User talk:2603:8002:1800:8F69:DDDA:880A:261C:556F

1. It is illogical to replace a photo in 2023 of Zech with one of her in 2016. Bios should have the most recent photo available.

2. There is no issue with Zech noting that Rooster Teeth "threatened her with recasting Blake if she didn't accept the wage offered to her" so that sentence has been restored

3. The line about how Zech told "Dunkleman that issues with dating as a

is a "universal bisexual problem"" makes sense to include because Zech IS bisexual! It is illogical to remove this.

4. Removing the words "decided to become an actress instead" and changing it "but her passion was in acting" is strange because both sentence fragments say the same thing

5. I don't believe that saying that "Zech's first TV appearance was a co-star role" is accurate, as it appears that Zech's role in Lethal Weapon was a bit role (I mean, she isn't even mentioned on the Lethal Weapon page). It's my error that I said she "voiced" someone there, but she has voiced so many characters that I guess I assumed she voiced someone there too. Historyday01 (talk) 18:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. You're not wrong, one just seemed to be a better photo.

2. It just seems unnecessary to include something like that on a wiki page. What does it add?

3. Zech's bisexuality doesn't matter in the reasoning in removal. The statement "Dunkleman that issues with dating as a bisexual woman is a "universal bisexual problem" just doesn't make sense. "Issues dating is a universal problem" is what that says taking out the specific sexuality. It doesn't make grammatical sense.

4. "Decided to become an actress" and "her passion was in acting" are two different sentiments. The first implies lack of history with the profession. It also states a decision against the other, when none of that was stated. Zech has previously mentioned on convention panels having a history with acting and an uncertainty with her career future until Monty Oum requested she audition for the first show she did. I could just be projecting, but "decided to become an actress instead" just reads as flippant.

5. A co-star role is "actors who typically have just a few lines and usually appear in only one or two is being questioned by a detective, or a customer placing an order at a restaurant, etc." which is quite literally the role she has in the episode. She speaks once to a main character, which is, again, by definition, a co-star role. Another definition of co-star "They often have lines, although there can be non-speaking co-stars, and they will likely work a single day." I think your understanding of what a co-star role is is different from the actual meaning of the role. 2603:8002:1800:8F69:DDDA:880A:261C:556F (talk) 02:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. Ok.

2. I think it is worthwhile to include considering continued criticism of RT.

3. In terms of that statement, that comes from the interview she did with Dunkleman. I would rather have more about her sexuality there than not.

4. The "decided to become an actress instead" part comes from what she told Naruda Magazine:

How has this [being an actor] changed your life? [Zech's answer:] In immeasurable ways. I really don’t know what I would be doing with myself if I wasn’t an actress. I considered going to law school to be a civil rights lawyer, which is a part of why I am so vocal about things like Black Lives Matter, women’s rights, and LQBTQ+ issues, but I am forever grateful to be where I am today.

5. In terms of co-star, I suppose you can say that (even though I'm not sure which role she appeared in), I just think it is worth at least noting what the name of the role she played. Historyday01 (talk) 04:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2. Fair

3. I still don't think it makes any sense and doesn't add anything but sounding a bit dumb. Her sexuality is already in the article, taking that out doesn't change the truth of it.

4. Nothing in her interview states those specific words though, which is why the differentiation is important. It wasn't just a one day off the cuff decision, it was a life of studying acting, voice, and musical theatre. The current entry feels diminishing of years of work and education.

5. Absolute agree on the title of the role, which is already displayed in the role column. I've seen the episode myself. She plays an unnamed waitress who speaks to a lead character, not much else to it, but still is a co-star role. 2603:8002:1800:8F69:95BD:317E:10B4:D8F2 (talk) 20:15, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]