Talk:List of Saturday Night Live cast members

A Few Changes

I made a few changes to the list. Hope you don't mind:

• First off, I think it's imortant to recognize and have one list of the orginal cast, just for monumental sake.
• The most major change: I've made it so that it went by 5-year periods and stayed more consistant regarding that division. Most fans tend to divide the show into "eras" (early 80s, late 90s, etc...) so I think it makes the list much more logical.
• I also included the current cast into their respecive "starting point" lists as well as the "current" list. It's a bit redundant, but I think it will make sense to the viewers, who can clearly see when each cast member started and with whom; and also who is in the current cast.
• I added spaces between the dashes regarding each cast member's tenure. Also for current cast members, I changed the "-Present" to just a blank space. This is technically proper, and makes the numbers look less cluttered, therefore much easier to read.
• I think it's important to differentiate between major cast members and those minor ones who were merely featured for a year or two, and writers who sometimes perform (i.e. for all intents and purposes, one could say that Al Franken has been on the show for 12 seasons, however since he was featured this is innacurate since he was not in every episode, and is unfair to someone such has Tim Meadows or Darrell Hammond who have performed much more often than Franken in only 9-10 seasons.
• Finally, I restructured a few sentences to make them easier to read; fixed minor spelling/grammar errors; and added the "dots" next to Jon Lovitz and David Spade who have "Best Ofs" coming out this Spring and Fall, respectively.

Distinguishing between writers has got to go. SNL makes no distinctions between cast members who write and cast members who don't. So, what's the definintion of a cast member who wrote most of the time? Also, I'm seeing names on the list that weren't listed in the credits. If they're not listed in the credits, they're not listed here. D. Wo. 00:05, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)

Fair enough on the Writers thing. I'll leave it up to you. As for the other names, the only one's I remember adding were "George Coe" and "Emily Prager" both of whom were credited. George Coe was in the 1st few episodes and is credited in list of the "NRF Primetime Players" (remember at this point, they were not called out individually, just shown on the screen). Emily Prager was also credited (called out by Don Pardo) in the 4/11/81 episode opening credits. She only appeared in this episode, but it was the same situation as Laurie Metcalf who was on the list. Anyway, if being on just one episode doesn't count, that's fine with me. You'd just have to remove Metcalf also, since they both received the same amount of credit in the same number of episodes.

Being born in 1986, I'll have to take your word for it. I just can't find any record of Prager. Coe, yes. I thought that he was on the list. Someone must have taken him off because I do remember putting him on the list to start.

George Coe is listed on the page as have an 8 episode tenure, yet the Notes state he was credited for the first 3 episodes. I'm curious on the criteria being used here. Is the tenure being based on the on-screen credit and/or audible introduction by the announcer? That would make the most sense. But if appearances on the show are being noted then where is Richard Belzer? He was in the jury for the courtroom sketch in the first show. How about Albert Brooks, who provided numerous films early on? No, the criteria has to be the specific introduction of the person as any part of the cast and not as a guest, either visual or audio.

Now, George was never introduced by the announcer, and per the official DVDs of the first season, he was only credited onscreen as NRFPTP for the first show. In addition to the "famous seven" both George and Michael O'Donoghue were included as well on the Carlin premiere. On the second show only the "famous seven". Then on the third show and the next few afterward, Michael O'Donoghue was back in the list, but George Coe's name was never credited again. Also he did appear uncredited beyond just the first season at least once, possibly more. See the video piece "Alan: A Video Junkie" from the 9/25/82 show with Chevy Chase. Coe was the Dr. who forced the kids to play video games.

So based on overt acknowledgement/crediting, I believe Coe's official tenure should be 1 episode, and multiple uncredited appearances in the first season and beyond. If it can be documented the number of uncredited appearances, that would be great, and it could be listed in the Notes, but the tenure needs to be 1 episode.

PS: RIP, George. Fgoron2000 (talk) 02:07, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Table

I need to make this page a table instead of a list. So, don't worry if it looks ugly now. D. Wo. 18:43, 2005 May 19 (UTC)

I think there's a mistake on the graph. It shows Rob Riggle as a current cast member, and he is not. Rob Riggle was a feature player during the 2004-2005 season only (according to his own Wikipedia page). 68.173.147.140 (talk) 19:30, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

"Three Groups"

"Three groups serve as “farm clubs” for the cast and writing staff: The improvisational comedy troupes The Groundlings and The Second City, Harvard Lampoon, and recently the Upright Citizens Brigade Theatre."

That's four. --Macarion 20:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Why is Molly Shannon listed as being a part of the 2006 season? Not under current players, but next to her name under past players. I haven't heard any news of her making a return... N.K.

Adjusted Maya Rudolph

I adjusted her dates because she decided not to quit after the 2008 season of SNL which makes her still a cast member. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.102.98 (talk) 08:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Darrell Hammond

He has made SNL History to become the longest running cast member ever in the history of SNL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.127.178.158 (talk) 21:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

• It may be worth mentioning in the main Saturday Night Live article, or probably better still, the opening paragraph of this article. Mainly.generic (talk) 08:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Jim Henson's Muppets?

Should there be a mention of the inclusion of the Muppets for the first season? They quickly fell out of favor and were dropped, but were listed in the opening credits (I believe as "Jim Henson's Muppets").146.122.71.68 (talk) 13:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

• I'd say they fall in more as "key inclusions", inline with TV Funhouse and the movies included in the first few seasons. Yeah, they were mentioned during the opening credits, but that hardly makes them "Cast Members"! Mainly.generic (talk) 08:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Icon hell?

Is it just me or did these edits turn the list into icon hell? For example, how does the (A-class article) icon come to mean deceased? -- Tcncv (talk) 01:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• Agreed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.109.179 (talk) 09:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I have to agree that the current icon used for deceased is just awful, and inconsistent with the icons used on season pages (a cross is used to denote a death). I also have to say, I kinda hate the anchor icon, and feel like the comprehension of the article would be improved if we put all the cast into a table, with columns like "featured player", "not ready for primetime", "writer", "newsdesk anchor" and the like.
    • Using a cross to denote death is awkward when the performer is Jewish, as in the case of Gilda Radner.--Edgewise (talk) 03:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
  • When I think about it, maybe it would be worth merging the cast and writers pages. I say this not as a blight against the articles themselves, but that so many of the cast wrote, and vice versa. I won't be making the change now, and would only proceed if there was a strong consensus.
  • Mainly.generic (talk) 05:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Best of

I should have the table of cast members completed soon, and am not adding "Best Of" honors to it. We have a DVD page for a reason (which will be expanded to include VHS releases in due course), and I feel like it makes this page seem a bit scattered with the inclusion here. That and it adds another page that has to be updated once new releases are made.

Mainly.generic (talk) 06:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Mass Removal of Sections

I have removed the following sections: Notable tenures, Best Ofs, Cast Members who have hosted These sections were, in effect, expanded trivia sections, with much of the information being redundant. I'm also planning to integrate the information from the "Family Connections" and "SNL curse" sections into the main article SNL article. Mainly.generic (talk) 08:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of Cast Members Birth/Death Dates

I have removed the list of birth and death dates that were added to the cast page. If readers want to know when a cast member was born, and when they died, they can view the cast member's personal page. This list is not supposed to be a complete repository on their lives, rather, it is supposed to tell readers the information that is directly pertinent to SNL. Do not re-add the information. If you feel like I have done wrong, take it up with an admin. Mainly.generic (talk) 03:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Placement of crucifix icon

I have once again moved the crucifix icon to the bottom of the table, and I will now justify my reason for doing so. In this table, and in written literature in general, when an icon, small letter, or number is marked next to something, it is known as a Wikipedia:Footnotes. Basically, it allows for the author to place a notification within the main text without significantly disrupting the flow of information. An explanation for the symbol is placed at the bottom of the page, where the reader is able to ascertain what it means at their own will. Having it at the bottom of the page means that it is not within the readers direct line of sight.

The top of of table is held exclusively for the title, while symbols and their definitions (footnotes) are directly under the main content. Trust me, I know this as a fact - I have completed two theses, and correct writing styles were drilled into me. There are set out rules in professional writing (it was the Chicago style I was trained in, which is the one most often in use), and these are rules we must follow.

Even if this explanation does not suffice, then I'll go for the more plain and simple - it's not done on Wikipedia. Look at all tables on here, notably the List of awards and nominations received by The Simpsons. They make the delineation at the bottom of the table, and being that it's a feature list, I'd say we can pretty much guarantee that they're doing it the way it should be done.

Mainly.generic (talk) 07:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

years active change

I am in the process of changing Years Active to Seasons Active. Because it is too confusing as of now. I will place them in the next day or so. Then I will begin placing links behind the season # to that page. I have went thru every Season page compiled lists of actors during that season. There are way to many mistakes doing it by year instead of season because every season starts in one year and ends in another. Which causes a lot of problems with how many years an actor is on the show.Swampfire (talk) 06:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

• Wow so many of the years are off by a atleast a year.Swampfire (talk) 07:00, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Have already applied change, with a sample of links behing seasonSwampfire (talk) 07:48, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The main reason for the fix is Saturday Night Live casts by season and not Year. Technically there are 2 seasons in every year because the show starts around Sept and runs til around May. They way the old chart was done somtimes had a cast member starting a season after or before tthey actually did. For instance sometimes you would see someone listed as 1984 - 1990. Which could actuallu mean 83-84 season or 84-85 sseason thru 89-90 season or 90-91 season. Which if you used 83-84 thru 90-91 that is 8 seasons they were on show, but if you used 84-85 thru 889-90 it was only 6. This caused huge problems in actually dating their tenure to give them the credit they deserve.Swampfire (talk) 20:06, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Timeline

I am added a timeline to the section, any objections to the format and how it is contained? Water78 ^{(talk • contribs)} 04 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't like the timeline format. There are no links to the actors pages. JDDJS (talk) 05:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC) I missed the first section. I know support it. JDDJS (talk) 05:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The timeline, especially with the current "generational" turnover in progress, is becoming quite unwieldy. A few possibilities for better usability:

• cast names also on right
• divider lines e.g. every fifth name, could be unobtrusive light gray
• splitting (yikes!) -- best split possibly at Damon Wayans forward

Any other suggestions? Just trying to get some solution rolling. I'm unable to handle this myself. --Dhartung | Talk 09:46, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I think it'd be great to put in divider lines and/or have the cast names on the right, but I've been under the impression that the timeline extension doesn't have any way to do either of those things. Looking at it again now, though, I think I see one or two possible methods that might work for divider lines. I'll try to experiment with it a bit. (Of course, if anyone else is able to figure it out, they're welcome to.) I don't want to have to split it, but I do agree there's a problem and obviously it would only get worse in time. Theoldsparkle (talk) 13:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

How many people were on this show?

How many people were on snl please write it in the part above the chat of cast members or do somthing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.245.39.73 (talk) 00:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Jimmy Fallon Host.

Jimmy Fallon is said to host the show in December we mind as well say he hosted.--GH200 (talk) 01:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

See what I told ya.--GH200 (talk) 05:23, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Denotes deceased

I don't understand why this article needs to point out the SNL performers that are deceased. Especially since there is a separate column specifying what years performers were active, which prevents any confusion as to whether or not the star still performs on SNL. Furthermore all actors who are deceased have their own wiki article, so it is easy to find out more about them by simply clicking their name. It is not denoted whether or not the stars are still alive on, say, the List of performers on Top of the Pops or List of performers on Frank Zappa records for example.

I propose removing denoting if the person is deceased. Also I don't think it is appropriate to denote if a person is deceased using a Christian cross. Can we get a reference that each deceased person was a Christian? I'm not sure if she was practising around the time of her death, but Gilda Radner was at least raised into the Jewish faith. As well as being inaccurate, Christianising the deaths of non-Christians is very disrespectful.

Any objections or comments? Freikorp (talk) 03:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Done. Freikorp (talk) 22:39, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

An IP editor undid my removal of the deceased category with the bizarre edit summery "please get consensus to rmv this long-standing content" [1]. Did I not make an attempt to get consensus on the talk page? I waited over 40 hours for comments before making my changes, but received no objections. Perhaps I could have waited longer but even now after two weeks even the IP editor who reverted my edit has made no comment here. How can I get consensus if nobody addressed my concern on the talk page? I am at least pleased, however, that this editor has addressed one of my two concerns by choosing a neutral symbol to represent the deceased. Now that the deceased have a neutral symbol and I am aware somebody actually wants the deceased category to remain in the article I won't push for its removal anymore, even though I see no reason for it to be in the article. Freikorp (talk) 05:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Freikorp, I was typing this while you were posting yours. Although I don't feel strongly one way or the other about whether deceased cast members should be indicated, I disagree with your unilateral removal for a few reasons. First, this is signficant (not minor), long-standing content - over four years. More importantly, not only was there no consensus, there was no input at all from any other editors; the thread was only open for less than 48 hours before you made the edit. If I had to choose, I would say that noting the deceased performers is appropriate because the show is extremely unique in that it's been on the air, on a major network, for almost 40 years. And its cast of course is comprised of individual performers, many who went on to have very successful entertainment careers on their own. I think the lists you referenced are an apples and oranges comparison. Also, the Top of the Pops example consists of many groups so obviously a group could not be denoted as deceased, so it wouldn't make sense to do it for the individuals. In any case, I think indicating the deceased actors in this article must be decided on its own merits. I definitely agree with your view that the using the cross as a symbol is inappropriate; that symbol wasn't always used. I've put back the deceased notations and changed the symbol to one that is neutral, the letter "d". Again, I think the deceased content is appropriate for this article and very helpful to readers. It would be very inconvenient to expect readers to have to go to the article of every actor just to see which are deceased; the list is way too long. Indicating the deceased in this articles make it simple, so I look at that as a very helpful improvement to the article and one is that is certainly encylopedic. However, I would not challenge a clear consensus for its removal. If you still want to pursue this matter, I would strongly suggest that you make a request for comments and allow a reasonable amount of time to get good participation from other editors. I sincerely appreciate your concerns, but I truly don't believe this matter is worth the effort. I would let it drop. The content is not hurting the article in any way and it's been there for many years. --76.189.98.149 (talk) 05:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

You make some valid points. I completely agree the matter is not important enough to be worth additional effort. The reason I removed it was because I couldn't imagine myself how this would be very useful to anyone, so I thought it was only making the page bigger than it had to be. Like I said, now that I am aware that somebody else finds it useful I am happy for it to remain. Freikorp (talk) 07:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I just want to note that while Freikorp could probably have waited a bit longer for comment before acting, I think his conduct was fine. I saw his post, thought about his question, and didn't care either way, so I didn't offer any comments. I don't think there was a burden on him to do anything beyond what he did (although I would also think it was okay for him to boldly make the change without asking first, as long as he was open to the possibility of subsequent reversion and discussion. Theoldsparkle (talk) 14:54, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I think this topic needs addressing again. I'm not sure of the benefit at all and eventually ALL of them are going to have a (d) next to their name. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:37, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

And so will you. Seriously though, it's not necessary -- but at least it's not like it was before (they're now small). But, it doesn't matter to me either way. --Musdan77 (talk) 01:38, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

That presumably won't happen until several decades after the show is cancelled, but I agree we should remove the (d)s when that time comes. Theoldsparkle (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Current Cast Members

Can somebody PLEASE add a section of current and featured cast members? While I appreciate the info charting three decades of SNL cast members, some of us just want to simply know who's on the show THIS SEASON. No reason it has to be so muddled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.7.106 (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

That information is at Saturday Night Live#Cast; I'm not convinced it needs to be spelled out here as well, although I'm not much opposed to it, either. Theoldsparkle (talk) 13:39, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Small change

Removed the claim under actor tenures that Kenan Thompson was the "first SNL cast member who got his start as a teen actor." Robert Downey Jr. and Anthony Michael Hall have both been cast members, and both were well known actors in their teens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elbruce (talk • contribs) 15:08, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Writers Section in the Timeline

What are people's thoughts on the Writer's section under the cast timeline? I believe the part had little use, since every cast member has a part in writing their own material for show. Feel free to discuss.

--Water78 (talk) 04:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Deceased former cast members / Saturday Night Live Curse

As currently posed, the section labeled "Deceased former cast members" is not encyclopedic, as all cast members will eventually be deceased. What makes this list notable is the "Saturday Night Live Curse". I tried to put a link to the New York Daily News, but if that reference is to "tabloidy" for Wikipedia, Here are some other links (easily found from Google): [2], [3], [4].

However, another reference challenges the "curse" [5] , which, if the community agrees with this source that the "curse" is not valid, would mean that the entire section should be removed, as death of former cast members would not be notable (whereas death of cast members while still on the show would be notable, but none of the deaths listed occurred while the people were with the show). Regardless of the opinions of the community, the fact is that the reference did mention (although in a challenging way) the existence of the "Saturday Night Live curse", so it can definitely be mentioned in the article, even if the curse validity was challenged (although I would say that WP:UNDUE would preclude adding the challenge of that one reference). However whatever (talk) 18:31, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

The question is not whether the alleged curse is valid. The question is whether it has significant coverage in multiple, indepenedent reliable sources. On the evidence, there does seem to be such coverage, both about the alleged curse and refuting its existence. Indeed, the fact that reliable sources have both reported on it and then been critiqued by other reliable sources seems to me nearly dispositive.

Quite apart from that, the edit-warring that's gone on here today, and some of the intemperate edit summaries, are exactly the sort of thing that drives away new (and even experienced) editors.

Hullabaloo we often agree on porn topics. I know you have a somewhat brusque style of discourse, and I often enjoy it, when it is leavened with good writing and, especially, humor. I'm not seeing that here. Why the vehemence? Am I missing something? David in DC (talk) 21:24, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Books that cover it. One with a chapter devoted to it.

[6]

[7]

[8]

David in DC (talk) 21:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I found However whatever's edit summary comments were tasteless, insensitive, and trivialized human tragedy. The rather unimportant pop culture has never, to my knowledge, been covered seriously (eg, comparing the SNL group to other, similar groups of entertainers. The death rates for SCTV cast members, Monty Python members, Hill Street Blues cast members, who knows which other groups, have been higher). And I'm also pissed off that somebody who was actually breaking 3RR stuck two warnings on my talk page while blithely continuing to revert. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 22:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

This claptrap has been rejected so many times, as recently as last month (and you were pushing it then). Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saturday Night Live Curse sums things up effectively. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 22:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Not withstanding my "tasteless, insensitive, and trivialized" edit summaries (which I'll ignore as a personal attack), it seems that there is a consensus that the Saturday Night Live curse has sufficient independent coverage to be mentioned in the article (the fact that it was deleted as an independent article is irrelevant, as that has a different threshold). For now I won't put the curse in the section heading, and we'll see how consensus forms on that question. However whatever (talk) 22:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

The text that existed in the status quo version prior to the edit war, already called it a "superstition", so there is really no need to show that the "curse" has been questioned. However whatever (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

However whatever, explain something to me, please. You are warned for edit warring, and then you go right back to it, claiming a consensus when discussion has only just started. Second, you claim you cite reliable sources--but your sources are sub-par, certainly compared to the three that were gifted to you in this very discussion. Bbb23, please see the history and tell me if you think that this edit, though it does not insert the disputed section heading, is a continuation of the edit war. I'm scratching my head here. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

All I did was return to the pre-edit war status quo w/ a replacement of primary sources by secondary sources. The primary sources were the only reason given for the removal of that sentence. However whatever (talk) 01:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of this discussion until now. A few weeks ago, I changed the heading from "Cast members who died prematurely" to '"Saturday Night Live Curse" (deceased former cast members)' (and an IP removed the "Saturday Night Live Curse" part), and I gave the edit summary as "Renamed heading; otherwise the section doesn't belong" -- meaning, the section is all about a so-called "curse", not just about cast members who have died. If it was the latter then it wouldn't be notable enough to be included -- and it could be discussed that the "curse" section is just trivial and not notable enough either. It doesn't matter to me whether the section stays or not, but what does matter is that if it does stay, the heading should indicate that it is about a "curse". --Musdan77 (talk) 19:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Somebody just undid my edits. I don't understand why this is a discussion. Remove the "cursed" section and just put a symbol next to the people who have died. Like what I did. The cursed section is trivial and unfair to the other cast who are not included but died. How is it fair that Gilda is included, but Tom Davis is not even though they both died of cancer. Water78 (talk) 01:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Or Jan Hooks, for that matter, who died from cancer just recently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.22.210.241 (talk) 05:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm with Water78. It seems a little ridiculous that Tom Davis' and especially Jan Hooks' deaths aren't notable in this article just because they don't lend credence to this "curse" nonsense (and that's what it is, BTW). I'd like to suggest removing the "curse" section altogether and simply footnoting the cast members who've died. Anyone else?PacificBoy 21:12, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Dave Golland (talk) 21:37, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Curious, the article states there are 10 persons related to this "curse", yet there are only 9 listed. Which is correct, is the list right and sentence wrong, or sentence right and someone missing from the list? Fgoron2000 (talk) 00:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

I changed the name of the section again from SNL Curse to Deceased Cast. The original intention of the section was to highlight the curse, but now the only aspect of keeping it is because everyone who died was under 60-years-old. I'd like to remove the section all together and add a footnote of some sort to the main graph to highlight the deceased members. Thoughts? Water78 (talk) 22:58, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

We can certainly debate the notability of this SNL curse, but a list of deceased cast members is not notable. All the cast members will die sooner or later. Banana Republic (talk) 03:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Okay, so we're in agreement for the removal of the section.

Water78 (talk) 20:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Steve Martin

Wasn't Steve Martin a regular SNL cast member? I seem to recall him being so or was he just a really frequent guest host? TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Steve Martin was a frequent host (15 times), but he was never a cast member. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.12.124 (talk) 04:06, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Both Cast and Host

The list shows numerous persons that hosted before, during and after being cast members. Over the years, it's become common and even popular for cast members to leave the show to further careers and for other reasons, and then to return to the show as a star in their own right, to host SNL. It's also well known the circumstance of Eddie Murphy hosting while a cast member when Nick Nolte became "sick" and couldn't appear. Eddie was also a star of the same film that Nolte was in at the time, so he was a natural to fill in at the last minute.

However, it's much more rare, and I think more interesting, for an established star to host the show first, and then join the cast afterward. To my knowledge, the only two who ever did this were Billy Crystal and Michael McKean. Crystal hosted first in March of 1984, and then later that fall he joined the cast for the following 1984-1985 season. He had previously been a star on Soap, had his own variety show on NBC, and was a very popular stand-up comic at the time. McKean first hosted in November of 1984, and then joined the cast much later in 1994. Before joining the cast he had starred in Laverne & Shirley as Squiggy, numerous films such as 1941, This is Spinal Tap, Clue, Earth Girls are Easy, and many others.

The idea of hosting a show first as a star, and then later joining the cast may be a bit of trivia, but I find it quite interesting, and wonder if it should be noted in the Casts and Hosts section.

Fgoron2000 (talk) 00:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Al Franken

From what I've researched, Al Franken didn't come back to SNL in 1987 for Season 13, he came back to the show in 1988 for Season 14, so he's been on the show for 11 seasons, not 12. -- Zach McAllen. 16:25, 23 September 2017

Cast Timeline

Hey,

I recently finished working on a new section for cast who have been nominated, and possibly won, an Emmy for their work on the show while still in the cast. I was looking at the overall layout on the page, and I want to pose a question. There is a section for list of cast and then a timeline of the cast as well. I've had a park in constructing both over the years, but I've now had a difference in opinion. I'm not positive if the timeline (the colored one) is honestly needed here. I believe that it's actually redundant.

What's your opinion to this issue. Water78 (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Personally I really like the colored timeline. It's a different way to view the information, and provides additional information that's not conveyed in the table. Takebackyourmink (talk) 13:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Brian Doyle-Murray in the cast table

For some reason, if you sort the table of cast members chronologically, Brian Doyle-Murray drops to the bottom, below the newest/current cast members. I cannot figure out what kind of formatting is causing this error (other cast members like Al Franken, who left the show and then returned are listed in their proper spots). Rather than keep experimenting and messing with the table, I thought I'd raise this issue here on the talk page and see if anyone can get that working properly.

98.190.223.50 (talk) 20:18, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Shane Gillis

Should Shane Gillis be added to this list? I mean technically he was a hired cast member, granted he got fired before the premiere of the new season but on the books he did work (albeit briefly) for SNL. What is everyone's opinion on this? YborCityJohn (talk) 22:40, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

No, definitely not. There have been a good number of SNL hires who didn't end up being on the show, and none of them should be or ever have been listed here. Shane Gillis was never on the show, and unlike Emily Prager, was never listed as a cast member in a single episode. He deserves to be mentioned on the SNL Season 45 page, but there is no need to add him to this page.

2600:8805:4200:3D0:8404:A74E:7953:E6A5 (talk) 22:51, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Steve Martin

I don't see Steve Martin mentioned in the article. --TheWolfius (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

User:TheWolfius Technically Steve Martin was not a cast member of Saturday Night Live he was a frequent guest and contributor in the same vein that Alec Baldwin would appear on SNL as Donald Trump he was paid for his appearance not as a cast member, same goes with George Wendt who made multiple appearances in a sketch about Da Bears! he was paid for his single appearances and not as a cast member. I hope this information helps. YborCityJohn (talk) 17:06, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Is there a reason Dan Vitale and Patrick Weathers don't have their own pages?

Are they not notable? Serendi^podous 20:07, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Patrick Weathers does have his own page which is linked under his name. Vitale is probably very borderline notable as he has had such a minor career and very little of note. However, someone could probably make a page for him and see if it passes notability standards.

98.190.223.50 (talk) 21:49, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Serendipodous, both individuals did have short articles, arbitrarily redirected here, without any prior discussion, earlier this year. Geo Swan (talk) 19:09, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Shortest cast members

Despite what is claimed in the editing history, Emily Prager WAS credited in a single episode and is a credited cast member. She needs to be listed with the cast in shortest tenures, not placed above with Shane Gillis (who shouldn't be mentioned here anyways).

74.96.73.138 (talk) 09:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I've added Prager back to the list of credited cast members, as she can't be considered in the same category as Gillis and O'Hara as she was credited and appeared in the opening sequence of her one episode.

However, this page needs to add some consistency regarding the list of shortest cast tenures. It currently counts uncredited appearances for a number of individuals (including Michael O'Donoghue, who was credited in one episode only but then appeared frequently as an uncredited guest, which this list takes into account), but other names on the list, like Dan Vitale, are numbered based on credited episodes (3 in his case) and not all appearances uncredited or no.

It seems to make the most sense to base this list only on credited appearances as a cast member for consistencies' sake, but that would be up to consensus.

98.190.223.50 (talk) 16:53, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 26 April 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved (non-admin closure) ~SS49~ {talk} 01:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

---

Saturday Night Live cast members → List of Saturday Night Live cast members – As a list-class list article, this article title should conform to the standard of all other list articles and include "List of" in its name. Elizium23 (talk) 22:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support for the reasons stated by Elizium23. Sundayclose (talk) 22:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

credited tenure vs. unaccredited tenure

Not that this is awfully important to me, but I took note while reading the sections "Longest Tenures" and "Shortest Tenures" that several actors' tenures are amended with statements regarding unaccredited episodes while the "Number of Episodes" in the table represents only the accredited episodes.

For posterity's sake, should not this list order them by the total number of episodes, accredited or not, and then (as addendum) note the number of unaccredited episodes in their respective subsections? I am aware this entails watching all of those episodes, but that is the very kind of thing of which Wikipedia is uniquely capable. Just sayin' 220.221.136.183 (talk) 18:54, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Should Dan Vitale have an article?

Everyone else does. Serendi^podous 08:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

A little context would help those besides yourself understand why you are asking. Who is Don Vitale? Sundayclose (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The only person on this list whose name redirects to this list. Serendi^podous 16:32, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. It also helps to spell it correctly for those who try to search. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it should be DAn Vitale. He seems to be notable, although I could find very little about him with Google (after weeding out American football player Danny Vitale). So the only requirement for an article is someone who's willing to put in a lot of time to dig deep for information and write the article. Sundayclose (talk) 16:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

OK. Fixed. There is this, but you probably already saw it. Serendi^podous 17:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be a few curious people out there, curious about his birthday and birthplace, as well as a biography of him. I believe Norm Macdonald even asked people about his birthday. IMDB and wikipedia don't have a lot on the man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.31.165.138 (talk) 11:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Longest tenure

Come March or so Cecily Strong, and Aidey Briant will equal then pass Tim Meadows. As they're unlikely to leave before then, is it worth adding them to the longest tenures just now (at 9 years) in preparation for that change, or just wait till that record occurs? Granted the other 9 season tenures Kevin Nealon and Maya Rudolph aren't in there, but these two actresses have already passed Rudolph's main cast number of episodes, and will pass Nealon's in less than a month. They're also only 5 episodes behind Kate McKinnon who is on the list albeit started before the summer break giving her six months a longer tenure. 82.11.86.191 (talk) 16:38, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL applies Elizium23 (talk) 16:39, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Granted, but there's no defined limit on the number of entries on the list. They'll pass everyone who isn't on the list by next month and could be added at that point whether or not they eventually pass Meadows in March. 82.11.86.191 (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Idea for section

The vast majority of SNL's cast members of course appeared on the show either as their first major gig or very early in their careers and became famous either because of their SNL involvement (pretty much all the original cast) or at a later time (such as Robert Downey Jr.). However, some main cast members joined the show long after they had become notable in their own right. I'd like to suggest a section indicating those individuals. Examples would include Randy Quaid, Billy Crystal, Martin Short and Michael McKean. Just a thought. 70.73.90.119 (talk) 21:54, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

The entire section about the President should be removed

The justification for that section is a meaningless fluff line in a meaningless fluff piece in a meaningless fluff publication, and the article isn't even up any more. The President impression is not really important enough to be in the "List of Saturday Night Live cast members". 69.113.166.178 (talk) 08:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

We don't remove notable information simply because you don't like it. Your comment is so vague that it's meaningless. Your calling something "fluff" doesn't make it fluff. And which "article isn't even up any more"? Sundayclose (talk) 15:57, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

The citation reference has been fixed, so the "article isn't even up any more" argument no longer applies. Although I don't necessarily want to see the section deleted, the reference is indeed weak. The "high honor" quote is attributed to an unsigned editorial. A better reference would definitely be needed. --Banana Republic (talk) 16:29, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

I think if you were interested you could have just looked to see, SundayClose. That section opens by justifying its own notability, which should be a red flag by itself. Is it "notable information"? Is your claim that it's notable sufficient? Would you like to check the citation and think about whether it's fluff or sufficient to justify the line and establish notability? 69.113.166.178 (talk) 16:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Impersonation of Biden

In preparation of Biden's impersonation on SNL as a sitting president, it may be worthwhile to note who impersonated Biden prior to assuming the presidency. We know that he was impersonated by Jim Carrey as a Democratic presidential nominee, but I cannot remember who impersonated Biden during the eight years that Biden was Vice President. I believe Jason Sudeikis impersonated him during the first term, but given that Sudeikis left the cast in 2013, I assume someone else impersonated Biden during the 2nd term. Banana Republic (talk) 16:11, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

When did they stop calling the cast the Not Ready for Prime Time Players?

The introduction says, "The ensemble was originally referred to as the Not Ready for Prime Time Players", but it does not say when they stopped using that title. That information should be available somewhere in this article, either explicitly or as a link to some other article in which it is given. I admit that I did not sift through the miles of trivial information looking for it, but the best place would be here in the intro, replacing the ambiguous "originally" with "through season n" or something equivalent.--8.9.88.105 (talk) 09:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

SNL Curse -- Should be removed

I would like to move that the entire section labeled SNL curse should be removed. A simple listing of deceased SNL cast members does not have relevance to this article, as discussed thoroughly on this talk page in 2012 and 2014. The only reason that section exists is because of the supposed notability of the "SNL curse" of seven cast members passing away before the age of 60. This is nonsensical, on it's face, because there have been 150+ cast members so just by the laws of probability and life expectancy this isn't particularly unusual. So the only reason for inclusion is if the curse is well-sourced as a pop culture idea relevant and notable for this article. However, the sources linked for that section are merely a single Huffington Post article asking if there is a curse and a listicle simple listing off cast members who have died. Based on these sources a whole section about a Curse and saying (without any sources) that "This has given rise to a superstition..." seems unwarranted and not justifiable. I think this section should be removed from the page as a list of deceased cast members is not encyclopedic and the supposed curse is not notable or sourced as a real phenomenon. I would like some input before making this change, however.

2600:4040:11A6:3000:A121:4153:53F5:38E6 (talk) 18:26, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I agree that it should be removed. With over 150 people, it's coincidence, not a "curse", that seven of them died prematurely (and three of those from natural causes). The probability facts on this are fairly simple. It's an imagined "curse" that attracts attention but has no substance. Even the sources cited provide little support, and one of them even says "there probably isn't a curse". Get rid of it. Sundayclose (talk) 18:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Revisited: 2024

I agree that this section and the premise upon which it is based are ridiculous things to mention on an encyclopedia page. The 2600 IP above puts it quite well: it's all based on a not-particularly-reliable HuffPo source (ProTip: When a headline asks a question like "Is There A 'Saturday Night Live' Curse?", the answer is invariably no) which, anyway, actually only points to a TruTV 18-page click-bait piece, "backed up" by the aforementioned listicle from Mental Floss. What, we couldn't find a story from the New York Post or the National Enquirer?

I found a web page offering calculations for life expectancy (scientific reliability unassessed) which gave 60-year-olds odds of dying at "1 in 83" for men and "1 in 137" for women. If there are 167 people in our SNL sample, then we can easily expect two or three to go just by statistical average. Make them entertainers in fast-moving New York, with a budget for narcotics, and it's not hard to picture five or so going before 60. We've got three cancers, a stroke, one murder, one suicide and two drug overdoses. Not a curse, just life. And some bad luck.

Let's rip this section out once and for all. No replacement, no additional mention of which cast members are dead, no mention of a "superstition" (for which I find zero evidence), just delete it (and let the rest of the page recover in peace). — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 18:09, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Cast timeline colors

The colors were pretty random until now, so I propose to make this visually more consistent with ROYGBV repeated in order, so red (pink), orange (lightorange), yellow2 (yellow), green (limegreen), blue (skyblue), purple (lavender). Some lines have multiple colors and no clear reason why (e.g. David Spade goes from pink to magenta to red), some colors seem randomly thrown in as alternates (redorange is "light orange" maybe? teal is... "light green" maybe, I sincerely have no idea? There are both oceanblue and skyblue: why?) Thoughts? Note that this may also run afoul of WP:COLOR by using color and no other identifier. I'll look into it more. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I counted over a dozen colors in the timeline.

It's been awhile since anyone has touched it. But I'm thinking the timeline colors should be, quite simply, three: red for repertory, blue for middle, and yellow2 for featured (darker to lighter based on a cast member's placement). I have no idea why there's so many different colors now (for example, why is Aykroyd red but Belushi orange when both were repertory at the same time).

Also, if a cast member was a Weekend Update anchor, a smaller-in-width gray line can go thru the middle of their main color during their tenure as anchor.

The dozen+ colors just looks like an absolute mess in my opinion. Three should be enough. Xanarki (talk) 17:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I think there are many colors to be visually distinct by person, not by some kind of performer. I'm also not clear on what "middle" means...? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

There were 3 groups which designated the cast members. Middle was a group that was used for about 10 seasons or so.

Above the timeline it says... "Lighter colors denote "featured players" versus repertory cast members."

Thus why I figured 3 colors for the 3 groups would make more sense. Xanarki (talk) 20:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, sorry--I was just speaking from memory without looking at the article. Anyway, I would support that kind of division, sure. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)