Talk:Brent Spiner/Archive 1

Edit wars.

I'd like to propose a moratorium on editing this article for a few days, to let everyone cool down. Edit warring among fans is getting a bit out of control. I will put it on my watchlist and keep an eye out for vandalism. Everyone take a breather, please. Fire Star 02:16, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Also, would people mind signing their comments on the talk page? Fire Star 02:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Not to worry, Tiswaz. This is Wikipedia, not a discussion board. I am an administrator here, and can close the page to further editing if the reversion wars get out of hand. I've done a bit of research and it looks as if Spiner is indeed married with a son, so it stays in, unless someone can prove otherwise. Fire Star 02:53, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Your research comes from one person and not a credible source therefore I would highly suggest that until Mr Spiner announces to the public (& he hasn't) that he is married sites should refrain from making this asumption. Your information and lack of knowledge on here is showing.

You've edited out your threat to continue your editing no matter what: "and the truth will continue to be edited." As a result of that statement (it is in this page's history) I've protected the page from editing. I read that Spiner was married on four separate internet bios. You will have to provide a link to the evidence that you have so we can read it ourselves rather than simply take your word for it. Fire Star 03:10, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

I would have done purely out of respect for Mr Spiner if you had not blocked the page, your information is inaccurate. If there is a link saying otherwise I would but do you know nothing about Mr Spiner? If you do you would simply edited out the incorrect information you have given. Unless Brent himself tells the public he is married and he has done many shows recently and verbally said to Dawn and Donna he isn't married (Dawn and Donna are his personal friends - they would know) I would take otherwise with a pinch of salt. Why don't you take a look at StarTrek.com under Brent's bio and notice that they do not have that information causing a great concern here.

If my information is inaccurate, you'll have to prove it by providing a reliable source saying that Spiner is single. I don't care one way or the other, actors are actors. The websites I read seemed to be different accounts, and each had slightly different info. I really don't know much about Spiner, but I know less about Dawn and Donna. Please provide verifiable information, otherwise this issue will go further into Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Fire Star 04:23, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

I am Dawn and I am the girl labelled here as a personal friend of Brent's and you really have to try and believe what I say. I will indeed confirm your statement of his marriage is indeed inaccurate, I will confirm he is not married, here is something he did for me and my sister a a huge favour,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Personal_dedication.jpg.

how much more reliable information do you need?

And finally......find a credible source for the 'Jackson Brent' information apart from one website owned by the person frequent on here over the last several hours and seemingly a troublemaker? Brent has never said the son is called 'Jackson Brent Spiner' and he has never himself revealed the name Loree as his wife. I think he would get a laugh out of all this for sheer amazement. The board here is a good idea until the troublemaker came on.

Look. This is not a chat room. This is not a flame board. This is an encyclopedia. If you have some PROOF that Brent Spiner is not married, other than some picture that you can't even prove he signed, then give it. As it is, there lots of references all over the net to his wife. See http://www.wireimage.com/GalleryListing.asp?nbc1=1&navtyp=CAL====17986&ym=200212. See http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000653/bio. Just two off the top of the search engine. Unless you can present hard core proof, you'll be reverted, and you'll be blocked from editing. And I have no particular stake in this silly argument. RickK 04:54, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

• Here are more: http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/entertainment/10153445.htm, which is the Dallas Star-Telegram, a newspaper, not a web source. http://www.nndb.com/people/547/000022481/. RickK 04:56, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

All I am stating is your facts is no other than fan input and it is. I have no means to war on this but I think Brent Spiner should be respected unless he says so himself.

• So the column in the Dallas Star-Telegram is fan input? Think not. RickK 05:16, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

User Rick: I know who you are and so do everyone else but not exactly who you saying you are, your information is too alike to ignore and of course your IPs are matching with someone, I think you need to cool your attitude a little if you want to be convincing. Just take my word and don't make any more threats towards me, it isn't nice.

RickK is a long time editor and admin here at Wikipedia. Please sign your posts. Fire Star 20:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Really? Then why is he being so aggressive? and why does his IP matches with someone else who has also frequented on here.

I don't know about his IP, but I've been with Wikipedia for a long time, and he was here before me. He isn't being aggressive, he is enforcing policy, which most folks here seem unaware of (not signing their posts, for one thing). We have different rules than you folks are used to. By not following our established policies people can lose the ability to edit here at all. Fire Star 20:59, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

He was being aggressive an unprofessional if he is really admin on here it has been noted by many people.

Hi, i was having doubts at first with the IPs and the aggessive attitude that sounded like 'mrsgodwyn' we all know, that RickK is that person, now i'm not so sure and apologise.

Miranda

That is fine. Rick is one of our premier vandal-stoppers, so he was just reinforcing our policy. You should know that we are only interested in an accurate, verifiable article, most of us don't give a fig about Spiner's personal life outside of wishing him (and everyone else) well. Fire Star 16:51, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

For The Administrators

We don't care about your feuds from other sites. This is an encyclopedia. Unless you can disprove the multiple websites and newspaper sources which say that he's married, the information will stay. Is that clear? RickK 06:08, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

In answer to this, check the URLs that you provided in the previous post. One is just a registeration form (?) and the other has too many discrepancies. I rest my case :o)

• • New**

Indeed. And news papers have never been known to get it wrong, have they? Just like People Magazine.  ;) Tell ya what, why don't you go ahead and get the writing on the photo analysed to see if it was written by Brent instead of assuming it wasn't? Go ahead. I've seen my share of proof that Donna, Dawn and Brent are friends including photos of them on stage with Brent. I've been around long enough to read stories on the internet in groups like FOBS, about two gorgeous women that Brent often makes personal comments to who are sitting in the audience at his conventions. Do you know who those two women are? Donna and Dawn. I've read about fans wondering who the two women are and why Brent was being so friendly towards them. He'd pick them out of the audience and share private jokes with them whilst he was on stage. These are all facts not from Donna and Dawn, but other fans that have witnessed it. And that, was before I even knew them. You better believe that these girls and their relationship with Brent Spiner IS authentic. They were his official UK distributors for his cd, "Ol' Yellow Eyes Is Back." They have nothing to hide, so go ahead and test it.

Oh, and another thing. If Brent IS married, then why as recently as March this year, was he still referring to his so called 'wife' as his "GIRLFRIEND" at conventions? I don't care if your sources are news papers, internet, rumourmongers, or the secret files of the FBI, until Brent says he is married, it isn't so. Nothing you can find on line could be as reliable as information from Brent himself.

A whisper in your ear...

Also, to the Administrator, maybe you ought to delete this entire topic incl. the main page. After all, there are too many discrepancies which shows very little respect for the actor.

DonnaJoan

No, Spiner is a well known actor, and as such, deserves an article here. That the obsessive fans can't deal with his being married is a tangentially related problem. There are ways to deal with such things. Fire Star 20:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

But he isn't married FireStar, I think you find it is the obsessive fans that can't deal with this fact. Ask yourself have you heard Brent Spiner himself say out loud that he is married, may that be the answer you are looking for. Believing in media gossip you may but you are completely wrong and this site is a farce and gossipy.

The Dallas Star-Telegram article is good enough for me, and proof enough generally for Wikipedia. Since I don't intend to hunt down Spiner, I'll have to rely on the press. Now, if you can come up with convincing evidence otherwise, well-documented evidence in the public domain, I'll happily change the article myself, because I don't care if he is married or not. I just care that the article is accurate. So far, the pro-married people have the weight of evidence on their side. Fire Star 20:53, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Weight of evidence that only the media can manage.. Still not a good source for credibility FireStar. Believe what you will I care not but have to ask, tell me where do you get the incredible information that he named his son Jackson Brent, come on as I am sure the rest of us would love to hear your answer on this one.

Tiswaz

Chill RickK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Personal_dedication.jpg.

Look. This is not a chat room. This is not a flame board. This is an encyclopedia. If you have some PROOF that Brent Spiner is not married, other than some picture that you can't even prove he signed, then give it.

Right then 'Rick' let's begin with a question: Why is your IP address match that of 'MrsGodwyn'? I wonder.

What the hell are you talking about? You have no idea what my IP address is, since I am a logged-in user. Only Wikipedia developers can see the IP addresses of logged in users. My login name is RickK, which it has been on Wikipedia for several years. I have no idea who Mrs Godwyn is. RickK 22:25, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Right this is not a chat room or flame board and yes if you want proof that the above picture is genuine then take another look and I think you find it is. I think its fantastic.

As it is, there lots of references all over the net to his wife. See http://www.wireimage.com/GalleryListing.asp?nbc1=1&navtyp=CAL====17986&ym=200212. See http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000653/bio. Just two off the top of the search engine.

Your credible source of information is wasted these sites do not have credible information?? They are acting on information provided by a fan and in these cases 'MrsGodwyn' since she has listed the exact sites on her Brent Spiner board Database section.

Unless you can present hard core proof, you'll be reverted, and you'll be blocked from editing. And I have no particular stake in this silly argument. RickK 04:54, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Reverted, blocked whatever but learn to take your own advice mrsgodwyn. On the other hand what hard core proof do you have to say that the child is called Jackson Brent Spiner, you don't. I think you have the evidence you need for proof of evidence but it hurts you to believe it, the rest of us can handle it but you can't, how sad. Being abusive and aggressive in this isn't going to win you any points but make you look sillier.

What a mess

FireStar since your site has become a warzone with one party saying one thing and another party saying another, aggressive administrators (if they really are) and such.

Why don't you shut everyone up and come up with information other than tacky media gossip and explain fully why you are convinced that the child is called Jackson Brent Spiner. Verify your reliable source on this one and people may start to believe you.

Out of respect to Brent Spiner why don't any one of you have the guts to ask him to his face whether he is married or not and you will mark my words he is going to say 'no' he isn't. Even if he is he obviously does not want the public to know which is why he keeps saying 'girlfriend' so until he says otherwise, your credible source is a valuable waste of time.

Tiswaz.

Respect?

No, Spiner is a well known actor, and as such, deserves an article here. That the obsessive fans can't deal with his being married is a tangentially related problem. There are ways to deal with such things. Fire Star 20:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Let me correct you dear.... What Brent Spiner deserves is some respect and not be the subject of unfounded trash made public on a nonsence 'encyclopedia' board such as this.

DonnaJoan

"Nonsense 'encyclopaedia' board"? Careful, you'll make us cry. However, there is perhaps an element of truth in what you say. While whether or not he's married might be considered of encyclopaedic relevance in a biographical article, including the name of his son (whose very existence appears to be heatedly disputed amongst his fans...) does seem to have stepped over the line into non-encyclopaedic celebrity gossip. –Hajor 22:09, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

There is alot of element of truth in Donna Joan's comments. Mr Spiner deserves to be respected and this board clearly has a problem of doing that.

Dawn

Dallas Star Telegram

So the column in the Dallas Star-Telegram is fan input? Think not. RickK 05:16, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

No you're right this one isn't fan input its media gossip that's all but the others are fan input by someone. Nothing here is totally sacred still, a few descrepencies here and there. But as someone said below, ask Brent Spiner outright if you have the courage and then feel foolish at his answer, you're in for a shock if this is what you believe.

Can't see here that Brent is Jacksons' middle name so in that case reveal your credible source for this information? Looking forward to hearing your answers.

Dawn

Dallas Star Telegram

Sparks are flying on the Enterprise bridge, in more ways than one.

Brent Spiner and Scott Bakula spit curt, nasty words at each other as smoke billows in front of them and fiery sparks cascade down on them from above.

"Give me one more puff of smoke up there," director of photography Marvin Rush says to his crew, as director LeVar Burton looks on approvingly.

Spiner waves a hand through the smoke and grins.

"More!" he shouts. "It's good for you!"

It's a strange sight, and strangely comforting. Spiner is back on "Star Trek," but not as his familiar Next Generation character, Data. Instead he's guest-starring as Dr. Arik Soong -- a distant relative of Data's creator, Dr. Soong -- in a three-episode arc of Star Trek: Enterprise.

"Borderland" aired Oct. 29, "Cold Station 12" aired Nov. 5 and "The Augments" airs Friday.

It seems that Augments, genetic supermen left over from the Eugenics Wars, are running amok, attacking the Klingons and provoking intergalactic chaos. And so Capt. Archer (Bakula) springs the Augments' "father," Dr. Soong, from prison, hoping he can help contain the damage.

"I don't see Soong as being a bad guy," Spiner says in his trailer during a production break. "He's got things he believes in, and he has followed through on his beliefs. He's a bad guy if you consider, for example, Dr. [Jack] Kevorkian a bad guy.

"I've heard people mention Oppenheimer, too," the actor says, "but I think Kevorkian is an even better example because, like Kevorkian, Soong has broken the law. So he has broken the law, but he believes deeply that he is doing the right thing.

"And maybe he is," Spiner adds. "Who knows?"

Moments earlier, back on the set, Spiner had greeted his wife, Loree, and their 2-year-old son, Jackson. It was Jackson's first time visiting dad at work, and father and son posed for photos in Archer's captain's chair.

But, for the elder Spiner at least, life on a "Star Trek" series set was business as usual.

"There's a definite sense of deja vu," Spiner says as Jackson plays at his feet, "but it's the same and it's different for me. It's a lot of years later, but many of the same people are still here. They were on Next Generation, and now they're on Enterprise.

"Rick Berman and Brannon Braga are still the producers," he says. "Marvin Rush still shoots it. . . . Mike Westmore is still doing my makeup. So in that regard, it's not that different."

Spiner's episodes during November sweeps are obviously intended to boost the show's flagging ratings. Though his appearance constitutes a bit of old-fashioned stunt casting, Spiner downplays the timing.

"I don't think it's unusual, historically, in 'Star Trek,' " he says. "We didn't need ratings on Next Generation, and we had Leonard Nimoy on the show. We had Jimmy Doohan and Mark Lenard, too."

The last time "Star Trek" audiences glimpsed Spiner, Data died saving the day in Star Trek: Nemesis. Unfortunately, that 2002 film went down as the series' biggest bust since the mercilessly maligned Star Trek V.

Spiner frowns when the conversation turns to Nemesis, the story that he had a hand in developing.

"Nemesis was pretty good," he says, "and deserved better than it got. I think a lot of it had to do with positioning: To come out between a James Bond movie and a Lord of the Rings movie wasn't the best positioning we could've had.

"On the other hand, I'm not sure where 'Star Trek' fans were opening weekend," Spiner admits

*New

I see so what some uninformed journalist writes in an article has more credibility than what Brent himself says? I guess he doesn't know himself as well as the media apparently does. Someone should tell him that he’s married, since he doesn’t know it. LMFAO!

Carol

LMOA! I guess not but I would love to see the look on his face if someone was to put it gently to him. One of these cry babies on here can do the honours maybe.

Dawn

Editing and replacing previous posts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Personal_dedication.jpg

Image added for further references. Confirmed as genuine signature, if in doubt get it checked out by expert or better still ask Mr Spiner. =}

>>I'd like to see photos of Brent signing those 2 dedication photos, as well as him holding them up to prove he did sign them. Do they have those photos? How about photos at the recent con of them with Brent and Jonathan? Do they have even one of those? The answers to those questions are: No and No. Yet, according to them, they and Jonathan and Brent "hung out" all during that day at the con. Interesting that there's not one photo of all of this happening. And one of them didn't even bring a camera? Um, ok then. Furthermore, they didn't even get a professional pic with him that day, like others did at the con. You'd think they'd at least want that.

Yes. Both pictures are authentic, why do you have a problem with that? Thought you would have alot ot say on this subject as you always do. I did not have witneses since I was in the room on my own with Brent, Jonathan, Richard Arnold and the PAs, but I suppose you can find someone to ask anyone of them. We owe you nothing so what is all 'I want'. Dawn.

>>But yet I am supposed to naively believe the 2 dedication photos are authentic, just by word of them and two of their friends who were with them. I want an outside person, non-biased and not involved in this to have witnessed these signing events of the 2 personalization signings, then I will believe it.

This is slanderous and I have reported you to hotmail/aol abuse since it is the ISP you are using. Make confirmation of the stelaing email addresses, just hope you can live with your comments after making this one LaVette Rowland, you've gone too far. Dawn.

>>Thirdly, anyone who says they are "personal friends" of his and are writing this stuff on the internet are probably all liars. Dawn and Donna, for example, steal the email addresses of people they don't even know and dump threatening junk in their mail boxes. Credible? I think not!

FireStar - I've edited my posts to another section

Hope this was ok to do this? I moved my own posts to this section no one elses'. Things are getting really messy and mixed up here. ={

Dawn

They certainly are. Perhaps it would also be useful for you new contributors to read Wikipedia:Talk page and Wikipedia:Talk Page Style Guide. Those two pages have some very useful tips on formatting, etiquette, signing, etc. –Hajor 23:41, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Also, as a possible compromise inspired by –Hajor, perhaps it would be easier if we just didn't mention Spiner's marital status one way or the other? Fire Star 01:01, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I hardly think that removing presumptively correct information from the article would be a good result of this discussion. I do think that presenting the entire picture would make sense, however. Something along the lines of "Spiner maintains privacy about his personal life, and as such his marital status is not certain. Some sources have cited (NAME) as his wife, while others maintain that he is a confirmed bachelor.". Would something along these lines be sufficient to appease both sides of this discussion? --ABQCat 03:45, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Fire Star 03:58, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

That works for me. RickK 04:12, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Sure. Who's going to do the edit? –Hajor 04:17, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I have a quibble with the phrase "confirmed bachelor." If it were confirmed, there wouldn't be all this debate. Also I think "bachelor" implies "not in long-term relationship," which is not what people are claiming. How about "Some sources have named so-and-so as his wife, while others maintain that they are not married." FreplySpang (talk) 04:24, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

"confirmed bachelor" also has an unwritten connotation of gay. RickK 04:52, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

I went and was bold over in the article space. Please rip to shreds as deemed necessary. –Hajor 05:10, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Boldness acknowledged. Ripping deemed unnecessary at this point. Cheers. Fire Star 06:54, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I think you need to grow up because you have already said you don't know anything about Spiner, so why the debate against those that do. If it doesn't matter anything to you then why continue with the arguments? Which obviously you can't win. You are looking really foolish and I guess people will argue back if they have every reason to, these people on here have every reason. Only you seem to have some difficulty adjusting.

Night Thunder

The Dallas Star Telegram story is one source. It is one more source than your camp has provided. We have compromised and reported on the controversy in the article. You should actually be complaining to the Dallas Star Telegram. In the meantime, if you could come up with a verifiable source saying he isn't married and explaining the Dallas Star Telegram article away, then I'd be happy to change the article again. Fire Star 16:41, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I think you guys need to grow up and do a bit better than you already have.

Forgive my out of term speaking but:

The guys who run this board did not know what Brent Spiner looked like sans the Data Make up which means know they have no knowledge whatsoever about the person who plays this cute character. So who the hell do they think they are to argue with people who knows what they are talking about, these guys certainly do not.

They get their so called information from a media source and fan input bases. Come then you guys if this information is solid where are the photographs to prove. If there was a wedding, there will be photographs (you bet your $ the papz and media will be there) well..... where are they? Stuck for answers? Patrick Stewart had some taken, so did Jonathan Frakes, LeVar Burton and they were all private weddings, so where's Brents'?

Brent Spiner has done many conventions over the years and have always remained vigilant in saying 'My girlfriend and I' even recently. He has said he is not married recently and so I guess either he got wed while stone drunk or unconcious and still do not know about it or he just does not want the public to know. Taking the word of media and obsessive fan inputting is a bit premature not to mention immature and I think you need to go back and learn a bit more on the actor before making further comments against the word of his friends and I will stress PERSONAL friends since that photo is clear to be as genuine as the day itself and what written evidence can they provide if the evidence they have is verbal. I think you should check it out with Mr Spiner himself because I think you all will find that what you have done is sheer embarassment to the poor guy. Thankfully there aren't that many of you out there.

The admin staff can only provide the board with nonsense websites as their proof of credibility, come on you guys you can do better than that. 'MrsGodwyn' gave 3 of these sites this information and this is someone who is nothing but abusive fruitcake who thinks and claims the internet and Brent fandom as her own. This is the person who has been known many times to harass Mr Spiner and his friends with claims of outrageous lies even writing retarded material then naming Brent as the writer. If you think your solid source is that of the person 'MrsGodwyn' then you all should get a reality check because you have just been laughed off the board.

Staff: Verify a solidable informative source to back up your claims not repeatedly provide us with the websites you've got, get the pictures and maybe just maybe your board can get back to normal.

Ginger

What do you mean, "get back to normal"? Are you planning on doing something disruptive? RickK 07:23, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

No RickK I am sure this is not what she/he means I am assuming she/he is simply saying that the board can get to how it should be as threatening behaviour does not show in this sentence. If you get my drift.

Maybe you need to listen and take heed to this advice. Storm

I've listened. What I understand is that some people apparently haven't realised that this isn't a Brent Spiner discussion board, it is an encyclopaedia (if you click on the blue word it will take you to a page that will try to tell you what an encyclopaedia is). As far as most of us are concerned, Spiner is just another of thousands of actors, albeit a relatively well-known one. Wikipedia has fairly strict evidentiary rules, and there has still been nothing but dismissive hearsay assertions from those who insist he isn't married. Where is the proof? Fire Star 15:05, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Where are those wedding pictures? And still waiting on your verifying source where he has fully named the son, other than a obsessive website whose beliefs are that the child belongs to her. Both of these you can't apparently answer. So I guess your 'dismissive hearsay' is known as factual. And, I think people do know what an encycylopaedia is but it is the argumentative people who run them that is the problem and boy don't the rest of us know it.

Night Thunder

The Dallas Star Telegram story is one source. It is one more source than your camp has provided. We have compromised and reported on the controversy in the article. You should actually be complaining to the Dallas Star Telegram. In the meantime, if you could come up with a verifiable source saying he isn't married and explaining the Dallas Star Telegram article away, then I'd be happy to change the article again. Fire Star 16:40, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

The Media

I see so what some uninformed journalist writes in an article has more credibility than what Brent himself says? I guess he doesn't know himself as well as the media apparently does. Someone should tell him that he’s married, since he doesn’t know it. LMFAO!

Carol

Carol.... Brent has said so himself many times that the Media knows more about his personal life than he does :o/

DonnaJoan

Hey I've heard that but I guess these on here know more than you do even if they do not have a clue what he looked like until some pictures were posted a couple of days ago. For all they knew he could have had green hair. LOL. BStallion

Newspaper Article

Since you lot have previously claimed you don't know anything about Brent, don't you think you should give the majority of the people who alledges that Brent is not married the benefit of the doubt over one loon and an article in just one newspaper? Everyone knows how the Media makes up stories just to get people's attention. You ought to know as well as the rest of us that if Brent did get married then someone somewhere (even the Dallas Telegram, Houston Chronicle and USA Today) would have got a picture. The fact there isn't one comes across as being a little 'odd' don't you think? The press somehow even managed to sneak one of Patrick and Wendy on their Wedding Day when they originally banned the Media from being present.

DonnaJoan

I'm not going to give anybody the benefit of the doubt if all they do is make personal attacks on other people and refuse to provie any proof of their claims. RickK 20:09, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

And, at the end of the day, it's not really that important a datum, is it? He appears to be shacked up with the lady in question, allegedly has a son with her -- the phrase common-law wife springs to mind, irrespective of whether or not there's an official State of California marriage certificate under the conjugal pillow. As a point of interest, the w:de article has had the phrase Spiner lebt heute in Los Angeles, zusammen mit seiner Lebensgefährtin Loree und seinem Sohn Jackson in it since first edit. Maybe the Germans are just more relaxed about such things... –Hajor 20:19, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

are you sure!? User:Blackstallion

No, I'm not sure. Hence the words "appears" and "allegedly" in what I wrote. I don't know and, quite honestly, I'm not all that bothered about whether he and she are and whether he and she have. –Hajor 21:50, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

OOPs! Sorry I didn't think I would be treading on somebody's toes but since this is a heated debate anyway I didn't think my input would matter that much. Didn't mean to upset anyone. BStallion

Toes? Nah. But it's a good idea to keep one contributor's comments separate from the others'. You can also do this cool preceding your comments with colons thing to get an indented effect, which makes it easier to read and follow a discussion. And, if you type in four tildes (thus ~~~~), your sig & date gets appended automatically. –Hajor 22:08, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I see you have some humour, good on you. BStallion

Encyclopaedias aren't written on the "benefit of doubt" principle. There is a verifiable newspaper article saying he is married. Brent Spiner isn't here, and the people arguing provide no other proof than "believe us or we'll call you stupid." Not convincing, or very friendly for all of that. I could proclaim myself an expert on Napoleon Bonaparte over and over, but any idiosyncratic assertion I made at that article would be reverted pretty quickly by our vigilant editors. Anyone who edits here has to provide sources anyone else can check. Period. Fire Star 04:50, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Dallas Star. Verifiable!?? LOL!!! You've really no idea have you? User:Blackstallion

Personal attacks

Isn't this how this debate began? Allowing someone to come on freely attacking another(s)? It was sure enough to start a war, this person has far too many enemies.

Since the admin are continuing with this discussion and to be honest what the hell does it matter anyway but I've one big question to ask of you all. You know nothing about this actor right, I mean you didn't have a clue what he looked like without the Data make-up so why on earth begin a topic on him? What real information can you provide with 100% accuracy yourselves? Or you seem to be doing is fighting against. Your information is coming from obsessive fruitcakes, media hearsay, paparazzi websites (everyone of them remains clueless) and such and to which you appear to stand firm with this as being factual yet you cannot provide the proof yourselves, see what I'm getting at.

If you have to do a site on this actor, why don't you learn a bit more about him, hear what he has to say at conventions and then write up on him, you'll be more successful.

Truly Amused

I guess these people are showing lack of knowledge due to their unfriendly and rather infantile behaviour and I am talking about the staff who runs this. They seem to enjoy being encouraged to fight back and it is entertainment in itself. LOL!

BStallion

Several of my comments have been removed from this page

It is a very strong policy on Wikipedia that posters not remove the comments of other editors unless they are personal attacks. But the edit history is so convoluted, I'm not even going to bother to try to figure out who did it.

However:

I will begin enforcing Wikipedia's remove personal attacks policy henceforth. You are all warned. RickK 23:30, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

OK firestar I have removed majority of the posts myself since all of it is a waste of time don't you agree? Needless rubbish that got out of hand. The previous comments that were removed from this page is from Mrs Godwyn as her Yahoo.com account IP for doing so is showing in the archives.

May the user: 'MrsGodwyn' learn another valuable lesson from all of this (my guess is she hasn't). And stay away from potential warmongering which she begins everywhere she goes. If you want to look up this individuals reputation, surf the web. Say, believe, do what you want but I know the truth when I see it and the your 'classed troublemakers' happens to be truthful. Tracey/Tiswaz

Founded information

For the record you guys go across to this link

http://www.empireonline.co.uk/site/gallery/viewgallery.asp?GID=241

and click on the Brent Spiner/Loree McBride thumbnail. It clearly states "Spiner and girlfriend", therefore my point is whatever the circumstances never take media 100% for accurate information. Good enough for you? Let's hope it is. :) Tiswaz

And I've reverted your changes, since, as I said above, you may not remove other people's comments. RickK 07:47, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Yep. Do whatever you want its your board after all and not very interesting, I was only trying to make things easier for you all Tiswaz

Removing personal attack. RickK 08:24, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Chill Rick! Removing personal attack from BStallion. Fire Star 13:26, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Marriage rumors

Instead of wars on the 'is he -isn't he' why don't everyone calm down and yes that includes this boards administrators who has somewhat shown alot of attitude towards the truth.

Take my word if there is a marriage there would be photographs (as several users already stated) this is "Brent Spiner" for heaven sake and the media would have at least grabbed 1 photograph, this is what media is all about. Sod the Dallas telegram, its nothing but fictional and unimpressive journalists who grab their information from websites. Ms McBride was on that set as Publicist - yes that does mean she is still a Paramount PA.

If there is a marriage there would be a marriage record and there isn't. Some fans have taken upon themselves to do this research not that it had anything to do with them but they did all the same. The came up with a marriage record of Loree McBride but not one for Brent Spiner.

There is only a small minor obsessive individuals with the claims of the marriage taking place but this is only hearsay and not to be taken as factual. Until photos, certificate and Brent's own mouth tells the rest of us of the marriage I think people should chill out and belt up and stop spreading rumors.

Free4all

We seem to get a lot of "administrators who has somewhat shown alot of attitude (sic)" "Take my word" "Sod the Dallas telegram" and "there would be photographs" from our new friends. You people should see that it seems to us Wikipedestrians (which you certainly could be, too) that there are other people who come in here trying to push an unsubstantiated agenda with a good deal of "attitude," also, it should be easy to see that an encyclopaedia isn't obligated to take anyone's "word" when attributing articles. The Dallas Star Telegram is a legitimate newspaper (Can they make mistakes? Of course, but their story is still one more attribution than the "take my word" people have provided). Lastly, Janet Jackson (much more famous than Spiner) got married to Elizondo without a single photograph of the ceremony being published. So you see, Free4all, that none of your arguments will stand up for our purposes. You are free to resent that as much as will suit you, of course, but to actually change the article in a lasting way (which is what these discussions are supposed to focus on) you will have to cite your sources. Fire Star 16:49, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

You too FireStar come up with a reliable/crucial source where Mr Spiner fully names his son which was stated in your original article. Reason: You have not got one have you? I think you can do better than some newspaper who thrives on internet gossip as part of their story so you see FireSar I think we have all got the picture by now so what is the point of the arguments?

BlackStallion

What is the point, indeed? Fire Star 15:48, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

"The Dallas Star Telegram is a legitimate newspaper (Can they make mistakes? Of course, but their story is still one more attribution than the "take my word" people have provided)."

and if they tell you the world was square you would believe them? Dallas Star is a tabloid [I think you should know what a tabloid newspaper is] and despite having journalists putting in stories they will add information for the sake of it to make their story bigger. You should know by now never to take media word as gospel.

For the record: I have shown you proof, I have a photograph which Brent had written on to prove a friendship between him, I & Donna so I guess that means I have more knowledge on the man. Believe me if you knew what I know you would feel a little silly keeping up the pathetic arguments. Now I could not give a fig whether you believe me or not or whether you the other user Rick think the signature could be fake therefore I need to prove it as genuine [as Rick stated to me last week]. Take my word its Brent's writing have it checked if you like do whatever, I care not.

"Janet Jackson (much more famous than Spiner) got married to Elizondo without a single photograph of the ceremony being published."

That's understandable as you say she is far more famous and far more power.

"you will have to cite your sources"

Your sources come from 1 obsessive freakish individual who has a problem of splitting fantasy against reality and 1 tabloid. You could not get a photograph of Brent without his Data make up to begin with, these in themselves tells us all we need to know

You can try and argue this out but its meaningless however amusing the entire thing has become. Dawn

Greetings Dawn. FWIW, I don't have to argue this out, you do, at least if you want to change the article (that's what this talk page is for, BTW). The newspaper article is one source. Your source is one photograph of Spiner with some people. No biographical text, nothing saying "BTW, I'm not married - Brent" on the photo, just some people smiling. It is a very nice photo but doesn't prove much. It also isn't the first time I have seen him out of ST character. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of publicity pix of Spiner and pix of Spiner from other shows all over the internet. I remember him from Night Court for all of that. So, assuming that I hadn't seen him without his makeup isn't appropriate. I never said that I know nothing about him, just relatively little. Actors aren't my thing. But I was one of the very few who did watch Nemesis in the theatre!

It is simple, the score so far is:

1 - newspaper story attesting to his marriage and nuclear family

0 - verifiable news stories in the public domain to the contrary

That is how the encyclopaedia editor's math stacks up, one to zero. Cheers, Fire Star 16:57, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

... personal attack removed ... Miranda

Link to Brent Spiner information

If you want to learn more about Mr Spiner go here ->

http://www.geocities.com/Brentwatch/miscellany.html

Liz