Talk:Justin Berry/Archive 1
You People are A Joke
Wikipedia has come a long way baby! Wasn't the idea to promote informative articles? Isn't Justin Berry a public personality, and isn't his story worth telling? No sex please, we're Wikipedia! Nothing controversial please, we're Wikipedia! When the NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW (God bless the view from nowhere) gives Wiki-pedestrians the license to delete entire articles, full of facts, then Wikipedia has lost it's reason for being. But I figured that out 4 years ago! Pity on fools who continue to believe in the Wiki-fantasy. Anon-o-Christ 01:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
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)
- Even if the article needs a total rewrite, all the prior versions should still be preserved in the history. My understanding of the Wikipedia biography policy is that people should not be influencing their own bios. This probably goes double for reformed camwhores doing the talk show circuit flogging the right wing child sex and porn agenda. Hermitian 22:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Redirect instead?
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)
- Jimbo, why don't you write the new article, since you are apparently the only person who knows what was wrong with the prior one, and you don't seem to be forthcoming with any details. Hermitian 22:31, 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)
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)