Jump to content

Talk:Rory Fitzpatrick

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Go leafs go02 (talk | contribs) at 23:28, 29 November 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconIce Hockey Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This page should be edited to include the 2007 all-star game. www.VoteForRory.com is proof enough. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Riel2000 (talk • contribs) .

The website does not pass WP:RS. Though if the campaign to get Rory in is as successful as hoped, it will hit the mainstream media, and will certantly immediately be included. Resolute 00:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Sounds fair, thank you - Riel2000
Side note, this WILL hit the mainstream media, just give it a few days. - go_leafs_go02, and I apologize for undoing your edits on the article.
I will unprotect the page now. If you are planning on adding to this article, please remember our policy on verifiability. -- JamesTeterenko 15:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel this is somewhat of a conumdrum. Wikipedia wants sources, and the media uses Wikipedia a lot. If we put it here, they will use it. But we won't until they use it. Vicious cycle. Also, remember to vote for him. Kaiser matias 06:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If he does get voted in, then I'm sure it'll be on Wiki. I mean, it'd be such an unusual event that it'd merit some sort of mention, imho. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 07:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Kaiser matias: I don't see the conundrum. If the media won't say anything about it until it gets into Wikipedia, then it shouldn't be in Wikipedia in the first place. There are policies in place that state this. The two key ones are:
1. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources.
2. Editors adding new material to an article should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor.
3. The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to challenge and/or remove it
Articles may not contain any unpublished arguments, ideas, data, or theories; or any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published arguments, ideas, data, or theories that serves to advance a position.

-- JamesTeterenko 15:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Vote For Rory campagin

Even though most of the people who will add this won't read here, I'm going to write it anyways. I am a supporter of it, but we have to respect the rules of Wikipedia. If you are at all involved with it, you know that the media is slowly responding. Give it enough time to have some sources, and then it will stop being removed from here. We have made it this far without the use of Wikipedia, so there's no reason we can not wait until there are sources that will comply with the rules set out here. Otherwise, anything put here is just going to keep being removed. That is all. Kaiser matias 09:40, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

–Thank you, and we have made major hints online on the forum to leave this page alone. WE will be given due credit eventually, and we respect Wikipedia's rules of credibility and such. I was the first one to actually edit this thread back in the day, but I thought it was professionally done and sourced correctly. Evidently, that was not the case, but I hope members understand that this page is and should be left alone for the time being. Go leafs go02 15:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[[reply]

VoteForRory should stay. There's no wikipedia rule saying otherwise. Just some users with sticks stuck up their you-know-what's Jaskaramdeep 01:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there is a rule. See Wikipedia: Reliable sources. Until the campaign's covered by reliable source, it stays off the page. NeoChaosX (he shoots, he scores!) 02:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you denying the existance of this campaign because you haven't heard it reported in the media? Several media sources have acknowledged its existance in Edmonton, if that's what you're after, and I've been told that some in Vancouver have as well. In any case, to say that something doesn't exist because a "reliable source" hasn't reported it is absurd. With this basis, you can say that Kim Jong-Il has done nothing to North Korea worth reporting in Wikipedia. No one knows what the heck is going on in there, but we do know that several sources "unreliable" by Wikipedia's definition, have reported atrocities, and so we take that as truth Jaskaramdeep 04:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody has said this movement does not exist. What is being said is that this movement simply is not notable enough for Wikipedia at preseent as it lacks reliabale sources. I am aware that there have been mentions on Edmonton and Vancouver radio, however all but one is simply the result of an on-air personality reading a submitted email. The fourth was a brief interview with the OP at hockeys future, but cannot be considered a reliable source because verification is impossible. Resolute 04:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now I understand where you're coming from. But check this out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kvV2LTRNbQ This promo video for the campaign snatched up 6 youtube honors, including #6 - Top Rated (This Week) - Sports - All, #6 - Top Rated (This Week) - Sports - English, #16 - Top Rated (This Month) - Sports - English, and #17 - Top Rated (This Month) - Sports - All. It was also yesterday's most watched youtube video in the sports category. I am pretty sure that the campaign is noteworthy based on this. Jaskaramdeep 23:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But Youtube is not a reliable source. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 01:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, just give it time. If you're as into the campaign as it seems, then you know that there has been lots of activity to garner attention. All the emails to The Hour come to mind. Just let it run its course; if George S takes into consideration all those emails, then I will assure you it will stay. Kaiser matias 10:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

meh, I'm not an advocate of the campaign, nor do I really give a hoot about Rory Fitzpatrick. It just buggs me when people get all high-and-mighty on the noobs over trivial things Jaskaramdeep 01:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The creator of this movement was interviewed by the FAN 590 in Toronto (radio). You can listen to it on http://shadowduet.com/SDPlayer.html (remember to turn any popup blockers off). Would this count as a reliable source? Canucks5551

rory has now been given mention on NHL.com http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?articleid=284150&page=NewsPage&service=page

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rory_Fitzpatrick&oldid=91026138"