Talk:Rachel Zegler

Articles to cite when this goes back up

Draft:Rachel Zegler

• This article has some more information about Zegler, including that she has graduated high school. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:47, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
• Her last role was as Fiona in Shrek; this article also names previous roles she has played. It also states that she was born at Hackensack Hospital. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
• This article mentions more roles. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Date of birth and parents' names

I think there's a good chance that her date of birth can be sourced from somewhere (it isn't on the citation), but not convinced the citation for her parents' names is verifiable. There's no indicator in the source that the Rachel mentioned is this Rachel Zegler; nothing that identifies her in particular beyond the name. There is also the matter of, given her being a relative unknown, whether they should be there, given WP:BLPPRIVACY. Given that, I think they should be removed until there's a more pressing reason to include them. Imaginestigers (talk) 22:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

It's reported clearly here, but WP doesn't accept the Daily Mail. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-6591873/Steven-Spielbergs-West-Story-reveals-core-cast-Rachel-Zegler-17-landing-role-Maria.html I imagine that if you look over Zegler's social media, you could find it. Let's see if someone come up with a better source. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree that Factfanatic has sufficiently tied this Rachel Zegler to her mother Gina, which, in turn, makes the obituary ref adequate for identifying her father's name. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:12, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to whoever tracked down a better source for her DOB! I still have some concerns about WP:BLPNAMES regarding putting her parents' names on there: "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, former, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject." I don't think her parents' names are information that is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of an actress notable for one (upcoming) role. I'm going to remove it for now, to err on the side of caution. Imaginestigers (talk) 08:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Imaginestigers: Please note that I undid you revision in which you removed her parents' names. No other editors have expressed concern about listing her family members' names. If we could reach a consensus with multiple editors agreeing that it would be best to remove Zegler's parents, then we can do just that. If you'd like, please feel free to create an RFC about the inclusion of her parents' names, or simply ask for opinions to reach a consensus. Factfanatic1 (talk) 08:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Factfanatic:, as per WP:BLPNAMES, 'the presumption [is] in favour of privacy'. It should be removed until a consensus is reached. Imaginestigers (talk) 08:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

An RfC is not necessary here. Do we have reliable sources that directly common on the subject's parents names? If not, we don't include it. We shouldn't be using non-RS such as the WP:DAILY MAIL nor "look over Zegler's social media". If they can be reliably sourced, fine, if not no dice. Also see WP:SYNTH for why we don't tie two citations together to draw conclusions. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:03, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The information that is in the article now is 100% reliably sourced and qualifies under BLP. The birthplace, mother's name and sister info is all stated in the Northjersey.com article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:10, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Not as of today. That tweet supporting her DOB just said "it is my birthday" - no indication of year, not even clear where she was when it was posted so it could be +/- 1 day, depending on time zone she was in. I've removed it per WP:DOB. Toddst1 (talk) 20:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Rachel Zegler targeted by cancel culture

In what appears to be a rare example of real cancel culture, Rachel Zegler appears to be targeted by racist internet trolls (it's always the same individuals, every single time) over her casting as Snow White in the upcoming Disney movie, and for her social media posts in which she regularly calls out racism, white supremacy, police brutality and transphobia. The alt right disinfor rag BoundingIntoComics has written a hit-piece on her, and twitter trolls have made some disturbing compilations of her social media posts, to incite harassment of her.

I'm not sure if the matter has been covered by reliable sources yet, but there have already been attempts made by IP users to vandalize this article, so protection may be required. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 09:14, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

While I'm not sure this is worthy enough to be added to the page (yet?), I'm monitoring in case we need to ask for the page to be protected. Apathyash (talk) 04:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Continuous misinformation of being "Jewish"

I undid a user who claimed Zegler was Jewish-Polish. This is probably because in the American psyche German names are associated with Jews, as most American Jews are Ashkenazi. However this is not one-size-fits-all. We see on the disambiguation Ziegler that while there are a few Rabbis, there are also monks, Protestants and even a Nazi SS leader. There was no shortage in history of German Christian migration to Poland, so the existence of a Polish ancestor with a German surname is not evidence of Judaism. If you want a source to prove a negative, [1] [2] Unknown Temptation (talk) 18:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Rachel Zegler's post from Twitter.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:07, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Birthplace, Hackensack

Hi, the IPv6 reverter claimed that her Hackensack place of birth was "false" because it wasn't found in the current citation, but I looked in the history and found a citation to an interview where Zegler herself says she was born there, so I've re-added that citation to the article. Elizium23 (talk) 16:12, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Horrible photograph

She looks deformed. Find another one. 2600:6C5D:5A00:B1D:B9B2:5BAA:53E5:3F2B (talk) 15:52, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree. We could take this one: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Zegler#/media/Datei:Rachel_Zegler_in_2023.jpg 2A02:908:1A6:25C0:44CE:EAF8:903B:2DE4 (talk) 18:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Inappropriate comment about her name

Inappropriate 2600:1010:B1AB:C8AD:8995:3456:BCF6:5F87 (talk) 03:59, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism, already removed. A09 (talk) 14:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

The cross in "Film roles"

What do the crosses in the "Film roles" spreadsheet mean? --Slow Phil (talk) 20:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Film yet to be released. Not necessarily needed, but it appears engrained in the pending film template. Rusted AutoParts 20:25, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2024

Add Rachel Zegler's performance as "Gloria Calderon" and "Maria del Carmen" for all 34 English Language episodes for Season One of the podcast "The Princess of South Beach."

Links for support: https://princessofsouthbeach.com/ (scroll down to Season One) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt18251276/ https://www.hola.com/us/entertainment/20210928g2so8dwz2v/rachel-zegler-stars-in-telenovela-princess-of-south-beach/ https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Rachel-Zegler-Raul-Esparza-More-Star-in-PRINCESS-OF-SOUTH-BEACH-Scripted-Podcast-Series-20220112 24.192.94.127 (talk) 00:57, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. , The sources are borderline reliable, but please explain what changes you want done. Begocci (talk) 15:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Add Snow White controversy

Wanting to add a section about all the negative publicity she’s been getting for her comments on the Snow White movie. Loads of trustworthy news sources have reported on this (it’s pretty much shows up when you google her but somehow it’s not on her Wikipedia) and it’s very likely going to affect the movie and the trailer has already gotten massive backlash. Lisha2037 (talk) 03:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Like I said, the "negative publicity" is primarily internet trolls and you tubbers and completely undeserved based on selectively clipped out of context quotes. No one knows how the "controversy" will affect the film but it is properly covered on the film page not on her page. Spanneraol (talk) 03:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

That’s absolutely not true. I’m not sure what you’re referring to as internet trolls here? And no her interviews were not taken out of context. She was directly speaking about the 1937 movie and kept calling it the words I had quoted in the paragraph I put in there. When you said racist I think you are referring to the fact some people objected to a Latina being cast as Snow White but i didn’t even mention that and for a reason as that’s not related to her personal conduct. Just wait and see. The movie will flip big time and everyone will agree her conduct prior to release had a big part in it. Lisha2037 (talk) 05:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Again, that's all your opinion. The film has it's own article. This stuff is not relevant here. Don't add it unless you can get consensus from other editors. Spanneraol (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

No YOU are the one who is stating your opinion here. What I posted are facts. She did post it. She did get a lot of backlash, enough to garner loads of articles from news sources that are listed as verifiable. The movie article itself mentions everything Rachel said and how it generated controversy for the movie. If it’s able to be on the movie page it should be on her own page as it’s about her, more than the movie. Lisha2037 (talk) 18:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

In general, if there are multiple sourcing, we can and should include it as per WP:PUBLICFIGURE.. Even if the phenomenon on review bombing was by trolls (and it was), it is notable and useful to include Bluethricecreamman (talk) 19:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

100% agrée. The review bombing is likely an internet phenomenon, but there has been constructive feedback on her comments on the original movie and how it’s going to affect the movie. Disney did move the release date because they wanted the controversy to simmer down. Lisha2037 (talk) 19:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Something could be added if it was written in a neutral tone, as opposed to what Lisha added which was entirely a pov claim with unsupported statements about the movie bombing because of her and included quotes that were out of context. Spanneraol (talk) 20:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Very much agree with Spanneraol here. I don't think it improves the article. And even if there is sourcing, it's a basic tenet of Wikipedia that verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Importing minor internet brouhahas is not, to my mind, in the best interest of the encyclopedia. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 20:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to agree that this should be at most on the movie page and it is. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree that it should be added. I literally came to this page to read about the surrounding controversy (which is not just about the movie, but also around her political views and debate with Gal Gadot), and to get some references, but was surprised to find that there is not a single word about it. As the aforementioned WP:PUBLICFIGURE states: If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. I do not really get, why there is even a debate about it. Argathron (talk) 21:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps when you have more than 15 edits you will get some sense of the concerns. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the remark, I hope so as well. Perhaps it would also help me understand why is it more relevant for an encyclopedia that she got a signed book from Barbara Streisand, than what's has been the topic in half of the articles about her in the past year (as it seems from a quick peek on google news). But anyway, my life won't be any worse nor better if this is included or not. Argathron (talk) 12:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

reliable sources for one thing. Streisand was a big influence on her which is why that is included... the social media trolls trashing her repeatedly for silly things that some you tubber invented on the other hand.. If someone can come up with some neutral sentence or two that is sourced then we can consider including some mention of it... so far the people promoting adding this content have proposed rather biased paragraphs. Spanneraol (talk) 15:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Grandparents

Why are her non-notable maternal grandparents named here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.195.16 (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2024

In her early life section, change her father's ethnic origin to specify it is Polish Jewish ancestry Bittzen (talk) 00:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done -- no reliable source provided. Dumuzid (talk) 00:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)