Jump to content

Talk:Luke Burbank

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Greater Accuracy in Previous Reports Filed

[edit]

The way the bio is written makes it sound like the subject filed multiple reports with This US Life. Evidence exists he only filed one report in 2001. I propose clarifying this. Bluecanary99 (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Deletion

[edit]

What:
The Bryant Park Project was targeted at on-line listeners, and reportedly grew to have one million "unique" listeners per month, but it was cancelled in July 2008, with NPR calling the cancellation "a financial and strategic decision."

Why:
(1) this level of detail is unnecessary and reads as if an apology, (2) it deals with a subject unrelated to the topic of this article (the topic had separated from this show prior to the facts this statement catalogs occurring).

If someone wants to know what the target audience of this radio show was, the date it was canceled (after the topic of this article had left), or NPRs rationale for its cancellation, they can read the article for this show which is conveniently hyperlinked in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notabilitypatrol (talk • contribs) 08:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please make new comments at the bottom of talk pages. It's much more convenient for everyone - especially you - to add them at the end of the talk page. There are guidelines for this if you'd like me to quote them to you. --Golbez (talk) 15:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello User:Golbez - due to your persistent harrassment of me that borders on cyberstalking in other articles, I will not be able to communicate with you in the future. As a result of cyberstalking it is possible I could come to suffer from any of the following: shock and disbelief, anxiety, a sense of helplessness, nightmares or changes in sleep and eating patterns. (http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32458#5)
Thank you for your understanding.
Notabilitypatrol (talk) 02:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If and when such things happen, please let me know, I'd love to keep track of the effect my harmless advisories to read Wikipedia guidelines and policies has had on you. Especially shock and disbelief. That one sounds particularly dangerous. --Golbez (talk) 16:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:HA is a serious question and I regret you have chosen to make light of it. I will have to request administrative assistance. Notabilitypatrol (talk) 18:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I VOTE DELETE!!! You are correct in your assesment ... in fact, since there's a hissy fit going on between the two of you I'm deleting it myself --- 207.102.78.164 (talk) 01:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Rationale for Deletion Occurring on February 27, 2009

[edit]

Section for Deletion
On February 27, 2009, the following portion of this article was deleted:

Burbank also works as a commercial voice-over performer, for Alaska Airlines, AT&T Wireless, and other companies.

Cause for Deletion
This was an uncited statement that had been marked for citation, off-and-on, for more than one month.

Process of Discussion
A discussion was initiated on deletion of this statement within this discussion board in which a suggestion for deletion was raised. After a reasonable period of time had passed, no one registered objection to deletion.

Registered Opinions on Edit
Supporting Deletion: User:Notabilitypatrol
Opposing Deletion: no on registered opposition to deletion
No Opinion: no one participated in the discussion who did not register an obvious opinion

Notabilitypatrol (talk) 07:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additions

[edit]

This article references allegations by former employers that the topic of this article stole office furniture. This is clearly germane to any bio and must be added (with a note that the allegation was denied, of course). http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=830690 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notabilitypatrol (talk • contribs) 04:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sentences for Deletion

[edit]

I request consensus on the deletion of the following sentences for the reasons given:

1 - Burbank hosts the show with help from producer Jennifer Andrews and engineer Sean De Tore. a- article is about Burbank not his radio show, he has a separate article for that; 2 - every radio show in the world is hosted with the help of a producer and an engineer, this is frivolous

2 - From there he moved to public radio station KUOW 94.9 FM, producing local talk show "The Conversation", after which he was hired as a producer / writer on the public radio satire show "Rewind". Later, Burbank moved to Los Angeles, where he worked as a producer on NPR's midday program "Day to Day", eventually working his way up to the position of reporter. These sections have been on this page, uncited, for months now. These are cornerstone, foundation statements and need to be deleted if citations can't be found extremely quickly.

3 - The Bryant Park Project struggled with low ratings on NPR stations. This needs a citation or rapid deletion. Every article I've read said the Bryant Park Project had good ratings but was only carried on 13 NPR stations which is what killed it.

4 - He was previously a freelance reporter for other NPR shows such as All Things Considered, This American Life, and Morning Edition. This is patently incorrect; one cannot "be a freelance reporter", one can only "file reports as a freelancer." That is the nature of freelance work in radio and every industry. This needs to be heavily edited or deleted.

5 - After leaving NPR and returning to Seattle, Burbank was approached by 710 KIRO to host a radio show that appealed to a younger audience who would not normally listen to talk-radio. This is severely disingenuous and needs a citation or deletion. An extended discussion on radio-info.com indicated at least 3 people were approached by KIRO to host this show and turned them down and Burbank sent in his resume and was hired. I'm not saying one or the other is correct but, because we have two unverifiable claims in conflict, the entire sentence needs to be purged unless a citation can be quickly found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notabilitypatrol (talk • contribs) 01:07, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial Endorsements

[edit]

It is not appropriate in an encylcopedic entry to list a local radio personalities local endorsements. There are three other hosts at KIRO who make endorsements of AT&T Wireless. Off the top of my head I can think of 9 hosts in Seattle who do paid endorsements of AT&T Wireless. Unless no one objects, I'm going to delete this.

Also, unless someone can provide a third-party citation indicating that he has been a voiceover performer for Alaska Airlines and "other companies" we need to delete that as well, expeditiously.

Please object within 12 hours.

Notabilitypatrol (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response and notes re revised draft

[edit]

Instead of demanding deletions and "purges" (a word with uncomfortably Stalinist connotations), one might have read the sources and found the desired citations and corrections. Anyway, that's what I just did. The results are found in the new version of the article I just posted. In response to your points:

1. I completely disagree, there's no reason not to have a sentence mentioning the main people on his show, especially since (as noted in #5) Andrews was reportedly key to his getting the job at KIRO.

2. These statements were all easily sourced from the articles; I've changed a few words to more closely reflect the articles (for example, the articles all mention that Burbank was originally hired as a "booker" on Day to Day).

3. On this point, I do partially agree with you--the articles don't talk about bad ratings, and NPR claimed they were happy with ratings, but not with the cost of the show.

4. I disagree with your semantic argument about "freelance reporter"--Google turns up 123,000 uses of the phrase, including 182 uses on Wikipedia. However, I actually didn't see any uses of the term in connection with Burbank, so I rephrased to match the cited source more closely.

5. I hardly think this was "disingenous" and "purging" is hardly the remedy; anyway, I went with what it actually said in the cited source, namely that Andrews pitched the show and Burbank to KIRO.

6. I don't think there's anything wrong with mentioning that a notable person does commercials; however, I do agree that this would benefit from a reliable source and you know, I already tagged the sentence requesting same.

7. Burbank's daughter's name is easily found in the cited sources.

8. No, the "stealing furniture" story is not a "must." If we end up adding an extensive section about his days at KUOW, maybe it could go in as a passing, joking mention, in the same spirit that it is included in The Stranger. Otherwise, see WP:UNDUE.

Finally, I will echo everything that User:Golbez has said at Talk:Too Beautiful to Live. In particular,

"Stop giving deadlines. Wikipedia doesn't work around your schedule. Propose, discuss, and then put up. No timing necessary. This isn't a race, nor is it a job."

--Arxiloxos (talk) 05:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replies to Responses

[edit]

1. This is an article about this Burbank fellow, not his radio show. I have no problem if his staff are mentioned in the article about his show, but not in the article about him. To come to this conclusion I have used comparative referencing:

It is poor form to make exceptions to precedent without just cause. What is the just cause to grant this Burbank fellow an exception to precedent?

2. To all other points, I'm reserving a right of reply. It will be an easier process for everyone involved if we can work through the fixing of these articles one deletion and edit at a time.

3. As I said, I do not make deadlines. I politely request expeditious response so that the articles can be corrected as quickly as they were created. This is a reasonable onus for us to assume in fulfillment of our voluntarily encumbered obligations to wikipedia readers.

Thanks for the input! I look forward to quick resolution of point #1.

Warmest Regards --- Notabilitypatrol (talk) 06:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disparaging Remarks about Differently Abled and Differently Oriented Persons

[edit]

He frequently uses the word "gay" to indicate something he deems to be bad. This has led to charges of homophobia and hate-mongering. --User:notorietypatrol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notabilitypatrol (talk • contribs) 01:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is known for using the word 'retarded' often and is thus very disparaging to mentally retarded people. Source: 710Kiro radio output at 710kHz amplitude modulation

He has also on-air used the phrases "duchetards" and "sub-retarded". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.191.214.143 (talk) 16:09, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While it is true that Jenn and Luke frequently use the term "retarded" in a pjorgative manner, they have been doing so less frequently. Likewise, Luke's facinsation with the words "Douche" and "Doucher" has fallen off in the past months and shouldn't be used against them in any decisions IMO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.167.196 (talk) 10:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Merge

[edit]

I would have to disagree with merging the articles together the Too Beautiful to Live article is much to developed and large to fully fit into the Luke Burbank article Goldman60 (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But does TBTL really rate its own article? Or if it does, does it rate one of that length? Remember this is an encyclopedia and much of what is in the TBTL article is rather trivial. This is not a fansite. --
True, but this is what TBTL stands for at its core... usurping tools, phrases, and general attention with the air of a pretenious hipster. The show is a poorly rated show on an otherwise well-rated talk-show lineup. The demographics of the show is for teens to twenty's, but the channel in general targets a more mature audience (40s to 50s), which explains their ratings. Fans of the site are die-hard hipsters themselves, which by nature leads to even more overstatement of the shows importance. Even worse, the station is the official station of the Seattle Seahawks, and Seattle Mariners which both broadcast during TBTL's segments... TBTL frequently gets pushed aside for political conventions and other such events. The station uses TBTL as time filler but will probably last for some time as the programming schedule would be difficult to fill with a show gathering a stronger following. Does it really rank as an entry in Wikipedia? not likely... not even remotely to be honest. But that's what makes it sooooo TBTL... self-importance. :)

Merging the phrase Too Beautiful to Live to a Luke Burbank entry would likewise be a little disingenious. The name's been used with at least two other shows I'm aware of... one in New York and another in the 90's in Canada on 99.9 FM. Claiming such a generic phrase parodyed heavily in movies and pop culture (especially 80s rock bands) seems, well, "hipster". 24.18.252.106 (talk) 07:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What Canadian station are you referring to? 99.9fm? I couldn't seem to find any such station with any history of a show called 'Too Beautiful To Live', or one in New York. It appears you have some kind of personal issue with the program, and are insistent on getting it removed from wikipedia. Being that wiki is supposed to be a neutral forum, this seems to miss the spirit of the site.


As it seems somewhat obvious that everyone discussing this (myself included) is bias in one way or another about the article's content and subject (so us making a decision would be a violation of the Wikipedia guidelines), we need a neutral person. Can somebody figure out how to request someone to review the article? I'll help mege it if required --Goldman60 (talk) 06:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I edit a lot of radio articles, and my general thought is that a local-only evening talk show shouldn't have its own article (re: notoriety). The TBTL article also looks like a fansite, though that happens with artioles for many shows. IMHO, even Mr. Burbank's article/notoriety is questionable, though the NPR/national angle could save it. 66.61.35.131 (talk) 18:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. This article and the TBTL one are more appropriate for fan sites, they are not encyclopedic entries. I've replaced the notoriety tag; both should be deleted. (Also, I've edited out Burbank being "the official voice" of Alaska Airlines and AT&T. Burbank is one of three on-air personalities on KIRO-AM who endorse AT&T on KIRO and KIRO alone. On-air endorsements on your own radio show doesn't make you a company's "official voice." For Alaska Airlines, he's been the uncredited narrator on some of their radio ads. That doesn't equate to "official voice."--notabilitypatrol
I've also replaced "approached by KIRO" to "hired by KIRO." There is no evidence Burbank was approached by KIRO as opposed to just applying. A discussion on radio-info.com indicates several local radio persons prior to Burbank turned-down the job before KIRO finally got to him and he was willing to take it. Using the word "approached" fictitiously leads the reader to believe he was their first choice. --notabilitypatrol —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Mouth herpes

[edit]

Luke has admitted in the last few months to having mouth herpes on air as the dentist mentioned it too loudly and the others in the clinic knew who was there. Dori was the first to talk about it on air, Luke played a clip of Dori talking about it - he was indirect at first doing a parody of it speaking of himself licking a thrown away yogurt cover and getting the symptoms. --Clark89 (talk) 07:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 'herpes' conversations were clearly a joke. Oddly enough, months later, Dori Monson also joked about having 'mouth herpes' and took calls from listeners trying to diagnose the situation.

Use of references

[edit]

Due to the fact that the section I have added may be conterversial, I would like to remind others that non-print observations and the alike from persons other than one-self are acceptable, and are not oringinal research or anything like that. I am not sure of how to write the reference for this kind of thing thought so I will leave it to someone else. 71.112.88.63 (talk) 07:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

agree about this point but, for those of us who have not listened to this program before, it would be good if we had at least 1 other perspective to the on-air aggression ... not saying it's not a fact, just saying i think we need secondary verification of observational statements --- that said, i'm still voting delete for this article but, if it must remain, i suppose i'm okay with this note since the rest of the article is pretty fawning ... also, you should join the discussion voting to delete Too Beautiful to Live at that page ... 207.102.78.164 (talk) 16:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of Article

[edit]

I have restored the article because Luke Burbank is still employed by KIRO until the end of the year, as stated in the article. Humbly, Nathalmad (talk) 18:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Luke Burbank. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:45, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Luke Burbank. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Luke_Burbank&oldid=1257326891"