Talk:Andrew D. Chumbley/Archive 4

message: Hullo - ? Anyone still coming around here?
Phil Hine never got back to us, did he? reineke 09:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm happy with that... By the way, I'm intrigued as well, now, to see the citation Phil is asking for. Rather than speculating on who is or isn't going to be embarrassed, lets just see the citation. Sorry if it's a bother for you to dig it out... Fuzzypeg☻ 05:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Well done, Reineke, and Lulu, you've both done brilliant work here. I'm very happy to do some copy editing, the simplest and least glorious part of bringing together the article. I know it's been hard work here and you've come through with flying colours! I still think to make a really good article it could do with a bit more biographical information — there are currently almost no details of his existence outside of magical groups — but I don't know how readily available this info is. What's here so far is excellent. Fuzzypeg☻ 00:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Phil Hine's review (citation)

message: Someone has gone to the trouble of stating that Chumbley was a "magician". I disagree. He was a writer , and an artist. But he wasnt a magician.  Using terms like that a very biased and subjective. In the occult proof of this nature is negligible. Chumbley wasnt a magician. He was someone who stole other peoples ideas , and dressed it up has his own in limited edition vanity projects.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.211.181.200 (talk) 18:14, August 21, 2007 (UTC) 
Tiresome boy. I know that you know nothing about this, or you'd say who you are and have something of any value at all to contribute. Since you have absolutely nothing to contribute, knock it off, please. By the way, you're fellow students have ratted you out. They're not happy. Lulubyrd 23:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He was either a magician, a witch or a sorcerer. Take your pick. He was named as such by a number of notable people. We need not say "purported" magician or any such phrase, according to ArbCom Para 6.2. Fuzzypeg☻ 06:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Occupation is not necessarily profession. Other biographies list people as poets, musicians, etc, things they didn't do for money. Please explain why you are so certain he was not involved in magic. Also please explain which particular "academic standards" of Wikipedia you think we're stretching. Unless you make your criticisms a bit more concrete there's little we can do with them; I'm having to guess at why you don't agree with "magician" being listed as an occupation. I'm also having to guess at what else in the article you find incredible. I'm also wondering why "magician" should be a WP:NPOV issue. Fuzzypeg☻ 03:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: No need for scoffing, Lulu. Now Bongo, what's the actual problem with the word "magician"? Do you think that he didn't claim to be a magician, or that no-one else claimed he was a magician, or do you think he was claiming to be a magician when in fact he wasn't, or do you think that no-one can claim to be a magician because there is no such thing, or do you think that a person can claim to be a magician, but not as an occupation? Please clarify. And if one of the other words "sorcerer" or "witch" seem more appropriate to you, then please say so, and explain why. I'm sorry, but I just don't understand, in light of the support I've cited, what your problem is. Fuzzypeg☻ 05:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I added that box myself, and the word "magician". I was hoping whoever looked at the code for the box would see all the empty fields waiting to be filled out, and help add some more biographical details. And I wanted to express the most well-known and central aspect of Chumbley's life, which was magic. I chose "magician" over "sorcerer" because the latter sometimes has more of a fantasy connotation to it. I'd possibly be willing to change it to, say, "occultist", but not just because another editor is being contrary. I'd like to actually hear a reason for changing it other than that "Chumbley stole other people's ideas" or that we're "creating a myth and cult", both of which are assertions made repeatedly by Bongo, without ever giving any support. I'm not interested in that kind of unfounded criticism, which so far has boiled down to "I personally dislike Chumbley". I won't change the article on that basis, and will just wait for him to say something more substantial. And I'm not absolutely certain that it's Bongo, but it sounds like him. I can't be bothered to track it down. Fuzzypeg☻ 21:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chumbley a magician?