| 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 Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interview edit
Please do not remove the Mei Han interview link, as it is the best interview with this musician available on the Internet, thank you. Badagnani (talk) 18:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Blogs are not appropriate here. The article is better off without it. --Tom 19:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Please do not remove the interview again, which is the best available online. Badagnani (talk) 19:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Please do not add the blog entry back. This project can do much better.--Tom 19:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Again, please do not remove the interview again, which is the best available online. Badagnani (talk) 20:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Again, please do not add the blog entry back. This project can do much better. --Tom 20:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
This comment is illogical and does not seem to show familiarity with the subject. In fact, due to the lack of commentary on the actual content of the interview, it leads one to believe that the editor did not actually read the interview before blanking. Blogs are "generally" frowned upon because most blogs are diaries or ephemeral political commentary. This blog posting, on the other hand, is hosted on a blog website but is not a blog posting at all; it is the text of a valuable interview--so valuable, in fact, that it appears to be the first and only extensive interview of this musician available on the Internet. As such, please reconsider your repeated blanking and restore the link. Thank you, Badagnani (talk) 20:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
An examination of WP:EL finds that this style guideline states that "links to blogs are normally to be avoided" "...except those written by a recognized authority." In this case, the interviewer is a noted authority on contemporary music, and the interviewee is the actual subject of our WP article--both being authorities in the subject of our WP article. This should solve the confusion, so I ask kindly that you restore the link. Thank you, Badagnani (talk) 20:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Mike Heffley has been accused of plagerism and is NOT a recognized authority on anything. The link is to a selfpublished interview from a blog. --Tom 20:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
What is "plagerism," and how do you know this? Badagnani (talk) 20:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- I meant plagiarism, my spelling sucks. I read it in a blog about him. --Tom 21:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Making such accusations could be a violation of WP:BLP and, if written in a blog, may not be accurate if the blog was not written by a "recognized authority." Badagnani (talk) 21:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Since Mike Heffley is not notable and does not have an article, how can this violate BLP? Also, I think you just made my point about blogs and why they should not be used here except in extrodinary circumstances. --Tom 21:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
This doesn't make sense, because the interview is in the words of the subject of this article herself. Blanking it robs our users of valuable information and is not helpful to our users, or the project. Badagnani (talk) 19:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)