Talk:Andrew Baron

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 June 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 April 2008. The result of the discussion was Merge.

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.

Requested info added. Pepso 09:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some NPOV please?

My god, this entry reads like Baron wrote it himself. Far too flacky. --Nick Douglas 05:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't agree. Baron and Rocketboom got a huge amount of press coverage. Those were the sources, and all sentences are factual, based on those sources, including direct quotes from CBS News, Rolling Stone and others. Pepso 13:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This really is unbelievable, this completely reads as though Baron created it. Delete.

I agree it reads like Baron wrote it himself, which is unfortunate. Baron's work is noteworthy, but this piece is largely about what he and others have said, rather than anything he's done. I'd expect better from a celebrity gossip vlog. Certainly don't delete, but please get some meat in the thing. Danja 23:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it

Andrew Baron is a not a well known name, but Rocketboom is! Gordo 10:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No reason why he should be a well known name. How many people know the name Jennifer Bermon... the producer of NBC Nightly News? How many people can name the inventor of OCR or the mouse? What Baron created is a significant turning point for the Internet, and I've tried to add the requested items of importance and reference. Pepso 13:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure that this page will stay, now: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Andrew_Baron Gordo 08:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the importance tag when I closed the AfD per that discussion.--Chaser T 09:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the impact that Andrew Baron has had on new media, its ludicrous to me that this page would even be considered for removal. There are so many less relevant people on wikipedia than Andrew Baron. I suspect foul play...maybe from Amanda Congdon?

RFC for NPOV

Recent edits by Sarahmeyers seems insistent on restoring a much older version on top of recent edits made by a large number of users. This article needs quite a bit of work (and I invite others to help) but I take specific issue with including large amounts of uncited viewership/popularity statistics yet deleting an independent analysis by BusinessWeek that provides a different yet interesting viewpoint. Cleanr 02:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I support changing the article but I reverted it to the last state before a troll (not Cleanr) revamped the article based on their apparent dislike for Andrew Baron and Rocketboom. SarahMeyers

SarahMeyers is his girlfriend, does that make her edits a conflict of interest? --User:Species5618 02:57, 21 December 2007 (EST)

Merge/Delete

Can anyone tell me why a Baron article should be in Wikipedia, rather than moving the info to the Rocketboom article? Mpublius 18:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was nominated for deletion previously [1]. The AfD is a bit odd in that people seem to be taking the approach that Baron will become notable in the future. Pepso goes so far as to state that Rocketboom is "busy making their first million." The most recent and most credible reference in the article indicates that Baron is losing money on Rocketboom [2] which contradicts much of the earlier material in the article as well. Although he's working on a notable project I guess I'm coming to the conclusion that there aren't enough verifiable sources to build a proper NPOV article around Baron himself. If someone wants to propose a merge/delete I'll support it. Cleanr 05:35, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Referred here while perusing the AN backlogs. My initial take, knowing nothing of the history of this article and the related Rocketboom article: Notability here looks to be ok to me, though the tone of the article itself has some deep POV issues. Also, a lot of what is here is contained almost word-for-word on the Rocketboom article. Thus, I do not think I would support a delete of this article, though it seems like an ideal Merge candidate, as much of the content is already in the RB article; merging the material facts of Mr. Baron into that article would be easily done, and would only serve to further improve the Rocketboom article. Arakunem 00:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to merge with Rocketboom. Andrew Baron blanked the page (see personal blog at http://dembot.com/post/28380458). After being restored, anonymous edits started. Cleanr (talk) 21:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Age

There is no way he is 27 years old, and linking to his Facebook profile isn't a reliable source. --User:Species5618 02:55, 21 December 2007 (EST)

Request to ban User: Cleanr

I have been looking at this page as Baron claimed on his blog that naysayers have owned this article.

Baron and Congdon have been fighting for some time and if you look at the changes user: Cleanr has made to Barons article as well as the Rocketboom article, and also note that the article for Amanda Congdon which is overly fluffly has never been touched by Cleanr, you will note that Cleanr is very likey part of Congdons camp, if not Congdon herslef.

I would like for Wikipedia to open an investigation and ban Cleanr from touching any of the articles.

One perfect example is that Cleanrs justification for her most recent edits had to do with removing info from Barons article that was duplicate to Rocketbooms article but the negitive points were left in tact. Ie, Cleanr only removed the positive duplicate information.

The above example is just one of many so I will revert Cleanrs edits and ask that Wikipedia lock down this article for some time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.250.27 (talk) 20:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not involved with any of the parties nor do I have a text or video blog. I removed unsourced material from many blogger's articles and purposely kept away from the Baron/Rocketboom articles for several months. I got involved after Baron himself blanked this article. If you look in the discussion pages, you'll see that a merge had no objections. You reverted the merge (without discussion). I then attempted to remove duplicated material and added in facts that were previously deleted by others. You reverted that, also without discussion. I'll let others review the history, but I don't feel that "undo" is an appropriate response to my recent efforts, nor does it help move the article(s) forward. Cleanr (talk) 17:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanr, the artice is fitting compared to other articles for people you edit pos. like Ze Frank, also a rival to Baron. You have edited neg on this article too much and agree you should stay away from the article.

My only point of contention is that the stats stay but that we cite Baron's response. I've heard this before, he has it on his blog somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustard45 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why Rocketboom stats should be in this article at all since they're not about Andrew Baron. The point of the merge was to get the Rocketboom stuff in the correct place, which should have the side effect of eliminating much of the controversy here as well. Cleanr (talk) 16:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge in progress

See previous discussion and history regarding the merge. Please note that material and links from this article were added to the Rocketboom article. The Andrew Baron article needs to have material about Andrew Baron: his personal background, personal achievements, etc. Articles where he is quoted in to the context of Rocketboom likely belong in the Rocketboom article. You may wish to edit that article instead, or add material there. Please discuss here or on my talk page if you have other ideas. Cleanr (talk) 16:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanr continues to mess with this article despite being told to stop above. Here is what we know from the history: Cleanr has been accused of being biased and Cleanr has claimed to be biased. She said she tried to stay away from article but was unable. Also Cleanr was not truthful about when she made edits: said she would stay away until recently, which is not true. Also Cleanr continues to not address claims above about being biased, Cleanr just comes up with a new justification for making article neg and then wipes it.

What we do know is that the edits that Cleanr makes to this article are negitive and Cleanr seems to have no justification for why this article should go. First cleanr says that it should be deleted, then redirected, then incorporated, then agrees it should stay but with dif.info then thinks it should go again. Always in the neg.

I will ask again that wikipedia please ban Cleanr from Wikipedia, esp. based on edits of other articles too which seem very questionable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustard45 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another example of Cleanr not being honest: Cleanr has had a history of trying to keep the neg stats in the article while also having a history of deleting Baron's counter claim. Most recently however, Cleanr made an edit saying "why are rocketboom stats even in this article". This is one of many cases like others cited above that show Cleanr has been malicious to Baron and his bio. The history is there for others to follow Cleanrs obvious neg feelings about Mr. Baron. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustard45 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page isn't the place for personal fights. Please bring up issues on my talk page and/or find an admin who can help you through the process if you feel I'm damaging the articles. Specific to Andrew Baron, the merge was discussed and received support. The full text of the Andrew Baron article was added to the Rocketboom article -- you may want to make changes there. I've reset the bio to its post-merge state. If you think it's somehow biased (frankly I don't see it) please add proper sourced material that directly talks about Baron separate from his work on Rocketboom -- that's the way to improve this biography! Cleanr (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rebuilding

Cleanr continues to delete info and tries to merge data. He sent a note to my talk page where he continues to claim that his views are supported.

I have shown Cleanr is not consistent, not forthcoming and I've shown cases where Cleanr is biased, all documented here in detail. Many more support this article beside Cleanr.

When Baron wrote on his blog that he wanted the entry deleted because it is owned by a biased party, it is clear, as documented here, that Cleanr is that person.

So, I have AGAIN restored the article and will continue to improve it over time as new information becomes available.

I will also head over to the Rocketboom, Joanne Colan and Amanda Congdons entries to clean them up. I will ask that others please help pitch in if you know of any information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustard45 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note positive comment from SarahMeyers above (she's affiliated with Rocketboom) and "seems like an ideal Merge candidate" in the discussion above. If you have problems with the merge I'd suggest bringing it to WP:AFD. Also please consider discussing with me using our talk pages. I've yet to receive any personal response from you. Cleanr (talk) 18:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop deleteing article long enogh to improve. I'm trying to add the big new about Barons Twitter account for sale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.250.107 (talk) 19:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that if you click the "article" tab and then the "history" tab up top, you can start editing from any version of the page. The "deleted" information was merged into the Rocketboom article -- please put Rocketboom info there. As an aside, Baron's in-progress eBay auction might not require immediate addition to his encyclopedia page. Although there are no hard rules, you may want to read up on wikipedia guidelines on handling current events. Often it's best to let things settle so you can get good external, verifiable sources. Cleanr (talk) 21:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Redirected

I have not deleted this talk page for now, but it may make sense to move the material of relevance over to the Rocketboom article... ++Lar: t/c 17:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Andrew Baron. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:09, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]