Talk:Al Fasoldt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

An appropriate infobox needs to be added to this article, or the current infobox needs to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

[edit] Notability

If he is truly "most notable" for criticising Wikipedia in one column he wrote, then it seems to me that he is not notable enough for an article. But perhaps he is notable for more than this, so I will allow at least some time for a response before nominating on AFD.

In any case, the current article reads more like a self-serving press release than an article about Fasoldt. Almost half of it is dedicated to someone apologizing to Wikipedia for some mix of misstatement and misunderstanding. - Jmabel | Talk 00:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

He's not most notable for his Wikipedia comments. They just made him famous on the internet. -newkai | talk | contribs 00:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I have to say, other than the removal of the claim about him being "most notable" for criticizing Wikipedia, the article is still problematic. It says almost nothing about its ostensible topic; it reads like a self-serving Wikipedia press release. I'm not going to nominate it for deletion; I'm also not going to keep watchlisting it. But I do think that as it stands it is pretty useless. - Jmabel | Talk 00:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

As it stands, this article is a disgrace to WP and an insult to Fasoldt, considering he's one of the most famous, competent, and reputable computer journalists. Here's something for a start from his own website that can be used if rephrased http://www.technofileonline.com/about.html :

I'm a columnist for The Post-Standard newspaper in Syracuse, New York, USA and have written about computers and consumer technology since 1983. I write Technofile, a weekly newspaper column on consumer technology published in The Post-Standard on Sundays. It's distributed to 100 newspapers in the U.S. and Canada by Newhouse News Service.

For 17 years, I wrote The Common-Sense Audiophile as a staff member of Fanfare magazine. My work has also appeared in Esquire and many online publications. I've been systems editor at the The Post-Standard, and have programmed software used at the newspapers and other sites. I've been a commentator and host on the weekly TV show, Point 'n' Click. And I was cohost, with Mac expert Gene Wolf and TV producer Mark Yafchak, of Random Access, the best radio call-in show in the country on computers. The show went off the air after a seven-year, eight-year or nine-year run (Gene never could remember this right), but audio archives of the show carry on the zany tradition. They're hard to find now, but I'll find a way to keep them available.

I've been a newspaper reporter, writer and editor since 1963. During the VietNam War, I was Saigon Bureau Chief for Stars and Stripes, the daily newspaper published for American military personnel and civilian employees overseas. I was awarded the rare Joint Services Commendation Medal in 1967. In Vietnam, I was wounded twice -- during a mistaken American attack on U.S. troops and during a misdirected American bomber raid against an outpost of 12 GIs on a hilltop. If that sounds to you like Mash, you'd be only half right; it was nowhere near as funny.

I temporarily removed the information about his cancer experience because this kind of trivia is an insult if nothing is said about his professional achievements; it implicitly states that they're so insignificant that even his medical history is more notable. In addition, one should be very careful in adding such very personal information to any biographical articles except perhaps of politicians and media personalities. --Espoo 15:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)