Talk:Dane Cook

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
Comedy Portal
This article is within the scope of the Comedy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to comedy, comics, comedians, comedy movies, and the like. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. User talk pages are more appropriate for non-article-related discussion topics. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters. See talk page guidelines.

Contents

[edit] Personal Life

Is there any way someone could add some information about his personal life?

[edit] "Tragic Death"

131.109.225.2 (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)Please review the source cited for his death, at the bottom of the page it states: " about this web site. (this story was dynamically generated using a generic 'template' and is not factual. Any reference to specific individuals has been 100% fabricated by web site visitors who have created fake stories by entering a name into a blank 'non-specific' template for the purpose of entertainment. For sub-domain info and additional use restrictions: FakeAWish.com)" I doubt including information from this source adheres to the Wikipedia biography standards, please revise accordingly.

"whose death"  when they pull that plugg  out of the wall. flowers  of all arrangments are sent to the person of so said wake i should know i used to be a processer you know the guy in the back that would clean the stems of all the leifs........muchos grazias ------------- @d!o$ ......131.109.225.2 (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)ettiene

[edit] Cleanup Needed

This article needs a cleanup. Some of the history sections are almost unreadable due to density and unorganization, and the content is scattered. I will work on it as much as I can, but some help would be appreciated. Furthermore, a new article about his HBO special,, Dane Cook's Vicious Circle has been created by myself, but it needs a LOT of work, if anyone is willing to help. -- Ubergenius 15:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hiya, I saw the new article on a maintenance sweep, but I've changed it to a redirect for now, since I'm not convinced that it meets the standard for an individual article. My recommendation is that you maintain the info on the special in a separate section on the Dane Cook article for now, and concentrate on accumulating verifiable references, per Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. If the section grows too large, then it'll be easy enough to split it back out to a separate article later. --Elonka 21:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
FYI, I changed the redirect to be to the article I've started about the special. I didn't know this redirect existed then. See Dane Cook: Vicious Circle. -Mike Payne (T • C) 15:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Devout Catholic? No

This was in the article:

According to his last HBO Comedy special, an hour and a half long presentation, he has become a devout Catholic, despite previous bits he has done that mock the Catholic Church. A part of the show was dedicated to talking about what Jesus has done for him in his life and how much he loves Christ. The effect it has had on his fan base is still unclear.

This is not true at all. Not only have I watched the video of the HBO special once, but the audio 3 seperate occasions, and no where is this said. He DOES tell a story of a guy who makes fun of him for his catholic beliefs in an argument over Cook saying "God bless you" when he sneezed and the man returning with "I'm an atheist". This skit lasted for, at most, 10 minutes, ending with Cook hoping that when he dies, his body becomes a tree, then chopped down, ground into paper, and the bible printed on him. No where was there a mention of discussing his religion and the things Jesus has done for him. Being a Christian, I would be happy if he did, as it would be good if one of my favorite comics was a Christian also, but he most certainly did not make the statements mentioned above in this HBO special. Ubergenius 14:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


I concur with Ubergenius. I've watched the special several times and there isn't one instance that he talks "about what Jesus has done for him in his life and how much he loves Christ." The joke is funny, but that's not what it's about.--Jude 05:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, nothing suggests that he's devout. It's all for the joke. -Mike Payne 09:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 8 Guys

a couple of days ago I posted anonymously and added that dane wrote, directed, and starred in 8 Guys. he definitely did, it's on his website even. Someone deleted it, however. I'm gonna put it back, if anyone deletes it, that's not cool. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Eagleboy978 (talk • contribs)03:41, 20 July 2006.


[edit] Famous Relatives

Is Dane Cook the son of "This American Life" producer Diane Cook?67.116.70.107 18:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


no, his mother's name is Donna, she just recently passed away.--Jude 10:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV movie

Although the scene is brief, Cook makes the character all his own and even sings his character's theme song, "Waffle Man!", a bit pov?-~~``~or whatever does the name thing

Changed. Williamnilly 05:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

He also won a spot on a Comedic Actors to Serious Roles list for his character role in Mr. Brooks!!

[edit] MSG

ACTUALLY DANE COOK HAS IN FACT PERFORMED IN THE ARENA. HE PERFORMED IN THE NOKIA THEATRE ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2005. HOWEVER ON NOVEMBER 12, 2006 HE SOLD OUT THE ARENA TWICE IN ONE NIGHT. AND WAS THE ONLY COMIC TO EVER DO IT TWICE IN ONE NIGHT. FOR PROOF VIEW THIS LINK http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-11-02-dane-cook_x.htm.

Changed "Madison Square Garden" to "Madison Square Garden's Nokia Theater" because Cook did not perform in the stadium. Nokia Theater is a smaller room within the MSG venue, but saying he sold out Madison Square Garden gives the impression that he was playing the same room that Bruce Springsteen plays when he sells out MSG.

Changed. Williamnilly 05:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


I have heard reference in a few places to this aswell, that he sold out the Nokia Theater, which IS a very different thing then selling out what people usually think of when they hear madison square garden. Can anyone find a source to confirm that he performed at the stadium or the nokia theater? I think this would be an important distinction to make. Riphal 03:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC) Riphal

I was the original poster of this topic and I was at one of the Dane Cook MSG shows. The show did take place in the Nokia theater.

[edit] Pop culture references

I'm going to argue that using pop culture references in a standup act is not a "hallmark," since it's nearly impossible to find a comic who doesn't do exactly that. The inclusion of this unhelpful section gives this page an air of vanity, so I'm excising it. R 11:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

  • He makes references that very few do. For example, when he told the Walgreen story, he did in reverse, in reference to Quentin Tarantino. He also incorporates jokes from previous CDs.
    • Quentin Tarantino didn't invent this storytelling device. He's self-referential? So are many other comedians.

[edit] Criticisms

Should some mention be made of the accusations that have been lodged against Cook? Namely, that he has "lifted" a certain amount of material from comedian Louis C.K. and potentially others as well? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd say sure, provided its stated who is generally making the allegations, that examples/proof is given, and its stated in a NPOV (rather than accusatory). Williamnilly 23:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I know where such evidence is posted, and I'm going to link to it, and I will try hard to keep the tone neutral.--Priceyeah 06:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
So where are you on finding this source? It's almost June! Please find it soon, Google is a bitch for me to use...168.103.56.133 00:48, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
EDIT: Okay, I found this on the Louis CK forum: Louis CK in an (edited) post merely says "fuck it. who cares?". The forum thread can be found here (screenname is 'louisck', second reply). Off topic: I don't think Dane Cook is funny...at all.168.103.56.133 00:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I removed the accusation until we can see proof of this. A source should be cited in which we can actually view the accusations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Weters (talk • contribs) 13:17, February 1, 2006.

I was suprised when I came to this article and found nothing at all on the whole Louis CK ordeal. I would really like to see some put in because it is very notable. PrettyMuchBryce 19:32, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

here's proof: http://www.redban.com/blogy/?p=51 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Benbenbenben (talk • contribs) 04:03, 30 July 2006.

I revised the line including Joe Rogan and cited a forum post by himself saying Cook has taken his material. --72.155.207.174 08:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

the entire critisism section seems to be written with a severe bias,especially where it states he appeals to pubescent girls and his comedy turns off "intelligent fans"

I firmly believe that the individual who contributed the extensive section on criticism of Dane is not a fan of his work, and this bias is evident. Therefore, the content should be shortened and the tone should be altered to reflect neutrality.

I think the page should be re-opened to editing, especially the part about the things Louis C.K. said about Dane in an interview. He was being pressured into saying more and more derogatory things by the hosts of the show who admittedly don't like Dane Cook. Whoever posted those comments should also have included that fact. The point of this website is factualy information, not biased opinions. I say this as a fan of facts, not as a fan of Dane Cook. (Although, in the spirit of things, im somewhat of a fan, he kind of tends to go overboard, so the jokes usually stop being funny about ten minutes into the punchline.)

I agree completely. To exclude that information is borderline ridiculous. I will add that information. Funkbomb (talk) 07:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Myspace's Tom Anderson quote

Is this true? Does Tom have a beef with Cook over something Cook said or something? I was skeptical, but there's the link .... BabuBhatt 22:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's true. Someone has deleted the proof but hopefully it resurfaces soon.
I'm placing the link here in hopes someone can determine its authenticity: [1] BabuBhatt 22:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


That's fake, from what I see is that it was made using myspaces ability to use full html, the last poster just had to make a fake post using html after his real post, it even broke the tables. If Tom had a problem like that and claimed to delete profiles if you disagreed, then why would dane cook have a profile?

Anyway, I doubt Tom is even that stupid. -- 21:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

This is direct from Cook in his podcast, so take it with a grain of salt, but he says that Tom has attended several of his shows and personally visited with him and that the two are somewhat friends, so I don't know what to think of that. -- Ubergenius 16:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BAMF

Could we get an editorial clarification on the BAMF reference? It doesn't make any sense. "BAMF, made by Dane Cook as a replacement for BAMF" or similar. Wtf does that mean?--Htmlism 18:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


BAMF stands for Bad Ass Mother Fucker put that

He did NOT coin this phrase.

showing his complete un-originality. Dane Cook is an unoriginal crook

So who coined the phrase then?

Wow! Way to stay neutral people!

[edit] Neutrality of Accusation

The last section's last sentence said that the material was clearly stolen, though the writer had said that this is what Louis CK thought. I changed the sentence structure to show that this is not a fact not endorsed by Wikipedia, but is merely what Louis CK thinks.

[edit] Yuk Yuk incident

This should probably be discussed: http://i7.tinypic.com/2119laq.jpg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Benbenbenben (talk • contribs) 04:03, 30 July 2006.

I added it in as a short line—The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.155.207.174 (talk • contribs) 08:58, 7 August 2006.

The article makes this incident seem as though Cook was clearly in the wrong, but according to the article that is cited, the owner of the club sided with Cook, saying the manager was wrong to try and cut his act short. I will modify the article to note this. -- Ubergenius 14:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

This whole section seems kind of biased and unclear.

"After going over time and ignoring the "red light", the club's manager and headliner (Peter Kelamis) cut off his microphone and tried to "play him off" with music." The mananger and the headliner are the same people? Doesn't that seem like a conflict of interest? If that's the fact maybe he was upset that Dane got to go first and that's why he tried to get him off stage, not because he ran over time.

"Mark Breslin, the founder of the comedy club chain, quickly apologized and placed the blame on the club's manager, who happened to be new to the job." So is the manager still the headlining guy. And the whole composiion of that sentance is biased. I would either take away the part mentioning that the manager was new or incorporate in a way that didn't insinuate that he was being used as a scapegoat by the owner.

Yeah but that still doesn't change the fact that What Dane Cook did was pull a "dick-move" by running over someone else's time. Zeelog1 —Preceding comment was added at 10:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Edits (2/25)

I've tried to overhaul the section on the Yuk-Yuk's incident. The headliner was not the manager of the club. Also there was nothing to support the statement that the manager was new to the job. I've tried to clarify what happened, and also emphasize the owner of Yuk-Yuk's strong support of Cook as opposed to the "scapegoat" statement previously discussed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Max Overload (talk • contribs) 13:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

Also Pete Johansson was not there, was not the club manager and had nothing to do with that show. I was involved in Talent AFTER the incident, brought in specifically to prevent anything like it from happening again!" Please change the post to reflect that. The manager at the time was brand new, and had no idea who Cook was. His talent surpervisor role was ended after that.


Dane Cook was not in the wrong. The manager is a dick.

[edit] Super Finger

Image:Http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/Previews/Dane-Cook-hb02.jpg

The super finger is a "Dane Cook Parody" of giving the middle finger. The super finger is like a bigger version of the middle finger, it is when you put your middle finger and your ring finger togethor and stick your thumb out. It is just a funny comedic bit that Dane Cook created.


Its not a parody. He made it because the middle finger is so tired.

Dane Cook made it up? My ass. People from Richard Prior to Eminem have been using it a long time before Dane Cock.--68.97.75.170 05:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm a fan of Dane Cook myself, but I have to say: I doubt he was the first to come up with it. Although, it is possible that he honestly THINKS he did, and wasnt aware that someone else had done it before.--Chipmonk328 17 September 2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Material Controversy

I removed the following paragraph from this section:

Another example of possibly plagiarized material is Cook's reference to the Department of Motor Vehicles as "Satan's asshole." This line is largely the same as a line used by comedian Bill Hicks in a 1992 performance (released in 2005 as the CD Salvation : Oxford November 11, 1992). During the performance, Hicks refers to Los Angeles as "Satan's shithole."

The use of Satan and a reference to the anus is hardly innovative. If both people had mentioned DMV, perhaps this could pass. As it is, the fact that one man does not like the DMV and the other does not like Los Angeles and both refer to it as a terrible place is not in any way "plagiarized material."

I also removed this paragraph:

Comedian Joe Rogan too has claimed Dane Cook has taken his material [2]. He has also listed Cook as one of the comedians he feels is a "hack" and a "thief." The list includes Carlos Mencia and Robin Williams.

For this to return, the last sentence must be removed (it has nothing to do with Dane Cook) and the information from the link must be worked into the text. Right now it is just a link to a story, not information in an article. - Kuzain 00:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


I do believe the line about Joe Rogan should be put back in. It is not bias and it is a direct quote from Joe Rogan. But I will let you guys deal with it.


Wow, Joe Rogan calls another comedian a thief, even mentioning Robin Williams. Joe Rogan was in diapers when Williams started his career, so I think Rogan needs to learn who is stealing from who.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.193.245 (talk)

I remember when I wrote that line about Joe Rogan and who is in his list of theieves...I think it was originally fine and that the second sentence is just a quick side note about the list of people he believes to be thieves. And just to say to the above discusser, you do know Robin Williams still tours and was on the touring circuits when Joe Rogan was too and thats when and where he heard these alligations.

[edit] Double Jointed?

I've edited out the entry:

"Cook is considered to be double-jointed."

Under "The Super Finger" entry. I couldn't find anything via google search to back this up, nor is it really relevant to "The Super Finger" since people that aren't double jointed (like myself) can also do the hand gesture.

Liqker 09:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Age?

The bio has two different birth dates (years) listed for him. 1972 & 1976. Which is correct?

On IMDB, they list his birth year as 1972. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.31.246.139 (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This is a PR piece

"After the release of his immensely successful CD"... LOL. That's ridiculously commercial. This is PR fluff... how many encyclopedias allege romantic affairs with people like jessica simpson? Argh. This is such a b.s. entry. pathetic.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Aethlos (talk • contribs)21:08, 19 Sept 2006.

Thank you for the constructive criticism. Now we really know how to make the article better. Please sign your critiques next time.Williamnilly 03:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree, can we tone down the whole "dean cook is god" tone of the whole article? I understand he is one of the top people in Hollywood today, but as it is the article skews pointlessly toward a promotional piece for everything dean cook. A lot of this information is irrelevant and tends to sound like a collection of clippings from an obsessive fan. I know that total neutrality is impossible, but perhaps tightening the article up by cutting out unimportant and tedious trivia and maybe putting the whole "hack" criticism as a redirect to the phenomenon of plagiarism in comedy? Because lots of comedians accuse other comedians of stealing jokes. user:Sanitycult 11:41, 22 January —Preceding comment was added at 19:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, just thought I'd let you know, it's Dane Cook, not Dean Cook. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.31.246.139 (talk) 20:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What the hell is up with this?

I don't think any of this is accurate. First of all, this guys birth date is listed as being 1962, this would make him 44 years old. Second, the years given later in the article are 10-15 years IN THE FUTURE!!!! WHAT THE HELL!?!?

IMBD says he's born in 72, making him 34. http://imdb.com/name/nm0176981/

lol internet movie basedata? :)

--64.26.117.250 11:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Words dont control us. Not anymore.


Who else finds that last comment creepy? --Chipmonk32817 September 2007

What, the "words don't control us. Not anymore" bit? That's from Vicious Circle.

[edit] Material controversy

This section must be verified with reliable sources before it is returned to the article. FloNight 16:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I returned it, with one source. The linked source has audio of some of Louis CK plagiarism, which is all from Louis CK's 2001 CD. The audio from Dane Cook is all from a 2003 act. Louis has also talked about this on a few radio shows, but audio and radio are hard to source. Louis CK also had an article on his website, but took it down. However, he talks about it briefly at a stand-up comedy forum here (Yes, it's really him and not someone posing as him). Second, if anyone can help find a source, one of the jokes that Joe Rogan claims that Dane Cook stole from him was about tigers mating. Dane Cook's joke is about hippos mating.--Trypsin 12:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
You need a reliable source that comments on this controversy; linking two similar things and saying "See, see, they're the same!" is not sufficient. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
How is it now? There's a newspaper source now that reports the controversy and Dane's response. If you want to cut it down or change the language, that's fine, but I don't think it warrants removal of the entire section.--Trypsin 13:36, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
It's fine now. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Cook has denied any plagiarism.[11] This footnote is a dead link. The citation specifies when the material was originally published, but that material no longer exists online to be verified. Do we delete the footnote? Must we delete the entire sentence? Or is it sufficient as-is? It seems to me, this is an important point — whether he denied committing plagiarism — and we should be able to provide some substantiation. Cribcage 08:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I quoted parts of Louis CK's posts about Cook in the article and added a link. MrBlondNYC 22:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lower than vandalism

"His loquacious trickery redefines common human experiences into a "unique" slang vocabulary." Is this a joke? Ninety percent of Cook's fanbase don't know what loquacious means. And is "found art" referring to the Louis C.K. incidents? Someone needs to delete this entire article and re-write it.--Hypermagic 21:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I altered that paragraph slightly. It's actually a direct quote from a Salon.com review, and it seems a bit biased. I agree that the article needs an overhaul, if only because it's not current. For example, the HBO special and Tourgasm, along with his film are all talked about in the future tense.--Trypsin 02:57, 14 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] A:F6

I do not think that when you search for A:F6, that you are redirected to this page. It is true that on October 14, 2006, he had made a joke about some dude on UTube that sang A:F6, but in no way does it show the relevance of A:F6 to Dane Cook. I think an article should be started about A:F6. However, I do not have enough information to start one; all that I know is that A:F6 is some random person that had a piece of paper with A:F6 on it and kept singing it for ten minutes. signed: .Chewka.


all you know is what you think- nobody did that until dane cook made the joke. did you read the thing you deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmmmmaaaasssoon (talk • contribs) 16 October 2006
The joke on Saturday Night Live about A:F6 was that Dane Cook was talking about the kinds of odd things that get made for, posted to, and popularized by YouTube (correct spelling), and he said that you could probably punch in something as random as A:F6 and find a guy with that on his chest, chanting that over and over. And lo and behold, as one might have predicted, multiple people posted such a video. What I don't know is whether Dane Cook seeded that or simply counted on someone rushing to make one while the broadcast was yet on the air, but it's pretty certain that Mmmmmaaaasssoon is right that the videos happened because of Dane Cook's joke (either as his setting it up personally or as others responding just as he expected). Lawikitejana 07:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


thank you. --Mmmmmaaaasssoon 11:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Citing Sources

Hey Guys. I just wanted to point that somewhere in the article it claims that Dane Cook has over 2 milliom myspace friends. This is untrue. He has over 1 million. It is stuff like this that makes Wikipedia unreliable. Any information that is put into an article must be verifiable. IF not, get rid of it. Also, please try and read the information your citing. Peace. RyanDaniel 09:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Death

If he in fact did die, put in a reference instead of having a revert war. He's alive until proven dead (and is there is a reference put it in the article int he death section and include him in Deaths in 2006. --Wizardman 01:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

He's not dead, some giggling forum kids found a death article generator and are amusing themselves with it. Observe: http://anythinggoeshere.swellserver.com/news/top_stories/actor_new_zealand.php

I suggest locking this until people get over it.--Tossrock 01:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Tossrock lol

Went and requested protection until those vandals go away. --Wizardman 17:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

No death, the world isn't that lucky.

lol —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.46.113.50 (talk) 16:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC).
wow, did they steal the HTML for the template directly from Yahoo! News and change the images? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.22.189 (talk) 02:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

No shit wish this unfunny little shit was dead.

Wow, way to stay positive! Go cut yourself, you little emo.

[edit] I have proof he did not die

I have proof he did not die. My proof is that he appeared at the live event "Comic Relief" on November 18, 2006. That was two days after his alleged "death". --User:Uber Cuber

We knew the death was fake a couple days ago, don't worry. that's why there's a lock on the article in the first place. --Wizardman 03:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Exact number of MySpace friends necessary?

"To date, Cook has 1,655,823 fans listed as friends on his profile."

Wouldn't "over 1.6 million" suffice, and eliminate the need to frequently update this statistic? SeanMon 04:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC) (sorry I forgot to sign, AGAIN)

Absolutely. —bbatsell ¿? 04:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sangwich?

I really like the part where it says he calls a sandwich a "sangwich". It goes on to say that he calls a chicken sandwich a "chicken sangwich". I was wondering what he calls a tuna sandwich? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.175.182.25 (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

I like the part where the anonymous user is such a chicken sangwich that she can't even log in or sign her name. BabuBhatt 21:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
I think the real kicker is when you called the unsigned person a "her" when you have no clue what gender the person is, which would mean the defalt would be to call it a "he"--Chipmonk328 17 September 2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Technically it should be written and said as if the person is female. This is because male is contained within female, as is he/she. I got this from an english teacher so don't even try to deny it. Gamer9678 05:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
is this english teacher a raging feminist? seriously though, the default, however chauvenistic it seems, is masculine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.223.198.102 (talk) 22:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I REALLY like the part where I say that THIS IS NOT A FORUM! I've been waiting to say that for so long. And by the way, his is not contained in the word her(s). frogTape: Covered in flies for your enjoyment (talk) 03:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Why is there no image for this article? I don't really understand the policies wikipedia uses for it's images... Is there a reason why this can't be used? [3] -Mike Payne 09:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] where's the album?

i see no mention of Dane's music album. i think it should at least be mentioned, at least in discography. it's not in the article though. somebody add it, or at least explain why not. Jibba-Jabbaman

[edit] mother

is Dane Cooks mother, Donna Cook, dead? im just wondering because at the end of Vicious Circle it says "in memory of my mother". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.185.163.37 (talk) 20:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

Yes. He mentioned it in his podcast. She passed away in 2006 from cancer. I don't know all of the details, however. -- Ubergenius 15:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

It should be noted that his father has also recently passed away. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.167.147.218 (talk) 23:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SU-FI

Alright, whomever placed the picture of the Su-Fi on this page, has a picture that is doing it wrong... The thumb needs to be sticking out..... Anyways alot of this stuff is silly. Like the thing written at the end of this page about how they are all offeneded because of what he is saying about religion and what not. Shut up...Stop your whining...There is nothing that bothers me more is how someone can complain so much about a famous persons views...I mean seriously...If you don't like it, don't listen to it. Dane Cook is hilarious....Get over yourself....I'm a devout christian, yet love his work...

Sadly the world is filled with silly people like you who can't seem to have a sense of humor. People need to learn to laugh at themselves. I mean seriously... Like you're some just person... You are just as guilty —Preceding unsigned comment added by BaP1803691 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Awful

This article is truly awfully organized. I will be attempting a full re-organization and re-write of some material. -- Ubergenius 15:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How many citations do you freakin' need?

I'm glad to see some clean-up is coming for this article. It's got several unnecessary "citation needed" notes in it. Someone actually put in a "citation needed" in reference to the sentence that states that "Concernicus" is derived from the name Copernicus. You have got to be fucking kidding me. And who gives a damn that he has new friends auto-added on MySpace? That is certainly not encyclopedia-level writing; that's fan-page writing. 74.114.219.5 23:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Material

Just re-wrote the part about Louis Ramey, it was highly out of tone. It also needs a citiation, but I didn't want to delete it without bringing it up. Birdman1011395 09:26, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Consider protecting

This page seems to have an inordinate amount of anonymous "contributors". I would suggest an ounce of prevention. Reason turns rancid 23:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not Funny

Shouldn't this article mention somewhere that this guy is not funny? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.235.39.100 (talk) 23:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The "controversy and criticism" section is already there. ChesterG 08:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

It's noticable that the descriptions of him as a "comedian" engaged in "comedy" are currently uncited... ;-) --Squiggleslash 02:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, what is the proof that he is a comedian?--Smart Mark Greene (talk) 23:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Where is the proof that he exists at all? I've never heard of him. I asked around, and nobody I know has heard of him either. Outside America, nobody has heard of the guy. Lexo (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
wp dayorder 10.2.2008 doc Dane_Cook refs unpersons doubleplusungood rectify upsub antefiling 216.82.171.7 (talk) 23:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to add that 1. the first post in this section is a complete opinion and 2. that just because many users are from Europe DOES NOT mean that anything not about Europe is not real or irrelevant. frogTape: Covered in flies for your enjoyment (talk) 03:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lakeshore Theater

The Lakeshore Theater in Chicago (crowned the "Best Place to See Comedy in Chicago" by Chicago Magazine) gives away free t-shirts that say "Dane Cook sucks & you know it." This should be mentioned in the criticism section. Jcc1 04:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Combining

Could whoever is combining the completely different sections stop please? Thanks. Boomtown Rat 21:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Demetri Martin

There is audio of Demetri Martin and Dane Cook doing bits that are very similar - about going to a shoe store and being told about shoe sizes in stock that don't apply to them. This needs to be in the section Dane Cook#Material, but it's being removed as "original research." Anyone have any idea how to get it in here?►Chris NelsonHolla! 03:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Your edit specifically states that "comparisons have been drawn on internet forums and YouTube videos." "Internet forums" (for which you did not provide any references) are not reliable sources. YouTube videos are often of questionable reliability and dubious copyright status. Further, your claim that "there are no accusations of stealing matieral here" is disingenuous; why else would you insert the material into this article?
I remain unimpressed by both your source for this poorly-veiled accusation of plagiarism and your attitude during this discussion. I welcome input and comments from others. --ElKevbo 04:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry you have some man-crush on Dane Cook. But the fact is there is a blatant similarity between the two comedian's bits. One DID steal from the other. (Probably Cook, given his history for such a thing.) So it without question deserves a mention here. The YouTube links provides audio from Martin doing stand-up and Cook doing stand-up. There is nothing else that needs to be verified.►Chris NelsonHolla! 05:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I was lured here by a familiar message on Chrisjnelson's talk page. (Chris, another "man-crush" type note and you will be blocked yet again per your ArbCom restrictions). As for the matter here, you're really citing a YouTube video as a reliable source?! Correct me if I'm wrong, but anyone can put any video they want on YouTube. Also, I listened to the thing - they're barely similar at all. If that's your basis for similarity then every comedian is similar to every other comedian because of similar airline jokes. You're way off on this one. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I would have expected an ounce of reason from you.►Chris NelsonHolla! 14:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Same here. You should know better. Sheesh, I could put up a video of just about anything on YouTube and you'd use it as a source on Wikipedia?! The one you're "citing" is similar how? That they're both set in a shoe store? That's it?! And they both had salespeople suggest shoes that were too small? Wow, spooky coincidence. Makes me want to check other sources you've used... —Wknight94 (talk) 14:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. First of all, this automatic dismissal because it's on YouTube is idiotic, because YouTube is simply the vessel for the media. The audio itself is simply Martin doing comedy and Cook doing comedy, so really it's no different than a CD of the show or anything else.

Also, there is an obvious connection between the material. One got it from the other, and it was probably Cook seeing as how he has a vast history of stealing material. You can disagree all you want, but you're deluding yourself. I'm not going to discuss this edit anymore because frankly I don't care enough. It's your business if you want to keep being wrong or if you actually want to face reality.►Chris NelsonHolla! 14:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Obvious to you and your internet forum buddies. Leave it there. Otherwise, I'll splice together airline food bits by Richard Pryor and Jerry Seinfeld and then post a conspiracy theory here because "obviously" they're stealing from each other. —Wknight94 (talk) 14:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Delusional.►Chris NelsonHolla! 14:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
You can leave this message up, I don't care. I don't know what you think I'm "delusional" about though. Hell, I think Demetri Martin is fantastic. I might even agree that Cook is stealing from him! But that's about the worst evidence I've ever heard. And even if it were good evidence, it's still just one guy's YouTube posting so it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. If it starts to gain more steam and following beyond some internet forum (which you haven't yet named, have you?), then maybe it would make more sense. As is, you're nowhere near making a case for its inclusion. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Again with the YouTube thing. YouTube is irrelevant here. It just happens to be the host of the video/audio. It's no different than the comedians' albums themselves. YouTube has nothing to do with the quality of evidence, and how a logical adult cannot get that is astounding.►Chris NelsonHolla! 17:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's try this again: The particular host of the content matters because we must, in an article about a living person, provide very solid evidence supported by reliable sources when including negative information. The material does appear to be accusing Cook of plagiarism and thus we need strong evidence supported by reliable sources. Further, comparing recordings of the two acts is a very clear example of original research which is prohibited here. As Wknight94 has stated, there may be factors that are not obvious to the uniformed or casual observer which is why we have requirement such as WP:RS and WP:BLP. --ElKevbo 17:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
And your fake astonishment is even less convincing than your original research. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Fake astonishment? What the hell?►Chris NelsonHolla! 18:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Unless you can cite CNN or some other reliable source saying that Dane Cook specifically is using stolen material, then any conclusions you've drawn based off the similarity of their videos is your original research and does not belong here. By the same token, I could use those videos as a reference to say the other person stole the material from Dane Cook, it doesn't make it correct. I agree with wknight. -Mike Payne (T • C) 18:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Except my sentence only said comparisons have been drawn, not that Cook was stealing material. And MY statement was fully sourced and I could find hundreds more.►Chris NelsonHolla! 18:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

At this point, I barely even understand your argument. You say that YouTube is irrelevant but that's the only place I've seen the "comparison" that you're referring to. Or are you trying to say that the two clips exist and are sources in themselves and that putting them together is just combining two "sources" into one "source"? That sounds more like a WP:SYN violation. I can't figure out which core policy(ies) you're violating but I know it's one of them. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Link to a news site like CNN or nytimes.com or some credible site drawing these comparisons. A youtube comment is far from a credible citing. -Mike Payne (T • C) 19:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

You guys still don't get it... It's like talking to a wall.►Chris NelsonHolla! 19:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget to log on to Youtube and write about how unreasonable we're being. -Mike Payne (T • C) 19:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Ohhhh, burn!►Chris NelsonHolla! 19:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I was pretty proud of it, too. -Mike Payne (T • C) 19:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
That was nice - and has the dual purpose of making the point much more effectively than "It's like talking to a wall" and other examples of feigning shock. If you really can "find hundreds more", you best do so because your argument is quite weak. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually it didn't make any point, since I've never been arguing YouTube's reliability. And why are you so convinced I'm faking anything. Because I'm not. You're being very odd.►Chris NelsonHolla! 20:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

There's a slight mention of it (along with all of the other accusations) in this article. Only thing I could find in a RS. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 20:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh, a hint at a real source. Nice job. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know who is right or who is wrong, nor do I want to side with anybody in particular. But I have a comment for both sides. For Chris' argument, it's a very likely possibility that what you say is true. For Wknight, ElKevbo, and Mike Payne, I can understand why you would say it is original research. There is strong evidence supporting both sides of the argument. Ksy92003(talk) 02:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Kinda depends on what you're saying. It's unquestionable that what Chris is advocating for is a textbook example of original synthesis, so there's not really strong evidence on that side. I, like Chris, personally believe that Cook has stolen bits from lots of good comedians (I'm a big fan of Louis C.K. and Joe Rogan, and I was listening live to the O&A show in Dec. 2006 where this was... "discussed"), and it appears likely that Demetri Martin is one of those. Without a reliable source, my opinion cannot go in the article. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 02:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
The accusations probably are true; Cook's critics have produced plenty of convincing evidence of his alleged plagiarism (some of which is already in the article). But this article is about a living person and we must be more than just "pretty sure" when making negative accusations. We must provide the strongest possible evidence and the evidence presented thus far, one YouTube video and an unspecified Internet message board, just don't make the grade. It's not about defending Cook or intentionally irritating Chris Nelson. It's about respecting a fellow human being and this project. --ElKevbo 03:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
You're still not getting it... At all.►Chris NelsonHolla! 03:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticisms section

Fabymcschooler keeps removing what appears to be to be relevent, non-redundant, information claiming it's redundant. An example of such an edit is here.

I'm having difficulty seeing where he's coming from, but do not want to get into a revert war. In particular he claims the information is repeated in the text above. But the text above is pretty much exclusively talking about plagiarism, from what I can determine.

Am I not getting it? I reverted twice because I thought it was vandalism, but Fabymcschooler seems convinced of what he's doing and nobody else is reverting him. I absolutely cannot see the same criticisms in the text quoted above the text he keeps deleting. And it does seem relevent for a criticisms area (if this is not suitable for inclusion, then shouldn't the entire criticism section be removed?) --Squiggleslash (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You Suck At Photoshop

I removed any mention of the video series, due to the lack of any sources or proof. A few comments on boingboing is not a rightful source. Landeyda (talk) 12:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Years Sections

It is completely pointless to put all of his achievements or whatever in sections by years. They are way too small, and can still be cut down. It's best to put it all into one to three paragraphs. IronCrow (talk) 05:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Style

The "Style" section is substantially made up of a description of the SUFI. This is not really an element of Cook's style; it is part of specific routine. It might be an EXAMPLE of Cook's style, but it shouldn't be fully described in section like this, where the particular details are irrelevant. On a related note, a paragraph that I had added which describes Cook's style as utilizing "surrealism" has been deleted, despite the fact that many of Cook's jokes ("I am Windextor"/talking-swordfighting Monkey/attacked by flying horses) are pretty much the definition of surrealist humor. What was wrong with that? It is my opinion that this particular aspect of Cook is what differentiates him from other "observational" comics and makes him so popular. Of course, I would not include my opinion on the main page; but the simple idea that Cook uses surrealism is no opinion, but a readily apparent fact.BeRose (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeRose (talk • contribs) 19:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you on that point, but if it's such an apparent fact, then it should be easily verifiable with reliable sources, otherwise it's just original research. Wisdom89 (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

A quick google search turns up a lot of passing references to him being "surreal," but no sources I'd consider "reliable." Perhaps I just don't know where to look.BeRose (talk) 01:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A-cleanin'

I took a pass at cleaning up the article, mostly turning the timeline into the semblance of an article section. Anyone feel like polishing some more and seeing if it can get to the point where we can remove the tags at the top? I've done as much as I feel like doing. Maybe some of the fact-tags can be replaced with citations as well? I know almost nothing about Dane Cook, so I'm not terribly inclined to delve into this much. I'd be nice to get this up to B class or whatever. At least out of cleanup mode. -R. fiend (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Emo Philips

The joke was not "originally done by Emo Philips" - the Rolling Stone writer claims that the joke is similar to Emo's style. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.215.221 (talk) 09:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)