Talk:Richard Simmons

Sexuality

The sentence saying that Richard Simmons' sexuality is a subject of speculation has been an interesting info. But now, I believe the sentence has served its purpose. Because Simmons died, the speculations regarding his sexuality will remain being only speculations. And because speculations are not facts, there's does not seem to be any need to have the sentence in the article. Hirameki (talk) 04:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

While the verb tense should be updated, the sentence continues to reflect the publicly confirmed status quo and comes with helpful sources. The status might change, as it did with Sally Ride and Rip Taylor upon their deaths, or it might not. 2601:642:4600:D3B0:39E7:2447:F0C0:95B2 (talk) 05:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Details

Block evasion
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
As for the details, I feel like they are worthy to note down, such as the time of his birth. Especially since I have added sources to prove these statements. I would say I am doing a fairly good job. At least I am trying. -- 68.104.130.88 (talk) 08:35, 2 November 2024 (UTC) We don't need to report everything simply because it is sourced. We don't need to know the exact minute of his birth, or of his death, or that he fed skunks, or what his house manager thought of his body. Meters (talk) 08:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC) What is it that I should add then? I thought I was doing a good job sourcing things to prove it. -- 68.104.130.88 (talk) 08:40, 2 November 2024 (UTC) Nothing. Self-revert and wait for consensus. WP:BRD does not mean that you get to restore your contested content 5 or 6 or however many times it is now before you finally start a discussion, and it does nto mean that your contested material stays in the article while consensus is reached. You have been undone by multiple editors, and are already at the edit-warring board over this article. Continuing to edit warr is not a good look. Meters (talk) 08:45, 2 November 2024 (UTC) I apologize. I do "nto" mean to cause a war. I was just adding verifiable sources to try and be constructive, as well as adding material that is legitimate and true to the source. Can you * not tell that I am doing my best? -- 68.104.130.88 (talk) 08:48, 2 November 2024 (UTC) No, I can't. You have been warned about edit warring before, so you should already know what it is and not to do it. You also appear to be evading more than one block. Meters (talk) 08:54, 2 November 2024 (UTC) I would not intentionally add false information. I always am sure to check if it is sourcable or not. As for evasion, I do not think I am since I was technically allowed back. I only wish to contribute and help out, not to be warring or anything. -- 68.104.130.88 (talk) 08:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC) What do you mean you were "technically allowed back"? As far as I can tell, you are currently blocked on at least two accounts, and on a recent IP, as I pointed out on your talk page. I see no unblocks. If those were you then you are not allowed to edit using any IP or named account. Meters (talk) 09:03, 2 November 2024 (UTC) My point is that I do not wish to war with anyone. I honestly thought I was doing a good job with the sources. I felt that I was surely being helpful. -- 68.104.130.88 (talk) 09:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC) Please answer the questions. What do you mean you were "technically allowed back"? Were you editing as user:MisterAnthony, user:TrueLegend23, or as any other currently blocked user, including the recently blocked user:68.106.251.16. Meters (talk) 09:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)