Talk:David Nathan (music writer)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
Problems with this article
editGenerally there is much unsourced information. It is moved here to this talk page -- when valid references can be found, please re-insert the referenced information back into the article.
Extended content
|
---|
Early lifeedit
Writing and media careeredit
Recording careeredit
|
Please remember that Wikipedia is not suitable for advertising as per WP:SPAM; please only add information which is verifiable which uses reliable sources, thank you.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- I have maintained the removal of the self-promotional material, while adding (or re-adding, in some cases) some sourced, accurate and uncontentious factual information. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Essentially you're restored the article back to a mostly unsourced puff piece. What I've been trying to tell you is that perhaps you think you're doing Nathan a great service by adding unsourced information about how Nathan has a "singing career", about how his album had guest appearances by Najee or whatever, but my sense as a writer is that you're shooting yourself and Nathan in the foot here. There's a reason that reporters didn't write about his singing career -- the reporters didn't find Nathan's singing to be that interesting. So they didn't write about it. Why are YOU writing about what reporters aren't writing about? It makes Nathan and yourself and the rest of us Wikipedians look amateurish, like an aunt gushing at a dinner party about the exploits of what-she-thinks-is a fascinating cousin. Trust me -- less is more. A tighter, fact-based article makes Nathan seem like a heavyweight with-it can-do music writer; the current version makes him seem like a struggling wishy-washy can't-figure-out-what-he's-doing nobody. As I keep learning time and again, Wikipedia's rules are great -- they have a purpose -- please respect them. It's for your own good. I'm no longer going to fuss with this article and I'm leaving it up to you and others what to do here.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- I disagree, though I've trimmed a few words. I have absolutely no intention of seeking to present him as a "heavyweight with-it can-do music writer", and I entirely agree that his singing "career" is not notable in itself - but that's not the point, it forms part of a rounded biography. In my view the article is now balanced, sourced, and complies with WP:BLP. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Essentially you're restored the article back to a mostly unsourced puff piece. What I've been trying to tell you is that perhaps you think you're doing Nathan a great service by adding unsourced information about how Nathan has a "singing career", about how his album had guest appearances by Najee or whatever, but my sense as a writer is that you're shooting yourself and Nathan in the foot here. There's a reason that reporters didn't write about his singing career -- the reporters didn't find Nathan's singing to be that interesting. So they didn't write about it. Why are YOU writing about what reporters aren't writing about? It makes Nathan and yourself and the rest of us Wikipedians look amateurish, like an aunt gushing at a dinner party about the exploits of what-she-thinks-is a fascinating cousin. Trust me -- less is more. A tighter, fact-based article makes Nathan seem like a heavyweight with-it can-do music writer; the current version makes him seem like a struggling wishy-washy can't-figure-out-what-he's-doing nobody. As I keep learning time and again, Wikipedia's rules are great -- they have a purpose -- please respect them. It's for your own good. I'm no longer going to fuss with this article and I'm leaving it up to you and others what to do here.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
References
- ^ a b c d David Nathan's pages at soulmusic.com Cite error: The named reference "soulmusic" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- ^ a b c d David Nathan profile at linkedin.com
- ^ Nefer Davis at reverbnation.com
Picture needed
editIf anybody has a picture of David Nathan which they have the copyright for, please write something here or on my talk page, thanx.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Alleged COI
editAn allegation of a conflict of interest has been made by User:86.19.238.17. I refute that allegation. Edits were made in the past to this article by User:Davidpnathan here, and by User:BritSoulMan (probably the same editor) here, but they have subsequently been removed in later editing. There seems to be an ongoing low-level content dispute about this article, but it has nothing to do with WP:COI - unless someone thinks that I have something to do with Nathan, which is certainly not the case. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
David Nathan photograph
editSince I am the David Nathan referred to in this entry, I am happy to supply an authorized photograph. Please advise the best way to do so. Many thanks, David (BritSoulMan (talk) 09:06, 8 April 2012 (UTC))
- I found this note about the David Nathan photograph on my talk page and I am moving it to the talk page of the David Nathan article (here) since it pertains to this discussion. I worked on the David Nathan article a while back. It had been a puff piece, with much unreferenced material, unencyclopedic. I honed down the article to something professional-looking, namely here. It was trim, lean, to-the-point and (in my view) I thought it presented the subject of the story -- David Nathan -- fairly, without bias, impartially, since I followed Wikipedia's rules. Soon thereafter, my changes were reverted by another Wikipedian, perhaps yourself, perhaps a fan of yours, that is, IF you are David Nathan as you claim. So now the article is back to being a puff piece, a fairly obvious bit of self-promotion, something I don't trust, something which when I read it, I roll my eyeballs and don't believe any of it. The current David Nathan article indirectly makes the rest of Wikipedians look rather like amateurs and it undoes the hard work of others here who try to follow the rules. If you have been editing your own article, that's breaking Wikipedia's rules about conflict of interest. So frankly I do not have much interest in getting your picture in there. The exception is that if my revamp is restored, and is allowed to remain for some time, then I may be willing to help in the future; but frankly working on a flawed article is back to amateur-land for me, and does not interest me much.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:11, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
I've responded to BritSoulMan's comment, at his talk page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on David Nathan (music writer). 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/20110614074909/http://www.soulmusic.com/danapa.html to http://www.soulmusic.com/danapa.html
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 07:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)