Talk:Paul Karason

Untitled

I disagree with this being put up for CSD on the grounds of it being non-notable. I think it's very notable when a man turns purple, and no scientist or doctor can figure out exactly why/how some colloidal silver (which is in many commercial skin-care products) caused it to happen. Call me crazy -- last I checked, purple is not a race. Mr. P. S. Phillips (talk) 00:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

this bit of trivia needs more and better sourcing to show notability. one local tv station report, is innsufficient notability for a biography of a living person, who says in the one reference that he just would like to be accepted. (see WP:BIO and WP:BLP) --Rocksanddirt (talk) 00:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

A person turning purple is not trivia. You want more news references?:

CNN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XV0I6Q70Yw

CBS: http://www.kval.com/news/local/12648491.html

ABC: http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=5843725

Fox: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317564,00.html

NewPublic: http://www.nowpublic.com/health/paul-karason-man-blue-skin

And a blog, just for good measure: http://fisherwy.blogspot.com/2007/12/paul-karason-is-blue-man.html

Enjoy Mr. P. S. Phillips (talk) 01:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• I've taken the liberty of removing the puzzling speedy delete tag. The man is definitely notable--many Nexis hits--global coverage--memorable.Wageless (talk) 02:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. That was the intelligent thing to do. Unfortunately I couldn't do it myself, being the article's creator. Mr. P. S. Phillips (talk) 18:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits

Hi Emerson7! I'm not sure why you undid my recent revision -- can you explain? I suspect we have somewhat different opinions about how to arrange this article, so maybe it would be good to discuss it here a bit. I'm in favor of in-text citations (instead of references at the end) because they're more specific, and I think we can directly ascribe his pigmentation to his silver intake (argyria seems pretty widely accepted). Are there any sources you've read that question that? Dreamyshade (talk) 05:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

hello!....per wp:blp, and wp:mos i identified several problems with the text, and i believe the edits i made were successful in rectifying them.

it is inappropriate to refer to karason in the header as a 'white american'. per MOS:BIO, the article header should only list the subject's name, dates, nationality, and why the subject is significant. his 'fair skin and freckles,' explained in the first paragraph, conveys the point much better.

karason has never been seen by a physician, and has never been diagnosed with anything. based only on his claims, only an educated guess can be made about what 'might' be going on, but it is inappropriate assert as fact that he has argyria, or that the silver is in fact the cause of the pigmenting. none of the articles or interviews give a diagnosis either, they only explain the association.

with regard to the citations, all of the other references referred back to one of the two interviews karason had with the local abc channel or the today show. each has video, and one has the transcript included. there was no link for the lexis transcript, and as far as i recall, the lexis cit requires paid access. per wp:el links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content is not permitted. further, i also prefer inline references, but since there are only two paragraphs, and both references buttress the entire article, it doesn't really make sense to have them inline.

with regard to the 'papa smurf'...well, i found the comment insulting, unencyclopaedic and unworthy of inclusion per wp:blp. lol...who cares what a scottish tabloid opines of a man they've never met anyway? --emerson7 18:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for explaining! You're more familiar than I am with some of these guidelines. I just recommend using more detailed edit summaries. :) Dreamyshade (talk) 00:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)