Talk:The Wack Pack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Wack Pack article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

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.

List

This article has been rated as list-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

↓

Archives
Archive 1 - 2006 and earlier

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep but cleanup/rewrite.

1 Sour Shoes image
2 Cleanup
3 Joey Boots
4 Zolar
5 Wood Yee
6 Eric the Midget
7 Members to be removed/included
8 Irish John
9 The addition of Irish John as a wack packer
10 Iron Sheik?
11 Joe Cancer

[edit] Sour Shoes image

I'm not 100% on this, but I'm pretty sure that the image posted in Sour Shoes' section isn't real. I was on Howardstern.com and there was a picture posted today (May, 17, 2007) that is attributed to Sour Shoes... Can I remove this link? 1337wesm 00:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

The Captain Catfucker entry is ridiculous. Who ever heard of him? What did he do, call in once or twice? I'd delete it but I'm not sure if that violates the rules.

I moved the contests content to its own section, it didn't seem to flow in the middle of the intro. I'd suggest we find ways to shorten this. Any former members we could take out, due to relative notability? Or within any member maybe remove some minor details about things they did on certain shows? --Bill.matthews 02:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that each member should have his or her own section. The article has become way to long and I think that there is much room for expansion for each member as the show progresses. It would probably be best if there is a quick summery of each member and a link to a full article about him or her. --Chris 21:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand that the purpose of wikipedia is simply to provide accurate non biased information, but do any of you feel the slightest bit of shame for helping to perpetuate indignity among human beings? I will not edit this article but I will say that there are some things in life that one can not be on the fence about. Exploiting people with various diseases and or disorders is a dispicable thing. Should Howard Stern be removed from the airwaves? Absolutely not, this is America and he has the right to say whatever he wishes. Even things that are uncomfortable. I simply felt the need to voice my dis satisfaction with an article that documents the people that are exploited. It doesn't appear to be in the public interest nor for the common social good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marsh25 (talk • contribs) 21:03 8 February, 2007

Actually you do appear to have edited this talk page, if not the article itself. You changed Crackhead of Crackhead Bob, and lesbian of lesbian sisters to multiple series of ##### symbols. I would consider this editing of others comments as defined in Talk page behavior that is unacceptable. I've undone the editing of others' comments you made to this talk page. Please remember that Wikipedia is not censored and refrain from editing others comments.(Optigan13 06:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC))

We shouldn't document the Wack Pack, but you have no problem with documenting mass murders and articles on rapists, or anything that isn't particularly savory (in your opinion)? Your comments are completely off-topic and have nothing to do with the use of Wikipedia, and essentially amount to suggesting censorship based on things that YOU don't like.1337wesm 00:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The article should remain because it discusses a well known group of people. It should be cleaned up and footnotes should exist but as a huge fan of The Howard Stern show, my opinion is that it is pretty accurate. The Howard Stern Show is controversial but the show does make stars out of stutterers, dwarfs, transvestites, maniacs, and truly grotesque people. Marsh25, I highly doubt that you actually care about the former mentioned. However, that anything exist on Wikipedia is irrelevant because it will always be composed by many and will never be 100% accurate. Wikipedia is a reference to lots of other mediums of knowledge.75.22.37.184 (talk) 05:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)May 28, 2008.

[edit] Joey Boots

I think Boots is pathetic just like everybody else, however their is no need pointing out he'll be dead in a few months. Tofilmfan 09:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of how people feel about boots, but it is annoying when fansite members take to wikipedia to voice their opinion and disrupt valid efforts. Boots is currently not on the page after several waves of vandalism and reverting, which for right now might be the best until people cool down and he can be properly re-introduced.(Optigan13 05:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC))

Frequent callers and wanna-bes should definitely not be on the whack pack list (Joey Boots, Double A, Zolar, Bobo, etc.).

At the same time, Riley Martin should be on the list.

Also, should it not be "Whack" pack?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.89.58.125 (talk) 07:06, 25 April 2007

I am removing the sentence that says the following: "This is widely accepted as a phony stunt to get air time as his character/act was getting very old." There is no wide acceptance, unless someone can provide such independent research. Artie believes that, but pretty much everyone on the show accepts Joey's orientation, especially after the porn star incident. Regardless, such statements either way are editorializing, potentially misleading, and don't belong.72.78.154.193 (talk) 09:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Zolar

Section for "Zolar" removed, no reliable sources and content written as advertisement for an online community. From my research I can also see that Zolar is NOT a member of the Wack Pack, please refrain from spamming advertisements on Wikipedia. Jiiin 01:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wood Yee

There's no entry for Wood Yee. I think he would be considered a member of the Wack Pack, but I don't remember enough about him to write an article. However, he should be added IMO. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.147.144.242 (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Wood-ye works there as an engineer, doesn't he? He's just a guy with a funny voice. They make him say all those things.72.78.155.165 (talk) 23:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eric the Midget

I have made several changes concerning the Eric the Midget entry, relating his sexual ambiguity (turning down advances from Tabitha Stevens) to his placing third on the all time midget list.

Both comments were succinct, and relevant. Anyone who knows the show can appreciate these references.

Both comments were subsequently edited out. I am wondering why these comments were deleted. If there is rationale from the person deleting the entry, I would appreciate knowing why.

69.71.79.166 13:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Members to be removed/included

This is an area to suggest Howard Stern Show related to guests to be included or removed from this list.

Remove:

King of All Blacks

Double A

Gay Ramon

Sal and Richard were unlikely ever considered Wack Packers. Even people like Captain Janks aren't referred to as wack packers.

Definition on the show of who is or isn't in the wack pack isn't 100% clear, but frequent callers or superfans who don't have some "comedic ailment" really aren't included. Gwynand 17:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually in the Private Parts book Captain Janks has his own section in the Wack Pack chapter. Although the book is old, I think being a wack packer is still fairly inclusive. Former Wack Packers King of all messengers and Vinnie Mazzeo are also included. I think if those are in there then a lot of the callers who are even somewhat odd would be considered Wack packers, including Gay Ramon, and possibly King of All Blacks and Double A. If Janks is a Wack Packer, then so were/are Sal and Richard. Even though they aren't nearly as odd as someone like Beetlejuice or Crackhead Bob, I think they are still considered Wack Packers. Optigan13 05:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Optigan is correct, we take our cues from the source material, not editor opinions. If this article followed Wikipedia's standards of Verifiability this conversation wouldn't be needed. Everything added to the encyclopedia should be verifiable. — Ocatecir^T 19:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Irish John

I've been removing the Irish John additions as vandalism, as has another user. Now User:A2-computist is inserting the Irish John addition, claiming it is vandalism to remove it. Obviously we are in a vicious circle here!

I do not think Irish John is a wack packer. But let's face it: this article is a wreck anyway. I'd ask for a reference that cites Irish John as a wack packer, but that strikes me as incredibly silly and probably more than half of this article is not backed up by reliable sources anyhow.

That said, I guess I'm just noting this here for posterity, or for the person that may want to come along and clean this mess of an article up. daveh4h 06:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

He is not a wackpacker. It is John himself editing himself back on everyday from different IP addresses. If there is someone else adding besides John, you in fact are vandalizing the page as well. The page was protected for a couple of weeks for the vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zkil44 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The fact that you don't believe Irish John to be a Wack Packer doesn't change the fact that he is. His section is in dire need of a re-write, as most of the article is. Howard has never clearly defined the criteria for inclusion in the Wack Pack, and has only named a few individuals (i.e., Bigfoot) as actual Wack Packers, so it could easily be argued that most of the names discussed in the article don't belong on the list. I will stop the reverts in the interest of settling this and perhaps getting a decent re-write. However, until the article is rewritten to include actual citations of individuals being named by Howard as Wack Packers, others will continue to re-add Irish John when you remove him. Judging from the article history, I'm not the only one who thinks he has a place in the article. Unless you can provide some reason Irish John isn't a WP'er? A2-computist (talk) 13:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

What are his physical or mental deformities? Zkil44 (talk) 19:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, that doesn't cut it. If mental or physical deformities were a requirement, half the people listed in the article wouldn't qualify. (Crazy Alice, Captain Janks, Daniel Carver, Double A, etc, etc, etc.) You'll have to do better than that.A2-computist (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

All the people you just listed dont have something mentally wrong with them? Give it a rest John. Zkil44 (talk) 20:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, obviously this is a personal problem you have with Irish John, which does make your continued edits vandalism. A2-computist (talk) 20:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the general consensus amongst real Stern fans is that he is not in any shape or form a wackpacker. Your feeble attempt at twisting this into me having something personal against him is ridiculous. Zkil44 (talk) 20:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

General consensus, eh? That's why you're the only one consistently removing his paragraph... over and over and over and... well, you get the idea. The fact that you're willing to call anyone who re-adds the info "Irish John in disguise" pretty much sums up your mental state regarding him. I don't need to twist anything - you're doing the job nicely yourself. At any rate, I've spoken my peace about the situation -- and you -- and won't be responding further, as this has gone on long enough. As far as your removals, I'm sure plenty of other users more level-headed than I will continue to Undo your vandalism. Enjoy. A2-computist (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

You are absolutely right that my opinion does not matter. However, if content is challenged, the person who is inserting is usually required to cite their addition to the article with a reliable source. daveh4h 20:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The addition of Irish John as a wack packer

An WP:RFC has been filed to get more comments about this. Here are my comments:

The addition of Irish John to the article does not include citations; therefore, I feel it reasonable to remove them, since it is being challenged. Furthermore, I have reason to believe that an IP range that is adding this material is used by Irish John—I do not know if this is relevant or not, but I figured that information may shed some light on this. here is one IP that obsessively adds the material. Others can be found in the history tab. daveh4h 20:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

- - - I did my research and found that on October 28th 2005 on both Howard Stern dot com and Marksfriggin that Irish John was indeed pronounced a wack packer by Gary Dellabatte, producer.

I can not believe how serious this is being taken..But I will continue to validate what I believe as a long time listener and express this in a non vandalizing manner...I encourage others to do so and not get caught up in such an elitest cencorship portrayed by some.

- - I did my research and found that on October 28th 2005 on both Howard Stern dot com and Marksfriggin that Irish John was indeed pronounced a wack packer by Gary Dellabatte, producer.

[edit] Iron Sheik?

is the iron sheik in the wack pack? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.150.13.74 (talk) 02:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joe Cancer

The article presently reads:

Joe Cancer's passing was confirmed on the air before the Stern show moved to Sirius.[citation needed]

The last live (non-replay) appearance of Joe was on 4-23-03 as logged by Mark's Friggin. He stated that his cancer was back, and he had already outlived the expectancy of his doctors. Based on that and his disappearance from the show, it would appear that he is deceased. However, Mark's is very thorough and does not document the above statement. Any suggestions how it should read? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stracci (talk • contribs) 18:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)