Talk:Mancow's Morning Madhouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Adding and/or Omitting information

If you wish to delete or change some of this article, please give me a valid explanation why you think omitting information that has already been published and/or admitted to by the subject is necessary to be hidden from the readers. Also if you have an alternative to the page set-up please let me know. I'm willing to listen to alternatives. I will not put up, however, with omitting useful information because the person who wants to change them just feels like it, or feels like it's none of their business. This is a fan page which is supposed to be filled with information and trivia for all the readers to know. NOT a means of omition for purposes of censorship.

-Maddawg1967

The information is hardly useful as it depreciative; it's written with a haphazard and fanboyic tone that is reminiscent to rabid 12 year old. Not only is the tone inapporiate to Wikipedia, it's full with a bunch of mind-numbing cruft, which makes the article seem like fan-based website. The reader does not need to know what each person says and does, or a three-piece biography on the person. Keep it brief and concise.

If you still not convinced, indulge with the grotesque edits of the a hapless group of eleven years olds and then compare it to any featured article. Obviously, you notice see a major difference; if not, consider relocating to Uncyclopedia or [Tripod.com]. You have to understand that there's a difference between having enough too much information. And even though your translucent motives hint you want to help the article - a plethora of information is just going to belittle it. If you still disagree with me, contact a veteran Wikipedian and ask him/her to resolve these discrepancies. --ShadowJester07 20:53, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with my edits. The fact of the matter is YOU JUST DON'T LIKE THE WAY I EDIT MY PAGES! You obviously either have something against me personally or have a distinct love censorizing on what you feel the public needs to know or what you feel doesn't need to know.

1. This is about wikipedia and the readers, NOT ABOUT SHADOWJESTER!!!

2. You may be an editor on this page, but I am too. Go GET OFF YOUR GODDAMNED HIGH HORSE ABOUT YOUR FUCKING SENIORITY ABOUT YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH WIKIPEDIA. I have enough knowledge about Mancow and other subjects I know about to make an authoritative contribution to this page. If you don't like it, you can contact someone else at Wikipedia to resolve this matter. Until then you can feel free to change it if you don't like it, but bear this in mind, if you omit information on this subject to "what YOU feel the readers DON'T NEED TO KNOW SOMETHING about a certain fact, IT WILL BE REVERTED BACK.

3. You cannot run me off this page or this board. Uncyclopedia? Come on, what are you trying to prove? Again, this is a public board. Not a board suited to the likings of ShadowJester!

-- Maddawg1967

/Sigh/, Maddawg, Please Drop the preadolescence derivative barks, and childish caps lock exclamatory remarks.

I've already told you this at least three times in the past. If you feel this article is so immaculate, ask a veteran Wikipedian to review it; I'm almost convinced he/she will agree with me. I don't have seniority; I'm not an Admin; nor am I an honored Wikipedians. My suggestions are derived from several College level writing courses and years and years of proof reading myriads of essays written by various children across the Chicago-land area. I'm not saying your additions are a disease, but rather torpedo the article with much unnecessary information. I've been across various Wikipedia Articles and seen similar articles with much similar surpluses of information trimmed.

Wikipedia is not a "board", it is a public nexus of information. Rather than battling it out like two gladiators, I strongly suggest getting an experience Wikipedian involved to sort out this disarray. I have nothing against you, nor am I a fascist totalitarian reverting machine - unlike you at certain times, I don't indulge in my own festering contraptions; 90% of this page was indeed written by yourself, and later re-worded/edited by myself. --ShadowJester07 20:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Rather than bashing each other like two tyrants, why not try to compromise? Yes, Shadow has a point that roster is jam-packed with information, he has just as much a right as both of us to intervene and edit them. MadDawg is trying to help the article by adding some (remotely) information. Why not just add a link to Mancow’s minor sidekicks – providing you can find the list online, and then just make some sections about his notable sidekicks. OR, why not make a subpage? Either way, I’ll leave a clean up tag so someone will remember to clean It up.

I hope I solved this dispute

-- Feudman Just a note to you tards. You didn't edit "myriads of essays"--you editted "myriad essays." You never have a "myriad of" anything. It is the most common writing mistake among myriad people who try to sound intelligent.

[edit] Dr. Phil, Big Gooney, etc.

Dr. Phil and Big Gooney and some of the other sidekicks have been relocated to "Other Cohorts" because they do not make everyday contributions to the show. However they are still contribtutors and thus still deserve merit.

--maddawg1967--

--Feudman--

Hey, wanna quit reverting my addition. I am not saying anything that is not true nor is it non-neutral. Contrary to your assertion, this is not a fan page. It is an encyclopedic entry and negative items may be added as well.

Really, The whole "Mancow is best known as a Howard Stern imitator...." is dissonant to Wikipedia NPOV and Living People's Articles. Unless you manage to cough up some proper sources to support the slanted claims, it will be deleted sometime later.

And contrary to your claim, This is Wikipedia, not a fansite; please learn to use a spell checker. ;-p. --ShadowJester07 18:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

What is spelled wrong?