Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Ibold

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Consensus is clear on the subject being non-notable for inclusion. Alex ShihTalk 13:19, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

James Ibold[edit]

James Ibold (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Musician who appears to fail WP:NMUSIC. The only sources are either not independent or just provide mentions. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:52, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no agenda here or knowledge of this musician, but I thought that I'd mention that someone (IP) keeps removing the AfD tag. I've now reverted this twice because I happened to notice it but I can't guard the thing ;) Elinruby (talk) 07:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've requested page protection. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:13, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Protected for one day. If it keeps happening after it expires, hit me up on my talk page and I'll protect it until the AfD closes. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeleteNeutral Fails both WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG. Most sources are written by the subject and therefore are not independent. The remaining ones don't even mention the subject. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 20:05, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Switched to neutral, as new sources have been added that could help meet WP:GNG I can't evaluate if it is enough for inclusion so I am not yet ready for a keep !vote. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 21:47, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There are some sources that seem to be valid but not enough to clearly establish WP:GNG since there have been no new ones added and especially because of the argument with legal threats included against Cordless Larry. This seems to be a clear case of a conflict of interest from the now blocked author so I also feel it should be deleted. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I should point out that a previous revision of the article, which can be seen here, had more sourced listed. They mostly seem to be local coverage. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:26, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. The only sources cited that mention James Ibold are his record label's website. All the others don't mention him at all or mention him in passing. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:30, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I object to the removal of James Ibold's wiki page and reliable source's are cited.--MiInReAs (talk) 07:59, 13 August 2017 (UTC) I cite that this a little more than a mention : Local musician James Ibold met Duskin at Dollar Bills in the 1970s, and has since traveled the world to perform with him. The guitarist says that Duskin... so on and so on. And there are many quotes. It is from a Major City News Paper Sunday article. The writers take pride in their work! Reliable source's are cited... James Ibold was a Legend in Southern Ohio/Indiana/Kentucky in the 80's and very, very high quality. I won't add any more text to the offering until. --MiInReAs (talk) 09:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC) The reference was cited as requested and outlined in the : Proposed deletion of biographies of living people as follows:[reply]

The proposed deletion process for unsourced biographies requires all biographies of living persons to have at least one reliable source that supports at least one statement about the subject. Once the article is tagged in this manner, the tag may not be removed until such a source is provided. If none is forthcoming, the article may be deleted after seven days. This does not affect any other deletion process.

Lady's and Gentleman of the Wikipedia editorial site; I have many reliable sources cited that support claims. I have added....

The one included I will cite is from: The Cincinnati Enquirer from Sunday February 6, 2005 Page 52,

"Local musician James Ibold met Duskin at Dollar Bills in the 1970s, and has since traveled the world to perform with him. The guitarist says that Duskin is noted for his strongly melodic song structures and his skilled left-hand runs on the keyboard. Learned from the greats Duskin provides one of the last living connections to Meade Lux Lewis, Pete Johnson, Albert Ammons and the other musicians who forged the boogie woogie style, Ibold says. "Joe is the direct descendent and learned directly from them," he says. "He is definitely the king of the boogie woogie."

Now I have stated Big Joe Duskin introduced James Ibold as his "consummate guitarist for over thirty years" on their final performance together on the Arches Piano Stage at the Cincinnati Blues Festival. Big Joe Duskin's statement about the subject of James Ibold and a newspaper article supporting Claims from a Reliable Source states: since the 70's Ibold has traveled the world to perform with him.

Those are and have at least one reliable source that supports at least one statement about the subject.

That is the verbatim definition of your Proposed deletion of biographies of living people.

Please acknowledge the references supplied for James Ibold and vote for inclusion.MiInReAs (talk) 23:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • A single reliable source is all that is required to save a BLP from proposed deletion, MiInReAs, but this is not the proposed deletion process. The standard for keeping an article (specifically the notability standard) subject to an AfD discussion is higher. What we require is significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've had my music played on the BBC - doesn't mean I get a Wikipedia article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We are legally obligated to remove material that infriges copyright, IP editor, as soon as that is verified, without waiting. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The line above is a duplicate !vote. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:51, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The line above is a duplicate !vote. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep So, I have one final question for both of you [[User:Cullen328|Cullen Cordless Larry. You both stated the problem with Ibold’s page is not "Conflict of interest" but rather it’s copyright liable. So if those source’s are not reputable or reliable sources as you state, why did you remove them? Why would you fear copyright infringement liable of those pages that you previously removed from your own server, and they were supported by an independent server, that the biographer states they own? Larry you couldn’t wait to butcher Ibold's page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.166.186 (talk) 08:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC) — 64.134.166.186 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • I haven't mentioned copyright, IP editor. My nomination concerns the subject's notability. I didn't remove sources, just unsourced article content. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:15, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cordless Larry Have you ever been a published music writer? 64.134.166.186 (talk) 08:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Something's wrong here Cordless Larry 64.134.166.186 (talk) 08:41, 16 August 2017 (UTC) Have you ever had anything published Cordless Larry? 64.134.166.186 (talk) 08:44, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure, but nothing about music. I don't see how this is relevant to this deletion discussion, however. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • A word to those wanting to keep the article - you need to bring forth policy-based arguments that principally centre on this: could anyone in the world write a comprehensive and neutral article on the topic? If you don't bring forward something like that, instead of relying on your gut emotion, the closing administrator will probably ignore you and delete the article anyway. See Arguments to avoid at deletion discussions. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious Delete as fails GNG. Also, I suspect that the IP accounts that did the 'keep' !votes above are the same person. J947(c) (m) 05:05, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your suspicions are shared (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MiInReAs).--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 06:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cordless Larry You don’t know what this has to do with your nomination to delete James Ibold? It is peculiar you monitor Big Joe Duskin’s and tell MiInReAs how to properly credit a periodical that I believe you have ties. You put a notice on the James Ibold page stating there is a "Conflict of Interest" that now you say you didn’t or don’t have a "Conflict of Interest" and you left that notice on the page but remove a lot of the biographers work. Huhh So, I’m not finished but Cullen328 did not respond to my question. 64.134.166.186 (talk) 07:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC) This question is for you. Cordless Larry So, did your boss/supervisor tell you to look into those particular Joe Duskin/James Ibold pages or were you randomly monitoring/patrolling when you came across them? 64.134.166.186 (talk) 07:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I do believe that MiInReAs has a conflict of interest, but that is not why I removed material from the article. I explained how to cite a newspaper article to MiInReAs because I have experience citing sources and know that one should put the author's name in the name field in the citation template, and noticed that he/she got that wrong. There are no bosses/supervisors on Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • None of this is relevant, by the way. The issue is whether the subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and every non-policy focused comment added here likely increases established editors' scepticism about the motives behind the creation and defence of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cordless Larry Then you created all those intricate little questions about press kits and public relations in the booking business but you claim never had experience? 64.134.166.186 (talk) 08:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC) Cordless Larry you randomly monitor music people pages? 64.134.166.186 (talk) 08:22, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I was trying to establish whether MiInReAs had a conflict of interest. Possession of obscure material on the subject is often a sign of that. I monitor all sorts of pages - see my contributions. If you have a complaint about my behaviour as an editor, please make it at WP:AN/I. A deletion discussion is not the venue for this discussion, and I will not respond to any further questions about my behaviour here. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:44, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cordless Larry all your questions were answered. I read it over and over... Again, this form may be the exact place to uncover your grudge against Ibold. Otherwise why does a non-experienced music editor hover over music business subjects. Why don't you hover over stuff you you have experience with? I still have questions! you asked and got answers. Because you don't have a boss or supervisor. Or yet are you a contributor? That would also mean you published music business fluff when you said you didn’t. It’s probably only gonna take is a Tennessee Judge to fix your wagon Cordless Larry. 64.134.166.186 (talk) 09:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply] 

:* Remember one thing: reputable and or reliable are subjective  64.134.166.186 (talk) 09:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333 did you even see what was on the page Cordless Larry butchered? 64.134.166.186 (talk) 09:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC) And this is the exact form to try to put a right where there is a wrong. 64.134.166.186 (talk) 09:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination, unable to find any sources to indicate notability worthy of a Wikipedia article. Bakilas (talk) 12:49, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James_Ibold&oldid=1137941140"