Talk:Justine Ezarik

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Justine Ezarik is part of WikiProject Pittsburgh, which is building a comprehensive guide to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and its metropolitan area on Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit the attached article, join or discuss the project.

Editors are currently needed to tag Pittsburgh-related articles with {{pghproj}}.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Common... this page needs re-writing...

Contents

[edit] Internet meme?

It did not come from /b/, I don't think it is one. 97.99.27.99 02:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Age/Birth?

Anyone know? --Recoil42 22:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


Deleted word "slut" after visit to "georgia aquarium". I dont think there is such a thing as a slutfish. Maybe I'm wrong though. --Greenboy84 20:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with iPhone?

Shouldn't this article be merged with either iPhone or 300 Page ATT Bill ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.225.15 (talk) 22:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope, she's notable independently of them too --lucid 18:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It should be merged with the Iphone article or just deleted. Most of the article is talking about her origins and the Iphone, I don't think she is notable enough to have her own article. 97.99.27.99 19:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

You've missed the converation about it. It seems nobody can make a solid consensus to delete the article. Because she's involved in more than the iPhone meme. Some people say that because she just became notable, she isn't notable enough. Well unless nothing changes in the future, it could go up one more time. But with her role in that SpikeTV shoot, I feel it's set in stone. --wL<speak·check> 05:40, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree this article should be merged or deleted... -Tracer9999 02:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


Sections of this article relating to the bill and its receiver should be merged into the iPhone or AT&T articles. The notability resides with the bill, the whole world does not need to know about Jtsines personal activities as she herself lacks the notability for such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.194.114 (talk) 14:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

You're an unregistered anon! What do you know about Notability guidelines at Wikipedia? --wL<speak·check> 17:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The very large number of sources about "Justine Ezarik", as a person, and the consensus of Wikipedia editors unfortunately disagrees. She is notable. • Lawrence Cohen 15:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use images are NOT acceptable

As the tag says, WP:FUC's #1 criteria and Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Unacceptable_images's #12 both say in extremely clear terms that fair use images are unacceptable in articles on people that are still alive. --lucid 18:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great.

Now wikipedia has become a personal vanity/advertisement/publicity host. Just great. If anyone can have a page, or anything, then it's not an encyclopaedia anymore is it? 84.254.51.121 01:37, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

In that case, lets nominate it for an afd and make sure this one get deleted into oblivion. Mr McLovin 19:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Based on what? Personal opinion, or objective criteria? Dhaluza 00:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

This page is personal advertising. If everyone got a Wikipedia page for having huge bills, there would be 20million instead of 2million articles on English Wikipedia.

This person is not notable and this is simply a vanity page. The first page of a google search on "Justine Ezarik" turns up - her website, her myspace page, her facebook page, her personal ad on Wikipedia (this page), etc. If she had any significance there would be something there other than her own content. Sbs9 (talk) 05:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Good Article?

Reading this article over, it isn't half bad. Once the current mistakenly began AfD is closed as a Keep, I think I will nominate this for GA review. • Lawrence Cohen 05:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Good articles need to be well written. It is not in-depth enough as well, hence its notability issues. --wL<speak·check> 21:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC) I'd fail it based on that. --wL<speak·check> 21:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I can definitely agree on the scope, and I wouldn't mind taking a crack at rewriting it from scratch. What notability issues, though? Multiple international coverage of two distinctly notable things, the videos and the iPhone bill event. • Lawrence Cohen 21:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Mostly the videos and the importance of her contributions to lifecasting in general. --wL<speak·check> 21:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
That could be a problem for the writing to reach GA/FA status, from the angle of it being a well-written, or simply being a good article (not GA, just not a crappy one). But the notability itself simply for the extended and constant coverage isn't an issue or question. From the purely objective standpoint, I mean. I agree that without half again as much new content this might be enough diverse material to make it a great article. But notability, itself, I can't see any question. • Lawrence Cohen 21:50, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply to User:WikiLeon....her importance to the "lifecasting movement" is that she's a pretty girl and has therefore gotten the mainstream media to cover the movement. Lifecasting would struggle for notability without her contributions. --Rocksanddirt 23:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But she's she did bring lifecasting in the public eye, and that's all that matters when it comes to notability. Next time you want to reply, just use a ":" below my note so it comes indented. --wL<speak·check> 23:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Have we seen any sources yet that credit her with this? That would be a great line in the article lead. • Lawrence Cohen 23:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I have not, but I have never come across lifecasting that didn't include her. --Rocksanddirt 23:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

For an article to be on Wikipedia, it must be about someone or something notable. And while Justine is certainly well known as being the receiver of a very large AT&T bill, the fact remains that the notability resides first and foremost with the bill itself and AT&T for dispatching such a ridiculous bill. I move for one of the following: 1. Merge it into another more relevent article such as the iPhone or AT&T articles. 2. Create an article for the 300page bill, but not for Justine. --****

[edit] WHY is this person notable

WHY is this person notable, because she is one of the hundreds of people who are "lifecasters" and she got a big phone bill... so??Blaze33541 23:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Because she has a significant amount of independent coverage from reliable sources, over a long period of time, for making videos, then for the iPhone fiasco, then for her lifecasting work and promotion. • Lawrence Cohen 23:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Image:Justine Ezarik.jpg was in the article yesterday, and got changed to Image:Justine Ezarik making faces.jpg I humbly propose that the first is more representative of the subject, so more deserving to be the lead image of the article. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 14:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the first one definitely is better given what she is known for. Lawrence Cohen 16:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment

I've just re-assessed this article on behalf of WikiProject Pittsburgh. I have moved it up to B-class for quality, and kept it at low-class for importance. A couple pointers:

  • This article has barely seen any edits of substance this year. This is the main reason that the article of "low" importance. There's no way she's going to get "high" importance -- that's reserved for major Pittsburgh icons like Myron Cope -- but she might be "mid" importance if there's evidence she is constantly doing notable things. Also, if this article is to become Featured-class, it needs to be clear that we are tracking her career closely.
  • The citations are thorough and cite reputable sources. My only suggestion would be to use {{cite news}} instead of {{cite web}} when citing to newspapers and magazines.
  • It's wonderful that there is a free image on the top of the page -- free images are always better than images under copyright. But if someone could please find a free picture that doesn't have the photographer's thumb in the way, that would be even better. :) (For example, maybe use Image:Justine Ezarik.jpg?)

--M@rēino 19:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)