Talk:Judson Laipply: Difference between revisions

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 C‑class 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 articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Internet culture C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ohio C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.OhioWikipedia:WikiProject OhioTemplate:WikiProject OhioOhio articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on August 24, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

"nor is Judson Laipply notable himself"

What's he gonna think if he sees this? That is so cruel.

• Unfortunately most people are not notable as Wikipedia defines it. Is it cruel to say that someone falls into the overwhelming majority of people on the planet, or that he or she is not worthy of being in an encyclopedia that the overwhelming majority of people on the planet (unfortunately) do not read? --Stellis 07:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote this article, removed POV's, added footnotes and removed templates for WP:OR and deletion. I see no reason there should not be an article about him. --MarkBuckles 10:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

there are some dead links in the references - how do you edit that? lkjh

I've recently came across this Wikipedia article on Judson Laipply about how he performs wittily on his dance talents shown from his "The Evolution of Dance" YouTube video. I must say that he really did create a joyful and an excitingly wild atmosphere towards the audiences cheering him on boisterously throughout his whole dance performances from the floor of a certain big dance hall on stage. Even so as the internet viewers from almost around the world in the YouTube video sharing community couldn't resist, stop or even get enough of watching him repeatedly together with tens of thousands of comments and acclaims are still pouring out continuously on his YouTube video profile plus his website!

No wonder this video has been the most-talked-of-that-site in the YouTube region of that grand season. That is why that hot matter had provoked me into edit some more about that video in his Wikipedia article (on Living People) subheadlined: "The Songs (from the 'Evolution of Dance')" as a new section (since at the bottom of that article page stated that this Judson Laipply article is a stub! Besides, why only one single passage or column? Isn't this a Wiki?).

To be more reasonable to myself as to why I'm doing this, firstly, it's more on the spelling mistakes that they typed it from the song list webpage of the "Evolution of Dance" official website. As I check through the whole list of it, I found it out that something is not right in their spellings: The songtitle of Michael Jackson's hit song was spelled "Billy Jean" instead of "Billie Jean" whereas the name of the group artistes who sang the song "Tubthumping" was spelled "Chumbawaba" instead of "Chumbawamba"! How pathetic! No wonder I couldn't get through the connection link to those articles from these names! "Sigh!"

Secondly, ask yourself this question: Wouldn't it be much better by adding the names and the artistes of those songs that played from that video so that straight-away the readers (from around the four corners of this planet Earth) will know and understand immediately? Coupled with they don't have to burden themselves by wasting their precious time (even if it's just a short moment) of having to go over or clicked on to the next link or the other external websites (especially to the "Evolution of Dance" song list page) that are sometimes hardly located in the vast Internet cyberspace tiresomely to look for what are really the songs they're expecting that played in that video? Besides, isn't this article as part of the Wikipedia page under the Wikipedian Guidelines must be as comprehensive and as comprehensible as well just like the other great Wikipedia articles if anyone don't want this article to be just a poor "stub" to go on forever?

In a nutshell, I hope you all (referring to both Wikipedian readers and editors) could understand what I'm trying to say and express to you all guys. No one should ever remove, erase, or even "exterminate" this section (I mean the newly edited section of that article aforementioned) I've edited lately unless if there is any good reason purportedly to why is it has to be altered or done so! Thanks!

--onWheeZierPLot Tuesday, 20th June, 2006ad.

I think the song list is a fine addition. MarkBuckles 20:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There must be some other evidence that Evolution of Dance is so popular. It may well be; but citing his own website for it is like citing phone company ads for the virtues of their products. They may be true, or they may be stretching. JCScaliger 20:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is the most viewed video on YouTube, simply check out this list. — Mütze 01:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With more than 45 million views, it has to be at least a bit popular. He's #3 most discussed now btw.

It's now up to 153,500,009 views.--72.24.207.77 (talk) 10:46, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He also performed a 4-minute longer version at Purdue in August of 2006.

He also performed this at Central Michigan University.

i was wondering why there isnt a article on his popular video and not ust him,for example there is an article on the viral video lazy sunday,and this one must be much more popular

Since Judson and The Evolution of Dance are pretty much inseparable, and searching for one gets you the other. I think this is a fine way to do it. (Especially since more people know the title of the video than the name of the star). --Snicker 16:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More than one year has passed (well actually, counting up to today inclusive it is one year and eight days to be precise!) ever since this video was uploaded on Thursday, on the 6th of April, 2006AD or last year and yet this "Evolution of Dance" YouTube short dance-sequenced film managed to clinch firmly at the top of the crop as the number one most viewed YouTube video of all time garnering around 46 million views!!! Wwwooooowww, my goodness! I was just wondering when will soon this be taken over by another YouTube video and that most-viewed title? 218.111.70.151 13:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to this page (see June 22, 2006 post), the spoken verse between Mr. Roboto and Electric Boogie is from Spoonin' Rap by Spoonie Gee (released in 1979). This fits the fact that "One for the trouble, two for the time, come on y'all let's..." isn't in any of the other songs listed. However, I have never heard this song before, and I can't guarantee that this is the right song (as there are a number of songs with similar lyrics). Can someone who has heard of this song please verify this? Hans404 02:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to the actual clip on YouTube and click on "Honors," you'll see that it lists the video as the #1 most viewed video of all time. If you click on that to see the list of the most viewed videos on the site, the music video for "Music Is My Hot Hot Sex" shows over 100 million views, making it easily the top video on the site. However, if you go to that video and click on Honors, nothing shows up, even though it says there are two honors for it.

Can anybody shed some light on this? Fishyfred (talk) 00:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as soon as we figure this out, the section in the article titled "#2" should be excised. Fishyfred (talk) 00:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. The most viewed video is 80 million and that's evolution of dance. Number 2 is 78 million and that's of some music video but some chick.

i looked up "Music Is My Hot Hot Sex" and the most views it had were 13 mil. theres no eveidence that it has been deleted and if it had got 100mil views why does know one know about? a thing like that cant be hidden — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leemyster (talk • contribs) 23:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And where would one look to find evidence of the video being deleted? As for no one knowing about it, it got a decent amount of coverage and speculation on several blogs. If you go over to the article for Music Is My Hot Hot Sex, you'll find some pertinent references. Hope this clears up any confusion. FlamingSilmaril (talk) 00:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-G — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 18:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added the years to the table (just by using Wikipedia). I hope this is useful to someone... Dj stone (talk) 01:29, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The version in the video Evolution of Dance 2 is defiently the Otis Day and the Knights version of the song Shout!, so should the articel be changed to reflect that? Or do we keep it by the original artist? Luciferian56 (talk) 19:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using the Wayback Machine, it seems that Laipply was the most subscribed at one point (as seen here), so I'm adding the most subscribed box. Quiznos55 (talk) 04:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The new number one most viewed video on youtube. 74.37.238.57 (talk) 03:59, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"How Wikipedia kept me out of jail".[1]. 92.233.60.181 (talk) 21:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]