This article was nominated for deletion on 12 June 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
I removed the following bolded text from the Personal History section:
It is unsourced, and it appears libelous. I think someone should find a source for this information before it gets put back in. — Äþelwulf See my contributions. 00:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I added the Suburban Perspective with Scotty J to the list of features. Also, should only current features be included? How Chicks Think has (thankfully) not returned to v5.0.RWgirl 23:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I feel like this entry should be broken into two entries. One for the Rick Emerson Show and the other for Rick himself. This would allow the duplicate entries regarding the show to be removed from Tim Riley's entry, plus the man should be separated from show. TEG 15:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I want to raise a concern for the consideration of privacy with specific respect to a recent addition to the Personal History section that included his wife by her first name, profession and the general region of the city that they live in. I see the relevance of mentioning his marriage - especially since it involved a bit of eloping and a return the next week to surprise the audience. I do believe, however, that inclusion of his wife's name, profession and the region of the city that they live in brushes up against issues raised in the Wikipedia standards for Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Privacy_of_contact_information and Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Privacy_of_names.
While his wife's name, profession and their general region of residence has been mentioned on the air, it seems like erring on the side of caution for a living person should be favored. Especially since there is little significance to adding specific identifying details, though it is agreed that these bits of information have been mentioned on the air a few times.
I have edited the line to read with less personal specifics, but to mention the greater context of them eloping over a weekend to return and surprise the audience the following week. It seems this bit of information might be of more interest to readers than specifics of his wife's name and profession. I could possibly see the relevance of mentioning the region of the city they live in, since ridiculing it is a frequent part of the show, but I'm unsure if this is relevant for an encyclopedic document. Perhaps instead of mentioning it specifically, we should simply say that comments are often made regarding the supposed crime level and lowest-common-denominator makeup of the part of the city Rick resides in?
At any rate, I have edited this information for the current time and would welcome other thoughts and discussions about it. Perhaps others feel differently about this. Cordell (talk) 05:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I deleted the inaccurate birthname that was put here. Considering Rick has been very careful not to disclose the fact that Rick Emerson isn't his real name, I have chosen not to add his birth name to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.166.90.32 (talk) 03:55, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
As not to upset the army of Rick, I wanted to point out that the link for Remote Control, take you to some kind of link/search page. I don't think people are looking for a Ceiling Fan remote.
Should be taken out right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.192.56.235 (talk) 22:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:BTJ.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
here. -Pete (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
It's nice that certain busy-bodies have deemed it their personal quest in life to decide what radio personalities are worthy of being documented in a wikipedia article. Good for you.
This particular individual, along with the rest of their show's cast, is notable because they have hosted a four hour show in the 23rd largest market in the nation every single week day for more than ten years and the show was nationally syndicated (as the article states) for more than three years.
In addition, as is also mentioned, the article's subject also wrote and performed in an extremely popular play and movie (Bigger Than Jesus). A significant portion of the listening audience is online, around the world. Especially in the military and among the large geek following.
I don't understand this infatuation with a radio personality only being notable if they're currently nationally syndicated and as popular as, say, Howard Stern. I do, however, agree that someone should include additional references in the article to the numerous media coverage regarding Rick Emerson and his radio show. Particularly, the articles regarding the "Coffee Cup Crusade" and the recent article(s) by the Portland Tribune.
As for anecdotal "notability", I live in the midwest and it's certainly notable to me and those around me who listen on a regular basis via streaming. Cordell (talk) 17:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm unable to locate two items that seem to no longer exist. One is the Talker Magazine article about the Rick Emerson Show when it was nationally syndicated. The other is the Oregonian news paper's article about the disturbance of the market when the show was taken off the air, especially focusing on the Coffee Cup Crusade that pushed to get the show back on the air -- it seems the Oregonian's web archive expunges articles rather quickly. If you can locate any of these or similar links, please include them (at the least, in the links section). Cordell (talk) 18:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I would like to add that one of the reasons for The Rick Emerson Show being deleted was supposedly the existence of this article. Deleting this in addition to the show's page would rather cancel that out. Owenja (talk) 22:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
If there are no complaints, I plan to restructure this article into a more typical Early Life, Career, Projects, Personal Life format. Cordell (talk) 18:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The recently added paragraph in this section is almost certainly someones attempt at humor but for the sake of conversation I'll add a dispute instead of simply rollbacking it.
Unless you can come up with citations that back up the claims made here, the paragraph is going away. Sionus [talk] 22:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rick Emerson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
((dead link))
tag to http://community.livejournal.com/rickemerson((dead link))
tag to http://community.livejournal.com/rickemerson/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:11, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rick Emerson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 18 September 2017 (UTC)