Jump to content

Talk:The Jim Rome Show/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Jim Rome Is Burning, soccer, Iafrate, and the weird laugh

  • (JRIB has been created)
  • Can someone list all the jumbled names that Rome uses for the US women's soccer team? I don't think that the "Mia Chastadonahamm" in the listing is completely right, as I've heard him use two or three names that have jumbled first names as well as last names.
  • Where does the handle "Iafrate" come from? I finally heard Rome use it yesterday, so I at least know how to pronounce it, but I don't get it.
  • (this point's been addressed) Willbyr 19:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Peyton Manning

For informational purposes, here's the text of the "idiot kicker" blast, which Jim played from February 2003

  • "Here we are, I'm out at my third Pro Bowl, (I'm about to go in and throw a touchdown to Jerry Rice, we're honoring the Hall of Fame,) and we're talking about our idiot kicker who got liquored up and ran his mouth off, so...What has the sports world come to when we're talking about idiot kickers? He has ruined kickers for life. Akers and Vinatieri, these guys are great guys, but they've been getting killed all week because our idiot ran his mouth. So when I get home I'll deal with it. Tony and I have talked about it. It's kind of funny really when you think about it. If he is still a teammate we'll deal with it, that remains to be seen. But, the sad thing is man, he's a good kicker. He's a good kicker. But he's an idiot."

Palmeiro listing

Doctorindy, I'm going to move your addition in the section on Rafael Palmeiro (which I originally wrote-how'd I do?) into the middle of the paragraph so it flows with the point about Rome liking to dissect the soundbite instead of it being soundbite-"Ratfael"-soundbite in terms of the stuff being mentioned. Willbyr 06:05, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

  • That's good, it was a little rough in it's flowing, it's better now. He had played the whole clip the other day, and I wanted to make sure the entire text was accounted for, especially since he blurts out "True!" everytime he plays it now. Doctorindy 19:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Crazy Woman and 9-1-1- Operator

For informational purposes, here is the text of the exchange between the Crazy woman (Lori) and the 9-1-1 operator (Mike Forbess)

  • Operator: 9-1-1 what is your emergency?
  • Woman: Yes, I need a police officer over here
  • Operator: What's going on?
  • Woman: I've got two teenage daughters, and I just got home from work, they were physically fighting with each other and one of them kicked a hole in a door, and they're tweleve and almost fourteen, and the twelve-year old is completely out of control, I can't, physically she's as big as I am, I can't control her
  • Operator: OK, did you want us to come over and shoot her...[silence]...Are you there?
  • Woman: Excuse me?
  • Operator: Uh, that's a joke...ok...
  • Woman: Who are you? What is your name?
  • Operator: Mike Forbess
  • Woman: OK, that's not funny Mike
  • Operator: OK, I'm sorry
  • Woman: Guess what, I'm going to file a formal complaint
  • Operator: That's...I don't blame you a bit
  • Woman: 'Cause you know what, this is really not very funny
  • Operator: I know it's not ma'am
  • Woman: Guess what, it's not going to be very funny when I go in front of your supervisor and tell, him
  • Operator: I understand
  • Woman: I guess he can listen to the tape
  • Operator: Yes he can, I'm sorry, I apologize
  • Woman: Well, sorry doesn't cut it, I need a police officer...
  • Operator: Well hold on...
    • Later in the call the operator explained that the police were on assignment, and that he'd get them over to her house as soon as possible. The woman responded, sarcastically "Well don't be in a hurry."

Doctorindy 18:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Doctorindy gets the Ironic Laugh of the Day Award for writing the section on Rome cracking on people with bad spelling yet misspelling "ridicule."  ;-) Willbyr 17:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Complete rewrite tag

Even as I may be a fan of the show and as I readily concede that it is useful for prospective listeners to have an enumeration of information such as that in the article itself and supra, but I certainly believe the article to be in need of a complete rewrite in view, inter al., of WP:WWIN, to-wit, the provisions relative to Wikipedia's not being a free blog, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a repository of original research, which, arguably, most of the article is. There are similar subcultures associated with sundry other television and radio programs (e.g., Family Guy, Seinfeld, or The Simpsons) but the articles for most other similarly-situated programs are better formatted and, in any case, more encyclopedic. Though surely some of the information on the page ought to be removed straightaway, still other data should be added to subpages or new pages. The cleanup tag was appropriate as far as it went, but I do not believe that the article is sufficiently proximate to appropriate to merit any tag other than that requiring a complete rewrite (the tone, syntax, and grammar, of course, are, passim, poor). I am certain that there will be those amongst the watchers of this page who will disagree vehemently with my tagging, and I hope that we might here discuss the issue and that the tag will not be cursorily removed absent a consensus for such removal. Most appropriate, though, would be our cooperation to produce a page consistent with the goals and standards of Wikipedia. Joe 06:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks, Joe. You went about this the right way, unlike myself. I like this article. I like contributing to it, but you're right. It is not Wikipedia-like. Just be careful when you (or anyone else, for that matter) decides to rewrite it. You will be personally targeted by Rome's legion of fans. It's a sad and unfortunate predicament that I found myself in a few months back. But you're right, Wikipedia is bigger than this article, and the rules that were set in place need to be enforced. Best of luck to you. --Zpb52 06:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
    • As a frequent contributer of this page, I will accept and support any changes, and will not revert Doctorindy 13:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm in support of re-writing the article as well, but I think that there needs to be a consensus on what should be included and what should be left off. Also, someone in the previous discussions about the article mentioned The Jungle getting its own Wiki. Could this be done through Wikipedia or would it have to be an outside site that Wikipedia links to?

When I get home tonight, if I've got time I'll try to do a draft re-write and submit it here for everyone to weigh in on. If anyone else wants to join me in this, go for it; we can always clean up the page when we're done. This is, of course, provided that this page can hold that much info without getting its own cleanup tag  ;-) Willbyr 20:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Draft rewrite of article

Alright, here's what I've come up with. What I tried to do was stay with the general layout of the present article, keeping as many of the main points as I could while trimming as much fat as I could. Some stuff has been re-worded, rearranged, and condensed or expanded. Dissect at leisure.

Intro paragraph (as is)

Highlights of the show

While the show has no set format, each broadcast is guaranteed to have certain set features: Rome’s takes on whatever is making headlines in sports; interviews with athletes, coaches, other sports-related figures, and even actors doing sports-related work; and e-mails and calls from the show’s listeners. What makes the show unique is the jargon, slang, and smack which permeates all aspects of the show, and the eccentricity of its regularly featured bits.

Show Personnel (added to article)

Regular Bits (as is)

The Huge Call of the Day (article edited to reflect)

Signature Music (as is)

Sound Drops (as is)

Special shows (DONE)

The Clones (changed to Phone Callers)

Infamous Callers (as is)

E-Mails (article edited to reflect)

Guest Hosts (no changes to this section)

References (no changes to this section)

External links (no changes to this section)

Willbyr 05:54, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

  • I actually like, it. However I kind of think we should preserve more in one form or another. I would be in favor of going with that as the "main page," then creating sub-pages for in-depth looks at the Soundbites, Famous E-mails, Tour Stops, etc. Stuff like that seems to always warrant adding to the list, since new infamous soundbites/calls/emails seem to happen on a semi-monthly basis. I've noticed other similiar topics have "sub-pages" for in-depth looks, so it would not be without precident. Anyway, my $0.02 Doctorindy 13:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I agree that each section should get its own page so the meat of the article can be preserved. I'd really like to get input from Saxonjf and Zpb52 before making the change to the main article, as they seem to be the only two Wikipedians who care enough to actually discuss the page here, rather than just making edits as they see fit. Is there a way to directly ping someone through Wikipedia? Willbyr 16:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

First, I am opposed to the change in general. The editors are essentially acting the same way as the college professors who turn their noses up at Wikipedia. The fact that there is an intelligencia makes me sick.

Beyond that, I would note a few changes to the shadow of the article that remains. I would say: 1. There is as much of a format on the show as on Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. 2. Songs need to have quotes around them. 3. There is not enough information on the Smack-Off. I think it important enough to have more info. I would be willing to write it if the powers that be don't consider it "unencyclopedic." I wrote the Smack-Off 2005 Article, and no one has put that up for deletion. 4. Travis Rodgers is officially the Senior Producer. Jason Stewart is "Show Contributor." Alvin Deloro is the Engineer. Whoever wrote this is not a clone. 5. On the show, there are four major parts: Jim's Takes, Interviews, Calls, and Emails. If there is a major rewrite, then there should be a format which give some serious focus to each of those for area. I don't see that.

You asked for my opinion. There it is. I liked to original "Jim Rome" article, before the split. I was opposed to a change. I lived with the split. I was opposed to Zpb52's massive edit. I am opposed to this edit, but it appears that this is going to happen. Let me know when there is a Wiki Dedicated to Jim Rome. I'll be active there.--Saxonjf 18:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Personally, I like the article the way it is myself and would prefer to not have to trim it down or bust it up at all. I would love to see a Wiki specifically for Rome. However, if this article is going to have to come under the knife to meet Wikipedia's standards then it's going to have to come under the knife. Now, to address the points that you brought up:

1. I don't listen to Limbaugh or Hannity so you lost me there. Since Rome keeps the show's flow loose and adaptable to circumstances, it seemed reasonable to go with the description as written.

2. This is a draft. It's not even remotely close to being the final document, which is where editing ticks like links and proper grammar would come in.

3. If you want to write a separate article on the Smack Off for Wikipedia, by all means do so. I had intended to take the information that's in the article right now and do just that but if you want to do it you'll get no argument from me.

4. First, thanks for the info, I had forgotten all that stuff. Second, does it really matter if I'm a Clone or not? I mean, really, do you think every fan of the show considers him/herself a Clone? Please.

5. I've only been keeping up with the show for about a year now, and that's infrequent due to my job and the lousy radio reception we get where our building is. I welcome any information that you've got that would help make this a better document. And I'd appreciate you laying off the 'tude a bit. Willbyr 20:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Since the discussion seems to be moving along, I'll add...
    • He's correct up there, song titles in Wiki are supposed to be in quotes, somebody can fix that pretty easy I think. Regular titles are italics.
    • The four main points I agree...
      • Jim's platform of Re-occurring takes
      • Soundbites
      • Callers/Famous & Infamous calls
      • Emails & Reoccurring E-mail topics
      • Plus a seperate section about Tour Stops, since that kind of is its own seperate thing
    • One thing that could be addressed is under the Emails header. There are two entries "Travis Rodgers list" and "the Isolated Incidents, etc." Most regular listeners know why the ones under 'isolated' are there, but new people would not. If there is a new page based solely for e-mails, it could be slightly re-worded and for each of those entires, if appropriate, a brief (and I mean brief) description of each could be listed in parenthesis.
  • As for me, I don't care enough to get into serious wiki disagreements on how pages are structured, and if they should be gutted. I leave that to self-proclaimed wiki people. All I care about is the preservation of content, in one way or another. Doctorindy 21:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

New Jim Rome "Smack-Off" Article

Edits to the Callers section

I broke up the Callers section to highlight callers who bring something positive to the Jungle with their calls and/or are very well known in the Jungle as well as listing the cannon fodder calls. However, the intro I've come up with for the "Famous Callers" section really sucks, but I can't think of a better way to say it right now, as I'm just about to fall out of my chair right now. Can someone come up with something better? Also, can someone add an entry on Orren (sp?) in Denver to the Famous Callers list? Thanks!Willbyr 06:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Bowtie Revolution

I'm not sure if this can qualify as a regular bit yet, but it has been mentioned on the show before. Jim was talking with Dhani Jones today, who's a bowtie guy. Jim has now declared seven members of the "Bowtie Revolution"...

  • Dhani Jones, Tucker Carlson, Matthew Lesko, Pee Wee Herman, Mr. Peanut, Orville Redenbacher, Irving R. Levine, and the guy with the blue tux at the prom who "won't get laid that night" (although Jim doesn't count that last one ;) )

If he starts talking about it regularly, it might be worth considering. If it ends up it was just a one-day thing, it can stay off.

  • The bowtie thing pretty much comes up when Rome is talking to or about Dhani Jones. I don't think it worth putting into the article. Too narrow. --Saxonjf 00:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Changes to Regular Bits section

I changed up the order of some of the items in the Regular Bits to try to put all the stuff that Rome likes and dislikes together in the list. It was a bit jumbled as it was. Also, what do you think about putting "Rome's Likes" and "Rome's Dislikes" in the list and putting the various items that fit under those headings, like this (example):

  • Rome's Likes - *explanation*
    • Good Will Hunting
    • etc.
  • Rome's Dislikes - *explanation*
    • Soccer
    • Star Wars
    • etc.

Yea/nay? Willbyr 21:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

If point is to pare the article down, then I assume this it is inevitible; however, what's the point in state that Rome likes Good Will Hunting without understanding why he likes it and its relation to the jungle. The same for Soccer, but even more so, since Soccer is allegedly a sport, and Rome is a sports talker. My main point is that if you're going to list Rome's and dislikes, then you need to give context; otherwise, its a sterile list that explains nothing.--Saxonjf 19:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

    • The context for each item would not be removed, the items would simply be organized differently. I don't want to take any information away if it can possibly be helped. Things can be reworded to be more concise or pointed, but you're 100% correct about the items needing context to be meaningful. As long as we can re-shape the article to make it more like an article, I'm in favor of keeping all the info in the page. Willbyr 05:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Possible New Category?---> "Famous Interviews"

  • I was going through the Callers & Soundbites section, and I noticed that some could be plucked out and moved to a new header titled "Famous/Infamous Interviews." Of the soundbites, many he has are just from general news sources, etc., but several are from actual live show interviews. Thoughts? Doctorindy 14:01, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
  • To add, there could be a new section, with a short intro about how interviews are a big, important part of the show, then under that, list the famous ones.
    • I like this idea. Saxonjf had a good point about emphasizing the four main aspects of the show's content, and your idea would be a good start on changing the article to reflect that emphasis. We can still keep all the listed information, but placing it within the context of the show's content would help the article feel more like an article. Personally, I'm in favor of taking all the content that specifically relates to the Clones and moving it to its own article, since there's enough info here to make a fairly sizeable article about the Clones. It would have to be titled Clones (Jim Rome) or something similar because there's already a Clones article that talks about a county in West Virginia. Willbyr 16:21, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Actually, I'm going to start moving some of the article content around to make things a little more consistent, per the rewrite I came up with. Nothing major for right now, just some re-shuffling. Willbyr 16:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Soccer Parody

(has been taken care of) Willbyr 22:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Discussion on the Fat Twins

I wanted to clear up an issue concerning the fat twins on the motorcycles. Some time ago, I decided to get the names of the guys on the motorcycles. I put them down as Billy and Benny McCrary. Today, I was corrected. The fellow was correct inasfar as McGuire was their stage name. McCrary was the twins' proper name. I won't change it back, since many might remember them by their stages names, but that's why there was a difference.

Here's a website about their grave, Fat Twins in a Huge Grave --Saxonjf 19:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

New Tour Stop Page

Edit to "The Clones" section

I changed the section titled "The Clones" to "Phone Calls" to try to make the page more reflect that aspect of the show, and since the info on the Clones is so limited. Here's the text about the Clones, for preservation's sake:

==The Clones==

The "Clones" are what Rome calls the listeners of the show. Their devotion to Rome along with their use of "smack" makes them different from normal people, but all the same as each other. Unfortunately, callers often only reiterate Rome's exact take on an issue.

I think there's enough info floating around here and in other sources to make a separate article dedicated to the Clones that can be referenced in this article. Critiques of the changes, please! Willbyr 05:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes for Rome

These can be found here. Willbyr 23:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually, no, they can't. Anyone looking to get a Rome infobox should check my userpage. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 17:41, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of the show, comments on content, and the whistle

I've been trying to find links to reviews by noteworthy people in sports and media who are critical of Rome and of the Jungle and Rome's responses to any such criticism, but I haven't been able to find much of anything aside from blogs where people rant about the show. Are there any such reviews out there?

Also, I believe I remember Rome saying something a few months ago to the effect that radio talk show hosts who proclaim that they take more phone calls from listeners than anyone else don't have anything to bring to the table themselves and are weak hosts. I don't remember exactly what he said, but I think this could make a good addition to the page. Anyone got that exact reference handy?

  • The best reference I have heard in that area is from Smack-Off 2005 (no one knows that better than me, huh?). He made it very plain that he believes that when some radio jock says " 'No one takes more calls than me; this show is about you, the caller,' What that guy is really say is 'No one has worked less and has less to say that I do.' " That's just about a word-for-word quote. If you got on Stucknut.com, signed up and then got on the Takebox, you could find the quote. --The Saxon 01:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Last thing-I know I've heard that steam whistle that's sometimes used as a sound drop before, but I can't remember where. Anyone know what it's from? Willbyr 23:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Additional sub-pages for "Famous Callers" and for "Soundbites" ?

I noticed that a tag appeared during editing stating the main page was 74 something kb, which prompted it to mention it might be too high. I think that could be solved by creating a couple new sub-pages to dump some of the material on.

  • Create one for say, "The Jim Rome Show (Famous Callers)"...cut and paste all of the callers (leave only an intro and link) to the new page, that way it could grow on its own, and new entires wouldn't have to be as infrequent
  • Create a new one for say, "The Jim Rome Show (Soundbites)" and dump all of the soundbites over there, leaving only an intro on the main page.
  • Perhaps, create another for The Jim Rome Show (E-mails)"...?
  • Leave the "Regular Bits" section on the main page
  • I think if we do that (dump that material onto sub pages, which has already been done for Tours Stops and Smack-off), and everyone is in agreement, in my opinion, it would make for significant changes that the page needed, and the re-write tag could be lifted...any thoughts? Doctorindy 14:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
    • The only problem I see with doing that is that the material that's still on this page after taking out the Tour Stop and Smack-Off content doesn't exactly make for good "articles," which is what the people who harp about the page's format keep pushing for. I think the main thing that needs to happen (for now) is to flesh out the show's content in paragraph style. The opening to the "Phone Callers" section is probably the best combination of information and proper style of any content in the article (intro paragraph notwithstanding). If we can figure out ways to approach Rome's takes, the interviews, the intro to the e-mails section, a section on the controversy around Rome and the Jungle, and maybe some of the material that's already here in list format in the same style as the Phone Callers opening, I think that would be very beneficial to the article. Once that's done, we can then approach the problem of what to keep and what to trim. I'm also torn on whether or not to move the people listed under Phone Callers to a page about the Clones, as the info given about them really supports why they are important to the show's content, for good or ill.
Maybe we could enlist the help of some of the folks at Stucknut...?

Willbyr 15:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

    • I agree, we need more opinions in this work. I agree with the "paragraph" form. It's still ongoing...Doctorindy 19:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I am a Stucknut moderator. In fact, I am the moderator for the threads pertaining to the show itself. One of the reasons I was chosen for that was because the admin of Stucknut knows my work with Wikipedia. I am not really in favor of moving famous callers and soundbites because they don't have any existence outside of the show. Someone might possibly type in Smack-Off or Tour Stops (unlikely, but possible), but famous callers and soundbites seem so generic. Is there a way to simply reorganize so to give it a little more clarity, instead of creating more pointless articles to make the main article seem less pointless? --The Saxon 01:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite tag

I noticed that the rewrite tag was removed. Since we haven't made any significant progress on adding new content to the page, and since the user that removed the tag apparently wasn't an admin, I'm replacing the tag. Willbyr 01:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I took a stab at "merging" a couple topics (no info lost), and converting them to "paragraph" form. I think we might have too many headers, and some of the broken down bits can be mergered with other to make it flow cleaner. Doctorindy 18:21, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I like the re-format a lot. I've moved the Interviews section up above the Telephone Calls to give things sort of a descending-priority flow. Good job! Willbyr 19:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Thanks, I think if we work at it a little more, we can convert/merge a few more of the 'itemised' lists to paragraph form (not too many, now!), and make it...dare I say the word..."encyclopedic". Doctorindy 22:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Question: Is the Ron Jeremy clip from an actual interview or just a one-off soundbite? Willbyr 14:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I did a little re-working on the Soundbites section. I changed the Carl Lewis entry to be The Star-Spangled Banner since Tyler and Barr are mentioned, and re-worked the Peyton Manning and Danica Patrick clips since Rome compared them on-air last week. Willbyr 19:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm not too crazy about the merge of the music and sound effects. If it's going to be left as it is, the bolded intros to the sound effects should probably be taken out. Willbyr 16:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Orrin in Denver

I added Orrin in Denver to the list of Famous Callers, but I don't know if I spelled his name right and I'm not 100% sure that I got everything right about him. Can someone double-check this info and correct it if necessary? Thanks! Willbyr 05:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I sort of remember, not much to add right now...I also swaped Rachel up to "famous," because I think "infamous" sort of suggests they went down in flames and are gone forever. She's still a regular Doctorindy 14:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Not sure if it significant enough yet, but Orrin seems to be gaining quite a bit of footing with Clones for his crack-back call on Jim in Richmond (Feb. 24, 2006). Calling him a "Huck Finn," and talking about Clone-on-Clone crime, as Jim said, using every which way to call the man a "redneck." Doctorindy 19:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Man, I wish I'd been able to catch that...I really need to put a radio at my desk with headphones, but our reception is so hit-and-miss that I don't even know if I could catch the show then. Willbyr 20:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Tim in Bend

Can someone clue me in on what exactly happened with Tim in Bend? I don't understand the "Drew Brees Mole Blast" reference unless it's got something to do with him having a lot of moles, and I don't completely get what it was about his call that made Rome fly off the handle...was it just the crack about the interview, that and the mole crack, or something else? Willbyr 05:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Rome Wiki

I have created a Wikicities page for The Jungle. I intend to make this cover more than just The Jungle, but for right now it's a good place to stash a copy of the Wikipedia article in case someone chops it down. Here's the link: The Jim Rome Show. Willbyr 19:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

UPDATE: I have copied the pages for The Jungle, Rome, JRIB, the two Smack-Off pages, and the Tour Stop page to the Rome Wiki. The only page that I have not given original authorship credit for is The Jungle page, and I'll get that taken care of by the end of the day if I've got time. My proposal is that if everyone's in agreement, the Wikicities pages be made the "official" Rome info site; that way, we can still make edits to the Wikicities page to keep the show info current and cut this article down to a manageable level so we can lose the rewrite tag. Thoughts? Also, if anyone has issues with the editing that I've done to the various pages, please revert as necessary. I'm having to cull a ton of dead links since Wikicities doesn't have as much info as Wikipedia, but I'll keep URLs active. Willbyr 16:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Complete Rewrite?

*crickets chirping*

  • Crickets are chiping here too...so to speak. Since few have seemed willing to take on the project, I'm about at the point where I think we've run out of new ideas for a "complete rewrite." I think enough positive changes have been made in the last 6 weeks or so, and outside of wiping it out, that the header for "complete rewrite" is no longer needed. I think the term "complete rewrite" is/was also quite a bit harsh, considering other pages that truely need rewrites. If anything, perhaps it should go back to tagged as needing [cleanup] 64.32.241.35 23:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
  • If the rewrite tag does get changed, maybe a link to the Rome Wikicity could be placed in the tag so people would know to place edits there. Willbyr 02:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, the rewrite tag is gone again...
For the Famous Callers section: Does anyone have ideas on writeups for Silk and Trapper? Iafrate needs to be added as well, IMO. Willbyr 16:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Takes

I added in a section about Rome's takes. Whaddya think? Willbyr 19:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Name-calling

The list of nicknames is starting to get a bit out of hand. Should it be trimmed to only the most popular and well-known handles or left alone? Willbyr 18:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Good Will Hunting, and archiving

  • Has Rome ever actually said that this is his favorite movie, or was he just quoting the Cablinasian's call from the '04 Smack-Off?
  • Since this talk page is getting so huge, something that might be helpful would be to archive the discussion at the top and each year's worth of edits and comments. Yea/nay? Willbyr 18:25, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

That sounds a little too complicated. I wouldn't mind trying to set it up in chronological order. But that's to in-depth of a project for probably anyone other than Alvin or Whitey. --The Saxon 23:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Cal Ripken, Jr.

Is this entry in the Soundbites section notable enough to deserve an entry? In the time I've been listening to the show, I don't think I've heard this brought up before. Willbyr 13:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying that it has to have an entry, but in the sometimes email bringing up that "someone sucks," they'll sign it, "that guy who said Cal Ripken sucks." It was an absolutely hilarious call, and Rome tore him up afterward.--The Saxon 23:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Coupla questions

  • Did Jeff in Richmond coin "Thanks for the vine"? So many Clones use that phrase that I was thinking about making a note of it in Jeff's entry.
  • Is the new entry about Tommy in Detroit under Infamous Callers worth noting, since it implies that it's a recent thing?Willbyr 19:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
UPDATE: Since I have to listen to the show on a significant tape delay (1-4PM CST) I just heard the call from Tommy, and I can see Rome and the Clones getting some serious play from this, so maybe the entry should be left. I'll edit it a bit. Willbyr 20:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Since Tommy in Detroit was able to co-opt the seal sound into a Smack-Off invitation, it makes sense to keep it.--The Saxon 19:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I had planned on leaving it in since it's gotten so much play over the last week or so. I thought about putting in something about his explanation in his follow-up call but I can't remember exactly what he said. Willbyr 20:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Spelling of Orrin?

Do we know for sure that Orrin is how its spelled? I knew a guy named "Orrin" who spelled it "Aarun"

  • I wrote it as Orrin, simply because when I hear that name that's the spelling that comes to mind. I've seen it spelled "Oren," also. I honestly don't know the proper spelling. Willbyr 20:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Archive and glossary

  • I've moved the talk material from before 2006 to an archive page. I'll try to archive every 6 months or so, so this page can be kept to a manageable size.
  • Something that's been bugging me for a while is that the article is laden with slang that non-listeners might not be familiar with. Would it be a good idea to include a small glossary of slang that's commonly used on the show? --Willbyr (talk | contribs) 05:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Article size

As much as I like to see pertinent information being added to the article, I think that a point of content saturation has been achieved. The article is currently 100KB; I don't know how that stacks up to other similar articles, but it seems a bit excessive, especially since a lot of the recent additions have been for fairly recent events on the show. Saxon, if you catch this, I'd like to go over the article section-by-section with you and see what could possibly be pared down or cut to streamline things a bit. LMK if you'd be up for this. --Willbyr (talk | contribs) 05:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Willbyr, before you jump to conclusions, do yourself a favor and look at articles concerning Howard Stern and Phil Hendrie. That way, you can make a reasonable decision about the size. --The Saxon 23:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Point taken. However, the Stern page is only 52KB and the Hendrie page is <32KB (no size warning when you click to edit it). The SNL article is only 75KB, and I was expecting it to be huge. I'm not sweating the size of the article as much as it may seem; my main concern, as it as always been, is to keep the article from being pounced on by the "intelligentsia" who have poked at it in the past. Streamlining the entries that are essential and removing "fringe" info seems to be the best thing to do, but I don't want to start chopping away without someone around who's more experienced with the show and has a better perspective on the info. --Willbyr 16:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I still think some consideration could be made out breaking up the page into some smaller pages....such as..."List of Famous Interviews from The Jim Rome Show" and perhaps..."List of Famous Callers from The Jim Rome Show"...and "List of E-Mail Topics from The Jim Rome Show." I've seen similair "sub-lists" for many other pages, and they seem to work, and allow the sub-list pages to grow a life of their own with worry of making them too long....anyway, just an idea as I've been away for a while. Doctorindy 17:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
    • It may come to that; if it does, I think all the lists could be combined into one article, say, "List of recurring material on The Jim Rome Show" or something similar. Personally, I think that some of the more obscure entries in each of the big lists could be cut out and not hurt the article at all. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 03:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't take Hubie Brown out

He said on the June 22, 2006 edition that Hubie Brown was on the list of his smartest people Soxrock 01:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Growing a tail

Is this really necessary? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 02:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a good addition. Dugbrown 18:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Referenced during the first hour today, think it needs to stay.

I heard it also (first time). Make sure to sign your comments. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 19:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


Manual Buzzer

How long is it necessary for Rome to keep using the "manual buzzer" for it to be included in the article. -Drdisque 01:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Rome's used the manual buzzer before, but rather infrequently. I debated including it in the list, but it's gotten so much play over the last coupla days that I figured it merited inclusion. Like the "OORF!", I don't think it's going to die anytime soon, especially if Rome and Alvin keep playing with it like they did today. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 02:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I think it should be tweaked because it's expanded as a show topic...now he's talking about the "mother of all soundbites" they put together, and has played it several times...it has just about everything we have here, and maybe one or two that we don't have here.Doctorindy 17:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Jim_Rome_Show/Archive_2&oldid=97596560"