Jump to content

Talk:Doug Stanhope

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Irregular advertising of external website

[edit]

When the so-called Campfire website is cited as being the publisher of Mr. Stanhope frontal nude pics, afterwards the pics appeared into Mr. Stanhope own personal webpage, I spotted it as being a sort of irregular advertising of external website, so I removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mister Nighttime (talk • contribs) 04:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poor citation

[edit]

The paragraph beginning in "Early this summer" is basically just plagiarized from the citation at the end. It should all be in quotes or rewritten.

Presidential campaign, libertarian?

[edit]

The article states he is running as Libertarian candidate. I know he strongly supports the parties politics and in the past expressed how he votes libertarian, but I haven't seen anything on his site that says he will be running with any association to the Libertarian party. --Twintone 15:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its up on his website now. He also mentioned on the dvd "The Austin Incident" that he's selling on his website. He refered to his run for president as a "half serious goof." --GregoryEvans01 16:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

[edit]

I've protected this page temporarily due to edit warring. If you would all like to discuss your changes here on the talk page, I'd appreciate it. --Kbdank71 17:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Revert to version...?

[edit]

Is that really the best one? How about those Wiki-intensive good ones? -Unknown

For example...

[edit]

[1] Isn't that one more NPOV and informative, or did I miss something? It's also a lot more blue, which I think is a good thing. I dont know who he is but if he cohosts a show with that jackass he is probably a jerk. -Unknown

Bill Hicks?

[edit]

I'd like to see some citation, or at least some tempering of the Bill Hicks comparisons with things like, "...however, Stanhope's acts invoke a less thoughtful and humanistic perspective than the late Hicks' material."

Proof of libertarian ties

[edit]

From the man himself: [2] "An unexpected outpouring of support from factions of the Libertarian Party has solidified my decision to run for the nomination as the Libertarian candidate."

Great thanks! --Twintone 19:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti/Man Show blog?

[edit]

I read a while ago about a blog entry he had, where he bashed the Man Show saying it was juvenile, etc. Does anybody have a link to this so we can possibly include it in this page? Chad Hennings 17:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know he does not speak fondly of doing the Man Show or the Girls Gone Wild. On his "The Austin Incident" DVD he compares his doing the Man show to people who believe the camera steals your soul.--Twintone 17:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've only heard it mentioned during his live shows, I haven't seen it printed anywhere. Besides the Austin Incident DVD its also mentioned on his XM Radio show that they've played a couple of times. --GregoryEvans01 19:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Atheist v. agnostic

[edit]

Why was there a change in what he is categorised as?--Twintone 06:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's an atheist, not an agnostic.
March 2001 ACID Bootleg:
"If you'd never heard of the bible or anything... you just stumbled across it in a used bookstore at a fuckin' adult age, yeah you'd buy that wholeheartedly. You didn't need that kicked into your head for thousands of years under fuckin' threats and false pretenses -- you'd have picked right up on it. "Oh this sounds completely logical. I'm gonna tell my friends." Yeah... it's fuckin threats is all it is. It's the only fuckin' thing it is is threats in childhood. You fuckin' threaten a child they'll believe it. You fuckin' switch the threat of lumps of coal in your stocking with an eternity in a firey burning hell, well, you still believe in Santa Claus too. Cause you were fuckin' threatened as a child and if no one ever fuckin' tells you otherwise, why not? "I feel sorry for you cause you don't have Jesus in your life." I feel sorry for you -- you're 45 years old and you still have a boogeyman under the bed. Get real Francis. Come on. Fuckin' think for yourself. It's got good points, but it's a fuckin' Aesop fable you know. You take the fucking moral but you don't buy the fuckin' hoopla you fuckin' stooge. Here's another fuckin big chunk of shit in the propoganda..."
October 2001 Die Laughing
"Does anyone get upset that George Bush keeps quoting the Bible in all his fuckin' speeches? Does that get on anyone's last nerve? Has it ever ocurred to him that it's all those stupid fuckin' religions that start all this shit in the first place? National Day of Prayer? Fuck you! You think you're doing something? You're not. You can sit at home and cry jinx and keep your fingers crossed too -- it does as much good. You wanna pray, pray all day. Pray on your own time. You wanna help? Grab a shovel and start digging there pinwheel, cause it looks like your God takes Tuesdays off. If that's what gets you through your day, sure, live it up. I don't think they should be able to teach religion till you're 18 years old. And you know what? It'd be a whole different world cause if they weren't pushing that shit into your head while it was still soft, you'd never buy it. Not for a minute. If you walked into a... you'd never heard about the bible and none of your friends have ever heard about Christianity and you just found the Bible in a used book store oh you'd jump right on that idea wouldn't you? "Oh this sounds completely logical, yes. The cave and the ark and oh yeah... Hey Dalia I think I found the meaning of life here." No... you'd fuckin' chuck it in the wastebasket. You would."
May 2002 Word of Mouth
"Why do all these religious people, why do they all fuckin' welcome one another? Why do all the heads of religions embrace one another if they really believe that the other religion is gonna send your fuckin' soul to hell for all of eternity? Fuckin' Pope right after 9/11 calls for all the leaders of all the major religions to get together and... Huh? Hedging your bets yeah... oh it's like Coke and Pepsi. Pepsi sucks! No Coke Sucks, drink Pepsi! No Pepsi sucks, drink Coke! But as long as you're drinking cola and not water that's good for you then we're all happy, aren't we?"
October 11, 2007 Baltimore, MD live performance
[Do we need the government to tell us when we're ready to fuck? No.] "Your instincts, or God if you're irrational," [tell you when you're ready to fuck].
Jcc1 04:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nowhere in those examples does he mention that he believes or disbelieves in a god or gods. Watch this video of his stand-up in Austin. At around the 10 minute mark he says "I'm not an atheist. I just admit I don't know, Alex." It doesn't get any more clear than that. Claiming you don't or can't know pretty much puts qualifies you as an agnostic. All those examples show is that he's not a big fan of Christianity. Says nothing about whether or not he believes an any other potential gods. --Ubiq 07:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

[edit]

Can we get a better photo of Doug up? I know Chris Saunders the photographer and am sure he wouldn't mind if one of his shots was used. I put a temporary one of him up that I took this weekend in Cincinnati, just until someone can get a better photo up. Someone PLEASE get a better photo up. --JerryLewisOverdrive 03:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I just uploaded one from a show in Manchester too [3]. Someone want to email Doug and see if he has a photo he'd like us to use?--Twintone 16:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... Get a better photo... Come on people do I have to do it myself... The photo sucks... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzenman 23 (talk • contribs) 04:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is still up with the photo? It makes me not want to READ anything... Get it? The photo still sucks unless Doug picked it himself... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzenman 23 (talk • contribs) 02:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to take a better pic in a couple of months when I see Stanhope perform here in Austin, TX. Modul8r (talk) 14:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't actually understand where the problem lies here, because he has got an official MySpace site with lots of photos: http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewAlbums&friendID=27637086 If Doug did _not_ want those pictures of him to float around the net, he wouldn't have uploaded them, would he? --Demon from Walmart 12:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC) These are my favourites:

Las Vegas Weekly

[edit]

This recent article now referenced on the main page seems to fill in a few gaps - anyone up for using it to update the main article?

Fan of racism?

[edit]

One of the first lines speaks of Doug being a fan of racism. Shouldn't there be a link to prove this claim? Also, it would help if it was explained more clearly in exactly which way he does, if it's true. It's even spelled wrong! For crying out loud... -Unknown

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Stanhope.jpg

[edit]

Image:Stanhope.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doug's health

[edit]

"By January of 2008, all production on the show was believed to have ended. The official reason given was that production deadlines set in the contract could not be met because of the 2007–2008 Writers Guild of America strike, though many feel that Doug's deteriorating health may have been a more likely reason. In Doug's words, "They were afraid that my cancer wouldn't get the kind of ratings that their other cancers got. You can't compete with American Gladiators with a couple melanomas. This is 2008. It's sloppy, dangling throat tumors or pack your shit and get the hell out. Well, my shit's packed.""

Would like to see some citation on this. I don't believe that there are any documentations of Doug having poor health. I actually messaged Stanhope on myspace in regards to this statement, as he reads and regularly responds to most emails. Here was his response: "Its wikipedia - where all my fans can make shit up... what do you think?" Jminternelia (talk) 18:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ecstacy?

[edit]
"During the first show, he took ecstasy given to him by an audience member and is rumored to have felt good."

This entry is a bit suspect, how do you tag stuff for unsourcedness or verifiability or whatever? I'm not sure how you could prove someone took ecstacy without having evidence of a crime taking place that the police would look into. Sounds made-up. This sounds more like a rumour at least, and more of something that should have 'he said' tagged to it rather than presented as a statement of fact as it is currently worded. Tyciol (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


911 Truther

[edit]

Video here where at 12:15 Stanhope says that if he had to put money on it, he would bet that 911 is an "inside job".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk4-xeAvWqs#!

Can someone tell me why this addition was erased? It is straight from the horse's mouth. If you're going to delete it, give a reason. The fact that he thinks that the biggest attack on the mainland in US history is bullshit, is relevant. Certainly more relevant than his stupid tiff with the Palins, which somehow warrants multiple paragraphs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.183.234.192 (talk) 17:44, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Doug Stanhope. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:59, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Podcast

[edit]

The podcast section was absolutely shameful linkspamming to each episode, and the descriptions were a complete WP:COPYVIO of content from the podcast site. Additionally, the rampant overdetail, which even include copyvio text about each sponsor, resulted in hugely promotional content, rather than a simple episode guide. The redlink editor who added it appears to be directly involved with the article subject, possibly as a friend or publicist. Whether it's that or simply an overenthusiastic fan, this was in no way appropriate, encyclopedic content. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:17, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Doug Stanhope. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 05:42, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Doug Stanhope. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 09:53, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Date of birth requires a source

[edit]

There is currently no source for his date of birth. If you add one, you also add a reliable secondary source, or we remove it all. Elizium23 (talk) 18:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary source required

[edit]

Per WP:BLPPRIMARY we are unable to use public records to support assertions about living people, such as date of birth. A reliable secondary source is required here. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 08:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Doug_Stanhope&oldid=1207194348"