Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tjako van Schie


 * 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   Keep. It has been discussed in detail that the Dutch wikipedia deleted this article. Sister projects have their own policies and guidelines for notability and their local wiki consensus is likely different than ours on many matters. Although if another wiki has researched a matter and has a viewable page with coherent and relevant information to the discussion at hand, it is obviously helpful to reference such a discussion. But we do not generally ignore our own consensus-forming processes and blindly follow what a sister project has done without reevaluating the details against our own policies and guidelines. So for this to be the central argument for deletion here, is quite problematic. Several wikipedians (as well as the subject himself) have offered reasonable evidence that the subject is at least marginally notable under WP:Music, and so I find keeping the article is the reasonable thing to do.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 04:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Tjako van Schie

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Some people are interwiki spamming the article about this Dutch musician who has no encyclopedic value. He is at the most localy famous in his town or gemeente. It was decided on the Dutch Wikipedia a long time ago by a majority that this man was not encyclopedic but the people who thought/think he was/is didn't stop there, now they do things like this. Jorrit-H (talk) 10:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Already removed from wiki-nl and wiki-zea forself promotion. Jorrit-H (talk) 10:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. If this very man has been removed from the Dutch Wiki, what on earth is he doing here? The external links are somewhat biased towards sites favouring the man in question, and the article itself fails WP:NOTE.  A Prodigy   ~In Pursuit of Perfection ~ 10:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The Dutch article was removed for it was written by the man himself. An error he later admitted to. The composer/musician seems to me to be undoubtedly of encyclopedic value. He has composed music, his compositions have been published in print, they have been recorded (and issued) on CD as well in public performances. Problems that might or might have not occurred (depends on your POV) on other wikis should not interfere here. Pithia (talk) 11:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * WRONG - it was removed several times after that as well, because he was according to a majority not of any encyclopedic value. Wich brings me to the question, who's sockpuppet are you anyway? Jorrit-H (talk) 20:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this WP:CIV please. Take these issues to Checkuser or SSP if you suspect sockpuppetry, but don't start trowing random accusations around uness you can support them with proof. Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 20:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Keep. par rationale provided below.(Talk ,Contribs ) 12:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right, I wrongly omitted sources. Now I've added references. Pithia (talk) 13:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Switched vote to weak keep. I think these sources lift the article subject above the delete threshold. While it are not the best sources in the world, and the artist is quite a borderline case there are much worse articles out there. I see little reason to remove this one. Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 20:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Upped to keep based upon my own investigation and rationale below. (Interesting really. I always deemed myself to be a deletionist) Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 17:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. This to mention "selfpromo" is ridiculous, as well as the absurd proposal here too for deletion. This very (well) known pianist was never to be "removed" from nl.wikipedia, only contested by people without much notice of music theory, e.g. . Yours + D.A. Borgdorff by: 86.83.155.44 (talk) 20:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article was anonymously created on the Dutch Wikipedia in 2005, 2006 and 2007 and Tjako later admitted he was the person who created it all these three times. Every time that article has been deleted within several weeks after creation following the normal procedure. The Dutch arbcom decided the article was rightly deleted and blocked for creation and that Tjako severely harmed both the Dutch Wikipedia and its community by constantly insisting to get an article about him on that Wikipedia and that it was clear he did so for personal profit. After it was deleted on the zea-wikipedia he entered under two identities in a discussion to get the article restored and for both identities without revealing he tried to get back a biographical article about himself. Later he did admit it was him. Yesterday the article was created here and on the French Wikpedia and in both cases as the very first edit of the same new user. Seems very much of yet another act of self promotion. - Robotje (talk) 08:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You seem to be Dutch hunter again too: Robotje.! And for the nominator: it has to be closed: this AfD. Don't nominate articles for deletion minutes after they are created; it screams of bad faith. In addition, your rationale -- albeit consisting of only a few words, was weak at best.
 * I decided to give this article a final thought by checking the reasons for removal the the dutch wikipedia to determine if i might have overlooked anything in my analysis below. I have to say i find it interesting that the AFD on dutch wikipedia actually seems to have been based upon a ballot, and I am honest if i say that my faith in the fairness of the removal of this article over there is actually rather low.
 * The last AFD of this article is literally riddled with votes that should not have had any influence on the removal process. Votes without comments, Votes that state personal opinions as opposed to rules, votes that actually make no sense at all (Freely translated example: Delete: This article is just a going to cause problems. User (Tjako red.) cannot correctly handle it). There is actually a vote that is an outright swear against the article's subject. And worse of all? Apparently ALL these votes are actually counted towards the result. I would conclude that an AFD like this should have no influence on the AFD procedure here, as it is (Excuse my words) plain garbage where a well thought of vote is apparently worth little more then a content less vote. Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 09:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep will be kept conclusion. Regards D.A. Borgdorff by 86.83.155.44 (talk) 11:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please !vote only once.--Prosfilaes (talk) 12:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Would we keep a junior professor at the premium music school in another country, who's recorded CDs and has played concerts around the world? Probably yes. How and why the article was created is completely irrelevant. Zocky | picture popups 15:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * He is one of the 12 people working as a 'correpetitor' (kind of répétiteur; i.e. he is not a teacher) at the music conservatory in Amsterdam and this conservatory is not considered to be of a university level in the Netherlands. Calling him a professor (as is done in the article) or "junior professor" as user Zocky does, is not giving a right picture of his job there. His main job doesn't make him notable at all for the English Wikipedia. - Robotje (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Mr. Van Schie is not only teaching for Masters' classes practice at the Amsterdam Conservatory but elsewhere too, as e.g. 'stated': in Porto. - But foremost he's a piano virtuoso to be heard of, secondly creating music compositions. Of course he teaches as professor as inherently well. Yours: dAb 86.83.155.44 (talk) 17:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC) (EC)


 * FYI: Just here to correct some arguments here, without trying tot influence the debate itself. I am Tjako van Schie. I am correpetitor and my job is also 'senior teacher' at the Amsterdam Conservatory, which has the official master degree in the curriculum. I don't want to go into details of the history of the article on other wikipedia's, but one thing I want to mention is that the article here, the article in france and the article on some local dutch dialect wikipedias are NOT written by myself. I did initiate the dutch lemma however, which I now regret, because it caused big debate about authors writing about themselves. About 8 months ago therefor I decided not to write about myself anymore on Dutch wiki, in order to let others decide whether or not an article should appear. The article which was deleted however was already also edited by others after my initiative. My aim was never to put 'advertising for myself' on that wiki, but to inform, because I believed my work might be encyclopedic enough. The deleted article also was built on quite a lot of sources of independent nature, if it helps for this debate i could provide those sources of course. I don't want to interfere with how the english community deals with a possible article about my work as pianist and composer, and hope the judgement will be on the basis of enough notability and reliable good sources, and I hope everybody will assume good faith towards me, like I do towards others. If there won't be an article it's fine with me. The Dutch matters and affairs around their deleted article are i.m.h.o. not relevant in regard to possible contents of an article here. Also what happened at other wiki's: i never used sockpuppets anywhere, let alone abuse them, an never had any secrets about my true identity in any wiki account. I won't interfere any further with this discussion, and wish all wisdom in this matter. If anybody has questions, feel free to put an entry at my talk page. On this wiki i contributed mainly in musical articles because that's my main expertise. That's all, happy debating for the rest. Regards, DTBone (talk) 17:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC) (Tjako van Schie).


 * Comment on Notability and AFD status I am getting the feeling that this entire AFD is mainly based upon WP:COI and WP:BIAS. The majority of the keep votes are being based upon being the article's creator/writer (With no specifics why it is a good article), and the majority of the Delete votes basis seems to be that it was "Removed at the dutch wikipedia". I find both of these arguments not valid for this AFD. An article should be kept or removed based upon Its compliance with the relevant guidelines in its current form, and NOT on the basis of having "Been removed before"


 * In order to get some form of debate instead of the current mudslinging, i have (To the best of my abilities) tried to verify if this article is compliant with the relevant guidelines.
 * - WP:COI and WP:AUTOBIO. According to these two guidelines self written articles are strongly discouraged by the community in order to prevent any self promotion. While being strongly discouraged, they are not outright forbidden. The article itself seems compliant to WP:NPOV. I see no personal opinions and the majority of the text is actually sourced. In fact, the article is in a better state then many of the other articles. Personally i would therefore say that the article does not suffer from standard autobio issues. in case this is really a problem, an autobio template could be added.
 * - WP:N / WP:Music and WP:V. The notability of this article depends upon compliance with the two guidelines mentioned. If the article would be evaluated based upon presumed notability, rather then on one of the more specific WP:MUSIC guidelines, the outcome would be weak. Part of the sources are newspapers, but most of the coverage is local or trivial. However, when evaluated against the music guideline, Subsection number 6 "Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country" seems to come into play. This article in the china daily confirms that he has been on an international tour, and i would say the article qualified as more then just "Trivial" coverage.


 * The article also mentions that Schie has won several "prestigious international piano contests such as the Debussy Talent Contest in Holland, the Vladiguerov Piano Competition in Bulgaria, the Bellini Music Competition in Italy and the Marguerite Long Competition in France" My musical knowledge is not enough to determine how important those competitions are, but it might skim across music guideline 8: Has won or placed in a major music competition.


 * Last, the article makes a mention of appearances in several international festivals. While this is not in a notability guideline per se, it could indicate notability. As a conclusion, i would say that the individual discussed is at least mentioned enough times to invalidate any "he has been deleted elsewhere" issues. While the exact extend of his notability can be discussed, and is based for a large part on a single article, i would say deleting the article in its current state would be deleting a possible good article. While he might not be the worlds most notable person i am upping my own vote to "Keep" unless someone can prove to me that the reasoning stated above is invalid. Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 17:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Fact correction (in order to get a clear image): I DID play in big concert halls (app. 1500 people each concert) in China in 2001 (in Bejing, Shanghai and Guangzhou), and the Shanghai recital was broadcasted nationwide for Chinese TV. Unfortunately the Chinese newspaper quoted by Excirial mentions things I did NOT do: i did NOT win in the Vladiguerov International Competition, but was there the only western european participant that year, which was quite remarkable, that was the reason why a Bulgarian newspaper, and a tv- and radio station covered my presence in Bulgaria there back in 1986. I did NOT win a prize in the Bellini Contest in Italy as I was not there at all. The same goes for the Marguerite Long Competition, in which i did NOT participate. The Chinese newspaper screwed all those things up, and i still don't know why (probably a big mistake by the concert promotors over there). I WAS rewarded with the Cultural Public Prize from my birth town Coevorden, and I did win a Debussy Talent Contest for young musicians. Also i won a second prize in the "Life Music Now Foundation", which meant i got a lot of performances in concert circuits in Holland. Rergarding international and other performances: i guess it is best to look in my past concerts agenda (although not all of that is useable as 'independent source' because it's mentioned at my site only). However under 'press' there are genuine scans and quotations. I did play several times in the Amsterdam Convertgebouw, and a number of those performances were recorded for Dutch Radio (Radio 4: Fuer Elise, Avro Spiegelzaal a.o.) Also I played for the Dutch Concertzender (a.o. own compositions), and a number of my cd's were broadcasted on several radio stations worldwide. Regarding my compositions: I write music since i was app. 9 years old, and a number of pieces were published, performed and recorded on cd's, and played in the Netherlands and abroad (a.o. Portugal, Italy, Germany). FYI. Hope this clarifies some matters mentioned here above. Regards, DTBone (talk) 21:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. For the reasons Pithia gave above: The composer/musician seems to me to be undoubtedly of encyclopedic value. He has composed music, his compositions have been published in print, they have been recorded (and issued) on CD as well in public performances. Problems that might or might have not occurred (depends on your POV) on other wikis should not interfere here. Otto (talk) 10:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp  | talk to me  22:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Tjako van Schie has well enough encyclopedic value. Emil76 (talk) 08:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The account who made this article is using an open proxy for me thats suspicious. I also find it very funny to see all the keep voters from the Dutch wiki here, like the have a mail communication or something. All in all I haven't seen 1 good argument or any arguments @ all saying what makes this man of a encyclopedic value. He is localy known in his hometown and thats it. now please come with sources that proof this man deserves an article. Jorrit-H (talk) 18:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Then there is also the question of the delete votes, including the nominator who is not on the best of terms with user Tjako van Schie on the Dutch Wikipedia and that is an understatement. --Kalsermar (talk) 00:18, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems notable, article is decent quality, referenced WikiScrubber (talk) 19:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, after being less than convinced as to Tjako van Schie's encyclopaedic notability on the Dutch WP previously I have changed my mind on this. As a composer/pianist van Schie is notable in my opinion according to WP convention. Being broadcast and appear in the press of the most populous country on Earth would be enough for any person to be encyclopaedic. Also, I question the nominator's motives in this matter. As for the status on the Dutch Wikipedia. The article Tjako van Schie was deleted as self promotions but the attitudes regarding this whole thing over there sometimes border on the hysterical due to personal animosities between some members of the Dutch WP community and the user Tjako van Schie. There are more than a few people who argue just as forcefully that the subject Tjako van Schie is notable and should be seen seperately from the user and there is a discussion currently ongoing about undoing the block on creating the article which also prompts me to view the current nomination as suspicious. --Kalsermar (talk) 00:18, 6 September 2008 (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.