- Tom Smith Online
- Support Tom at Patreon
- Buy Tom's Music at Bandcamp
- Host a House Concert
- Tom's Facebook Musician Page
- Tom's Facebook Personal Page
- The FuMP - The Funny Music Project
- 2015 Appearances
- Apr 3-5: ConGlomeration (Louisville, KY)
- Apr 24-26: PenguiCon (Southfield, MI)
- May 8-10: MarCon (Columbus, OH)
- Jun 5-7 (hopeful): FuMPFest (Wheeling, IL)
- Jun 26-28 (hopeful): LibertyCon (Chattanooga, TN)
- Jul 30-Aug 2 (hopeful): GenCon Indy
- Aug. 19-23: Sasquan, the 73rd World Science Fiction Convention (Spokane, WA)
- Sep 4-7: DragonCon (Atlanta, GA)
- Sept 26-28 (tentative): FenCon (Addison, TX)
- Oct 23-25: OVFF (Worthington, OH)
- Nov 13-15: WindyCon (Lombard, IL)
- Nov. 20-22: SFConTario (Toronto, ONT, Canada)
- Nov 27-29: ChessieCon (Baltimore, MD)
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007, 10:39 am
The Black Hole Of Wikipedia
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
ETA: The call to delete the page was withdrawn.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 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 04:10 pm (UTC)
I take your point, and I agree. The gist of what I was saying is that your genre is acknowledged (you're also categorized as a singer/songwriter, fwiw), and so success within that genre, regardless of mainstream recognition, ought to be sufficient to get the page about you retained.
I'm not involved in editing Wikipedia, so I don't know what the standard for non-notability is, but it looks like someone's decided it's "Well, I've never heard of him...". On that basis, I could cut a great swath through those Celtic and goth bands... :)
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 04:45 pm (UTC)
Howard Tayler has nearly the exact same rant when it comes to the terms "webcomics" and "webcartoonist". He says that he's not a webcartoonist, he's a cartoonist whose medium of distribution happens to be the Internet... and he's found that when he's talking to the vast majority of people who don't live on the Internet, the latter description means something to them, and the former makes them glaze over, or dismiss him as unfamiliar, or only important on the web.
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 05:04 pm (UTC)
Interestingly, Russ says that at least some of the "wizard-rock" filkers (and they ARE filkers, dammit!) have exactly the same look-down-their-noses attitude about us. He got the Frigid Glare from 2 different ones at NASFIC for daring to suggest that they might show up at the filk; one of them dismissed us with, "They don't have a stage." Excuse me, lukeski
gets stage performances, and HE isn't above hanging out at the open filk! What's with these Special Snowflakes?
(And yes, I've seen those "No Filking Allowed" signs too. That's one reason I don't buy Steve Brust's books.)
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 05:09 pm (UTC)
I will point out that I performed on a stage twice this past NASFiC. A whole bunch of other filkers did as well.
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 05:06 pm (UTC)
Genres + egos = intra-subculture pissing contests.
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 04:45 pm (UTC)
Yeah, that was my thinking on the subject. If you have an article on filk, the article must have referential links to the most well-known or influential of the filkers. I haven't read that entry, but leaving Tom Smith off of a discussion of filk seems rather like leaving Washington out of the whole formation of the United States story. You COULD do it, but something would be missing.
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 04:53 pm (UTC)
Millard Fillmore, maybe. ;)
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 04:55 pm (UTC)
American history really isn't my thing, as you can probably tell. I should've stuck with literature, or something.
Literature without Jane Austen, maybe?
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 04:58 pm (UTC)
Some damned Roosevelt, at least :-)
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 06:14 pm (UTC)
But wouldn't it be grand if we could talk about the Presidents of the United States and skip over George W. Bush completely?
Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007 06:16 pm (UTC)
Ah, if only . . .