Talk:Hasan Minhaj

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 14 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mlozonschi, Shadinamiranian.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 16 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kcologna.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism
The passage "Amongst other achievements like claiming to have placed first in a 1993 spelling bee, Minhaj confirmed a love for breakfast cereal Honey Bunches of Oats in August 2019." was suggested vandalism (check the citation on the passage) and at least the part about the spelling bee should be removed. ControlledCrash (talk) 19:58, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Nailed it
Details of correspondence dinner section needed. Wikipietime (talk) 02:58, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

"he took on the traditional role"
"He was chosen to perform at the White House correspondents dinner in 2017 where he took on the traditional role of making jokes about the United States President Donald Trump and the American press corps."
 * This needs rewriting by someone who has seen many White House correspondents' dinner speeches (Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump), and can find relevant citations.Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 19:07, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

"Nicki Minhaj"
Okay, I'll give you this one. Nicki Minhaj is kind of hilarious, but PLEASE don't vandalize the wiki. Keep jokes away from places where people often need factual information. Readers likely aren't here for comedy. | MuganiHakHakHak (talk) 04:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Despite not being a place for humor it might make sense on some pages, such as pages from comedians to have some humor there, especially if it samples the humor of the comedian, of course it will need to be properly introduced that that paragraph is humor and not true (or not verifiable) | Tbbttbbt (talk) 09:18, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hasan Minhaj. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141016172019/http://www.laughspin.com/2009/08/24/hasan-minhaj-giving-comedy-the-college-try/ to http://www.laughspin.com/2009/08/24/hasan-minhaj-giving-comedy-the-college-try/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:53, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

22 Aug 2019 vandalism
Hasan suggested adding some funny things to the Wikipedia page on him during today's episode of Deep Cuts. (see youtube v=lMcOynrekI8?t=316) FYI. 107.147.186.215 (talk) 18:43, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I had a feeling that's why this page was experiencing such a random influx of vandalism. Thank you for that information. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:57, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 August 2019
Revert the article to 912006985 (only qustionable selfpublished source (WP:SELFPUB) provided) --Pan BMP (talk) 19:33, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done – Muboshgu (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Personal life section
Apparently Minhaj encouraged his fans to add certain trivial details about his personal life to this article. Those details aren't encyclopaedic or sourced, but people keep adding them, so it seems like this article will have to remain protected for the time being. Robofish (talk) 23:02, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Lead phrasing
The there seems to be some debate brought up by User:Matza Pizza. The lead mentions Minhaj's use of "emotional truths" in his standup. I think it's unfair to say, "Many of the personal anecdotes used in his standup are untrue or partial fabrications". This seems to not have an objective point of view, and is inaccurate since it's impossible to know the factual inaccuracies of all his stories, we know only some of them to be untrue or partially untrue. We can't assume what we don't know and say "Many" are "untrue", despite his acknowledgement that some stories are untrue and he doesn't always tell stories that are factually true. I suggest the phrasing, "Minhaj uses stories which are loosely based on his personal life which are intended to illustrate "emotional truths"". This seems to be an accurate objective way of approaching the topic.The One I Left (talk) 11:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Mainstream media is describing what Minhaj engaged in as "lies" and "fabrication".
 * The lede should represent the facts as described by the New York Times, NBC News, the New Yorker, and others. I should note that every time someone gets caught making stuff up, they always retreat to the undisprovable version of "composite" and mere "exaggeration" and the like. Here are the facts: The stories which formed his standup career were made up of lies. Matza Pizza (talk) 17:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC) Matza Pizza (talk) 17:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * No doubt that there was reporting from The New Yorker which covered three or four stories that Minhaj had used which were either exaggerations or complete fabrications. But I think that its unfair to say, "Many of the stories are untrue" based on these four instances. It seems to strike a particular biased POV, with language that is specifically provocative. Many comedians also tell stories that aren't accurate as well, should that caveat be included in all their ledes as well? I don't think so. Are you saying you want a line in the lede discussing the controversy? Would love to hear what other people have to say.The One I Left (talk) 11:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Discussion of his gross fabrications belongs in the lede. Saying "he uses stories which are loosely based on his personal life" is meaningless, as every personal story is based on the speaker's personal life. What Minhaj did is entirely different. Bangabandhu (talk) 16:05, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Consensus hasn't been made yet. I have to disagreeThe One I Left (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * There is consensus, as demonstrated in this thread and in the edit history. You just disagree with it. Take it to RFC or BLP if you want additional eyes on it. Bangabandhu (talk) 16:12, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. Reliable sources describe his remarks as lies and fabrications. This should be in the lead. KlayCax (talk) 04:06, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Does anyone object me readding it? KlayCax (talk) 05:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I see you've significantly expanded on the one sentence mention in the lead. I don't feel strongly but an entire paragraph may be too much detail and unnecessarily redundant considering it is discussed at length in the controversy section. Bangabandhu (talk) 06:18, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Final sentence in lead
The phrasing here seems itself misleading, "Minhaj responded to the reporting, stating that it was "needlessly misleading" while admitting to the fabrications". Context needs to be added so the reader knows that he admitted to few "fabrications" and were for the purpose of comedic storytelling in his standup material.The One I Left (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Agree with updating this. His YouTube video response has been posted. I propose this be updated from:
 * > In September 2023, The New Yorker detailed instances of Minhaj fabricating or embellishing stories that were used in his comedy specials and repeated in interviews. Minhaj responded to the reporting, stating that it was "needlessly misleading" while admitting to the fabrications.
 * to
 * > In September 2023, The New Yorker detailed instances of Minhaj fabricating or embellishing stories that were used in his comedy specials and repeated in interviews. Minhaj responded to the reporting, suggesting it was taken out of context, and providing the surrounding context to the interview snippets in a YouTube interview.
 * He didn't really admit to "fabricating". The only word he uses in the video is "embellishing" and his point-of-view is that storytelling shows are an emotional piece first, a factual one second (contrasted with Patriot Act, which is a factual show first and an emotional one second).
 * The entire section below also needs to be revisited - the passages about race have been directly countered in the video, and the others have been explained. I'd suggest the article should give equal coverage to Hasan's response, by either expanding that section or contracting the New Yorker focused section. Silent Nemesis2710 (talk) 21:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)