Talk:Howard Stern

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
Portal:Radio
 Radio Portal
This article is supported by the Radio WikiProject.

This project provides a central approach to Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article attached to this page and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards. Visit the wikiproject page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
To-do list for Howard Stern: edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
  • Fix missing citations, add fact tag when needed (You may find some good sources in the Private Parts book.)
  • Get permission for use of Howard's Sirius promo image,or find a freely licensed image of him.
  • The text under the picture indicates the photo is one of howard doing his sirius show, but it is actually just a cover of his book.
Priority 3
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Contents

[edit] Who is Harmon Leon?

Why is Harmon Leon in the See Also list?

Dunno, removed.. LilDice 19:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Error

There is a spelling error: the word "schtick" should be changed to "shtick." So someone who can edit this page please make the correction. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.174.174.158 (talk • contribs) 03:30 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Changed, although both spellings are valid schtick or shtick, even per the wiki, but the primary page is at shtick, and the other just redirects.(Optigan13 08:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Quick Question

Why does "Blumpkin" redirect here?

Stern was once fined for describing the act (blowjob while on the toilet)...not sure if redirect is really valid, but that's why someone did it. LilDice 03:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
More importantly.. why were you searching for Blumpkin? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HOD (talk • contribs) 13:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Libertarian?

I see that stern is considered a libertarian in the categories list even though he's said many a time not to categorize him in his political views....—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hcallen (talk • contribs).

Probably because he ran as a libertarian for Gov. of NY... LilDice 12:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DEATH PENALTY

He says in his second book that he no longer supports it becaus ethe OJ trial showed him that the poor will get sent to the chair while the rich will not.

So cite it and add it. LilDice 17:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image

I wrote Sirius publicity and they never sent me an official headshot with permission for use, unfortunately. We really should try to get permission to use and a nice hi-res publicity shot though. Maybe someone should e-mail Fred, he respects wikipedia! LilDice 02:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what Fred's email is, but maybe someone can ask Mutt on SternFanNetwork. --Bark 19:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I dont have an account at SFN, but if someone with a connection over there can just get someone at Sirius to e-mail one of us an official publicity photo with copyright info and permission to use that would rock the current one is a really bad photo. LilDice 19:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Replaced with newer screen grab from HSOD. The old image was very old. LilDice 01:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I realize the quality isn't great. But it is more recent than the previous one, so please stop the reverting. LilDice 16:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
If Howard doesn't like this picture then Howard can get one of his boys to upload a recent picture with a clear view of his face, and we'll use that one instead. --Bark 19:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Howard should like this one, I think. --Bark 22:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
You can email Fred through the "Contact" section of HowardStern.com, just include your email and hopefully they'll get back to you. 68.193.87.97 21:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Just did, hopefully I hear back from him. LilDice 14:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Has anyone tried the webmaster or Jason? Their addresses are at the bottom of the the rundown pages Would it be useful if several of us try to e-mail the show in the hopes that at least one of us will get a response? Also do we want to put a no free content image in the spot?[BLP_default_photo.svg](Optigan13 05:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC))
sorry can we take that free image thing off? it kind of looks strange on an encyclopedia article68.193.87.97 02:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
It looks a bit funny but it serves a purpose. If that thing gets more people to try and find a usable picture, then it's great, but if no one feels it will does us any good than by all means take it down. A flickr search for a creative commons licensed picture turns up nothing useful, but there are some good howard stern ones on there, just not cc licensed. We could contact the individuals to see if they would be willing to license one. (Optigan13 06:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC))


[edit] Controversial Statements and Trivia

A section like this is problematic. What constitutes "offensive" and "controversial"? Answering that question opens a whole can of worms because what one may consider offensive, another may not. The same holds true for controversy. To have a section like that opens the door for anything anyone to add. This article may become so long and awkward, it defeats the purpose. Not to mention the fact that the article would no longer read like an encyclopedia entry and more like a rap sheet, violating Wikipedia's Neutral point of view policy. Also, I question the worth of the Trivia section. Is anything there interesting and worthwhile? That section is also problematic. Wikipedia discourages trivia sections, asking for you to either assimilate the item into the body of text of the article or remove it entirely. --Bark 13:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see a controversial statements section. As far as the Trivia section, I'm fine with removing it. It's all innane POV stuff. LilDice 14:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed the Controversial Statements section. I'll begin integrating and removing the Trivia section. --Bark 14:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stop spreading the minsinformation that the $500 Million figure is a salary, it's a budget.

It was first reported as a budget in major newspapers and still a few select non lazy journalists will report this amid the torrential output of people who chose to get it wrong.

People with greater journalism skills than me can easily prove this but the base inquiry could start with this

http://www.siriusbackstage.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-67344.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stephen's black friend (talk • contribs).

If you read the Forbes article it lists $300 mil. as how much he makes a year and calls it a Salary, not $500 mil. This might contain a one-time $230 mil. payout. But regardless, does anyone ever claim $500 mil is his salary? LilDice 11:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
So if I understand you correctly, Forbes isn't a reputable source, but a message board is? Like LilDice said, the page doesn't even list $500,000,000 as the figure. --Bark 18:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

howards salary is not public information. Forbes ridiculously and arbitarily combines the DEBUNKED $100 Million a year salary figure(same as 500 over 5 years) with wildly incredulous rumors about various stock deals/bonuses. So since this is ONE source for disproving half of Forbes bull$hit math, please don't go and use their figure anyway.

http://www.secinfo.com/dsvRa.13ej.htm

Section 8.01 Other Events

We have entered into an agreement with Howard Stern, one of the most widely listened to radio and entertainment personalities in the United States, and his production company. Pursuant to the agreement, commencing on January 1, 2006, Stern will move his radio show to SIRIUS Satellite Radio from terrestrial radio as part of a channel created by Stern. We also expect Stern to develop and produce one or more additional channels of programming for us during the term of the agreement. The agreement will expire on December 31, 2010.

Our financial obligations under the agreement are material, and consist of both fixed and incentive payments. These obligations are payable partly in cash and partly in shares of our common stock. We estimate that we will recoup our fixed obligations under the agreement when we acquire approximately 1,000,000 incremental subscribers. This estimate is based upon a number of significant assumptions (which we believe to be reasonable but which contain significant uncertainties), including the timing and costs of acquiring such subscribers and the length of time such individuals remain subscribers. In addition, if we achieve the incentive milestones contained in the agreement, we believe that the material positive effects on our business will far outweigh the related incentive payments.

Our aggregate fixed obligations under the agreement are approximately $100 million per year. These costs include production and operating costs for the show, including compensation of show cast and staff, overhead, construction costs for a dedicated studio, a budget for the development of additional programming and marketing concepts, and payments to Stern and his agent.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stephen's black friend (talk • contribs).

Unfortunately, if you look at http://www.secinfo.com/$/About.asp, it says quite clearly that the source is not affiliated with nor endorsed by the SEC or CSA. Moreover, this excerpt doesn't refute the other source, which happens to be a business periodical that has been around for a while. What seems more discomforting here is that you seem unable to "play nice" with others. --Bark 13:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Bark please relax. We're all on the same team here just trying to get the best article we can. You can understand that we dont want to remove a cited source just because someone comes in and calls it bullshit. Now, I think you have some good points. And I do think that Forbes is including the $240 mil. in business deals in the figure, which technically isn't a salary, since he isn't payed that every year. I am actually fine with just omitting the figure if the other eds are. It is indeed speculative in nature, and not really all that notable. LilDice 14:19, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey baby, I'm peachy. It seems to be a moot point now because the Forbes link has died. However, I would appreciate it if name calling wasn't introduced to this discussion. (See the article's history if you missed it.) --Bark 17:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Howard Stern in Douglas Adams Books

In the book, The Long, Dark, Tea-time of the Soul, by Douglas Adams, there is a bestselling author by the name of Howard Stern.He is actually a terrible writer, and the only reasons his books sell is because his name is absolutly perfect for printing on the front of books. I have no idea if this charectar is connected with the other Howard Stern, but I thought I'd let everyone here know. I think that Howard Stern was already on the radio by the time this book was written, but I'm not positive.

Hmm, interesting Stern was on the air in '88 for sure. LilDice 23:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I just checked and it was actually Howard Bell, sorry, my mistake.

[edit] Daughter: Deborah or Debra?

Hey anon user, I cited a source to backup Deborah, and it's on Sirius.com. I don't care who you go to school with. Here on Wikipedia, you have to Cite your sources with no original research. --Bark 16:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sources that spell her name "Debra" include imdb.com, eonline.com, fan website marksfriggin.com, yahoo web-celeb ... I don't know how to spell her name ... the sources contradict one another. Ebzlef 04:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, if I was her, I would probably spell it Debra. It'a probably like John-Jack, James-Jim, William-Will-Bill, Robert-Bob, etc. However, the Sirius page has more credibility than fan sites and even IMDB. (IMDB is good for filmographies, but their other content is dicey.) I'm not familiar with eonline enough to comment on their quality.
Deborah was in place here for months/years until an anon "classmate" of hers got a burr in his saddle. I would say leave it Deborah. That's the precident and the official Sirius biography of Howard Stern lists that. It's more solid ground. --Bark 14:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newsmax.com Spam

The 'editor' Art2006 keeps crow-barring references to a non-notable newsmax.com list of radio hosts in the article. He simply adds the reference in the middle of a normal paragraph without any respect for the article. Please Art2006, do not add it back without discussing here first. Not discussing just proves you're a spammer. Thanks! LilDice 22:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

it's been referenced on the show recently, or a similar list, so i would say that it is notable now. Lenn0r 07:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
The list you're talking about is the Talkers magazine list, newsmax.com is completely irrelevant to anything. LilDice 11:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Abu badali

Abu badali is currently questioning two pictures on this page, the main info box picture and the newspaper scan. If you wish to defend them, please go to the pictures' respective pages and do so. (Image:SternWRNW.jpeg) and (Image:Howard Stern Sirius.jpg)

I'm trying to assume good faith, but when he removed (Image:SternWRNW.jpeg) on this page and then tagged it as an orphaned picture, I raise my eyebrow. Of course it's orphaned now, you orphaned it! Having concerns about the content here is one thing. Creating the situation and then criticizing it seems questionable at best. I've restored the image into the article until a resolution is found, or until he reverts it back.

Anyway, I'll be out of town for a while, so my defense for these images will be limited. --Bark 14:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Bark, if you're curious about my reasonings, you should have raised your concerns about my behavior on my talk page. Anyways, as I explained in my edit summary, I removed Image:SternWRNW.jpeg from this article because the image's tag says it's a newspaper cover (although it really doesn't looks like one) that was not being used as the {{Newspapercover}} tag explains it should be: "to illustrate either the publication of the article or issue in question" (it was being used to illustrate a "24-year-old Stern", and not a news article or issue) and "with the publication name either visible on the image itself or written in the image description above" (which was clearly not the case). Also, the image information on it's copyright holder. --Abu Badali 16:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
The article in question is actually about a "24-year-old Stern", so I don't see a problem with displaying a photo from the article. And the missing info, which can be seen in a larger, non-cropped version of the image found here can quite easily be added in. Tarc 22:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand What do you mean by "The article in question is actually about a 24-year-old Stern". Isn't this a bio, that is, about the life of this person?
The non-cropped version of the image show us it's not an newspaper cover. It's just an image copyrighted by The New York Times, that this article is using in a way that detracts the image's commercial value (NYT could have been relicensing this image for a fee, or simply using it exclusively to increase it's own value). --Abu Badali 23:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:bizperson99 bizperson99

I deleted the part that stated the wccc engineer gave Stern tapes to listen to in order to do show. That did not happen. (Firsthand knowledge).

something tells me you're a howard fan and don't want to admit that the stuff that Dahl was doind predated Howard by two years, at the least. (firsthand knowledge.)

Regardless, I don't think an Unauthorized Biography is a good source for the Bio of a living person. LilDice 00:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Response: firsthand knowledge because I was at station. The engineer was the GM/owner. He did not give any tapes to Stern. user: bizperson99

Actually being there doesn't meet WP:V but an Unathorized biography is not much of a source either, so I'm not including it for that reason. LilDice 18:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that Wikipedia was nothing more than a "fan" site for little girls. I'm glad you've decided for everyone that an unauthorized biography isn't a proper historical reference. I'm sure everyone who writes biographies about Winston Churchill, for instance, uses only "authorized biographies." You, sir, are the greatest of fans, and I congratulate you on your obsequiness.

[edit] 'The Howard'

Let's wait before we add this 'The Howard' silliness. It's a joke, we don't need to add every bit to the show, it will probably be irrelevant in a couple days. I'm removing for now, unless you can produce a news source calling him 'The Howard. LilDice 23:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/149187/howard_stern_changes_moniker_to_the.html

Sign your posts please, All i'm saying is wait on this. Howard was messing with the AP people as a bit with this 'The Howard' thing, it's not necessarily encyclopedic at this point. LilDice 12:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well thank you for taking charge of the page. I guess the whole "free" thing is out of the question. 206.48.230.11 05:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, King of all Media was just a joke. 206.48.230.11 05:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's an issue of whether or not it's a joke, it's more of if it is a running joke that will last. The King of All Media was one he did for a long period of time, and is fairly established at this point. I agree with Lil Dice that we don't need to add every day's info, that is what the rundowns and mark's friggin are for. If we really need to constantly update the section we can add a [current event / timing tag] somewhere on the page. (Optigan13 05:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC))
Exactly just relax, we can discuss things before they are added. I am not 'taking charge' of the page, I am simply trying to make it the best article it can. If you want to help then that's great, but don't expect your every edit to be viewed as valuable. LilDice 14:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Howard TV

Howard TV redirects here some mention of it would be nice, it is an actual solo cable channel and some info about it would be greatly appreciated. Quadzilla99 16:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree it's important, but it is already included on the show page, so I don't know if it needs to be mentioned on his bio page. (Optigan13 20:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
In that case I'll fix the redirect and send it the appropriate article and section. Quadzilla99 17:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is Howard Losing His Appeal

I'm wondering if the article should talk more about Howard's diminishing appeal to audiences. He's been getting rather mediocre reviews lately, and the younger generation isn't as impressed as Gen X was. http://www.helium.com/tm/186578 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.227.79.190 (talk) 14:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

If there's an authoratative source that says so using facts, i.e. legitimate research/statistics/etc., by all means, add it and cite the source. However this is not the place for original research, hypotheses, or editorialization. Whether the "diminishing appeal" argument is valid or not, the articles you cited are grossly inadequate to support it in the main article. Mdeaton 22:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm 19 and love listening to the show--207.190.61.122 15:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page organization

After re-organizing the placement of some of the page contents, I just want to express my hope that you find it an improvement. My first reading of the article left me dissatisfied with having two personal-life paragraphs in two places within the Terrestrial radio career section, and then I realized that those paragraphs were also embedded among other paragraphs that were not specifically about Stern's radio career. In that edit, I moved text intact, without changing any of it--except to avoid duplication on the subject of Stern's engagement, because the engagement had already been mentioned in the Personal life section.

Other changes that I'd like to see, but will leave for another time--or for other people, whichever comes first--include: elimination of duplicate wikilinks within the article (e.g. the year 2006 and the name Beth Ostrosky); and removal of one sentence about Ostrosky ("Ostrosky frequently appears in the men's magazine FHM, and hosts Filter on the G4 network"), because she has already been identified sufficiently and that kind of detail is best kept current in the separate article about her.

--Rich Janis 02:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate it. LilDice 03:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] External Links

I'm not sure where some eds are coming from completely trimming the fan site section, the 2 fan sites listed are quite relevant. One gives extensive transcripts from the show and the other is the quasi-official message board for the Stern show, certainly well within WP:EL. LilDice 23:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I concur these links are highly relevant. Mvemkr 00:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
When does the 3RR take effect? Mvemkr 01:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The marksfriggin should be the only fansite listed as it provides show rundowns (though so does howardstern.com, so maybe marksfriggin is not needed). Sternfannetwork or any other bulletin board most definitely does not meet the criteria for external links. WP:EL and WP:NOT#LINK are pretty clear on this (See WP:EL, Links normally to be avoided, #10). —Ocatecir Talk 04:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
marksfriggin offers unbiased transcripts and a longer archive. The guy who writes marksfriggin actually quit doing it on an official basis because he refused to be censored, so it's definitely relevant. Now as far as sternfannetwork, it does contain some encyclopedic content such as a photo gallery and is the defacto 'official' forums/fansite since the owner of the site is employed by the Stern radio stations on Sirius and hosts a show. Most articles contain a link to at least one fan-site, the only reason this was even up for debate was that a vandal from a rival forum has been here trying to remove it. LilDice 11:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/o/w/Talk%7EHoward_Stern_8405.html"