Talk:Clint Catalyst

message: User:Tallulah13, who I have an ongoing dispute with over this article, claims to have created this image.  This would she accompanied the article subject on a trip from Los Angeles to Germany, and suggests far more involvement with the subject than she has admitted to. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI issues 

message: I've decided to do one unilateral move and removed all the birthday sioree names here.  Beyond concerns about undue weight, a lot of names are thrown out there (some not notable, other without sources), with the sources even provided are at best gossip (not in accordance with WP:RS) and is just plain inappropriate. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birthday siorees 

message: I've removed the entire Apocalypse Theatre collaboration information here.  While the sources are somewhat reliable, without Apocalypse Theatre have any notability, this starts to feel like a WP:COATRACK concern (a bootleg version, a track on MySpace and then a blatant advertisement doesn't bode well). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apocalypse Theatre collaboration 

message: This seems like an extended exercise in name dropping ("clint attended a party with a celebrity! Omg!!") almost entirely cited to blogs, social networking sites, and commercial sites. Sticking here since it is a large chunk removed in one fell swoop, but the more i think on it, the more im convinced it doesn't belong. Should have this boiled down to actual sources and real information in a day or so. But must say this is one of the single greatest fests of bad sourcing i've ever seen.Bali ultimate (talk) 12:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Trendsetter

message: I was wondering if it is now OK for someone to remove the 'conflict of interest' tag at the top of the Clint Catalyst article. 
Now that the page has pretty much been brought to wiki acceptable standards by User:Bali_ultimate and User:Ricky81682, among others. 
I do not believe that my editing is really a concern of COI. It was just that I did not understand all of the wiki editing rules. I apologize for angering anyone. I think that User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz was slightly out of line with the way they handled the issue, but I am over it. 
I have meet Mr. Catalyst once in my life, but I do not think that that should forbid me from contributing useful information in the future.
Thanks to all who have been helpful & kind.
And thanks to User:Ricky81682 for offering to help me with images and to User:Neutralhomer for being so chill and understanding. Tallulah13 (talk) 23:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: With the recent updates by User:Bali ultimate and User:Ricky81682, I think we can pull the COI template.  I am not sure why it was necessary in the first place. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 14, 2009 @ 23:31
I would also say thank you to User:Bali ultimate , but he/she does not seem to be very nice, he/she has deleted 2 of my neutral messages from their talk page and just ignored me. One message was actually saying thanks for the work on getting the page more acceptable & talking about the inappropriate comment they made about the photos making the page look ugly, the other message was asking why they were ignoring me. I was nothing but polite & I think it really sucks that a wiki editor would just ignore someone who was being nice and trying to learn. Tallulah13 (talk) 20:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clint Catalyst COI 

message: Why is Metromix allegedly "unreliable"? It is owned by the LA Times and is its entertainment newspaper.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Granny Bebeb (talk • contribs) 14:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metromix 

message: I have spoken directly with Mike Woodlief, Mr. Catalyst's literary agent, and have copies of deal memos between Fred Paccone (CEO, World of Wonder), Darren Stein, and ABC Family.
These are background documentation which I am using as research for an article on Clint Catalyst, but as business correspondence, they would not be appropriate for inclusion in an encyclopedic article.
If there is some way to provide this documentation in a talk forum, please let me know.
jayson23 (talk) 22 April 2009   —Preceding undated comment added 03:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If it isn't covered by a reliable source we're not interested and don't care who you say you've talked to.Bali ultimate (talk) 03:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

text: IMDB? Uhm, no.Bali ultimate (talk) 10:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Generally, speaking, no, IMDb is not reliable enough, as defined at our policies.  Some discussion can be found here with a more detailed policy proposal at Wikipedia:Citing IMDb.  Generally, alone it shouldn't be used. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentation on Clint Catalyst development deal 

message: How is the fact that he was Beth Ditto's stylist "not supported" by the page cited? Can it possibly be any more clear than "Stylist: Clint Catalyst"?
How is an ISBN number not proper citation to prove that he was a contributing author to the list of books he contributed to? One look at the book in question can prove this. If there is any argument, why not simply tag the books with "citation needed" for additional proof, rather than removing them entirely in one fell swoop?
Why is the title of "The Flyover States" being removed, in addition to the fact that he was clearly a screenwriter as supported by the cited link? For that matter, how is the IMDB "an unreliable source" in proving his production credits? Granny Bebeb (talk) 03:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggestion: If the discussion here on specific points isn't productive (and it doesn't look like it is), I would suggest you folks consult dispute resolution services, rather than repeated notes that aren't responded to.  I've found Wikipedia:Editor assistance to be very helpful. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allegedly unreliable/not supported? 

message: Ok, before we go on further with the fight over this section, let me see if I understand.  Catalyst "contributed" to those short stories and books.  What exactly does that mean?  It doesn't look like he wrote or edited them?  Did he write part of the stories?  What exactly was his involvement?  The style guideline at Wikipedia:Layout#Works says to include things he "created", so specifics would be helpful. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:55, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, the attack isn't necessary.  However, he does have a point.  It's not common to include anthologies.  However, I think I'm going to open an RFC and get some more input.  But still what was his involvement with the books?  Those aren't anthologies.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:19, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: He contributed a story he wrote to each of the books. And Hullaballoo, I just went to his website and clicked the Bookstore link for the first time to try to see what you're talking about, and I don't even see all of these books. Wouldn't SPAM be linking to places to buy them instead of simply crediting his work? And yes, I've seen anthology work credited in the bibliographies of Emanuel Xavier and Elizabeth Donald (which was a featured article recently). Granny Bebeb (talk) 03:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Elizabeth Donald was not a featured article; it's barely more than a stub for a minimally notable writer.  You are, as usual, saying things that aren't true.  It is very unusual to see lists of individual stories in Wikipedia articles on any writers, even those noted in particular for their short stories.  See Raymond Carver for the paradigm. Several articles do have lists for award winning short stories.  But that does not apply here.  The fact that you can dig out a rare exception to consensus practice does not mean that consensus has changed or should be ignored.  It means the exception should be revised in line with consensus. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

text: We have our own WP:MOS, instead of following the MLA or APA.  Incidentally, what brought you to this specific discussion for some reason? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a former editor of Clint's and also an academic who studies digital and social media. I've been following the edits on this page, but didn't feel the need to weigh in until this section came under dispute. My post was intended to reply to the RFC on whether anthologized items belong in this section. I understand that Wikipedia is beholden to precedent and consensus on topics such as this—I was not suggesting that we follow MLA or APA style, but rather attempting to shed some light on what exactly anthologized items are (since it seemed that there was confusion in early posts) and some perspective on the fact that they are quite valid and important works cited, always included in standard offline academic and literary parlance.--Thinkpiece (talk) 20:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contributing authorship 

message: I'd also like to know why there isn't a awards section on Catalyst's page?
I have noticed when glancing through the page's history, the "Awards" section was deleted in its entirety. I'm  wondering why this edit was made, as the awards for example, winning the Murphy Foundation for Literature and Language short story competition are of absolute
historical relevance.Clockworkpink (talk) 06:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, when was there an awards section?  I can't find it in the history.  If you please help describe it, that'd be great. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Ok, they were removed in this edit.  Here's why I'd support their removal: there are no citations for any of those awards other than the "Renaissance Man of the Year" one, which only cites a blog.  Per our policy for biographies of living people, unsourced or poorly sourced material about living, whether negative, positive, or just questionable, should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.  Per our policy of what is a reliable source, the blog linked isn't appropriate.  Now, for an awards section, we could say Cottonmouth Kisses was a finalist for the Lambda Literary Awards, but I think the mention in the published works section is enough.   -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards 

message: * Specifically in regards to this addition.  While Wikipedia:Layout#Works says to include all works "created", it doesn't seem to follow with a number of articles, as Hullaballoo notes above.   I'm also not sure since the only source seems to be the ISBN numbers as to the books themselves, a primary source rather than a secondary one (but probably the best thing available).  While the general notability standards aren't relevant, I'm a little concerned when books like the Underground guide (with 23 listed contributors are claimed as "his" works. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that I moved Clockworkpink's comment down here, for clarity.  Generally, the fact that they don't appear anywhere else I don't think really supports their inclusion.  We aren't including every piece of writing he's ever done as that would be giving undue weight to them.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC: Should Works include anthologies 

message: Is the blog coverage in Variety magazine sufficient for WP:RS?  "The Stylephile" is a section of Variety.com (note: "Powered by Variety" in upper right-hand corner):
http://www.thestylephile.com/blog/330000033/post/130028013.html?category_id=30688
What about the editor's mention of the exhibition (on the far right hand side)?  This is a literary journal, BTW--not a "fan site"
http://www.vagabondagepress.com/90401/V1I11IN1.html Granny Bebeb (talk) 08:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Blogs generally aren't adequate but there is a very limited usage for statements of opinion.  I'm not sure of it, especially since again, it's really just a mention of him being at the gallery.  I would have a really hard time justifying a link to his piece (there are levels between he's there, he's featured there, and his piece in particular is featured there and I'm really struggling with a passing mention of his name there).  For the journal, I'm more encouraged.  That feels more independent and serious, even if some of the interview and photos aren't typical journalism. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Following this comment, I have revised the section here. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andy Warhol Museum/Uberstars exhibit 

message: I came over here from WP:COIN. I don't really care to get deeply involved but I have a couple of suggestions. One is to remember there is a difference between an external link and a reference. If you want to say that Clint produced a youtube video, for example, then citing the video itself would be considered at best a primary source, and at worst original research, both of which are frowned on. Better would be to cite a secondary source, such as a book or newspaper, that talks about the video. If you can't find such a secondary source, then you need to consider the possibility that this isn't notable enough to include in a Wikipedia article.
If you do want to cite something like a youtube video as a source, please cite it (inside "") rather than link it (inside "[]"). Inline external links are not normally acceptable. See WP:EL. Rees11 (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed - the usage as a reference was not optimal.  However, I think the youtube piece is a good external link for the article - it's a demonstration of the subject's art and there do not appear to be any copyright issues.--Kubigula (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  My problem is that the Spoken word piece is only in the article because of this citation, which has no mention of the piece in particular (the earlier link to gallery itself really doesn't cut it).  While we don't follow our full notability standards for everything, it starts to look like spam to just include non-RS sources as external links to advertise his work, without any serious independent sources about it.  I would have no problem with the YouTube link directly in the article (probably as a reference) if I was secure in knowing his piece actually had a RS with some coverage behind it. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no requirement for an external link to have an RS - unless perhaps there is some dispute about its authenticity.  The question is whether the link is useful and adds value to the article, while not running afoul of the link restrictions or avoidance criteria.  He is a spoken word performer, so I see a link to one of his performances as adding value to the article.  I don't think a performance link is usuable as a reference, but, if not done in excess, it's fine as an external link.--Kubigula (talk) 03:54, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  But why not just link to his YouTube channel?  That would seemingly make more sense than just his specific piece.  I could live with that.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is better - I didn't know it existed.  Good call.--Kubigula (talk) 04:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good.  Consensus on something has been achieved.  High five! -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links and primary sources 

message: I should start by saying that I have had a Wikipedia account since 2006, but until today have not felt the need to contact anyone regarding any egregious page edits.  However,
when I went to the page of Clint Catalyst today it had extensive edits on it. I am a former editor of Clint's and have published more than one piece by him. I am familiar with most of the anthologies deleted by folks here. 
Time and again on Catalyst's page edit history, literally hundreds of edits were made by an editor with a previously noted COI with Catalyst: Hullaballoo Wolfowitz.  Wolfowitz has a history of COIs and Inappropriate Edits by Gaming The System, as well as a history of previous tendentious edits under a prior user name.  However, there are so many points to bring up on the vandalism to Clint Catalyst alone; I’m afraid I’m going to be taking up a great deal of space just mentioning a few of them.
For starters, Clint Catalyst is a WGA-accredited screenwriter and television producer, so I found it curious that these credits are no longer mentioned in his entry.  I specifically remember this information, as I am in the process of developing a feature-length book adaptation for which I purchased the option, and hence have been researching/interacting with writers listed in the WGA-West directory:
http://www.wga.org/agency/MemAgency.asp (a simple "search" available for employers from the organization's main page--wga.org, section "If You're An Employer," fourth option in the pull-down menu: "Find a writer") provides the name and contact info for Guild-affiliated writers.  I just double-checked, and Catalyst's name comes up in this search—along with dozens of articles in which he's named as a screenwriter in a google search when one types "screenwriter Clint Catalyst" in quotation marks.
::That's rich. If you enter "screenwriter Clint Catalyst" into the Google search engine right now, you get exactly one hit -- to clintcatalyst.com.  Google News, all dates, gives zero hits. . Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Screenwriter and other issues

message: Ok, User:69.238.165.217 added this mention of Catalyst's attendance at the wedding of Jessicka and Christian Hejnal in 2007.  I removed it, thinking there was no mention of him at all, but in fact, he is mentioned on the last page as noted here.  Repeating my view, regardless of the importance of his speech, his involvement, and generally of the marriage itself, it's not worth including.  Yes, the LA Times is a reliable source so that's not the issue.  It's a questions of undue weight.  Including every part of his social life starts to approach the problems we had with the birthday siorees, as noted above.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur.Bali ultimate (talk) 12:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

text: I understand here are my thoughts about the wedding inclusion.
I believe it to be an event/movement - not only a union of two people but an actual time where some really interesting, notable and talented LA musicians, models, artists, photographers, and writers came together. It marks a time in LA and certain scene. I think it worthy of a one line mention in the Catalyst article.
Ricky I understand why you find these people irrelevant, but know that is your opinion and lots of others find them important.
Unlike a birthday, a wedding (hopefully) happens once in a couples lifetime.
Can we find a balance on these articles?
"author Clint Catalyst, who waxed lyrical. ("Jessicka and Christian's union is an integral part of an ancient umbilical cord, connecting multi-talented musicians to visual artists to writers to performers to designers, in a symbiotic relationship that academics of future days will pigeonhole as a 'movement."
This part above, I wish could be put into the article and conveyed without being a peacock.
Hopefully I'm helping you understand why I think it needs to be kept.
69.238.165.217 (talk) 17:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Insert text that makes a wikipedia article sound even more like a cross between a press release and an advertorial in US Weekly? No thanks. No one is arguing "relevance" or "importance." We are arguing matters of appropriate weight and encyclopedic style. What is encyclopedic about having attended a wedding party infested with b and c list celebrities? Was this covered in some non-trivial way in reliable sources that would establish this was some particularly important wedding event? Was this some formative event in this person's life? Could a reader learn something important about this person by reading that catalyst "waxed lyrical" followed by some of his truly awful doggerel? (yes those were leading questions. I already know the answer to them all is "no."). Alrighty then. Again, Wikipedia is not myspace.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

text: If you need help listing Edie Sedgwick for deletion, I'll help you, even though I think you would lose and frankly I have to agree that I'm not exactly sure why.  And what you believe about the event is not relevant.  It's called original research and we try to fight that here.  That is why we focus on secondary, not primary sources.  Would a biographer describing Catalyst's life include that speech?  The fact is that in two years, the only notes about the speech are articles discussing the wedding itself and not "the great summit of LA artists."  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Let's leave the name-dropping for the gossip pages. I once attended a small party with Ric Ocasek and David Byrne. Byrne was fascinating and quirky, Ocasek was quiet and fussed over his wife and kids. Shall we write an encyclopedia article about it? I mean, there I was, standing next to and talking to famous people (and not just c-list famous)!Bali ultimate (talk) 21:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

text: No, it wouldn't be of note on its own no matter who i am unless there was something biographically important or notable about my brief co-location with those other people. And by the way we keep quoting WP:NOTMYSPACE because it's part of the culture here, not because there's anything wrong with Myspace. It has its place, of course. As does wikipedia. There is very little intersection between these two places, and that is the issue.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jessicka and Christian Hejnal wedding 

message: Are there no sources for some of the early life material? Also --- the quotes at the end of that section seem a bit out of place and overly dominant. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 23:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny how the only thing I thought had a decent encyclopedic tone here had all its references stripped and replaced with inappropriate links.  I'm tired of playing with people who don't care about our policies and would rather argue about including wedding speeches.  On you if you want, since that giant quote doesn't even source properly (WP:BLP anyone?).  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean. Its a shame in a way -- for the subject too I have to say. Better surely to have a short, tight, encyclopedic article than a long rambling puff piece. I see though that this article has generated plenty of arguments so I may give it a pass. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 19:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Because there's not a shred of substantive independent third party evidence from a reliable source that Catalyst has actually written a screenplay in a professional situation.  The WGA membership is not limited to screenwriters.  Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Is there a secondary source?  Is he called a screenwriter by reliable sources?  Whether or not he wrote one or is with the WGA isn't the point, it's whether other reliable sources describe him as a screenwriter.  He's been called a stylist, he's been described as having done performances of spoken word, his book has been described, all by reliable sources.  For the screenwriter, we get "if you look this up, you can see that he's a member of the WGA."  It's a matter of putting the proper weight on the claim.  As a compromise, would people accept, "He's a member of the WGA" but not the category?  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there are sources mentioning him as a screenwriter - here: http://instinctmagazine.com/celebrity-interviews/clint-catalyst-takes-our-pop-quiz (Highlight under the picture - the site's new layout has the lede appearing as white on white, but he is mentioned as a "WGA screenwriter")...I need to find the others again. Granny Bebeb (talk) 02:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I just noticed that one of the articles that's already been linked in the entry for some time, which seems to have no issues with WP:RS, also mentions him as being a screenwriter. http://blog.peta2.com/clint_catalyst/
Shouldn't this be sufficient to reinsert the title? Granny Bebeb (talk) 04:05, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there have been no objections voiced otherwise, I went ahead and inserted this. Granny Bebeb (talk) 07:34, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Life 

message: I know it probably seems as if I’m just another Clint Catalyst supporter but I more just a person whom has been sitting backing watching certain editors’ bias possibly cloud their judgement when editing Clint Catalyst.
User: Bali ultimate I’m speaking to you specifically. Your nasty tone, constant snide remarks, and threats of banning users - does not sit well with me. You are acting like a playground bully. I can find examples of this behavior if you wish. Perhaps rudeness isn’t against wiki laws or etiquette but it’s most certainly offensive when trying to have having a rational discussion on a talk page.
Avoid indirect criticism??
:A reminder....
"Avoid use of unexplained scare quotes and other means of implying criticism or making indirect criticism when you are writing in edit comments and talk pages. Out of respect for other editors, criticism of another's edit, of phrasing and choice of terminology, or any criticism of or critical response to talk page commentary and participation ought to be made clearly, directly, and explicitly in a manner that may be easily understood and replied to."
Most people take pride in their work and in their point of view. Egos can easily get hurt in editing, but talk pages are not a place for striking back. They are a good place to comfort or undo damage to egos, but most of all they are for forging agreements that are best for the articles to which they are attached. If someone disagrees with you, try to understand why, and in your discussion on the talk pages take the time to provide good reasons why you think that your way is better. Like science, the improvement process employed by Wikipedia is iterative and the critical analysis of prior work is a necessary part of that process. If you are not prepared to have your work thoroughly scrutinized, analyzed and criticized, or if your ego is easily damaged, then Wikipedia is probably not the place for you. Do not label or people or their edits. "
:I’ve seen a lot of really bad behavior here. You can just scroll up and look at this talk page in order to see what I mean.
A  little patience and undestanding will go a long way while trying to get  this page up to par and meet wikipedia standards. 
Fairness Is A virtue (talk) 13:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  A redlinked users first talk page edit is to launch an attack on me. I've never threatened anyone with a "ban" and to say i have is an... untruth. Good luck with poisoning the well, straw men, whatever the fallacy de jure is. But in the end, making this even more of a promotional article about this minor scenester aint going to happen. And since you're obviously a new user, i direct you to our policy pages. Start with WP:V WP:RS WP:WEIGHT WP:NOTE WP:BLP and WP:NOT. Some direct advice. Don't make it about me. Make it about the content.Bali ultimate (talk) 14:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: The Clint Catalyst Debacle

message: Why is the "Clint Catalyst for Lipstick Prophets Photo by Sasha Sheldon" photo marked for deletion? Lipstick_Prophets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipstick_Prophets even have their own wiki page.So to me that makes it relevant? ClockworkpinkClockworkpink (talk) 23:48, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_June_23#File:Cc-tub.jpg. There's no further point to continuing this discussion here.  -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Cc-tub.jpg]] 

message: The link  for Los Angeles magazine just redirects to the main page and a search for him results in nothing.  I've also searched on Lexis and cannot find any articles by him there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is you clearly have a COI and shouldn't be editing the article anyway.  I've reverted your edit.  Assume good faith of the original editor and until we find proof that he ISN'T any longer writing for LA magazine, then we can remove it. -- Ricky28618 (talk) 23:18, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  LA magazine 

message: I'm unclear on why items where the subject of the article contributed to anthologies have to be removed from the article. There are several articles in Wikipedia that have sections such as "Anthology Contributions" and lists of articles which the writer has written; see for instance Lauren Slater. --Larrybob (talk) 06:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See the RFC above.  Just because it's used in some articles (I'm more interested in GAs and FAs as examples but still) doesn't mean it follows the MoS.  I don't really care either way though. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

text: As discussed before, the practice in Wikipedia is not to include such lists except in unusual circumstances, typically for otherwise uncollected works by very significant writers. And the Lauren Slater section may be captioned "anthology contributions," but it's actually recognition of her work in a highly notable series of anthologies, Best_American_series.  If Clint Catalyst ever gets a story collected in The Best American Short Stories, that will not just be listed, but highlighted in the article's text -- just as the recognition was handled in Slater's article.  Vanishingly few prose authors have Wikipedia bibliographies extending beyond book-length works, as is generally true for songwriters and poets, absent extraordinary stature or works receiving special recognition. Whatever exceptions you might find should be cleaned out, not replicated. If Raymond Carver doesn't have a list of his short stories is his article, if Bob Dylan doesn't have a list of songs in his article, if Allen Ginsberg doesn't have a list of poems in his article, and if Joyce Carol Oates doesn't have lists of poems, plays, essays, or short stories in her article, I see no reason to extend special treatment to Clint Catalyst. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: His works that are published in these books are not collected elsewhere. Considering that Catalyst has a cult following as opposed to the types of authors you are mentioning, I'm not sure the comparison seems fair. It is not a list of all of his short stories, far from it - note that all of the individual works in his own books (which are primarily short stories) are not specifically named, nor are his numerous chapbooks and other print works. Granny Bebeb (talk) 02:28, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Clint Catalyst. 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/20080724153633/http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA318539.html to http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA318539.html
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.lambdaliterary.org/awards/previous_winners/paw_2004_2006.html
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.foreverplaid.com/about-the-event.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110107033916/http://www.frameline.org/festival/film/detail.aspx?id=1927&FID=47 to http://www.frameline.org/festival/film/detail.aspx?id=1927&FID=47
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.horrornews.net/exclusive_news/_news_01.2010/01.27.10.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120402212506/http://www.asitecalledfred.com/abouttown/38.html to http://www.asitecalledfred.com/abouttown/38.html
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.out.com/detail.asp?page=3&id=23673
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 15:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Clint Catalyst. 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/20090820020721/http://inthisweek.com:80/view.php?id=103551 to http://inthisweek.com/view.php?id=103551
*Added  tag to http://www.thestylephile.com/blog/330000033/post/130028013.html
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) 15:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Clint Catalyst. 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/20061214232823/http://www.virulent.org:80/converg4/past.html to http://www.virulent.org/converg4/past.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:16, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Clint Catalyst. 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/20090819164239/http://www.canalplus.fr/index.php?pid=2863 to http://www.canalplus.fr/index.php?pid=2863
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://inthisweek.com/view.php?id=103551
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629183525/http://www.homocinema.web.iq.pl/gay_movie_joshua_tree_1951_a_portrait_of_james_dean.html to http://www.homocinema.web.iq.pl/gay_movie_joshua_tree_1951_a_portrait_of_james_dean.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080917091245/http://bumbershoot.org/history.htm to http://www.bumbershoot.org/history.htm
*Added archive https://archive.is/20020716135606/http://www.outfest.org/fest2002/fest2002.platinumartist.html to http://www.outfest.org/fest2002/fest2002.platinumartist.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130121084541/http://www.darkartsfestival.com/2001/body/performers.html to http://www.darkartsfestival.com/2001/body/performers.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:05, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified