Talk:Jim Rash

Untitled
2 issues: nothing is sited here, and it is ambiguous what "partner" means in this context: they are clearly writing partners but are they also acknowledged intimate partners? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.142.225 (talk) 01:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Straight?
He is so over-the-top as Dean Ubergay, is there any chance he's actually straight in real life?

Is this known/public info? 173.9.95.217 (talk) 14:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

According to this channel, he came out as gay: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVlevDlod_M&ab_channel=OSSA

2601:1C0:6A01:5DE0:D62:ED8E:EBA1:573F (talk) 13:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Instagram post
I am very concerned about using the Instagram post to verify the actor's sexual orientation. I tried finding other sources, including ones discussing the post itself, without avail. I removed the info, but then someone using an IP address reinserted it. I invited others for intervention, but no luck either. What can be done about the info? George Ho (talk) 03:11, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I've removed it. The source is not acceptable. Rash doesn't describe himself as "gay" (for instance, he could be bi or pan) so we can't describe him as such. I can't find any other sources about his sexual orientation so we shouldn't mention it. — Bilorv(c)(talk) 12:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't know why you reinserted the info and used the Instagram post as a source. The Instagram is still unreliable and shall not be used. George Ho (talk) 05:06, 27 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The Instagram post is definitely not enough in and of itself. It certainly verifies that he's somewhere in the LGBT family — and I strongly doubt that anybody who's familiar with him was actually surprised by that — but Bilorv is right, it completely fails to clarify whether he identifies as gay, bisexual, pansexual or queer. So yes, we need a better source than this. Bearcat (talk) 20:04, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Hollywoodmask.com article
The article from hollywoodmask.com cites Instagram post, which has been deemed unreliable and vague (see above section). Honestly, I thought it appears gossipy and sensational without value. --George Ho (talk) 22:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the Instagram post itself can be used, carefully, to say he came out as a member of the LGBTQ community. He certainly didn’t write that he is gay or homosexual.  Glee anon 22:54, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:OR and WP:BLPCAT. No reliable secondary sources verify significance of his sexuality and belonging to the community AFAIK. --George Ho (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * A person is considered an expert on themselves, he would know if he came out or not.  Glee anon 00:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * The official page of a subject may be used as a self-published, primary source.  Glee anon 00:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think his Instagram post adheres to WP:BLPSELFPUB. Do you? George Ho (talk) 00:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I do, how do you think it doesn’t?  Glee anon 01:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * What about the Instagram post's authenticity? I have reasonable doubts about it, like its vagueness, language that may invite implicitness and rushed interpretations from others, and the possibility that the post can be deleted at any time. Furthermore, he didn't indicate whether he belongs to the community. He did mention "National Coming Out Day", but he also mentioned his mustache at that time. George Ho (talk) 01:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * ”I make it a point not to judge my timeline or regret not coming out earlier. I just love how I got to these selfies, and I love even more where I’ve been since them. For the past six years, I’ve been true, open and vulnerable. And, more importantly, I’ve been me.” We could just ask him, and use our system to confirm him. As for it disappearing that’s the same concern with all Internet links.  Glee anon 02:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

The user was verified and then blocked as a sockpuppet. Please feel free to either strike the user's replies to me or "hat" the whole discussion. (More at WP:STRIKESOCK) George Ho (talk) 08:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

agenda
Stop reverting simple articles about how someone defines themselves. You quite possibly could or are doing this with anyone that is not heterosexual. STOP. Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 02:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * We have to get the sourcing right.  Glee anon 02:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC) Striking verified sockpuppet's comment. --George Ho (talk) 08:49, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You're not the Wikipedia board. Find a new crusade.Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 02:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

The volunteer left closing rationale for the DRN case, saying that directly contacting the actor and using him as the source may constitute original research and that policy against generally using social media as a source still stands. I decided to re-remove the content. If you have issues with one of policies, best to go to either WT:BLP, WT:OR, or WT:RS. George Ho (talk) 19:08, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The content should remain removed, yes. This isn't a Hollywood gossip rag. If Rash wants to talk about his sexuality to reputable publications then that's a reasonable indication that he would want it mentioned here; otherwise, reference to the Instagram post is simply not what Wikipedia is here to document. — Bilorv ( talk ) 23:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Of course, the discussion from RSN ("Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 210") concluded that any subject's Instagram blog post about oneself can be used as a source. However, they didn't say that Instagram is reliable. If you disagree with my revert and others who are against using the actor's Instagram post, then please post your concerns at WP:RSN. Otherwise, I insist that you revert your undoing to my removal of the sordid info. George Ho (talk) 04:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

BTW, have you read the DRN discussion yet? George Ho (talk) 04:45, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Not interested in arguing with you; you have apparently decided what you are doing and nothing anyone on here, editors, deters you.Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 05:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If not interested, then please read Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 223 and other discussions about Instagram. George Ho (talk) 05:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

You and I are close to reaching the three-revert rule limit within 24 hours of the first revert made hours ago, but I've not yet reported you to the WP:3RRN for your edit warring because I've not yet given you a warning, which I'm doing so now. I suggest that you comply to other editors' agreement with the removal of the Instagram post. Otherwise, I can guarantee that you'd be blocked temporarily for that, but I predict you can disagree with me and then accuse me of edit warring, which you got involved in. You can read {{subst:uw-3rr}}, which I've not yet posted to your user talk page as of date. Furthermore, your recent remarks to another editor (diff 1, diff 2) and then to me (diff) imply that you're not interested in a healthy discussion with anyone, which is close to an WP:ANI case alongside edit warring. Again, I suggest you undo your revert of my removal, i.e. please re-remove the "Personal life" section, already agreed by others. George Ho (talk) 07:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Please stuff it. You want to accuse anyone who disagrees with you and even shows you where there are problems with your editing. Sorry, not sorry. No one cares. You don't even follow the rules you espouse; you stir up people. Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 09:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Use Rash's Instagram post?
The actor Jim Rash's Instagram post has been discussed. Many attempts to use the actor's post, including recent edits, have been challenged and been subject to rules like WP:BLP and WP:RS. Shall the Instagram post be used in the article? Why or why not? If so, how can the post be used? --George Ho (talk) 22:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Past discussions: --George Ho (talk) 22:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * 
 * 
 * (not started by me)
 * Dispute resolution noticeboard (diff)
 * I would say information about the Instagram post could be included on the page if it was covered in a news source that can support the post. In a cursory search, I don't see any sources of that nature, but there may be some out there. Quorum816 (talk) 14:55, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Sexuality
I'm pinging you based on the above discussion about his Instagram post. Billy Eichner did this Hollywood Reporter interview where he stated all the starring roles were played by openly gay actors, Rash being one of the actors in the main cast. Would this source paired with his Instagram post be sufficient to include on the article? Rusted AutoParts 17:17, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Probably not, or rather "should not". I can see "openly", but I don't see his name anywhere. Why do certain editors insistantly want to use the Instagram post? Also, the combination of the interview and the post would be original research or synthesis of sources, right? George Ho (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Has there ever been any actual quote of him stating he is gay? I think saying he “came out” on the article without saying what he came out as is a bit weird, but also the instagram post never says gay/bi/pan/queer/anything. Many articles reference it saying he is gay but don’t seem to cite anything other than the instagram post which says that. The fact that he plays a bi character in Bros makes me wonder if he’s bi since they tried to have representation Heymisterscott (talk) 18:07, 22 July 2023 (UTC)