's essentially just a Q&A/meet & greet). If it's a unique recurring feature of Smith's career, that should be stated. Otherwise, it isn't that notable.

If there is some reason for the section to be included, I'd be happy to hear it. KieranStanley (talk) 05:54, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Whoops

I didn’t know he directed a short film in 1992. My sincerest apologies. 2600:1700:87A0:D8C0:6F:FDB6:7E8D:9FC4 (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

^ http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/movies/mmx-0607160015jul16,0,6135852.story?coll=mmx-movies_heds

[1] ttp://metromix.chicagotribune.com/movies/mmx-0607160015jul16,0,6135852.story?coll=mmx-movies_heds

[1]