Talk:Jerry Dandrige

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. This is a close one, but Amakuru has a point that sources that use two Ds may simply be in error. --BDD (talk) 00:35, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Jerry Dandridge → Jerry Dandrige – This article refers to the character seen in Fright Night. The character's name is listed as "Jerry Dandrige" in both the script and the end credits. The wiki page for the movie reflects this. As such, it is requested that the spelling mistake be fixed. Thank you! Relisted. BDD (talk) 23:36, 5 December 2013 (UTC) Dying at James Franco's House (talk) 22:21, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

• Every reliable secondary source gives the last name as Dandridge. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 02:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

• What reliable secondary sources are you referring to? I would assume that the character name given by the screenwriter himself and the name listed within the official end credits would be creditable enough. Furthermore, these would be considered primary resources which would be held above secondary resources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dying at James Franco's House (talk • contribs) 00:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

• So we should move Uhura to "Uhuru" since that's how it's spelled in the primary source credits for Star Trek V? Secondary reliable sources that use "Dandridge" include all of these and the sequel spells his sister's last name "Dandridge" as well. There's also this interview with Holland which uses "Dandridge". Jerry Pepsi (talk) 02:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

• Since "Dandrige" and "Dandridge" are pronounced the same, online text-based interviews are dependent on the writers themselves. This interview with Tom Holland has Jerry's last name listed as "Dandrige" within a direct quote. The spelling is subjective and as such, I don't believe they should be considered "official" hence why I did not use any interview references in my original proposal. I do, however, consider the both original screenplay and the official credits as such - especially because they are consistent. If you look at the script for Star Trek V, you'll see that Uhura is listed. There is a clear discrepancy and technically speaking, either could be used. That being said, since Uhura's name has been spelled as such in various other forms of canon media on several different occasions, it makes sense to title the article based on that spelling. Furthermore, the article in question (Jerry Dandrige vs. Jerry Dandridge) does not concern any character in Fright Night Part 2 so I don't believe that it should be seen as evidence. But for the sake of your argument, if I were to consider your point, the credits to Fright Night Part 2 only list her as "Regine" - no last name is given. Would you please direct me to your reference? Thank you! Dying at James Franco's House (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
• Support - I think the author's choice and that used in credits is quite compelling here. I see it not so much a case of WP:OFFICIALNAME, but rather that any secondary sources spelling it otherwise are just in error. It's not up to those secondary sources to define what the name is. Also, it's by no means every secondary source that spells it with a D. IMDB, for example, uses the same form as the primary: [1]  — Amakuru (talk) 12:46, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Information linking Jerry Dandrige with Homosexuality and HIV needs to be removed as it is based on opinion and not facts. Unfortunately the references you refer to can not be accessed via the links for verification, therefore these citations are not credible and therefore should be removed. Also like I said the information is opinion and not fact. There are also no quotation marks to support what has supposedly been referenced. I once again ask for this information to be removed, as there is no evidence/citations to support this unfounded rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:7867:4600:198C:5631:3E65:BD51 (talk) 18:26, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

No. Fictional characters are open to interpetation. Nowhere does it say that the info is objective fact. Please stop it with the edit warring and censorship.★Trekker (talk) 18:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

There’s a big difference between interpretation and deliberately changing a character’s sexual orientation to suit an agenda that doesn’t exist in the Movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:7867:4600:198C:5631:3E65:BD51 (talk) 20:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC) By your logic the Lord of the rings Trilogy could be perceived as a homage to pedophilia depending on how you view Gandalf’s relationship with Frodo.

Yeah it can. But no reliable sources have written about that. But reliable sources have written about homoerotic elements of this character.★Trekker (talk) 20:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm going to try to put this as simple as I can so you grasp it

1. Homoerotic is not the same thing as homosexual, a person can have homoerotic feelings and not be homosexual, just because the character is depicted as having sex with women that doesn't mean they can't be attracted to men as well.
2. This character is never stated to be heterosexual, so there is no "chaning of sexual orientation" like you claim.
3. The page clearly states that the section if for interpetations
4. The information on the page is cited from published books, therefore from reliable sources, so nothing you say is going to change anyones mind about reverting you if you try to remove it once again
5. At least three different editors have already reverted you, which means they don't agree that your edits are helpful and that you are being disruptive, it's rather nice of us that we havn't had you blocked already for edit warring against consensus
6. Its pretty clear that you seem to be upset by the information on this page, but let me tell you, no one here cares that you're upset by information on this site and no one is going to care that you are angry that we won't do as you say
7. There is not political agenda in doing interpetations of a fictional characters sexuality, it has been done since at least Alexander the Greats time
8. Literally any interpretation of a work of fiction can be done, doesn't matter how stupid or "incorrect" you think it is. Its part of what is called death of the author.
9. Its not helpful to revert the bot which gives you a timestamp on your edits, please stop doing that

Please stop complaining about this now.★Trekker (talk) 21:10, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I’m sorry but the only ‘reliable’ source that is worth citing is the Movie itself and Tom Holland (Creator). Neither have eluded to, or have ever mentioned the ‘Homoerotic’ connection with the Jerry Dandrige character. I like to deal with facts and not speculation. I suggest you watch the Movie if you want to see what Heterosexual behaviour looks like i.e sleeping with Numerous ‘Women’. In the words of Jerry Dandrige himself ‘FOOL’. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:7867:4600:198C:5631:3E65:BD51 (talk) 05:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Clough and Mitchell book

@Crazyloop NY: would you mind explaining why you believe this book is not reliable? ★Trekker (talk) 15:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

How could it be? Actually it isn't even referenced correctly. The only quote or excerpt used is the phrase "beautiful but strange". The rest of the paragraph is hearsay. Please note I have no issue with this section of the page except this paragraph. I am familiar with the source material and if this paragraph represents the Clough and Mitchell book, then these authors are drawing unfounded and unsubstantiated conclusions. Clearly opinions. So, regardless of how reliable it is, can you explain why it is a valid source for a fictional character?

Another user on this talk page said “the only ‘reliable’ source that is worth citing is the Movie itself and Tom Holland (Creator).” While I am not sure I would go that far, it's a fair point. Why is somebody’s opinion about this fictional character relevant?

I’m going to let this go for now and revisit this issue later. I've just started reading “Fright Night Origins” (Copyright 2022) by Tom Holland. I’m thinking it just might be a better reference material than the Clough and Mitchell book. I’m looking forward to reading it as well as your reply. Crazyloop NY (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about, this is a reception/analysis section of a fictional character, the authors are allowed to have whatever interpretation they want.★Trekker (talk) 14:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)