Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter M. Ferreira


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete.  MBisanz  talk 00:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Peter M. Ferreira

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Vanity/advertising article about apparently non-notable musician. The text is pasted from his official biography, though there is a plausible assertion of permission on the talk page. The violinist has basically no news coverage whatsoever (searched "peter m ferreira", "pedro m ferreira", "pedro ferreira" AND violinista, "peter ferreira" AND violinist). Supposed NYT quotes listed on his website don't check out (no hits when searching NYT archives). I think it's nearly speedy-deletable as an ad, but it's been around for a long time so I thought I'd bring it here. Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:29, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Mr. Ferreira is a well known violinist in the violin/classical community and has been on Wikipedia for many years! The above accusations are ridiculous! Vanity?? Advertising??? Are you serious?? Do a proper search and you can find his recordings, books (http://www.amazon.com/The-Violin-Companion-Peter-Ferreira/dp/0578011387) The New York Talk is an old article and with enough search can still be found. No news coverage? Let me know where I can send or post some photos of some of the magazines or news coverage that has him featured, some on the front page, and I'll gladly send them to you! Bionerysuarez (talk, 5 January 2013  —Preceding undated comment added 03:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC) — Bionerysuarez (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Photographs of newspapers and magazines are not what's needed, and are of no benefit to the encyclopaedia. Citations are.  Cite these articles!  Uncle G (talk) 10:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I say advertising because, as you can see in the edit history, Ferreira's record company has been maintaining his article, pasting his official (promotional) bio, etc. And you may be a friend or significant other of Ferreira's, judging by my google searches? Very clever that Ferreira's website abbreviates New York Talk (an apparently non-notable publication I can't find any information about) as NYT, implying that the New York Times praised him.  Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You guys are funny!!And my search on Google also notes and warns of people like YOU who "run" Wikipedia! For example: "people have a strong opinion about a subject, so they will try to control the articles about that subject." EXACTLY what is going on here!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.222.228 (talk) 01:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)  — 71.232.222.228 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * No one person runs Wikipedia. It’s a collective effort based on factual information & a consensus of editors. Anyone checking the page in question now can see your multiple attempts to self-delete the page so I think that answers that. Good luck! --SpyMagician (talk) 01:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Sure... who the hell wants to put up with your BS people! The world doesn't revolve around wikipedia! It seemed interesting, but being its run by people like you it's just a big waist of time and effort! So go ahead delete it. Good luck! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.222.228 (talk) 04:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The article is a huge load of blatant advertising and puffery. It requires a full teardown and rebuild. It's hard to find the wheat from the chaff in it. If the advertising and promotion and puffery is not removed our only recourse is to delete the article with a view to a new article f the same name when emotions have cooled down. The better approach is to rip it apart and cite it. The heat in this deletion discussion suggests to me that the article has been written by those involved with the subject who are distressed that it is being criticised. They need to stand back. If the gentleman is notable he will have his article. If he is not then he will not, but they are not helping it to survive. Only improvement of the article will achieve that. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I've been into the article and removed some of the worst of the puffery, but there is loads more to prune. It can be pruned, but it is quite a task. I've also flagged many points where citations are required. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Revising my thoughts to a simple Delete as failing WP:GNG. Searchng for news reveals nothing. Maybe he will be notable one day. He can have an article then. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I had another go at editing the article to remove yet more puffery, and have reinforced my opinion that it needs to be torn down in its entirety. The assertion on the talk page that copyright materials may be used is weak. OTRS processes are non negotiable. I have also placed this relevant comment on the article's talk page which I feel has relevance to this discussion: "The article is full of blandishments and quasi-facts. So he performed in a concert at the age of 8. Whoopee. So do pretty much all kids who learn the violin. What is significant is whether the performance was a violin concerto or Twinkle Twinkle Little Star on open strings like most 8 year olds do. As it stands today the article is a load of flannel and puffery. Loads of folk can play the violin. Some can play it reasonably well. A few are great soloists. Nothing in the article, nor in any sources, suggests that the gentleman is anything other than a pretty ordinary bloke sawing a cigar box in half who has enough cash to record and produce his own self-published work." Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Note that File:PeterbythepianoNEW.jpg replicates much of this article in the summary. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Note that there is substancial information on his site with links and PDF files showing articles about Mr. Ferreira worth looking at here (http://www.peterferreira.com/acclaim.htm)! Because your search on Google didn't show you "much" doesn't mean he is not in the news. Let's be reasonable people!!
 * On the other hand Fiddle Faddle seems to be the one and ONLY person on this topic who has the right wikipedia approach of at least try to look more into it and try to be positive instead of trashing the article and for that matter a violinist/musician who may not be a "Lady Gaga" of the classical world, but HAS indeed done a lot for himself. He is also a published author and I did find one of his books on Amazon here: http://www.amazon.com/The-Violin-Companion-Peter-Ferreira/dp/0578011387


 * I agree that the article needs to be worked onn but don't agree with the way it was "approached" and "trashed" by the earlier so called wikipedia admins whos approach in my opinion was very negative, unconstructive and in my opinion should NOT be "working" for wikipedia. Good luck - Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.63.70.190 (talk) 14:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)  — 174.63.70.190 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I fear that self published material that may or may not be a reference is useless when seeking to establish the encyclopaedic notabilty of he gentleman. We are forced to ignore it.
 * You are doing your cause absolutely no good by being at best venomous towards people here. Most people suspect you of being either Mr Ferreira or at least his publicist, and in this way you are doing him precisely no favours. If you can find real references in reliabel sources then add them to the article. That is the only thing that will save it. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete As not sufficiently notable. No doubt he is very talented, and his book at least is verifiable, but published by Aeminium records, with whom he also records. And only him, as far as I can see. I can find no independent reviews, so certainly there are none for major venues by the mainstream media. Unfortunately at present there is nothing here beyond self-published work and skilful promotion. Perhaps in time there will be. Mcewan (talk) 16:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete As Mcewan notes, Amazon does have a book by a man of this name -- a text for beginning violinists. Amazon does not have any CDs, MP3s or other music with him in any of the roles mentioned in this article -- violinist, conductor, etc. If all of the claims in the article were true, then perhaps it would meet our standard of notability, but since none of it has citations, it is hard to believe. Both the tone of the responses and tricks such as referring to "NYT" to mean something other than "The New York Times" convince me that this is nothing but puffery. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs)  12:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete I've searched extensively under multiple search terms and also have access to Highbeam Research, Questia, and Jstor. The subject comprehensively fails the General notability guideline and fails to meet a single one of the alternate criteria at WP:MUSICBIO. There is no evidence of him having appeared in any major concert halls or as a soloist with notable orchestras. He appears to perform locally in Connecticut in small venues and at private functions, combined working as a violin teacher. The book and CDs are self-published, and I have been unable to find any reviews or even mentions of them in reliable sources. His website has PDF copies of two articles in minor publications aimed at the Portuguese community in the US, neither of which is notable, and one of which is defunct. Both articles are basically interview and press-release based, and the quote "one of the most celebrated Portuguese-born violinist [sic] of the modern era" (or its Portuguese equivalent), does not appear in either of those sources, or anywhere else that I could find. If it were indeed true, there would be significant coverage of this person, at least in specialised music publications. Instead, there's nothing. Voceditenore (talk) 14:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.