Talk:Lonelygirl15/Archive 1

message: I'm in the midst of trying to edit out the weasel words from this article.  Most of my attempt to do so will be from CNN and their article on the front page of their website under "Technology". --Shirley Grace 13:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: On CNN's webpage under "Latest News"

message: The New York Times published an article with photos of Jessica Rose, the actress, information about the filmmakers and comments from the software engineer . Some of this information is now included in the beginning of the article, and someone's changed "Speculations" to "Previous speculations", which is great. The article could really do with a LOT of cleanup now that we know the phenomenon's status as fiction. Removing most of the speculations and shortening it considerably seem advisable? Lijil 08:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup now that we know who the actress and filmmakers are

message: I just deleted the following section from the main article - it was titled "Samantha Bree, Actress" and placed at the end of the speculations section.
lonelygirl15's real identity uncovered? A myspace account has been discovered of an Actress named Samantha Bree, her companies listed are "CAA", intials for Creative Artists Agency. The account also has a B/W photo of Samantha Bree, undeniably looks just like lonelygirl15. Her quote of Alphonse de Lamartine "Sometimes, when one person is missing, the whole world seems depopulated" has an irony to it since her "persona" as lonelygirl15 will make the world feel depopulated to many of her fans when she is gone.
This had no references, and when I googled it I found absolutely nothing about it. I suggest that it's moved back to the main article only if it's properly sourced. Lijil 09:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Section alleging "Samantha Bree" is connected to Bree

message: I think the information cited there is tenuous at best. A forum post by someone claiming to be the creator and an article claiming that some fans have found where the e-mails came from is not proof. Marsman57 14:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revelation of fakeness? 

message: *Here is another one in New York magazine: http://nymag.com/arts/tv/features/19376/index.html
*To the user above that said this, I think you should see this article from The Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2319463,00.html). Does that make her notable enough for you now? Scott 110 04:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the guy from that website, the movie is still in pre-production with the main parts not even being cast, he denies involvement in the hoax himself, and other people have said that the actress isn't the same.--BigCow 00:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "She isn't notable enough..." 

message: it's been mentioned in multiple media sources, a small sample of which are here:
:
#New York Times, 25 August, "Today in Business" 
#Chicago Tribune, 23 August, "Shoot From The Clip" 
#New York Magazine, 28 August, by Adam Sternbergh "Hey There, Lonelygirl" 
#New York Newsday, 17 August, by Megan Chan "Channeling into a new generation" 
#Denver Post, 1 August, "Click These" 
#Alameda Times-Star, 23 July, by Candace Murphy "Today's kids have their own outlets for creativity" 
#The Times of London, 19 August, by Jonathan Richards "Worldwide acclaim for lonely girl" 
#AgoraVox, 21 August, by Matthew Ingram "What Is YouTube Good For?" 
#Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, 6 August, (trans) "The Webcam Generation has a new star: "Lonelygirl15. But is she authentic?"
It's notable enough to make it into print media, it can be verified, and Wikipedia is in a position to be ahead of the curve in writing about topics like this, not behind it. I'm with the New York Times on this one.--BigCow 17:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Comment, #9 is also entirely about the subject, and questions its authenticity. A rough translation can be read here.TimB 17:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of media coverage, from AFD discussion

message: This video has Bree quoting some specific posts with their content and making a video based upon them, establishing that they aren't all scripted/recorded in advance. Also of possible interest: The three cookies are rated 10, 12, and 06. Not just 6, but 06. The obvious interpretation seems to be 10/12/06, or October 12th, 2006, which also happens to be Alastair Crowley's birthday, which would also tie into the upcoming "religious ceremony". I believe it would also be helpful to describe the "plot arc" of the videos in the article itself.--BigCow 07:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am reminded of Lost. Anyway, keep in mind the Wikipedia:no original research rule. — Saxifrage ✎ 23:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She doesn't mention specific posts, she mentions specific posters. Even still these could be filmed as pickup shots more recently and edited into the video. Also, at the beginning of this video Daniel is sitting on the bed reading a recent Entertainment Weekly with the cover shown, but many speculate that the magazine cover is edited in to make it appear recent. The way Daniel holds the magazine is a bit unnatural (held straight up with no fingers over the cover), and the lighting of the cover doesn't match anything else. -Asriel 03:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Videos aren't recorded in advance 

message: Cookie Monster used to poke fun at Masterpiece Theatre as Alistair Cookie, a take the name of Alistair Cooke, the shows presenter. But, if you contextualize that within the reference of cookie rating and lonelygirl15, the Aleister Crowley connection seems even more valid, even if its silly. Also, being related to Masterpiece Theatre, a show made of episodic TV miniseries, seems to speak of the same pattern we have seen so far due to the nature of how vlogging works.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.22.107.15 (talk)
: Seems like a bit too much of a stretch to me, I think it's more likely that the reference was independent of whatever joke Sesame Street did a decade ago. --BigCow 23:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Worth Noting Maybe? "Alistair Cookie"

message: See: http://www.argn.com/archive/000456lonelygirl15_the_end_or_the_beginning.php
: Maybe, but we need to wait for the facts: who, how, why etc. Hakluyt bean 19:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  She is fake! 

message: I think it could be made clearer than the article has it atm that lonelygirl15.com is not an 'official' site at all.  The attached forums and anything said there are, well, unofficial.  To be rigorous about it, I think the idea that it is fake is just as speculative (for now) as the idea that it is real.  As far as I can make out the only 'official' sources of information are the youtube pages of lonelygirl15 & danielbeast and any videos produced on youtube under those account names.  Otherwise we await a clear statement to the media, which we have not had....
I might also point out that it seems the admins of the official forums (lonelygirl15.com) are pretty well the same people who are admins at the 'unofficial forums' ( http://alissabrooke.proboards56.com/ ) who it seems are responsible for the fake DanielBeast page at Myspace (see discussion above) who are also responsible for the CAA 'ip trace' and subsequent 'story' (see discussion above).  Added up, there doesn't seem anything reliable coming out of the forums.  Particularly given the obscene posts there recently.  In short there seems to be quite a lot of fooling around... Hakluyt bean 18:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  lonelygirl15.com 

message: Some retard has gone and deleted 90% of the content from the page. The last deletion vote was UNANIMOUS KEEP. So some fool thinks he'll get around it by hand deleting most of the article. Well that person is an ass.
September 9, 2006 -- I've found that someone edits out whatever I add to the entry as well.  I believe it's clear this activity is being done by the Hollywood marketers of the movie(s) in question.
:Additions that are original research will be cut ruthlessly and as many times as necessary. Also, identify yourself, don't just go by your IP number. --TallulahBelle 23:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  deleting again 

message: What are the weasel words that the warning on the article's main page warns about? I can't find any discussion about that here in the talk page... Lijil 21:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm the one who put the "weasel words" flag on the article. What it means is, people are putting original research and/or opinions and/or unsubstantiated claims in language that implies a factual basis for the statement, even though there is none. For instance, the phrasing "speculation exists that" is the perfect example of weasel  wording. With the "Specualtion Exists" preamble, one can conceivably write and include anything in the article. "Specualtion exists that Santa Claus is real"; "Speculation exists that LonelyGirl15 is actually an animatronic puppet operated by several hand monkeys"; and so on. This article is rife with weasel wording by people trying to express what they think or surmise about LG15. --TallulahBelle 12:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point - the whole speculation section is terrible. I'm assuming there'll be ample opportunity to clean the article up when this has all died down a bit though. Lijil 21:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel Words? 

message: The new section "Alleged Confession" (section 3.4) discusses the statement from "The Creators", but this is already dealt with under "lonelygirl15.com" (section 2).--GagHalfrunt 12:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section 3.4: Alleged Confession -- duplicate coverage of "The Creators" 

message: I removed this section just now because it is irrelevant to the article. The name hasn't been paid much attention to in the videos. If they are real, the origin of her name is irrelevant anyway. (Brad Pitt doesn't have a section on the origins of "Brad," for example.) If it is fiction, the choice of name is not relevant either, unless "Bree" makes a point of discussing it in the videos. ♠PMC♠ 23:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, actually the choice of names in fiction CAN be important but I agree that it probably isn't particularly in this case. So I'm happy with the deletion. Lijil 12:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Section "What's Bree"

message: Speculation exists regarding the music choices through out the video series; namely, the use of smaller unsigned bands to score each film. The addition of Band Name, Song Title, and Band website added to each video description further points to the assertion that these films are a marketing vehicle, not for a movie, but rather for CAA's unsigned music acts. The videos are simply a viral method to develop a fan base and following making acts more appealing to large label R&D executives. The eclectic nature of the music – strong variance in style, genre, and tempo, is in stark contrast to a girl who is homeschooled and otherwise insulated from the workings of pop music culture.
This looks like original research to me, but beyond that the last two sentences are obviously biased ("viral method") and offer synthesis via conclusions that don't exhibit a strong logical connection.  I'm removing.  /Blaxthos 07:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Speculation -- Original Research & Analysis 

message: I'm not doing it myself because I'm not sure if there's policy on this, but it looks like this article is serving as the de facto article on Jessica Rose, so I think it should have :Category:Living people attached.  --Allen 18:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would appear that someone has made a seperate article on Jessica Lee Rose, though I don't know if it would survive a potential vote for deletion. Serpent-A 00:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Already been redirected. Hbdragon88 06:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think redirecting "Jessica Rose" to lonelygirl15 is a good option. Jessica Rose is NOT lonelygirl15 and redirecting is like making Timothy Dalton redirect to James Bond. Admittedly Timothy Dalton has a more varied and famed career than Jessica Rose has at this point, but still, there's a severe logical error in this redirect. I think Jessica Rose should either have an extremely brief entry "Jessica Rose is an actress who is best known for portraying lonelygirl15" - or none at all. This article should NOT be the de facto Jessica Rose article - it should be about the fictional character lonelygirl15. Lonelygirl15 is NOT a living person, however, Jessica Rose is. Lijil 07:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

text: But Jessica Rose has no notability besides her being Lonelygirl15.  That's who she is.  That's how we know her.  That's why Patsy Ramsey redirects into JonBenet Ramsey. Hbdragon88 07:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another example is Jeff Veasey being a redirect to GameFAQs, the website he founded. WarpstarRider 07:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Patsy Ramsey DOESN'T redirect to JonBenet Ramsey! I take the Jeff Veasey point though, and agree that Jessica Rose isn't yet notable enough for an article aside from lonelygirl15. Lijil 15:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh.  Well, it was a redirect until just recently, but I'm sure it will be soon be merged back in - there's nothing in the Patsy article that isn't already included in the JonBenet one. Hbdragon88 19:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think this article shouldn't be in any of the people categories (living people, year of birth etc) because she is fictional. A good comparison would be Basil Fawlty and John Cleese. --kingboyk 09:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The big difference is that while this article is primarily about the character, it also covers in some detail Jessica Rose since as discussed above, Jessica Rose doesn't currently have notability outside of lonelygirl15. Personally, I believe, although not extremely strongly, that it should be in the living person category. But even if it isn't, we I've reconsidered and decided it doesn't belong in the living person category. But please remember this article covers several living people in some detail including Jessica Rose and as in all case, we still must observe the policy completely when it comes to Jessica Rose. any living person. Nil Einne 11:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If Jessica Rose isn't notable enough for her own article, I think it's OK that her article redirects to this one (that's not what I argued above, but I guess you've convinced me) but I don't think this article should only have very minimal information about Jessica Rose.  I don't think this article can be in the living person category as lonelygirl15 clearly is not alive. Lijil 15:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you mean to say you do think this article should have only minimal info on Rose?  --Allen 16:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, yeah..... Actually I see now someone's changed the Jessica Rose article into a stub instead of a redirect. I guess I don't really mind much either way. Lijil 07:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggest category:living people 

message: The article is somewhat getting out of hand with the amount of OR and unencylopaedic stuff being added. For example, I removed this:
:On September 14th 2006 roughly 1:22am lonelygirl15 and cassieiswatching both last logged in on the site YouTube 1 hour prior.
:Coincidence? maybe, but unlikely.
Nil Einne 11:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please remember this is an encylopaedia 

message: Furthering the plot, a new video has been released, but this time not on Bree or Daniel's pages, on the ever mysterious 'Cassie' who it seems has some unfinished business to settle. It appears that the creators are effectively urging the audience to participate in discovering the twist hands-on. It already seems that one male on YouTube is to go to the location of the 'Swimming' video to unearth what has been shown in the most recent video, which dipicts an not-seen person throwing a sack into the lake which Bree swam in. The haunting voice of Cassie tells us to 'Come and get it" (or something similar). Many speculate that Daniel has had something to do with the possible murder of this girl. Others think that Bree's constant questioning about her could indicate that Cassie was part of the same religion as herself (thus why "Everyone was always to mean to her", as Bree comments) and that perhapes she too, was involved in a previous ceremony which Bree is now to take part in.
The video's, which first seemed very innocent and lacking in any real storyline, now suddenly are loaded with subtle clues in each. There is no doubt that they are heading down a much darker route than what everyone first anticipated.
Cassie's video can be viewed at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IcYUifgEfw
or by searching: cassieiswatching
: Thx :)  Is this advertising? Hakluyt bean 19:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cassie 

message: The page says
:As the series has aired, a story arc has emerged which — according to at least one critic — is almost Shakespearean in its nature.[4]
The source? A guy who posted a video of himself on youtube saying that it was "almost Shakespearean". Anyone can be a critic, but for an encyclopedia to say "at least one critic", they should speak of at a critic on a different level than a YouTube posting.
I removed the sentence.
--A Sunshade Lust 02:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good on ya, I agree. Lijil 07:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shakespearean 

message: Was the original posting of this article a plant by the creators? It's more than a stub, and builds the vlog up to suggest people tear it down. Am I being cynical? Nah - there's been professional promotion behind this thing from the start, and an entry on Wikipedia can increase traffic to a site by factors ...--Shtove 21:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original posting of this article 

message: "Everyone knows what You Tube is"? Nuh-uh. Why cut the brief description of it?--Shtove 12:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what links like "YouTube" are for. Only information that is relevant to the details of this article should be added. Extraneous details are just distraction. Now, whether a description of YouTube is extraneous to this article is a different issue, but I mean to say that there are good arguments against describing every little thing. — Saxifrage ✎ 16:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  You Tube 

message: For more information, see cassieiswatching. In "Swimming" Bree playfully whispers to the audience "He's probably not taking me swimming at all. He's probably taking me into the woods to hack me into little pieces and eat me.
The two sentences after cassieiswatching seem tacked on and don't really flow with the rest of that section.  We don't really know anything about Cassie yet (we don't know 100% if she's even affiliated with The Creators of lonelygirl15), so there's really no point in suggesting that Daniel has done that to her(as the section seems to).  Unless anyone objects I'm going to delete it.  If you strongly object then feel free to revert but at least justify it first.  Levid37 17:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sentence Removal

message: I looked up LG15 on wikipedia because I'd seen some news articles and  wanted to know the history of the video blog. When did it start? how many episodes etc?
I expected to find this information on wikipedia, being an encyclopedia rather than a news site, but most of the article is about the ummasking of LG15. Does anyone know the history, should it be here?
Ta Paul 210.9.69.203 05:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unanswered question about LG15 

message: Under "Uncovering the Truth", she is described as using non-American pronunciations of certain words. I was curious and checked out the video in question - while one can hear certain twangs you wouldn't expect from an American (especially when you're trying to detect New Zealander speech!), none of the cited words seem off. "Antarctica" comes close, as we usually drop the first C, but while reading from a book, people tend to enunciate better. I do think there's SOME truth there, but can anyone do a more honest edit of that portion?--Falsified 04:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of her accent? 

message: In the Trivia section, Bree's discussion of a trip to the Northern Territory and her subsequent witnessing of the start of the wet season is cited as being an indicator of some kind of occult activity. This is simply not the case. What she describes is both normal and common, and happens every year in the many places around the world which experience monsoon season. It is eerily quiet before the storm hits, and the lcoal people usually do come out witness the event, which is quite spectacular.
I haven't changed the article, as this is my first post on wikipedia, and I thought it wise to see if more experienced people agree first.
Mortal Wombat 16:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wet