Talk:Kim Mitchell
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia. | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Guitarists, a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to guitarists. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
Contents |
[edit] RFC
Debate concerning whether it is ok to include the following paragraph (originally inserted here, I think):
- On February 02/07 Joanne Wilder of Q107 Petitioned Q listeners to nominate Kim to the Canadian walk of fame. Kim' response later while talking to Joanne was that he thought it was a pity party.
One editor asserts that this qualifies as an unsourced and unverifiable claim. Another editor disagrees. RFC created to avoid revert war. Prior discussion has taken place at User talk:BFD1#Kim_Mitchell and User talk:Myfro#Kim_Mitchell_Unsourced_Material. Thanks. BFD1 20:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Edit Warring
Myfro, please read the first box at the top of this page. It clearly states that "this article must adhere to the Hey policy on biographies of living persons." One of those policies is that information included in an article must be cited to a reliable source. If you continue to ignore this fact you will invariably get into trouble. In the meantime I have once again removed the contentious material. Please, let's reach consensus here. You are more than welcome to make an argument here on the talk page. Simply re-inserting the material without presenting a firm rationale after an editor has warned you several times against it is not an argument, it's very poor form. BFD1 22:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] RESPONSE
hello,would an email/edit from joanne wilder or kim himself count as reliable.if you would like i can ask either to clarify?Myfro 22:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting question. Looking at WP:RS, reliable sources are typically secondary sources, e.g. a newspaper article. This is considered "reliable" for two reasons: (1) anyone can get the article and check it for themselves, and (2) newspapers are typically fact-checked and edited stringently to avoid libel. The problem with an e-mail from Mr. Mitchell is that no one can check it independently, right? Also, even if if he were to send you an e-mail confirming he said something on the air, that would constitute original research on your part, which cannot be included in the article - Wikipedia is very serious about that.
- Basically, have a look through the newspapers; see if anyone has published about the petition or has quoted Mr. Mitchell. That's your best bet. Avoid sources which do not meet the criteria of reliable sources, such as forums, fan-sites, etc.
- As an aside, I get the sense you may be a little too close to this situation. Your earlier edit here makes it seem like you do not like Mr. Mitchell very much. Wikipedia strives to keep a neutral point of view. Something to keep in mind. Thanks for bringing up your question here. BFD1 22:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
actually i am a great fan of kim's i saw him at my high school in the 70's and have been a fan sinceMyfro 23:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- FWIW, I think private email should not be used as a source. The idea (AFAIK) is that any information you find on Wikipedia, you should be able to find somewhere else, i.e. in a book, on a reliable web site, published in a newspaper or magazine, etc. "I heard it on the radio" is also not sufficient. I believe the original paragraph is unverifiable and so should not be included in the article unless a verifiable source can be found.
- Asking Joanne Wilder or Kim himself to edit the article is no good either -- see WP:AUTO.--MrBoo (talk, contribs) 11:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey BDF1:Hey dude didn't your parents ever tell you about people who live in glass houses.First about being not neutral,you are guilty yourself of this by deleting my unsourced claim stated by kim on the radio but leaving posted the unsourced claim by kim which i deleted.It seems to me you left the one because it was to your liking but deleted mine because you "personally" did not approve of it.Tell me why you left the one but deleted the other? Second i will withdraw my line but will,as per your "rule" delete any edits attributed to anything supposedly said by kim on the radio.In my opinion,by your bias against my edit, you have just made this page weaker.Another old saying i can recall is an old chinese curse."Be careful what you wish for....
Myfro 22:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Does the radio station have archives? Are they publicly accessible, via the web or at the station itself? This could confirm that it was said, were someone to get ahold of the actual radio show it could be used as a primary source to verify what was actually said. What would need to be clarified is whether Kim's response was on the same radio show or came elsewhere. Barring that it needs to be attributed to a reliable published source, check local newspaper archives. IvoShandor 11:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] History
removed reference to opening up for summer concerts as this is not history but advertisingMyfro 21:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not so sure that it is advertising; the section you removed was written from a neutral point of view. There is lots of precedent to include information about upcoming tours in Wikipedia articles, e.g. The Police#Reunion Tour. If a reliable source can be found for the upcoming concert information, it may be included per wikipedia policy. Similarly, if reliable info can be found on his upcoming CD it may be included. BFD1 13:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
It's not advertising or promotion. It's a fact. Sportsnut 19:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
It is a future event and does not belong under history.why not make a new heading for the page.if it continues to go under history i will continue to remove it.24.141.231.161 12:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
If you think you know how to include it in the page the why don't you do that instead of removing it. Sportsnut 18:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
