Talk:Kari Byron/Archive 1

Archive 1

Biography assessment rating comment

WPBiogaphy Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WPBiogaphy 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 23:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Nomination for Deletion discussion

Ask me but this sounds more like opinions. Especially "at first she found it hard to act naturally with this more visible position but gradually became more used to it." Unfortunately this article is full of This ^^^

Note! The deletion discussions mentioned below have long since finished, and resulted in the article being deleted. It has since been recreated, and is much more substantial than the deleted versions. This article is not being considered for deletion as of the time of this writing!--Drat (Talk) 07:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

This definitely does not need to be deleted, not just one trick pony, but several popular appearancesUser:dpb2104

why is this page being voted for deletion?

see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Kari Byron UkPaolo 4 July 2005 11:17 (UTC)

Good question, she is an established artist, and TV personality... --Kvuo 05:17, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

No reason to delete. HybridFusion

Funny how the VfD Nazis keep saying she's "not notable" and "OMG ONLY TROLLS WANT TO KEEP HER ARTICLE" without backing it up. She's a regular on Mythbusters and she's an established artist.

Then write something that tells us more than "She's an artist in San Francisco, and she is on MythBusters."--Drat (Talk) 02:45, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

She is beautyful!! Picture is added.

The only reason people want this article deleted is because they let themselves be controlled by rules. It's not about rules. She's a beautiful girl, and therefore she should stay. That's the COOL, awesome thing to do. It's not going to hurt anyone, so why not leave it up?

Yes, but Wikipedia is not a Hot Or Not page. Articles should be created on a slightly more concrete basis than "I think she's pwetty!!!1!". At least now the article has some proper info, not just "She's an artist from San Francisco".--Drat (Talk) 16:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Why delete? Ms. Byron is a clear example of a young person who has made a successful career for herself. An artist who has carved out a niche. Not many artists can even afford to feed themselves. Also as a role model to young people who are looking for exciting and different career choices (didn't we all browse through the encyclopedias when we were young?). Furthermore, the business of "special effects" in movies and television is intruguing and I am very impresses to see a sculptor choose and succeed in such a career aspiration. Expand the page, include interviews with this vital young woman. Spare the letcherous accusations.

How hard is it for people to notice that the deletion debate listed above was in July last year? The article was deleted, and has since been recreated, with some proper content.--Drat (Talk) 22:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Kari Byron is a popular cultural personality. She's an important part of Mythbusters and has appeared on The Late Show with David Letterman and Beyond Tomorrow. In all of these, she plays "herself" and not some bit character. For as long as Mythbusters is a cultural phenomenon, we should keep the principals in their own page and list secondary personalities on List of MythBusters cast members --Thoughtfix 18:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

This article is not up for deletion! This is not a deletion discussion. It's an article talk page. If you want to talk about making a better article, that's what this page is for, not discussing a deletion that hasn't even been proposed. Brian G. Crawford 00:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

She's kinda hot. Can we not delete the page?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.106.106.213 (talk • contribs) .

That's not a reason (in and of itself), for keeping the article. But besides all that, it is NOT up for deletion. I'm finding it harder and harder to remain nice in my dealings with those who don't read.--Drat (Talk) 04:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Art example

It would be very nice to have one example image (more would feel like overkill to me at the moment) of her artwork here on Wikipedia, as I believe she has found a quite characteristic style in her sculptures. I haven't contacted anyone about permission yet, but perhaps the "inquiries" address on her website could be used for this. A problem might be the licensing that should preferrably be quite unrestricted. -- Northgrove 21:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I took the liberty to contact her about this issue and she gladly told me to use any of her pictures. I've gone ahead and added it, please, if you feel it needs changing, do so, as I don't edit very often. -- Boyblunder 13:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

FHM link

Does the new FHM link, to her photo spread/interview, need to go in the external links section? Or is it gratuitous? I removed it, the other user replaced it, so I bring it here for discussion. -- nae'blis 15:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

If you check the contributions of the editor, they've been adding FHM links to other articles too. I don't have the time to deal with this.--Drat (Talk) 16:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added a warning to the user's talk page. Perhaps not surprisingly, a WHOIS search shows that this IP address is used by the FHM magazine's office in NYC. -- Tomlouie | talk 17:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

If we're counting votes, I think it should go into the external links section simply because its a media appearance for her. Maybe when she's made twelve extra-Mythbusters appearances in the media we can think about which are the best ones to keep. (I have no connection with FHM. I don't buy it, I don't read it, I don't want to read it, I don't sell it, I don't write for it.) --Billpg 17:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I would write my own reason, but I vote for keep for the same reasons Billpg listed. It's relevant, end of story. :) EVula 17:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I'd like the link to actually cover an actual interview though. Is there even something like that there? Couldn't find anything but she doing the silly experiment with very little talk, and pictures. If there is, I'm all for keeping it, as it's still media coverage. Otherwise I would perhaps not oppose it as it's still media coverage, but I wouldn't exactly feel I was strongly backing the link inclusion. -- Northgrove 21:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there is an actual interview, but I'll have you know I searched that article long and hard... -- nae'blis 06:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, no original research. :) -- Tomlouie | talk 12:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Related to this, the FHM shoot was referenced in the Mentos and Cola episode, which implies it wasn't recreated from the experiment on the show, but rather from the viral videos that preceded it. Of course I'm going off the episode being aired. It's possible that it was added to the episode afterwards and the experiment leaked to FHM prior to the episode airing. Need a more firm source. Merennulli (talk) 02:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Beyond Tomorrow

I'm not sure how accurate it is to say she's made guest appearances on Beyond Tomorrow. To my knowledge Beyond Tomorrow merely took entire Mythbusters episodes, sliced them up to create much more condensed myth reels and aired them as 5-10 minute segments on an one hour show. "Guest appearance" may be appropriate if there was original content starring Kari, but to my knowledge it was little more than reused Mythbusters footage which happened to contain Keri, which hardly counts as a guest appearance.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rankler (talk • contribs) .

That's exactly what I thought to be the case.--Drat (Talk) 18:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, to my knowledge it is. Keri has not produced or particpated in any orginal content for Beyond Tomorrow. She has however appeared on the show as a part of Mythbusters. 58.7.201.237 10:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Geek sex symbol

I removed the FACT tag as the citation confirms that at least 2 major men's publications consider her a 'geek sex symbol'. That's good enough for the terms of this encyclopedia.--Lepeu1999 19:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Drat felt my mentioning that Byron "is" a geek sex symbol was excessively editorialistic. It is a fact that she is considered a geek sex symbol (see Wired poll), whether or not this makes her an actual g.s.s. So I have put this back in, using the word "considered". The new sentence is a safe generalization of the information offered by the Wired reference. Is there any reason why this shouldn't be in the article? Manderr 07:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

My sectioning

The article was getting long and needed some organization, I hope you'll find my sectioning of her article is a nice arrangment of the well-sourced information that previous editors have diligently added.Piperdown 01:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

One tidbit to add to the trivia... Kari revealed she has been fitted with an RFID chip implant as part of a myth currently under investigation. I did not hear her state what myth they were exploring. The other cast members have not had this done, apparently.

Someone should also update the appearances list to reflect Dragon Con 2006 and 2007.

208.27.235.133 06:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm, I don't even see a Trivia section on this page. Anyway, yeah, she had an RFID chip put into her arm. They were testing whether or not it would explode/heat up/malfunction during an MRI scan. (Nothing went wrong, as it turned out, but the chip showed up as a dark blotch on the scan itself.) As to whether the chip is still there, who knows. They mentioned that there were a number of /other/ conspiracy theories associated with RFID chips, but didn't elaborate or do further testing. (EDIT: Oh, I see you mentioned "under current investigation". Maybe they're gonna do something new with her chip.) --76.21.195.127 00:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Another update to the appearances should be made to relfect the tour she did with Grant Imahara, including a stop at Harper College, Palatine, IL. 98.228.231.114 (talk) 20:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Why do people on an open source encyclopedia always say "Some should put this in." Put it in yourself lazy!129.139.1.68 (talk) 20:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Joe-Mammy.com Interview #2

OK, so Joe-Mammy did another interview with her here: http://www.joe-mammy.com/pages/features/kari-byron-2/kari-byron-2.htm

I've already added a paragraph to the art section as it felt like a good update on her current situation so it doesn't come off as her still doing exhibitions. Maybe there's more there that's relevant enough for the article, but I think I'll leave it at that for now myself. -- — Northgrove 00:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

MySpace

That MySpace is a complete and total fake...it's too obvious....Discovery Channel bio...wrong job discription...hint, hint.--Monnitewars ^(talk) 03:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope, Grant has confirmed that it's her (and Grant confirmed that he was him by posting pictures of himself with user-requested items, like fruit). It's the real deal. EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Is it still relevant to include her myspace link anymore? She no longer keeps up with it and just has it going so people want be fooled by imposters. Just asking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.152.115.82 (talk) 19:02, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Kari's leg

This may or may not be fodder for the article, but I'm still curious - how did Kari hurt her leg? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 15:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)