Talk:Bullseye with Jesse Thorn

message: Open Source (radio show) recently did a show with Jesse Thorn as a guest.
Guests: Jesse Thorn, Mal Sharpe, and Robert Thompson. 
Subject of discussion: Cringe humor, Coyle & Sharpe, Borat, Colbert Roasts Bush.
Open Source is produced in association with UMass Lowell and Open Source Media, Inc., and airs on American Public Radio. 
It is licensed under Creative Commons.
In the interests of full disclosure, I'm a producer with the show.  
I leave it to an admin to discern whether this should be included as a relevant reference. 
If this is the improper way to offer references, please let me know. Thanks, La Rue w. ROS 19:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jesse Thorn Interview 

message: Tag removed There are a few things that I think should be noted about the deletion tag:
*While it is the case that there is a problem of sources, the problems are that there are not enough and that they are not properly cited - for instance:
:"In November 2005, Salon.com's Audiofile covered The Sound of Young America, writing that 'If you've never heard of The Sound of Young America, The Sound of Young America is the greatest radio show you've never heard of.'  In January 2006, Time magazine selected the show as 'Pick of the Podcasts.'"
:These are sources.
*Furthermore, these sources clearly do cite notability, as well as the fact that it was picked up by PRI - that makes this noteworthy.
*If someone wants to list this for a proper AfD, I think that would be appropriate, and I will discuss it there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: The article reads as though this is a nationally-heard radio program. Programs like Limbaugh, Morning Edition, Marketplace, Car Talk, etc., have national reach and are heard on anywhere from 600-1000 radio stations. A once-a-week, 60-minute special heard on 24 stations - many of which are low-powered FM broadcasters in small markets like Thief River, MN and Colchester, VT - does not meet an objective definition of "national." The selective word choice of the article indicates intentional evasiveness and would lead a non-listening reader to believe this radio show was more than it is. User:notabilitypatrol  —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody said TSOYA is as famous as Limbaugh. But there is no real doubt that the show is sufficiently widely distributed, and has received enough outside coverage, to qualify under the Wikipedia definition of notability, which is the issue raised by your tagging of the article.  As already discussed at Talk:Jesse Thorn, according to the sources, the show is carried on stations in major markets and college towns in different parts of the country--New York, Philadelphia, Salt Lake City, Santa Cruz, Las Vegas, Austin & College Station, St. Louis, Colorado Springs, Detroit, and Indianapolis, plus weekly on XM Public Radio (which, all by itself, would seem to qualify as national distribution), plus, yes, a bunch of stations in Vermont and New Jersey.  In addition Thorn and the show have received notice in major media sources like TIME, Salon.com, and The New York Times.  This article does have clean-up issues, but based on the evidence, I don't see notability, in the Wikipedia sense, as even a close question here.--Arxiloxos (talk) 22:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  User:notabilitypatrol A 3 year old aside in the online version of Time is a notability disqualifier as it's transient in nature and impact. There are much more widely distributed radio programs than this small one that do not have wikipedia articles, nor should they (see: Into Tomorrow with Dave Graveline). Salt Lake City, Santa Cruz, College Station and Austin are not considered "major markets." The Philadelphia station does not currently list this show in its lineup so some of the show's website information may, itself, be out of date. Weekend late-night radio gets almost no listeners; so few that Arbitron doesn't even calculate audience numbers. Based on all these facts, this entry should be deleted.  —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Responses: 1.  Notability is not temporary. If a show starts to lose all its listeners and affiliates, it was still notable when it had them.  2.  I don't know a single solitary thing about Dave Graveline, but if he has as many radio affiliates as his website seems to indicate, I don't see why the show couldn't have a page.  3.  On what part of WP:N are you basing your very exclusive standards? My readings of the relevant rules lead me in a very different direction, and at least one other editor, far more experienced than I am, has agreed. 4.  Please sign and date your Talk Page posts by adding FOUR tildes at the end.--Arxiloxos (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  User:notabilitypatrol "Notability requires objective evidence" - "Substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence" ... an off-hand reference in the online version of Time from 3 years ago is not "substantial." Why don't any of these radio hosts have websites: Michael Dresser, Dave Graveline, Ray Lucia, etc.? They're not notable. Wikipedia is not a fan club, it is not a self-esteem vehicle. This article treats it as both.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.209.204 (talk) 04:10, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks very much for your post.  There have recently been some contentious discussions about this article and the Jesse Thorn article, but they seem to have calmed down; the standards suggested by the above user do not reflect Wikipedia consensus by any means.  Given the conflict of interest guidelines, I'd think you're doing the right thing to raise any concerns here on the talk page--but don't worry too much about any dubious statements here, we've already straightened most of it out.  (For example, I had already confirmed that you were in print TIME--that's how it's shown in the footnote in the article.)  If you see any specific errors in the article or at the Jesse Thorn article, please do let us know (and I see you've left a note about that at the other talk page).  Very best regards, --Arxiloxos (talk) 05:45, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: Here are some more sources to be incorporated into the article:
*
*
The first one is a mini-review on Wired that has some info about the format of the show, the second one is a reddit AMA, which is probably fine for uncontroversial statements per WP:BLPSELFPUB, so I'm thinking, again, citations for simple factual details like the format of the show or maybe the history. 0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 22:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some more sources 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bullseye with Jesse Thorn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051018173459/http://www.podcast411.com:80/podcasts/411_26mar05.mp3 to http://www.podcast411.com/podcasts/411_26mar05.mp3
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bullseye with Jesse Thorn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061004003906/http://smallworldpodcast.com:80/ to http://smallworldpodcast.com
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified