Talk:James Allen Gähres

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on James Allen Gähres. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lma-nds.de/index.php/sinfonieorchester
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160525135908/http://www.ljo-saar.de/index.php/das-orchester/dirigenten/bisherige-gastdirigenten/ to http://www.ljo-saar.de/index.php/das-orchester/dirigenten/bisherige-gastdirigenten/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kultiversum.de/Veranstaltungen/?idPersonDetail=56728%2F

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Previous version
The earlier version of this page was a disaster of meaningless laundry-list text of repertoire, which is meaningless because all conductors conduct the same core repertoire in operas and orchestral concerts. The laundry list aspect clutters the focus of the article. The point of a Wikipedia page is to present 'just the facts' on a subject that are unique to that subject. In addition, material was brazenly and badly pasted from the German Wikipedia page on Gähres. DJRafe (talk) 14:55, 7 April 2018 (UTC)


 * (Comment by AndreaChénierGiordano, dated 4/24/18, 11:40: 'Not every conductor works on the same repertoire. Anyone who works as a professional musician or conductor knows that. The English Wikipedia article was written, to that extent, before the German, so no material could be inserted from it. The point of a Wikipedia page is certainly not to publish the place of residence of a conductor. That is private matter. In addition, the information in this case is incorrect.')


 * First, it is not permissible on wikipedia to blank out all previous discussion on a subject, simply because you do not like what you have read on a page. That betrays your inherent bias towards the subject, besides poor etiquette.  You should put your comments on the talk page in response, which I have done above.  That aside, material in the old content proves the incorrectness of your thesis.  Many, many conductors in history have conducted all of the operas listed in that text (Rosenkavalier, The Magic Flute, et al), so Gähres is far from unique in that regard.  However, his work with those particular German youth orchestras is fairly unique, so that is a fair passage to retain.


 * I have also noticed that you have an exceptionally high percentage of your own edits that are of James Allen Gähres's wikipedia page. That conveys to me one of 3 possible scenarios:
 * * You are a friend of James Allen Gähres.
 * * You are a relative of James Allen Gähres.
 * * Or, in the most extreme scenario, you yourself are James Allen Gähres.


 * If any of these scenarios applies here, you need to be aware of this standard disclaimer text regarding editing on wikipedia:


 * "....if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.


 * "All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible."


 * I have no bias either for or against Gähres. My bias is a general one, namely for objective and objectively presented content that does not sound like hagiography or public relations.  The versions prior to my edits were much, too much, in that hagiographic/PR-like vein. DJRafe (talk) 14:54, 28 April 2018 (UTC)