Talk:The Opie and Anthony Show Army

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Removed link to .net since the show is suing them.

where is it noted that the show is suing .net? I'd like to see some factual proof beyond the bit on the radio show (aka Ant's asscaves rant - btw, I see no asscaves on .net...)

IF THIS IS DELETED THEIR WILL BE HELL TO PAY. THIS IS JUST A WARNING FROM THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING! RAMOOOONE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.2.86.182 (talk) 13:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger proposal

This page is mostly redundant and needs to be merged. This is essentially vanity for a bunch of people on a message board. Dwmr 20:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

so Firefly/Serenity's Browncoats and Star Trek's Trekkies are allowed to have Wiki pages, yet Opie & Anthony's Pests are not? the Browncoats and Trekkies are also extremely avid fans who organize to show their enjoyment of a common interest, as do the Pests. and not only do the Pests organize for a common interest, but they also defend Opie & Anthony from detractors and critics when controversy arises regarding the show. their actions have proven vital to the Opie & Anthony show, especially recently during O&A's suspension. their first day back from the suspension, Opie himself admitted on the air that the efforts of the Pests pretty much saved them from being fired by XM. if you're going to propose the "merging" (which is pretty much a nice way of saying you want the page deleted, since past attempts to have this page completely deleted failed and a "merging" is the closest thing to a deletion you can get) with Opie & Anthony's page, maybe you should also propose the merging of the pages for the Browncoats and the Trekkies with the pages for Firefly/Serenity and Star Trek. otherwise, this page should stay. a merging of this page would take up too much room on Opie & Anthony's page anyway, since quite a bit of explanation is needed to describe the Pests, their efforts, and what sets them apart from other fanbases. that's why this page exists.(GLENN THE TOOL 01:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC))

"They are involved in listener events, promoting the show, promotions, etc."

that sounds rather redundant, doesn't it? either include just "promoting the show" or just "promotions," not both. it's saying the same thing twice.

This is a great article. To give it some legitimacy, can we get the links to the Pest articled that have been in R&R news sites? This will help negate any attempts to get this page thrown out. Also, the Sonni Forelli section needs to be revised a little. Sonny didnt organize the Million Pest March, Myself and BAM did. Sonny is KNOWN for his Assaults on the media. He was one of the TOP guys for that, and carried it for MONTHS along with Boston Strangler, and No Filter Paul. Perhaps a history of all attacks? I can provide all attacks, but I did not want to alter the page because I think I read something about altering people's own descriptions, so I didn't want to mess with it. Great page though.68.225.32.161 00:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)Dugout Doug

Woah buddy, it's Dugout Doug. I've been trying to work on this forever, as well as other projects on Wikipedia so getting cited sources can be hard, but if you can produce some links to reports on Foundry, FMQB, or any major news network, I'll throw them in. Unfortunately message boards, most blogs, and videos cannot be used. Just toss up the links and I'll write it all out. I stink as a pest in attacks, but I like to think of this as my contribution to the show. Payneos 02:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Naturally, I post this link on FBA, and try and get some help, and we start attacking our own fucking Wikki page. Got to love it. I will pull as much info as I can as far as reports and news articles and get them to you next week. 68.225.32.161 10:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC) Dugout Doug

That's why I didn't post it on any of the fansites. I'll be around, no rush, Wiki will still be here, Ell-Oh-Ell. Payneos 11:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

ʒ==Proposed Deletion==

Let's begin the discussion here, and not on the actual page. The article is important and works well to serve the purpose it serves. I think the Pests have grown to a point where there is enough citation and notability to keep it. If not, then it all gets thrown back in the O&A Article, which as it is is over the 60kb limit.

To be quite honest, most of the article is well written, accurate, and honest. It doesn't violate any Wikipedia policies and just seems like a well off article. So far it's survived deletion, I don't see why it all the sudden has to come under scrutiny. Payneos 04:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The only reason it's survived deletion is because I just discovered this article tonight. This article is nothing more than a circle jerk for the pests. Frankly.. if it can be written less NPOV, then I think it should stay. As it is now... DELETE!--XMBRIAN 04:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The way you're wording it clearly shows a severe bias against the "Pests" despite being a fan of Opie and Anthony, which is a bit unusual. Regardless of that, if you can [i]make[/i] it less NPOV, why not do so. I don't see any NPOV, but that's because most, if not all of this article was ripped straight from the main O&A Article itself, where it was exposed to many people, including Howard Stern fans (who generally cry POV) and had no problem with this particular section. Rather than delete the whole thing, try modifying it first. Payneos 04:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

My POV on this has nothing to do with this. I do not want to make this improved. How about just putting it back in the O&A article? Only this time... make it less POV there!--XMBRIAN 04:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not POV at all, and the fact that you refuse to do anything aboot it just shows where the commitment lies. The O&A Article is already long enough, hence why this one was created as an offshoot. This page can be made even better with the inclusion of the Pests' erected billboard photo aboot Jim Philips. This article is a keeper. Payneos 04:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't tell me it's not POV. Looking at this article makes me want to VOMIT! It clearly was written by a pest. "On January 9, 2006 'war' was officially declared by the boys. The show was opened with a live feed of rival Howard Stern's first show on Sirius Satellite Radio. To many fans, this is considered the final showdown between the two shows as they duke it out in the realm of satellite radio. Since then fans of both sides have been fighting informal battles by camping outside the Sirius building in New York or on various internet message boards, blogs, and chat rooms." Yeah... this belongs on Wikipedia. Suuuuuure.--XMBRIAN 04:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Then instead of deleting the whole article, why not just take that small section out and re-write it? It's starting to be clear what you take issue with and you're taking it out on the whole article, rather then facing the real issue which is that it can be re-written better, you're just being lazy and stonewalling. If it goes back into the main article, it won't last more then a few days before it's recreated in some form mentioning the Pests, because there's enough to go on to warrant such an article. The notion of deletion is rather frivilous. Payneos 04:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

And that ensuing article won't last long either. Tell me.. how is it possible that Eric Logan's article gets deleted twice? Aren't you gonna defend the bbbbbbboys boss?--XMBRIAN 04:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

This isn't aboot Eric Logan's article, which should also be a real article in Wikipedia. The Vice President of XM Programming I would think is noteworthy, but I digress. What happens on that article has no warrant to here in that case. THis article shall stand. Payneos 04:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

keep telling yourself that. maybe you'll get mentioned by the bbbbbboys!--XMBRIAN 04:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Already was once, good enough for me. Payneos 04:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Well isn't that special. I've been called a rihnocunt by Anthony.--XMBRIAN 04:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

And? What does any of this have to do with the deletion of this article? Payneos 04:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought we were talking about being mentioned by the bbbbbboys? Excuse me!--XMBRIAN 04:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

This isn't a forum, and I didn't bring that discussion up. This is aboot deleting this article, which will not happem from what I can see. You seem unwilling to edit this article to clean it up as you see fit, but rather want to simply destroy it because of some misguided agenda. Payneos 05:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

How is my "agenda" misguided? This is NOT worthy of an article! --XMBRIAN 05:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Proof is on the prosecution, so you tell me. Payneos 05:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Proof? Yeah... proof in things such as the Wackbag article being deleted.--XMBRIAN 05:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

That's more acceptable and reasonable. Wackbag is a forum with no major merit to have its' own article. It hasn't made headlines or been noted in publications and even O&A's Letterman appearance. The Pests, however, have. Payneos 05:11, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The pests were not mentioned on letterman. --XMBRIAN 05:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

"We have to feed the pests, or one day they'll take over the show."- Anthony. Payneos 05:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Didn't he say that on HIS show.. not Letterman.--XMBRIAN 05:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe it was both, but on Letterman first in reference to the money clip played for their walk on introduction, which Letterman had asked aboot. Payneos 05:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Watch the video for yourself... I don't believe they ever mentioned the pests on TV. here. i'm not gonna watch it myself, since i'm not defending this page

Too lazy, too tired. And even if they weren't, also remember that they were featured in the clip being given the money. That also speaks volumes. Payneos 05:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

How does it speak volume? That they need money?--XMBRIAN 05:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

XMBRIAN, please, enough. This agenda is just crazy at this point. The Pests are here, they arent going anywhere. I mean, I wish I understood what drives you to do this. I am Cheif Pest, the BIG LOSER, the unemployeed, living in my basement ass, and I havnt even had the time to ger Payneos his information yet. Being PRO pest isnt as important to me as being ANTI pest is to you. Just stop. The pests have done more promoting for the show, have taken part in more FIRSTS for radio, then your fucking S P A Z guy that you forught so hard for in the O&A article. Just enough. Pests have been in news articled, interviewed for papers, and on TV. We were refered to in Forbes. Enough with your agendas. Citation of pests as part of pop-culture http://www.forbes.com/2006/07/13/xm-sirius-marketing-cx_gl_0713autofacescan05.html?partner=yahootix "Cumia and the Pests have effectively pushed the O&A brand in the public's face. Now that' s viral marketing." FMQB http://fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=186874 Also from FMQB, First fan base to raise a billboard for a radio ad http://www.foundrymusic.com/opieanthony/displayheadline.cfm/id/8213/div/opieanthony/headline/THE_OPIE_AND_ANTHONY__PESTS__GET_MENTIONED_IN_FMQB.html Dugout Doug 00:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)Dugout Doug

You know what drives me to do this? THIS ISN'T THE FUCKING PLACE TO PUT THIS ARTICLE! WIKIPEDIA IS NOT WACKBAG OR FBA! You truly do need to get a life. Oh, and feed your kid.--XMBRIAN 03:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

None of that made any sense and is rather offensive to the editor you accused of. Regardless, he didn't use a message board to cite a source, he used FoundryMusic (which is acceptable), FMQB (which is MORE than acceptable), and *Forbes Magazine* (which I should HOPE is more than acceptable). If any of the above who said delete would come back and read those articles, I guarantee they would switch votes in a heartbeat. However, you have a set agenda to erase this any any article you find "uncyclopaedic" involving O&A. I see you are slow to act, however, on the List of celebrity guests on the Howard Stern show, since I mentioned that it too was uncyclopaedic for the SAME REASONS you cite against all the articles you have put up for deletion, yet it still stands. There's hypocracy and an agenda in your actions. Payneos 03:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, fine. Consider it put on the discussion for deletion. Actually, why don't you do it? You seem to have a problem with it. I don't have anything to say about it either way.--XMBRIAN 03:21, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Because I'm not the one who's acting on hypocracy here. I don't have a problem with the page, however, you should because you have a problem with similar pages aboot a show you claim to like. Something seems very fishy in your actions. Payneos 03:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Here comes the typical pest argument again. THEY DONT LIKE THE PESTS! OMG!!!1!!! TEHY MUST BE FOR THE OTH3R SID3! PAT BATTLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--XMBRIAN 03:25, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Here is further proof the O&A Army have at least some cultural effect, they have received much coverage on Orbitcast, one of the foremost sites that cover satellite radio:

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/oa-pests-protest-howard-stern-rally.html

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/opie-anthony-back-on-directv.html

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/oa-pests-invade-stern/letterman.html

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/assault-on-the-media-oa-army-billboard.html

Really, the existence of this article "makes you want to vomit?" Your anger over the existence of this article reveals that you have some personal agenda other than questioning the vailidity of this article. The Pests have an impact, however big or small it may be, whether you personally like it or not, XMBRIAN.

Wow! Orbitcast, the satellite radio BLOG reported on it. OMG! I totally feel Owned!--XMBRIAN 03:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Some blogs are acceptable, including MarksFriggin, a Howard Stern Superfan site. Payneos 03:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Now your just desperate--XMBRIAN 03:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC).

You still have no credible rebuttals to every statement I make. The burdeon of proof is on YOU to tell us why the article is not Wiki-Worthy and so far, you've only screamed one statement and haven't much backed it up with supporting evidence. Hence, why I'm not convinced. Payneos 03:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

i dont care what you think (accidently put this on your talk page by mistake)--XMBRIAN 03:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Since the Orbitcast articles weren't enough, here's further proof of their impact, here are more articles, this time from FMQB, which covers both terrestrial and satellite radio happenings:

http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=251830

http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=186874

http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=254092

http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=108439

Single words get their own Wiki, so why can't they?

Care to explain what you mean by single words?--XMBRIAN 04:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

take the word "pest," for example. sure, you get several disambiguations, but if you look under the disambiguation of an animal "pest," you get a description of various bugs and nuisances that can be considered "pests." not the best example, but here's another one - even Trekkies get their own Wiki, and they're diehard fans of Star Trek. So in that vein, why can't the O&A Army, who are diehard fans of Opie and Anthony?

Then nominate it for deletion, as i just said on FBA.

NONE of the articles I have cited I have EVER had a problem with! However, they are all articles you SHOULD have a problem with because you are the one who is complaining aboot THIS article. But there are many articles that are called into question due to the precident you may set in THIS article.

I AM a Browncoat, and Trekkies SHOULD have their own article. But the way you're arguing why the Pests shouldn't have their own article, neither should Trekkies or Browncoats. Copied, pasted, and quoted for truth, wherever you say that. Payneos 04:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Deadheads and American Idol Taylor Hicks' "Soul Patrol" have their own Wiki too. They're fanbases, groups of people with a common interest. Sure, they're loosely affiliated, but that doesn't mean they don't exist and don't deserve their own Wiki. Now stop whining.

Pests advertising and soliciting meatpuppets Wiki editors should consider Dugout Doug's solicitation of outsiders to this discussion in making their decision about this article.

http://oaexperience.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4501

It is considered highly inappropriate or unacceptable to advertise Wikipedia articles that are being debated in order to attract users with known views and bias, in order to strengthen one side of a debate. It is also considered highly inappropriate to ask friends or family members to create accounts for the purpose of giving additional support. Advertising or soliciting meatpuppet activity is not an acceptable practice on Wikipedia. On-Wikipedia canvassing should be reverted if possible.

The arrival of multiple newcomers, with limited Wikipedia background and predetermined viewpoints arriving in order to present those viewpoints, rarely helps achieve neutrality and most times actively damages it, no matter what one might think. Wikipedia is not a place for mixing fact and opinion, personal advocacy, or argument from emotion. Controversial articles often need more familiarity with policy to be well edited, not less.

If you feel that a debate is ignoring your voice, then the appropriate action is not to solicit others outside Wikipedia. Instead, avoid personal attacks, seek comments and involvement from other Wikipedians, or pursue dispute resolution. These are quite well tested processes, and are designed to avoid the problem of exchanging bias in one direction for bias in another.

Conversely, to bring outside people into Wikipedia who are doing so ti IMPROVE the article in question (not tear it down) brings Wikipedia up. Isn't it the goal of Wikipedia to create the most informative encyclopedia ever? Payneos 15:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

My thoughts on deletion...I think the O&A pests are relevant and noteworthy. However the problem with this article is it was mostly created and supported by the pests, and that generally creates problems.

In terms of notability, I think we could establish that. The news coverage certainly helps, and it passes the Google Test. As i said, my only concern is the Neutral point of view. Perhaps the article should stand but the "famous pests" section removed? --Bill.matthews 13:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

!!! KEEP IT IN Isn't it pretty obvious from reading this discussion that this whole deletion campaign is about 1 person with an agenda? The agenda is so passionate and transparent that he doesn't even want other people voicing their opinion. Face it, the only way to get an intelligent discourse is to get people to discuss it before it is too late. If he happens to know a lot of people who agree with him I suspect he has pointed them here. He KNOWS more voices chiming in with intelligent points will completely overwhelm his agenda driven delete campaign.

In any event, it is pretty obvious that "The Pests" are an entity separate from O&A as can be evidenced by the various attacks on things like Whoopie In The Morning, Scott Ferrall, Bubba the love Sponge and many others. On the recordings of those attacks you never ever hear Opie, Anthony or Jim Norton making the actual attack. Those attacks could not happen without the pests and often completley independent of Opie and Anthony. Opie and Anthony have even mentioned several times on air that they can't control the pests and the pests may some day turn on them.

KEEP THE ARTICLE! DON'T GIVE IN TO A WHINEY BOY WITH AN AGENDA! ELC_1 13:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that really didn't help your case at all.--XMBRIAN 20:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vandalism

i have just deleted a section from the area "pests vs. howard stern" the section read "As you can see, most O&A fans fail to realize that Stern is paid more and more popular for a reason." in my oppinion there is to much between howard and o&a so there should be a slight lock on editing there articles. hohlederschatten

[edit] Fancruft at its worst

Yes, this so called article is fancruft at it's worst. It's sole purpose in this encyclopedia seems to be a shout-out from O&A fans to O&A fans. Why don't we have similar articles in here for Madonna fans and for Howard Stern fans and for Dolly Parton fans and for fans of the group Bread... It is filled with non-NPOV and self glorification. It's dosen't need to be merged with any other article (the Main O&A article already mentions pests and the O&A Army) it needs to be deleted outright. Buster 04:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

We do. It's called Browncoats and Trekkies. Any other questions? Payneos 02:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)