Talk:Justin Berry/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
:Just standard operating procedure in a case like this.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 14:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC) |
:Just standard operating procedure in a case like this.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 14:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC) |
||
:* Not sure what you mean because I'm not really privy to the details. I will say that I had previously read the article and didn't see anything outlandish. I'm also somewhat surprised that Mr. Berry would complain. Given how he achieved his fame (webcam, Times expose with which he fully cooperated, Oprah, etc), I wouldn't have thought he was opposed to exposure. -- [[User:JJay|JJay]] 18:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC) |
:* Not sure what you mean because I'm not really privy to the details. I will say that I had previously read the article and didn't see anything outlandish. I'm also somewhat surprised that Mr. Berry would complain. Given how he achieved his fame (webcam, Times expose with which he fully cooperated, Oprah, etc), I wouldn't have thought he was opposed to exposure. -- [[User:JJay|JJay]] 18:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC) |
||
:* In other words, "in a case where someone has unusual views even though they are writing an unbiased article despite those views". Okay. - Ella |
|||
==Photo== |
==Photo== |
Revision as of 19:45, 8 March 2006
Total rewrite?
I'd like to see this article totally rewritten by uninvolved wikipedians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimbo Wales (talk • contribs) 04:09, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sorry...is this part of some project? JHMM13 (T | C) 04:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that this article should possibly be a redirect to Kurt Eichenwald. Academic Challenger 04:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- The subject of the article called Jimbo personally and was very upset about something in the article. So we're going to go through and rewrite being very careful about sourcing. JesseW, the juggling janitor 04:17, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Possible references
- "Through His Webcam, A Boy Joins A Sordid Online World" - The New York Times (December 19, 2005)
- "NY Times Internet Documentary" - The New York Times (December 19, 2005)
- "The New York Times Legal Aid Society" - Slate Magazine
- "KurtEichenwald.com: The Back Story" - Slate Magazine
- "A Heartbreaker From Eichenwald And The Times" - CBS News
- Justin's Amazon.com Wishlist.
These are the sources used in the old version of the article; they are a good place to start, I suppose. JesseW, the juggling janitor 04:17, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- I added them in as external links (except the last one, that's rather creepy) and rewrote this to have some semblance of relevance. It's bare bones, and I doubt (hope!) that those changes won't be disputed.--Sean Black (talk) 04:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- The amazon wishlist is a big part of the story. You should read the times article. I also don't see why the previous article was completely trashed. From what I recall it was fairly well done. -- JJay 09:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- Just standard operating procedure in a case like this.--Jimbo Wales 14:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean because I'm not really privy to the details. I will say that I had previously read the article and didn't see anything outlandish. I'm also somewhat surprised that Mr. Berry would complain. Given how he achieved his fame (webcam, Times expose with which he fully cooperated, Oprah, etc), I wouldn't have thought he was opposed to exposure. -- JJay 18:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- In other words, "in a case where someone has unusual views even though they are writing an unbiased article despite those views". Okay. - Ella
Photo
Is there any reason why we can't have the photo Image:JustinAt15.jpg in the article? Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 18:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)