Talk:Tube Bar prank calls

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tube Bar prank calls article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on June 11, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on June 1, 2012. The result of the discussion was keep.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Tyros1972 (talk · contribs) / Tube Bar prank calls Tube Bar prank calls

Prior Art section

The article seems to suggest that the coincidence of Mike Hunt proves this is the source for the Porky's gag. It may be, but that is no evidence; in some men's dorms when there were such things, it was routine when a lady caller asked for someone so named, to shout down the hall, for her benefit, the obscene version of the real name. And yeah, people do really get given those names. I also remember meeting a Charles ("Chuck"?) Farley, tho he didn't have the middle initial "U", AFAIK.

Anyway, my point is that there should be a lk to a joke names article (to acknowledge the prior art) which in turn should link to Monty Python and especially to Life of Brian.
--Jerzy•t 03:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tube Bar Movie

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh......... Why no mention of the film "Red", which uses these prank calls? Anyone remember the "Bite the curb" scene? This was popular at Virginia Tech in 1992. 68.167.161.182 (talk) 19:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tube Bar Demolition

It might be worth noting that the Tube Bar is no longer standing. In a visit to Journal Square in May 2009 there was only construction rubble in and fencing around the lot where the Tube Bar and other buildings used to stand. Signs posted around the empty lot imply that a new "One Journal Square" high rise tower will be built on the site. See also the 1 Journal Square article. According to "Brooklynfoo" the buildings were demolished starting around March 20, 2009. The demolition was finished by April 8, 2009 according to The Jersey Journal. 69.119.27.73 (talk) 01:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good info! Thanks! --SpyMagician (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Improved non-opionated introduction needed

"The Tube Bar prank calls are arguably the most famous series of prank calls ever recorded."

Obviously, this is based on opinion and an introduction referring to reliable and valid sources needs to be used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KungFuMil (talk • contribs) 00:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with this, and have revised it to "legendary" which is cited. Ravensfire (talk) 18:10, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why no mention of examples in modern pop culture?

The Simpsons character Bart used to make these phone calls all the time to Moe, resulting in Moe becoming very angry and threatening Bart with all sorts of terrible things. Why no mention of this in the article? It seems as though this might be relevant as it could help bridge the gap between generations. Bowenj10 (talk) 19:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The final paragraph of the "History" section already mentions this. --McGeddon (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia, lack of sources

I have removed some of the unverified information, including the long list of names called for--even if that were verified, it falls short of WP:TRIVIA. It's time that this article gets cleaned up and meets Wikipedia guidelines. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

Why doesn't the copyright belong to the bar owner who was tormented by the two pricks? Varlaam (talk) 16:35, 26 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

That is probably a legal question IF it ever went to court. Jim Davidson and John Elmo copyrighted the calls with no mention of any of their callers. It is questionable as to how "legal" their copyright is...chances are we'll never find out. Tyros1972 (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI for ref: If you or anyone wants to mention this in the article, see the US Copyright Office and look up the 4 copyrights I have found. SR0000183677, SR0000242448, SR0000399036, SRu001012224. Tyros1972 (talk) 18:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Late to posting my thoughts on copyright surrounding this historic prank call tape. This is a fair question, but the copyright on the calls themselves would fall on the pranksters themselves. If the bar owner wanted to claim that the authors made profits off of the harassment of other, the bar owner would have a claim. Sadly, Red (the bar owner) died in 1983 and theses published recordings appeared at least 5 years after his death. As of now, John Elmo and Jim Davidson claim to be the original pranksters and have claimed copyright and I have little reason to personally doubt they are indeed the pranksters. And FWIW, the original pranks were simply passed around on dubbed cassette tapes back in the day with nobody claiming ownership or profit.

So yes, this is all murky territory copyright-wise. And if you feel bad for the bar owner, that would be fair. But in some other world where Red Deutsch was still alive, the most he could do is claim he was an unwilling participant in these recordings and make claims over the sale of CDs with his voice on them. Not much else. If you ask me in the year 2015, 100% nobody should be claiming copyright on this tape at this point and it should just be stored and distributed via someplace like the Internet Archive. I mean, who buys CDs anymore so that ship has passed. And people now share MP3s the exact same way people dubbed cassette tapes back in the day. Life’s too short. Just let the pranks be free. But hey, only my two cents as a fan and only my opinion. --SpyMagician (talk) 05:23, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Legitimacy of the supposed “Official TUBE BAR Prank Calls” website

TL;DR: Note is being place here to simply state the obvious: Wikipedia is not self-promotional tool and the misuse of Wikipedia for such promotional purposes puts the deletion of valid content at risk. And this article in itself has been put at risk due to misuse/abuse of the page for self-promotional/commercial purposes. It needs to stop and editors need to be aware of the background here.

Here are more details: I’m posting this since I am a fan of the original Tube Bar tapes—predating any unofficial or even official release—and wanted to add my perspective for anyone else daring to tread into the odd politics of this article and the recordings themselves. Specifically the issue of the questionable legitimacy of the “Official TUBE BAR Prank Calls” website.

It’s my understanding that the website purporting to be the “official” Tube Bar website has no true affiliation to John Elmo and Jim Davidson (aka: the pranksters known as the “Bum Bar Bastards”) but is rather owned, run and managed by Edward Heldman III. Mr. Heldman is a person who I believe is a non-affiliated 3rd party who has attempted for years to distribute Tube Bar CDs and recordings of his own—under the “labels” T.A. Productions and TubeBarPrankCalls.com—using the concept of “derivative art” to skirt the true ownership of the material by John Elmo and Jim Davidson and—frankly—get away with selling his own versions of the recordings on CD and digital download. A quick glance at the content “TubeBarPrankCalls.com” shows the site to be nothing more than a commercial site which sells digital downloads and CDs connected to T.A. Productions and TubeBarPrankCalls.com. Heck, the site’s about page is clearly just a swipe of an earlier version of the Wikipedia page without any changes whatsoever; you would think the official pranksters would at least have their own/unique promotional copy.

Which is all to say, I myself am still confused as to who Edward Heldman III really is in his relationship with John Elmo and Jim Davidson, but this core Tube Bar article should be kept as Wiki Non-POV neutral as possible. And to be honest this whole article was at risk to be deleted at multiple points due to the fact it was mainly being used—abused?—by some to simply promote their “for sale” products. This article should be an authoritative source on the history and legacy of this prank tape and not a promotional page linking to commercial sites.

Any future editors coming here should be aware of the edits made by the user Tyros1972 (who I believe is Edward Heldman III) and the potential COI (conflict of interest) his edits might carry. Hopefully the nonsense he has engaged in here on Wikipedia—such as creating non-notable promotional articles/pages for his work—and the resulting deletion of those articles/pages have sent the message home.

Thank you. --SpyMagician (talk) 15:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If there's some question over whether the site is "official" - if the only evidence to suggest it's the official site is the site's own word - then it seems fair to cut the link under WP:LINKSTOAVOID ("web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services"), since all it's doing is selling some MP3s. Perhaps User:Ruffles2016 could shed some light on confirming that the site is an official one, instead of blanking this thread. --McGeddon (talk) 08:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Loved

I love you 223.238.22.214 (talk) 12:54, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_%22Red%22_Deutsch

Is Louis “Red” Deutsch, a Jewish heavyweight boxer, unknown for anything else noteworthy? Drsruli (talk) 19:57, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Ahmed adoodie" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Ahmed adoodie has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 17 § Ahmed adoodie until a consensus is reached. Xeroctic (talk) 18:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]