Talk:Jason Earles

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 WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Birthday

If Jason Graduated from college in 2000, wouldnt that typically put a person around 30 years old, i am just saying —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyefor (talk • contribs) 19:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not saying I have any idea what his correct age is, but not only does 1977 seem too early a year of birth, so does 1985. I am thinking 1987-1989 somewhere. Hallpriest9(Talk|Archive) 04:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Why? I think 22 year olds can pass for a teenager! I can! 1985 people are 22 or 21 depending on the month of birth.
...I was born in '84 but people always think I'm much younger than I am. --Punkymonkey987 22:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

If you look on imdb, it says he graduated in 1995, is married and is 31!!! Also he is only 5"3 lol!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by H3VVii3 (talk • contribs) 10:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

When I first heard that Jason Earles was around 30, i was in complete shock! in the hit show, [Hannah Montana] he is probably supposed to be around 17 or 18 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.230.134.132 (talk • contribs) (20:59, 1 July 2007)

This is crazy if he would be 30 then shouldn't he look older.I think he is 30 but he must have some kind of disease because I don't think he is growing properly.PMM loves you

Tv.com says his birthday is 1985, but IMDB says his birthday is 1977. What is his real b-day? --GeorgeMoneyTalk  Contribs 22:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe his birthday is April 26, 1977. To me imdb is more reliable. --Mward87
I believe IMDB is more reliable too. --GeorgeMoneyTalk  Contribs 03:48, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I think 1985...I mean, he plays a 15 year old boy!- Hill03

His Birthday is April 26, 1985

On Hannah Montana, he looks much too young to have been born in 1977. - P&G

Check out his resume` - http://www.entalent.com/jason_earles.htm It says his birthday is April 26, 1985 --72.148.209.49

Actors' birthdates are regularly fudged by their agencies to expand the roles they can play. Since Earles is young-looking, by lowering his age on his résumé, he doesn't get overlooked for college and teen parts.--Rcharman 23:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

OK. Someone changed the birth place to San Diego. There is a Jason Earles who was born APril 26, 1977 in San Diego. So - basically - either he was born in San Diego in 1977, or he was born in Tennesse in 1985, because the California records don't pick up any other Jason Earles'. Mad Jack 01:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Definately Tennesse 1985 -- have you heard his accent!? --72.148.209.49 14:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Among the accents Earles lists on his résumé is "Southern". It's a trained accent.--Rcharman 23:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

His IMDB.com birthdate of 1977 is correct. I was able to confirm this, and once I figure out how to do the change on wikipedia, I'll do it. I want to make sure people don't think I'm submitting false information and revert it. --Doomstars 17:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Right - did you see the birth certificate at Ancestry.com or somewhere? That's what I saw. It had a Jason Earles, 77 - same exact date - in San Diego. They don't track Tennessee, though, but I suppose this is the same Earles anyway. Mad Jack 05:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't know about that, but I do know this. (Excuse any poor grammar in the following.) I looked up one of his castmates' official sites. On that castmate's official site, there was a way to contact that castmate's official fan club. The fan club (not Jason Earles') was able to confirm his age is basically correct. I think I asked if he was around 28 years old, despite how I think he's 29, if I did the math correctly.--Doomstars 06:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone needs to do something about the birth year vandalism. I was able to confirm he was born in 1977. Like I said above, I looked up one of his classmates' official sites. I went to that official site and contacted the official site's official fan club. They confirmed IMDB.com's birth year of 1977 is correct. I'm going to ask permission if I may mention the source specifically.Doomstars 17 July 2006

In my opinion, the year that he was born is in 1977. As I checked information about him on internet, 1977 was correct. But some editor has edited his birthyear as 1985 which is not correct. Therefore, Please, Do not change the his birthyear so that otherone could not be confused. As they mentioned above. *~Daniel~* ☎ 06:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Once Again, Please I would suggest you look on his official Sites. *~Daniel~* ☎ 06:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Someone needs to officially change the date to 1977. Someone keeps changing the date back to 1985 and threatening to block someone if they change it back to 1977. Tennisjockster 22 July 2006

I was able to confirm Jason Earle's 1977 birth year by way of Billy Ray Cyrus Spirit. That is my source.--Doomstars 04:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Billy Ray Cyrus Spirit is the source I used to confirm it. I did not mention how I retrieved the information. A Google search will show that Billy Ray Cyrus Spirit is Billy Ray's official fan club. I am told not to give out more information on this matter.--Doomstars 08:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

There is no info on Billy Ray Cyrus Spirit, about Jason Earles's B-Day.--Chrisstilwell 04:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)chrisstilwell

Told not to? Is it because your source is wrong, or that you have no idea what you are talking about?--Chrisstilwell 18:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Chrisstilwell, I presume you were the one who added the Ancestry.com source that I just reverted. Ancestry.com has the following record for the only Jason Earles born in California - ever: "View Record Jason D Earles 26 Apr 1977 Male Obrien San Diego" O'Brien is his mother's maiden name. Mad Jack 05:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The picture I put in the link had a Jason Earles born in San Diego in 1985. I'm changing it back. Please do not change it back again!--Chrisstilwell 05:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm tired of fighting this. If you people want to have him have the wrong birthdate of 1977, then go right ahead, it's no skin off my nose. I for sure know he was born in 1985. And if I ever get an e-mail back from his agency company, then I willlet you all know.--Chrisstilwell 05:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

If you're citing Ancestry.com as a source, it says 1977! The image you scanned doesn't have a birth date. Mad Jack 06:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
You can see a free version of the birth records here, just search for Jason Earles: [1] Mad Jack 06:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

TV.com says Jason Earles was born in 1985. I believe it would impossible for a person who is nearly 30 to play a 16 year old. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsm500 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

TV.com is one of the least reliable in general, though it may be correct in this case. IMDb is not much better than TV.com, and it could easily be incorrect in this case. You have multiple conflicting sources. One solution is to list both numbers, and say 1977 or 1985 according to various sources. This alerts readers that various sources are conflicting - you might even want to make up footnotes to list all the variations, as is done at Brooke Hogan. Gimmetrow 00:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Tv.com now has his birth year listed as 1977. WAVY 10 14:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I have to go with IMdB on this one. Everytime I look people up it is always right! So I say Jason is 30. I just can't believe he looks so young! It just doesn't seem possibe for him to look that young! User:Dicetiny 7:27, February 2007

On Hannah Montana, he looks barely twenty, in fact not much older than Miley Cyrus, who is only fourteen years old. Hallpriest9 20:24, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I worked at Ralphs (#752 in Ontario, CA) in the summer of 2006 at which Mr. Earles had shopped; We carded him when he used his credit card as form of payment and I can confirm his year of birth is indeed 1977. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.58.126 (talk) 09:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately nobody else can independently verify what you report so it can't be used in the article. --NrDg 13:35, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Footnote on 1977/1985

A footnote was created to discuss the 1977 vs. 1985 issue. The footnote says that familytreelegends says 1977. I checked that, and it does. Please do not edit the footnote to say that this source says something it doesn't. It's fine to discuss which number should be in the main text, or how the footnote should be worded to explain why different sources have different numbers, or why some source or another may be doubtful or misinterpreted. This may change if other sources come to light. But that source X said Y (on date Z) is a fact. Gimmetrow 01:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, it said in places that he was born in 1985. Just change it back to 1977 if you wish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.34.18.151 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Does he really look like a man in his late 30s!?!?! I mean, he does play a 15/16 year old boy!!! --72.148.209.49 19:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Late 20s you mean. While it seems exceptional, it's not impossible. I think it's relevant to have the discrepancy alerted to readers. The primary text could say "1977 or 1985" with the footnote, but so far nobody has actually argued for that. Gimmetrow 21:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
OK, nobody else has argued for this, but I am tired of the repeated changes and the people saying "but haven't you looked at TV.com". Thus I made a footnote which acknowledges all the trivia sites that people keep bringing up. The discerning reader should be able to understand that the only neutral, independent, 3rd-party source is familytreelegends. Gimmetrow 16:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah but it now says "His resume at entalent.com gives 1985, as does a TV.com profile. However, IMDb and TVRage.com list 1977". As if his resume is as reliable a source as TV.com! And then IMDB and TVRage as if those are a stark shocking contrast to TV.com. The fact is these trivia sites get a ton of stuff wrong, and I don't see the encyclopedic value of noting every one of those and saying they are wrong. You'd have a page full of footnotes like that. It's like citing a message board. Wikipedia should only acknowledge reputable sources and, indeed, only the mistakes of reputable sources. The only data useful or usable to us is A. his birth certificate and B. the agency. Anyway, I am probably not able to under 3rr to revert right now, but as soon as I am I will remove those bits. I have been fighting a long-time battle against these third-hand websites here on Wikipedia, which for the most part has resulted in better sources and more accurate information, and I don't want them given any legitimacy to, especially not as sources in a case like this. Mad Jack 16:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, rather than fight about this, how do we work out a good phrasing. Note that the footnote form you want to revert to was written by me. The problem I'm trying to address is stated above. Gimmetrow 16:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Well I suppose the problem you're pointing to is that people say "TV.com says this", etc. but surely these people realize that a birth certificate and his agency are more reliable sources (and of course, TV.com doesn't mention a third date or anything) Mad Jack 17:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately, a lot of people have no idea what a "reliable" source is. And they disregard WP because "those idiots can't even get this right" when "all they have to do is look at TV.com." It seems to me that a lengthy footnoting saying "yes, we looked at TV.com, and also six other sources, and this is what we found" might illustrate something about the reliability of these various sites, the fact that they give no evidence for their stats, and suggest how to weigh conflicting information. I see we've had some vandalism again despite the info in the footnote.... How is the footnote now? Gimmetrow 19:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, the footnote now is perfect, thank you. I think the bottom line is, people are going to revert it to 1985 or whatever no matter what the note says - i.e. these are probably the same people who say "TV.com says". TV.com doesn't come up that high in Googles matches, usually below us. IMDB comes up in front of us, most of the time (although in one case I know, Alex Pettyfer, Wikipedia has been the #1 match with IMDB at #3 - but I'm getting off topic). Mad Jack 20:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
See, no need to approach 3RR over this. Now, how could one characterize trivia sites without calling them such in the article? I have other articles involving the same idea. Here, I would still like something in the footnote which says, more or less: "various trivia sites such as TV.com, IMDb and TVRage copy one or the other primary source." Gimmetrow 00:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm..... is "second-hand sources" a bad way to refer to them? Mad Jack 06:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


I think his birthday is April 26 1977. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.246.118 (talk) 23:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] is jason really of 29?

I go to Glencoe High School. I was looking through the old yearbooks and saw his senior picture in the '95 edition. He is 29. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.111.123.14 (talk • contribs) 01:39PM July 1, 2007

he looks too young to be of 29 years old i think there's some mistake in this encyclopaedia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nawazish (talk • contribs) 07:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Found a Star Telegram article [[2]] confirming Jason is 19 (that's more practical aswell) and cited that his imbd is incorrect. - Natasha1994 12:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
That link doesn't work. However, see this recent USA Today article which refers to "Hannah co-star Jason Earles, 29". Gimmetrow 15:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I have that article posted on the Talk:Miley Cyrus page. (See the "Is Miley a Christian Musician" section) WAVY 10 13:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank God the year or birth was FINALLY resolved! 205.244.107.198 01:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Is anything really "resolved" on a wiki? WP reports what other reliable sources say, and the fact is these have conflicting accounts. No particular source is clearly definitive, not the USA today article, not his official resume, and not IMDb. Gimmetrow 02:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Just because he plays a teenager doesn't mean that he is one or even close to one. Look at 90210, half the cast was almost 30 when it was on the air. The "hot guy" in 16 Candles with Molly Ringwald was in his late 20s. It's called acting. Missjessica254 16:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Weblink showing dob 4/26/77: http://www.nndb.com/people/725/000129338/ Also shows his high school graduation year of 1995 Is this proof enough to have just the date of '77 listed? Missjessica254 16:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Not on the basis of nndb. Would you take that page as a definitive statement? Gimmetrow 19:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't really know what the site is other than some type of search engine. Found it by googling him. If not reputable, no biggie. Missjessica254 14:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course he is 30, the people who produce the show want the kiddies to believe otherwise, for some god-forsaken reason —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.166.124 (talk) 19:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] California Birth Index

There is a weird sense of irony here, as I originally got involved with this article in support of the 1977 date, but I question the notion that CBI is reliable enough to suppress contrary info. The CBI is a database. It's usually a reasonable step to say the name in the database corresponds to the person in question, that the database accurately reflects the birth certificate, and the birth certificate gives the birthdate. However, in this case we have the subject's resume giving 1985, and the subject himself in a separate reliable source stating explicitly that he was not born in 1977. While these statements may be self-serving, I don't see how a database of unknown reliability is supposed to "end-all". Similar databases have *my* birthdate wrong, so while I think they pass WP:RS, they are not high in my scale of reliability. Gimmetrow 17:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions

A couple ideas regarding the 1977/1985 issue:

  • It may be fitting to categorize the article into (or a category concerning disputed years of birth if one exists).
  • Alternatively, while I don't know what type of dispute Wikipedians talk a lot about, but it may be fitting to protect the page.

Hallpriest9 (Talk | Archive) 03:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BirthDatabase.com and Other Evidence: Jason was born April 26, 1977

June 16, 2007

Every credible piece of evidence -- and there's LOTS of it -- says that Jason was born on April 26, 1977. The only info which says he was born in 1985 is the LEAST reliable document one can find: an entertainer's resume! Please read on and then I hope whomever is in charge here will officially change the article to reflect the true DOB of 4/26/77. All I ask is that you read what I have to say then do your own online research to verify that what I'm saying is completely accurate. How much more evidence do you need simply to put someone's DOB in a Wiki article?! Let's end the debate. The evidence is overwhelming. Thanks!...

Has anyone checked www.birthdatabase.com? It lists Jason D. Earles born April 26, 1977, but with a city/state of Cornelius, Oregon. This site is extremely accurate. The site obtains its information directly from available government records. It does not have listings for every person in the U.S. since it only checks certain goverment documents, but I've used the site for many years and it's NEVER given an incorrect DOB for any people whose birthdays I already knew. And I've looked up hundreds of people. I'm not sure if this direct link will work to his listing on the site: http://74.208.10.11/cgi-bin/query.pl?textfield=jason&textfield2=earles&age=25 ... The site asks for an estimated age (just in case there are lots of people with that name) and I put 25. But there are only two results anyway.

After I did the Birthdatabase.com check, I confirmed through many sources on a Google search that Jason did in fact live in Portland, Oregon area and graduated in 1995 from Glencoe High School in Hillsboro, Oregon. You can call Glencoe High School at 503-844-1900 to verify that it's "our" Jason. I also checked Google Maps and also confirmed that Cornelius is a suburb of Portland, and Hillsboro is three miles East of Cornelius. Bullseye! A lot of the info I found says that Jason was born in San Diego, then his family moved to Washington (the state), Montana, and then Oregon. It all fits like a puzzle!

Now that you have this info, search for yourself and you'll see that "our" Jason is surely 30 years old (today is 6/16/07). The claimed DOB of April 26, 1977 must be correct. There are way too many reliable sources that list it, and very few that show 1985. So whoever is in charge of this page should make it official in the article.

By the way, I want to make one comment about the 1985 birth year on Jason's resume. I can tell you with certainty that MANY entertainers change their age on their resume so that they can get work. There have been many stories written over the years about this. One of the most notorious was about Irene Cara, the woman who sang the hit song Fame. Her real name is Irene Escalera. There were articles in the biggest newspapers in the country about how she's listed her age with many different birth years. And many entertainers were interveiwed for the various articles, most of whom revealed that a lot of famous people lie about their age for various reasons, but mostly because it helps them get work, particularly when their young enough to pass for someone younger as in Jason's case where he's 30 but could pass for 16. This is especially true for adults who could play kid roles. Producers love using older actors who can pass as kids because they're more mature and responsible, and especially because there are no work restrictions or requirements to have a tutor or parents on set, etc. There was an actress around 30 who got a guest starring role as a teen on Dawson's Creek. She did the whole talk show circuit to talk about how she fooled everyone, and about how there are many others who have done it. The bottom line is this: don't ever use an entertainer's resume as evidence of their true age. It is probably the LEAST accurate document one can use to verify a famous person's age.

Here's a great current example for you of an adult actor who plays a kid on TV. Rami Malek, who played Kenny, the gay teen on The War at Home on FOX. He is now 36 years old and he played a 15 and 16-year-old high school kid on the show when he was 34 and 35! I've checked all the very reliable databases and they all confirm his DOB as September 14, 1970. Check Birthdatabase.com and see for yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.61.119.84 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 16 June 2007

Unless I'm mistaken, the article says 1977, or another year. Information is not being suppressed. However, there are reliable sources, other than the resume, which give other dates, such as two Star-Telegram articles "Hannah Montana stars handle fame" and "Miley's moment". The latter article expliclty states 1977 is wrong. Of course entertainers fudge ages and it's legit to suspect self-serving statements here, but given conflicting reliable sources, listing both seems prudent, and this has kept the article relatively stable. BTW, birthdatabase.com has my DOB wrong. Gimmetrow 15:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

You obviously have not followed the evidence I provided because it would have made it abundantly clear to you that Jason was born in 1977. First of all, the resume is not reliable in the least ("...there are reliable sources, other than the resume..."). It's completely unreliable. It was created by Jason's handlers and approved by Jason himself. In any case, the slam dunk evidence is the Oregon connections. The timing is right on the money, and it ties directly to his social security info and many biographical documents which confirm he went to high school there and graduated in 1995. If he was born in 1977, then the '95 grad date fits perfectly. Multiple confirmed former Glencoe students have stated that he graduated there in '95. I've used that Birthdatabase for years and it's never once had the wrong DOB for anyone I know. Any person who read what I wrote, followed the research, and called the high school (which I know you could not have done), will determine without question that what I'm saying is correct and that Jason was born in 1977. I'd win my case in front of any jury in the land. Interesting how the Wiki article currently states that Jason worked toward a graduate degree, which is true. But anyone knows that one is typically AT LEAST 22 when they're in grad school. How long ago was he taking those classes. A smalltime newspaper "explicitly" saying it ain't so don't make it so. Where's the article (no link provided) and who was the "explicit" source of the information? Obviously, if it was a fellow actor, they'll only know what they were told or respect Jason's wishes and lie about his age. But how about a major, well-respected newspaper like USA Today which published an article that stated, "Says Hannah co-star Jason Earles, 29, who plays Miley's big brother, Jackson..." http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2007-01-10-miley-cyrus_x.htm ... Do you think they pulled Jason's age out of a hat? You're giving a resume and a little newspaper equal credibility to major newspapers and high profile databases which would not survive if they were not typically accurate. And the Oregon info is the icing on the cake. The dude is 30. There's no mystery here. It's obvious for anyone who spends a little time researching it. Unless Glencoe High School has some reason for making up Jason's age. I don't think so! I've looked up hundreds of DOBs for people I know on Birthdatabase and it's been right on ALL of them. Intersting that you say they got yours wrong. Our of curiosity, what is it that you are claiming they got wrong with your DOB?

If you look at Jason's photos with shorter hair and minus the goofy-looking faces he makes, you can see how he looks 30ish and not a teen. http://www.buddytv.com/articles/hannah-montana/profile/jason-earles.aspx

This has all been fun, though. And funny.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.61.119.84 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 16 June 2007

Briefly. I understand where you're coming from, but Wikipedia doesn't do investigative journalism, and can't use sources that must be verified by phone. See Wikipedia:No original research. Gimmetrow 23:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reliable sources

An anon has asserted in edit summary that "plenty reliable sources list 77", but has not chosen to provide any sources. The known reliable sources which address this point are:

  • Databases which say 1977
  • One USA today article which says in passing "Jason Earles, 29"
  • The resume of the subject which says 1985
  • A Star-Telegram article which says Earles is age XX despite IMDb listing 1977.

So this is conflicing reliable sources. If you know of any other reliable sources, please provide them here. IMDb, TV.com, etc. are not reliable sources. The issue here is that having just 1977 in the article is not stable, and having just 1985 in the article is not stable. Listing both is stable, at least in regard to registered users who are aware of Wikipedia policies, including WP:BLP. To put it as simply as possible, if you were a journalist and had to put your name, reputation, and net worth on the line publishing one year or the other, could you do it? Gimmetrow 16:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

A resume is not a reliable source. An official record from a state database is a reliable record. Information appearing in a national newspaper must be confirmed by multiple independent sources, and as such is a reliable record. You have no reliable sources to keep asserting the 85, yet you continue to do so. This isn't difficult to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.113.119.180 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 7 July 2007

On the contrary, a resume is a reliable source for what the subject says. Also, the *only* news source which directly addresses the date of birth says 1977 is wrong. I am emphatically NOT asserting 1985 is correct, but that sources are conflicting. I have listed the known reliable sources above. You have been asked to provide any additional reliable sources to justify suppressing information. The databases qualify as reliable sources, yes, but I have addressed above why they are not sufficient to suppress information. Interpreting them is often Wikipedia:Original research. Recall that this article used to give Earles born in Tennessee. Wikipedia is not a place to negotiate truth. Note also that choosing one year and getting it wrong might harm the subject, which is a potential WP:BLP issue, whereas listing both and letting the reader decide is far less damaging. Gimmetrow 20:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I find the evidence that he's 30 to be fairly compelling. However, I do think there are arguments in favor of presenting both sides: (1) reduced revert wars, and (2) the fact that he appears to falsify his age on his resume might be considered noteworthy on its own. I gather that it's a common practice in Hollywood, and it's good to see a detailed and documented example of that. So let's either go with that, or I propose that three or four of us call his friggin' High School for verification, because they would surely know if he had just turned 10 when he graduated in '95. I know that we're concerned with verifiability, not truth, but perhaps truth can at least put an end to these incessant disputes. Poindexter Propellerhead 21:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
P.S. -- Hey, lookie here! He was performing as a member of the Rocky Mountain College theater department in the 2000-2001 academic schoolyear, when he was allegedly 15! Not only can he act, but he was a child prodigy!  ;-) Look soon, before they disappear out of Google cache.[3] Plus there's confirmation from the college that he went there in 2000,[4] and that he lives in Ontario, CA, the same place that Zabasearch says has the Jason D. Earles who is 30. Poindexter Propellerhead 21:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Good, this might be progress. Gimmetrow 22:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm really just an antivandalism editor who happened to pass through as a result of seeing revert wars. So let me tell you what I've got, and I'll leave it to consensus to figure out.
We have data, supposedly confirmed in an unverifiable fashion, that he graduated from Glencoe HS in Oregon in '95. We have unreliable info that he went to Rocky Mountain College in Billings, then later entered (but did not finish) a graduate program in California. Zabasearch has a Jason D. Earles, of Ontario, California, who was born in April '77; it also has an (older) address for Jason D. Earles, born 4/77, from Feb., 2003, which is just over a mile from the campus of Rocky Mountain College in Billings, and a few blocks from Montana State U. RMC confirms that he was a 2000 graduate, and the Billings newspaper (in cache) confirms that he was performing with their drama department then, RMC says that he currently lives in Ontario, Calif., and donates cast-autographed Hannah Montana memorabilia to their fundraising auction. His resume ties him to Glencoe, OR (where he supposedly finished HS in '95), and to Montana Shakespeare in the Park, a production of MSU, as well as to Susan Felder and Joel Jahnke, who were then both drama faculty there. His resume mentions their production of The Tempest and Twlefth Night, which were performed in Summer 2001. His resume also mentions Erik Hendricks (Executive Director of Billings Studio Theater), and Gerry Roe, the head of the drama department at Rocky Mountain College, along with other references to performances in the Billings area. By 2003 he was getting gigs on TV shows like MadTV and The Shield, so was presumably in California at that point.
None of this is conclusive on its own, it's possible that he started his BA program when he was 11, and was playing adult Shakespeare roles, sharing the stage with professionals and university drama faculty, when he was 16. But I find zabasearch's version of reality far more persuasive. Time to look over WP:BLP and see what it says to do in situations like this. Poindexter Propellerhead 02:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Good stuff Poindexter, certainly that has contributed to the overwhelming evidence of he being 30. Again, it's time to put this issue to bed, in light of the lack of credible evidence that says anything other than 1977.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.113.119.180 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 8 July 2007

Yes, PP's contributions have been helpful, because sources were provided—something you might want to think about in any future interactions, 68. Gimmetrow 21:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree that is a plausible scenario, even the most probable one. But we had to piece together all sorts of info and make (reasonable, but not conclusive) inferences to get there, which seems like original research. I've found that when only one year is listed, it gets changed back and forth multiple times a day. (It was particularly bad when imdb had one year and tv.com had the other.) Might be time to expand the footnote more and ask for semiprotection. 02:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

PP, IMDb is not a reliable source, we can't use it for high school graduation info. The RMC publication for college is good, although I don't understand why you've added the Cole Management and Black Tie links as references. Neither appear to say anything relevant. Gimmetrow 21:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Because imdb is not an ideal source, I included the words "said to have." He may or may not have ever attended high school, but we can prove that he was said to have. WP:BLP says that resumes and other self-published material should be considered very unreliable, and avoided for that reason. I suppose we could meet in the middle and throw out both references, but would that be an improvement? Poindexter Propellerhead 21:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
P.S. - Having looked over WP:BLP yet again, I have a proposal.
"Self-published material may never be used in BLPs unless written by the subject him or herself. Subjects may provide material about themselves through press releases, personal websites, or blogs. Material that has been self-published by the subject may be added to the article only if:

[.....]

  • it is not contentious; [.....]
  • there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it."
In this case, it is contentious, and there is doubt as to whether he or his agent wrote it. WP:BLP very much favors throwing out everything which might be contentious if it cannot be convincingly referenced. I'm thinking about how we can give him any birth date while doing so; the usatoday article gives an age, but not a date. Give me a few minutes to think this through... Poindexter Propellerhead 22:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
OK, I now have one reliable source for his age (usatoday), and one for his birthday (ABC). We can use those, and throw out ALL unreliable references. Sound reasonable? I went ahead and asked for a week of semi-protection, per the discussion above. Poindexter Propellerhead 23:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Er, it's a bit of an important point that he presented himself as a different age, and this issue is mentioned elsewhere, such as the Star-Telegram "Miley's Moment".[5] As for the contentiousness of the resume, if this were a situation where someone had falsely claimed a PhD on a resume and was later caught about it, surely we would still report that the person's resume claims such a degree. I also don't really see doubting authorship - he has some responsibility for how his management company portrays him. Gimmetrow 01:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I purposely created an account to weigh in on this. What is the big deal? If he is actually going on 31 this year, how would that be different from several sitcoms way back when of people close to his age were playing teenagers? I can think of one off the top of my head - What's Happening!!!Wfspma (talk) 07:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not a big deal, but some fans object to noting that he might be in his 30s, and kept changing the years around. So in typical Wikipedia fashion, almost the entire discussion page is devoted to this one factoid in the article. Gimmetrow 07:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reliable Sources, next installment

As for "Miley's Moment," I don't really know what to say, except that exceptional claims require exceptional sources. The movie reviewer is not only calling imdb wrong, but it also claiming that Earles is lying on his resume, that he's saying that he's 2-3 years older than he really is. We've got solid primary sourcing for his degree; we get not just his name in the town we believed he lived in at the time, but the fact that he donates autographed Hannah Montana stuff to college fundraisers, so there is no doubt that it's the correct Jason Earles. "Miley's Moment" would make Earles 11 when he got his BA, presumably no more than 7 when he started his freshman year. And I came up with tons of evidence which I can't cite. (Examples: (I made reference to Earles' wife here, but have deleted them for privacy reasons.) He was nominated for a KC/ACTF award for his acting with a professional theater group in Billings, in the role of a middle-aged minister in the play The Crucible -- when he was 10 or 11?) Do we know anything about how well the Fort Worth paper fact checks articles by its movie reviewer? Because I think that claims like that really need some additional sources. The question of whether or not (Earles' wife) did something that's a felony in all 50 states hangs in the balance.

As of right now, we've got 2 sources for his age which have the presumption of reliability: USA Today (30), and the Fort Worth paper's movie reviewer (19-20). I have tried to minimize the issue, because I didn't want to make a big deal out of the bogus age on his resume in a BLP article (and no, we would not report someone lying about a degree on their resume if the story were not covered by major, reliable press), and doing that closed the whole can of worms related to weak sourcing and synthesis, hopefully mitigating the revert wars. But I would like to hear your perspective more completely, I feel like there's still something I'm not getting: why do you feel that the Fort Worth article deserves to be weighted the same as the USA Today article? Why do you prefer the idea of listing multiple ages? Poindexter Propellerhead 21:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Followup: I contacted Robert Philpot, the author of the "Miley's Moment" article, and he said that his source for saying Earles was 19 was a Disney Channel publicist. He did no fact checking, is now convinced that Earles is much older, and is trying to figure out whether there's a way to gracefully publish a correction to a 5 month old article. Poindexter Propellerhead 22:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Interesting investigative journalism, but unverifiable until a correction is published. The relevant point of the Star-Telegram article is not the age, even if it allows for absurd dramatic flair about a "felony in all 50 states". Gimmetrow 19:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, my contact with Philpot is strictly unverifiable OR, and I wouldn't have mentioned it if he hadn't discussed the possibility of doing a correction, which (when I posted) seemed like it was in the works. Then he emailed me a second time, and said that he had emailed the Disney PR person to see if they wanted to change their story, and made it sound as if he might not print a correction if Disney didn't reply with a retraction. I don't have a high degree of confidence that that will happen, I expect that Philpot's unverifiable explanation will be a moot point as far as Wikipedia's concerned. Just another useless thing for the collection.(Here I gave a URL for a picture of Mr. & Mrs. Earles, now removed for privacy reasons)
So, for at least the time being, that brings us back to where we left off. We have a ton of information, most of which is uncontroverted, but most of which is not citable for one reason or another. That doesn't matter for most issues, since nobody's questioning what shows he appeared in, etc. Age is the only significant issue where there's controversy. I'd like to get one thing clear before getting any more procedural about things. Even if the vast majority of evidence that he's 30 cannot be cited in the article, do you believe that he's 30? We favor verifiability over truth, but I'm not asking about verifiability here, just wanting to know what you think the truth is. Poindexter Propellerhead 00:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

To quote my comment on the Miley Cyrus talk page "Is Miley a Christian Musician?" (see archive), "And the people said, 'We are all confused'. Amen." WAVY 10 15:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


This page confirms Jason Earles from Hannah Montana is the same one from Rocky College class of 2000 http://www.rocky.edu/rocky-press/journals/RT9_1.pdf Page 9. 18+4+7=29 years old at the very minimum. Let me know what you think. CashDude 09:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

It's the cite we've been using to show that, see the first sentence of the second paragraph. The second RMC cite is just additional confirmation. Poindexter Propellerhead 09:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Oops, I thought I had found something new!! I'll keep searching. CashDude 23:05, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
What you need to find is some reliable source such as a news article that addresses the age issue in total and makes a conclusion that he is 30 and that Jason is being deliberately disingenuous about it. We could do this, we actually tried doing this, but are strongly prohibited by no original research rules from putting that in an article. Wikipedia wants to be able to put the blame on someone else if there is legal action, thus the rule. It sucks when the facts are so obvious. --NrDg 23:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Irish descent?

Is Earles of Irish descent? He looks Irish and he can do the River dance, but I'm not sure what he is. Can anyone answer my question? --Sylvia 21:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

His mom has a last name that starts with "O'", so it's likely. Beyond that, I've seen no source that actually states his background. Maybe if he gets more famous... Mad Jack 22:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Just because he can river dance, doesn't mean that he's Irish. bibliomaniac15 00:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
In this interview [6], he said he's of Irish decent. Darrik2 20:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

In Hannah Montana he often wears Clothes with Irish symbols like the four-leaf Clover ore the Harp! 85.177.16.110 (talk) 09:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Marriage

I note in the article that Jason is married to Jennifer (Humphrey) Earles with a cite of "Rocky Today; The Magazine of Rocky Mountain College". There is not an explicit statement in that cite that they ARE married. Just the coincidence of the two names appearing together a lot. While it is fairly pursuasive that Jason is married to Jen, this looks like original research. I think we need some authoritative source that made this explicit before we put this fact in the article. --NrDg 21:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm going to agree with you, but not on those grounds, since I think that references to "Jason & Jen (Humphrey) Earles" are reasonably clear in meaning. I had decided that it was unlikely to bother the subject from a privacy perspective, since Jen maintains an active web presence where she posts all sorts of family material. And I thought maybe it would prevent a few unreferenced age edits by 12 year old girls with crushes. But I did some more digging, to see whether his marital status was in any way disputed, and found that Jason's public comments have been less than fully forthcoming; he has denied that he's single, and said that he's in a very serious relationship, but also suggested that he has a "girlfriend."[7] This makes me think that his agent and/or Disney are leaning on him to project an image which differs somewhat from reality. For this reason, I'm comfortable with taking her back out of the article on BLP privacy grounds; I don't want some Disney spin person to go ballistic on Jason. Poindexter Propellerhead 23:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


Yes, Jason IS married to Jennifer. I have met them before and, yes, they ARE married. But they had been married recently and secretly.: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.177.1.132 (talk) 02:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Should Age Be in Article

It is obvious that Jason does not want his real age to be known as it looks like he believes that knowledge will harm him professionally. Current newspaper articles featuring Jason such as Chicago Sun-Times July 23, 2007 explicitely state he is 19. This newspaper would normally be a reliable source but the article likely got its information from a Disney press release. Still getting a major newspaper to go with the age 19 fact is significant. I suggest that from a WP:BLP perspective we drop all references to his real age as it has been demonstrated that Jason does not want that information published. This might also stop the edit war of people continually "fixing" his birth year although that is a secondary consideration. --NrDg 13:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I had felt quite clear on what Disney wanted people to think (19), and what his agent wanted prospective employers to assume (22), but had been kind of mystified as to what Jason's thoughts were, since he himself has never said anything on the subject, aside from a very oblique reference to Michael J. Fox as his role model (who was 29 in his last "Back to the Future" movie). So I emailed his younger brother (via a socially-oriented address) and asked him what Jason's thoughts on the whole thing were. That was almost 2 weeks ago; he did log onto that account a few days ago, but no reply so far. Does anyone think it would be a bad idea for me to send a short message to his wife inviting either or both of them to log on, verify their identity and have their say? A number of BLP articles I've worked on have had input from the subject of the article, so it seemed to me that it might not be inappropriate to invite such participation, particularly where there are questions about what the subject wants said about them. Poindexter Propellerhead 23:04, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't know how Jason COULD respond. Right now he can sort of claim plausible deniability about the whole issue. I serves him no purpose to comment one way or the other on this issue so I don't expect a response. If I were him, I'd not get involved and let Disney plant seeds of doubt everywhere to keep the age issue fuzzy if that is his goal. I don't think it would be a good idea to put his wife and brother on the spot in a way that might undermine what Jason is trying to accomplish. If they talk to you privately it may give you a better idea of how to proceed but we couldn't state any of that in the article.
I'm thinking of this as an original research issue as well. We have lots of conflicting secondary sources and one primary source. We are not supposed to be synthesizing information. The wiki recommendation seems be in case of sources conflict to just note the sources and let the reader make conclusions. In this case would we could just state that, in a note, that references conflict and not conclude an age. It WOULD be proper, if we could reference some reputable secondary source that has done the synthesis and concluded he is 30. --NrDg 23:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Um, that's what this article had for about a year - a note explaining that different sources gave different ages. But some people don't like that. Gimmetrow 23:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I have no problem with listing multiple dates per se, the article has at all recent times listed all 3 of the claims that have been made about his age in either reliable sources or in possibly self-published sources. The only thing I'd have a problem with would be putting our seal of approval on data which we're pretty sure is false. (In the Age fabrication article we seem to have no qualms about outing around 100 public figures who have had tales told about their age, most of whom are living, but Jason Earles seems to cause more headaches than all of them put together.)
The problem, as it see it, is that we have ample data which shows that he is 30, but most of it can't be cited in the article because it would be OR. A few weeks ago I edited several things out of the article along those lines: his birth record with the State of California, age 30 in zabasearch, and so on. And those were barely the tip of the iceberg, so it's not as if the facts were unclear. What is unclear is how we deal with age fabrication which isn't decisively documented. We value verifiability over truth, but we also say that zero information is preferable to false or misleading information.[8] So, a few minutes ago, I deleted his age out of the article, and replaced it with discussion under the "Age" heading.
If we cannot tell his actual age in the article, then so be it, he can go ageless. I just don't want us knowingly publishing misleading data. Poindexter Propellerhead 00:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I conclude we can't tell his age in the article as we have conflicting usable secondary sources and primary sources that don't tie Jason to the data except by inference; however strong that inference is it is still a conclusion we are making. I include the college cite as a primary source. Conclusion - drop year of birth as has already been done and leave it that way. I suggest listing just two sources in the age section, I prefer the Chicago Sun-Times for 19 as one and USA Today for 30 as the other. Other cites are superfluous to the point. If we can find a secondary source for 22 include it too. We just need to work on wording the age section to a neutral point of view. This also addressed my WP:BLP concern. --NrDg 00:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I did an edit including the above. Still needs to be cleaned up, but I think it should be acceptable. --NrDg 01:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Heh, I seem to have awoken a sleeping Disney publicist with my email to that journalist in Fort Worth; not only is there the new Sun-Times article, but there's also an article from July 17 in the Houston paper saying that he's 19.Houston Chronicle July 17, 2007 Considering that his birthday of April 26 is undisputed, and that he himself says that he's a Taurus (April 21-May 21),[9] there is some serious Magic Kingdom mojo going into making him 19 despite passage of his birthday.
I'm OK with the cites in question, although I don't want to eliminate the 1985 one without input from Gimmetrow, who has in the past thought it important to include the date given by his resume. Poindexter Propellerhead 01:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I prefer the Houston Chronicle cite over the Chicago Sun-Times cite as it is specifically an article about Jason as opposed to an article about an event that Jason attended. I don't have a problem keeping the 1985 cite, just thought it looked too "self published" is all but it does reflect something Jason would likely have to approve or know about so should be usable as a reference. I left content in the article, just commented stuff out so should be easy to restore. --NrDg 01:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
New edit looks good and I like how the information is included in the intro paragraph. Still need to do some cleanup but we should let it be for a bit to see what other people want to do. --NrDg 01:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Glad you like it! I changed the Chicago cite to the Houston one as per your preference, and will leave it alone (other than protecting it from unsourced changes, as usual) until we hear from others. Poindexter Propellerhead 02:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Kind of odd, really, because you don't see too many male actors trying to "fudge" their age downward. WAVY 10 15:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Separate Section on DOB Issue

Should we create a separate section reserved for the debate over his birth year? WAVY 10 16:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

We don't want a debate in the article. This article has been stable for about a week on this issue. We are not supposed to be doing original research in articles and choosing which of the multiple conflicting secondary references would be original research. I think the way the article is right now states the facts as known and lets the reader make the conclusions. As to formating the information, I don't think we should change it in a way to highlight the issue. That is sort of pushing a point of view by way of emphasis and I don't feel right about doing that. --NrDg 16:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, there's really no debate, he's 30. For reasons related to the biographies of living persons and original research we shouldn't say that he's 30, but we also can't say anything false or deceptive. The article, as it now stands, is our best effort at balancing the two. Poindexter Propellerhead 10:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
That is the point of referencing secondary sources - we are truthfully reporting what they say, WE are not saying anything false or deceptive. We do say enough that it is fairly obvious that they all can't be right and the reader can determine the truth without us having to evaluate the sources and make that conclusion for him. The reader is also free to make any other conclusions the facts we present to him lead him to. --NrDg 12:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protection request

Just requested protection on this page. WAVY 10 22:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


The only thing for certian, is that the internet is the biggest source of misinformation in the world. And eventually it will be addressed in one of his interviews. Until than nothing should be stated for certain. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tmgdfsm (talk • contribs) 06:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC).

[edit] A Pup Named Scooby Doo- Major Motion Picture

please add that jason earles is in A Pup Named Scooby Doo- Major Motion Picture in 2008 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.74.168.207 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC).

Can't add anything without something other than your say-so. Where is this mentioned? If you have a good reference we can put it in the article. --NrDg 19:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
It says it under A Pup Named Scooby Doo: The Motion Picture, the wikipedia article thank you very much —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.74.168.207 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC).
There is no movie being planned. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Pup Named Scooby-Doo: The Motion Picture. This movie article is a hoax and the actors listed are not supported by anything. I have initiated an AfD process to delete the article. --NrDg 19:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Article was deleted. --NrDg 16:03, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Now Disney says he's 30!

Or at least a writer for a Disney contractor does. http://www.mickeynews.com/News/DisplayPressRelease.asp_Q_id_E_9117Casting Will wonders never cease? Poindexter Propellerhead 02:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Mickey News is a Disney fan site, not part of Disney see http://www.mickeynews.com/Other/AboutUs.asp. They are just reprinting an article http://www.buddytv.com/articles/the-suite-life-of-zack-and-cody/disney-vs-nickelodeon-age-appr-10543.aspx from Buddytv.com written by Gina Scarpa, BuddyTV Staff Writer. Disney is thus not saying he's 30, Buddy TV is. I think the references we have in the article right now are better sources than Buddy TV so I don't think we should change the article based on what they have written. For all we know Gina Scarpa might have gotten her info from here. --NrDg 03:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


I am a distant relative of Jason (his cousin's aunt's brother's godfather's niece's daughter) and i know for a fact that he is definitely 31 years old! He came to the family reunion and i asked him to clear up the rumors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.245.65.242 (talk) 14:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)