This article was nominated for deletion on 20 March 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Arts and Entertainment This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance). Radio Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary) Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane Maintain : Portal:Radio Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs Verify : Unreferenced BLPs Other : Collaboration of the Week: Requests for Radio peer review: Rod Serling The Howard Stern Show The History of Rock & Roll American Top 40; The Museum of Curiosity; Scott Mills (radio show)

Archives

Archive1 - June - October 2006

should they all be grouped into the same category?

Yes they should, I think I'm going to reorganize the page to work that way. Otherwise this reads as a day to day journal of every call he makes. (Optigan13 06:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Wasn't the Fly Me With Balloons song sung by Shuli not Sal? It sure sounds more like Shuli who usually does the Eric impressions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.111.208 (talk) 21:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Folks, this is an encylopedia, not a fan site. Although I believe Eric the Midget deserves an article, we do not need a day by day recap of his appearances, negotiations, etc. The The Sal and Richard agreement section seems the worst. --Bill.matthews 18:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In order to clean up this article, the day to day summary of that Eric did every time he called in to the Stern Show should be replaced with an overall summary of what happened in the past. The Sal and Richard agreement should be in the article but it should be cleaned up. Plus, I wonder if it was Eric The Midget himself who put up all of those Wikipedia banners stating how poorly written this article is.

So the issue at hand is not notability, rather readability and conciseness? If not then maybe I'm missing the point? Who brought up notability anyway? If this is a case of someone who is notable getting an article "too big for his britches" then put that instead of bringing his notability into question. By the way, the article isn't that badly written. We'll make a good page of you yet. Its also noted that the "eric bangs tabitha" cartoon is up on youtube.com and is probably of interest to those researching eric (why would you?).

I cleaned up the article in general.. personally, I like the detailed timeline. I think it establishes Eric's hypocritical attitude towards the show nicely. I'd say it's 'cleaned up', myself.. MGlosenger 10:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added citations using the show rundowns and infobox, but I'm not certain the show rundowns are ok as the only source. I'm not sure about the infobox to use from the People_infobox_templates selections, I'm going between actor as he likes to call himself, celebrity, and person. This article still needs to be trimmed as you can see from all the citations I included. This thing still reads like a long running list of events instead of a broad biography. Optigan13 06:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am believe the article should remain. People who do not know about Eric the Midget may want to look up and read about why he is in the situations he is currently in on the Stern Show. Maybe there should be separate articles for each major event. Chris01720 06:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly Eric the Midget is a person of interest who is worthy of having his own Wikipedia page. 12:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed minor vandalism. --GG The Fly 05:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like like to see a blip about the law suit he tried to bring on stern, how he tried to solicit lawyers with offers of commercials and adds in exchange for pro bono work 67.81.255.39 08:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, it's just a blip after all. If there was media coverage that'd be on thing. Otherwise, it's not notable. Lil' Dice ^{(yeah, I said it!) - talk} 23:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who deleted that section? That is a pretty significant event for Eric, ordering that. If him wanting to be roasted is worthy of a paragraph...so is that. I'm gonna re add it.

I better not sign my name, I don't wanna suffer the same fate as Jerry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tofilmfan (talk • contribs) 05:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• Walk through the history section to see who deleted it.[1] I understand the logic. This same issue came up with "The Howard" thing. We don't need to add day to day summaries of the show, that is what the rundowns or Mark's friggin are for. American Idol, balloons, and his general history of what most consider being an ingrate is important to he is, and were established over long periods of time. One or two days of wanting to be roasted or to have someone bumped off is a little more questionable. For me the same holds true of the nicknames section, it has become sprawling, and people just try to beat each other to see how many nicknames they can put up first. I'm planning on either removing nicks or moving them into footnotes, since that attracts listcruft. Also as you can seen, even if you don't sign your posts a person or a bot might sign it for you. (Optigan13 08:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  • Thanks Optigan13, I was indeed the one who removed it, and cited why in the history. If you feel it's significant then I won't revert, but we should review it a month or two from now for historical significance. This article has a history of growing with every call Eric makes. --Bill.matthews 11:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well it has been a while, can we agree that this went nowhere and we can pull Eric's hit request. It doesn't really to appear to have become central to who he is.Optigan13 04:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

\Actually the The thing I'd like to try and add is historical context for Eric including how he first came to the show, and how he established himself. The farthest back I remember him is around the time of the move (2004,2005), does anyone have a better estimate? It's important to note how he came to the show, and to establish how his identity on the show initially came to be.(Optigan13 21:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Eric's first appearance was sometime around 1999 I believe. I know Marks friggin talks about it, but you'll have to hunt it down.Hoponpop69 00:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first appearance I could find was on Mark's Friggin(MF) on the September 2002 date I put. The way MF described it that was Lynch's first appearance, at least the first where he was recognized and called Eric the Midget. I think the next thing I saw that needs to be put in is Stern's attempts to get Lynch dates. I'm just trying to fill out Eric's back story so it doesn't have as much bias towards recent stuff. Optigan13 05:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think this was worth it's own section, however since it was designated a section I cleaned it up and added sources. 20:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I gave it it's own section until we could figure out what was going on. I'll try and clean up and refine the cites some more later today. You need to change the name of the citation, right now you re-used the 2007-01-04 cite, so the citation from that date is out of whack. Optigan13 21:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that Optigan, I'll fix the citation for today's date. (Tofilmfan 22:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I just removed it, it's over the top and not notable. Remember this is a Living Person, show a little bit of restraint. LilDice 23:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You and I always butt heads over what ever is notable. This is a big deal within the Stern community, Eric admitting his choice of porn and how he masturbates. If the staff brings it up tomorrow I'm going to re add it. Tofilmfan 04:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to assume good faith from each other, you both care about the show and improving the article, its just difference in opinion. Even though it may be a big deal to Stern fans we need to keep it within bio notability and BLP guidelines. The rundown from today didn't mention wikipedia, specific pornstars, or masturbation beyond that he does it in bed[2]. I think that we become so immersed in listening every day, and tend to write where someone who wouldn't know the show would get lost or care about some of this minutiae. The rundowns and mark's friggin citations we put in aren't generally considered as reliable sources, or proof of notability, and the articles are easily deleted. I don't want to put a lot of work in, only to have an article deleted for BLP or notability concerns. That's why I wanted to merge the stupid bowl a while back, it and some other TV articles are kinda of floating around on their own, and could easily get picked off one by one or just plain lost. They should get merged into one comprehensive TV article. We should have a select tight group of articles about the Stern Show. It is easier to maintain and improve them, they are much better connected, are much less likely to get deleted or lost among the shuffle.Optigan13 05:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I've ever butted heads with you, unless you're using a different account (which I think you may be doing judging from the contribs on your current account). Anyway, ETM is a living person and your edit seemed to me to be not notable and only put in to humiliate him further. LilDice 11:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thnink there was some minor disagreement over inclusion in one of the articles, but I can't seem to find it. Also that wasn't Tolimfan's edit, I moved the Brandi mention there. It was added a couple times by IP editors on the 24th, but those edits were mixed in with all the vandalism. I gave it a section and kept it since people were peppering that info all over the article, and I hadn't even heard what exactly he said or how much it mattered. Optigan13 04:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All are good points Opt, I disagreed with you regarding the stupid bowl because their are a lot of other articles regarding half time specials that have articles. I looked at the stupid bowl as a separate entity, apart from the Howard Stern Show. I disagree with you on the rundown not being a reliable source. I mean it is the only documented source of the show, and it is on the official website, what more do you want?

Anyways with regards to the incident that took place today, we'll see if it is discussed on up coming shows. (Tofilmfan 05:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

It's not really an issue of what I think about the rundowns or mark's friggin, those are fine for me when there is a dispute between fans those are fine. The issue is when people from the general Wikipedia community come in and review the articles. I wasn't really thinking of merging stupid bowl into the main show page as I was thinking of splitting the Stern Show page's sections on the TV shows and the film fest into an article with stupid bowl and Howard Stern's New Year's Rotten Eve. The main show page is getting big, and those two are kind of small. So you would have this overlap between stern show, a tv show page, and a games and bits page. Optigan13 05:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you feel compelled to delete and tinker with the article? The paragraphs that you deleted contribute to Eric's character and would help non Stern fans understand what kind of person Eric is. (Tofilmfan 21:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I deleted your edits, they are not notable. LilDice 23:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but while Eric asking to be roasted and requesting a hit are interesting, I don't think they are notable because they aren't really central to who he is on the show. I'm going on a break for a while so go nuts with additions and changes, just work it out with the other editors. If you have any constructive criticism of my work leave it on my talk page. Optigan13 05:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted in the article that Eric is terrible at phone sex. His terribilitousness is crucial for non-fans to understand Eric's character, in particular his inabilty to conduct phone sex in a non-grumpy-midget-like fashion.

I have planned to make the necessary changes to the article upon feeling like it. 72.78.21.93 02:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]