Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward R. Thaden

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. --Coredesat 21:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edward R. Thaden

Edward R. Thaden (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Appear to be a non notable music teacher. No sources provided and I could not find any through the usual avenues. Daniel J. Leivick 00:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Dr. Thaden is notable for many reasons if not the least of which as teacher of American composer Randall Poshek-Gladbach.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpgbach (talk • contribs) 00:42, 4 February 2007
Being the teacher of a a famous person does not make someone notable, in any case Poshek-Gladbach doesn't have a article so maybe we should start there. Please see WP:NOTE. --Daniel J. Leivick 00:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete under A7. So tagged. Soltak | Talk 00:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Speedy is contested, so I change my vote to Delete. Non-notable music teacher. Soltak | Talk 21:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • No vote at this time.Comment. A user has asserted that sources are available that confirm this person's notability -- I will withold my judgment until I can review the sources. Delete. I can't find documentation of this person's specialization in 18th century music, which is the only real assertion of notability. If sources are found, I may change my vote. --N Shar 00:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Poshek-Gladbach is widely known in the world of New Music as found on the internet as well as Dr. Thaden is noted in the article on Ernst von Dohnanyi herein. It would be useful if persons who have at least a minimal background in music were passing judgment on Dr. Thaden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpgbach (talk • contribs) 00:52, 4 February 2007

Being mentioned in a Wikipedia article does not equal notability. Please read WP:NOTE and it will make everything a lot easier. --Daniel J. Leivick 00:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Which recital/concert programs would you like? Would his 18 appearances with SLSO, 4 appearances with the LAPO, would his 11 appearances with the NYPO do? Or perhaps we should consider his recordings of the complete keyboard works of J.S. Bach and Couperin. Or would a list of his students since 1956 (including 2 Pulitzer Prize winning composers). Or would a list of journals in which his writings are published help? Again, it would be helpful if just one reviewer knew anything about the music world. I'm sorry, a degree in engineering does not qualify one to evaluate the notability of a musician. At the rate we are going, I'm surprised any musician has ever made it onto Wikipedia. And I'm rather perplexed by "I could not find any through the usual avenues." What are the usual avenues? Obviously, they are not music journal databases. Perhaps had Dr. Thaden pursued engineering instead of music he would qualify for Wikipedia. Fortunately for the music world, he did not do so. Perhaps we should re-evaluate Nadia Boulanger's article. She was only a music teacher.

  • Delete unless sources are provided to meet WP:N. Teaching famous people is not, in itself, notable. janejellyroll 01:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. Yes, it would help if you would provide a list of journals in which his writings are published. What are the music journal databases we should be searching? --N Shar 02:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Miss Jelly Roll, as I said, let's delete Madame Boulanger and every other teacher of music.... the sources have been provided, JOST will provide you with every citation to every article of Dr. Thaden. So what if he changed music in America. And certainly having recorded the complete works of JS Bach and Louis Couperin is not important... so let's delete Rubinstein and Horowitz. In fact, let's delete every musician and artist starting with JS Bach. In the mean time, let us inform the mainstream media that only nerds and engineers need apply to Wikipedia. God forbid should we permit an article of a teacher who has changed music in the world. Again, it would be nice if someone who know what the hell they are talking about would evaluate entries in Wikipedia. As of yet, no one with any qualifications has reviewed the Dr. Thaden article. What a sad day it is to find the Wikipedia is controlled by those who have no qualifications to determine what articles are or are not posted to it.

    • It's called JSTOR.ORG.
  • Delete I have voted to save similar articles before, but I don't think this one is worth saving. Searching on Amazon and Alibris turns up no books by Prof. Thaden; Google Scholar has no listings for articles; searching on "Thaden Bach" and "Thaden Couperin" on Google comes up with no relevant hits, as far as I can see. I have a hard time believing he is more notable than the average long-time professor of music. --Brianyoumans 02:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


God forbid if we might look to RCA Victor or CBS or Bell Telephone Hour or Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians.... I think the appropriate approach for me is to advocating the deletion of all musicians because they are of obviously no importance.... a Google, Amazon, Alibris search is only as good as the searcher.... it's interesting that I find 11 references on Amazon.... again, it might be helpful if we had real musical authorities reviewing articles rather than self-appointed computer nerds... thus far, no one with any creditials has reviewed Dr. Thaden's article.... In the mean time, I believe this discussion would be of great interest to the NYT or to John von Rhein of the Chicago Tribune who have both reviewed the performances of Dr. Thaden. Still waiting for someone who knows the difference between and accented grace note and an unaccented grace note in Bach's WTC to respond. At this point, I have to say my first experience with Wikipedia confirms everything negative published about it including its anti-arts bias.

  • Comment You need to provide links or citations! Every argument presented here for deletion will fall apart if links are provided, but without them the arguments make a great deal of sense. Please LINK to your amazon search results. Please LINK or CITE a NYT review! We would love to keep the article, but none of us know how to find sources -- we've asked for your help. --N Shar 03:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Delete unless sources are provided. User Rpgbach needs to cool down a little (maybe read WP:CIVIL, I am not really up for having my engineering credentials come into this debate or being called a nerd repeatedly, if user Rpgbach would like I can create a new account and and write that I have a PhD in music from Stanford on my user page maybe then we can stop hearing about how no one knows anything about music. I have been nothing but friendly and civil with this user from the beginning. When he or she contested my first speedy by deleting the tag I nominated it for AFD and left a very friendly note on the user's talk page. I recommended then that Rpgbach take a look at WP:NOTE and did so again at the top of this discussion. It is obvious that this user has not read this or any policy as he continues to call into question the credentials of those who oppose him and refuses to offer any sources not to mention threatening to expose the monster that is an AFD debate to the NYT (I would like to see a story on this debate in the NYT though). Not understanding policy is very common problem for new users and I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, but Rpgbach hostility is not acceptable, if this user where to relax a little they would find Wikipedia to be a friendly and very reasonable place. There may well be a place for this article on Wikipedia, but there is no place for threats and hostility. --Daniel J. Leivick 04:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment I should also mention that there is no such thing as "Western Kentucky State University" - WK State College became WK University, and searching their web site gives no hits for Thaden. And neither does the web site of the University of Missouri at Columbia (which is what I assume is meant in the article). I assume that Prof. Thaden did teach at these schools, but it appears he is not memorialized there by scholarships, chairs, etc. - the sort of thing a distinguished professor generally leaves behind. And since you are so enthusiastically calling us art ignoramuses, I suppose the assumption of good faith here is suspended somewhat and I can point out that the most obvious notability that Prof. Thaden has is as the teacher of Randall Poshek-Gladbach, who is "widely known in the world of New Music", according to Rpgbach. I understand that you may have a great deal of respect for your former teacher, Mr. Poshek-Gladbach, but we can't accept your word that he is worthy of an article, or your word on your own notability. Please give us references, ones that we can check. Mr. Thaden may have been a very well-known performer at one time, but it appears his fame has faded. --Brianyoumans 04:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, non-notable plain and simple. Randall Poshek-Gladbach is not a prominent composer by any stretch of the imagination, and even if he were it would take more than that bare fact to confer notability on Thaden. I don't feel the need to throw my credits around but I know what I'm talking about in this regard.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 04:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 04:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • A very slight correction: doing yet another search, I did find a reference to Thaden on the Western Kentucky University site, in a PDF (probably why the search on the WKU site itself couldn't find it.) He is named on a list of WK State College music department faculty as of 1964. --Brianyoumans 10:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Article does not appear to meet WP:BIO.Tellyaddict 12:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

To keep the record straight: It is Dr. Poshek-Gladbach and Dr. Thaden.


  • Wait an extra week or so for reliable sources, delete if not provided by then. Wikipedia is run on the assumption that volunteer editors aren't experts in specific fields. To permit this, the folks proposing an article must provide sources showing that the subject is notable and verifiable. So instead of complaining that it's a sad day when a famous person is challenged by folks who don't know squat about the classical music world, the article's proponents should accept that yes, we ignoramuses and cultural dufuses (is that ignorami et dufi?) don't know squat, so please produce the sources needed to enable the article to be kept. If this individual is really this famous, they won't be difficult to find. On-line sources are preferable if available but not necessary. Citations to print publications would be fine. --Shirahadasha 17:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete The reviews in the New York Times and Chicago Tribune might establish notability per WP:MUSIC, however I could not find them in the archives of those newspapers. If such sources are found and an article is written based upon them, though, I would be inclined to change my opinion. JChap2007 20:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong delete. User:Rpgbach has had plenty of time to find us citations. I left a message here and on his talk page encouraging him to do so. Since the time I left those messages, the user has left an unsigned comment here to indicate that we should refer to the subject as Dr. Thaden (rather than Mr. Thaden), but has declined to provide citations. This is despite his assertions (see above) that they are easy to find. I, for one, am approaching the end of my good faith. --N Shar 00:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
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.