Talk:Rob Reiner

Can we decide on a lead image before an edit war happens. Here are probably the most viable options.

• 
  A - During his most well known role (1973)
• 
  B (2016)
• 
  C (2013)
• 
  D (2016)
• 
  E - Currently nominated for deletion (1970) (note added by Funcrunch)
• 
  F (2025) (added by Funcrunch)
• 
  G (1971) (added by Minermatt122514)

Executive20000 (talk) 04:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

could you reduce the size manually, it's filling up my screen and making it hard for me to edit jolielover♥talk 04:07, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I vote for Image A, it is the second-best quality after D, but I'm not fond of D as it is not a clear, unobstructed view of his face like A is. The fact that his head is tilted, and his lower half of body is blocked, make me not want to pick D. jolielover♥talk 04:14, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I have added a fifth image for anyone to consider. Executive20000 (talk) 04:36, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Image E, higher quality than Image A, pretty much perfect. jolielover♥talk 04:41, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Image B as the highest quality most recent colour image, or Image E as the highest quality image overall, despite age and B&W image. - Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 04:48, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't think the photo (E) of him is best for notability as a lead picture. He's 23 years old, this is even before All in the Family, and with his distinguished career as a director, I think photo B is better served here. ~2025-39885-95 (talk) 04:51, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. Photo B makes more sense as the lead image, in my opinion. ~2025-40616-72 (talk) 04:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Even if it's before his distinguished career, I still think it's best for the quality. And I know this is treading the line of sentimentality, but B&W feels appropriate, no? Michael Jackson has a B&W image in the lead. jolielover♥talk 04:57, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. Twistybrastrap (talk) 23:02, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Image B or C. I don't really see much of a reason to change it. ~2025-40616-72 (talk) 04:52, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Image B or C. E makes no sense at all ~2025-39885-95 (talk) 05:09, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

agree, image-F could work but I see nothing wrong with current photograph. PeachyBum07 (talk) 07:07, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

I personally like image A or E Agnieszka653 (talk) 05:11, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I say change it back to a recent one. being old is not bad and this tendency to change people's images to a younger one as soon as they die looks ghoulish. LamentForIcarus (talk) 06:41, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose E and A. He is best known for his directing and later work as a “personality”.

Support B, looks exactly like my mental image of him Mikewem (talk) 21:14, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Support E - his face is better known from All in the Family. Number one show every week for five years straight. Kire1975 (talk) 21:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

F might be better than B. Higher resolution, the Spinal Tap hat is a nice touch Mikewem (talk) 01:43, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

The lead image should be image C. Candidyeoman55 (talk) 23:33, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Image E per trend. If it gets deleted however, I advise Image C based on both time and resolution. GuyMan529 (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I have added a seventh image Option G. This also depicts him when he became mainstream, but there are no copyright issues. Minermatt122514 (talk) 18:51, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Image B. It’s high quality, in color, face-on, plus it’s relatively recent and reflects the individual's image better. Phoeromones (talk) 21:20, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

To add my own opinion as the proprietor of this discussion, I think that the newly added Image G, which has proof of being taken before 1978 to qualify for the public domain, is a PERFECT image as it is during Reiner’s role as Meathead Stivic. Executive20000 (talk) 05:14, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Image B - I do think image-B has the most relative image when thinking about Reiner and it it was recent enough to give a good idea of what he looked like, I do understand he might have been more "famous" in his early career but I don't think he had enough drop-off and was still relevant in his older age for the most common readers purposes. MaximusEditor (talk) 18:36, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I think the original image was fine. I feel like if we're going for notability here, Rob Reiner is probably known more globally as a director. Also helps that this photo includes him with a Spinal Tap hat, which is one of his most well known works as a director.

• 
  Rob Reiner at SDCC in 2025.

-K-popguardian (talk) 05:13, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I prefer the photo from the same event currently used in the Filmography section, as he's smiling and looking to the left (toward the page content.)

• 
  Reiner at the 2025 San Diego Comic-Con

Funcrunch (talk) 06:46, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I think that one's perfect. - K-popguardian (talk) 06:58, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I've added it as Option F to the gallery at the top of this section. Funcrunch (talk) 00:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I personally prefer E. When I think of what Rob Reiner looked like, I think of around the time he was on All in the Family. The fact that it's high quality and well framed makes me prefer it slightly more than A. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 07:38, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Option E Depicts Reiner when he first became mainstream and the quality isn't that bad either. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:39, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

What I don't understand is why a person's death even warrants this discussion?

On Friday, when Mr Reiner was still alive, why were people not discussing what better image to use, the current one was fine. Why does the fact that he has died require this change in photo. Option E to me is too obscure, given that his greatest fame as a director not a fledgling actor as that photo depicts. I vote for Photo B and C ~2025-40879-37 (talk) 21:53, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

While someone's alive they prioritize using a recent photo, but once someone dies they try to switch to a photo that best matches the most popular public image of the person, such as during a role they were famous for. When David Lynch died the photo was changed from a current one to one from the 1990 Emmy awards when he was entering the prime of his career. Sometimes that instinct can be overzealous though and the initial attempt at a good pick can be wrong, which is what looks like it was the case for Reiner. ~2025-41032-34 (talk) 07:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I am going with Option G because it also depicts him when he became mainstream, but there are no copyright issues. I would cut out the border if it was used. Minermatt122514 (talk) 18:50, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

His face here is also a little less obscured by his hat & its shadow. Twistybrastrap (talk) 23:01, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

What are we using a picture of him from 55 years ago, for when we have one of him from this past Summer? I mean, come on. CNC33 (. . .talk) 22:39, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely, 100% ~2025-40879-37 (talk) 23:12, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Note: Option E in the gallery at the top of this section has been nominated for deletion. Funcrunch (talk) 00:44, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

• NOTA A and C are low resolution, B and F are low quality (B is blurry as a result of cropping too far, and F has poor lighting which creates a sort of unfocusing effect on his face), D is an odd angle, and E is currently nominated for deletion. Of these, C is the least bad, but do not take that as any sort of endorsement. Are these really the best on offer? Curbon7 (talk) 13:53, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

• 

  Ladies and Gentlemen, I have found this image, how about it? It is in a higher resolution and, to me, perfectly represents the director. I think it is a piece of photographic art. Look at the eyes, how much sorrow and thoughtfulness is there... All the tragic love and life of this man of Art is depicted in this portrait... and the misty and dark blurred background creates such a tragic philosophic feeling, it makes to think of the fate of this creator and the tragedy of life and evil— Preceding unsigned comment added by K. M. Skylark (talk • contribs) 20:30, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Are there any pictures of him in the 80s/90s we can use? The typical custom is to use a picture of the subject in their prime after their passing, and since the 80s/90s is when he directed his most famous works I'd think that would be the best option. Of the Images presented, though, my vote's on G. Thethincontroller (talk) 00:01, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

There is this one, but the quality is not good. Minermatt122514 (talk) 00:45, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Provide some examples of this? Did some surface-level checking and usually the lead image seems to be aimed close to their death, not their prime. Phoeromones (talk) 02:39, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Here are some examples of articles that I know of which do this:

Norman Lear

James Watson

Leonard Nimoy

Sean Connery

Michael Jackson

Ozzy Osbourne

Hulk Hogan

Paul Newman

Elizabeth II

Do you need more, or is this enough? Minermatt122514 (talk) 03:52, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

This is my opinion, but when I think of Rob Reiner the image that comes to mind is of his portrayal of Mike "Meathead" Sivic. His portrayal of the character was so iconic that people called regularly called him "Meathead" in real life. It makes sense for the infobox picture to be of him at the part of his career that is the most iconic. Minermatt122514 (talk) 04:22, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I see it as analogous to Ron Howard as Richie Cunningham on Happy Days. The character is iconic, but for both of them their large body of work as a director has overshadowed their earlier TV work,and they've made numerous public appearances in that capacity over the decades. I suspect the average person off the street nowadays visualizes them more as directors than as TV actors and the main image should reflect that. An image of him as Meathead should certainly be included lower down in the article however. AndyENy (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Option G We should be using an image closer to the subject's appearance at their peak, which is central to their encyclopaedic merit. MB2437 02:38, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

How is Option G even close to Mr. Reiner's peak? He was just 24 years old here, and way before he reached acclaim as a director. I absolutely think this is the wrong image to use as a lead, and I echo what @AndyENy has said. An image of him as director in middle age to later years is better suited.

As an example also, let's think of composer John Williams. Are we really going to use a photo of him at 24 years old, when he passes away? Does that make sense? ~2025-39885-95 (talk) 04:55, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

I also choose Option G UWMKEgypt (talk) 19:28, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• If a suitable image from the 1980s or 1990s can be found, that would be ideal. If we are stuck choosing between 1970s images and 2010s-20s images, the latter is far preferable. His work as a director came to far overshadow his acting. Also, while All in the Family was huge at the time, I can't imagine readers under 50 having much familiarity with Meathead-era Reiner. CAVincent (talk) 05:24, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

  I found 2 pictures on eBay from 1979 and 1982. Neither of them has a copyright notice, and neither of them was ever registered with the copyright office (I did a records search). So, these are public domain and free to use. As far as I can tell, there are no known public domain images of him during his early directing career (1980s-1990s), and there is only 1 Creative Commons image from 1988, which is shown above. However, that one is not great in terms of quality.

  https://www.ebay.com/itm/306290002725?_skw=rob+reiner&itmmeta=01KCQZBSEKVXZWW10R2402W7W5&hash=item47504e8b25:g:oV8AAeSwk3toGwFU

  https://www.ebay.com/itm/306298565986?_skw=rob+reiner+1980s&itmmeta=01KCQYZ6YJ6NACRJPXFVJK22V7&hash=item4750d13562:g:zYUAAeSw3hVoIZlf&itmprp=enc%3AAQAKAAAA0FkggFvd1GGDu0w3yXCmi1c9HoUqmPgv6M%2BNjNeKLRE8tjsqTD5%2BxCmpWcAFHirF4UrCeoh7zx7aV2kYVuAicjsktsLdv3r9k9iZSo%2B9CgRK46eX2%2F9kek9j1GIm8c23hS%2BV3nXjUBKhDqef21d4%2Bxelq%2BATFQT%2FyijNQoUg1kk0DQwMr8Otc1HZNDeO1tRSmOMno1ofIWYsUS74ZUEA8ooEo0IebXbFFePvf%2Bv3F8fprsbtXvFbDwEILoTRUWOlmkA8GwfOtJ5GZ7e1U0hiC2o%3D%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR7zv_P7lZg Minermatt122514 (talk) 06:22, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

  @Minermatt122514 That's not correct (saying that these pictures are in the public domain). A photograph is copyrighted automatically when it is taken, even if it's not registered and does not show a copyright notice. If you can't find a positive declaration that a photo is in the public domain, then it's not. "Freely available on the Internet" is not actually public domain. See WP:COPY which says "Images, photographs, video and sound files, like written works, are subject to copyright. Someone holds the copyright unless the work has explicitly been placed in the public domain." Thanks. David10244 (talk) 15:50, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

  That is how copyright law works for works starting from March 1, 1989. Originally, if you didn't put a copyright notice on your work, it entered the public domain. This was changed somewhat in 1978. From 1978-early 1989, if you didn't put a notice on your work, you had a 5 year grace period where you could still register it with the copyright office to make it copyrighted. I checked these sets of photos. There are no copyright notices and/or filings. Therefore, they are in the public domain.

  Here is a document from the copyright office which explains this: https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ03.pdf Minermatt122514 (talk) 16:38, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I am trying to quell my subjective gut reaction of "well of course an unsettling photo suits him, he's a murderer" because I think it would be valuable to choose a photograph that more clearly highlights that at that time nobody suspected that he had this in him. ~2025-41032-34 (talk) 07:09, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Sort of, see Category:Nick Reiner which has 1 other. There may of course be photos we can use that Commons doesn't currently know about, but if so, someone needs to find them. And put them on Commons. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:00, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Has this picture been touched up with AI or similar? It looks incredibly off.★Trekker (talk) 13:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

His pose looks incredibly normal in the other photo though he's barely visible unless you blow it up. I think the disturbing photo was just taken at the wrong milisecond, though it is foreboding. Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Well, I agree the new photo is not great either. But it is better than the previous one. And as far as "foreboding" goes, that really is not fair. Every photo of a person who is suspected or has committed murder will be overly-scrutinized, since us humans always want to make sense of things that are threatening to life. I think the previous photo was more of a "deer in the headlights" moment than anything else. Still, I like the newer photo where he is avoiding eye contact. This is all truly a tragedy for all. Even Nick Reiner. --Giacomo1968 (talk) 01:38, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

I spent some time looking at this, the image looks fake especially with the weird second hand on Nick's shoulders. But it's a crop of a group photo, with an artificial backdrop, so the shadows and edges are natural and the hand was not a disembodied artifact. No objection to changing to the other photo unless there's something wrong with it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 02:11, 17 December 2025 (UTC).

I have changed to this picture. Still not great, but I think, better. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 23:06, 18 December 2025 (UTC).

It's significantly better. Thank you. Jessamyn (my talk page) 23:41, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you (same IP here). That was the right move. Shame on whoever first undid your change. I've already seen a Twitter/X account (politically motivated to dislike Rob Reiner) using the reinstated wide-eyed picture to make a joke like "if only there was some indication beforehand, huh?". Oh well... I guess it was fated to be this way ~2025-43158-17 (talk) 05:11, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

It appears that the image was reinstated at least once. I had left the old version, commented out, in case there was not consensus here that this was an improvement. I have restored the image on the right, and left a comment requesting that it not be changed without talk page consensus. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:35, 28 December 2025 (UTC).

Early life Reiner was born in The Bronx, New York, the son of Estelle (née Lebost), an actress, and Carl Reiner, a comedian, actor, writer, producer, and director. As a child, Reiner lived in New Rochelle, New York, where his family resided at 48 Bonnie Meadow Road, similar to the fictitious address of 148 Bonnie Meadow Road, as the Petries on The Dick Van Dyke Show, the 1960's CBS sitcom created by his father. (It may not be a coincidence that lead character on that show was named Rob.) When Reiner was about 13, the family moved to the Los Angeles area, where Reiner attended Beverly Hills High School and the University of California, Los Angeles. He also has a sister, Sylvia Anne (Annie) Reiner (b. 1947), who is a poet, playwright and author; and a brother, Lucas Reiner (b. 1960), a painter, actor, and director.

Piñanana (talk) 10:23, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Does anyone have a reliable source for the approximate year when the family moved to LA? It's confirmed that he went to Beverly Hills HS, so obviously moved there before that. Minor point, but a citation whould be nice. Tvoz/talk 22:19, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

To whoever is adding Norman as his middle name: please stop. Even the death certificate I cited in a recent edit to the page does not list a middle name. --~2025-42657-19 (talk) 23:10, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

This is coming from what appears to be a vandalism-only account. I just gave it a third warning. GA-RT-22 (talk) 12:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

It’s very jarring to have the very first thing you see in the Death section be a photo of Nick Reiner. Especially a photo of him at an awards ceremony, and especially an awards ceremony about mental health and substance abuse, which he was known to struggle with, and where he was honored with Rob Reiner for their work on Being Charlie. It feels inappropriate and in very poor taste.

But also, from an information hierarchy perspective it’s confusing. If someone was not familiar with the story or the family, it would be confusing to see a photo of Nick before they even knew Rob was murdered, let alone by his son. The section should start with information about Rob’s death, and then any supporting imagery further down. And a mugshot feels more appropriate than one of him at an event where he’s receiving an award.

But mostly I just don’t understand why a photo of him is needed at all. There is now a whole separate article about the killing of Rob and Michele Reiner. Let Rob’s page be about him, not his killer. Ankusnoo (talk) 09:17, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I agree with you. Moncrief (talk) 00:46, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree that it has to be removed. Nurken (talk) 14:25, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

I have removed the image, given there’s been consensus here and no objections in 2 weeks. Ankusnoo (talk) 15:00, 14 January 2026 (UTC)