Talk:Chuck Klosterman

Untitled

Chuck Klosterman was born Charles John Klosterman son of William John Klosterman, Sr. and Florence Irene Pikarski. He is listed as being born on June 5th, 1972 in Wilkin County, Minnesota in the Minnesota Birth Index. Whats your source that he was born on a farm in Wyndmere?

i was curious as to why the jacket of his book says he is from Akron. But in the book he visits North Dakota, where he says he grew up.... Brockmanah 17:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

He previously lived in Ohio, and probably resided there when the book (which one?) came out. As for the Wyndmere versus Minnesota claim, from his books we know he did grow up in Wyndmere, and a quick look at a map shows that it's a very small town a few miles from the Minnesota border, and Wilkin County. It's quite feasible his parents went to a hospital in Minnesota when he was born, due to lack of a better facility in their small town. Jkonrath 01:11, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Birthplace/Hometown

I think he was likely born in Breckenridge in Wilkin County. I'm the one who put his birthplace as Wilkin County up. It's in the Minnesota Birth Records Index, and aside from that, he's actually a distant relation of mine (a 3rd cousin, shall we say), being related to my grandma, so I know who his parents were, and thus know the listing in the birth record index (Charles John Klosterman) is Chuck Klosterman. My mom grew up in the same county, and she was also born in Breckenridge (as were all the kids in her family) . It was (and still is) quite common for many parents in Richland County, ND to drive to Breckenridge, since the area is extremely rural. At the time he was born, and today still the only nearest hospital with obstetrics to areas of Richland County is in Breckenridge in Wilkin County. There used to be one in the Breckenridge's twin town of Wahpeton, North Dakota but it is no longer in operation. Most people born from Richland County, born in the 1950s and onward were born across the border in Breckenridge. I hope that clears up any questions as to his birthplace/hometown

Critisicm in Gawker

Is the criticism of his Snakes on a Plane column really worthy of being included in this article? I know it's a popular blog, but the whole matter seems kind of trivial.

Is the above anonymous Klosterman himself? An encyclopedia isn't a fansite. Neutral pov means negative items may be included if noteworthy. I believe it is.BabuBhatt 17:39, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I really think the criticism is entirely unnecessary. This isn't a NPOV issue, but rather a relvance issue. DaveyE 19:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, I am not opposed to its removal based on a discussion, rather than with no explanation. Why isn't it relevant? BabuBhatt 20:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I've reread the entry and I think the problem is that it is based around Gawker.com instead of around klosterman (the subject of this article, right?). Perhaps a rewrite where Chuck's original article is mentioned first, and gawker's reaction to it is mentioned as secondary to that? Also I think we should consider Gawker.com's importance as well. Can any random E-zine or blogger be included in wiki if it criticizes someone? --DaveyE 20:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I like your idea. But Gawker.com has an article, it's not really a random ezine. BabuBhatt 17:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the wiki entry on gawker.com sort of backs up my argument here...What level of importance is necessary in a blog to constitute as "enough" to include on wikipedia. If I post a criticism of Chuck on my blog (regardless of how pithy!!), is it worthy of being posted on his Wikipedia biography? If not, why does gawker.com's criticism get posted? Is it the number of readers? the fact that gawker itself has a wiki entry? --DaveyE 05:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that Gawker is at all non-notable (and I happen to like Gawker); I just think this particular criticism is. It would be one thing for the NY Times or Newsweek to so vocally criticize somebody; a popular blog (no matter how blog) doesn't have the same journalistic pull, especially considering how often they criticize people in this fashion. -- Kicking222 19:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Name pronunciation

I saw Chuck at the Brattle Theater in Cambridge, MA a few weeks ago and he started out by saying that his name was pronounced KLOH-ster-man, not KLAH-ster-man as he had been introduced (and I had previously thought it was pronounced). This might be a useful fact to include in this entry, but I don't know how to enter pronunciations.

These seem to concur, though it may be his choice to pronounce it that way:

The Tim Show Blog
Article at The Phoenix

BabuBhatt 20:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Kloh-ster-man is how it is pronounced in German, as that is how the word "Kloster" is pronounced... Kloh-ster. Some branches of the Klosterman family have started pronouncing it Klahsterman.... but most, including mine, have stuck with Kloh-ster-man

I was at that reading (read that Phoenix article- the guy who he calls "fucking crazy" is me!!), and even though he says Kloh-sterman, and I believe it to be Kloh-sterman, I've followed him for so long that I can't help but say Klah-sterman. Still, I think enough people make this error that there's no reason not to include the proper pronounciation. -- Kicking222 19:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree there's no need to include the pronunciation in the article. But it's common courtesy to at least try to pronounce someone's name correctly. It's the correct (linguistically) pronunciation.

Of Note

Does Klosterman have a webpage, official MySpace or blog? It seems strange that he only has the middle one (and that's kinda iffy) Doc Strange 12:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

According to him during his Q&A in Pittsburgh on July 11, 2007, no.

That's a huge suprise... Doc Strange 20:23, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

"Ironically?"

I fail to see the irony in the fact that Klosterman is teaching American Studies in Leipzig. As far as I can tell, it seems like the exact opposite of irony that a man whose career to this point has been mainly focused on American popular culture should be hired to teach a class on American popular culture.

I could be missing something here, I suppose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.145.154.40 (talk) 02:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

He's engaged since Halloween 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.31.230.128 (talk) 06:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

What's with the set of cards?

Answer: it does read oddly, but is explained...--Jack Upland (talk) 08:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chuck Klosterman. 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/20150611013619/http://gawker.com/550882/chuck-klosterman to http://gawker.com/550882/chuck-klosterman
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150611013619/http://gawker.com/550882/chuck-klosterman to http://gawker.com/550882/chuck-klosterman

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) 10:25, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chuck Klosterman. 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/20110430080618/http://www.espnmediazone3.com/us/2011/04/28/writers_editors_join_espn/ to http://www.espnmediazone3.com/us/2011/04/28/writers_editors_join_espn/

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) 04:24, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Removed quote from the Adult Swim cartoon

I've replaced a quote that was supposed to have been from the Adult Swim cartoon, the one in which Carl explained why Klosterman will no longer be appearing on the show. I watched all the episodes available (the episodes' poster says that "Almost All Episodes are present") and I did not find the quote; beyond that, the quote was from an episode in which Klosterman did not himself appear. I have replaced that quote with another, which I have reliably sourced and accurately cited. —catsmoke ^talk 09:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)