Talk:Rick Emerson

Suspected libel

I removed the following bolded text from the Personal History section:

He was promoted to a position broadcasting during the afternoon drive in Salt Lake City where he co-hosted a show with Clyde Lewis. He became Program Director of KCNR in Salt Lake and helped create one of the most popular radio stations in Utah. In the process, he was arrested twice, banned from the State Capitol for life, married another man, and was the voice of the "little pig" in Green Jelly's famous song Three Little Pigs. A change in the station's format in 1997 left Emerson without a microphone.

It is unsourced, and it appears libelous. I think someone should find a source for this information before it gets put back in. — Äþelwulf See my contributions. 00:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Archived copies of Rick's website mention being being banned from the Utah state capitol --katt 09:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

The bolded text is from his own website[1] but I think it's meant to be satirical. One would think he would have made mention of the supposed ban when he talked about his recent trip to Utah.RWgirl 15:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

In point of fact, he did marry another man, as a combined political statement and publicity stunt, while at KCNR in Salt Lake City. If I could find a source, I would certainly provide it. Let us hope I can. Mordant Kitten (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Addition

I added the Suburban Perspective with Scotty J to the list of features. Also, should only current features be included? How Chicks Think has (thankfully) not returned to v5.0.RWgirl 23:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Seperation

I feel like this entry should be broken into two entries. One for the Rick Emerson Show and the other for Rick himself. This would allow the duplicate entries regarding the show to be removed from Tim Riley's entry, plus the man should be separated from show. TEG 15:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Definately.RWgirl 15:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I concur. --Katt 21:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Please help me expand the new page. Rick Emerson Show TEG 19:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Privacy of Individuals in Biographies of Living Persons

I want to raise a concern for the consideration of privacy with specific respect to a recent addition to the Personal History section that included his wife by her first name, profession and the general region of the city that they live in. I see the relevance of mentioning his marriage - especially since it involved a bit of eloping and a return the next week to surprise the audience. I do believe, however, that inclusion of his wife's name, profession and the region of the city that they live in brushes up against issues raised in the Wikipedia standards for Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Privacy_of_contact_information and Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Privacy_of_names.

While his wife's name, profession and their general region of residence has been mentioned on the air, it seems like erring on the side of caution for a living person should be favored. Especially since there is little significance to adding specific identifying details, though it is agreed that these bits of information have been mentioned on the air a few times.

I have edited the line to read with less personal specifics, but to mention the greater context of them eloping over a weekend to return and surprise the audience the following week. It seems this bit of information might be of more interest to readers than specifics of his wife's name and profession. I could possibly see the relevance of mentioning the region of the city they live in, since ridiculing it is a frequent part of the show, but I'm unsure if this is relevant for an encyclopedic document. Perhaps instead of mentioning it specifically, we should simply say that comments are often made regarding the supposed crime level and lowest-common-denominator makeup of the part of the city Rick resides in?

At any rate, I have edited this information for the current time and would welcome other thoughts and discussions about it. Perhaps others feel differently about this. Cordell (talk) 05:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Rather than just re-introducing the stricken data mentioned above, how about discussing it first? While the information you wish to include may be "public knowledge" in as much as it has infrequently been mentioned on his show, it does not seem relevant to an encyclopedic article since it has little or no relation to the subject of the article and in light of that, certainly may not be prudent to include in the biography of a living person. What is the reasoning for the subject's wife's name, her profession, their pet, their pet's name, the region of the city they live in and the style of home dwelling they occupy being included at the cost of potential privacy? Cordell (talk) 03:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the inaccurate birthname that was put here. Considering Rick has been very careful not to disclose the fact that Rick Emerson isn't his real name, I have chosen not to add his birth name to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.166.90.32 (talk) 03:55, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Unless you can corroborate that Rick Emerson is not his name, what has been said on the show must be taken as factTEG (talk) 23:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material, not the one who removes it. Wikipedia guidelines also warn against the use of self-sourced material (i.e. What Rick Says), especially when there is reason to doubt its authenticity - see WP:SELFPUB #4. Not only is the quoted source not an official transcript, but it doesn't even state that Richard Karl Emerson is his real name. Considering Rick is known to make many statements that Rick has said on-air are not true - a number of items have since been removed from this article, as well as his prior use of a stage name - there is plenty of reason to doubt that his real name is Rick Emerson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.171.129.224 (talk) 21:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Bad Links

As not to upset the army of Rick, I wanted to point out that the link for Remote Control, take you to some kind of link/search page. I don't think people are looking for a Ceiling Fan remote.

Should be taken out right?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.192.56.235 (talk) 22:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC) 

Agreed and done. How unfortunate. Cordell (talk) 03:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BTJ.jpg

Image:BTJ.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Please DO NOT DELETE this image. The owner of this image has contacted me for assistance in properly classifying this image for use on Wikipedia and I have forwarded them the appropriate license information and permission request. Cordell (talk) 03:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Good writeup of show

here. -Pete (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Submission for notability deletion

It's nice that certain busy-bodies have deemed it their personal quest in life to decide what radio personalities are worthy of being documented in a wikipedia article. Good for you.

This particular individual, along with the rest of their show's cast, is notable because they have hosted a four hour show in the 23rd largest market in the nation every single week day for more than ten years and the show was nationally syndicated (as the article states) for more than three years.

In addition, as is also mentioned, the article's subject also wrote and performed in an extremely popular play and movie (Bigger Than Jesus). A significant portion of the listening audience is online, around the world. Especially in the military and among the large geek following.

I don't understand this infatuation with a radio personality only being notable if they're currently nationally syndicated and as popular as, say, Howard Stern. I do, however, agree that someone should include additional references in the article to the numerous media coverage regarding Rick Emerson and his radio show. Particularly, the articles regarding the "Coffee Cup Crusade" and the recent article(s) by the Portland Tribune.

As for anecdotal "notability", I live in the midwest and it's certainly notable to me and those around me who listen on a regular basis via streaming. Cordell (talk) 17:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, except the article presently fails to cite the major front page writeup in the Tribune. Once that is corrected, it should be a pretty convincing "keep." I unfortunately don't have time for that right now, but will try to return this evening. -Pete (talk) 17:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. There are actually numerous citations that have not managed to be included yet, such as the most recent write-up by the Tribune and previous write-ups by the Tribune, Mercury and others dating back to the Coffee Cup crusade. I'm sure we're missing articles regarding BTJ which can hopefully still be found.

If Wikipedia is only a repository for radio stations, shows and personalities who are of the highest national notability, then the radio sections of Wikipedia will find themselves rather anemic. There are few nationally syndicated and/or nationally notable radio shows in the modern radio age. If documenting every minor character of the entire Pokemon series is a worthwhile endeavor on Wikipedia, then the inclusion of shows and personalities that are more than ten years running with several years of national syndication under their belt and a national online/streaming listener base are certainly worthy as well. Though, as with many articles around here, additional citations and references sure would help make these articles more robust.

However, the solution to articles which would be vastly improved by additional references and citations is to place a template on them noting that they are lacking in citations and referneces. Not throwing up a template requesting that they be deleted within a few days. Cordell (talk) 17:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm unable to locate two items that seem to no longer exist. One is the Talker Magazine article about the Rick Emerson Show when it was nationally syndicated. The other is the Oregonian news paper's article about the disturbance of the market when the show was taken off the air, especially focusing on the Coffee Cup Crusade that pushed to get the show back on the air -- it seems the Oregonian's web archive expunges articles rather quickly. If you can locate any of these or similar links, please include them (at the least, in the links section). Cordell (talk) 18:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like to add that one of the reasons for The Rick Emerson Show being deleted was supposedly the existence of this article. Deleting this in addition to the show's page would rather cancel that out. Owenja (talk) 22:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Owenja, that's not accurate. Only one participant in the discussion mentioned an article on Rick Emerson; he said he'd support one in theory, but his comment made it appear that he wasn't aware one existed. Here's a link to that discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Emerson Show. (And if this discussion continues at all, it should probably be at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Emerson.) -Pete (talk) 02:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Restructuring of Article

If there are no complaints, I plan to restructure this article into a more typical Early Life, Career, Projects, Personal Life format. Cordell (talk) 18:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I will seek out the Oregonian article (the Multnomah Cty Library web site allows cardholders to view Oregonian back to 1988 or so) see WP:ORE/RD -Pete (talk) 18:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Early Life Dispute

The recently added paragraph in this section is almost certainly someones attempt at humor but for the sake of conversation I'll add a dispute instead of simply rollbacking it.

Unless you can come up with citations that back up the claims made here, the paragraph is going away. Sionus [talk] 22:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

There is no need to keep the last paragraph from the Early Life section. It *IS* someone's attempt at humor, much in the same way they keep changing Sarah X. Dylan's name. I'm going to remove the entry, and I will attempt to be a little more vigilant in trying to correct these issues. TEG (talk) 21:38, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rick Emerson. 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://community.livejournal.com/rickemerson
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070616142345/http://www.biggerthanjesus.net/ to http://www.biggerthanjesus.net/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://community.livejournal.com/rickemerson/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 21:11, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rick Emerson. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070616142345/http://www.biggerthanjesus.net/ to http://www.biggerthanjesus.net/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 01:20, 18 September 2017 (UTC)