This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
How can the writer claim that Egbert was an undeclared homosexual with no citation? If he were undeclared, how would the author know? I propose this gets deleted.
I agree with about everything in this article, but dont find it to be neutral. I dont have time to change it right now, and i dont know to add the disputed article header.
It strikes me that these articles essentially cover the same ground. I don't see any reason why there would be an article about JDE III except for the steam tunnel incident. Put another way, the person himself doesn't seem to be particularly noteworthy; it is the indicent and the cultural reaction to / books written about the incident that are noteworthy from an encyclopedic perspective. Therefore, I am suggesting we eliminate the redundancy, merge the JDE III content into the Steam tunnel incident article, and keep JDE III as a redirect to Steam tunnel incident. Any thoughts on this proposal? Fairsing 20:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Is there some implication that a) thre are no steam tunnels at Michigan State University, or 2) that students (and possible others) did not obtain keys to same and enter them to wander around and use the tunnels illegally to enter buildings surreptitiously? Edison 21:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Do The Simpson's make (inferred) references to this when Martin Prince and the other nerds hide out in (what look like) steam tunnels in the school? I think Lisa discovers a secret group down there is one episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.14.186.34 ( talk) 03:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I'd go nuts if people were callin' me 'Egbert' all the time.
Even though it was previously merged, this article is basically an article about Egbert; why is it called 'The Steam Tunnel Incident'? I propose a renaming. Vaguely 07:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
While the issue of renaming is discussed, can we also talk about re-writing this entire article? The fact that the article states that the 'steam tunnel incident' refers to a series of urban legends, then never mentions any such legends and instead goes on to present a true and verified incident, this page is in dire need of a re-write. I will go ahead and do some searching for information on this subject, but if anyone is off-the-bat familiar with the subject, please, help us clean this up. Vaguely 05:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
The article describes the intent of his second suicide with, "this time with cyanide". The cyanide ion cannot be obtained by itself. It is either found in a solution or bonded to other ions to form cyanides. This is why the text should read, "this time with a cyanide".
Michael Stuart's article in the State News did not break the story of Egbert's disappearance because it was on the local evening news the day before. However, Mr. Stuart was present during much of the videotaping - he lived one floor below Egbert. Snerdon ( talk) 03:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Seems like this article needs a pretty significant rewrite. First thing you read in this article is that he disappeared. This reads a little more like a poorly-done report or newspaper article on his disappearance than an encyclopedia article on an individual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EJS2014 ( talk • contribs) 04:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
The last of the 3 external links to this article does not produce the desired results. Neither Google, Bing nor Yahoo can locate a server at: “http://www.geeksix.com” or “http://www.geek6.com” nor the article, The Truth Behind the Disappearance of James Dallas Egbert III. In addition, all of the information written online about this link reveals a circuitous path from one '-pedia' to the next. The Wikipedia article is copied nearly word for word among them, most likely gleaned from the story written by Shaun Hately which is found at the first external link.
What is done with broken or unusable links? Should this instance be brought to the attention of a senior editor? As it is painfully clear, I am a newbie to "The Wiki-dom" and could not find direction among the help files. Thank you for any guidance you can provide.
-- DexGypMom ( talk) 17:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James Dallas Egbert III. 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.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Egbert himself was an ordinary college student. The disappearance of Egbert and subsequent press coverage is WP:NOTEWORTHY. But he himself is not in the WP:NOTABLE realm. The article should be titled. – S. Rich ( talk) 02:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Two books were written about him and a movie was made for TV. I don't see how this couldn't be considered notable.
However, I am willing to support re-titling if that is considered appropriate. Nonto4567 ( talk) 13:21, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
How can the writer claim that Egbert was an undeclared homosexual with no citation? If he were undeclared, how would the author know? I propose this gets deleted.
I agree with about everything in this article, but dont find it to be neutral. I dont have time to change it right now, and i dont know to add the disputed article header.
It strikes me that these articles essentially cover the same ground. I don't see any reason why there would be an article about JDE III except for the steam tunnel incident. Put another way, the person himself doesn't seem to be particularly noteworthy; it is the indicent and the cultural reaction to / books written about the incident that are noteworthy from an encyclopedic perspective. Therefore, I am suggesting we eliminate the redundancy, merge the JDE III content into the Steam tunnel incident article, and keep JDE III as a redirect to Steam tunnel incident. Any thoughts on this proposal? Fairsing 20:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Is there some implication that a) thre are no steam tunnels at Michigan State University, or 2) that students (and possible others) did not obtain keys to same and enter them to wander around and use the tunnels illegally to enter buildings surreptitiously? Edison 21:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Do The Simpson's make (inferred) references to this when Martin Prince and the other nerds hide out in (what look like) steam tunnels in the school? I think Lisa discovers a secret group down there is one episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.14.186.34 ( talk) 03:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I'd go nuts if people were callin' me 'Egbert' all the time.
Even though it was previously merged, this article is basically an article about Egbert; why is it called 'The Steam Tunnel Incident'? I propose a renaming. Vaguely 07:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
While the issue of renaming is discussed, can we also talk about re-writing this entire article? The fact that the article states that the 'steam tunnel incident' refers to a series of urban legends, then never mentions any such legends and instead goes on to present a true and verified incident, this page is in dire need of a re-write. I will go ahead and do some searching for information on this subject, but if anyone is off-the-bat familiar with the subject, please, help us clean this up. Vaguely 05:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
The article describes the intent of his second suicide with, "this time with cyanide". The cyanide ion cannot be obtained by itself. It is either found in a solution or bonded to other ions to form cyanides. This is why the text should read, "this time with a cyanide".
Michael Stuart's article in the State News did not break the story of Egbert's disappearance because it was on the local evening news the day before. However, Mr. Stuart was present during much of the videotaping - he lived one floor below Egbert. Snerdon ( talk) 03:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Seems like this article needs a pretty significant rewrite. First thing you read in this article is that he disappeared. This reads a little more like a poorly-done report or newspaper article on his disappearance than an encyclopedia article on an individual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EJS2014 ( talk • contribs) 04:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
The last of the 3 external links to this article does not produce the desired results. Neither Google, Bing nor Yahoo can locate a server at: “http://www.geeksix.com” or “http://www.geek6.com” nor the article, The Truth Behind the Disappearance of James Dallas Egbert III. In addition, all of the information written online about this link reveals a circuitous path from one '-pedia' to the next. The Wikipedia article is copied nearly word for word among them, most likely gleaned from the story written by Shaun Hately which is found at the first external link.
What is done with broken or unusable links? Should this instance be brought to the attention of a senior editor? As it is painfully clear, I am a newbie to "The Wiki-dom" and could not find direction among the help files. Thank you for any guidance you can provide.
-- DexGypMom ( talk) 17:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James Dallas Egbert III. 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.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Egbert himself was an ordinary college student. The disappearance of Egbert and subsequent press coverage is WP:NOTEWORTHY. But he himself is not in the WP:NOTABLE realm. The article should be titled. – S. Rich ( talk) 02:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Two books were written about him and a movie was made for TV. I don't see how this couldn't be considered notable.
However, I am willing to support re-titling if that is considered appropriate. Nonto4567 ( talk) 13:21, 23 November 2022 (UTC)