| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: |  | This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation. | |  C | This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. | | | It is requested that a photograph or picture of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. | | |  | This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | | | C | This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. | | Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. | | | | note: Disc Jockey Site Down
some wikipedia editng person who knows what they are doing please link this page to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_the_%E2%80%98Influencing_Machine%E2%80%99_in_Schizophrenia. this one 165.196.139.129 19:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
It is done. Both pages linked to from one another, respectively.
[edit] Deletion Discussion OK, looking at the claims by Pohta ce-am pohtit I'd have to say that the marking for deletion is completely without merit, but lets get going on strengthening this article's sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freddiefreelance (talk • contribs) 21:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC) This is the crappiest article I've read on Wikipedia for a long time. Neutrality and verifiability is absolutely horrible, and its supposed to be a biography. It reads like a smear page put up by someone from 4chan or something. Kill it, please! Take it out of its misery! --83.89.0.118 (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC) [edit] Use of "Not unlike Ed Wood" About two bits that got deleted:[1] - Ever since the Tim Burton movie has propulsed Ed Wood from underground culture to pop culture, statements such as "Not unlike Ed Wood"[2] or "he's the Ed Wood of (something)"[3] or such have become common when trying to explain or introduce the underground popularity of similar people: lesser known cult figures and/or people so bad some consider them good. It is a useful and appropriate shortcut to help frame Dec for the uninitiated in the WP:LEAD section.
- The publisher of Dec's biography, Feral House (specialized in non-fiction), is the same who published the Ed Wood biography that spawned the Burton movie (Nightmare of Ecstasy, by Rudolph Grey). Again, it is a quick and useful way to impart some relevant context about this publishing house, and it nicely ties in with the previous point.
Hope that helps. — The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 18:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC) - Again, what does this article have to do with Ed Wood? Apart from their rather unorthodox behavior, there's absolutely nothing to connect these two men. The Ed Wood reference doesn't belong. C1k3 (talk) 08:21, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- I already provided you with two rationales. You didn't give any specific counter-argument, you simply repeated your question and went on posting threats such as "I'll revert your shit"[4] on my talk page, breaking the WP:CIVILity policy, and deleting content from the page as Minor edit for the second time after being warned[5] it wasn't. Also you've never been involved with improving the Dec article, so it makes it look like you're trying to enforce some sort of Wikipedia-wide WP:OWNership on references to Ed Wood.
- Again, it's not just about "unorthodox behavior" but about the very similar cult-like popularity, as well as the similar "so bad it's good" kind of legacy: Ed Wood has entered pop culture and is now commonly referred to for events and persons not directly connected to his biography. — The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 17:29, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
-
-
- Looking at the this and Cult following#Cult figure I would suggest that a comparison with Ed Wood might not be the best. While the general public knowledge of Wood has grown in the past few years there are several other cult figures listed that might serve as a better comparison. The second looks better and could even include some of the other books published. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 19:13, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
-
-
-
- But which other cult figure do you think would make for a better comparison? The comparison to Ed Wood is not just based on cult status, but also on the "so bad it's good" nature of his legacy, the "Worst Director" tag, contrasted to the earnestness of Ed Wood; that's why the expression "the Ed Wood of (something)" is so common now. None of the others listed at Cult following#Cult figure seem to fill both shoes more adequately: people from Christopher Walken to Bruce Campbell to Vanessa Duriès are not considered delightfuly awful by their fans; in that direction, the only one I could think of is actor Jean-Claude Van Damme, who has some sort of alternative cult following in Europe for the earnestly stupid aphorisms he often uttered about life, universe, and the rest (his fans deleted them from Wikipedia/Wikiquote so examples here) – but that's far to be as good an introductory example as Ed Wood. — The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 19:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Ah, I didn't realise that the second reason was a basis for the comparison. I thought it was just based on the cult figure thing. So it's possible that other people may not realise it either, especially if Wood is not the best known of the examples given. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 13:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Maybe I can explain it better like this: - The main parallels between Wood and Dec: (1) they're "weird" people obscure during their lifetime, (2) they were completely earnest in their works, including some form of sociopolitical activism (defense of transvestism for Wood, conspiracy warnings for Dec), (3) they became underground cult figures in some subcultures but mostly in an anti-worship fashion, "so bad it's good" or "too bad to be bad", (4) additionally, they both had a major biography about them published by the same publisher Feral House, precisely because they're similar enough to interest the same non-fiction, socio-political publisher.
- There are plenty of such people, especially in outsider art, but Ed Wood is the one who got worldwide famous and raised from underground culture to popular culture, with the Golden Turkey Awards (Wood voted "Worst Director of All Time" and his Plan 9 "Worst Film of All Time") and especially the Tim Burton biopic. This is why you'll find tons of articles and references to Ed Wood even in the Time magazine ([6], [7], etc.) who aptly puts it as, "Once a never-was, Wood is now a brand name" — whereas Dec and others aren't even mentioned in Time. Wood is the emerged tip of the iceberg of this brand of weird creators, and thus references to Wood have become common parlance to easily describe or introduce similar people who are still in obscurity but enjoy enough underground popularity to be notable.
- So that's why I find useful and relevant to have the WP:LEAD of Dec (a difficult subject to summarize) be introduced with the now-common comparison to Wood: parallels #1-3 are strong similarities, and #4 is the icing on top. Basically, Francis E. Dec is the Ed Wood of paranoid rants, except he didn't get a Tim Burton movie. I don't claim that absolutely everybody knows Wood, but the common "Not unlike Ed Wood"[8] is the best I see that fits so well to introduce the weird sort of cult popularity enjoyed by someone as Dec – who else than Ed Wood would be so close? Also, I think that removing Wood does not improve the lead for people who don't know Wood while making the introduction much less useful for the countless people who do know Wood. — The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 16:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Good page about Dec... Now, what about Ant? The Real Walrus (talk) 10:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC) |
