Talk:Danny Masterson

Infobox image

Image A: Masterson's 2023 booking photo (current infobox image)

Image B: Masterson in 2007 (currently in article body)

Image C: Previous infobox image (not currently in article)

Which image should we use for the infobox? If B, should we put A in the article body, or remove it entirely? If C, do we keep B and A, etc. Xan747 (talk) 23:35, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

My preference would be to replace A with C and leave B where it is, in a section discussing his career from that period. Meters (talk) 02:47, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Discussion (Infobox image)

Infobox: C. It is a better composition than B, especially for a lede image.

I'm ok to leave B in place, ok to lose it.

WP:MUG does not say "no mugshots at all," but the general guidance on images in that section begins Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. As Masterson has been convicted of particularly heinous crimes, his mugshot is certainly not painting him in a false light. But neither is Wikipedia a pillory, which is why I think it should not be the lede image. I think a compromise solution is to put it in the Criminal charges and trial section where it is most contextual and would be a good fit for the layout. Xan747 (talk) 02:12, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

@Meters I went ahead and restored C to the infobox and left B where it is as per our mutual agreement. I moved the A to the Criminal charges and trial section. If that is not satisfactory to you, let's discuss. Xan747 (talk) 04:07, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

@Cambial Yellowing: The reasoning in your revert edit summary is well enough, but it doesn't trump talk page consensus. There are other concerns afoot. Please consider restoring my edit and engaging here as I requested in my own edit summary. Xan747 (talk) 04:37, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Two people commenting ≠ consensus. The most recent and representative image, like the one that has been in the infobox for a long time, is the appropriate one. Cambial — foliar❧ 04:57, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

One person is definitely not a consensus. Xan747 (talk) 13:20, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Another editor added it to the page four months ago, a change I agree with, and it's remained as status quo since that time. The image is not used out of context. It readily and appropriately indicates the current cirumstances of the article subject. Cambial — foliar❧ 14:15, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

@Cambial Yellowing I don't contest that it is in context or the most recently available image. Those are both good points. That another editor than you added the image lends some weight toward your preferred version. However, yet another editor removed it from the infobox in favor of image C in this diff, which you also reverted. (A curiosity here is that the editor who uploaded the mugshot to commons only has two edits to this article, neither of which added the mugshot to it.)

Back to the present, there was deliberation here prior to making what was sure to be a controversial change, which was then very transparently implemented by me. Your unilateral revert of that without first discussing it with two opposing editors is against guidance regarding collaborative editing, and I again ask you to self-revert. Xan747 (talk) 15:21, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

I opened a Teahouse discussion asking whether this issue might warrant an RfC, and if so, other considerations. Xan747 (talk) 19:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

A Teahouse volunteer directed me to ask for help at a relevant WikiProject talk page, which I have done here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biography#Danny_Masterson_infobox_image Xan747 (talk) 22:11, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

All things being equal, "Recent images are preferred", as Cambial Yellowing wrote in their edit summary, but all things are not equal here. I don't think it is appropriate to use a booking mugshot as the infobox image of someone when there is another good choice, particularly when they were notable before the crime. Meters (talk) 23:44, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

I checked a couple of other articles to see what we've done in similar cases of celebs currently in prison for sexual crimes:

• R. Kelly: We're using a 2017 image of him File:R._Kelly_in_2017.png in the infobox even though we have a free use mugshot available on commons. No mugshot is used in the article at all.
• Josh Duggar:We're using 2007 image of him File:Joshua_Duggar_2007_cropped_and_retouched.jpg. I don't believe we have a mugshot on commons, but Washington state mug shots are available online, so we could probably find something we could use if we wanted. Meters (talk) 00:24, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
• Image C should be used for the infobox. The mugshot should go to the relevant section. Meters is correct – things aren't equal. While a mugshot of a person who has been convicted of serious crimes doesn't present a false impression, it's far from a reasonably neutral one when used as the first image for someone who is not notable only for being a criminal. The lead looks good otherwise. WP Ludicer (talk) 00:31, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

@Cambial Yellowing: Is this enough recent consensus for you to self-revert, or shall we seek additional input? If the latter, how do you suggest doing that? Xan747 (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Requesting additional eyes @Vadder, Doniago, Meters, Death Editor 2, Jaydoggmarco, Nostaljack, Pincrete, Cpotisch, Ortizesp, Some1, XeCyranium, Loriendrew, Nemov, FMSky, TruthByAnonymousConsensus, Grorp, Glman, Cambial Yellowing, Isaidnoway, CranberryMuffin, Tbrowne03, Nø, Senorangel, Curbon7, DrewieStewie, Chillowack, TarnishedPath, Thryduulf, Last1in, Pistongrinder, Fred Zepelin, and DominionSeraph: I'm reaching out to you because of your participation in this never-closed RfC which touches on some similar themes being raised here. Thanks in advance. Xan747 (talk) 18:26, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

• Option C Like it or not, this person is notable for being an actor. While he will likely spend the rest of his life in prison, his notability is still primarily based on his acting career. Images in biographies should represent the subject in a way consistent with their notability. A recent mugshot does not reflect his acting career and provides little encyclopedic value. Option C is therefore the better choice. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 18:53, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option C per Nemov and Meters. The mugshot would be appropriate in the criminal charges and trial section, where it is contextually relevant, but not for the lead image. Thryduulf (talk) 19:04, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option C For infobox, strongly not "A". As mentioned, primary rolebio is actor.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 19:18, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option A - I think notability has shifted here. Vast majority of the (well-sourced) article now reflects that his criminal record is extensive and notable. glman (talk) 19:36, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

  That’s a good argument for summarizing the article, not for changing the lead image. A recent conviction, even if it has received heavy coverage, doesn’t erase or outweigh 30 years of the subject’s biography. Wikipedia should reflect the entirety of a person’s notability, not just the most recent headlines. Nemov (talk) 19:43, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

• Option A (responding to ping) - WP:MUG states Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. The usage of the mugshoot is clearly not out of context given that the subject has been convicted of two counts of rape. TarnishedPath^talk 21:12, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option C is by far the best in terms of quality, option A has a dull and dark sheen to it. We should always use the best quality image for the infobox. Isaidnoway (talk) 21:46, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option C Thanks for the ping. Prefer Option C for infobox image. The mugshot belongs in the body of the article in the relevant section. Some1 (talk) 22:20, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option C is the best infobox image. Put image A somewhere in the body. Image B is too old and not relevant enough.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 01:46, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Option C for the same aforementioned reasons. It’s the best image and he’s known primarily for his career, not his crimes. Include the mugshot in the body. Cpotisch (talk) 03:25, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

• Option C (responding to ping). Per Nemov. Also, regarding WP:MUG, please note that it states "Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light." A mugshot for a person convicted of crime is not false, but it is disparaging, and to be avoided in the infobox when a good non-mugshot is available. Use the mugshot in the body where his criminal history is discussed. Vadder (talk) 03:55, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option C for the infobox, for the reasons mentioned by others: he's an actor who committed a crime, not a criminal first and foremost. Option A should remain where it currently is, in the "Criminal charges and trial" section. I don't have an opinion about Option B except that it shouldn't be the infobox image. Thanks and happy editing.Chillowack (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
• Option C His arrest and conviction seem notable only because he was a reasonably famous actor. If he was a nobody would anybody be talking about a conviction on two 20 year old he-said-she-said rape accusations after a mistrial where three "she said's" were deemed unreliable? Unless someone was pursuing the "probably wrongfully convicted" angle or the "Scientology" one there doesn't seem anything particularly salacious about this to warrant much media coverage. So his notability still remains due to his being an actor, not a convict. DominionSeraph (talk) 21:33, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Note for the record: Some1 has implemented Option C for the infobox, with the mugshot going to the criminal history section, citing opinions expressed above. This is not any sort of closure of the topic: this wasn't an RfC, so others are still encouraged to weigh in. Xan747 (talk) 18:07, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Until there's a consensus for a change, C should remain since it is the status quo. Nemov (talk) 18:19, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Seems like an overwhelming lean toward option C so far. If for some Sisyphean reason, the winds change to A, then you can change it back. There is no need to wait longer to see "if" some other outcome happens. In addition, I would like to comment on Cambial's argument that the mugshot was there for four months and they agreed with the placement of it — note that the user who put the mugshot in the infobox was only ever active for a few months, and 147 of their 267 edits (55%) have been reverted. Just sayin'.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:13, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I never did figure out who first inserted the mugshot. I only know it wasn't the editor who put it on commons, which I think is interesting. Xan747 (talk) 22:16, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I t was added by user:Kline1992 on April 18 , removed by user:Toshibafansandmore on April 23 , and restored by user:Cambial Yellowing a few minutes later . Meters (talk) 22:32, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Very interesting. Kline1992 is more or less a SPA, over half of whose edits seem to have been adding

Category:The Joe Rogan Experience guests, most of which seem to have been reverted. It's neither here nor there at this point, but thanks for digging that out. Xan747 (talk) 22:39, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know why the mugshot was moved to the top page. It made more sense in the Criminal Charges section. Toshibafansandmore (talk) 04:21, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

I think option B finely encapsulates ALSO the rape conviction with that revealing female body behind him, as his chosen promo accoutrement.

OK, it is also the most flattering pic and he has not looked like that in 2 decades. So not 100% sure. Annabelleigh (talk) 09:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2026

Please change "One plaintiff...also alleged that Scientology members: chased her as she drove her car..." to remove the colon, which is unnecessary here. Wolf Spitzer (talk) 11:47, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

 Done ScrubbedFalcon (talk) 12:47, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2026

American actor AND convicted sexual offender (first line) to match other similar individuals ~2026-19465-85 (talk) 20:07, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before posting an edit request. This has been previously discussed here and the current wording reflects the established consensus. You're welcome to start a new dialog on the matter if you'd like, but I'd encourage you to review the prior discussions before doing so and to address the arguments raised in the past if you go this route. DonIago (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

"is an American actor."

He is in prison. How can you say "is"? Maybe either "is a former American actor." or "was an American actor." would be more appropriate. Masterlet 18:35, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

See discussion at Talk:Danny Masterson/Archive 2#Former Actor in the Lead.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 18:44, 16 April 2026 (UTC)