Talk:James Hydrick

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the James Hydrick article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if 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
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents 1 James Hydrick today 2 Technique? 3 Video Available 4 Broken link 5 Length of time 6 WP:BLP violation text discussion

[edit] James Hydrick today

Further information about James Hydrick can be found on the California Megan's Law Web Page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.235.209 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 3 September 2006

Excellent find. That is indeed him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.197.217.20 (talk • contribs) As it states on that site, "Extreme care must be taken in the use of information because mistaken identification may occur when relying solely upon name, age and address to identify individuals." This information may or may not be about the subject of this article and requires independent confirmation in a published source. Jokestress 16:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It is him....the man in the photo is the exact same age, height, and has the same tattoos in the same places as James Hydrick. Also, well, the man in the photo looks exactly like James Hydrick. And like Hydrick, the man in the photo is also a pedophile. If it walks like duck, quacks like a duck.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.219.130.35 (talk • contribs)

That's not how Wikipedia works. Unless we have incontrovertible verification from a reliable published source, we cannot confirm that's the same person. Please read WP:BLP and WP:RS for why these policies are in place. Your belief that they are the same person may be true, but Wikipedia policy requires that we have carefully sourced facts to make a claim like that. Jokestress 19:26, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Uh, yes, that is how it works. That is why the sex offender list is there. That's him, no question. His name is right there, and that is without a doubt his face. If that isn't a reliable source, then nothing is. Get over it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.219.130.35 (talk • contribs)

I don't think you read the two links I listed above. We need the court case, or a newspaper article, or some other reliable source to confirm this. Jokestress 19:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you went to California Megan's Law Web Page. You want confirmation? Go to the site. James Randi, the one who exposed him, also said he was back in jail. His name and picture is there. What more confirmation would one need? You could claim that the newspaper article, court case, etc is speaking of another James Hydrick. See how stupid you sound? Again, that's him, get over it.

Who keeps removing the information about Hydrick being a child molestor? Does he have a relative watching this page or something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.157.14 (talk) 09:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I removed this section again. As I said before, you guys complained when I put it in there, now you are complaining that it isn't there. You can't have it both ways, sorry.~~Justtalk

[edit] Technique?

In the show, Hydrick performed his stunt with the mouth covered with host's hand, so how could he use blowing air. Pictureuploader 07:25, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply to the above: He made the air current with his hands. Try it yourself and you will see. James Randi demonstrated this when he exposed him on "That's My Line." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.219.130.35 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 18 January 2007

While the toothpick trick that James Hydrick perfomed was most certainly a trick, he never admitted to the particular feat as being a magician's trick. Unless you can supply a newspaper article that states this, then it should be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.197.217.20 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Video Available

$24.95 gets you "PSYCHIC CONFESSION—Video" where "Investigative journalist, Dan Korem, not only exposed on camera how each of Hydrick's tricks worked, like moving objects without touching them, but his eighteen month investigation also resulted in obtaining the only known confession of a cult-like figure." See http://www.ifpinc.com/New%20Materials.htm TV programs are notorous for loose controls, letting fakers get away with all sorts of nonsense. AaronWL 22:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Broken link

(The first link following this article's text is broken and should be removed.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.4.133 (talk • contribs) 05:48, 11 November 2006

[edit] Length of time

I presume Hydrick stared at the phone book for ninety seconds not minutes on "That's My Line"... Oogrooq 04:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it was for 90 minutes. The show was edited for time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.197.217.20 (talk • contribs)

Also, article states that Randi performs said trick just after judges say it is not supernatural. I have just watched the video on Youtube, this does not seem to be the case, with the show going to commercial straight after the debunking. Did this element happen after coming back from the break? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.155.54 (talk • contribs)

Yes, it was at the end of the program. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.197.217.20 (talk • contribs)

[edit] WP:BLP violation text discussion

Some editors appear to want to include a "where is he now?" section in this biography and include information pertaining to Hydrick's current status as a sex offender. Other editors believe this is a violation of the Biography of Living Persons policy which is strictly applied to any biography due to legal concerns that always arise with Bio pages.

My personal opinion is that this section and the subsequent link to the sex offender roster is immaterial to the notoriety of Hydrick and applies too much undue weight to his legal issues. Since this information is not notable (there are many sex offenders without wikipedia pages) and does not further the stories that make Hydrick notable, then it is simply a ham-handed way of attempting to disgrace the subject of the article: a blatant offense against the WP:BLP policy.

Please discuss this issue here rather than continuing to add and remove the information, especially since removing it as BLP does not count against the revert war rules and yet adding it back does break the rule and may be necessary to report if it's not discussed here and consensus reached. 24.218.222.86 (talk) 02:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hydrick does not have a Wikipedia entry because he is a pedophile; Hydrick has a Wikipedia entry because he was famous and was subsequently exposed as a fraud. The information about Hydrick's arrest and current whereabouts is germane to his biography page in the same way similar allegations, lawsuits, arrests, and convictions have been made against Pete Townshend, Bernie Ward, Gary Glitter, Jeffrey Jones, and Michael Jackson, and are currently included in their respective Wikipedia biography pages. If child-pornography charges (which, I might add, were subsequently dismissed) are included in Pete Townshend's Wikipedia biography, then the same rule should apply to Hydrick's Wikipedia biography. 24.5.199.3 (talk) 07:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but Hydrick is not the same degree of famous or notable as all of the examples you mentioned. See WP:NPF. Also, this is for discussion and it's clear we need to make this something the BLP noticeboard can take awareness of since you persist at adding the offending material rather than *only* discuss it first to gain a consensus. 24.218.222.86 (talk) 07:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Aha, I see. My mistake. Onward! 24.5.199.3 (talk) 07:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Why does the person have to meet a certain degree of fame before something like this can be added? I think the information about his arrest is within BLP guidelines and should stay. Meinsla (talk) 18:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)