Talk:Jori Chisholm

Untitled
I notice that most of User:Jchisholm's edits have been directed to this article which is something of a contravention of various Wikipedia policies. I dare say Mr Chisholm is just about important enough to have an article of his own, but it would be nice of him to contribute his unquestioned knowledge elsewhere first. Calum 08:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I added the notable wikipedians template. --Liface 19:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Deletion
The person in question is clearly not that important in terms of professional piping not having won any of the major awards at the Argyllshire Gathering, The Northern Meeting or the Highland Society of London Competitions. The awards listed here which the subject has won are second tier awards and do not fit into the category of world class. To be considered one of the world’s best pipers a piper would have to have won a Former Winners event or either of the Highland Society of London Gold Medals. There are many competitors who have won these awards over the past few hundred years. Why is it may I ask that that someone who has never won any these major awards is being portrayed as being so important?

There are many websites you can go and research the subject. To name a few

I have purposely not provided a full test of the article as I am quite sure that upon researching the subject using the websites provided that the subject in this article is not at all very important in terms of world class competitive pipers. He may run his own piping business; in teaching which may I suggest is the main reason for the existence of this article. It is nothing more than an advertisement for his teaching business. Next we will have an average car mechanic on Wikipedia trying to increase his sales!

I will provide a more substantive test with more references and reasoned argument if necessary however at this stage I will not waste my time on an article as insignificant as this one as I think it quite obvious what this article is about and who it was written by! It is quite obvious by the level of personal detail in the article it was contributed to by the subject in the form of another username.

In short I think this article is a joke and should be deleted, and I will provide a more reasoned argument if required.

Fing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fingyon 83 (talk • contribs) 21:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

This absolutely does not qualify for a speedy. Nominate it in AFD if you would like. --Liface 16:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I concur with User Liface. This is not a candidate for speedy deletion. Or any other deletion. JFPerry 21:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I am not a expert on Wikipedia policies but frankly this article appears to be a well placed advertisement. Most of it is placed by the subject himself. Calum 13:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * You are right in that the article was originally posted by the subject himself. However, that does not necessariy mean that it should be deleted. The question, as always, is whether the subject merits inclusion in the Wikipedia, not who originally posted the article. Of course, the problem with autobiography is one of neutrality, but that seems to be a copyedit problem, not an inclusion problem.


 * I have been working on Highland Games related articles, including pipe bands, one of which is the Simon Fraser University Pipe Band, a grade one PB which travels around the Pacific Northwest US and BC where I live and, as such, I had a short list of SFU PB players whom I felt were proper subjects for inclusion in Wikipedia. Among the folks on that list were Robert MacNeil, Jack Lee, J. Reid Maxwell, and Terry Lee (see the article on SFU PB). Jori Chisholm, while not on the "A" list, was certainly on the bubble and it is likely that I would have posted the article myself if he had not done so first. Anyone who is a featured solo performer with this grade one PB which has finished in the top 3 in the World Championships each of the past 8 years, winning the World PB Championships 4 times in the past decade, is certainly a fit candidate for inclusion in Wikipedia. JFPerry 15:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm going to agree with JFPerry here. It is extremely bad form to post an article about yourself, but the fact alone does not merit instant deletion. --Liface 19:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The criteria for speedy deletion of a musical group is not notability but a claim of notability in the article. From WP:MUSIC: "An article that fails to even claim that the subject of the article is notable can be speedy deleted under criterion A7, however." The article previously did not claim notability. Now it does. --Craig Stuntz 15:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not very comfortable with this article as it stands now. I can't seem to find any verifyible sources describing his playing style or history of involvement with bands and solo competition—basically any NPOV information that would turn this article into more than a vanity peice or a promo. I would like to continue to look, as this guy is clearly notible per WP:MUSIC. This page should be tagged as until the tone changes.--Musaabdulrashid 07:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Currently, the major source of information is the second result on a Google search for 'Jori Chisholm', and it appears to be maintained by the individual in question (or his organization). I agree that this individual is notable enough to have an entry, but said entry needs to be supported by citations unaffiliated with the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewLiberal (talk • contribs) 20:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Sources, advertising
First, a discalimer. I am not a student of Jori Chisholm's, nor have I ever been. I am not a member of, nor am I in any capacity associated with, the SFU PB or any of its associated RMM bands, nor have I ever been. And I am not a member of any PB which employs or is associated with Jori Chisholm in any way, nor have I ever been. I have met Jori Chisholm only once - at the 2006 Skagit Valley Highland Games - where we spoke very briefly (for about 2 or 3 minutes).

Sources: Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons (Biographies of living persons) states that information supplied by the subject (for example, from the subject's official web site) may be added to the article under certain conditions. Basically, as long as the information is relevant to the person's notability, it may be included.

Clearly, a list of prizes won at major piping competitions is relevant. This, in fact, is what makes Jori Chisholm notable. The same is true of the discography listing for a musician.

Advertising: Previously, I did remove the list of upcoming releases as this could be construed to be in the nature of advertising. Likewise, I rremoved the somewhat gratuitous link to the subject's official web site in the article (but not, of course, in the links at the bottom as this is the primary source for some of the material).

The listing of solo performances refers to a number of CD recordings which are available commercially. While I don't have a copy of all of the recordings listed, I do have a copy of On Home Ground (vol. 1) and indeed he is listed on that disc as a soloist. But it is not necessary to confirm each and every listed performance. The inclusion of such material from the subject (or his web site) is enough according to Wikipedia policy.

Finally, it appears that this controversy is largely the result of the subject (or someone editing anonymously) placing links to Chisholm's web site in various Wikipedia articles. Yes, this is bad form, especially since they did not appear to belong and were properly removed. If there was an intent to send a message regarding such spamming, you have made your point. The removal of those links having been done, that should have fixed the problem, just as my removal of advertising material (or that which could reasonably be construed to be advertising) should have dealt with the promotional tone of the article.

You may also check the following:


 * http://www.sfupipeband.com (under Members)
 * http://www.bagpipejourney.com (the Who's Who listing)

Also, check the article newly referenced at the bottom of the page (from Celtic Heritage Magazine, reproduced on the SFU PB page). I will be expanding the biographical portion of the article based on this reference in the coming day or so. Hence, the inuse tag.

If you feel that the article still has a promotional tone, or needs sourcing, please be more specific. Which statements do you feel are promotional/advertising? Which statements do you contest as needing sources (keeping in mind Wikipedia policy permitting the usage of the subject, or his web site, as a source)?

Finally, the article was tagged (by myself) with a biostub tag. The biographical section is indeed a stub. Currently, the listing of prizes and discs is out of proportion to the biographical portion, but that is the result of the paucity of information of a biographical nature, not overzealous inclusiveness in the other sections. The solution to the problem of this article is to expand the bio section. There is no problem with either the tone or the content otherwise.

Jim Perry