Talk:James Randi/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Fact tag on 'Background' section

Why is there a {{cn}} tag following the short paragraph introducing the background section? Is someone actually contesting the factual basis of the statements? If not, it probably doesn't need the tag. Every single statement on Wikipedia does not need to reference a source. Statements only need to cite sources when their factuality is challenged or clearly dubious. A quick look at the cover photo of Randi's children's book (to the right of the 'background' section) and a look at the list of books he has authored can quickly confirm all the statements in that section. Exactly which statement is contentious enough to require a separate <ref>? — DIEGO ^talk 19:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I removed it. I don't see any need for that fact tag at all. Anyone can check that he has written books on those subjects. Bubba73 (talk), 19:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Please improve lead

Please improve the lead. Lead sections are supposed to summarize articles. So far this lead section leaves out most of the information that the article contains. The lead needs to be expanded to include at least 2 large paragraphs. Please see WP:LEAD for more info. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 16:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Real name?

The link is an interview with Randi, and he says that his name was not and never will be "Zwinge". Bubba73 (talk), 01:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

This link says:

There's something else going here for Dudley's ego-trip; kids who consult Who's Who or other biographical listings, can discover my original name — Zwinge — and they take great glee in sending letters to me under that name, as if they've cleverly rooted out a dark secret — as Dudley has done. Well, let him have his thrill. It may be the best he can do. He also has a unique view of reality. He writes:

Think of Zwinge as a brass player; He toots the same horn over and over, desperately hoping that the audience will notice him instead of the other performers on the stage. Zwinge is an illusionist — a self-described liar and con artist — who discovered early in his career that he could make more money by debunking the work of other illusionists. So he reinvented himself as James Randi and hit the road as — get ready for it — The Amazing Randi.

Well, folks, in each of the biographical sketches of me that have appeared in various parts of the world, I've planted one totally invented piece of family information, a different one for each biography. Then, when I've been given back one of those false bits of information by a "reader" or a "spiritualist," I can tell where they really got the item...

So, the way I take it is that Zwinge was not his real name. Bubba73 (talk), 02:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's so clear. Here's a continuation of the second unnamed link above, which is actually the 19 November 2004 Swift commentary, more specifically the "Dudley — Do Right" topic. (Basic rule of hypertext: one does not say "link" or "this link" — one identifies with meaningful words what the link points to. This has long been true for HTML anchor tags; it's even more important for wiki links. Besides the jarring shift of perspective — one is forced to jump to the link to understand the context — non-descriptive text prevents one from easily referring to previous, ambiguous links, as I've just had to do.) Anyway, here's the continuation of the "Dudley — Do Right" passage:

… I can tell where they really got the item. In Dudley's case, he reveals by his devastating "self-described liar and con artist" "coup" that he's been out on the Internet archives flailing around for apparently grubby details he can use. That quotation first appeared in The New York Times back in February of 2001, has been picked up and repeated many other places, and was part of my regular opening address to my audiences, back when I did my cabaret magic act. You have to understand that in this case Dudley has to grab at whatever he can get.

Though he's obviously been to my web-page, and knows that I strenuously deny the "debunker" label, he ignores that fact in order to enrich his account.

It seems to me that Randi is claiming here that the "self-described liar and con artist" quote was information he planted in the 2001 NY Times interview that Dudley is unwittingly parroting.

Bubba73's first undescribed link is an unnamed MP3 file that one must listen to even to begin to attempt to assess it as a reliable source. It turns out to be an undated episode of "Kaufman and Company", a local radio program on WDNA-FM hosted by a "Charlie Kaufman" (not WP's Charlie Kaufman, nor anyone I found in WP or at randi.org, although I'd swear I'd heard of this guy before, somewhere). I deduce it's 5 December 2007 by a synthesis — forbidden original research — of part of the URL ("12-5"), the show's mention on WDNA's Programs page, which says it airs on Wednesdays, and the fact that last Wednesday was 5 December. (But what's to say it wasn't Wednesday, 5 December 2001?)

Anyway, Randi's opening words in the interview, as Bubba73 suggests above, are "Good morning. My name never was 'Zwinge', and, uh, never will be." That would seem to be quite clear — except that how do we know this is not the "totally invented piece of family information" he chose to plant for the bio information in this interview?

With the information presently at hand, I would say the most we can do is include a note that cites specific wiki-reliable sources that give his commonly reported "real name" and add a citation for his denial of this name in the interview. But perhaps we could use more independent sources. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

How 'bout something like this?

James Randi (born August 7, 1928), stage name The Amazing Randi, is a stage magician and scientific skeptic best known as a challenger of paranormal claims, debunker of pseudoscience and founder of the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF)]. According to some biographical records , Randall James Hamilton Zwinge, was born in Toronto, Canada, however Randi has said that he's purposely varied some items of biographical information found in public sources in an attempt to expose fraudulent psychic "readings" of him.(http://www.randi.org/jr/111904the.html)

--- LuckyLouie (talk) 05:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Too heavy with details in the lead section, but that's putting the cart before the horse anyway. So far we have only a single interview in a single, apparently obscure radio program that indicates the name is wrong, versus many reliable sources for it being right, or at least that's how it seems at the moment. We can't be sure how much weight to give the question while we have no review of sources for and against. Once this is assembled, we might better judge whether there should be a main-text paragraph or a mere footnote on this question, and how it should be phrased. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it is too much for the introductory paragraph, but it should probably go in there somewhere, somehow. BTW, I shouldn't get "credit" for the link to the radio program. Yesterday someone took out the "Zwinge" and cited that as a source, but it was soon reverted. I listened to the link and he does say that Zwinge never was his name. Bubba73 (talk), 00:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

This gives Zwinge also, but who knows? Bubba73 (talk), 00:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, your suggestion of "Biography for James Randi" from IMDb would be considered a reliable source, although it's possible they are in error. It can be one of several sources we cite for the name. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 07:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Errors tend to get propegated. Bubba73 (talk), 16:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly why Wikipedia requires reliable sources, which are organizations that have professional editorial boards who pay a price for propagating errors. It's hardly an infallible system, but it tends to screen out most of the rumor-spreading flotsam that people try to cite in this "believe everything you read on the Internet" age. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't know of a reliable enough source for what his birth name is. Bubba73 (talk), 18:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's an interesting tidbit: page 243 of The Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada (1907) apparently includes, in its list of officers and members for that year, a "Mr. Randall J. Zwinge" of Leaside, a Toronto neighborhood. This could hardly be Randi, of course, as he's hardly old enough to have held a position of responsibility in 1907 (presumably having been –21 years old). But it could be either a relative from whom he got his name, or just an interesting name he decided to claim in the NY Times interview as part of his stated disinformation effort. This is sheer speculation, of course, and can't be used as a source. But it may inspire more research. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Why not featured?

This is one of the best written and well-referenced articles I've read on the 'pedia. Why isn't it a featured article? — Frecklefσσt | Talk 17:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

debunker

I linked to debunker in the article, but Randi has said that he denies that label, presumably because he doesn't really go out and show things to be false - he asks the ones making the claims to prove it, and the proof is never forthcoming. Bubba73 (talk), 17:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Cite errors

I'm getting a bunch of big red "cite errors" when viewing the main article. Does someone know how to fix that? Bubba73 (talk), 22:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any errors. There could be some template editing going on elsewhere, but there are a lot of citations here, so it's hard to know where to start looking. Could you be more specific (e.g., "a red blah-blah-blah appears after the text yada-yada-yada, and it happens in X other places")? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm still getting them, fon instance right under "early and personal life", it shows: "Randi is the oldest of three children born to a Bell Canada employee.Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name cannot be a simple integer, use a descriptive title ", and the Cite Error and the rest is in large red letters. Bubba73 (talk), 01:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, now it is OK. Bubba73 (talk), 01:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I've just cleaned up 4 references (including one duplicate) by using the {{cite news}} template on them. This is not just an exercise in formality. Not only does it standardize the source information we display, it also makes it easier while editing to find the references, identify any problems or omissions, and fix or update them. I had thought that I'd done a lot of source cleanup, but it looks like most of the sources in this article are still (or once again) tossed in in any old fashion, in wildly varying forms, and so embedded in the text it would take an obfuscated-code programmer to extract and work on them. Wikipedia is supposed to be editable by mortals, not code fiends. I highly recommend we put some effort into cleaning up the rest of the references. See Wikipedia:Footnotes for how to do this; I'm also be happy to answer questions on my talk page. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Reference For Florida Segregation Incident

I like the anecdote about Randi in Florida and walking away from the performence, however it remains uncited. Can anyone provide or I may remove it.. --99.247.120.178 (talk) 05:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)