Talk:Rogue (musician)/Archive 1

message: Article listed on WP:VFD Jul 14 to Jul 23 2004, consensus was not reached.  Discussion:
Le vanity. Le delete. Ambivalenthysteria 13:47, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm not seeing the problem here. The Cruxshadows are a fairly popular band in that particular scene, and Rogue is something of a celebrity. Just on a goof, I looked up several other bands--Smashing Pumpkins, Aerosmith, and Bauhaus. Sure enough, the front men for these bands (Billy Corgan, Steven Tyler, and Peter Murphy, respectively) all have their own pages. Why not Rogue?
For that matter, referring to something in the discussion above, why not your local college professor? More information is a good thing, not a bad thing.
I do think, however, that if Rogue gets his own page, it should have his birth name (since it's available). Wikipedia is, after all, an encyclopedia--the point is to be informative, not to cater to the feelings of the people who may be covered in it.
from Synthetic_coma
Adding him to wikipedia is not against the wikipedia rules, the page does not break any of them either. He has a VERY large fanbase in Germany (i know seeing how i live there)so if your going by popularity then there it is. 
Either way it doesnt matter if a few admins or editors know who he is or likes him. Wikipedia is for people to look up things and get results, its not serving its purpose if people cant find information.
Also, marilyn manson has a page under his name. not brian warner
:What's with all the mushy stuff?! Despite the various schools represented here (inclusionist, deletionist,...), we at least all agree that this is still an Encyclopædia, right? Why should we treat this differently than any other figure's nom de plume? Speaking of Bauhaus, David J's last name is on his page, and I'm sure there are numerous more examples like: Sting, Cher, Madonna, etc. Khiradtalk 05:52, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Voice 

message: While of course it complicates matters that the name appears on his own website, it is worth noting that at least in theory that name could be the name of a business manager, another pseudonym, etc.
We have testimony (which I have no reason to doubt) that this name was confirmed in a radio interview (but in a part that wasn't broadcast?), but this is not verifiable by our usual standards.  I can't go anywhere on the web or to a library to listen to it myself.
In all cases like this, we should practice our usual policy of requiring validation in a published mainstream source: not blogs, not usenet posts, not emails, not un-aired radio interviews, not testimony from Wikipedians.  Err on the side of human dignity, not on the side of speculation.--Jimbo Wales 14:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: . When their songs are registered with ASCAP, that's done under his real name as well. Phil Sandifer 15:32, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, and Rogue is always listed as a songwriter, so at least Rogue is one of those three names. And also the person you write the checks to. And also the name he's given on radio shows. Anyone have any evidence for any other name? Phil Sandifer 13:39, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

text: That sounds like something that should be listed on the band's page; the writer of all the songs isn't this "Rogue" guy but someone else named Virgil, and "Rogue" is merely the guy on stage, singing someone else's words; unless of course they are the same person. Xinit 19:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unconfirmed 

message: Substituted at 15:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment