Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Johnathon Schaech

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 9 months ago by Bishonen in topic WP:LEAD

Request edit on 11 November 2021

[edit]

Could someone please put back the names that were redacted by the edit time-stamped 2021-11-10 2:23? And change the citation? All of the names are accurate in a Vanity Fair source (which was linked by the cited WaPo source). The citation to use should've been "https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/photos/2012/03/03/hollywood-cover-timeline-slideshow-201203". Matchbox23 (talk) 01:52, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply


Matchbox23 (talk) 01:52, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

This one? IMO that's a reasonable edit, less name dropping (my own instinct is to remove more names). It's not that interesting that he was on the cover (actors are on covers of magazines, it's part of what they do), but it's somewhat interesting that WaPo thought it was interesting, so that's the source we use, WaPo has a generally good on-WP reputation (so does Vanity Fair (WP:RSP)) If there's an article about him in that issue, that could be useful as a source. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:06, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
I suggest this rewrite: "Also in 1996, he was on the cover of Vanity Fair's annual "Hollywood" issue. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:13, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Gråbergs Gråa Sång. I understand about removing an assortment of names. The original edit included all of the names, then another editor removed them because the citation listed only two names. So I provided a better citation, thinking that the names could be put back. Including the other names of the gentlemen on the cover I think provides a wider context of the 'caliber' of entertainers that were featured on the cover. Those are A list actors, and the "who's who" of that era. I do appreciate that you took the time to consider and respond to my edit request. Matchbox23 (talk) 07:39, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
Note — I have closed this already-handled edit request as declined (clearing the request edit backlog). WhinyTheYounger (WtY)(talk, contribs) 17:14, 29 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

References

The sexual assault charges.

[edit]

Details please. 77.136.67.36 (talk) 20:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

what details do you want published? 77.136.67.36 (talk) 20:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

WP:LEAD

[edit]

I just did a brutal revert to an earlier (January) version of the lead, partly because of repeated WP:PUFFERY additions and partly because there was too much stuff there.

But there should reasonably be some mention of specific work, I'm just not that sure what is WP-good. According to google's AI (which we will NOT use as a source, but they're not always wrong)

"Johnathon Schaech is best known for his role as Jimmy Mattingly II in the 1996 film That Thing You Do!. He is also recognized for his work in TV series like DC's Legends of Tomorrow (as Jonah Hex), Ray Donovan, and Quantico. Other notable early film roles include How to Make an American Quilt and The Doom Generation. "

Opinions, editors? @Bishonen, feel like having one? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:53, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pings also to @Melcous, @Filmbuff102 and @Wireless4519. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for doing that revert, Grey Mountain. The lead had really bulged up beyond reason. I'm no specialist in Schaech's work, even though I tried to keep the article clean at one time, but something like your quote above seems to be reasonably scaled as a lead.
Unfortunately, the body of the article still makes the impression of fans or friends (or Schaech's own "team", see this and especially this) having hoovered up every last crumb of work and placed it in the article, rather than summarizing. Bishonen | tålk 09:37, 11 October 2025 (UTC).Reply
Re-added something to the lead. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:00, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
New longer version added and reverted by me, "Still too detailed for lead and still WP:PUFFERY like "gained widespread recognition". Certainly doesn't need this level of detail on what he played and genre. There is an open thread on the talkpage." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:08, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I’ve updated the lead paragraph to include several of Johnathon Schaech’s best-known film and television credits, along with reliable citations from Variety to support each listing. The previous version was largely unsourced, and these additions help ensure verifiability and accuracy under Wikipedia’s Biographies of living persons policy.
The updated text references Variety reviews or industry announcements for the following works:
– The Doom Generation (1995)
– That Thing You Do! (1996)
– Hush (1998)
– Prom Night (2008)
– Phantom (2013)
– Marauders (2016)
– The Night Clerk (2020)
– Blue Ridge: The Series (2024)
– Houdini (1998 TV film)
All citations are formatted in standard Wikipedia style with full Variety references for verifiability. The goal of this edit is to strengthen sourcing, improve neutrality, and reflect Schaech’s more recent and notable work in both film and television.
Please review — happy to adjust formatting or placement per consensus. Wireless4519 (talk) 17:31, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
As long as the role is cited in the article body, consider WP:LEADCITE. IMO most of the names of characters can be dropped from the WP:LEAD. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:02, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Also, please check your punctuation better. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:19, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I did some trimming and tweaking:. @Bishonen, other interested, feel like taking a look? Looks ok-ish to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:39, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Btw Wireless4519, if you are using sources that are already used in the article, you should follow WP:REFNAME, it makes the ref-section better. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:56, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
The body of the article still seems excessively detailed to me, Mr Sång, but your version of the lead looks reasonable now. Bishonen | tålk 09:36, 19 October 2025 (UTC).Reply