User talk:GeorgeGeoffries
Corgan
[edit]The paragraph you added is totally irrelevant. Read Wikipedia:Recentism before editing again, please.--109.116.188.103 (talk) 19:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
It is relevant and if you are trying to pin this as recentism then you are a deletionist, and there's not much I can do about that. While you might not find this fact relevant I'm sure a lot of transgender folk out in the world who stumble upon this fact will find it interesting, and I should think many others (like myself) would as well. This is a relevant piece of information concerning Mr. Corgan's personal life and I have not spindoctored it. It should remain. GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 19:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
- If you actually *read* the page I've linked you'd understand what's the exact meaning of Recentism. Wikipedia is neither a news site nor a mere collection of "facts": outside Netphoria and some other fan forums this story will be forgotten in a week or two, as all this kind of garbage does... if it will ever surface.--109.112.1.176 (talk) 20:37, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Not going to carry on an argument with someone who won't accept the possibility of validity of the other side, however I will ask you explain the relevance of the entire paragraph about Courtney Love. It seems to be that you simply do not want what I have to add mentioned because it has to do with transgenderism.
GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 20:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
By the way this shit has been sourced, not sure why you feel the need to take down particular pieces of sourced material and not others. So while you say Wikipedia is not a compendium of useless facts, Wikipedia is also not supposed to be a place in which facts are hidden. The relevance of this is not disputable unless you want to remove the paragraph about Courtney Love as well. GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 20:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
- The problem is not the topic of the story, but its relevance. What exactly proofs Corgan intended to insult that person by referring to her sexuality? From what has the whole story started? Two private messages on Facebook? Some deleted tweets on Twitter? Is this story going to have media coverage outside Netphoria, even little? It's higly unlikely, and until it doesn't (or it affects Corgan's life in some other ways) it won't be published on Wikipedia, like it or not.
- If you think some other paragraphs on the Billy Corgan article are irrelevant point them out in the Discussion Page and purpose their deletion, don't add other irrelevant informations to the article.--109.112.1.176 (talk) 20:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Right, I didn't think the part about Courtney Love is irrelevant. You suggest it is by removing the part about Devi Ever. There are video blogs of Devi Ever talking about her grievances to Billy Corgan, if you actually checked the source you would see that. GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 20:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC) Also, it is neutral to say that calling a transgender individual a "he/she" or "it" is pejorative - that is simply what it is. It is pejorative. There is no other way to describe it. So yes, it is neutral to claim that Billy Corgan was being pejorative. GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 20:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC) I'll leave it be for now, but just to spite you and your recentism argument you can expect me to change it back after a little bit of time. GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2011 (UTC) Also your argument of the tweets being deleted simply falls flat. That's all it does. Ministry of Truth much? Have a good one, until we invariably chat again when I change it back. GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 21:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Well, I'm sorry but a video blog isn't considered a reliable source here on Wikipedia (please read here for more accurate information). If some major newspapers/tv news give relevant coverage to the story (and I strongly doubt it will happen) then it will be published on Wikipedia, otherwise, as I've said, all we have are some private messages on Facebook, some tweets and countless, useless pages on some fan forums on the net... and that's not enough. As for the Courtney Love bit, the relationship between her and Corgan has been very long; I'd cut myself all the references to tweets and interview quotes, but not being a native English speaker I just seldomly contribute here on en.wikipedia, and I wouldn't be able to follow a possible related discussion here.--109.112.1.176 (talk) 21:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
August 2011
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not include unsupported or inaccurate statements. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Billy Corgan with this edit, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for guidelines. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ 20:39, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Jeff G., a citation was included. Not sure what you're getting at.
GeorgeGeoffries (talk) 20:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
BLP noticeboard - Billy Corgan
[edit]Hi there is a report about this BLP and some disputed content - please discuss at the noticeboard and refrain from replacing the disputed content without some consensus or support , thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 11:21, 27 August 2011 (UTC)