Talk:Borf

Untitled

Finished reading archive of the original VfD discussion. As the creator of the article, and as a result of reading the discussion, I recommend this article, plus others for Cool Disco Dan and Fab 5 Freddy be merged and/created to document the impact of such graffiti artists on urban American culture (and hip hop culture in the case of Fab 5 Freddy). 38.118.43.2

Text removed from Borf

I have reverted Borf to a redirect to this article and have removed the following text:

Borf is not caught.

Borf is many. Borf is none. Borf is waiting for you in your car. Borf is in your pockets. Borf is running through your veins. Borf is naive. Borf is good for your liver. Borf is controlling your thoughts. Borf is everywhere. Borf is the war on boredom. Borf annihilates. Borf hates school. Borf is a four letter word for joy. Borf is quickly losing patience. Borf yells in the library. Borf eats pieces of shit like you for breakfast. Borf is digging a hole to China. Borf is bad at graffiti. Borf is ephemeral. Borf is invincible. Borf. Borf ruins everything. Borf runs near the swimming pool. Borf keeps it real. Borf writes you love letters. Ol’ Dirty Bastard is Borf. Borf knows everything. Borf is in the water. Borf doesn’t sleep. Borf systematically attacks the infrastructure of the totality. Borf is a foulmouth. Borf eats your homework. Borf brings you home for dinner. Borf is the dirt under your fingernails. Borf is the song that never ends. Borf gets down. Borf gets up. Borf is your baby. Borf is neither. Borf is good for your heart, the more you eat the more you. Borf is. Borf knows. Borf destroys. Borf is immortal. Borf pulls fire alarms. Borf scuffs the gym floor. Borf is looking through your mom’s purse. Borf is M. Borf is the size of Alaska. Borf likes pizza. Borf is in general. Borf ain’t nothin’ to fuck with. Borf runs it. Borf has reflexes like a cat. Borf is immortal. Borf sticks gum under the desk. Borf is omnipotent. Borf is flawed. Borf is winning.

If you can think of an appropriate way to incorporate it into this article, please feel free. Thanks. Doctor Whom 18:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

More Removed Text

I took this out of the article:

"*The following article has a negative bias against BORF, but more importantly it is without much factual basis in a number of ways the most important of which is that BORF is not one person. I have tagged BORF myself and know others who have done so as well. As an autobiography this entry fails even more. This article failed to mention any of John's more "mainstream" accomplishments including his early graduation from high school and his collegiate study, among many other things. Because I know John personally, and not through the media, which also had gross innacuracies, I will honor his biographical page by saying that whatever is written below does not represent him, he would probably not like to be represented on this website at all.*"

-The article doesn't sound negative to me. It says he's a guy who did graffiti and was arrested, which is all true. As for graduating early from high school and going to college (both of which are hardly unique feats), this needs some other source besides yourself, like "according to the Washington Post..." or whatever. Anybody could claim to know him and say whatever they want about him. If it's in an article somewhere, feel free to put it in here. Make the article better, don't complain about it.

"As an autobiography this entry fails even more"

-this article isn't an autobiography, unless John Tsombikos started it himself.

"it is without much factual basis in a number of ways the most important of which is that BORF is not one person"

-the article says this - "Shortly after his arrest, a group of young people held a rally in Dupont Circle, claiming that they were all Borf and that Tsombikos was one of their group." You can't say something is a fact if you can't verify it. Whether you knew him or not, we can't just take your word for it. Somebody else could say they knew him and he smelled bad, or whatever, but you wouldn't put that in the article.

Awiseman 14:24, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Article

[ L D Tibbins 1/1/06: hello, if you consider it relevant I wrote an article on the alleged Borf interview in the WP, mainly deprecating their article, available at http://feedhand.typepad.com/feedhand/2005/11/index.html sorry but I dont get the four 195.92.67.66 22:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC) mark thing, cheers LT]

Where did you see the thing about the cops and the I Saw You ad? That's very funny! Awiseman 15:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

The prose in this article is awful and needs a cleanup. --Sludge 14:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Seems ok to me. If you don't like it, fix it. Awiseman 21:13, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it somewhat ironic to be reverting vandalism on an article about a vandal? SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Quite ironic. Stupid people will worship stupid people... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.197.53 (talk • contribs)

Links to other articles

Someone deleted the redirect to here on Borf, and I restored it, since I have a feeling that the admin that deleted it didn't see the link between "John Tsombikos" and "Borf". I'm leaving the "orphaned" tag in place, though, since we still need more links. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Notability

I think notability most definitely isn't established, so if you can help demonstrate it, please do.

Here's how it looks to somebody over the pond:

• Guy gets some local infamy for vandalising walls
• Gets caught
• The vandalism and court case is mentioned in some local newspapers

Where's the notability in that? If I go out and tag some walls, get myself arrested, and have my local newspaper (The Gloucestershire Echo) cover it, do I get a Wikipedia article too? --kingboyk 16:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Several of my friends and I who are all from California know about him. And I'm not a graffiti artist and only have a passing interest in graffiti. I think he's pretty notable. Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 03:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Move to "Borf"?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

While the article definitely covers Tsombikos, the article also seems to move on to cover the Borf brigade beyond Tsombikos, and therefore it might be worthwhile to make "Borf" the main title, and make Tsombikos the redirect. Thoughts? SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hm, you make a valid point. --AW 16:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

So do you think that, after the AFD closes, we should make a requested move to change it? (We have to go through WP:RM to do it because "Borf" as a redirect was created independently.) SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

John Tsombikos → Borf — Article seems to cover the concept of "Borf" more than it does Tsombikos, and therefore should go on the "Borf" title. Currently, Borf is a redirect to John Tsombikos. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Since this is not a vote, please explain the reasons for your recommendation.

• Support. Tsombikos is not notable except for Borf; the article should be his associated moniker, not his real name. - Freechild 23:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. Borf isn't Tsombikos's 'moniker,' as this wasn't traditional 'tagging' graffiti. Tsombikos (according to the Washington Post article) was memorializing a friend who had committed suicide. An article at 'Borf' would need to be about the graffiti itself and not the person who created it. -- Vary | Talk 01:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, the article does not cover the 'concept' more than it does Tsombikos, especially if you discount the quotes from the 'comuniques' (the first of which in particular is plenty long enough to be a copyright violation.) The actual original content that's not directly about Tsombikos totals about five sentences. Not nearly enough to justify a change in topic, even without taking into account that the content on the 'borf brigade' group is very poorly sourced. -- Vary | Talk 13:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support. This article is about more than just Tsomikos. Borf involves more than one person and so it doesn't make sense to only talk about one memeber. As mentioned below by others, two articles isn't a good idea, so we should have one. And it should be at Borf. Further, someone is more likely to search for "Borf" than "John Tsombikos," and naming conventions say that in most cases we should try to name an article based on the most common name for the subject. So even if we don't want to change the focus of the article to the entire group, we should still move it. Also, "Borf Brigade" should redirect wherever we decide to keep this article. I don't want to do it now in case it gets moved, in which case there would be a double-redirect. Ungovernable Force^{Poll: Which religious text should I read?} 06:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support because there is Borf the guy, and Borf the group of people who also do graffiti. This article is about them both. --AW 15:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support Not only is Tsombikos only a candidate for article per WP:Notability bc of Borf, but Borf has become a meme larger than one individual. VanTucky 04:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments:

The original rationale behind changing from Tsombikos to Borf is because the Borf graffiti campaign appears to have moved beyond Tsombikos to a group that identifies as the "Borf Brigade". How would those opposing rectify leaving the title on John Tsombikos, while the movement which is Borf seems to have moved beyond him? SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

If anyone thinks we need an article at 'Borf', moving some of this article's content there would, of course, be appropriate. I wouldn't oppose a new article at 'Borf,' but I do oppose moving this article when that move would require a change in subject. This article, as it is now, should not be located at 'Borf' because it's about the guy who created the graffiti originally, not about the graffiti itself or its inspiration. -- Vary | Talk 02:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the article would certainly need to be adjusted to shift some of the focus onto the Borf campaign rather than on Tsombikos. Looking at the article, though, the only major adjustments would be to the introduction, and maybe a little reframing of the section on Tsombikos's arrest, trial, and sentencing. By and large, it wouldn't require that much work, since it already is more Borf than Tsombikos.

Now I would oppose splitting out a second article for Borf specifically. As Freechild mentioned, John Tsombikos is not particularly notable outside of his Borf work. To separate Tsombikos from Borf in Wikipedia would, in my opinion, make a strange, unnatural split. I could also see it getting merged back together in the future because one is so entwined with the other. Depending on how it would go back together, it could comprise an "illegal" page move.

Otherwise, though, by shifting to the Borf title, I see a greater creative potential. It would allow us to expound further on Borf without veering off the topic of Tsombikos specifically, especially since Tsombikos is banned from DC, and the announcement that Tsombikos was "purged" from the Borf movement. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Many people with wiki bios are notable for one thing and only one thing, so saying he's not notable- other than for the thing that makes him notable - is a little silly. And we're not here to be 'creative,' remember. The fact that someone somewhere announced that Tsombikos was 'purged' from the 'movement' doesn't change the fact that he - and not whoever decided to throw him out - has recived a respectable amount of press coverage.

Do we have any reliable sources citing the 'movement,' other than the pictures from other cities posted on the DCist? This article, on John Tsombikos, has survived two AFD's already, based on the coverage of him and his actions, not on the actions of others who may or may not be copying his tags. If someone feels that they can properly cite and support an article on a 'borf movement,' then they should do so, but if the plan is to move this reasonably good article to a new location to prop up a weaker article, that's not a good idea. If we can create a good article on Borf right now, we should do it. If we can't, we should wait until we can. -- Vary | Talk 13:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

First of all, some clarification. When I said "creative", I was referring to expanding the article, as in creating content, not so much as "getting creative" as that term is usually used. Now, as for the rest, it all kind of falls in line. With the article on the Tsombikos title, the Borf Brigade and such is veering off topic - a big tangent, so to speak. Thus technically it shouldn't be in there at all with Tsombikos on the title. Under "Borf", it fits right in as a continuation of the concept beyond Tsombikos. I'm sure that with a little digging, we can locate a reliable source for the Borf Brigade. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

If the 'brigade' can be sourced, then source it and find a place to put it. If it can't be sourced, it shouldn't be in any article. But just because the unsourced content is out of place at its current location, it does not follow that the sourced content should be moved. The content about the movement needs to be sourced before it can be used to support a move that is effectively overruling past consensus.

And, once again, many people who have articles on wikipedia are only notable for one reason. "He's only notable because of Borf" is not a valid argument. He was found notable enough for an article at two separate AFDs. Not only that, but all of the cited content currently in this article is about him. What exactly would be the harm in moving any properly cited off-topic material to its own article? -- Vary | Talk 05:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The Borfyou.com site mentions the Borf brigade, as do some DCist posts and various DC blog posts. I realize blogs aren't always reliable sources though. This one seems to be the most legit [1]. --AW 16:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Associated Content is not considered a reliable source, either. It's user-generated, so it would be on about the same level as a blog. -- Vary | Talk 17:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

And, in fact, the article does not cover the 'concept' more than it does Tsombikos, especially if you discount the quotes from the 'comuniques' (the first of which in particular is plenty long enough to be a copyright violation.) The actual original content that's not directly about Tsombikos totals about five sentences. Not nearly enough to justify a change in topic.

I've put 'unsourced' templates at the top of the last two sections, neither of which cites a single source, reliable or no. This guy was big news here in DC not to long ago; some DC-focused columnist somewhere has to have done a follow-up if the 'movement' is still so active.

I do think that registering borfyou.com in Bernardine Dohrn's name is a little over the top. -- Vary | Talk 14:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This article has been renamed from John Tsombikos to Borf as the result of a move request. The article will need to be adjusted after being moved, to make it clear that the graffiti phenomenon is the main topic, not the person who made it. --Stemonitis 06:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Fox 5 link

I've stuck this link [2] into the links section for now, but it does provide a reliable source for the later Borf stuff going on. I'll work it into the article later. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Borf show miscellanea

First of all, I went to the Borf show, and got lots of photos of that. I'll be putting a lot of that up in Commons when I get a chance.

Also, has anyone found a reliable source for the proceeds from the sale of art at the show paying off all of Tsombikos's restitution? I got that information from Chuck Burgundy directly, but of course, my word is not a reliable source, and I'd like to see it in print. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Grammar

I saw that some people are using the word tag incorrectly. This it a tag: [[3]] and this is a graffiti piece [[4]] not a tag. --Evanw 18:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent point. I called it "tag" because I couldn't think of how else to describe it. Especially since that particular Borf spot was legally on there. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Judge comments

I think adding some things from the Judges sentencing of Borf would be good. For example:

"You profess to despise rich people," she said. "You profess to despise the faceless, nameless forms of government that oppress. That's what you've become. That's what you are. You're a rich kid who comes into Washington and defaces property because you feel like it. It's not fair. It's not right."

"That's not artistic expression," she said. "That is not political expression. That is not grief therapy. That is vandalism."

"It's not about whether you want to express yourself," she said. "Washington, D.C., is not a playground that was built for your self-expression. It's a place where people, real people, live and care about their communities."

"You should have been walking out of the front door of this courtroom today," Leibovitz told him. "Unfortunately, I have come to the conclusion that you require more than that to impress upon you the seriousness of what you've done. Not because it's a wall, not because it's a building, not because it's a fixture in some abstract sense. But because of people."

And he must pay $12,000 in restitution, money that better not come out of his parents' bank accounts, the judge said. "In other words," she said, "not the bogus jobs that your father gives you in New York . . . a real job, going to work like the people you demean, earning it with paychecks and the sweat of your own brow."

"I want him to see what the inside of the D.C. jail looks like," she said, "because unlike every other person you've seen in my courtroom this morning, who have a ninth-grade education, who are drug-addicted, who have had childhoods the likes of which you could not conceive, you come from privilege and opportunity and seem to think that the whole world is just like McLean and just like East 68th Street. "Well," she said, "it's not." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.114.176.23 (talk) 16:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Source them to a reliable source, and perhaps they can be worked in. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I took them from the Washington Post. I think on this it is reliable.97.114.176.23 (talk) 15:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

That's pretty reliable, all right. Do you have the specific article and date, or a link to the article? This way, we can pin the exact citation to these passages. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

WP Feb. 10, 2006. Here is the link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/09/AR2006020902273.html97.114.176.23 (talk) 16:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Much appreciated! I can see this getting worked into the article, too. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:34, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Borf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081022205249/http://www.newsobserver.com:80/928/story/230481.html to http://www.newsobserver.com/928/story/230481.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061019085916/http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/07/24/a_borf-in_at_du.php to http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/07/24/a_borf-in_at_du.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:46, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Borf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081022205254/http://www.newsobserver.com:80/928/story/324689.html to http://www.newsobserver.com/928/story/324689.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Borf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060303091459/http://visualresistance.org:80/wordpress/?p=94 to http://www.visualresistance.org/wordpress/?p=94

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Borf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20130415031306/http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/139148/index.php to http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/139148/index.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://visualresistance.org/wordpress/?p=94

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Borf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://dcist.com/2005/04/borfs_magnum_op.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070407131425/http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/04/13/borf_on_the_wes.php to http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/04/13/borf_on_the_wes.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061019065524/http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/09/07/the_borf_saga_c.php to http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/09/07/the_borf_saga_c.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070214062855/http://www.dcist.com/archives/2006/10/12/borf_goes_globa.php to http://www.dcist.com/archives/2006/10/12/borf_goes_globa.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081102213533/http://dcist.com/2008/06/26/the_house_that_borf_built_is_closin.php to http://dcist.com/2008/06/26/the_house_that_borf_built_is_closin.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:27, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

The Last Post Wins! Borf

Please make changes to this article to reflect the entity 'Lord Borf'/'Lorde Borf' found on [|this] thread of 'Terraria Community Forums'. Thanks! Realicraft (talk) 00:43, 16 June 2018 (UTC