Talk:Jimmy Kimmel

@Jonesy1289: re. this edit to an archived discussion which you're not supposed to do. Per WP:TALKCOND, you may unarchive a discussion that has been archived prematurely. This isn't the case here, though. I started a thread on September 19. You didn't respond to my notification, and the stale discussion was archived 30 days later, on October 19. This is Kimmel's article, not Robinson's. Kimmel wasn't talking about Robinson's alleged motives or political leanings, he was talking about MAGA reactions. I've removed the entire sentence as undue. Space4TCatHerder🖖 15:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

@Space4Time3Continuum2x: Apologies for responding to the archived post - I hadn't realised that at the time of responding to it. However, I strongly object to the edit you made for the reasons previously explained. Moreover, the edit as you made it could be interpreted as supporting Kimmel's position, whereas the cited BBC article explains both that the FBI considered it an ongoing investigation AND the comments from the mother. By choosing to only present one element of the cited article, this is adding bias and does not provide the relevant context which made this a controversy. A reader would look at the article as you had it and think Kimmel was entirely justified, whereas the picture was more nuanced, hence the controversy at the time. Your edit is adding bias by selective quoting from the cited article. If you wish to revert again, please put it to a vote, but it seems very clear to me that your edit is selective quoting from the reference and therefore biased and against Wiki policies.