Talk:David Quinn (actor)/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

David Quinn says "STOP IT ALREADY!"

Quinn is my teacher. Last week he made a point of telling us that business partners and/or reporters actually LOOK at this site and he is getting tired of this.

I just email him. THIS is the correct info he wants. If you think otherwise, use the Edmonds School directory and send him a message yourself.

And stop adding the photo. He looks NOTHING like that anymore. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.197.148.37 (talk • contribs) 22:41, Feb 12, 2006.

Thank you for clarifying your points to everyone who did not believe me. As I said, the content looks fine and should not be subjected to anymore unnecessary changes (essentially adding the picture) from a questionable user. --67.183.56.51 07:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
What further evidence is required to have the picture removed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.183.56.51 (talk • contribs) 00:52, Feb 13, 2006.
If you fee you have the evidence, go to the article explaining how to remove a picture. ChessManXI 22:31, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Lamest Revert War

This might end up on Lamest edit wars ever, because neither of us seems to want to give in. I like the way with 2 main sections, why do you insist in the 3 bio sections? ChessManXI 07:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Please explain your reasoning for blanking the discussion page. And TeenAngst, why do you keep on reverting the article? 71.112.203.13 07:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

How can you possibly say that you are addressing any of the concerns expressed about the quality of the material in this article?

TheRingess 08:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Um, Quinn just IMed to tell me what fun was happening tonight. I spoofed his email addy and he is "not pleased" with the results of the history and discussion page.

People: Quinn is for free speech, but this is all a bit nutty tonight.

Why not give him the bio he wants? I wrote it, and I know him better than most of you.

Too bad you have no sense or organization.

Passive Voice in Actor Bio section

Now that you drew my attention to this article, the Actor bio section uses way, way too much passive voice

please clean up fragments like "His work has been nominated..." to specify who did the nominating, when they did it and cite sources, so an average reader can easily verify the information.

Thanx.

TheRingess 08:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

It won't work. Every time I edit it, Godmann TeenAngst or one of his/her sockpuppets just reverts it. Some living encyclopedia....
Agree. His minions are numerous. Tony Kim at MIT has likely written a program.
) Hey Ring-gal. Quit while you are behind. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nublet (talk • contribs) awhile ago.
To anyone who wishes to know, KillChessCookie 71.197.148.37 Godmann TeenAngst are the ones reverting this article

Bright one, paduwan.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.197.148.37 (talk • contribs) 00:39, February 14, 2006 PST.

How old are you? 10? 11? ChessManXI 08:40, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

16. My extended essay is going to be about wikipedia, given the time involved! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KillChessCookie (talk • contribs) 00:41, February 14, 2006 PST.

My IM is going insane over this fight. KillChess has all of us up tonight!

WOW

Look who's been hopelessly violating the 3revert rule! The Ringess?ChessMan?

REVERTING VANDALISM DOES NOT COUNT, NUBLET
However, Sock Puppetry to avoid that rule is.

Webster Rule

Does the Webster rule apply here?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Small IB kid (talk • contribs) 00:58, February 14, 2006 PST.

What's that? ChessManXI 09:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
The Dean? You are so lame, detention is gonna be Quinn's 10 hour rule.
I don't get it. I go to Meadowdale, not IB-crap. ChessManXI
Then it'll be a visit to the midget ASB dude.
Sounds fun

Possible Copyright Violations

BTW, all pettiness aside, this article borders on a copyright violation of material found on the pinpoint website.

TheRingess 09:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Look Who Is Deleting Now

Afraid, Chess widget?

Go suck a dick. I don't care anymore, I'm probably going to be banned from wikipedia for participating in this shitty feud, so this accoun't will go out in a bang.

Vulgarity

You have been turned in....

I'm crying. Like this account isn't already in the dupster for reverting a single article 100 times


Awards

What awards was he nominated for? When?

Which emmy did he win? When? For what?

I have removed the line about his awards until someone can name the specific awards, cite sources and give dates.

TheRingess 09:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


Can we all just calm down

As the material stands now it seems to me

  • there is nothing objectionable
  • the article includes mostly statements that can be verified, with 1 request for a citation

What is so objectionable about the article as it is now? TheRingess 10:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

    • YOU** didn't write it. He did. Just give the guy some control over his own life - -like that 10 year old ridiculous photo -- and we'll all go to bed. I'm due to be off in the next 15 minutes. Like I said: 60 students are lined up tonight.

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit.

You didn't answer my question. What is your objection to the material?

Please assume good faith, I merely edited the article to provide references for material in it.

I removed material that I could not easily find references for.

TheRingess 10:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


Actually article was far from good when I started looking at it.

  1. There was no way to verify that he had actually been roommates with the people claimed.
  2. There was no source for the claim of a peabody award, no year given, no link to the official peabody site.
  3. Ditto with the Emmy. what year did he win? Where is a source.
  4. Why no mention of attending U of W and his degrees?
  5. Why no other links so that info could be easily verified?

TheRingess 10:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

GOOD FAITH??

Again, are you David Quinn? Good faith is found in a man who gets kids into MIT, Columbia, Harvard...and then pays for some of them. Like I said, you picked the wrong entry to fight over. When he wakes up and calls the lawyers, that Kennedy assassination Wiki is going to look petty compared to what he's going to do. Lady! He founded like the second web company!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by EW-Warrior (talk • contribs) .

Why do you assume that my edits are some sort of attack.

Please read guidelines on verifiability and citing sources

TheRingess 10:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

The article as it stands now, includes info that can be easily verified by any reader, and is pretty neutral. No attempt is made to disparage the subject of the article, I still fail to see your objection to sticking to material that has sources.

TheRingess 10:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

What right do you have to tell someone what their bio is?? And don't give me the "anyone can write wiki" nonsense. I left your sources in. That's a trade off for the removal of the old photo. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EW-Warrior (talk • contribs) .

You are mischaracterizing my edits. Take out the photo if you want.

You provided no sources for the material you put back in.

And why is it nonsense that anyone can edit Wikipedia?

TheRingess 10:24, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Because, dear Ringess, YOU are NOT David Quinn. Don't tell the man what his bio is.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by EW-Warrior (talk • contribs) .

Once more you mischaracterized my edits.

Any mention of an award should include at least:

  • a date
  • a category
  • an organization
  • a link to a website in the references section

I could find nothing about his emmy, I see that the show won an emmy, but found no info on his on there.

TheRingess 10:35, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

What do you want? A picture of him hitting me on the head with it. It is on his school desk, for god's sake.


What I want is a verifiable source. When did he win it? For what? Isn't there a website with this info?

TheRingess 10:38, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

The IMDB link is now on.


Fair enough.

The material about his association with the theatre camp needs a reference. One difficulty I enountered, while trying to find a reference for that, was that the official site does not list him as an alumni, so I could not provide a reference on that site.

TheRingess 10:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm Michael Lam, stop it!

I am Michael Lam, a junior who attends EWHS. ChessAndCookies, please stop it already! I am not ChessAndCookies or any of his inferior minions. I finally found out what Mr. Quinn was referencing during Warrior Period. Are you Steven? Or do you really go to Meadowdale? I just woke up and saw all of this madness when discovering the two hour delay. FYI, I was not involved in this huge battle, for I had to grade the posts and responses. If everyone really needs to know, the signature after this message contains my IP Address and there is no lie about it. Chess, do you hate me or what? If you look at my edits, they were not involved in the fight. I'm really tired of all this! Please just agree with Mr. Quinn and keep the article stable. Although I really want to give chess 10 hours of detention, I don't need the 10 hour detention myself. If ChessAndCookies is not Steven, then Steven should not deserve detention as well. If you are Steven, why would you do such a thing to me? Remember, this is Mr. Quinn's article. If Mr. Quinn has any questions, he can talk to me at school, not by learning from fallacious comments from other questionable, agressive users. In principle, this is my IP address, I have no other users. I wish to prove it, but Wikipedia's privacy policy fails to do so. Please ban ChessAndCookies if it's possible.

Stop fixing the articles already! Aren't you tired? Just to let you know, I support Mr. Quinn, even if I'm foolish. (Michael Lam) --67.183.56.51 15:37, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I SMELL AN IMPOSTER!!!
Please stop it. Can we private message each other? How do you know me anyway?
Don't play dumb. I know you know me, we're good friends. We were chatting about the nublets reverting the article. ChessManXI 15:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
How can you give detentio to someone trying to fix a wikipedia article? Also, the ip you wrote this from has been used in the war previously. Finally, I have no minions, except my ip when i forget to login.... The other guy/guys have like 5 sockpuppets, whatever... ChessManXI 15:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Quinn can do anything, are you pretending not to know him? Are you really from Meadowdale? Anyway, yes, it was involved in the pictures war, but I was the one removing the pictures. I don't plan to edit the article in the future, for I am powerless without an account. --67.183.56.51 15:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Whoa, Mr. Quinn cannot do anything, if someone challenges an non-cited exerpt from the article, Mr. Quinn does not have permission to just revert it without an explanation. I would be very happy to see this article delete, 250 reverts seems like a lot. Sonic3KMaster 16:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting that. Anyway, to prevent myself from getting into trouble, I'm not replying anymore. --67.183.56.51 16:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I still don't understand

why would David Quinn have an article on wikipedia, and have you guys revert it? I totally defeats the purpose of wikipedia. If he wants to be on the internet, he should get a blog. If he wants to remain unknown, this article should be deleted, but you can't just revert it whenever someone tries to fix the organiztion of the article or adds references or removes unvalidated material. 71.112.203.13 15:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC) (Suppose to be ChessAndCookies, I forgot to login....)

Because "business partners and/or reporters actually LOOK at this site." Please leave it alone for him. He does use it. And I don't know why I'm back on Wikipedia, adding comments when Mr. Quinn told me to stay off of it. --67.183.56.51 15:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Umm, he should get a personal website for that use. Wikipedia is designed to be like an encyclopedia, not a personal advertisement. Sonic3KMaster 15:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh, so that's why he liked the 3 bio sections like before, because reporter/business parters can see his 3-point plan. How lame, he needs a blog. I suggest Blogger.com. Huzzah! ChessManXI 16:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Just left his class. He didn't write the entry in the first place. One of his idiot students did. Once it was there, however, he went in and corrected it. No "3 point" plan. And he has his own website. If it were up to him, this article would be deleted FOREVER. {unsigned|168.99.166.79|18:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)}
Maybe this article should be put up for deletion because of so many reverts, and one group of people refusing to let the article be edited. 168.99.166.20 22:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

This article is protected

I have protected this aritcle due to a large edit war. Protection will probably last for one week. --Commander Keane 15:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

eek, that's a long time, especially considering the typos on the article :D ChessManXI 15:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Commander Keane. --67.183.56.51 15:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Deletion

I would put this article up for deletion, but I do not know if it falls under the criteria of a notible person because I do not know Mr. Quinn and the information on the article is questionable. Could someone who knows David Quinn please go Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People still alive and decide if this article needs to stay on wikipedia? 168.99.166.20 22:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Notability

Sadly for him, he meets the notable definition:

 Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions.

Even if he didn't, his participation at Allrecipes would likely get him a profile. But I know for a fact that he doesn't want this profile messed with by people who just like to drive-by. He didn't create it, doesn't want it, and is tired of idiots like ChessandCookies having an edit-party at his expense. Delete it. [Quinn's faithful minion]

Come on Quinn, do you you think I get a thrill from childish people such as yourself, reverting a page? Stooping down to a high schooler's level when you're a teacher seems pretty low, honestly. And apparently I'm an idiot, eh. You clearly don't understand the purpose of wikipedia. Does Bob Barker get to decide what's on his wikipedia article? No. It's from the public. I agree, delete this article. It has to pass a vote, and I bet it'll be Unanimous. And please properly sign your comments instead of with witty, yet uncomfirmable remarks.

You'll probably never see me use this account again. I was hoping to one day be a SysOp with this account, but the past 3 days ruined monthes of work. Good Bye, Wikipedia!!! ChessManXI 05:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Not Quinn. Not even the same gender, Chess-ter.

My 1 Cent

Firstly, I think that any teacher that inspires such loyalty in his students, must be a pretty good guy.

Secondly, for my part, looking back at the minor edit war that went on, I could have done a better job of explaining the minor edits I made and made my requests clearer.

As per notability, probably anyone who has won a Peabody Award is notable enough for Wikipedia.

However, there is nothing to say that any person who is notable enough must have an entry.

What I suggest is that when the 7 day protection period ends, is that we nominate the article for deletion.

The process is documented somewhere, I don't have the link handy.

But what it means is that the article's status is put to a vote. Any interested party can vote to either delete or keep the article, and discuss their reasoning. I emphasize the word "discuss", because a nomination does not guarantee that it will be deleted. At the end of the discussion period the votes are tallied and a sysop decides that either the article survives and stays or it is deleted.

Any editor, even an anonymous editor can vote, and the vote is completely democratic, with no person's vote counting more than any other person's (even David can vote, though his say counts no more than anyone elses).

I suggest that we put it through the process.

If enough vote to delete it, then perhaps we can persuade a sysop to delete it with a block to protect it from being recreated.

If enough vote to keep, then I suggest that we all sit down and have a cup of tea together and hash out the direction the article needs to go (keeping in mind Wikipedia's style guidelines and guidelines regarding verifiability). It's just my personal opinion that this is a much more civilized and mature process than simply reverting each other's edits.

At the very least, nominating it could result in a lively discussion.

Oh btw, please remember to sign comments on talk pages with ~~~~

TheRingess 05:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

ChessAndCookies

I'm still not sure about the real identity of ChessAndCookies. After a private talk with him, he claims to know a lot about perception and other things I do not know, suggesting he's a senior at EW? Clearly, he's most likely a student but I still don't know who he is. And unfortunately, how do I know what he says is reliable? What if he really does go to MDHS? Or yet, LHS or MTHS? I'm pretty sure I do not know him.

I'm sorry for adding a section about ChessAndCookies in this discussion, but I just wanted to see if anyone recognizes him. I know he is now gone (as well as abandoning his e-mail account), but it is unfortunate that I will never learn who this this guy was. What he did these past few days was not funny and I hope no one in the future will do such things to me again. (Michael Lam) --67.183.56.51 09:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/a/v/Talk%7EDavid_Quinn_%28actor%29_archive1_44be.html"