Talk:Andy Gross

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Andy Gross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203004119/http://www.selectcomedy.com/index.php/Learn-more-about-the-entertainers-we-work-with/andy-gross-bio.html to http://www.selectcomedy.com/index.php/Learn-more-about-the-entertainers-we-work-with/andy-gross-bio.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:27, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Expansion of Purdue performance

To me the recent expansion seemed like far too much coverage and detail for a single event that has apparently little or no lasting impact.

That said, it certainly could be written better, and the references formatted. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 23:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I disagree and plan on reverting back your edit. In hindsight the article may not have required a separate header, but in its current state this article is embarrassing. Your opinion alone, without citing any policies, is very poor justification for reverting my edit, and Wikipedia's own policies agree with this fact.

I'll first explain why the current portion I edited cannot exist in the way you decided to edit it. Your edit has a quotation, that according to the WP:BLP page, "must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source." That is not the case, as not only is your edit a misquote, but in the same sentence violates the neutral point of view requirements. Your edit states that he made "continual sexual harassment jokes," and, aside from the poor wording, I will refer you to the WP:IMPARTIAL policy. To call the jokes explicitly sexually harassing, your edit presents his comments with bias. The students interpreted his actions as being sexually harassing, but as a performer he might argue that it was a part of the act and his comments were not to be taken literally. There was no criminal law violated, so to remove the neutrality in your edit is a clear violation. Finally, reading over your edit, there are still grammatical errors, poorly worded phrases, and general vague descriptions of events where there exist secondary news sources that could provide clarification.

My edit not only addressed these issues, but did so in the manner preferred by Wikipedia's policies on editing. My article provided the correct quote, as well as context behind what was said to avoid any misinterpretation of the events. That edit also clarified that it was the opinion of the students that Gross' actions were sexually harassing, rather than your edit that again violates the neutral point of view. Not only was all of this done following the WP:BLP guidelines, something your edit again violates, but in the reccomend fashion of WP:EDIT. Wikipedia's editing policy explicitly states that "Instead of removing article content that is poorly presented, consider cleaning up the writing." The original edit I modified was poorly worded and formatted, so I made my best effort to provide context where it was left out, along with sourcing where it was required. I suggest you read over the WP:PRESERVE section of the editing policy, as my edit follows the recommended actions.

Andy Gross' actions received national media attention, and deserve to be addressed in detail. Your opinion of what has impact or not is a very poor justification for reverting an entire edit, especially when you consider Wikipedia's policies. There is nothing wrong with providing properly sourced context behind a vaguely written article. Nucleartaco123 (talk) 12:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for joining the discussion.

I cited two core policies, POV and NOT, as well as the supplement WP:EXCESSDETAIL.

Again, I don't think the specific details that you provide matter, per NOTNEWS and WP:EXCESSDETAIL.

While the performance did receive a wide attention at the time, none of the references offered demonstrate any lasting impact. This suggests little mention should be given per POV and NOT.

Rather than focusing on a specific incident in his performance, we should summarize why it's noteworthy and what happened.

I'm not going to edit the article further at this point until we resolve this. However, the material is disputed and should be removed if we cannot find consensus.

I agree that the previous material needed work. I disagree on expanding upon it.

@Nucleartaco123: Please trim back the content and focus on summarizing the incident rather than giving all the details. If you can find references that demonstrate lasting impact of the performance, then we need to reconsider our approach. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 17:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I disagree that removal is the option if consensus can be reached, but I will be more than willing to substantiate my claim that this edit is appropriate. However, I first want to inquire as to why WP:POV has come into play here? I am also curious as to why my edit was disputed with regards to neutrality. Lastly, you keep bringing up the idea of a lasting impact. In your words, what would describe this? Nucleartaco123 (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE is part of POV. I've stating that the expanded version is undue.

WP:NOT issues are addressed through applying POV.

Basically, it's not neutral because of all the problems I've listed.

The performance was in 2018. Gross said he would no longer work college shows immediately afterward. That's lasting impact, and we've included it. It's a year-and-a-half later. What's the lasting impact beyond the immediate news cycle hype that NOTNEWS tells us to avoid working from? --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 17:53, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

The details included by the edit provide context to his decision to stop performing college shows. In addition, if you read the article (reference 5) that addresses his decision to stop doing college shows, it is clearly stated that the parts of his act that I described by providing context have been removed from his show. The date, specific, now removed aspects of his shows, the subsequent protest, and his subsequent response are not unnecessary details that WP:NOTNEWS discusses. These details are not "trivia," they represent the context about why he has made 2 changes to his career as a performer. I made that very clear in my above reply. With regards to WP:UNDUE, no minority opinions were listed. Given the event was "easy to substantiate [] with reference to commonly accepted reference texts," it was given the weight of a "widely supported aspect" that WP:UNDUE states is acceptable.Nucleartaco123 (talk) 18:59, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, we agree that his no longer performing at colleges is important. I'm saying it's the most important aspect because of the clear impact.

At this point, let's just move on assuming there is no other lasting impact.

UNDUE addresses the amount of detail we give. I'm saying we're giving too much.

The students considered it sexual harassment. That's important.

Many students walked out of the performance. That's important too.

As you can see, we agree on much of this. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

We will not move on assuming there is no other lasting impact considering I already gave additional lasting impact in my response. The specific details I listed are specific portions of his future acts that he plans on removing. Considering his acts are an extension of his career, I would certainly consider that to be important and a lasting impact. I also clearly explained why this does not conflict with UNDUE.Nucleartaco123 (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean, and it appears you don't know what I mean. Maybe we just disagree. I specifically mean no other lasting impact beyond the areas with which we agree. If you believe otherwise, the sources don't support it, and you'll have to clearly describe what else is important and why. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 19:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

As previously stated, reference 5 in the article clearly states that that Gross intends to remove the portions outlined by this section from his future performances. That clearly establishes the lasting impact of the specific details I added to this section of the article. Nucleartaco123 (talk) 19:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

It's a quote from Gross' lawyer at that time. That's due little if any weight. We've no later, independent sources verifying that he's changed his act as a result of this happening. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

We have no later independent verifying sources that he's stopped performing college shows either. That was a statement reported by independent source, and the burden of proof lies with disproving the claim, not substantiating it. Imagine the unfair precedent that would be set if information reported by a news source must be continually reported on over time in order to consider them valid. In reference to an earlier comment made by you, yes I believe we may disagree. You may interpret the cited policies differently than me, but there is no clear violation present. That does not mean that in disagreement we must default to your position, however, like you asserted in an earlier point. The information listed in this section is the sufficient amount necessary that still provides sufficient context for the event.Nucleartaco123 (talk) 01:26, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Maybe we should look for more current refs then. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:12, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Attempts to move on

I've made this change to the first sentence. I don't believe any of the material is in dispute, and it's wordy. I'd like an alternative to "sparked controversy" as well. Is this ok as I've changed it? --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 19:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

That is fine, and I agree that "sparked controversy" is not ideal, I mostly left that in to avoid further conflict with the previous editor for expanding on his/her article. Nucleartaco123 (talk) 19:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks.

I trimmed it a bit further . I hope that's ok. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 20:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Potential refs

• https://www.dosavannah.com/news/20200108/viral-youtube-sensation-andy-gross-brings-comedy-magic-to-tybee-post

  Performance announcement, but it looks like the author is on staff at Go Savannah. Doesn't mention Purdue, college gigs, or changes in performance content. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

• https://www.connectsavannah.com/savannah/andy-gross-jack-of-all-trades/Content?oid=13831145

  Here's something. Another performance announcement, for the same gig as the above. The author is the retired Music Editor for Connect Savannah. It does say that Gross has given up college gigs, doesn't mention Purdue nor changes in performance content. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

• https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/08/30/despite-struggles-comics-find-lucrative-business-college-campuses

  Coverage about the Purdue incident, in a broader context. This is a follow-up to their initial report on the matter. This is by far the best ref we have, though it's not specifically about Gross. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 21:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

• https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lake-county-news-sun/ct-lns-andy-gross-genesee-st-1016-20151015-story.html

  Performance announcement from the ChicagoTrib. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 21:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for removal of Purdue paragraph (BLP/RS/UNDUE)

Request for removal of Purdue paragraph (BLP/RS/UNDUE)

Disclosure: I am closely connected to the subject of this article. Because of this conflict of interest, I will not edit the article directly, but instead make requests on the Talk page per WP:COI.

The final paragraph describing a 2018 Purdue University performance should be removed in its entirety for the following reasons:

Unreliable sourcing (WP:RS / WP:BLP):

Reference [4] is a Medium blog post, which is a self-published platform with no editorial oversight. Per WP:BLP, contentious material about living persons must not rely on non-reliable sources.

Undue weight (WP:UNDUE):

References [5] (Journal & Courier) and [6] (Newsweek) mention the incident briefly, but giving this event its own long paragraph disproportionately emphasizes one isolated controversy over the subject’s decades-long career. Wikipedia articles should not give undue prominence to minor or localized coverage.

Non-neutral narrative (WP:NPOV):

The current wording is not written in a neutral, encyclopedic tone and instead reads like a news story or opinion piece.

Per WP:BLP, contentious and poorly sourced material must be removed immediately and without discussion. I therefore propose that the entire Purdue paragraph be deleted.

Somonelikeyou (talk) 06:17, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm declining the request. Thank you for following WP:COI.

I don't see any reference to Medium. Reference #4 is https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/andy-gross-purdue/ , which appears ok to use. The author, Natalie Hayes, appears to have been a CBS employee at the time judging by the many articles by her.

I've removed the Newsweek ref per the WP:NEWSWEEK.

I think some mention is clearly DUE. If coverage does not span outside the time of the incident, then we should be very careful with deciding what to keep.

I agree that it is UNDUE as written, and there are POV problems with the choice of content.

I think a rewrite is in order, focusing on the impact to Gross (the refund and stating he will no longer perform on college campuses). https://apnews.com/comedian-andy-gross-apologizes-to-outraged-purdue-students-d4d3d3a8495240b39d731cbab7771a96 might be helpful with weight and focus. --Hipal (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Proposed neutral rewrite of Purdue section

Note: I have a COI because I am closely connected to the subject of this article, so I am posting here on the Talk page rather than editing directly.

Hi all,

Here’s a concise wording based on reliable sources. Please feel free to adjust or improve:

• • Proposed Minimal Rewrite**

“In 2018, Gross’s performance at Purdue University received media coverage after some students objected to parts of his act.” [^1][^2]

[^1]: [CBS News](https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/andy-gross-purdue/) [^2]: [Associated Press](https://apnews.com/8495240b39d713cabb7771a96c)

Thanks for considering, Somonelikeyou (talk) 01:20, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

That misses the important aspects of what happened and the impact on Gross.

A better ref is https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2018/08/20/comedian-faces-calls-for-boycott-after-he-goaded-a-college-student-into-touching-him-onstage/

Most of the students walked out. The school was reimbursed. Gross said he'd no longer do shows for colleges. There was a call for a boycott against Gross.

The Bangert, 2018 ref should be used, or something with even more depth and follow-through like https://www.jconline.com/story/news/2018/08/23/purdue-walkout-andy-gross-out-4-600-after-elliott-show-apology/1076023002/ --Hipal (talk) 17:40, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Andy Gross

• • COI disclosure**: I have a conflict of interest as I am closely connected to the subject of this article. Because of that, I am suggesting proposed text here for other editors to consider, rather than making the change directly.

• • Proposed revision for accuracy and balance**

Thanks for the feedback. I’d like to propose this updated text that reflects reliable sources while keeping things concise and neutral:

• • Option A (balanced version):**

> *“In 2018, Gross’s performance at Purdue University drew media coverage after some students objected to a part of his act. The Washington Post reported that some audience members walked out, and coverage in local outlets noted calls for a boycott.”*

• • Option B (shorter version):**

> *“In 2018, some media outlets reported on controversy during Gross’s Purdue University performance, noting that a portion of the audience walked out.”*

I’m open to whichever version other editors feel is most appropriate.

I also want to note that this was one incident in a long career. To keep the article balanced and in line with Wikipedia’s due weight policy, I believe a concise, neutral summary is more appropriate than extended detail.

Somonelikeyou (talk) 18:44, 30 September 2025 (UTC) Somonelikeyou (talk) 18:44, 30 September 2025 (UTC)\

References

Thanks. It's still missing the main points.

Not that I especially like the wording or length:

In 2018, Gross's performance at Purdue university resulted in a mass walkout, accusations of sexual harassment, and a rebuke by the university for "clearly inappropriate" behavior which some students . The university was refunded and Gross apologized, saying he'd change his show and not perform further on college campuses. https://www.jconline.com/story/news/2018/08/23/purdue-walkout-andy-gross-out-4-600-after-elliott-show-apology/1076023002/

He's avoided colleges ever since? --Hipal (talk) 19:25, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

References

Suggested neutral wording for 2018 Purdue section

COI disclosure: I have a connection to the subject of this article, so I am not editing the page directly. Instead, I am suggesting neutral wording here for review by independent editors.

Some of the proposed wording on this page reads editorialized (“mass walkout,” “accusations of sexual harassment,” “rebuke”) and does not reflect Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View (WP:NPOV) or due weight (WP:DUE). Reliable national sources such as The Washington Post and Indianapolis Star covered the event factually.

To improve neutrality and accuracy, I suggest replacing the current paragraph with:

> In 2018, during a performance at Purdue University, some students walked out citing concerns over parts of the act. The university later described portions of the show as inappropriate. Gross later stated that he was sorry if anyone was offended and that he would not perform at college campuses going forward. Purdue University subsequently received a refund issued by Gross’s agent; Gross himself still received a negotiated payment.

Somonelikeyou (talk) 01:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Declined. Written like someone with a COI. This isn't a negotiation, nor a venue for public relations.

Sources verify that most of the audience left, so "some" seems problematic.

"Accusations of sexual harassment" seems a main point of interest. Not specifying what happened in any manner seems extremely problematic.

"Rebuke" - agreed.

You didn't answer my question. Did he stop performing at colleges? --Hipal (talk) 15:47, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Purdue section / UNDUE weight concerns

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I would like to suggest a more neutral and proportionate version of the Purdue section, based on reliable published sources:

"In 2018, during a performance at Purdue University, some attendees walked out citing concerns about parts of Gross’s routine. The university later described portions of the performance as inappropriate. National outlets including *The Washington Post* and the *Indianapolis Star* reported on the incident. Gross later stated he was sorry if anyone had been offended and said he would not perform at college campuses going forward."

• • Sources:**

- [Washington Post link] - [Indianapolis Star link] - [Journal & Courier (USA Today network) coverage](https://www.jconline.com/story/news/2018/08/21/purdue-walkout-comedian-apologizes-defends-act/1049945002/)

This phrasing keeps the event documented, but in proportion. At present, the Purdue section risks giving **undue weight (WP:UNDUE)** compared to Gross’s broader career. He has decades of professional work as a comedian, magician, and ventriloquist, with coverage of his Amazon Prime release, national touring, 1B+ viral video views, and his earlier racquetball career. Reliable sources cover those aspects, but they are currently underrepresented compared to this one controversy.

Including the fact that Gross chose not to perform at colleges afterward also reflects a wider trend reported in reliable sources. For example, the *Journal & Courier* (part of the USA Today network) covered the Purdue event alongside comments from Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock, who have both publicly stated they avoid college shows due to increasing sensitivity in the current cultural climate. This context helps keep the entry balanced and neutral.

It is also worth noting that the Purdue event occurred in 2018. Since then, Gross has continued performing, producing, and touring, with additional coverage of his career highlights. Giving disproportionate space to one older controversy while omitting more recent developments risks violating **WP:RECENTISM** and **WP:UNDUE**, and it may also raise concerns under **WP:BLP** which requires special care in representing living people fairly and proportionately.

Because I may have a conflict of interest, I am not making direct edits to the page. I respectfully leave this proposed text and balance concern here for **uninvolved editors** to consider.

Requesting input from outside editors on how best to summarize the 2018 Purdue incident while maintaining neutrality, avoiding undue weight, and ensuring the biography reflects the subject’s full career in line with WP:BLP.

Somonelikeyou (talk) 01:07, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Someonelikeyou, if you have further input, please put it in your own words. Do not have chatbots generate comments, and certainly please do not waste community time with RfCs that are chatbot-generated. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:16, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

UNDUE weight of Purdue section

For transparency, I have a COI as I am close to the subject of this article. I also understand this is a living biography and should be handled carefully per WP:BLP. I think the Purdue section is giving too much weight to a single incident. It was reported at the time, but it represents just one performance out of a long touring career. Giving it its own section makes it look more significant than it really is. A better approach would be to mention it briefly within the main career section, with sources, but not as a standalone heading. That would still acknowledge the event while keeping the article in balance with WP:UNDUE.

Somonelikeyou (talk) 05:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

That's already the case. It's a single paragraph under the "Life and Career" heading. It seems you're asking for something that's already happened. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:58, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

=Trim Purdue paragraph for UNDUE weight (BLP/COI)

Thanks for pointing that out. I do understand it’s under “Life and Career” now, but I still feel it’s giving too much space to one isolated show. For transparency, I have a COI since I’m close to the subject, but I’m just trying to make sure the article stays balanced per WP:BLP.

The incident was only mentioned briefly in reliable sources, but here it takes up a whole paragraph, which makes it look more significant than it really was. Other parts of the career that got far more coverage are written in less space. Per WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP, I think it would be more fair to just mention it briefly in context with the rest of the career rather than give it its own big chunk.

`` Somonelikeyou (talk) 03:37, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Decline. This seems a WP:COITALK situation at this point. I suggest you re-read WP:COI and WP:ER, and follow them more closely if you decide to make another request. --Hipal (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Request to add Amazon Prime special and Hall of Fame info (COI disclosure)

Hello editors,

I’m closely connected to the subject of this article and wanted to suggest a couple of factual updates that are supported by reliable sources.

1. Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame (MORA)

Andy Gross was inducted into the Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame in 2023. Source: morball.org

1. Amazon Prime Special

In July 2025, Fox 5 Atlanta covered Andy Gross’s Amazon Prime comedy magic special titled Andy Gross: Are You Kidding Me? Source: Fox 5 Atlanta

If these sources meet Wikipedia’s reliability standards, could an uninvolved editor please review and consider adding this information to the article?

Thank you for your time and help keeping the page accurate and well-sourced.

• (COI disclosure: I’m close to the subject and will not edit the article directly.)*

Somonelikeyou (talk) 05:15, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Declined. Please engage in addressing the past concerns rather than repeating yourself. --Hipal (talk) 16:53, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

You wrote, and will not edit the article directly. but you did edit the article directly. Are you not fully in control of your account? --Hipal (talk) 16:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

•  Done Nothing in the response above actually addresses the appropriateness of the content. Seems fine to me, fairly mundayne in fact. GMG^talk 18:22, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Neither ref meets BLP requirements. The first is self-published, the second just a PROMO piece. I've retained the second, trimming it. Further trimming or removal seems appropriate without better sources. --Hipal (talk) 18:42, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

An interview with an Atlanta news station is promotional for the purpose of establishing that he released a special? GMG^talk 18:57, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

I not clear what you mean. It's DUE little or no weight without a better source. Moving it to the Filmography section is probably best. --Hipal (talk) 19:53, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Well you're going to have to make up your mind what your issue is here, because it's starting to look like you didn't put a lot of thought into the question before now. GMG^talk 19:58, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

WP:FOC. --Hipal (talk) 20:00, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

I can't very well address the content issue until I know what you're taking exception with. Having smashed the revert button, have you decided that the source being somehow promotional isn't a problem anymore? GMG^talk 20:03, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

No.

I couldn't find better sources so moved it to Filmography. --Hipal (talk) 20:14, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

What are you looking for? A peer reviewed study? It's an arts and entertainment piece about an entertainer. GMG^talk 20:23, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Rewriting Purdue info

Hipal, please give a specific reason for your recent revert concerning the statement from Gross' attorney. I agree the section on the Purdue incident needs to be pruned. However, the edit was to correct a partially misleading cite, and is necessary to maintain NPOV. The reversion leaves in salacious allegations while editing out any response to them from the subject of the article, and as such is a BLP violation. Bob Gollum (talk) 16:15, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

I moved the above comment from the very old discussion at the top of this page.

Digging through the subsequent discussion with the COI editor:

https://apnews.com/comedian-andy-gross-apologizes-to-outraged-purdue-students-d4d3d3a8495240b39d731cbab7771a96 might be helpful with weight and focus.

Slight modification of my previous proposal:

In 2018, Gross's performance at Purdue university resulted in a mass walkout, accusations of sexual harassment, and a rebuke by the university for "clearly inappropriate" behavior. The university was refunded and Gross apologized, saying he'd change his show and not perform further on college campuses. https://www.jconline.com/story/news/2018/08/23/purdue-walkout-andy-gross-out-4-600-after-elliott-show-apology/1076023002/

References

I've gone ahead and replaced the old content. I'll get around to cleaning it up further if someone doesn't do so first.

With the rewrite, which I had informed Bob Gollum about previously, is there more than minor cleanup needed? --Hipal (talk) 16:44, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

It's starting to look like the answer to your question is that Hipal is the only one allowed to edit the article. GMG^talk 19:00, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Digging through the very old discussion on the topic, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/08/30/despite-struggles-comics-find-lucrative-business-college-campuses might be helpful. --Hipal (talk) 20:24, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

The proposed edit cuts some of the salacious content, but it does not address the NPOV problem. Gross' rep made the point that the lines people were complaining about were a regular part of his act, used before many other audiences, and that he was unaware of how much what was acceptable for a campus audience had changed. Ignoring that and just summarizing the complaints and saying he apologized, without that context and response, is a POV violation and a BLP violation. It distorts his response.

Apart from that, "mass walkout" is probably too POV-laden. Bob Gollum (talk) 01:11, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I already noted I want to change "rebuked". I agree "mass walkout" should be reworded as well.

Which refs bring up Gross doing similar sets? Is it always attributed to Gross's rep that he hadn't received complaints in the past?

Gross was supposed to give a "PG"-rated show, according to the refs, which he did not. Why he did not doesn't appear to be explained. --Hipal (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

It sounds like it was a PG show - some edgy material, but nothing R rated.

The Journal and Courier reference talked about him doing similar sets, and how those objectionable lines were part of his regular routine. They weren't ad libs. The IndyStar account goes into detail confirming.

No one has ever said his rep prevented similar complaints in the past. He is a successful but minor entertainer - his rep ain't that immense. Some, especially cranky old school comics but not only them, have said the campus climate is overly sensitive and woke these days, so the students complain where no one else does, and his apology aligned with that message. Bob Gollum (talk) 16:35, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

It sounds like it was a PG show Says who?

It sounds like he had one regular routine that he couldn't adapt to that audience, which was especially problematic when presented soon after a presentation on sexual harassment (all during MeToo movement). --Hipal (talk) 17:01, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

PG allows some adult material unsuitable for kids, including nudity and some foul language, as long as it does not predominate. But of course PG is just for motion pictures; it is only a metaphor when applied to a live act. Bob Gollum (talk) 17:21, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, so it would be OR/SYN to suggest the performance met the terms requested. --Hipal (talk) 17:30, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

"Before the performance was halfway through, most of the audience had walked out." - WaPo ref.

Bangert (August 23) does not refer to the amount of students that walked out.

Bangert (Aug 21), "...on the show that had hundreds of incoming freshmen walking out..."

"..with many filing out of the auditorium...", "Photos taken by Purdue student Hannah Erdos show a packed auditorium before Gross took the stage and the mostly-empty seats following his on-stage comments." - CBS News ref.

The InsideHigherEd article above says "hundreds". --Hipal (talk) 18:15, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

"Many students became upset and walked out," - https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/comic-apologizes-purdue-show/531-083896a9-8910-4696-bdea-bb1990f0d842

"Several students walked out of an orientation week performance by Gross Saturday night" https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/nidhiprakash/andy-gross-purdue-tweets

"Some walked out of his Saturday performance" - Associated Press, https://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/08/21/comedian-andy-gross-apologizes-to-outraged-purdue-students/

"Several students walked out of the performance," https://fox59.com/news/comedian-at-center-of-purdue-controversy-apologizes-plans-to-change-routine/

"Students reacted quickly, with many filing out of the auditorium"- Students reacted quickly, with many filing out of the auditorium

Given that the last source says that there were thousands in the audience, hundreds walking out would still not mean most.

You are picking and choosing who you want to believe, and that is not NPOV. Bob Gollum (talk) 19:19, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Focusing on content:

We don't use OR/SYN to determine article content.

We do note the quality of the sources. Drawing upon poor sources is not a way forward. --Hipal (talk) 19:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

No disagreement there; those are good general principles. Bob Gollum (talk) 22:47, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I misidentified the improperly identified citation in the recent back-and-forth. Regardless, it does not compare the size of the crowd vs the number that walked out, nor does any other source, so neither should we to avoid OR.

As for his not stating he did not understand campus climate during MeToo, it doesn't matter given the contract terms to provide a "PG" show. I've been meaning to add the InsideHigherEd ref without content change to provide background on the challenges to comedians on college campuses. --Hipal (talk) 17:02, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

There is no source that can say whether or not he did a PG show, so anything about that is OR. PG does allow some adult content.

Whether or not you agree with the apology, it is the appropriate thing in BLP to quote it accurately, rather than saying parts you pick out don't matter.

The source says hundreds walked out and there were thousands in the audience. But I agree, talking about numbers is cumbersome and probably would lead to inaccuracies. If you don't mention the hundreds, not need to mention the thousands.

It is misleading to attribute the apology to him directly, if he did not say it. Those were his lawyers words, not his. Bob Gollum (talk) 17:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Also,"change his show" is vague and confusing language that he himself did not use; better to accurately describe what he said he would change, removing those lines or bits of business that offended. Bob Gollum (talk) 17:20, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Request to add Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame (2023)

For independent review — I’d like to propose adding Andy Gross’s induction into the Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame in 2023, with reliable sourcing.

Suggested sentence (to insert in the “Early life” or “Sports career” section):

> Gross was inducted into the Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame in 2023.

Posting here first for transparency and independent review in accordance with COI-safe editing. Somonelikeyou (talk) 01:23, 27 October 2025 (UTC) Somonelikeyou (talk) 01:23, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

References

Declined - no change from previous request. Maybe with an independent source of BLP quality that demonstrates its importance. --Hipal (talk) 15:44, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Proposed addition: Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame (2023)

I have a connection to the subject of this article. I am proposing the following sourced addition here for independent review and possible implementation by an uninvolved editor, in accordance with Wikipedia’s conflict of interest guidelines.

Proposed text:

In 2023, Gross was inducted into the Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame. Before pursuing a full-time career in comedy and magic, Gross was an accomplished competitive racquetball player, beginning the sport at a young age and competing for more than a decade. His early involvement in racquetball preceded his transition into entertainment.

Source:

St. Louis Jewish Light – “Andy Gross: From St. Louis racquetball to comedy and magic”

https://stljewishlight.org/news/news-local/andy-gross-st-louis-racquetball/ ~2025-40201-22 (talk) 04:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Declined. That reference reads like a publicity piece. I think it should be treated as such. --Hipal (talk) 16:16, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

We need the kind of hard hitting journalism we've come to expect from 1980s St. Louis Jewish community sports. GMG^talk 16:59, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Request to add Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame

Hello, I have a suggested update for the Andy Gross article.

Andy Gross was inducted into the Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame. I found two independent sources that appear to confirm this:

• https://stljewishlight.org/news/news-local/andy-gross-st-louis-racquetball/

• https://www.news-herald.com/2026/02/17/comic-andy-gross-bringing-his-bag-of-tricks-to-lorain-palace/

https://www.morball.org/mora-hall-of-fame

Because I may have a conflict of interest, I am posting this here for independent editors to review and add if appropriate.

Suggested wording: "Gross was inducted into the Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame in 2023."

Thank you.

Somonelikeyou (talk) 23:27, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Following up on this request — two independent sources confirm the induction, along with the official Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame listing.

Suggested addition:

"Gross was inducted into the Missouri Racquetball Hall of Fame in 2023."

Sources:

https://stljewishlight.org/news/news-local/andy-gross-st-louis-racquetball/

https://www.news-herald.com/2026/02/17/comic-andy-gross-bringing-his-bag-of-tricks-to-lorain-palace/

https://www.morball.org/mora-hall-of-fame

I may have a conflict of interest, so requesting an uninvolved editor review and add if appropriate. Thank you. Somonelikeyou (talk) 03:48, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done, doesn't seem like a particularly noteworthy honor -- it's a small, niche, recently-founded organization. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:54, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Request to reduce undue weight in Purdue section

Because I may have a conflict of interest, I am requesting that uninvolved editors consider whether the current Purdue section gives undue weight to a single college performance incident from 2018. The current wording may place more emphasis on the incident than necessary relative to the rest of the biography. A more concise and neutral summary might be: “In 2018, Gross performed at Purdue University during orientation week. Some students considered portions of the performance inappropriate, and some walked out, saying the material made them uncomfortable. Purdue later stated that parts of the show did not align with the school’s expectations for the event.” Thank you for your consideration. Somonelikeyou (talk) 04:43, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Declined, per previous discussions, requests, and the references cited. --Hipal (talk) 16:24, 14 May 2026 (UTC)