Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/01 September 2011/Gil Birmingham

Where is the dispute?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertspr

Who is involved?
The list of the users involved. For example:


 * minervaK
 * Robertspr

What is the dispute?
Robertspr is Gil Birmingham's publicist, who persists in simply copying over the content of his website to the Wikipedia article. She also objects to my citing San Antonio birth records for the subject's date of birth, which she gives as 1966 (the birth records give it as 1953). If I am in the wrong on this, I would like to know. She is calling me a "stalker" on the edit page, which I feel is highly inappropriate. I request that this name-calling please be removed, at the very least. If the Cabal feels that the correct date of birth is too obscure to reference, I will abide by that decision.

What steps have you already taken to try and resolve the dispute?
I have posted on Jody's talk page, but I feel that her characterization of me as a "stalker" has already put rational discussion out of reach. When I first discovered this information, I wrote directly to Gil by email, asking him about it. Jody replied, and we exchanged several messages on the subject, the final upshot of which was that she did not feel like there was anything she could do if people wanted to look into Gil's background and find out his real birthdate.

Jody didn't attempt to contact me at all before reverting the page back to her plagiarized version. However, she did post some additional allegations about me on another user's page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WikHead#Gil_Birmingham_page). I find this behavior highly disturbing, given that I have never threatened her or her client with anything. I simply posted a piece of independently-verified public information.

What issues needs to be addressed to help resolve the dispute
I understand that it is common in the performing arts to shave a few years off one's age, and that in some ways it could be detrimental to Gil's career for him to be known to be older, but it is not my intention to try and harm him in any way. I simply want there to be accurate information available about a public figure that many people are interested in. Does citing his correct birth date fall under the definition of unacceptable "outing" per Wikipedia policy?

What can we do to help resolve this issue?
Please offer your opinion on the viability of the birth date records as a source.

Please remove the comment on the article history page calling me a "stalker."

Thank you.

Mediator notes
I will close this in 3 days. If there are still problems, please say so. Xavexgoem (talk) 10:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


 * This specific issue has been resolved to my satisfaction -- MinervaK (talk) 19:13, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Discussion
robertspr response to what is the dispute: The site was created with this information in 2009, and the Wikipedia folks were fine with the information, until this individual decided to remove it. minervaK deleted his entire "Career" section which discussed many aspects of his career and most of his early life information. She replaced it with a sentence about Gil playing music with Moses Brings Plenty and Arvel Bird, which he did one time in his career. It does not reflect the bands he's played with or his musical career. And she added that he makes appearances for many Native American causes, which while not completely untrue, mischaracterizes his charity work since he has not appeared on behalf of Native American charities in the last two years and more than 90% of his charity work is non-Native. It's not that he doesn't support Native causes, but it's not the total focus of his charity work. After she removed all the information on the site, this actor's only claim to fame according to minervaK is a Muscles video back in the 80s with Diana Ross and playing once with Moses. It misrepresents his entire career. If these sentences were added to his other information it wouldn't have been so misaligned.

Regarding the birth records, Gil's middle name is not Al as she posts. I do appologize for the "stalker" comment, please remove it. Gil Birmingham and I were both upset at the time. He is very disappointed that someone would disrepect him and violate his information in this manner. While I know that anyone can post anything on this site, I would hope that Wikipedia would want as much information as possible on individuals in their listing and not allow so much information to be arbitrarily deleted. If Wikepedia has problem with the information coming from Gil's website(which I would point out many other celebrity information comes from), I will be happy to rewrite it all so that it does not resemble the site so closely, or we will select and independent writer to create his career section. Our goal is that Gil be adequately and accurately represented. We have not had a problem with other individuals who have chosen to update this site, as they have added or changed information that was truly accurate and represented Gil Birmingham for the career that he has worked so hard at. Thank you.

robertspr response to what attempts have been made to resolve it? Wikipedia encourages individuals to change information. I read the section about what to do if there are problems with a person's page, and followed the instructions. Both Gil Birmingham and I feel that important information was arbitrarily removed and that the new version created by someone who has never met him does not accurately reflect the totality of his career and achievements.

robertspr response to what issues need to be addressed? robertspr: I agree. Accurate information should be posted. Your birth info post is not accurate. Also, the Career information should remain and not be deleted. After minervaK was done with her edits, the site does not reflect Gil Birmingham's career or accomplishments.

robertspr response to what can be done to resolve the issue: I agree that the stalker comment should be removed, and I appologize. minervaK should produce proof of the birth record and that it is the same Gil Birmingham before the information is posted. The Career information should be restored. As I said previously, I will rework the information if it bothers Wikipedia. We would prefer that minervaK not be allowed to edit this site further, as we feel her edits harm Gil Birmingham's image and his reputation and do not represent him accurately, but rather reflect her opinion of what people would want to know about him, rather than his total career achievements. At minimum, we would prefer that wholesale "deletes" not be allowed once Wikipedia reviews the information unless there is true just cause for the removal.

All we ask is that the information accurate reflect the total scope of his career, not little pieces that on person thinks make up the whole career. It is unfair to your readers and unfair to Mr. Birmingham. Thank you. Jody Roberts, Native Spirit PR & Entertainment


 * I am fine with Jody editing the page to update any information she wishes, but it should maintain a neutral point of view, per WP policy, and avoid the 'PR-ese' that was used before. As far as the birth date, I accessed it through a genealogy site that I pay for, and confirmed it with the vital records office in San Antonio. The genealogy site is Ancestry.com, and anyone with a subscription can go onto the site and get the info. The listing from the San Antonio records division was via a look at their birth records listing at the records office -- these records aren't available online, but I can provide a scan if necessary. If these two publicly-available sources are incorrect, as Jody says, then corrected documentation should be provided and referenced in the article, rather than simply erasing the information in question. Thanks MinervaK (talk) 23:43, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Editors are generally discouraged from doing their own investigations from primary sources like a birth certificate. The problem right now is that neither year will suffice: one is probably correct and original research, the other is wrong and... well, wrong.
 * The current footnote for his DOB that states "no record can be found of him directly stating his age or year of birth" is also OR. There are few content policies on WP, and one of them forbids original research, especially when it's connected with a biography of a living person.
 * Until there's a secondary source for the birthdate on the birth-certificate... I'd play it safe and not give a year at all. It could be argued that listing a DOB is largely only conventional and rarely very necessary anyway. You can leave the month and day, since that doesn't appear to be contested.


 * These policies protect the project from litigation, so I need to be clear: the birth-certificate cannot be used to support the DOB until such a time as a reliable secondary source reports it. Xavexgoem (talk) 04:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Xavexgoem, is not Ancestry.com a reliable secondary source confirming the San Antonio records, or vice-versa? MinervaK (talk) 04:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The consensus is that it's not. Here's the link for that discussion: Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_92. Xavexgoem (talk) 04:08, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I'll go over and change the birthdate to just the month and day, and remove all references to the year, and my sincerest apologies to Jody and Gil. MinervaK (talk) 04:19, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Never mind, I see it's been done. Thanks, Xav -- MinervaK (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2011 (UTC)