Talk:Angry Video Game Nerd/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ADD

He mentions he has ADD in his McDonald's Kids Show/Review sounding serious enough for me to ask the question if there has been an official statement about that. Thanks. 77.183.120.33 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

He was joking. That's comedy for you. FF7SquallStrife (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

An opinion

As a common Wikipedia viewer, well I don't do much to contribute for various reasons but I strongly believe that this page should be simplified. What I mean? Make it much smaller. I really am a fan of Angry Nintendo Nerd as I have watched nearly all episodes, but I don't think he deserves this size of attention. Also, in each game he has reviewed he is mentioned, a thing which I think is wrong. To sum it up, the page should be there, but it should have been smaller. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.1.128.155 (talk) 13:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

If we do that, an overzealous administrator will delete this article for not having enough content. Condensing this article is a dangerous idea. 75.66.233.162 (talk) 03:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Why do the admins hate him so much? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.190.218 (talk) 00:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Because they know they'll never be as known as him. -Jeremy and his small Asian compatriots —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.129.94 (talk) 22:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Episode list

I think we should make a separate page for the list of episodes, the current one just clutters up the article. -ZFGokuSSJ1 (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

We might want to keep the list in the same article until we are certain that this article is going to remain on Wikipedia. I am confident that this should be the case, but it might a tad premature to worry about cutting down the page size. If anything, we need more content! --DevinCook (talk) 23:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Split episode list?

It's getting kinda large. Might it be time to move the episode list to its own page? Mr Senseless (talk) 01:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but the page should be named "List of The Angry Video Game Nerd Episodes" rather than "List of Angry Video Game Nerd Episodes" -ZFGokuSSJ1 (talk) 05:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Too soon. The split would potentially make this article more vulnerable to further deletionist attacks. 75.65.91.142 (talk) 07:08, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I think we should split and re-name the list per ZFGokuSSJ1 suggestions. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 07:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
It's still premature and could be a huge mistake. 75.65.91.142 (talk) 07:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
My thoughts are 100% agree, and I'll take care of it when the time comes. But I will kindly and respectfully wait for DevinCook to add his input. --Mooshykris (talk) 08:15, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
He had this to say about this exact same matter two weeks ago, after the AfD had completed. This article's future is still not safe from deletionists, especially those with admin tools. 75.65.91.142 (talk) 10:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
It's better to wait because it can be easily labelled as non-notable.--Svetovid (talk) 10:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

In response to 75.65.91.142, I wasn't in that conversation unfortunately, so I didn't know his input, thanks for the info. --Mooshykris (talk) 01:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


Length of each video?

Should the length for each video be on the list? And possibly where it is hosted in the notes? It might help informing people on when he started to get sponsored by screwattack/gametrailers, as opposed to just posts on youtube. also a mention about irategamer perhaps..? Feudonym (talk) 07:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Done and done ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.179.29 (talk) 22:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I also think there could be a mention about Irate Gamer. After all, he makes the same kind of show (and is often accused of being an AVGN ripoff). Apoyon (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Episode List Format

Hello everyone. I want to hear everyone's opinion regarding how episodes will be listed on the chart. Should the list contain a number for each released video or only numbered for official reviews? Also, what format should should be used for the numbers: basic numbers incrementing for each item, the s.e notation (season 1, episode 3 = 1.3) or the common television format (season 1, episode 3 = 103). Anyway, I would like to see what everyone thinks. -DevinCook (talk) 22:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


AVGN article from the Philippines

This article from the Philippines:http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/ceb/2007/11/12/life/do.you.play..html

I'd add it, but I'm having trouble with hotlinking. Can anyone add it please?202.69.180.95 (talk) 12:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

VANDALISM!?!

ok! Someone is deleting episodes from the list! first we lose a ninja turtle thing, then rambo and now intellivision part 2 is gone. I mean people are getting sick and tired of re adding this information! I dont know how you prevent vandalism! but i think someone should do it!

  • Thanks for your help. The shear number of different users that have worked on this article is quite impressive. Of course, you also draw the attention of others that want the article to fail. The best way to keep an eye on the article, is to create a full account and add the article to your Watch List. In any case, whenever the article it is changed, you can review the differences and undo if necessary. -DevinCook (talk) 02:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Adding to the Episode List

We need to make some sort of decision as to whether or not we should be adding episodes that are either A)speculated or B)have not been released yet. Andy120290 (talk) 04:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I saw your posting after I undid the changes. I don't think the article should contain speculation. Still, I do look forward to a review of the Power Pad! :) -DevinCook (talk) 05:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
While I am thinking about it, I noticed that in the latest addition to the episode list, there seems to be information about the plot (i.e. the part of the video that is not a review). Should we put information like this into all of the episodes that contain a plot? Andy120290 (talk) 03:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
We should work the material into the main article. There are some policies concerning plot summaries and television episodes. I would suggest that we keep the list pretty minimal - just the episodes and reviewed movies/games and any special guests. -DevinCook (talk) 08:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Movie reviews

Should there really be sections on movies that Rofle has reviewed? Is that kind of stuff really relevant to the article? It seems kind of unnecessary considering it is not realated to the Angry Video Game Nerd. Andy120290 (talk) 18:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It might be, especially if there was an article on Rolfe himself. Martarius (talk) 09:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Andy120290 does have a point though. Rolfe has two separate YT accounts for AVGN and CM. His video game reviews are done under the moniker of AVGN, while his Movie Reviews (albeit TMNT 3), are not. Given this article is about AVGN, and not Cinemassacre, I guess the content could be removed. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  09:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Possible tile change

James Rolfe Because there is a lot of info to do with his other work that is nothing to do with Angry Video Game Nerd. Also why is it The Angry Video Game Nerd? Buc (talk) 16:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

He is most famous for his work as The Angry Video Game Nerd. But I do no mind a title change to James Rolfe and then having The Angry Video Game Nerd redirect to it. As for the title. His website lists his name as The Angry Video Game Nerd[1]. Rgoodermote  16:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes but Wikipedia normally drops "the" in it's article titles. Buc (talk) 20:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Then I have no clue why The is in the article name. Rgoodermote  01:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
From WP:MOS ""the" is normally avoided as the first word (Economy of the Second Empire, not The economy of the Second Empire), unless part of a proper noun (e.g The Hague)" Buc (talk) 16:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Well I think this is the exception as he is called The Angry Video Game Nerd and not Angry Video Game Nerd on his website. Though there does appear to be a random usage of Angry Video Game Nerd. Rgoodermote  17:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
You could make it something like James Rolfe: The Angry Video Game Nerd but I think changing it on to James Rolfe would better. Discobird (talk) 04:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Dark Side of the Moon

Should we add a note about how Dark Side of the Moon syncs up with The Wizard of Oz review? Apparently, Rolfe himself has revealed that it is indeed true a couple days ago:

http://forum.screwattack.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=28616

Now, I usually do not hang out on the ScrewAttack forums, so this is news to me. What does everyone else think? Andy120290 (talk) 03:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Be careful not to turn this article into fanfare. It will catch the attention of fast finger freddies and before you know it, most of the article will be in the toilet, fanfare or not. Ive seen it happen many times before. Space Invaders was a great article until the FFF's hit it.99.230.119.26 (talk)

YouTube account suspended

It looks like James account has now been suspended on YouTube. Is this worth mentioning in the article or would it be irrelevent? PoeticXcontribs 23:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to add it. I think it's pretty relevant, even though most of his things are hosted on screwattack now. PoeticXcontribs 00:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you think we should change all the 2004-2006 review links to those at ScrewAttack.com for the time being? As in this etc? Or link them to the videos at the Revver site? --Addict 2006 01:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Should it become necessary, I would sugest using ScrewAttack. Andy120290 (talk) 01:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, uh, do you think it's necessary yet, or do we have to wait a week? Just wondering. --Addict 2006 02:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Despite my fight against the 99.95% on YouTube, I have to say: [citation needed]... Until we can at least know who of the 99.95% has shot and killed that account. --Addict 2006 03:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

NES Accessories: What games did he play?

I don't know; the article doesn't tell me. I'm not watching it myself until I go back to school in the fall, 'cause all I got here is stupid dial-up. Anyway, I noticed that the NES Accessories section of the episode list does not mention which games he played, instead listing only the accessories that he used. Conversly, the power glove episode lists all the games he played with it, rather than simply saying "Power Glove". It seems a little inconsisant to me... 142.166.251.233 (talk) 06:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I will get on that later today. Andy120290 (talk) 17:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, now that I am checking the episode again, I do not think the games played would really be necessary. There are two problems. Not every game is identified and if you watch the part with the Roll & Rocker, he names off several games in a short time without really saying much. Andy120290 (talk) 18:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Split

I think the list of episodes is getting a bit long and should be split into another article. Agree? TIM KLOSKE|TALK 15:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, the list has gotten too long. PoeticXcontribs 17:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Nerd sound clip on Savage Nation?

I was told that a sound clip was used on the Savage Nation. I'm not able to confirm it though. If it is true and can be confirmed it might be worth adding since a CNN clip is mentioned. (Roodhouse1 (talk) 05:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC))

Deleted untrue sentence

Deleted this from Monster Madness, because it's just not true. I sit through the whole thing, and there is only one retro game reference, or two if we count Freddy referencing the Powerglove. "Often throwing in retro gaming related references that give his core audience a common ground."

And changed "cult films" to "horror films", because the concept is to review horror movies and I doubt that each and every of them would be a cult film. 84.0.117.19 (talk) 01:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Cinemassacre and SpikeTV.com

James will be reviewing 'classic guy movies' on SpikeTV.com under the Cinemassacre label. Sources: [2][3][4][5][6] 75.66.233.162 (talk) 00:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Response to the Nostalgia Critic

Should Rolfe's recent response to the Nostalgia Critic be added to the episode list. Not as an official episode with a number count, though. I wanted to ask first. The reason is that he does seem to do the video in his Nerd persona. Andy120290 (talk) 01:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Perhaps we can add a section to Popularity as evidence of his relationship with fans and other reviewers. I wouldn't be opposed to a new section listing the "war" videos. -DevinCook (talk) 01:44, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


It's no more of a "True Episode" than the Toilet Tuesday video with him in it was in my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.168.67.38 (talk) 23:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Toilet Tuseday video is listed on the list of episodes, but not as an actual episode. Andy120290 (talk) 00:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Car Accident

Why does it say the episodes have ben on hold because James was in a car accident? I cant find that anywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truevideogamer (talk • contribs) 02:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Not Sure... I went ahead and removed it until someone can find a better source. Thanks for the heads up. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  03:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't think it's a car accident. He was probably busy after making appearances at Iron Man of Gaming and Digital Press. Just so you know. It's settled. Don't add it. --Addict 2006 14:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
James was actually in a car accident in 2004. He even makes a small dramatic short regarding the incident, which he titled Mechanical Losses. You can find it on his TheCinnemassacre website here: http://cinemassacre.com/Home_page/frameset.html.
--FF7SquallStrife (talk)

Importance of the Nostalgia Critic

I seriously think that a section should be dedicated to this ongoing "feud" between the AVGN and the Nostalgia Critic. From the look of this video [7], it seems that this issue is going to be around for quite some time. Any thoughts on the subject?--Brad M. (talk) 03:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think a section should be added about the matter. You can't ignore AVGN's ongoing war with NC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.4.98 (talk) 04:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Well seeing as there is no objection to adding a section about the AVGN "feud" with the Nostalgia Critic, I will proceed to insert one.--Brad M. (talk) 00:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not worthy of an entire section, but probably should be mentioned in the history. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  00:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Furthermore, this is just one event, composed of a few videos being thrown back and forth. Just because it's something that is relatively recent does not mean it deserves itss own section. In recent headlines A-Rod Divorces his wife amidst an alleged affair with Maddonna, Mike Vick declares bankruptcy - yet none of these topics merited their own sections in their respected articles. To my understanding AVGN has only made one response, almost one month ago, and there have been no developments, or primary sources (ex RS's from other non-related parties). I would have replied sooner, but I did not see this topic. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  02:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, you are using the wrong citation template, you need a title field to complete the ref, otherwise it shows up as an error. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  02:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

This event comprises more than "a few videos being thrown back and forth" and is not "relatively recent." If you stop to see my sources, you will understand what I mean. You will find that many of your other assertions are severly flawed as well. BTW, please show some respect and stop engaging in an edit-war with me simply because you are not informed about the facts.--Brad M. (talk) 02:55, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

As for the citations, I plan to get to that as soon as possible. However your help is always welcome.--Brad M. (talk) 03:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Neither of the references provided are considered primary references. Given the context of the content only affirms a series of series of a few events that took place. I have only found three videos exchanged between both parties, which were uploaded in June. As I stated, what became of these events? What WP:RS and primary sources actually very them appropriately. What developments have taken that make the content encyclopedic to the point that makes the section worthy of its own section. To me, this is just something that happened to AVGN, that is not particularity that notable - notable to the point where it complies with WP:NNC, but not to the point where it received any critical attention or had any serious repercussions. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  03:27, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

How much more "primary" does it have to be? I fail to get your point. The videos I provided come straight from the mouths of both parties (NC and AVGN). You finding 3 videos only speaks of the flaws in your abilities. I am still in the process of writing the section, more sources are available.--Brad M. (talk) 03:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Eepps, sorry, I used the wrong term, I was actually attempting to go from the exact opposite. Quoting WP:V + WP:SPS, "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.... All articles must adhere to Wikipedia's neutrality policy, fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view" All, or most, the other information in this article can be verified through interviews b/w AVGN and other News sources. As of right now, I have found three videos by NC and only one by AVGN on his CM YouTube Channel. Until you can find some 3rd Party RS's I would suggest moving the content to the 'history' section. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  04:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you think you could give me an example of what a 3rd Party RS should consist of so that I can meet your criteria properly? The point I am trying to make is that just because you found a certain number of sources, it does not mean they are the only ones.--Brad M. (talk) 04:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

An example would be this article by Wired, which summarizes who AVGN is, and why he's popular - an article published by a well-known 3rd party source. WP:RS should give more general criteria --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  05:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

That is no problem, I can get those types of sources. But I do have a favor to ask of you, can you fix the citation templates so they appear properly. I will get to work on getting those sources you described.--Brad M. (talk) 05:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I really appreciate your help so far.--Brad M. (talk) 05:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I fixed all of them except the Forum reference, as it cannot properly be cited with a standard CITET template. :p --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  15:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You did not fix anything. I was already in the process of putting up proper citation, while you forced your edits on the last two sources. On top of that, you failed to properly accredit where the last two edits came from (Guys With Glasses?). It seems that you are severly misinformed about this topic. I suggest you learn about it some more before forcing your input.--Brad M. (talk) 15:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

He obviously misunderstood you Brad, it is no reason to be so incredibly rude. You suggested he learn more about the topic before forcing (poor choice of words on your part) his input. Well you need to learn more about Etiquette before you deal with other people apparently. PoeticXcontribs 14:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

james rolfe article

Someone really needs to make a seperate James rolfe article. Hes becoming quiet well known and now hes doing movie reviews on spike.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.51.159 (talk) 21:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

You'd figure he'd satisfy the standards for WP:N by now. :p --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  02:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, it's the main headline on Spike.com today... probably won't be too long before he does something for SpikeTV proper at this rate.Froo (talk) 03:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
But most of his notability is deeply rooted in TAVGN. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Redo the Nostalgia Critic section

'This though led to millions of viewers to overflow the traffic on the Critic's server, therfore needing to shutdown the site for days.' That was a joke :| . This has been obiviously written by one guy, so can somone possibly redo the paragraph? stuff like fistfight, which makes it sound like they actually beat each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.217.253 (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

References suggestion

Hi everyone! :) Maybe we should reference portions of the article with the interviews that are in the external links section? Things that need good sources -- I'm sure there are some good reliable sources in those links below. CarpetCrawler (talk) 04:03, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


Nostalgic Critc article

Someone should do an article on the Nostalgic Critic. He's just as popular as the AVGN and just as funny. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There was an article on him before it got deleted due to a lack of notability. Andy120290 (talk) 04:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, I personnaly don't think he is a rip-off of the AVGN. AVGN does games and Thatguywiththeglasses does movie reviews, not to mention Ask that guy and bum reviews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 20:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The Nostalgia Critic is not at all notable enough for inclusion into Wikipedia. Just because he's in a "feud" with Rolfe does not mean he is notable enough for a Wikipedia entry. CarpetCrawler (talk) 04:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

What makes him less notable then the AVGN? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 20:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

He's not as notable? AVGN appeared on CNN, Spike TV, etc. He's someone who's imitating AVGN (not saying he's bad, just that he's riding his coattails). Several videos are about the AVGN, and many of his reviews are of bad games. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Just to add to ALttP's point, The Nostalgia Critic is no different than Armake21, Spoony, PlayitBogart and whomever else you wanna name. His notability is the exact same as the others, possibly only slightly higher than the others, due to his "feud" with Rolfe. CarpetCrawler (talk) 00:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

NC doesn't imitate the AVGN. If you look at the NC's site you'll see that several other people imitate the NC. NC does movies, AVGN does games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 00:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

But how does that make him notable enough for a Wikipedia entry, among the other dime-a-dozen movie reviewers? And where do I say anything about other reviewers "imitating" Rolfe? How are they imitating Rolfe? Most of them don't do skits like Rolfe does. If you're saying that they're imitating his act, in that he reviews video games, Rolfe's act was done by Seanbaby YEARS before Rolfe did his reviews. No one is imitating anybody. No one reserved the right to REVIEW video games. CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I know but its crazy to say that NC has the same amount of notabilty as Spoony and Armake when he doesn't. The NC has as much notabilty as AVGN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 20:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Where's your proof? I don't see anyone interviewing NC. I don't see CNN mentioning the NC in any of their shows. I don't see the NC with any DVD releases. I don't see the NC with as many views per day to his webpage as Rolfe has. I don't see it in general. He doesn't have as much notability as Rolfe does. Rolfe has outside recognition. NC doesn't have that yet. CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree with CarpetCrawler. The term ‘notability’ is often used too liberally on Wikipedia. Contrary to popular belief, a subject’s notability on Wikipedia is not determined by its immediate popularity, but rather by the amount of recognition they have received from third-party sources and available information from reliable third-party sources. This policy is further explained detailed in Wikipedia:Notability (people) and Wikipedia:Notability (web).
This topic is also getting off-topic – this a discussion page meant for the immediate improvement of this article, not NC’s. If one feels NC deserves an article, they can request it here, Wikipedia:Requested articles. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  05:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The Irate gamer was in a newspaper and has a DVD plus a T-shirt, but he doesn't deserve a article. Just because there was an article and DVD about him doesn't mean anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 21:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Once again, he doesn't have as many viewers as Rolfe, he doesn't have as much notability, he hasn't had any outside source articles dedicated to him, besides an article in a single newspaper. And even HE is more notable than the NC at this point and time. Give it a few months, maybe the "feud" will make the NC become more popular, but until then, can't you just stay patient? CarpetCrawler (talk) 21:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, NC isn't as popular, I was watching CNN & AVGN was on there and several clips of him were put on another channel I was watching. Just leave it be, this CarpetCrawler guy knows what he's saying. James Rolfe gained alot of fame by episode 4 getting him a deal with Screw Attack and Gametrailers.com which is one of the reason's he's big. So maybe NC will end up getting lucky with a movie review site or something. I mean, for crying out loud, there are AVGN gamer pic's on Xbox Live, you know who's more notable when........ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.85.6 (talk) 02:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

NC already has a movie review site thats been up for several months. Its called thatguywiththeglasses.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 05:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

So? Spoony has one too. It's even just like the NC's, mainly focusing on movie reviews, amongst other things. CarpetCrawler (talk) 02:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but Spoony isn't as popular as NC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 23:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

So what? He's still not notable enough for a Wikipedia entry. CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

NC is going mainstream. He is as well known as AVGN and even if he isn't notable enough right now its only a matter of time until he is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.178.3 (talk) 22:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

We don't practice crystal ballism here. Come back when he IS notable enough for his own article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Should Cinemassacre should have it's own article?

It seems as though either Cinemassacre or James Rolfe should get his own page. He is now listed on IMDB. And his series "Cinemassacre" has been picked up by Viacoms Spike Network. Which certainly is noteworthy. And it seems a good idea to keep his Cinemassacre work and nerd character material separate. Further, The Angry Video Game Nerd is a Cinemassacre Production. Perhaps the production company itself should get it's own article. Or maybe James Rolfe. Also, his "You Know What's Bullshit" series is not Nerd related. It is a Cinemassacre production which was aired on CNN. This should be on the Cinemassacre page. (if there was one) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdartist (talk • contribs) 22:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that it should be James Rolfe if it does move. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Having a page on IMDB.com does not say much; anyone can add/edit content to it as long as they have a user account. The credentials needed to assert notability are stated in the previous topic. There are a lot of online articles published by respected 3rd party sources that recognize AVGN, but neither specifically Rolfe nor CM. I'm optimistic that Rolfe will be able to attain his won article within the next couple of months given his videos on Spike (owned by the same people who own GameTrailers.com and MTV) continue to gather success and popularity. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  23:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I want this article to be remade as James Rolfe. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Why should this article be moved to James Rolfe? Rolfe himself does not have much "notability" yet. Even as it stands, his show and character barely have enough to merit an article as it is right now :x. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  05:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Because AVGN does not cover all of his works, and it's not a case of a person who's almost not known by his real name. His name is seen in every video's credits, so I hardly see why it can't be at James Rolfe. And if the show and character barely have enough, what does making an article about a living person make worse? I mean, James' role on Spike TV certainly won't be as the "AVGN". - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
As I stated before, notability is not defined by a subject’s immediate popularity. It is defined by the amount of attention that the subject has received from respected third party sources. The amount of attention from third party sources is directly propionate to the amount of substantial information that can be added to an article. A majority of the information that can be published about Rolfe or CM can only be taken from either cinemassacre.com or one of Viacom’s websites – which is generally taboo for a subject like Rolfe or CM on Wikipedia. James Rolfe and CM will be able to get their own articles when they meet
For further reference see WP:N and WP:WEB --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  05:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
If the article is about all of his works, his notability is increased. Simple as t hat. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Not quite; links and descriptions of Rolfe's works would probably get dragged to AFD in a week if it does not contain proper sources outside of CM/Viacom. If you really feel the need for an article about Rolfe or CM, etch out a draft in a sandbox, and bring it back here. It's better to have a running start on an article as opposed to just making something that immediately fails WP:N/WP:OR --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  06:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Will you please read what I'm saying? An article about all his works. I'm lost as to how Angry Video Game Nerd has more notability than all of James Rolfe's work, INCLUDING AVGN. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
If you're confused as how AVGN has more notability than his other content, you should probably re-read WP:N (mainly WP:GNG), or ask for an opinion on Wikipedia talk:Notability. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  21:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Are you going out of your way to ignore every word I'm saying? How can every work of his combined be less notable than one of those works? What you're suggesting requires that AVGN has to be more notable than itself combined with all his other works. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:41, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
It just is; How much substantial information can you add to the article when a there are not many reliable second/third party sources that actually cover the entire subject. Yeah, You'd have an article about AVGN, and then a bunch of non-notable stuff. In a similar way, My Way Entertainment was responsible for the creation The Juggernaut Bitch, which received some media attention, as well as a reference in X3. However, My Way's article was deleted on the account that, a) Aside from "The Juggernaut, Bitch!" the group themsevles did not not assert much notability. b) The article did not have enough 2nd/3rd party information to verify content. When you take that into account, Information from CM.com, Spike, or GT is all first party as they publish/distribute his content. Furthermore, a consensus here is not going to create a Rolfe/CM article, nor prevent it from being deleted. It's a matter better addressed at WP:N. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  22:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Are you going for the record for "ignoring someone in a debate"? How many times have I EVER even hinted for a single moment that Cinemassacre or James Rolfe should have their own article? About... never? Pretty much. Maybe, God forbid, when I stated that "This article should become James Rolfe and should be about him and his creations", that's what I'm talking about? - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Same principles apply, champ. Whether or not you want to create or re-design an article, the same principles apply. This article is best where it is right now; iIt’s specifically about the character and the series, not an article about Rolfe or CM. Moving this page to CM is almost as great of an idea of moving Resident Evil to Capcom, or The Simpsons to Matt Groening. It’s not my fault you never specifically bothered to clarify the core thesis of your argument., nor my fault that you never specifically corrected me. For future notice, telling someone they are doing something wrong, and not telling them what specifically they are doing wrong or how to fix is just as good as not pointing it out altogether – just something I thought you might of wanted to know. ;) --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  02:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, further proof you don't read my statements - what you were doing wrong is "you weren't reading". "This article should become James Rolfe and should be about him and his creations" How is calling it James Rolfe like "calling The Simpsons Matt Groening"? A lot of what made this article notable is being on CNN, or being on Spike TV, two things which are why the person portraying the nerd is notable, not why AVGN is notable, considering his role on Spike TV isn't as the AVGN. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
First, AVGN has NOT been mentioned on CNN, one of Rolfe’s separate segments has however. That alone does not make this article notable. Second, AVGN has NEVER been featured on Spike TV, they have only appeared on Spike.com, which is owned by Viacom, who also own GT. Given Rolfe’s preexisting affiliation with Viacom in the form GT, it’s nothing that currently adds notability. Had you of read WP:N, you would have known that his this article meets WP:N due to the amount of recognition it has received from various other third-party organizations. Furthermore, while Rolfe has been recognized by CNN, it was only one segment – which has featured several others in the past.
I analogized your proposition to move this article as moving The Simpsons article to Groening ’s for the reason that Groening himself is mainly notable for his work with “The Simpsons” – without it, he’s still be cartoon columnist. Groening has also created several other forms of media, including Futurama , but none of which surpassed the success of the Simpsons. Likewise, Rolfe would be nothing without AVGN. Had AVGN of never have become popular, we would not be having this discussion. I cannot find any articles that specifically talk about CineMassacre or Rolfe; most of them only talk about AVGN. If you were to move this page to CM/Rolfe what would put in it, and source it with? --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  03:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Your reasoning that "James Rolfe isn't notable for being on SpikeTV.com because it's owned by Viacom" doesn't matter for anything. There's a reason that he's getting a paycheck to work on SpikeTV.com and the other members of GameTrailers aren't. The only way that you can show that being hired by SpikeTV.com doesn't make him notable is to show that they have a track record for doing this. Do they? - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Do you have any proof that he is actually getting paychecks from Viacom for appearing on Spike, or is that just speculation? The agreement b/w Viacom is seemingly benefiting Rolfe more than it is Viacom, albeit advertisement deals. Rolfe's CM already had popularity before hand Viacom just gave him another outlet. Also, He's had that Spike account since 2006, well before CM even caught momentum. Spike is Viacom's outlet specifically dealing towards television and movies, as opposed to GT, which deals only with Video Games. His ScrewAttack compatriots that made it to GT, Stuttering Craig and Handsome Tom, only specified in video games, while CM is an low-budget movie productions company, that is related to AVGN. Also can you find 5-10 RS's that specifically discuss either CM or AVGN in a manner that meets WP:N? --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  03:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm still dumbfounded how this entire article with MORE content that can fit is a bad idea. If it's James Rolfe, anything related to AVGN can go on there on top of everything else not related to AVGN. If it's AVGN, only stuff related to AVGN can be on the article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I strongly agree with you. In fact, DevinCook are actually trying to determine what belongs here, (and what does not) in the next topic. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  04:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
And changing the name would allow for all the content in the article to remain as is. It allows for more notability - James Rolfe has been growing more and more notable outside of AVGN lately, and keeping it at AVGN serves the purpose of making less reliable sources usable for this article. The only good argument against James Rolfe would be that he's not known enough as James Rolfe, which I strongly disagree with. His mention on CNN was "James Rolfe", his work on SpikeTV.com is "James Rolfe", and in every video, people will see "James Rolfe" in the credits. There's no "harm" involved in moving the article, and on the subject of stability, the article needs to be moved to preserve sources to boost the subject's notability. Staying at AVGN loses the CNN mention and his activity on SpikeTV, as well as anything he's done outside of his AVGN persona. And as we can see, what he's done outside of AVGN has been ever-growing. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
As I stated, It’s all Viacom – It would be another thing if another Company picked it up, but Rolfe getting a nod from Spike is nothing special. Can you prove that Rolfe’s role on Spike.com is directly correlated to his increase in success? There are hundreds of people who are mentioned on CNN segments, some of them who are mentioned multiple times, and have even been featured in more in-depth and controversial segments, not just for ~45seconds. Outside of Viacom, what other notable media groups have recognized and commented on CineMassacre in an appropriate manner – not just a 45-second blurb? You cannot even show me reliable third party sources that talk about Rolfe (not AVGN) or CineMassacre. Where do you expect to get substantial content for the article for the article? According to Wikipedia’s policies, "If no reliable', third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." And “rely on reliable, published secondary sources. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors." CineMassacre has made over 200 movies; AVGN is only a small fragment of that. The claim that this article needs the CNN reference is does not hold up – look over this articles AFD, only one person mentioned the CNN tid-bit (even though it was not done as Rolfe), while most of the others pointed out other alternative forms to assert his notability. There’s enough stuff on Google News and mention from 1UP, GamePro, BlogCritcs, and elsewhere to assert notability. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  05:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
The fact that Viacom had him do work for a notable web site doesn't matter. If Microsoft promoted a minor employee to the CFO position, does that not make him notable because it was a company with an interest in his success? - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Depends; does the employee pass WP:N? Seriously, look over it - read past lead for once. If you were to make/move an article to CineMassacre, it would fail the first four terms of the policy. The article would be about CineMassacre, not 'AVGN. This is just like the Simpsons analogy I used - Groening and The Simpsons are two different, but related subjects that are expected to make the notability guidelines separately. In other words, Groening is not automatically notable because of the Simpsons' are, and vice vers a. The claim that the CM/Rolfe have gained notability thru Spike means Jack' in terms of WP:N, unless you have citations/2nd paty sources that verify it. Otherwise it's just speculation and crystal balling. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  06:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
That argument only applies to Cinemassacre, so how do you jump Rolfe in with it? Calling it AVGN serves to make it more difficult to be notable, as his role on SpikeTV.com and his appearance on CNN can't be mentioned here. The reason to believe that James Rolfe, whose name is in every video he ever appears in, is not notable enough to have the AVGN page be called James Rolfe, is completely nonexistent. Calling it AVGN is counter-productive, as James Rolfe has, by even the most minimalistic observation, been branching out from AVGN and doing stuff other than that. You've never validated why his SpikeTV.com appearance doesn't matter. Just because the company that owns one site also owns another site doesn't mean that appearing on the latter means it is because he appears in the former. If he's one of, if not the only person to have made such a jump at GT, it's based on his massive popularity, not "the company that owns the site he's on also owns the other company". - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
And the CNN airing of his video specifically calls him "James Rolfe", never once mentioning his AVGN role. I guess I'm just a bit confused as to how being specifically mentioned on a major news channel and having your work shown in its complete form is not "a reliable second party source". And SpikeTV is independent from GameTrailers. Under your logic of "Viacom bias", appearing on the Spike TV channel would be construed as "just because he works for them", or appearing on Comedy Central, or appearing on a DreamWorks film would be not notable because you could argue that his role in the film was only because Viacom owns the company. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah none of those reasons assert any actual notability - had you of bothered reading WP:N, you would of known that because it's blatantly stated in there. You still have not even found five RS' that cover CM in a non-trivial matter. Regardless of why Rolfe earned a role on Spike is just going to boil down to speculation both of our parts unless one of us coughs up a citation. AVGN and Rolfe (or CM) are completely different yet related subjects. AVGN's draws notability, verifiability, and substantial content from various third party references (ex 1UP, The Simon Magazine, And the several other links in the Reference section - Rolfe/CM on the other hand... a crickets nest. If you want to move this article, make a draft of what its going to look like, or atleast provide five reliable sources that interview Rolfe/CM, not AVGN, in a non trivial and real-world manner. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  19:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Being on SpikeTV.com or CNN isn't trivial. Your assumptions don't make it trivial, and we should assume that he appeared on these outlets because of his popularity, not because of bias. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I never said being on CNN was trivial; I said the manner in which they covered him was trivial. They merely showed a 50-second clip of "You Know whats Bullshit", with no actual commentary or substance. They may as well of just posted the YouTube link somewhere. Yes, CNN is a respected source, but it merely covered Rolfe no differently then they covered "Fred" - actually there was more information about Fred. As I stated way in the beginning an article's notability is directly correlated to the amount of available third-party sources. Spike, GT, YouTube, and CM.com are all considered first party sources, and cannot be used alone WP:V - articles that do not have 3rd party sources, should not be covered on Wikipedia. There's a difference b/w source, and merely having CNN air one of your videos. The CNN clip cannot verify anything - you can claim its because of his high popularity, but that's just a synthetic claim unless you have citation to back it up. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  20:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
They mentioned him by name, they linked to cinemassacre.com, how could this coverage be trivial? They wouldn't have posted it if they didn't think the author was notable. If James Rolfe + AVGN + Cinemassacre = not notable, than AVGN = not notable. Simple as that. Basically, SpikeTV.com and his appearance on CNN and anything regarding his notability outside of AVGN cannot be mentioned here, because they are not relevant to the article, which is about a character he portrays. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Your comprehension of WP:N is 'amusing' to say the least. If you do not understand why "You Know..."'s coverage was trival, compare it to anything else that's aired on CNN - you do know what CNN is right?. Compare that to any actual story/report by CNN, [8] that actually contains information that can be used in an article, and could help Huckabee gain notability if he was not already notable. BTW, I'm still waiting for you to give me those third party references to back up a CM article. Until you do, the CM subject fails WP:V --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  20:56, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Uh, do you understand notability at all, or are just making things up as you go along? "It's not covered as in-depth as other things, so it's trivial". You'd get a lot of opposition for that. Would you also say that a one paragraph preview for a game is trivial compared to full-page previews? - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
It depends on the style and manner in which it was covered; "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.. Also, Sources, defined on Wikipedia as secondary sources, provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  21:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Honestly, I agree with StarScream, on the simple basis that Cinemassacre has not reached the true level of notability it takes to deserve an article on Wikipedia. Basically, more press is given to Rolfe's CHARACTER of the Nerd more than anything else. Do most production companies have articles on here, as opposed to the shows themselves? Like I said to the anon in the NC article, just be patient and give it some time. Who knows, maybe Rolfe will become a reporter to something like G4 or some other gaming channel, and then he'll have more reliable third party sources writing about him, justifying and article on Wikipedia. As of right now, Cinemassacre is no different from any other independent film making production company, with the deciding factor being that the one character, in this case the Angry Video Game Nerd, is bigger than the production company itself. I hope that should help settle this down a tiny bit. Thank you everyone for taking the time to read and have a nice day! CarpetCrawler (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to mention that Rolfe's new show "Cinemassacre" has had Spots on Spike Television. Here's a link to that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpdOGo3mYK4 Also, the was a spot on the avgn character on G4 Television. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziJ8685oTsQ Hope that helps somehow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.250.232.218 (talk) 01:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

You Know What's Bullshit

I readded the section about CNN's coverage of the "You Know What's Bullshit" penny rant. Even though this is not a video game per se, it is done using the same character in much the same way that Rolfe reviewed a number of movies. What is everyone's thought on the issue? -DevinCook (talk) 07:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm uncertain whether "You Know what's bullshit" is actually done under the AVGN moniker. None of the video's actually say it's done as AVGN, but rather just as Rolfe. The thing that separates Shit Pickle from this is that shit pickle has actually appeared in the AVGN series. but then again, I'm not 100% sure that its just simply a James Rolfe production. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  19:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree that there is a definite gray area here. One could make the argument that CNN only saw the penny rant do to the AVGN show.-DevinCook (talk) 19:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I've seen the CNN report, but I do not think it refers to him as 'AVGN'. Then again, I agree with you that his rant was only made popular by his success as AVGN. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  19:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with the idea that the article should stick to stuff involving Rolfe's character of the Nerd only, and that the "You Know What's Bullshit?" series is certainly a grey area when it comes to this article, but I'll e-mail Rolfe and see if the rants are SUPPOSED to be done in the form of the Nerd, and if they are they can stay here. CarpetCrawler (talk) 22:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Making it an article about the actor solves this problem. The fact that James Rolfe has appeared outside of GameTrailers and AVGN suggests we'll see even more. Not moving only delays the inevitable. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a Crystal ball; when the 'inevitable' actually happens, we'll documented it. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  07:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

You know whats bullshit is NOT suppose to be the nerd. It is another character called "the bullshit man" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.250.232.218 (talk) 23:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Calling the article James Rolfe solves this discussion. James Rolfe has all notability attached to AVGN and has a broader coverage. James has already had commercials on Spike TV, the channel, not the web site. Keeping the article at its title is simply ignoring all of the evidence of a wider allowable coverage - under the current title, anything not associated with AVGN can NOT be mentioned here save for a short mention of other characters that James Rolfe portrays. "The bullshit man" is not under the scope of AVGN, and his movie reviews aren't, either. His role on SpikeTV.com is notable, but it doesn't warrant an article. Calling the article James Rolfe does not negate any notability if it's about the person and his characters. That's like saying an article about Super Mario Bros. that also contains information on all of its remakes and ports is less notable than SMB by itself. Taking this article and giving it wider coverage results in wider notability, this is an indisputable fact. Moving this article to James Rolfe retains 100% of the notability and adds 10% more. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I just don't understand. What's with your impatience with Rolfe getting an article? Honestly, like I've said before, just wait a few months. He's getting close to notability with just his name alone. When we see more of him from Spike, whether it's on television or online, maybe he'll have the chance. Otherwise, he's still known for his one character: The Angry Video Game Nerd, more than anything else. No matter how you try to explain it any other way, he's more notable as the Nerd than he is as James Rolfe. Very little casual viewers know much about Rolfe's status as an independent filmmaker, and I'm sure his exposure on SpikeTV.com will change that. Until he actually gets notable enough on the website, let alone having 3rd party sources dedicated to Rolfe and not his CHARACTER, can't you just be patient and wait for it to happen? If you're so sure that he's going to get notable soon enough, why not just wait? I just don't understand the hastiness. CarpetCrawler (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Moving this article to James Rolfe retains all sources and makes using You Know What's Bullshit?, as well as his role on SpikeTV.com, which ARE notable, but have no connection to this article, meaning that their notability is irrelevant to any one article on Wikipedia. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


Irate Gamer

This topic has already been discussed. Please see Talk:The Angry Video Game Nerd/Archive 3, which deals with copycats -DevinCook (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


I'm gonna make an Irate Gamer article. I didn't know that IG copied most of the AVGN's games and jokes until I actualy watched AVGN, but I think either the IG critisisms should be added here, or a ig article be posted. if u wanna delete it, at least add the ig critisisms here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.130.198.233 (talk) 01:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

  • For one, IG is not notable enough for his own article. Being funny isn't being notable. For another, what makes his opinions of AVGN notable? - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Irate_Gamer_(Game_Reviews) I made it as notable as possible. Please change anything crappy about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebrothers (talk • contribs) 01:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing notable in that at all. If that's as notable as IG is, there's no chance for him to become an article on Wikipedia. Notability is secondary reliable sources asserting notability. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

there's more than that, but since i dont really watch ig anymore, i kinda forgot to add some stuff. so if there's anything else, please people, add it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.130.198.233 (talk) 02:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Anyone can make merchandise for something if they want to - that's the reason it's not considered adding to the popularity of the character, because if it did, that would mean he is asserting his own notability, which no one has the ability to do. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I personally feel that we should one-up the current prod and go for a nomination at the Articles for Deletion page. CarpetCrawler (talk) 02:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

happy, i added his popularity, as well as a part on irate gamer neo episodes. now im gonna write a seperate piece about merchandise. happy?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.130.198.233 (talk) 02:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, he is still not notable. Prove to us his notability. Nothing you've written in the article so far has shown us why he should have his own article on Wikipedia. The Angry Video Game Nerd is more notable than the IrateGamer, he has more fans, more views on his videos, has had mentions on VARIOUS television shows, multiple interviews, amongst other things. Chris Bores has, as far as I've been told, only gotten a single mention in a local newspaper. It doesn't matter if he's had a DVD or not. Anyone can make a DVD, it's not a hard thing to do anymore. It still doesn't make him notable. CarpetCrawler (talk) 02:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

now check it. if it's still not notable, ill add more. please give me a break! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.130.198.233 (talk) 02:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how much you add. A lot of text in an article does not mean notability. Please re-read the reason why I said that he is not notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia, above your latest message. CarpetCrawler (talk) 02:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Carpet,hes was at least puting effort into this-its not like he gets payed for it,he just wanted to make this site beter and I think downright comanding him around,demanding something from him and isuing orders at him and downplaying everything he does isn't both professional,nor is it helpfull to the comunity. --New Babylon 2 (talk) 00:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Archive?

This page is becoming quite large. It might be a good idea to archive the older messages/topics. What does everyone think? - DevinCook (talk) 16:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. Just leave the more recent conversations still on the page, so that others who are late to the party can view them! Have a nice day! CarpetCrawler (talk) 17:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Angry_Video_Game_Nerd/Archive_4&oldid=1156372348"