Talk:The Jim Rome Show/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This page was 17 pages when i printed it out. I think we should split it up into seperate articles. -- Doc Strange 09:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

This article is getting out of hand. If we don't trim some fat, it could wind up on the VfD list. --Zpb52 05:04, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I enjoy the fact that it is huge and unabridged. I think we should continue to let it grow and expand. --Saxonjf 22:15, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

As someone who has contributed text to this article in the past, I strongly object to all of the content being removed for what is now a pretty weak, meaningless blurb.

I also don't think the answer is to have people continue to revert back and forth. That does no good either. But I vote for the larger version of the article. It *was* the best summary of the Jim Rome Show to be found anywhere on the internet. No longer.

--Spevack, 28 October 2005

    • Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. If you want to take what was the Jim Rome Show article and put it elsewhere on the web, do it. But Wikipedia was not designed to be nor does it serve the purpose of being a fansite.

--Zpb52 16:37, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Triming the fat is one thing. Deleting nearly the entire article is another. Some of the more obscure entires could be edited down, but the page is a collection of what makes the show "tick." Rome's show is very misunderstood by the vast majority of radio listeners and sports fans, and only by explaing the reoccuring bits can one unfamiliar with the show understand it. I vote for keeping the old version, with some small edits. Doctorindy 18:12, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Although I belive that Zpb52 was entirely dishonest in his actions and intents, I am not going to argue about the nature of the article. I just want the article to exist. What I believe should happen is that someone should start a Wiki for Rome. I think that if Zpb52 had goten some editor to throw up a cleanup tag for a couple of days, then cleaned it up himself, there would be less argument. However, there was a huge groundswell against deleting the article, then Zpb52 edited it down. Let's not forget that when Zpb52 split the The Jim Rome Show article from the Jim Romw he left the general format of the show's layout, then killed all of the layout, leaving little more than a stub. He talks about losing respect. He lost my respect with his actions. I hope other editors who watched his actions because it was a bait and switch that made me very angry. --Saxonjf 00:14, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Cry me a river. --Zpb52 02:07, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Zpb52...Was your problem with the article that it had become longer than your personal bio?

    • Look, I liked the article as a fan of The Jim Rome Show. Every time something was added, I'd read it, and I'd laugh. It was a good synopsis of the show. However, it was not suitable for Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, and that was beyond encyclopedic. I don't believe I'd open a paper encyclopedia and see a list of Rome's bad phone callers. As a fan site, it was great. But Wikipedia is not a place to host fan sites. Yes, the show deserved to be split from Jim's page, and I'm just as guilty of making it what it was, which was unencyclopedic. --Zpb52 23:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Zpb52...However logical you think your point may be, why don't you look up Howard Stern. The very same material which was deleted from this article exists there with more show trivia. It includes guests, callers, etc., only in much greater volume. Checkmate. Brad in Newport, RI

    • A somewhat similar page exists for Saturday Night Live, and it, like the Stern page, is an overwhelming wealth of general show info, trivia, all-time hosts (30+ years worth), episode guide, re-occuring characters, etc. In addition, it branches off into dozens of other pages going into depth for numerous skits, etc. Like the other guy, I understand the thought (this isn't a fan site), but compared to other similar topics on Wiki, the "long version" Rome page was a lightweight. Doctorindy 16:56, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
    • If that's the case, then why doesn't someone revert back to the "long" show page, and everyone agree to defend it against Zpb52. If SNL and the Stern show have longer pages, and are considered acceptable, then we should defend the Rome show page that way we like it (I'll add that T-Rodge likes Jewel on emails). We shouldn't have to be kowtoed by the likes of the filibustering felon (look up Smack-Off 2005: Oliver in St. Louis) like Zpb52.

http://stucknut.com/forum/index.php/topic,2755.0.html

Apparently voted down by a few loud clones with very good points and thought you handled the whole thing very badly. Let me remind you that with there wee a few of us, there was one of you. The few of us made our points, and agreed that this was the best action. If SNL's and Howard Stern's pages were even longer with no complaints, I don't see the problem.--Saxonjf 04:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I think the majority of Wikipedians who do what is best for the site would agree with my point of view. The only reason you wanted to keep it the old way was because you're a fan of the show. Hell, I'm a fan too. I'm one of the infamous "monkeys" and I love the show. But the Wiki was just way too detailed. Just because Stern & SNL's articles are longer doesn't mean it's okay for this one to be that long. It goes back to the old adage...if everyone else is jumping off a bridge, would you do it too? --Zpb52 06:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Attempt to reconstruct Talk page

The above is a best guess at reconstructing the Talk page discussions repeatedly blanked by Zpb52 (talk · contribs). Destroying the talk page is viewed as vandalism. It removes useful informatiom about an article's history; please don't do it again. Tearlach 23:49, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Rome Hates

  • I tried taking out the "Rome Hates-" and "Rome and-" and "Rome Loves" from all of the regular bits lines. It was looking a bit too repetitive, and really didn't need to be there. But if it was too much, it can be changed back without any problems.

Doctorindy 20:53, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

    • Personally, I think there should have been a consultation, before you did that. It might be a good idea, but others should have been consulted before you made that big a change. --Saxonjf 21:14, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Nobody has to consult you, Saxon, before making changes. I, for one, like the change. It simplifies things. --Zpb52 04:03, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
        • I think it's a little nicer. I didn't remove any content, and the context of the topics is not lost. I wanted to try it out for a couple days to see if it looked right, and if people liked it, and I had no problem if it would have been reverted back. If I get any other "big" ideas though, I'll try to run it by here first. Doctorindy 15:01, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
          • I don't have a problem with the changes Doctorindy made. I made some slight changes to the second intro paragraph and the "Name Calling" entry, as having the sentence about name-calling and sarcastic humor seemed redundant where it was. Also, can someone explain exactly why "Rachel from Houston" is so infamous with the clones? And is "reveled" a word? Willbyr 05:00, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
            • Rachael from Houston is infamous w/Clones because of his/her unsavory voice. Capt.Ned War Stucknut
              • Willbyr: Did you clear these changes through Saxonjf before you implemented them? (just teasin ya, Saxon...lighten up a bit) --Zpb52 07:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
                • No prob, I just thought a BIG change like taking out "Rome Hates" and "Rome and" merited larger discussion. Doctorindy himself waqs open to discussion after the fact, I just thought it would have been better discussed before the fact. I have made no changes in the area, because I don't give a flying crap myself. I miss the "Rome hates" since its neat to know see easily Rome hates: Soccer, Wrestling, etc. I am more worried about the Smack-Off 2005 article, since I actually wrote that one.
  • From dictionary.com---> rev·el - (To take great pleasure or delight: She reveled in her unaccustomed leisure.) I can't remember now, but I think I might have put "Rachel" in the list. Either way, I'd say she'd pretty famous, since after every call, she herself gets several e-mail responses, regardless of what she says. Doctorindy 18:22, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Ah, I see...I thought reveled was spelled with two L's. Will her entry be edited to take Capt. Ned's info about her into account? Willbyr 20:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Mike T in C-Town

Could be a pretty significant "topic" under e-mailers, it's spread into Wednesday's show already ...For dicsussion As I try to recall the story....Tues 11/29/05, Mike T was commenting in an e-mail about Silk not having a job. Then Silk (or someone else?) e-mailed asking what Mike T does for a living, since it seems like he e-mails the show all afternoon, and doesn't seem to do any work. Travis (IIRC) counted up his e-mails for the day, and he had sent 28 up to that point in the show already. A few minutes later, Mike T has the guts to e-mail a rather unimpressive comeback e-mail saying he's an accountant. He explains that he has spare time during the day because he says: "I don't have to be perfect, if I make a mistake, the IRS will let me know." (exact quote uncertian). From that point on, the show turned upsidedown, as Rome and the rest of the e-mailers rediculed him, and he didn't get another e-mail in the rest of the day. Rome even mentioned something to the effect of Mike hurting his business if people find out that he doesn't seem to care about doing his work right.

I didn't put it in the main page yet, since I'm still sketchy about the exact details, but feel free to add more, or clarify. Doctorindy 18:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

  • While I'm thinking about it, under "The Clones" header, should we add a subtitle of "Infamous E-mailers"...we already have an "Infamous Callers" subtitle...some show regulars never call, but are well-known for emailing all the time Doctorindy 18:16, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
    • I only caught the last 10 minutes or so of that show, but Rome's cracks about Mike doing his taxes had me in stitches. If someone's got a fairly comprehensive list of people who e-mail the show regularly, I'm all for including them. Doctorindy, you should be able to download that show from Rome's homepage for reference. Willbyr 14:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
      • The official site had some sort of list, but it looked old...

Faxers Boston Phinn, Dark Gable (active as emailer), Doc Mike DiTolla DDS, Jeff in Isla Vista, Jeffrey E. DiTolla Esq., Jon The Chowd

E-mailers Dark Gable (active), Quinn The Car Fixer, Joe In Bugaha (active), Joe In Winnipeg (active)

Current All-Stars/1st Team All-Jungle Andre in Ottawa (Email - named 7.18.03), Blake in Denver (Email - named 4.10.03), Gabe In Irvine (Email), Josh in Dallas (Email - Named 4.10.03), Kris in Austin (Email), R.C. from Tampa (Email), Steve In Maine (Email), Shorty Longback In Toronto (Email)