Talk:Jeffree Star/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Jeffree Star. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Birthdate and other things...

In the article, it says he's 21 years old...but if he was born Nov. 15, 1986, he's only 20. Whoever wrote this article probably meant to write 1985 instead...also, I know for a fact he went to Pacifica High School in Garden Grove, California, and graduated in 2003...how do I know this? He's in my yearbook; I graduated in 2005. And yes, his real name is Jeffrey Steininger. He has a younger brother named Phil.

• This is the first I've heard of Phil, but what about Daniel Hilton? The two have claimed to be twins before and certainly look like they could be fraternal twins. Or is "Daniel" really "Phil"?

• I haven't heard of Daniel Hilton; I only know Jeffrey has a younger brother named Phil because he is also in my yearbook and I've talked to Pacifica High School teachers about it. Who knows, though...the name "Daniel Hilton" sounds kind of phony anyway so maybe it is an alias of Phil's. - myspace.com/amandalovespurrs

What is true and what can be referenced and included on Wikipedia are two separate things. If and when it's sourced that he has a brother (and frankly if it makes sense t include that information in the article) then by all means go for it. Please also sign your comments. Benjiboi 21:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)`

Wasnt he in class of 1990? making him in his 30's - ^{unsigned comment from} Jak3m

If you can find a reliable source that confirms it then please post it. Benjiboi 23:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

gay artist' category

I don't think it he should be in the 'gay artist' category. In interviews, he has mentioned having sex with a woman named Paige. I believe he says it in his video interview with auralsalvation.com. Here are links to the interview: http://www.auralsalvation.com/2005/11/jeffree_star_part_1/ http://www.auralsalvation.com/2005/11/jeffree_star_part_2/ http://www.auralsalvation.com/2005/11/post/

He says he's gay but that doesn't mean he's exclusive to men. The category is GLBT so he's covered even if bisexual is more accurate. Benjiboi 14:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD

Clearly this needs to go up for another AfD. A bunch of uncited information does not a worthwhile article make.--75.2.32.250 16:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Only one statement appears to be uncited. Most of the statements are cited properly, which is much better than most articles. I don't see this "bunch of uncited information" you describe. As for putting it up for AfD: the previous AfDs were about notability, but now, with the increased media coverage, I don't think that would work anymore. Whether people like it or not, he is now notable. You're welcome to put it up for AfD if you feel there's a case for deletion, though.

PS. I've made a header for this topic. -kotra 19:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Picture

The picture from Perez Hilton has been edited; Perez is known to draw on pictures, usually words or certain 'liquids' dripping from places, always in white. This can clearly be seen in the posted photo; perhaps an unedited one should replace it? 75.8.90.63 12:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Good point. I hadn't noticed the white "liquids" on that picture. I've removed it. -kotra 22:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the image back to the first download, which is from his MySpace profile.--milk the cows (Talk) 21:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Jeffree's BandMerch store.

I think it might possibly be a good idea to add into the page that Jeffree currently has a BandMerch store where he has many different Jeffree Star band merchandise for sale. The store's URL is: http://www.bandmerch.com/java2/BandMerch/jeffreestar/ Huntx 05:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

done. Benjiboi 14:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Tone of the article

I commend whoever recently expanded the article to practically 5 times as long. It is much more informative now, and the some of the new references are great. However, the tone of the article is now overwhelmingly positive, like an entertainment magazine article mixed with a biography written by an admiring fan. Peacock words and phrases like "success" "gift for aesthetic beauty", and "impressive" are not very objective, nor are the numerous quotes of glowing praise (like the laughable "digital polymath" quote). The article needs some cleaning up to stick more to the facts and less to personal opinions (even, sometimes, if they're opinions presented by magazines). -kotra 00:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment, I can't say I'm a fan although I do find his tenacity compelling (like Madonna's). Given the subject's trajectory I'm sure more critical press will soon emerge providing plenty of criticism. The industries he's centered in presently (fashion, make-up, modeling, internet celebrity) are not known to have insightful and critical attention from reliable sources so the article reflects that. I'm sure that once his physical album is released it will be praised and scorned and more information balancing the positive tone of the article will be readily available. The music industry is notoriously brutal to all and Star definitely will get heat even if only for his image. I think within a few months, when his album hits much more mainstream attention will give more balanced opinions on his music and plenty more material to work with. Benjiboi 00:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Star's next untitled album coming out will be available in stores, so I'm sure there will be reviews and information from the mainstream media coming out in the next few months. I have met Star at Warped Tour and he is a very nice person which somewhat contradicts his "I don't give a shit about you" attitude, so maybe the press will get a hold of that. The article does have some weasel words, and the quotes shouldn't be in there unless they're well known within its fan base, other wise this passes WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC (in other words, there probably won't be another AFD on this anymore since the recent one passed).--milk the cows (Talk) 01:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Article cleanup

I cleaned up the article a lot so it's written in the right tone. Thanks for everyone that has contributed to this article, especially with referencing. I'm going to request a peer review to find other things it should be improved on before it goes up as a good article candidate.--milk the cows (Talk) 17:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to make Plastic Surgery Slumber Party a separate article again for now since in most cases albums/EPs have their own articles. It looks messy with the EP template in the article along with the main musician template at the top.--milk the cows (Talk) 18:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Totally disagree. This flies in the face of the just-closed AfD discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffree Star (2nd nomination) in which the newly rewritten Jeffree Star article was to be kept and the album page deleted with information merged into this article. Although we might not agree with the decision it was a community consensus to take those action and the process should be respected. The article could be recreated once more sources sustain it's notability possibly when the physical version of the album is released (apparently slated for Oct 2007) three months from now. I suggest you reverse your edits or I will seek more experienced editors' input about what appropriate actions are appropriate. I also realize you may simply be doing what seems to make sense but the Plastic Surgery Slumber Party article has just been removed per the AfD process so please reconsider. Benjiboi 19:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I will revert it back for now.--milk the cows (Talk) 19:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I have little doubt that it will soon enough be it's own article but the AfD was clear and wasn't even a week old. Benjiboi 20:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Genderbending, genderfuck

I read gender bender and genderfuck, trying to find the difference. I gathered from them that genderfuck is just an openly defiant or outspoken subset of gender-bending, particularly for performance purposes. Since Star seems to fit that description well, I removed "gender-bending" from "his gender-bending appearance as a genderfuck cross-dresser", because it seemed redundant. It's been changed back, though, because "Star, at times, does one or both". Am I overlooking some major aspect of his persona that can be called "gender-bending" but not "genderfuck"? I'm not totally familiar with Star or genderfuck in general, so it's possible. -kotra 19:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The Genderfuck article indeed needs work so that is probably part of the issue of understanding some of the nuances. Gender-bending speaks to subtle as well as outright bending of gender rules and roles, I think there is little doubt Star does that. Genderfuck is usually over the top "fucking" with gender assumptions, roles and ideas. It can be done, as in Star's case simply with an image that if you only saw him from the neck up you would assume he is a woman but when you see his non-female breasts it's obvious he's not. The present Genderfuck article incorrectly limits the scope to a performance but Star does that as well. Genderfuck also speaks to the DIY and in-your-face attitude both of which Star has exemplified. Benjiboi 01:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I see what you mean. Star does sometimes practice gender-bending that isn't as over-the-top as genderfuck. In that case, logically the word "gender-bending" should be enough. So I've removed "genderfuck" from the sentence accordingly. Feel free to revert it if you disagree. -kotra 02:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I do and I did. Star regularly is a gender-bender and a genderfucker. Both are appropriate and mean slightly different things. Benjiboi 02:32, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand how gender-bending isn't necessarily genderfuck, but not how genderfuck isn't necessarily gender-bending. My conclusion from what you and the articles said was that genderfuck is a subset of gender-bending. Could you explain how I'm mistaken? Sorry for being dense. -kotra 17:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Part of it I would have to venture is intent (all of this would make a great thesis if I were going for a degree in Gender Studies). Gender-bending is more playing with gender roles and assumptions - sometimes purposeful, sometimes completely unintentional and, I believe, the emphasis is on the viewer to interpret. If someone assumes that pretty model is a young woman then so be it. Genderfuck is more deliberate and an outright smashing of gender confines with the subject either having no choice to choose (as they have genderfluid appearance or manerisms) or usually purposefully confounding assumptions about a person's gender. And there is less subtly open to interpretation - That pretty woman is a guy. I think this might be a "which came first the chicken or the egg" as both these concepts are new-ish and have yet to be fully dissected, compared and contrasted. There is also the added bonus that many folks use the terms interchangably but in my experience those who consider themselves genderfuckers do not see themselves as simply playing with gender or gender-benders. Another aspect is undeniably generational and cultural, it's much more punk and hip for some to be a "fucker" than a "bender." Benjiboi 01:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I gather from your explanation that, as I had previously assumed, gender-bending and genderfuck are basically the same idea except genderfuck is more extreme and overt, but also, against what I had assumed, one isn't necessarily a subset or a synonym of the other. So assuming your explanation is correct (though I think both terms are still ambiguous enough to make pinning down a definite meaning difficult at best), it makes some sense to keep both words. So I won't touch that sentence anymore. Also, one thing I want to note for the record is that in my experience "gender-bending" is an older (1980-85) and more well-known term than "genderfuck" which I hadn't even heard of until I saw it here. Probably in the gay community it's more common though. Thanks again for clearing it up. -kotra 03:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I think you may be correct that genderfuck is a newer term although both are well-represented in scholarly circles. Benjiboi 17:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Jeffree Star is amusing, he has inspired so many teenagers on myspace, to copy his pictures and dress like him :/

I hope one day I become more famous than Jeffree Star, without cross dressing and having pink hair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackotheripper (talk • contribs) 19:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Face the Jury and Facebook

2001-2004 "Jeffry Starr" was once known as user name "CUNT" on FacetheJury.com He had over 100,000 forum posts and most of his pictures were examples of photoshop trickery. Source: Most of Facethejury.com's general forum regulars who witnessed and ridiculed him. --HeXt (talk) 02:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Does he have a Facebook? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.199.2 (talk) 16:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

JEFFREE WAS BORN NOVEMBER 15.. 1985 NOT 86! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.90.2 (talk) 13:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

What is a reference

This article is/was overly referenced. You do not need to reference EVERYTHING, just things that could be considered unverifiable. The removals of reference tags to myspace are justified and should not be returned. This article has been up for multiple deletions obviously not because of content but rather because of structure and unverifiable content. Myspace is not a reference source. Do not continue to add it as one. CelticGreen 00:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, You are mistaken. Per WP:SELFPUB - "Material from self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources in articles about themselves, so long as:

• it is relevant to their notability;
• it is not contentious;
• it is not unduly self-serving;
• it does not involve claims about third parties;
• it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
• there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it;
• the article is not based primarily on such sources." Benjiboi 02:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The reasons an article is put into the AfD process are numerous not the least of which is some wp folks' distaste for internet celebrities. What counts is making a decent article now. The reasons some may feel points are "over-referenced" is because it is subjective - what you feel needs to be referenced and what someone else feels can certainly be wildly different. As an internet celebrity Star attracts a high amount of vandals and detractors and as such many things that on another article probably wouldn't need a ref do have one here. It's also interesting, to me at least, that in one step you state the article is overly referenced and in the next claim that it must have faced AfD so many times because of unverifiable content. Benjiboi 02:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

• Y'all can argue all you want about it, but just a glance shows that the links marked as reference go to pages that have nothing to do with what is referenced. That's the least of the problems I see. Try removing a few of the bad references, as someone tried to, and start from there. Like I said on the other page, I would support this being cleaned up but if it can't be cleaned, deletion would be the next option. Referencing to myspace is considered unverifiable content as it's put up by the person you are trying to reference.IrishLass0128 13:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

It's very likely that other well-intentioned editors simply deleted and moved things to also "clean-up" the article thus moving something that was referenced but not the reference itself. I personally have no issue with cleaning up work but I do find sweeping deletions of content and refernces based on the mistaken perception that they don't belong as unencyclopedic - well that's problematic. Perhaps a lighter touch would be more appropriate? I disagree that deletion is the next step if clean-up cannot happen and WP:AfD disagrees with you as well, that's abusing that process. Also MySpace might not be an ideal source but is certainly acceptable as outlined above. Whenever I've utilized it it wasn't to assert anything contentious simply verifying what other reliable sources had asserted. Every article can be improved and this one is no exception. Benjiboi 14:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Update. I've added the clean-up tag to article. Also if you can specify which of the references don't support what they are referring to I'm happy to look into them if no one else wants to. Benjiboi 14:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

• Well, the very first reference that is supposed to support his birthdate says "my birthday show, November 2007." That's not a reference. The deletions I saw were bad reference links and links to myspace, the article was actually cleaner by removing these. They were not valdalization or change in content to the article. I disagree that this is not overly self promoting but that's not my call. IrishLass0128 20:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the article to see the latest round of changes but it did occur to me that many of the refs could simply be moved to the end of the phrases or sentences to make the reading a bit less clunky which should be a common goal. In the case of the birthday ref you mention i really don't know (without digging through the massive pile of deletions, reinsertions and changes what that ref was originally for and is more likely that it was moved from what it was asserting. Benjiboi 05:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• Click on the first [1] next to the DOB and it goes to the reference list. Click on the reference and it doesn't go to the actual supposed reference. There's no need to look at deletions or edits, it is what is on the page currently. That's what I tried to clean up that you reverted. I actually have no "feelings" one way or another about "internet stars" but I do care that visually and accuracy wise articles are encyclopedic and acceptable. Take away preference toward the article and just look at it. Don't read it, look at it. It looks HORRID. That's what I tried to help fix. The list of references is too long, the "see also" section should be incorporated into the article, not be a list at the end. There is also the option of adding catagory links, if there are ones that associate with your "see also" section. No one was trying to kill the page, just clean it. Look at the first link, just the first link, and see I was only trying to help. CelticGreen 23:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Done, I removed the ref as it asserted the date was a birthday show, it would have to be combined with another ref to confirm it was on his actual birthday. I do appreciate the concerns you have and generally agree. i think where we differ is perhaps the style in which it's done. I suggest taking each removal of a reference individually rather than mass deleting content and refs altogether. In the past, on this articles and others, that well-intentioned editing has resulted in what an editor thought worked but then had to be reverted partially and cleaned up. I believe in being bold but there is a point where good material is removed with less stellar stuff. This article has a long history of AfD'ing and deletionism and vandalism so I was probably on watch for such activities so apologize if my reaction came off as rude. I don't agree with removing the See Also section although we both see it as a temporary thing, articles that should be incorporated into the main text but haven't been as of yet. To me there is no rush to do so as this article and the subject's career are both in the early stages. Benjiboi 22:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll also offer, if you or anyone wishes, to recheck any particular section or references as time allows. It can be tedious but I'm somewhat familiar with most of them so I'm happy to recheck to see that what they originally reffed is where they are at.Benjiboi 22:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Indent reset. I've moved refs off the lede into the infobox as appropriate to clean up the problems outlined above. If there are any other sections that need to be addressed fel free to post which sections or paragraph. Benjiboi 13:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Friend Trey

And as you all know his Best Friend Trey is now in a program for 15 months —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.172.210.140 (talk) 18:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea who that is or if it has any bearing on this article. If so please explain it for those of us who don't know. Benjiboi 19:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it mean his best friend, Trey, meaning Jeffrees friend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.161.237.130 (talk) 17:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like Trey is in a rehab program, if so I wish them the best but that might not warrant inclusion on Star's article. If a mainstream media outlet covers it and Star's involvement then is certainly possible. Benjiboi 11:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Trey is an amazing person!

We love u! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.43.25.5 (talk) 17:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

OMFG TREY IS HOME AND HE IS JEFFREES BEST FRIEND OMG WE LOVE U TREY WELCOME HOME! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.43.25.5 (talk) 18:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Heart Surgery Isn't That Bad

Who keeps changing the link back to his MySpace page?

People want to find out about the song, not listen to it

The link should go to the song's page here, which then provides a link to MySpace —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blosk (talk • contribs) 23:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe this has been resolved now. Benjiboi 09:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Queercore???

Why is he listed under Queercore? It says the music he performs is a mix of electronica and hip hop, Queercore is a category for GLBT Punk artists. If it's because of his look...the Club looks of the late 80's and early 90's certainly had things in common with punk, but I wouldn't list Leigh Bowery under Queercore, or Jeffree Star for that matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.63.203.161 (talk) 19:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Strongly agreed; I'm deleting this link. A Jeffrey Star AND queercore search brought nothing up. Nothing in the first two pages, anyway. im pissed. jeffree star internet royalty you all want me. we want cunt. --128.119.16.227 (talk) 15:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Or not, the page is protected. --128.119.16.227 (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, that wikilink is in the "See also" section which means some editor, possibly me, I don't remember, thought that it was a related-enough topic that it should be incorporated into the article when appropriate. It doesn't mean Star is queercore simply that there is enough similarities that readers may benefit from also looking at that article, all articles are interelated in this way - linking to each other. I believe the spirit and DIY ethic of queercore is quite similar to Star's so would support it being used in the article. Also I apologize for not responding sooner, I must have missed the above comment. last month. Banjeboi 00:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

laughable

--- This page is pretty ridiculous. Why the hell does this guy need a wikipedia entry? he hasnt done anything worth while besides being a myspace celebrity, if even that; If were gonna give him an entry we might as well give everyone an entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.78.247 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 21 April 2008

Hopefully if you read through this article completely you would discover that there is more than just his myspace fame that he is notable for. Though admittedly, this is a somewhat borderline case of notability, at least judging by the number of deletions there were of this article before it was finally allowed to stay. -kotra (talk) 07:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Author reference

Resolved

References 20 and 21 in the article should be cited as by "Ryan C" as that's how they are signed on the blogTO.com pages that they are linked to. There were several "Ryans" writing for the site at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Photendo (talk • contribs) 18:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Taken care of. -- Banjeboi 22:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

sexualltiy

jeffree star is not gay he is bi-sexual many people should know that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.169.22 (talk) 07:46, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

It really isn't clear yet in my opinion. He has stated in a couple of articles that he only likes men. He has also gone on to state that he'd "make out" with a woman. He's stated that he refuses any kind of label. I am personally not comfortable placing a label on him in this article when he refuses to claim any. I also don't think it's relevant to the encyclopedic/biographical nature of the article in this specific case because he's billed himself as androgynous and gender bender.Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 21:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

nahhh hes gay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.51.17.141 (talk) 14:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

He mentions having had sex with Raquel Reed because they both thought it would be hilarious.98.225.230.65 (talk) 11:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

jeffree has said recently on facebook "is it wrong to find both genders attractive? everyone's obsessed with labels.. relax and enjoy the pleasures of both" and "men are fucking stupid, maybe I should try girls..."

Please verify songwriting and fashion designing claims

Is there any credible information to back these claims up? The only fashion lines involving him were designed on his behalf, and he did not write the majority of his songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.193.18.66 (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe sources concur with what's presently in the article, for sngwriting credits you may want to check the album article. Banjeboi 06:54, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed that it appears from sources cited that he did at least originally write his own music. That's good enough.

Is there any reliable citation for his fashion designer claim? The link cited is broken and appears to be someone's personal blog anyway. Granny Bebeb (talk) 03:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

If you're talking about the "South End Newspaper" reference, I marked the link dead and am going through the other refs looking for something. If I can't find anything, I'll research who designed the Hot Topic line and anything else relevant trying to come up with a source. Failing that, I'll remove the claim.Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 21:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

As to the fashion designer claim. I've not seen anything yet mentioning his designing the clothing. I'm still reading though so I haven't removed it.Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 21:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

You can pretty easily verify that he designs clothing for Hot Topic in the US, but you may not find a link to an article on it. Also worth noting that although Marc Jacobs designs with a team, you won't see that mentioned in most online article -- IMO, it's problematic to verify design work based on online articles. He also created a lot of independent clothing to promote his music even before he released an album. This would have been before he would have really had a budget to outsource design. I have seen quite a few pictures of him in clothes that promote his work, but that don't ever wind up for sale. So my guess is that he wears them to appearances to gauge reaction before mass-producing them. Just my guess. 98.225.230.65 (talk) 10:45, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Age Verification

He wasn't born in 1986, he was born in 1985. Who keeps reverting this? You can even find in recent articles that he just turned 22 in November, not 21. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.190.98.31 (talk) 02:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, we don't seem to have a reliable source that states his birthdate or age. If you have one either add it or post it here for someone else to. Benjiboi 09:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

HE WAS BORN IN 1985.. NOT 86. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS DO A PUBLIC VITAL RECORD SEARCH FOR CALIFORNIA, AND HE WAS BORN IN L.A COUNTY NOT ORANGE COUNTY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.90.2 (talk) 13:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually a reliable source per wikipedia's standards would be better, if you happen to see something in an article or interview feel free to post it here so others can check it out. Banjeboi 06:54, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure why this change requires a source at the moment since the original date doesn't have a citation. You are simply changing it back to uphold a standard that wasn't upheld in it's original creation. Either remove the reference to the birth date or change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.22.30.2 (talk) 16:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is a source: http://www86.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Jeffree+star (Anon) 11:42, 20 May 2009 (EST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.22.30.2 (talk)

I've changed the birthdate to 1985 citing IMDB's database. Also, as an aside, you can search the occourts.org online case access under traffic tickets and put in either Jeffree Star or his original name along with a birthdate. The year 1986 returns no results, but 1985 does. I don't know if/how anyone can cite this. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 21:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Birthdate verified through Orange County Court system website (occourts.org). Case #46563KH, speeding in the carpool lane (by himself) on 9/2/09. It shows his original driver's license read Jeffrey Lynn Steininger, but that his license now reads Jeffree Star. It also shows the info that he listed on his Driver's License (which is not verified for accuracy!): 6'0", 98lbs, Brown Eyes, Red Hair.98.225.230.65 (talk) 10:59, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Sales

jeffree has had over 115 thousand downloads. he states this on his myspace page so could we put it in the main wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.144.198 (talk) 02:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)