Talk:Joi Ito

This Article is Extraordinarily Bad

I don't know Ito, but this article gives me a bad impression. It's trite. It's sappy. It's a masterpiece of bloviation. It was worse before, and it is still nauseating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.135.164.197 (talk) 05:41, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Instead of all this self-absorbed garbage about Joi Ito, lets compare another person's Wikipedia entry that is more appropriate, Craig Newmark. Factual. Brief. To the point. Not all of this bullshit we see in the Joi Ito article, 90% of which is useless crap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.135.181.179 (talk) 17:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Attempts at education

Isn't saying "attempted, again, to educate himself" rather rude to the obviously intelligent man? Is there a better way to say this?

Partner vs Wife

Actually, Mizuka and I are not married yet so we are "partners" but not spouses... yet. --Joi 19:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe they will never marry ("yet"?)... what is the point of having her picture in his Article???? Other wiki article about notable persons usually do not have pictures of their partners?? Can we take this picture out, there is no relevance. --SasiSasi (talk) 12:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, it means BUSINESS partner, obviously.

No one's gonna put a picture of a GIRLFRIEND in an article like this!!

64.48.78.7 (talk) 20:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Right, I removed the picture and her first name.... I assume she has a surname(?), if we need her name in the article, it should be her full name. --SasiSasi (talk) 08:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You have provided no reason based on Wikipedia policy why this free image, relevant to the topic, should not be used in the article. Ito has confirmed above that the individual is his girlfriend. Unless there is a sound argument forthcoming, I am restoring the content to the article. Skomorokh 08:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead... since this is MySpace and we should invite all living notable persons to post a picture of their girlfriend in their Article. Show me one other notable person article that contains a picture of the girlfriend. --SasiSasi (talk) 09:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

As you wish. It is a free, high quality image relevant to the text of the article, and you have declined to make any argument for removing it. Skomorokh 09:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Here we go... "Wikipedia is not a social network such as MySpace or Facebook. You may not host your own website, blog, or wiki at Wikipedia. Wikipedia pages are not: Personal web pages. Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your resume, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account..."

Also:

"Autobiography Avoid writing or editing articles about yourself, since most of us find objectivity especially difficult when we ourselves are concerned (however it is not impossible.). Contribute on the talk page instead. Feel free to correct mistaken or out-of-date facts about yourself."

Its not "verifiable" and not "sourced" apart from the fact that Joi Ito has edited his own article, which is discouraged as per Wikipedia policy.

Also: "Privacy of names Caution should be applied when naming individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed (such as in certain court cases), it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When evaluating the inclusion or removal of names, their publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Editors should take particular care when considering whether inclusion of the names of private, living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of the privacy of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved persons without independent notability is correspondingly stronger. In all cases where the redaction of names is considered, editors should be willing to discuss the issue on the article's talk page."

I think the fundamental problem is that Joi has started editing his own article heavily, without his involvement we would not have a picture of the lady in the first place, and would not have a discussion about this. I fail to see how a picture of his girlfriend is relevant to the article (as he is notable in a professional capacity, not for his private life). Just because something is a free image does not mean we have to include it in Wikipedia. --SasiSasi (talk) 09:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. You claim that " the fundamental problem is that Joi has started editing his own article heavily" when he has not edited the article since September 28, 2007. Your quote from WP:MYSPACE and WP:AUTO are thus irrelevant. A picture of the girlfriend of Joi Ito is relevant to this article because this article concerns Joi Ito. Notability of individuals on Wikipedia is all or nothing - statements like "he is notable in a professional capacity, not for his private life" are incoherent in a Wikipedia context. The image of Ito's girlfriend comes from his own Flickr account, so biographies of living people privacy concerns are scarcely relevant here. Skomorokh 09:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

We agree that we disagree on that one then. If you think that a encyclopaedia should include private pictures of non-notable girlfriends (only identified by their first name), that’s fine by me (thankfully this has not yet become the norm in Wikipedia).... I just hope Joi let us know when they break up (or finally marry), so we can update the article accordingly, it would be a shame if we or anybody else in the world should miss this absolutely relevant and important piece of information.--SasiSasi (talk) 10:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Let me be the tiebreaker. Who the *bleep* CARES who he's dating?!

You led me to believe it was his BUSINESS partner. If it's just some babe he's shacked up with in Chiba, it doesn't deserve even a MENTION here!

If she is actively involved in his business and/or philanthropy (as, say, Melinda Gates), I would say a mention is in order. Not a photo. Unless it's a photo of them together cutting a ribbon or something. Or unless she is famous in her own right and you want to say "He's been linked to...".

But if she's just some nobody in the background -- as evidenced by the fact that we don't even know her FULL NAME (!) -- well then, let her remain in the "background"....

I.e. no photo, no name, no mention.

My two cents. 64.48.78.8 (talk) 12:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, well, I understand they have a meaningful relationship, its not just quick sex in Chiba! Why would we otherwise have to discuss her picture in his article at lengths.

Is there anyway we can refer this issue to an administrator, to get it settled??

At the very least put in her surname!!! I feel offended on her behalf that she is not even worthy of a surname, just a decorative picture (the fact that her surname is not provided may have something to do with the fact that people originally thought she was his wife). If we had her surname we might also be able to establish if she is noteworthy in her own right, than we can move that picture to her own article (after all this is the 21st Century and she might be more than just “the pretty girlfriend”). --SasiSasi (talk) 15:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with SasiSasi that there is no reason for the article to include a picture of only his girlfriend. If it were a picture of the two of them together, then that would be understandable, since free-use pictures are hard to come by. But his girlfriend is not independently notable, so there's no need for her picture to be there. ... discospinster _talk 00:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

> the fact that her surname is not provided may have something to do with the fact that people originally thought she was his wife

i dunno about wife, but the fact that his SISTER has a nearly identical name and *IS* his business "partner" (in some ventures) led me to assume that was HER.

BTW, I checked Ted Turner's wiki (only entrepreneur I could think of offhand who's not married) and, surprise surprise, it has THIS note: "Turner is reportedly involved with several women, including the novelist and playwright Elizabeth Dewberry."

What?! Not a single photo?!

How odd. Surely we should have a full GALLERY of those "several women"...all of whom I suspect are more prominent than Madame Coffeeshop...I dunno...at least they might have SURNAMES.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.48.78.19 (talk) 00:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Mizuka's full name is Mizuka Kurogane.Christopher Lee Adams (talk) 23:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

64.48.78.19 (talk) 00:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

So just a few comments of clarification. I've lived with Mizuka for about 11 years I think and her mother lives with me as well. We are much closer than "girlfriend/boyfriend". In some countries we would be legally married under common law I think. That's why I usually introduce her as my "partner". Having said that, I don't really care either way whether her picture appears. You decide. ;-)

While "partner" is quite common in these situations, given all the BUSINESS connections being discussed in the article, it's just asking for confusion to use it here. I honestly thought the original line meant "business partner".

I dunno what else to offer. "Girlfriend" DOES sound a bit trifling, I agree with you, but no one wants to be called a "common law wife" either!! You're lucky she doesn't SLAP you when you propose that term!!!! ;->

I suggest adding the surname, btw. Kanji and all. 64.48.78.7 (talk) 05:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I definitely did not put the photo of her up. I haven't edited the article in terms of substance for as far as I can remember, although I may have done something a long time ago when I was more ignorant. The edit that I did in September last year. was to fix some of the formatting in a citation/reference. Several Wikipedians told me that fixing formatting would be OK. However, since then, I've decided to stop doing even that. Everything substantive, I've basically posted on the talk page and NOT on the article. (See the Editing my own article section below) I also have discouraged people who I am related to or closely connected to from editing my page as well. --Joi (talk) 10:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I will change the article to "his longterm partner Mizuka Kurogane", cant think of a more appropiate term than "longterm partner" in English, any alternative suggestions welcome. --SasiSasi (talk) 19:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"Longterm partner" does sound better than plain ole "partner", but I still think it sounds like a business partner in a bio like this. If someone refered to Bill Gates' "long-term partner", I would immediately think of Balmer et al.

I think one way to diffuse this would be to insert an OCCUPATION for Ms Kurogane: "...his longterm partner, actress Mizuka Kurogane" or "...his longterm partner, bank teller Mizuka Kurogane" etc.

Or "coffee shop owner", as I suspect from that photo! 64.48.78.4 (talk) 08:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

She used to be a dental hygienist but is now a home maker. --Joi (talk) 18:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Man, we are stumbling over just about every pitfall there is in the 21st Century... --SasiSasi (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL! I like your changes, but I *STILL* think it reads as "business partner" as it now sits.

BTW, can "home maker" be used for a non-wife? I myself lived w long-term girlfriend, and even during her longterm stretchs sans employment, I can't imagine calling her a "home maker".

I dunno if that's coz she was single (and in and out of employment, depending on where I got posted), or just a generational thing. Not sure I'd call ANYONE my age a "home maker"....

BTW, Joi-kun, while we have your attention...pls. explain what "On the long tail" means 2 sections down!!!! On ni kiru!

64.48.78.15 (talk) 21:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

What is the politically correct way of referring to someone whose primary job/pride/focus is taking care of the home? --Joi (talk) 00:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Timothy Leary's godson

"Ito is Timothy Leary's godson." There is no mention of a godson on the Timothy Leary article. ;-) Reference needed! (Yosofun 07:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC))

It was actually in older versions. Someone deleted it. For instance: [1] - I think someone doesn't like this fact. The original simple "Ito is Timothy Leary's godson" was replaced by some weird longer "Ito claims" comment. Not that it's not true, but... ;-) Anyway, I don't really feel like bickering over this sort of detail, but it is slightly annoying. If you need references, I think I can dig up letters or something from Tim with a reference. --Joi 14:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Here's a reference: http://www.leary.com/joiito/ -- Joi 00:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Editing my own article

I've been talking to some of the admins in the IRC channel and it is my understanding that I can edit my own article to clean up formating, grammar, etc. so I may do this from time to time. Although, I would rather have someone else do it. ;-P --Joi 14:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked again at the article and thought about cleaning it up, but realized that it would introduce bias so decided against it. --Joi 02:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I changed my mind. I'm not going to edit my own article. Also, if you're a close friend or family, please do not edit my article. Personally, I think articles on the long tail like mine are kind of between a rock and a hard place where probably only the people who have a conflict are really interested in doing anything about the article. I suppose that's a lack of notability in a sense.

"On the long tail"???? Nan da, sore?! 64.48.78.7 (talk) 20:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

See [The Long Tail] --Joi (talk) 00:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

But I think there is probably a chunk of articles like mine that are probably notable enough to be worthy, but not notable enough to get attention from normal people...

Anyway, if it's OK with everyone, I'll post suggestions here and if anyone feels like adding them to the article or making the changes, please do so at your convenience. --Joi 12:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, the suggestions I will make will primarily be for the purpose of linking this article to other notable articles I find on Wikipedia to increase context and to provide references for unreferenced assertions. --Joi 12:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup?

How do I get rid of this: {{Cleanup|date=September 2007}} ?? --Joi 15:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I have tried to organise the material into sections. I think the main areas requiring attention are the long lead section, which is a list of posts rather than a succinct statement, and the presence of too many one line statements beginning Ito this... and Ito that..., which needed to be converted into joined up prose. William Avery 13:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! on my user page, User:Jacoplane said he'd give it a crack here: User:Jacoplane/Temp. All of this sudden attention is making me blush. ;-) -- Joi 13:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, just keep editing the article here, I'll incorporate the good changes into my version and finally merge it back. It's going to take a while since this article needs a lot of work. JACOPLANE • 2007-09-28 13:31

The sections helped a great deal, William Avery. Also a good third party source exists in Finland that could replace a string of external links in the lead so that is now in place (I removed the cleanup tag for now). -Susanlesch 13:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Rated Start (high start!) but there are quite a few good sources here. This could be a B class biography quite soon if not now I think. -Susanlesch 14:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Joi: You're not dead are you? I removed Kyoto as being your place of death... --Zeraien 17:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

References

Don't want to add things directly to my page, but if someone could review the following references and add them to my article if it makes sense, that would be great. Thanks. -- Joi 00:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The "Cyber-Elite" business is from "Time digital" October 1997 p.57 -- Joi 00:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Timothy Leary calls me his godson in this video. [2] -- Joi 00:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Rupture

I invested in and joined the board of Rupture founded by Shawn Fanning - Joi (talk) 14:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Doppelganger

Is that really your photo? You're a dead ringer for some Japanese celeb!

Can't remember who...maybe it was a Nikkei celeb now that I think about it....

Anyone know?

64.48.78.7 (talk) 21:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Jonkichi

Why is there no mention of Jonkichi, We Know and falling asleep at the keyboard? :-P (AKA Allyn) JS747 (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Out of order talk page?

The talk page seems to be out of order date wise? No biggie, just sort of hard to follow. Also, in the info box, it has this persons schools listed with "drop out" in parenthases, is this standard? Cheers, --70.109.223.188 (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Keio University, USC Annenberg Center and Machinima.com

A few factual additions/deletions if anyone has time and is interested in doing update...

I'm now a Senior Visiting Researcher of Keio Research Institute at SFC. see program on this page as a neutral source: http://www.hct.ac.ae/news/aspx/ViewDetails.aspx?newsid=159

Joined the board of Machinima.com. See: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10083692-52.html

Annenberg Center for Communication no longer exists so I am not a fellow there anymore. --Joi (talk) 02:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

One more if anyone has time, are you also on EPIC's board? -SusanLesch (talk) 02:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I am indeed on the EPIC advisory board. --Joi (talk) 08:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I update it if Joi gets round to uploading some more photos :-) Davis Guggenheim is missing, if we get a photo of him I update his Profile as well.--SasiSasi (talk) 17:41, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Haha! So demanding. ;-)

Davis Guggenheim with daughter Stella

How's this? --Joi (talk) 23:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

dont want to come across as demanding, but can we have a picture without baby...? Its a lovely baby, but I guess if we have a picture of it in his article we have to establish its name and occupation, and origin. So no pressure.

by the way, I have created an article for Kevin Werbach and have submitted his and Susan Crawford's selection to lead the FCC review on "did you know.." If the nomination goes through (dunno, let see) this info should be on the front page in next couple of days. Could you upload a picture of him for his article?--SasiSasi (talk) 16:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

OK. I'll work on a better isolated picture of Davis. ;-) Where is the vote for the "did you know..."? --Joi (talk) 17:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

How's this?

I'll try to get a better photo this summer when I'll see him again. --Joi (talk) 17:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

There is no vote, the article has to meet certain criteria (length and quality), and some random admin needs to be convinced that it is a worthy subject matter. A picture would not make a difference, but it is a nice touche.

Thanks for trying with Davis' picture :-) maybe try and take a picture when he is having less of a good time...--SasiSasi (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Added a photo to Kevin's article. --Joi (talk) 20:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice ta. I update your article.--SasiSasi (talk) 22:09, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The DYK hook has been approved, jipi, but dunno when its gona be on the front page, has to be in the next 3 to 4 days because the Werbach article was created on the 19th and the DYK articles on the front page can not be older than 5 days.--SasiSasi (talk) 21:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit.--Joi (talk) 12:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

ahhh.... werbach and co were already on the front page, you can have a look here... I completly missed it (sleept right through the 6 hr window)--SasiSasi (talk) 14:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! --Joi (talk) 14:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

For sleeping through it? :-)--SasiSasi (talk) 16:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Finally got you your Davis Guggenheim headshot User:SasiSasi

--Joi (talk) 11:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

ta--SasiSasi (talk) 11:25, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Joi got married!

I guess the old "partner vs. spouse" debate has finally been resolved ;-) http://joi.ito.com/weblog/2008/12/03/we-got-married.html Mizuka and Joi just got married. I'm replacing "longterm partner" with wife, please make any other appropriate changes. --Skyfaller (talk) 09:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

For instance, did Mizuka change her name or is her full name still Mizuka Kurogane? Inquiring minds want to know! --Skyfaller (talk) 13:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

She is now Mizuka Ito. Which is unfortunately VERY similar to my sister's name, Mizuko "Mimi" Ito... hmm... IN Japanese their names are slightly more different however. 瑞佳 vs 瑞子--Joi (talk) 13:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

you spoil us, this is far too easy now! are you not suppose to be on honeymoon or something like that... all the best for you two. --SasiSasi (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I make it easy so you can save your energy to save the rest of Wikipedia. ;-) --Joi (talk) 05:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

DBA not PhD

"Doctoral Candidate" in my studies at Hitotsubashi is redirected to Doctor of Philosophy, but it's actually a Doctor of Business Administration that I'm getting (DBA) not a PhD. --Joi (talk) 06:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit, but it's still wrong. It still links to Doctor of Philosphy but it should link to Doctor of Business Administration. This isn't a vanity point... I think PhDs are probably harder to get than DBAs. It's just not correct the way it is now. --Joi (talk) 17:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Corrected link [3] - GateKeeper^(X) @ 02:33, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Joi (talk) 13:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Photos

Not going to add these myself, but if anyone has time, maybe add them to the references. I'll try to keep this section updated with stuff that isn't in the article.

• Fred Wilson in New York Times http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/one-on-one-fred-wilson-union-square-ventures/ -- Joi (talk) 18:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Limelight Chicago

Someone removed Limelight in Chicago from my article saying that there wasn't a Limelight in Chicago, but in fact there was.

Here's the edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joi_Ito&action=historysubmit&diff=367980220&oldid=367962351

You can see in The Limelight article that there was in fact a Chicago Limelight.

-- Joi (talk) 11:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)