Talk:Jonathan Majors

untitled

Appearance in Loki is currently, per this Esquire article, currently only a fan theory: https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/a36901371/loki-fan-theory-jonathan-majors-kang-the-conquerer/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.89.150.33 (talk) 16:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Kang vs He Who Remains

He is revealed to be Kang in the ending of the episode with the statue. His name isn’t He Who Remains. Filmmaker8306 (talk) 07:54, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

If you have a RS for that it would be great to add. Majors played "He Who Remains" in his appearance in Loki. A variant of the same person. One of which is Kang (potentially what we see as the statue) but all official Marvel communication is that he is the former in his appearance in Loki, not the latter. Ckoerner (talk) 21:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

References

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:

• Jonathan Majors on ColliderVideo, September 2018.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

“starring” is used in a misleading way

Majors is mentioned a couple of times in this article to have “starred” in the Last Black Man in San Fransisco, but he played a supporting character to Jimmie Fails’ lead. 69.112.125.189 (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

"Starring" only means they are a principal actor in the project, the kind of person to be featured in the promotional materials and have their name on title cards rather than just in the Cast list at the end - it does not mean that they are the lead role in the film/show. "Dark Knight" starred both Heath Ledger and Maggie Gyllenhaal, neither was playing the lead character.

Majors is listed as one of the stars of "Last Black Man in San Francisco," along with Mike Epps and Danny Glover, despite both playing supporting roles. CleverTitania (talk) 14:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Possible Recentism issue beginning

I believe we have an issue building with WP:RECENTISM, in terms of WP:RSBREAKING information going up about the trial, in a way that is contrary to WP:NOTNEWS. I think it would be worth starting a conversation now, rather than tagging the article or the potential of edit wars. Seeking feedback on these (or any) Recentism/Breaking concerns.

1. I would tend to lean away from posting anything approximating daily updates one the trial, and only add things happening which might be unexpected in the flow of how a trial takes place. For example, I don't believe it's encyclopedically valuable to note that Jabbari testified today - an alleged victim testifying on day two of a criminal trial is not a notable event. I question where information like that passes the WP:10YEARTEST, much less the WP:20YEARTEST. Especially while the trial is (arguably) not notable enough to justify its own page, much less include a detailed timeline. But I realize that some might disagree, in light of her having been briefly accused and arrested in relation to the same events.

2. Also, I would shy away from sources that are okay for your garden variety BLP stuff, but a bit gossip-mag and salacious for ongoing coverage of a criminal trial - like People Magazine. CleverTitania (talk) 21:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree, per all the policies and guidelines cited above. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news website. The trial occuring and the eventual result will be sufficient for most purposes, and we definitely don't need a day-by-day recap. Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 23:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Magazine Dreams screened v. release

Not sure it's appropriate to label Magazine Dreams as having a 2023 release date since it was never officially released. The film had select screenings for a limited audience at the 2023 Sundance Film Festival. I'm not sure if that counts as a Studio release of a film. The way I see it, the film was never released and the public wasn't able to see it and hasn't seen it. The film's release date has been postponed and I could see a world where it is never released.The One I Left (talk) 01:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@The One I Left: Per Wikipedia MOS:FILMYEAR, we list films by their earliest release date, regardless of whether they premiered at a film festival or had a wide theater release. Though, as it pertains specifically to this film; according to at least one film critic the film did have public screenings at Sundance.

From how the Sundance incident was originally written, in the Release section of that article, it could be inferred that the jury members didn't see the film - or even that it wasn't publicly screened. I have added some additional context to that article (from the existing citation) that should clarify things. But, regardless of whether it sees a wide release, it still premiered in 2023. CleverTitania (talk) 06:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes the film did have screenings for the public at the Sundance Film Festival but I wouldn't call that a release date for the film. The film has never been released to a wide public outside Sundance. What if the film is locked in a vault? Does it seem appropriate to label the release as 2023 when it never had an official release?The One I Left (talk) 14:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

The public at Sundance did see the film, so technically it did have a release, just an extremely limited one. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Section heading

Please decide on what section heading to use for the assault and harassment charges. I don't really have an opinion on what to use, but please do not keep changing it. Many articles are linking to this section via section links, so every time the section heading changes, it breaks many incoming links. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Majors' career is not necessarily over

There has been continuous reverting of Majors' active years from "2017-present" to "2017-2023". His sentence has not been passed yet and will not be until February 2024, so there's no evidence at this time to indicate that his career is definitively over. For that reason, I believe it should be left at "2017-present" for the time being. ChristianJosephAllbee (talk) 20:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, I think until he comes out and says he’s retiring from acting, or he dies, it should be kept as "present" LADY LOTUS • TALK 21:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Article on assault allegations and trial

I think it's high time we create one. What to title it? Kailash29792 (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Kailash29792 It doesn't seem like there's enough content in that section to justify a separate article. Isi96 (talk) 11:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I seep plenty of benefits in doing so. The title should be Trial of Jonathan Majors, similar to Murder trial of O. J. Simpson. Because Grace Jabbari is currently at AfD, having her redirect to the trial article will save the edit history. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

In that case, maybe you could start creating it? Isi96 (talk) 12:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Good idea, when I get desktop access. Only hope it doesn't swiftly get AfD'd or draftified. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:51, 28 December 2023 (UTC)