Talk:Nicholas Hoult/Archive 1

Sexuality

I think He is gay in real life, their is a rumor going on!

There is! --90.240.242.76 04:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't any person known to the public have a rumour regarding their sexuality going around at some point? Hazzamon 12:34, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It needs citation. I put {{fact}} up by the statement. --TheTallOne 19:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this shouldn't be in the article at all as it appears to be just hearsay. 213.218.228.37 23:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

"Channel 4 have not yet commented if he will be dropped from, Skins, because the news will no doubt effect the way his character is portrayed as a heterosexual, fun-loving teenager." This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard, why would C4 drop or retool his character? Are you saying that Tom Hanks can't have done Philidelphia because he's straight? They're actors for goodness sake. 172.141.171.190 09:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Where's the quotation from? I cannot see a reliable news agency coming out with bigoted crap like that. Of course he won't be dropped. I reckon it's crap anyway, he's probably not even homosexual. 89.213.50.242 21:16, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

unless there is some verifiable source for them, please do not add any claims. this is an attempt at an encyclopaedia remember. Poojean 00:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

For the record, I read in a GAY magazine that he has a girlfriend. 89.213.9.194 00:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Lies. Shamess 09:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Age

Please stop changing Nicholas's age, he is 20, not 17. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Grayfox1988 (talk • contribs)

IMDB says he is born in 1989. http://www.mooviees.com/4065-Nicholas-Hoult/celebrity says he is born in 1989. Greswik 21:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying it's not true (or that it is true), but IMDb is not a reliable source of information, because it is mainly user-edited. I've never before seen the website you linked to, but are we sure that it's not user-edited either, or that it got its information from IMDb? I think that the best way to resolve the situation is for anyone who has access to the Births, Marriages & Deaths Index of England & Wales, 1984-2004 (which is the reference for his birth name) to look him up, confirm the right year, and add a reference to the Index.

(That being said, a cursory Google search yields no results that say he was born in 1986, so unless someone can find a reliable source that says he was, I saw we leave it at 1989 for now.) --DearPrudence 00:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop changing Nicholas's age, I know him personally and the man was 20 years old in december. I will try to find a citation of some sort, if only to appease your inquisitive mind.

It's not because we have "inquisitive minds" that we want it referenced, it's because almost every other source we've seen has his birth year as 1989. We're not doubting you, but this is an encyclopaedia, and so any disputed facts should be proven true before they're put into the article. --DearPrudence 20:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop changing the age, thanks.

In the Blockbuster guest blog he did in 2006, he said ""Harold and Maude" is a very funny film, a comedy about an odd twenty year-old man who falls for an eighty year-old woman. It's very dark humour, but I like that. I love watching the relationship between the two main characters. I'm not ready to date any 80 year olds myself yet though. Maybe in a few years as I'm still only 16." so I think it's safe to say that he was born in 1989.

Right, we have confirmation! Thank you, anonymous poster. I'll change the year back and add the reference ([1]), since it's such a contested topic. --DearPrudence 00:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

That is hardly viable confirmation, sorry.

How? Hoult wrote in a blog in 2006 that he was sixteen; therefore, he was born in 1989. --DearPrudence 20:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

A link to the article would be appreciated, until then i will not accept these unviable manipulations of information.

Here: [2] I linked to it in the article. Look at the entry for July 3rd: "'Harold and Maude' is a very funny film, a comedy about an odd twenty year-old man who falls for an eighty year-old woman. It's very dark humour, but I like that. I love watching the relationship between the two main characters. I'm not ready to date any 80 year olds myself yet though. Maybe in a few years as I'm still only 16!" If he was 16 in mid-2006, then he was definitely born in 1989. --DearPrudence 16:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't provide any decent source of information but he's often about where I live as he's friends with my mate who plays basketball with him (or something like that). He's 17. IMDB is correct. How on earth does anyone claim him to be 20? Hehe. He was tiny in About A Boy in 2002... --Python911 13:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The man is 21 this year, my sister who is at a similar age knows him personally and can verify this. Until you can physically prove that he is in fact, 17, then I will not accept changes to this article.

We DO have proof that he's 17. In an exclusive blog he did for Blockbuster.co.uk, he writes, "'Harold and Maude' is a very funny film, a comedy about an odd twenty year-old man who falls for an eighty year-old woman. It's very dark humour, but I like that. I love watching the relationship between the two main characters. I'm not ready to date any 80 year olds myself yet though. Maybe in a few years as I'm still only 16!" You can find it here in his entry for July 3rd, 2006. If he was 16 in mid-2006, he was definitely born in 1989. If you can provide counter-proof, then go ahead, but until you do, our best bet is keeping it at 1989. --DearPrudence 16:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you leave me no other choice than to fight indefinitely until this injustice stops. I will always restore Nicholas to his rightful age, and stop oppressors such as you from undermining him.

Dearprudence, you're becoming quite the antagonist, please withdraw your comments and curve your behaviour before further disciplinary action is required.

I'm not being antagonistic; I have been as reasonable and polite as possible. To be honest, I don't know that much about Hoult, and I don't doubt you when you say that you know him, but as this is an encyclopaedia, and his age is in great dispute, we need a reference. We already have a dated quote from Hoult himself that implies he was born in 1989; if you can provide counter-proof (with a proper citation), then go ahead and post it, but until you do, that quote from Hoult is the best we have.

It was never my intention to sound antagonistic; I didn't start the dispute over his age, anyway, and am only supporting his being born in 1989 because another (unsigned) poster provided a proper reference. --DearPrudence 17:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I've stumbled upon this from the request for comment page. A quick look at the sources for this article and I see that this reference already in the article implies that Hoult was 12 at the time of the interview in January 2002 which would coincide with a birthdate of 1989. Unless a source can be found which explicitly states the birth date as 1986 I can't see a reason to change it. Stardust8212 18:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing this up! I have added the second reference to the article just to be sure, and hopefully this will end the dispute. --DearPrudence 18:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, i would really appreciate it if this article was locked and rendered uneditable, thanks for contributing useful information, but there are too many vandals changing the age. Who agrees?

Look, this is the final time i will draw attention to this: please stop changing the age, leave it at 1985, or risk the page turning into a farce. It's a far more beneficial option to you.

If you have a reliable source stating the birthdate as 1985 please bring it forward. The current date of birth is sourced from two independent articles and the age will remain as stated there until such time as a different source is presented. Stardust8212 15:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I have already stated that i feel no inclination whatsoever to provide an citation for you or your cult-like followers, nor am i in any way obliged to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.32.135 (talk • contribs)

Erm, okay. --DearPrudence 23:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Political Stance

I've heard from various sources that Nicholas holds strong socialist views, and is exceedinly interested in the study and practice of Marxism. This is affirmed by the information at the top of the page, that his father is indeed, a marxist theorician.

Does anyone know if this is true? I suppose it's wise to assume so until further evidence is provided.

School

Nick does not, and never has, attended The Henley College.

I've heard from numerous reliable sources, a newspaper, close friends etc, that he does indeed go to that college.

Then cite it. If you can't back up a claim with a reliable reference (hearsay does not count), it doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia. --DearPrudence 22:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

How am i supposed to 'cite' it? There is no online evidence of this, and as it is an external fact, there is no possible method of doing so.

I am a student at The Henley College, and I know a lot of the drama department, and I can assure you they would know about it if Nick went to the college. I also know someone who goes to college with him at a DIFFERENT college, in Wokingham I think. But I forget the name of it.

I too am a student at The Henley College, and i am mutually acquainted with Nicholas through a close friend. He studies drama, philosophy and psychology and is a first year, which should clear up your doubts. Please be more thoughtful and empathetic when making statements. Perhaps you should actually ask the drama department for information?

Is this the same personal knowledge that tells you that Hoult is a lesbian, which you also added to the article? -FisherQueen (Talk) 13:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Nicholas is in my Philosophy class at college, he doesn't really speak unless spoken to, and is quite a humble and shy character. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneLane1988 (talk • contribs)

Major

I've noticed alot of vandalism and disruptive editing on this page, something that urgently needs to be rectified. We should leave the page as it is at present, and consider the possibility of it being locked. Who agrees?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.196.238 (talk • contribs)

Well, I agree that you should stop the disruptive editing. Your last edit was not exactly helpful to the article. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Understanding

You people need to understand, wikipedia is a powerful media tool in the shaping of ones public persona, try to comprehend that you are victim to malicious editing by the media at practically all times, and that only becoming an artisan of people like Nick's destiny, can you truly reach piece of mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.196.238 (talk • contribs)

Response to RFC

A quick google shows up that he is in The Guardian 18th January 2007 as being 17. So he is 17. It's verifiable. Even if it isn't true in real life it is true in WP until someone finds a source as reliable as The Guardian that says otherwise. See Guardian article by Hannah Pool. Itsmejudith 22:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that extra reference. I've added it as one last citation for the birthyear - as it's still a somewhat contested point, we might as well keep a few references up, at least for a little while. --DearPrudence 23:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

A very contested point in deed. This calls for a solid citation to backup the ludicrous claims, likewise for the others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneLane1988 (talk • contribs)

If you are implying that we need a solid citation to prove that he was born in 1989, we already have three. And if you believe that he does in fact attend The Henley College, please provide a citation before adding it. We have already come to the conclusion that he does not, but if you have proof that he does, then go ahead. --DearPrudence 16:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Dearprudence, I'd like to inform you that this is an encyclopedia filled with content by means of user input. Consequently, i am a user, and feel that the three citations stated above are not relevant and do not fill my criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneLane1988 (talk • contribs)

By all means, feel free to show your reliable sources, then. -FisherQueen (Talk) 14:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Janelane, your statement is incorrect. Please read the guidelines provided by your fellow editors. You (along with everyone who edits Wikipedia) must abide by Wikipedia's content policies).TheRingess (talk) 17:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I must state that i think that you people are very, very wrong and slightly delusional. I hope you're satisfied with your attempts to block useful, genuine knowledge, and happy that your efforts have deplored frustrated, and to some extent justified, others opinions of you.