Talk:Magibon/Archive 1

Help needed
I'd like to expand and improve this article. I think that I can say that I am one of the best connoisseurs of Magibon and her videos, but I do not have much experience with writing articles for Wikipedia. There is also a lot of disinformation about Magibon on the internet, but I think that I am able to separate the wheat from the chaff. We have also to be aware that this article is not vandalized again. What happened yesterday was no coincidence. Magibon is the target of severe cyber-bully attacks. It might be necessary to protect this article. So, if anyone wants to expand this article and has factual questions, plz contact me via my talkpage, and maybe we can work together. --Firithfenion (talk) 05:31, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure where to go with this page, but I just blanked most of it. It states repeated supposed facts about this young, living, girl. No sources. Not to be lazy, but I'm not going to sift through a myriad of blogs and youtube videos to start making guesses about what nationality she is or who is flying her where. For anything to be added regarding this subject, it needs a reliable source. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 18:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Firith, if you are wary about writing the article yourself, a way you could help is by cutting and pasting links to reliable sources regarding information about the topic directly to this talk page. The problem with Magibon is 99% of the "info" regarding her is either false or comes from a shoddy source. The hard part in writing this is finding sources. A good place to start would be any news pieces done about here. Avoid: youtube videos, blogs, fan sites. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 19:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it was not quite fair to blank it. What was wrong with it so far? It was not perfect, but it was a start. For example, I would not have used that cliché phrase that she "stares" into a camera. Staring means looking without much movement of the eyes and that is not what she does. "Silent" videos would IMHO be a better and more neutral description. "Supposed facts.. No sources". What do you mean? The Youtube statistics? You can find them in her profile on her YT-Channel. The fact that she is a member of the YT Partner program? I linked to this YT site where she is listed in the YT-Partner program. My description of her videos? Do you doubt that the videos that I described exist? Shall I make a link to every described video? The songs that I mentioned? YT has videos of the original singer, you can compare it with the songs she sings and see if I am right or wrong. "Avoid videos, blogs and fansites". I have just checked the other articles about Youtuber and I think it is not quite fair to apply double standards here. Most of the other articles - maybe with the exception of Happyslip, Brookers and TheHill88 - are not better sourced. The problem is that her appearance was in Japan on GYAO, Fuji-TV, TBS-Radio and 2 x Japanese Playboy and I do not speak Japanese. Much has been translated by fans and supporters and I have seen these translations and know the people who made them, but unfortunately these translations are not of much use in Wikipedian sense.--Firithfenion (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and BTW it is really annoying that this little troll from Encyclopedia Dramatica is still here. I predict that we will get further problems with him. He even had the balls to boast with his yesterdays vandalization on the discussion page of the hateful Magibon article on ED. Look what he writes there:
 * "Magibon Wikipedia article
 * lol I have vandalized it. expecting B& followed by a rape spider from Wiki admin. lulz.(Arguecat3 07:55, 19 June 2008 (CDT)) Also, I think we should plan a raid of it to subtly troll the article, making minor changes until it is lulzy. Yes? No? (Arguecat3 07:55, 19 June 2008 (CDT))"

It makes me sick that this troll is still here. --Firithfenion (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Since Magibon's celebrity derives from YouTube, it seems unfair to disallow YouTube videos as sources. Her trip to Japan and her media appearances there were thoroughly documented by Gyao entertainment, as was Gyao's visit to her home in the US which preceded her trip. Unfortunately, for those outside Japan, they cannot be viewed at the Gyao website (http://www.gyao.jp/news/magibon/), just at YouTube. For the record, Magibon has been referred to by both the NY Times in one of their blogs and Scientific American in a podcast. No hard information about her is provided by either source, but the mere fact that she was referenced by them attests to her bona-fides as an internet celebrity. It would be very unfortunate if the efforts of one or more individuals to vandalize the Magibon Wiki entry resulted in overly stringent standards for sourcing, especially given the internet-based nature of her celebrity. Gefiltefisheater (talk) 01:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * To all: I don't like blanking most of the page, and I avoided doing it initially. When I realized the page was more of one person's report on Magibon, along with supposed facts that aren't properly sourced, I had to remove it. Firith - the issue you are having (well not necessarily you, but the subject) is using primary sources for things, that have questionable reliability. When it comes to Magibon, her notability is suggested by her video count on youtube, but in terms of information regarding her, notability would continue to be confirmed if there were reliable sources reporting on the various things that were in the article. Most of the youtube celeb articles are horrible in terms of sourcing. I am not trying to apply double standards, I simply take one article at a time. Translations are not to be automatically discounted, but it is often hard for them to be considered reliable in terms of a source. Unless "hard information" can be documented by third party reliable sources it shouldn't be added to the article. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 16:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

POV and weasel words in the video review section
I would have enjoyed editing this but for a strange reason I am unable to... As anyways... Here are some edits that I would suggest the person in charge look up to...

Magibon has uploaded a large number of videos to YouTube
 * Please clarify! What does one mean by a large number? A 1000? 5000? 100000?

she spends most of her time just staring 
 * Isn't that kind of weaselly? Do consider these other alternatives: eye, focus, gape, gawk , gawp , gaze, glare, glaze, look, ogle, peer, squint, watch...

she received so much positive feedback that she decided to do more videos of this kind.
 * Citation needed.

In some of her videos, Magibon speaks Japanese, reads from a Japanese grammar book, or sings songs of Japanese popstars like Tomoko Kawase (Bloomin'), W (Matsu Wa) and Masayoshi Yamazaki (Boon Boon).
 * What's the notability of having these mentions in an encyclopedia. Seems to me like that a loud call of POV problems... Also, Please cite them.

Magibon is a member of the Youtube Partner Program.
 * I think this last sentence (being the most notable compared to what of the rest...) should be moved to the top section. Also please leave a citation.

She has appeared multiple times (non-nude pictorial interviews only) in the Japanese edition of Playboy magazine.
 * What's with the comment "non-nude pictorial interviews only" ? Seems to me like it's very POV. POV in the sense that someone is making the subject appear innocent. Is appearing nude on PlayBoy necessarily a bad thing?
 * Also do consider changing the word "multiple" to "several".

Hetelllies (talk)

some answers
"What does one mean by a large number?" Hm, okay but we have to consider the fact that Magibon has removed some of her videos (I know of at least 13) so the number of videos you can find on her channel is not identical with the total number of videos she has uploaded on Youtube. Okay, maybe we can put it this way. "Magibon has currently 55 videos on her channel." I hope you can live with that.--Firithfenion (talk) 19:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * She has? I wonder why she would do such a thing. And I can live with that.--Hetelllies (talk)
 * I changed this to "by July 2008, over 50", as an exact figure without a date becomes obsolete every time she posts a new video. I suggest updating this periodically with a roundish number and month. If you want to go back and figure out when she hit 50, and update the month to reflect that, I have no objections, but I didn't feel it necessary to be so precise here. At the same time, I changed the word several to many in reference to her "無" series, as there are currently 21 videos in that series out of a total of 56, a significant proportion. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 13:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

"She spends most of her time just staring". I completely agree that this is not very appropriate, it is just a repetition of the cliché phrase that she is "The girl staring into the camera". My alternative suggestion: "In which she spends most of her time silently looking into the camera."--Firithfenion (talk) 19:37, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * How about "silent model" or something? But then again, models are silent, most of the time. Perhaps a comparison with generic youtube vlogs that have gathered similar in amounts of popularity. Also, Just because everyone says that all she does is stare, doesn't necessitates us of having that published out.--Hetelllies (talk)

"Whats the notability of having these mentions in an encyclopedia?". The notability is that this chapter is called "Video overview". This is what I try to do in this sentence. I try to give a short overview. If I would not mention these "not-silent" videos, the reader would get an distorted idea what her videos are about. --Firithfenion (talk) 19:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No comment... I can't think of something proper to say.--Hetelllies (talk)

"She received so much positive feedback.." This is a citation from her Playboy Interview. I have read the translated version by Forryga. She also mentioned it in her GYAO-Interview. --Firithfenion (talk) 19:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, The thing is she mentioned it. They were interviewing her, and she said that of herself. So, I think an "according to her" should be included just so we get the facts right.--Hetelllies (talk)

"Youtube Partner - citation needed". The citation I found for this fact is the listing of the Youtube Partners. It is link Nr. 6 in the References. I've just updated that link, because her position has changed. Now, if you open this link of Youtube Partners, you'll find that MRirian is listed there among the YT-Partners. --Firithfenion (talk) 19:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Firith, would you mind putting these citations into the prose with footnotes? Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 20:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, admitting I don't know much about this girl, is her actual name really not public? This seems unlikely if she is so famous in Japan. Article reads quite silly because we keep referring to her by her web alias... Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 20:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Gwynand, it is widely known that her real first name is Margaret or short Maggie and she Japanized Maggi to Magi. However, Magi is very shy and she did not want to see her name published for a long time. After her Playboy interviews however, it could not be prevented that her name became known. The Japanese Wikipedia has her full name, but I can not find a source that we could use (Or we refer to Japanese Wikipedia, what about that?) I agree that the article reads a bit strange if we have to refer to her web alias but what can I do? Everyone knows that her first name is Maggie but if you ask me for a so-called reliable source... it gets difficult. I am also not quite sure if she would feel pleasant if her full name is published. She is very shy and a bit introverted and still has problems with lots of stalker and weirdos who desperately trying to find out as many as possible about her in order to publish it online.
 * I am also not sure if we could/should mention this strange magibon.com] incident, where a weird "videomaker" from sweden registered for the domain Magibon.com and published strange horror- and stalker videos on this site. This led to a lot of accusations and rumors about Magi because some people thought she was somehow involved in that strange site. --Firithfenion (talk) 20:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I'm 100% with you that without a great reliable source we shouldn't give her name, I'm just surprised at the difficulty in finding one. I tried myself, couldn't get anything real. I'll keep my eyes open. Good job improving the article. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 21:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that website has little if not no value of notability, all we have against that website is rumors and what it be. Anyways, as for me, I think that's nothing more than a publicity stunt, and one of the reasons why it's thought notable in the sense that it was brought up here was that, there is little else to go about with the subject of the article. So any scrape of entertainment or "flesh eating maggots", as depicted in the magibon.com website, calls for serious arousal in terms of notability. I wonder if you understood what I wrote. --Hetelllies (talk)

"What's with the comment "non-nude pictorial interviews only" ? Seems to me like it's very POV". When I look at someone, and I say: "You are not nude" than it is a fact, not a POV. "Is appearing nude on PlayBoy necessarily a bad thing?". No. Who said that?. "Also do consider changing the word "multiple" to "several"." (X) done --Firithfenion (talk) 21:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstood the question, what I was trying to say was that, why have it in brackets. Correct me if I am wrong, isn't brackets used for commenting. There isn't a need for commenting, Is there? As to who said "being nude on playboy is a bad thing", I think got the wrong point over,sorry. Let me rephrase it, based on how I feel towards brackets and the 'only' word, I had the funny impression that a past editor thought it of most importance to highlight (in a bracketing and adding the word only) to convey the message that the subject of the article is still to be considered innocent because appearing nude publicly in his or her culture, is consider shameful, a sin, derogatory? Or to draw it from another perspective, doesn't think too highly of models who bare all.(Models baring all are considered art in certain cultures, but in some, the sole thought of a women being naked is considered a sin.)
 * Oh and when you said, it's a fact, and not a POV, I think you could still be proven wrong. "you are not nude" could be all... It could be a comment which could be a POV of your culture, it could be a fact, it could also be a lie. And sorry if I made you look bad. I am a bad editor... --Hetelllies (talk)
 * Hello Hetellies. Don't worry, you didn't make me feel or look bad. I have no problems with positive criticism. About the brackets: I wasn't the author of that sentence, but I agree with the content of this sentence. Maybe I would not have used brackets, but brackets are not only for comments. They are also used to give additional information. About being nude or not: No, I don't think you could prove me wrong with that. You could only start a completely useless and endless philosophical debate similar like the Chicken or the egg problem. ;-) --Firithfenion (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it needs to be stated somehow that the appearance in Playboy was not a nude spread, as the assumption of many familiar with the magazine (assuming the Japanese one is similar to the US version) will be that it was, which is not fair on the subject of the article. Whether to include this inside brackets or in the main flow of the sentence is a matter of style, and I don't know if Wikipedia has a policy. It is incidental to the main idea being conveyed, so brackets seem appropriate to me.  --Fugu Alienking (talk) 13:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The Intro section
young woman
 * Is it possible to have a birth date written out?

Magibon has been invited to and flown to Japan for interviews on television shows and magazines. Also... Please cite this.

On another thought, shouldn't the official site be of the youtube link? After all, Is it not there that the supposed popularity is thought to have been originated. Hetelllies (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

MRirian FAQ
I just want to mention that I created a MRirian FAQ some time ago. This FAQ contains my personal point of view, however, some of the co-authors of this article might find it helpful to read. I created this FAQ because I was frustrated that it was almost impossible to find reliable information about Magi. If you Google you get 100.000th of hits but almost everything is useless, rumors, conspiracy theories, insulting, parodies - or stuff written in Japanese. When I created this FAQ it was AFAIK the only somehow reliable source. I know that Magibon has seen this FAQ and she wrote me a mail in which she thanked me and said that she likes the design, but she did not mention any mistakes, so I think that this FAQ does not contain major mistakes although I wrote it from my personal point of view. http://home.arcor.de/firithfenion --Firithfenion (talk) 14:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting info... just, as the saying goes, unreliable. She weighs 86 pounds? How would anyone know that? Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 19:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Gwynand. "How would anyone know that?" Very simply, because they asked her when they made the second interview for Japanese Playboy. Here is a video which allows you to browse in the Playboy magazine. When you watch it till the end, you will see a scan of the site where it is stated that she weighs 39kg. And the guy who made the video translated these infos at the end: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raT0lUfqoEw --Firithfenion (talk) 20:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I did not put any infos in the FAQ that I found unreliable. Some infos may not be reliable according to Wikipedia standards, but the are reliable according to my common sense which means that I have reasons to trust them (partly because I know some of the people who provided them). --Firithfenion (talk) 20:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * So, the info about her birthday, being the 09. August 1986 is provided in that print magazine and also in the Japanese Wikipedia. If that seems reliable enough, we could provide this info too. --Firithfenion (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Where is the link to the translation? That needs to be just as reliable as the magazine. Also, in regards to weight, we wouldn't take a person's statement regarding their own weight as fact. Weights change daily, up or down, if anything, it could be stated that "at one point Magibon claimed she weighed 86lbs"... which would be totally irrelevant to this article anyways. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 17:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Gwynand, you can see the translation in English at the end of the video. I 100% agree with you that the weight is irrelevant to our article, I just mentioned the weight because you asked me how I knew it. I also agree with Hetellies that it would be cool if we could provide her date of birth, because this would make this article look more professional. The date of birth would also not violate the private sphere of Magibon, because she always pointed out that she is 21 although some people tried to start rumors that she is either a 14 year old who pretends to be 21 or a 26 year old who pretends to be 21. For example: On Yahoo exists a profile of a fake-Mririan with the Yahoo ID MRirian who claims to be 26. Magibon confirmed to me that she is not identical with this person, it is one of many fake-profiles of her. --Firithfenion (talk) 20:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Popularity in Japan
I have added the info that she is especially popular in Japan. This is given by the fact that she is all-time #1 in Japan. This helps the reader to understand why an american girl has been invited to Japan and not to any other country like Italy or...Zimbabwe. The reference for this Youtube Statistic can be found in her YT-profile, therefore I put a reference link. The link is factual correct, however, I admit that the statistics are difficult to find on that page, but that's not my fault. If you want to see that she is all-time #1 in Japan, go to her Youtube Profile page. On the left side you'll find 3 all-time global honors (#58,#26 and #53) below this, there is a small link: (more). Click on this link to expand the list and to see all of the honors, including the all-time #1 position in Japan that I mentioned. It is a bit tricky to find, but it is there. --Firithfenion (talk) 09:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Now I have changed the reference link for her number 1 position. Instead of making a reference to her YT-Profile, (where most readers of this article will not be able to detect the full list of honors) I provided a link to the Japanese all-time toplist of most viewed channels. Everyone can see on first sight that she is on #1, even if he is not able to understand the words. The reference looks much more professional this way. --Firithfenion (talk) 09:46, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Firithfenion, I highly doubt this girl is the most popular thing in all of Japan; they invited her over b/c they were curious as to why she has such a huge interest in japan, and why she does what she does. That does not make her #1 of all time anywhere. Also, a huge portion of Magi's fanbase is actually outside of Japan as opposed to inside. If you say she is the #1 of all time Japan on YOUTUBE, then its more feasible. I know that you mention youtube later on in your paragraph, but your first sentence is misleading. (Yariau neko (talk) 13:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC))
 * He does say its on youtube, which I left in as a sourced fact, but removed the further sentence about her popularity. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 13:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed that he mentioned youtube; but it seems firithfenion is a big fan of Maggie; anything he contributes should be checked since he might tend to be a little biased. Other than that, he is doing an OK job at this article. (Yariau neko (talk) 14:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC))

fixed a strange problem with links
I noticed that there was a strange problem with the Youtube links. My first reference is to the Japanese Youtube All-Time bestlist, as source that Magibon is actually the all-time number one in Japan. Unfortunately, when you first visit the Japanese link, the other Youtube links do not work properly, because watching the Japanese Youtube link, switches your browser-settings constantly to Japanese Youtube, so if you visit the second link afterwards, it redirects you to the Japanese page, which is not identical with the global page. After some experiments, I found a way to change the links that they force you in the right language version and avoid an unwanted redirect, even if you have visited Japanese Youtube first. --Firithfenion (talk) 23:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

allegations of hoax.
What about her being a hoax? I keep hearing this one over and over again, but I think they debunked it as a myth (so it was a hoax that she's a hoax!). I wanna know more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.245.164.108 (talk) 00:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The rumor that Magi is a kind of "hoax" (similar like lonelygirl15) has been invented by some simpletons shortly after the site magibon.com appeared. If you make a simple Whois-lookup you can find out that this site is not registered by Magi, but by a guy from Sweden, a weird videomaker with an obsession to violent horror clips. So some people thought that Magi was somehow connected with this wacko and the whole thing is a kind of "viral marketing campaign" for an upcoming Japanese horror movie. (Similar like the The Blair Witch Project ). Considering the fact that Magi is almost 2 and a half year on Youtube and has been in contact with the Japanese Playboy and even visited Japan, it needs an insane amount of paranoia still to believe in this ridiculous idea. --Firithfenion (talk) 20:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

MRirian playboy
I would just like to point out that this girl has appeared in the magazine twice, yet this Wikipedia article states that she has appeared Several times. Several usually entails appearing 3+ times, not only twice. (Yariau neko (talk) 19:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC))
 * You are correct. I have changed this sentence and I've also removed the brackets that Hetellies criticized. :-)--Firithfenion (talk) 21:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Which Playboy did she appear in? The Weekly or Monthly version? I changed the wikilink to Weekly Playboy, as the external link is to that, and it was certainly not the US version of Playboy, which is what the previous wikilink linked to. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 13:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I found the answer to my own question via some videos posted on YouTube. Both articles were in Weekly Playboy. I'm not sure the term "non-nude pictorial interview" is appropriate, as they appear to be mostly text with a few B&W screen grabs from her videos to illustrate them. My interpretation of a pictorial interview is one where full color pictures dominate the interview. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 13:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Without a source stating this either way, I would agree with removing "pictorial" from the article. "Non-nude" is enough to clarify, and "interview" is descriptive enough. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 13:28, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a short one... "Two times" wouldn't that be better replaced by the word "twice" --Hetelllies (talk) 05:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I changed pictorial to illustrated, to reflect the fact that the photos are not the main focus of the article. I think just "non-nude interview" is a little strange without something there to indicate that there are pictures, and dropping the non-nude might give the wrong impression to people familiar with the monthly Playboy magazine. I also changed two times to twice as suggested, and thought that the sentence would be a little clearer if reworded to "appeared twice in ... with ..." instead of "appeared twice with ... in ..." so boldly did that too. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 11:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Added real name
For the record, her name is ..., not Maggie. (Yariau neko (talk) 14:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC))
 * I see no reliable source. It is controversial to add the full name of a living person if he is not or poorly sourced. --Firithfenion (talk) 17:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Umm, there is no reliable source with Maggie being the birth name either. However, it does fit under a web alias. I suggest a do away with birth name. As the first sentence of the article suggested, Magibon is the alias of a young woman ..., brings forward the thought that little is known about of Magibon and that she being young and a woman is a high point of notability and that her alias is Magibon.Hetelllies (talk) 00:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Birth name removed. Maggie is not suitable there, though her full name would be if there was a reliable source for it. Her web aliases are MRirian and Magibon, so doesn't fit there either. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 11:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hetelllies: "brings forward the thought that little is known about Magibon and that she being young and a woman is a high point of notablitiy..." Yes, little is know about Magibon. This fact is not contradictory to her notability methinks. Little is also known about a person called "Mona Lisa", we do not have a birth date, exact birthplace, real name.. (not even the gender is clear).. however she is notable enough to have an article on WP. The reason for her notablility is her influence, not the amount of personal details about her private life. Okay, Magi is not as influential as Mona Lisa (at least not yet) but she has a total view of more than 37 Mio to her videos, this is more than the population of Australia. Not so bad methinks. --Firithfenion (talk) 17:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OOps Bad writing on my behalf, I think you have slightly misunderstood as to what I was atempting to say, I was actually questioning the need to have a sentence "young and a woman" at the very beginning of the article. It seems like a highlight. A major point that must be conveyed in utter most urgency. So, it gives me an impression about that is what the article is all about. Sure there is the Internet Celebrity part that I didn't mention. But what need is there to convey the message that she's young and a woman? How is that relevant to the article?Hetelllies (talk) 07:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Regarding Mona Lisa. A simple answer to your question would be that Mona Lisa has her own article in other published and sourcable encyclopedias. That sort about satisfies wikipedia policy on having that article. On another note, the wikipedia mona lisa article is not that of a living person biography or that of a dead person. What is mentioned is that Mona Lisa is a painting, an object and that is a different thing from a person, is it not? Sure there is a sub topic within the article that mentions the possible person being potraited but that is near irrelevant as to the main topic. The introductory paragraph says it all. Hetelllies (talk) 08:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Going back to Magibon, The Magibon intro starts of with, Magibon is the alias of a young woman who became an Internet celebrity on the video-sharing website YouTube, which she joined on February 26, 2006 and on which she uses the username MRirian. What relevance is the date of her joining youtube? Perhaps it is relevant but is it that important to have it as part of the first paragraph? As for what is her username,that too ,I doubt if most people would be bothered to want to know that kind of fact.(I think I have gone a little off, let me reel myself back in.) Back to what I was on about, Magibon has it is described is a young woman. Young woman doesn't tend to be a young woman forever. Therefore it is unencyclopedic(weasel wordish) to describe her as a young woman, even it be true, because her being a young woman doesn't really relate as to what made her of notable value. Hetelllies (talk) 08:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hetelllies: "A simple answer to your question would be that Mona Lisa has her own article in other published and sourcable encyclopedias." This creates a paradox. If any encyclopedia has the rule that it should only mention people who have their own article in another encyclopedia, it would make it impossible to add new people to the encyclopedia because every new entry has to appear for the first time in an encyclopedia without being mentioned elsewhere before. --Firithfenion (talk) 14:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Umm My bad, I said a "simple answer". I didn't meant it as a general rule. That would as you no doubt said, create a 'paradox'. A complicated answer to explain my answer would be that Mona Lisa is a work of art by Leonardo Da Vinci(Read the article about him,you will probably understand his significance). You will probably note that he is someone of note worthy. he has done his contribution to humanity. We study about him in our text books(A weaselish statement ). Put that a side, we have the painting he painted, the list of why it is notable is endless(very weaselly), read Mona Lisa, do note that people actually pay to see Mona Lisa and Mona Lisa is a cultural asset, she is worth a lot. And once again the wiki article of Mona Lisa, is that of the painting not the person (note the categories). The person who is potraited in the painting Mona Lisa, doesn't have her personal article (she isn't noteworthy, though she may have books written about her) . The Magibon article, seems to me, to be about the person, a biography, a LPB. And in case you forget, I assumed your question to be about why Mona Lisa deserves to have an article in Wikipedia. Hetelllies (talk) 10:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sigh, Hetelllies, it seems that your only contribution to this article is that you try to make it more difficult as it already is. It seems you want to prove that Wikipedia rules can be interpreted in an ad-absurdum way that makes it impossible to create any kind of article. Have you ever created an article? If so I would like to see if it fulfills all the criteria you try to apply here. Your own messages are full of socalled weasel words too. --Firithfenion (talk) 14:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well it could seem that way, but you must admit I have made it slightly more wikipediaish. I don't want to prove that (refering to what you said that I was attempting to prove). The rules I think are what that keeps wikipedia great. Great civillizations (in my textbook) all have rules, it is in this rules that they usually prosper. It's like the American Constitution. We look at it in a Greek proud way. Arrgh and yeah I am very weasel wordish in my messages. I use my POV to carry my views of NPOV across. If it's any consolation. I'll try backing off, okay?Hetelllies (talk) 10:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hetelllies: "Young woman doesn't tend to be a young woman forever. Therefore it is unencyclopedic(weasel wordish) to describe her as a young woman,.." That's a ridiculus argumentation. I just had a look on the article about Germany. They mention that Angela Merkel is Chancellor of Germany. According to your logic it would be "unencyclopedic" and "weasel wordish" to mention her, because she will not stay the chancellor in Germany forever. That Magibon being a young woman did not relate to her popularity is just your POV. How do you know that? Look at this humorous Magibon parody. He does basically the same what Magibon does. Why has this guy only 977 views and not several millions? I dare to claim that it has something to do with the fact that he is not a young (and cute) woman.... --Firithfenion (talk) 21:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think my answer would be really POV if I ever were to trully answer this one. but I'll try. I think the main reason is simple, he's a guy, he's not cute and there are many like him. Obviously, his thumbnail is a turn off. Wait, let me reconsider my answer. I think to trully answer this question I must ask another question. Why is it do most media agencies employ beautiful woman? Why is it there are more beautiful actresses than that of plain ones in Holywood? Why aren't there more plus size models?Answering "That Magibon being a young woman did not relate to her popularity is just your POV. ", Yeah it's my POV but saying it is would be your POV. To futher add something to it, I got that off a comment left somewhere on youtube. Most people have an assumption that she's 16 or so. 16 or so, isn't a woman, a teenager, an adolescent. And if isn't them who is contributing to her popularity, then who is? Then again, the real question we should really be asking should be, how do we neutralize it?Hetelllies (talk) 10:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Why is it I write without getting all my thoughts across? Nevermind. The part of Chancelor Merkel being Chancellor of Germany is informative. It gives us useful factual knowledge of who currently heads the german people (notable, it affects the lives of a lot of people). However it would be funny to leave a fact about her gender and age, Chancelor Merkel a middle aged woman is Chancellor of Germany. That I believe has no bearing on the goal of the article. A check on the Chancellor's article also bears the same. There is no word of her being a woman or being middle aged (but there are other facts to point out she's a woman, the word 'she' for instance. Her age is also revealed through her birth date). As it I think, and as many would probably agree with me, be sexist to point out such a fact. An encyclopedia is supposed to be informative. Wikipedia holds the credibility of being unbiased, I think it is a duty to up hold that.Hetelllies (talk) 10:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Uploading a Picture
I think it would be a better improvement if a picture of Magibon was added. I think that shouldn't be much of a hassle. It would clarify as to who is Magibon. I suggest a selection that is of most known and bears the general opinion of the majority of her viewers.Hetelllies (talk) 00:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't be a hassle??? I needed a few hours to try to understand all that licensing stuff. Now I have made a screenshot from one of her popular Nothing videos and uploaded it under the socalled Fair Use license. I hope I did everything allright and it will not be deleted because I forgot something. The article looks much better now.--Firithfenion (talk) 17:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe the pic should be removed since this article is starting to look like a vanity article.... (Yariau neko (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC))
 * Maybe you should be removed because I know who you are. You already vandalized this article with your ED name and now you dare to come back with another name? Go back to your shitty encyclopedia crapatica or I will show all the Wikipedians here some outing informations about who you really are. I also consider to make an interesting outing article about you and your friend Campus on the FAQ page. It depends on you. --Firithfenion (talk) 18:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Firithfenion, I have not once vandalized this article since I joined. Calm down. I am testing out the waters at wikipedia. Also, I am a half fan of this girl. She does have potential, yes. But she needs to work on it etc etc. (Yariau neko (talk) 00:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC))
 * Nice try Arguecat3... sorry.. Yariau Neko. By the way, you know I don't speak Japanese but I have asked my friend Forryga what Yariau neko means in Japanese. However, I will think about your "cease fire agreement" you made me on another place. Oh... before I forget, you should not use the asterisk here...it's typical for your shitty ED but this is Wikipedia. Use the colon next time. And now go away. Thanks.--Firithfenion (talk) 09:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know if you noticed, but the asterisk and the colon do the same thing. Oh and to save you the trouble of asking forryga, Yariau means argue and Neko means cat. Also, I think I might stay in wikipedia but not really edit; I have not found any article of interest to me as of yet except the desu article to which I already contributed. (Yariau neko (talk) 23:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC))

Reference links
Section8pidgeon has added a link to my Magibon FAQ as reference source, which is very nice, however I have moved the link to the external links section, because I think that a private website can not be used as a reference source, even if I am the creator of this site. I did my best with this site to make it as accurate as possible, however it contains the results of my original research about Magibon and therefore I have moved it to the external links section. --Firithfenion (talk) 13:13, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

The Secret Behind That Devious Smile
As revealed on a popular Japanese talk show, Magibon has hideous teeth. How cute is that smile now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brappton25 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

CleanUp
Removing links of blog, personal web pages etc. BLP Hetelllies (talk) 00:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I added some of these back, as WP:BLP allows such references if they are by the subject themself or by professional journalists under editorial control. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 02:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. WP:SELFPUB does have allocations for Magibon's Japanese blog. However, I would like to listen to your interpretation as to why Magibon's blog in Japanese need be reinstated. editors should exercise restraint and include only material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability WP:NPF Hetelllies (talk) 09:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Removing links and statement of appearance in Playboy. Poor source. ''The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. Editors should cite sources fully, providing as much publication information as possible, including page numbers when citing books.'' As it is of now, I have doubts this magibon person has ever appeared on Playboy. Please submit a reliable source WP:PROVEIT Hetelllies (talk) 00:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There are many references to these articles in various blogs and forums, so doubting they exist is cynicism taken to the extreme. I have added these links back with the addition of the issue in which she appeared. These magazines are not large volumes, and the reference is to an entire article, not just a short passage, so page numbers should not be necessary for someone to find them. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 02:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that cynic comment. I was merely attempting to emphasize a point. It is better refered now.Hetelllies (talk) 10:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Is being a youtube partner of significant note?Hetelllies (talk) 02:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Removed Video Overview section, please rewrite. and add vertifiable sources. Hetelllies (talk) 02:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Hetelllies
It seems obvious that Hetelllies is nothing more than a troll. I have not visited this article for a few days, and it looks worse than ever, "thanks" to Hetelllies. Hetelllies, you have not made a single improvement to this article. You are no help, you are constantly trying to make it impossible to write this article, which is difficult enough, even wihtout people like you. You add taggs to this article and you delete parts as you like it, but you made no improvements. Who do you think you are? You try to sound like an administrator, you try to tell us how we have to write this article, but your "contributions" are pure rubbish. This article looks worse than before. Was this your intention? I will go to Administrators Noticeboard and ask for help there.--Firithfenion (talk) 08:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It is no surprise that Hetelllies trolled the Magibon article yesterday because it was Magis birthday. I suspected that there would be trolling activities on this day, but I did not expect it to be so obvious. The other reason for the increased aggressiveness of the trolls is the fact that the shitty "Encyclopedia Dramatica" - home of the worst Magibon haters - is in severe difficulties and will have to close soon. This is their revenge. --Firithfenion (talk) 10:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)