Talk:Seanbaby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 25/2/2006. The result of the discussion was keep.


It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Mark Discordia

Was it ever proved that the person who flamed him was Mark Discordia? I was never quite sure, it seemed more likely that it was- as Seanbaby suggested "a ten year old autistic boy masterminding an elaborate prank to convince me that a moron from Nintendo Power's fan mail section is in actuality, a total moron" (Darien Shields 18:51, 21 October 2005 (UTC))


  • Came to this entry from wikilink Internet Phenomenons - and visited Seanbaby. It just wasn't very funny. What actually makes this particular (not very impressive) site - a phenomenon?
    • Whether or not you think he's funny (I used to think his site was flat-out hilarious, not quite as much recently), he was able to parlay his writing into some somewhat high-profile writing jobs. Thunderbunny 07:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Did Mark Discordia get made fun of in the national press or something? If someone could make a breif articale explaining what happened to him after nintendo published his article that would be great. I was 4 when this happened so i'd love to know what happened to Mark.

[edit] James H. Vipond

Sorry, but James H. Vipond is a real person, and not a creation of Seanbaby. I've met him.

[edit] Any way to prove that it was really "Mark Discordia"?

This article refers to emails that "Mark Discordia" supposedly wrote -- is there any proof that it was really Mark Discordia responding to him?

The page can be left as a reference to Seanbaby's website, but shoudln't refer to the correspondence as a true conversation unless they cite a reference.

[edit] Deletion notice

I have removed the recently added deletion notice since that seems to be the appropriate way to deal with that. I apologize if I have done so inappropriately. I've certainly seen AFD and speedy deletions, but this one is new to me. Strikes me as a bad idea to just allow editors to try to delete a page that doesn't qualify for speedy deletion and then have them succeed if the page is not watched by other editors without comment from the community as a whole. The objection seems to have been related to notability and asked for confirmation of that outside of the gaming community. I'm not certain why a notable person inside the gaming community does not qualify as notable, but Seanbaby's writing credit for The Adventures of Chico and Guapo and his appearance on several television shows are all easily visible from the imdb link provided at the bottom of the page. Was the objection, perhaps, that the imdb source is in a section labeled "External links" instead of "References"? The Wave and EGM are also magazines, which also seemed to be a requested criterion. I would point anyone who objects to the existence of this article to the AFD it survived with unanimous "keep" votes outside of the nominator. --Aranae 07:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Agree, an article which has already been through AfD shouldn't be prodded per WP:PROD - "Articles that have been previously proposed for deletion or undeleted, or discussed on AfD, are clearly contested and are not candidates for {{prod}}" In any case, Seanbaby is obviously notable given the claims under "Media appearances". DWaterson 11:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Resume tag

Would someone care to explain how to improve the article to deal with whatever complaint warranted the resume tag? If the tag was a suggestion that Seanbaby is too obscure to warrant a wikipedia article (as suggested by the edit summary), I would point you to te results of the prior deletion attempts. --Aranae (talk) 04:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sean Baby.com?

Is this really relevant to the article's main topic, Sean Reiley? This is worthy of its own article if it is what made Sean Reiley so popular, hell this article includes more information on the site than the actual person. I suggest we either shorten it or give it it's own article and replace the current information on the site featured in the article with a short summary. I fear the section makes the article look completely unbalanced as it is unnecessarily long compared to the rest of the article. 68.219.26.177 (talk) 22:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

If we don't need separate articles for Perez Hilton and Perezhilton.com (they were merged), then I'm fairly certain we don't need separate articles for Seanbaby and Seanbaby.com. DWaterson (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)