Log in

No account? Create an account

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007, 10:39 am
The Black Hole Of Wikipedia

shsilver informs me that the Wikipedia page about me is under discussion for deletion.

This amuses me to no end.

It was under discussion for deletion in 2004, y'know. I didn't even know I had a Wikipedia page until sarekofvulcan told me it was under the gun.

I say now what I said then: I don't need a Wikipedia page. I mean, I like having it, and if I think about it I suppose I can justify to myself that I might deserve one. I have done a few things of some note.

But for all that I love and support Wikipedia, there is one thing about it that makes me crazy (and if you really want a rant on this topic, just wind up partiallyclips): the notion that someone can decide you're not worthy of inclusion on the apparent basis of their likes and dislikes.

The guy who's trying to get me deleted seems to have a problem with my existing on Wikipedia because I'm not notable enough, or something. His own page lists him as "a comics/SF fan with a background in mathematics, living in the Greater Manchester area (that's in England, folks)". It mentions his Doctor Who fandom, and hints that there's a story behind his nickname. And, apparently, he comments on his own page.

I'm not calling for the deletion of his page.

ETA: The call to delete the page was withdrawn. Many thanks for the yeoman work, gang. I am flattered by and grateful for your efforts to prove that I'm Somebody.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 02:56 pm (UTC)

*laugh* Randy of Something Positive found out that his page was deleted, as well, IIRC.

Perhaps someone felt his "lack of notoriety" was interfering with their lint collection or some such. ;)

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:34 pm (UTC)

Yeah, he mentions that below. I could've sworn the idea of Wikipedia was to include everything. Lack of recognition in the mainstream for otherwise worthy things is one of the reasons for having a Wikipedia.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 02:57 pm (UTC)
giza: Minor clarification of terms

I know I'm being pedantic here, but I feel the need to clarify the terminology so as to clear up any misconceptions that may arise further down in the comments.

It's not "your WikiPedia article", but rather "an article on WikiPedia about you". The reason why I make that distinction is that the former implies ownership of the content while the latter implies that you are the subject of an article, which is more accurate.

And the reason I'm even mentioning this is that, given my experience on WikiFur, people will confuse the two. :-/

Good luck!

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:01 pm (UTC)
filkertom: Re: Minor clarification of terms

Interesting point. I adjusted the wording above from "my Wikipedia page" to "the Wikipedia page about me". Better?

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:08 pm (UTC)

As I am sure others will chime in, a lot of stuff hase been deleted lately, Dementia Radio, Hot Waffles, at least yours is getting a discussion. Apparently someone thinks that if they don't know who you are, you have to go.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:28 pm (UTC)

The amusing thing is that the Defender Of Wikipedia Standards[tm] who initiated the deletion vote seems to have found some standards (i.e. the one that says "notify the article creator about deletion votes") to be less equal than others.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:12 pm (UTC)

The simple fact that a "filkers" category exists says to me that notable filkers, and I don't think anyone can argue that you're not a notable filker, get pages about them...seems like a no-brainer to me.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:24 pm (UTC)

See, at core this is why I encourage people to avoid the terms "filk" and "filkers" when discussing the genre with nonfilkers. I remember seeing posters for room parties which read, "Real Music - No Filk". I am going through forty-seven kinds of I don't even want to say with Dragon*Con because the filkers are treated differently from the "musicians" -- i.e., the Celtic acts and the goth bands. We are musicians first and foremost, dammit, and filk is our genre, not our phylum.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:13 pm (UTC)

I just added the link to the SciFi Channel's review of your CD and book. I wonder if that's notable enough for this jerk. :-D

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:18 pm (UTC)

Thanks. There was also a review of Last Hero on scifi.com's SciFi Weekly.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:22 pm (UTC)

Looks like the "Great Dementia Decimation" is still going on.... -.-

Tom Lehrer, yes TOM LEHRER, was even briefly considered for deletion, until a mod (who recognized Lehrer's impact) intervened and not only untagged the article, but DELETED THE DISCUSSION AND ANY REFERENCES TO IT out of embarrassment.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:23 pm (UTC)



If Wikipedia won't have us, we'll make our own Wiki! With Blackjack! And Hookers!! ;)

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:26 pm (UTC)

"I want the expurgated version."

"The expurgated version of Wikipedia?"

"Yes. The one without Tom Smith."

"The one without Tom Smith? They've all got Tom Smith! He's a standard, erm, topic for an encyclopedia. Smith's in all the Wikipedias!"

"Well, I don't like him. He wets his lyrics."


"All right, then. I'll remove him!" RIIIIIIP There! No Tom Smith! You happy now?"

"I don't like Jon Stewart either..."

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:33 pm (UTC)

Damn, now I have to get my Computer Support to replace my keyboard.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:26 pm (UTC)

Heh - mine was deleted a week or so back because "no one's heard of my comic."

Yeah. It's just read by more than a quarter of a million people.

Wikipolitics are weird.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:30 pm (UTC)

Like I said, talk to Rob. Apparently there's some admin or other who doesn't like web comics, or thinks they have no audience or importance, or something -- a matter easily disproved with a single T-shirt.

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:33 pm (UTC)
nimitzbrood: Maybe you _should_ call for his page to be deleted..

Just FYI this also is happening/happened to John Lotshaw of Accidental Centaurs.

This whole thing goes against the spirit of Wikipedia...

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:38 pm (UTC)

WiKipedia serves one great purpose, it serves as a home for all those officious, heads up their asses, idiots giving them a place to go, so they'll leave the rest of us alone.

They're are from the same group of people who use to write LOCs to fanzines.

But, seriously, its these people who defend WiKi's that will be their downfall. Cause applying complete analism and assholeism to the editing practice will destroy everything that WiKi's were created to do.


Thu, Aug. 30th, 2007 01:12 pm (UTC)

Ahem. :-)

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:44 pm (UTC)

Apparently the guy who started it all just found an article that quotes you in the Times of India

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:51 pm (UTC)
filkertom: Three More

The Wired article from last year.

The Bodyhack blog entry about my song "Bodyhacking".

The AfterElton.com blog and subsequent interview regarding "Two Guys Kissin' Ruined My Life".

This is fun. :)

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:52 pm (UTC)

I just added in support, having played your music on my radio show back in '92-'93.

Obviously, this dude has way too much argument time on his hands.
(Deleted comment)

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 03:58 pm (UTC)

Jeez. I thought that was why we all have our own blogs/LJs/MySpace/FaceBook pages, and why conventions have different programming tracks.