Talk:Del Palmer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

Alternative music Portal This article is part of the Alternative music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the Project's importance scale. This article is part of the Rock music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to rock music, and who are involved in developing and proposing standards for their content, presentation and other aspects. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale. This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. Biography Portal Stub This article has been rated as Stub-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. It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

This page was previously nominated for deletion. Please see prior discussions before considering re-nomination: 2. Keep, 18 September 2007, see discussion. 1. Delete, 8 September 2007, see discussion.

[edit] Deletion discussion

Note that this article has now been put up for deletion: further discussion should take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Del Palmer (second nomination) rather than here. Bondegezou 11:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I've re-created this page that was recently deleted. I'm sorry I missed the AfD[1] for this before. The concern expressed then was that the article lacked citations and did not meet WP:BAND. I have expanded on the original article, focusing on providing citations. I include two articles about Palmer: an interview in magazine Future Music and another in Fachblatt Musikmagazin, both archived at a Kate Bush fan site. I also include citations about Palmer's relationship with Bush from The Independent, Salon.com and others. So, as I see it, Palmer meets the WP:BAND criteria (1) and, through his work with Bush, at least (2), (3) and (5). It is true that most of his notability comes through his work with Bush. However, I think the article now has sufficient, cited material about his other work. Bondegezou 13:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

• I've corrected the referencing formatting and given descriptions to the links, I'm sorry but in no way does the new article meet the criteria for WP:BAND. Of the references and citations you have given the only one that is acceptable as a reliable source is the New York Times article and that isn't even about Palmer. Any references must be non-trivial, reliable and substantial. The only article purely on Palmer that is substantial is written by a fan and is not classed as a reliable source for Wikipedia purposes. The rest of the references are either marketing pieces or fan written material. None of them fulfil the criteria set out in WP:BAND or [{WP:BIO]]. The links to Palmer's own site are discountable as they are not independent. Most of them only mention Palmer in passing as album credits etc. I'm afraid Del Palmer is not notable in Wikipedia terms. Point references at articles where his name appears is not what is needed. To prove notability the critera needs to relate directly to Palmer himself. ---- WebHamster 15:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for tidying up the references, but, sorry, your argument above is factually wrong with respect to the sources given. In particular, http://gaffa.org/reaching/i93_fm.html and http://gaffa.org/reaching/i94_fmg.html are not fan-written articles. They are articles in the mainstream music press that have been archived on a fan site, as I said in my original comments. The magazine articles can be cited directly if that would make it clearer. They are non-trivial, reliable, substantial and about Del Palmer. Bondegezou 16:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

A fan written website regardless of the source of the material they are writing is still a fan written website and is therefore not deemed reliable, please see WP:RS and WP:N for what constitutes reliability. I'm afraid you are grasping at straws here. Please know that I am not out to destroy your hard work. I work for independent musicians so know how hard it is for them to gain publicity and notability etc especially so for session musos, but at the same time the rules here are pretty clear cut. Notability isn't inherited and his relationship with Kate Bush is NOT (nor ever will be) a factor in gaining necessary notability. He has no published work in his own name, he hasn't done a major national/international tour in his own right. All these are a factor. Being Kate Bush's boyfriend is not. ---- WebHamster 16:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles were published about Del Palmer in Future Music (November 1993) and Fachblatt Musikmagazin (January 1994). Those are reliable sources under WP:RS and WP:N. Do you contest either of those statements? Given those magazines don't have online archives, providing a link to a verbatim archive of them on a fan site seems useful. I really don't see how you can interpret the rules to make those articles not reliable sources just because Gaffa Web archived them. As for WP:NOTINHERITED, while being Bush's partner for many years does not make Palmer notable, being a member of her band on multiple tours/albums does seem relevant. I don't see any consistent ruling on the notability of musicians who are regular members of a "solo" artist's band. I don't work for a musician and have no special interest in Del Palmer's or Kate Bush's careers: I just don't see any problem under WP:BAND with Palmer's notability. Bondegezou 17:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

As you say being a member of Bush's band is relevant, it's just not a slam dunk for notability. As regards the interviews archived on Gaffa. Fair enough if they are archived versions of mainstream press articles. The problem is that they aren't exactly about Palmer are they? The "right hand" interview is more about what it's like working in Bush's band and what was done in the studio to get the album out. The "Well Red" article is also about Kate Bush but from Palmer's perspective. It's a stretch to assert that they demonstrate notability. More a way of getting inside info on Bush without actually getting to interview her (a journalistic equivalent of groupies bonking the roadies to get to the star, used frequently by journalists of less important mags who don't have the clout to get to the big star.) It's pointless putting a prod notice on the article as you've already done the equivalent of contesting it. I can only suggest that it goes up for AfD again with the revised article and then let the consensus decide. At the moment it serves no purpose and achieves nothing by you saying yes, and me saying no. If you are confident that your references demonstrate notability then it shouldn't be a problem for you. ---- WebHamster 17:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I will endeavour to improve the site further, particularly in terms of finding more reliable sources. If you wish to put it up for AfD, go ahead. Bondegezou 09:48, 18 September 2007 (UTC)