Talk:Louis C.K.

I was a little surprised to see the article say his sexual misconduct had first been reported in Gawker in 2012, and followed the links to find a 2015 article.

I found on following the links that the 2012 article was a blind item that described the allegations without a name but a descriptor that many could have surmised his name from. Then in 2015 they linked that item and named him. I think this is an important distinction and updated that paragraph to be a bit more precise, and with the Wayback Machine version of the 2012 article. Minivet (talk) 19:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, weird. I realize the above flaws were in a very old (2017) version of the page I was looking at, now the whole thing is completely different, but I clicked "edit" from that and for some reason it effectively meant I was reverting to that old version plus my edits. Sorry! Reverted my whole edit, it's not needed. --Minivet (talk) 20:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hi all — I’d like to propose a citation update for the line: “In August 2022, he mentioned that they had broken up.”

The current citation leads to a general episode summary of books mentioned in the episode of Joe Rogan Experience that doesn’t contain or timestamp the relevant quote.

There’s now a more accurate, verifiable primary source available from the same episode, with a timestamped start of the conversation with Louis C.K. mentioning Blanche Gardin as his ex-girlfriend.

Proposed source: “Louis C.K. explains why comedians should completely ignore social media feedback and focus solely on their live audience.”

Joe Rogan Experience #1859 - Louis CK & Joe List, August 2022.
Moment .
Timestamp: 1:09:23 – 01:13:50

Relevant excerpt:

“This is something my ex-girlfriend, who’s very close to me still — Blanche Gardin — she’s a French comedian and she’s very big in France…”

This source directly verifies the claim and takes readers to the precise moment where Louis C.K. makes the statement.

Since it provides the exact timestamped evidence, I’d recommend replacing the existing citation or listing this one alongside it for improved verifiability. Thanks for considering! Memorekt (talk) 23:53, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: The video is already mentioned in the existing source, and you've used the same website in a declined request, which was deemed unreliable. x2step (lets talk 💌) 05:22, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

Understood. In that case, would adding it as a supporting source be appropriate, since it provides the exact timestamp of the quote for verification while the existing citation does not? Memorekt (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

bro why you are obsessed over a 10 second clip of another dude's life. ~2025-34835-18 (talk) 12:49, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

"Boisterous applause" or even just "applause" would suffice. "Boisterous approving applause" is overkill. One or even two too many adjectives there. Brandonlicata (talk) 21:58, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

I changed this. CapitalSasha ~ talk 16:27, 12 December 2025 (UTC)