Talk:Remy Blumenfeld

File:Remy Blumenfeld.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Remy Blumenfeld.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests May 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Remy Blumenfeld.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2018

Remy Blumenfeld
Nationality	British
Occupation	Television producer
Employer(s)	ITV, Endemol,Brighter Pictures
Family	Erwin Blumenfeld Yorick Blumenfeld Helaine Blumenfeld

Remy Blumenfeld (born October 13, 1965 ) is a British television producer and format creator, who co-founded the production company Brighter Pictures which he sold to Endemol for £15m in 2004. He is TV format creator of There's Something About Miriam, Gay, Straight or Taken?, Wudja Cudja, and Undercover Lovers.

Until 2010 he was director of formats at ITV.He is the son of Yorick and Helaine Blumenfeld, and the grandson of Erwin Blumenfeld. In 2013 he made a documentary – The Man Who Shot Beautiful Women – about his grandfather for BBC4. He has also worked on the documentary The Other Francis Bacon, and on Get a New Life, a reality TV show.

Blumenfeld was ranked #19th in The Independent on Sunday's 2006 Pink List of most influential gay men and women in the UK.

Career

Blumenfeld has created and produced more than 30 original Television series, including BBC1's Tabloid Tales with Piers Morgan and My Worst Week, and BBC2's Get A New Life, reportedly by The Guardian

He founded his production company Brighter Pictures along with Gavin Hay in 1991. Later, Brighter Pictures was bought by Endemol in 2001, but he remained as creative director at Endemol UK for Brighter Pictures.

Later, Blumenfeld joins a production company, ITV as ITV Studios director of formats, where he exported TV shows such as Come Dine With Me, I'm a Celebrity...Get Me Out of Here! and Four Weddings around the world and launched production divisions in the France and Spain.

In 2016, he co-founded The Hot House, a £3 million (US$4.3 million) TV production incubator. He has also produced many plays including Eunuchs In My Wardrobe, Julie Burchill Is Away, and Tennessee Williams's Confessional.

Recognition

• In 2006, he appeared on the Independent on Sunday "Pink List" as the 19th most influential LGBT person in the UK.

References

External links

• Remy Blumenfeld at IMDb
• Q&A: Remy Blumenfeld at The Hollywood Reporter

MrDavies (talk) 15:35, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

 Partly done: I have edited the suggested replacement text below (see edit history of this page for details) and then inserted it into the article page. Next time, please make the nature of the edit request clear at the top of the request and also consider WP:BLP requirements for verification of sources. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:46, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

removal of verified text as "promotional"

Regardless of the origin of the above edit request, the text was all verified and obviously promotional text (e.g., nonsense about volume of created shows) was removed. The subject of the article in certainly notable having been the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable sources and those qualities also apply to the text. The remaining text fully complies with WP:BLP and WP:PROMO. The reversion by Justlettersandnumbers therefore does not comply with these policies and is knee-jerk reversion. In the spirit of WP:BRD, I am not re-reverting but starting this discussion. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:58, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Eggishorn, I've somewhat boldly undone your edit, as I don't believe that this was a good-faith request by a bona fide editor – this is patently either sockpuppetry by indeffed editor Gyles82, or undisclosed paid editing (or, I suppose, conceivably both of the above). Please see the brief discussion on my talk-page, and the very pertinent question asked there by Voceditenore. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

... and actually ping Voceditenore this time ...Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:04, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers:, as I said above, I did not just accept the edit request as a good faith effort. If you look at the edit history of this talk page, you will see I removed a large amount of their proposed text and I personally verified every proposed reference and the text it was supposed to support. As I said, the remaining text complies just as if it had been written de novo by an unconnected user. The revert was unjustified. I trust you will not continue to object? Thank you. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:11, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Eggishorn, if the content had been written ex novo by an unconnected contributor such as yourself I would not have dreamt of reverting your addition (heaven knows, there's plenty of room for improvement!). But it wasn't; the content was created (or at least posted here) by someone who is apparently either a sockpuppet or an UPE. We have no reason to assist editors in either of those classes in any undertaking, so – with all respect – yes, I do object. Do please invite other opinions in whatever way you think best. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers, as much as I loathe paid editing, we don't do vigilante justice and make up policy to justify it. We have no policy whatsoever that forbids us to add material to an article simply because it was once written or requested by a paid editor (declared or otherwise). Eggishorn's edit should be restored. He/she personally edited the requested material before adding it to the article. It is now neutral and well-referenced. The subject is notable. It was Eggishorn's editorial decision to add it to the article. I am now going to restore it with further edits. Both those edits will be our decision and our responsibility and no one else's. Voceditenore (talk) 07:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Voceditenore, the policy which prevents us from adding content submitted by an undeclared paid editor is this one. It is binding on all of us. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:09, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

No, that policy prohibits editing by undisclosed paid editors. It says nothing about editors in good standing making edits like the ones under discussion here. In fact, this has been relatively common practice, also with re-creating articles created by banned editors, on the understanding that the editor adding the material or re-creating the article takes responsibility for it. In any case, note that neither Eggishorn nor I have added the material requested by MrDavies verbatim and that he has admitted that he is a paid editor here. Voceditenore (talk) 13:51, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I have now extensively edited the article for coherence and other factual issues. The text is now quite different from what the paid editor had requested. Voceditenore (talk) 15:39, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Voceditenore:, thank you for confirming my interpretation of policy and for restoring the text. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:24, 25 February 2018 (UTC)