Talk:Dara Maclean

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance).

Women in Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

COI tag?

Why has this been tagged? Tom Harrison ^Talk 20:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. The article is better referenced than many WP articles about performers and there doesn't seem to be any clear evidence for the COI-maintenance template. I would support its removal unless the situation changes. Shearonink (talk) 16:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Starting this up again, I'm interested to hear from User:Qxukhgiels56 and User:Toa Nidhiki05 about their views on whether the article should be COI tagged. Before you talk to each other and try to come to a consensus, I suggest you each put why you think what you think, which may make it easier for later on. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 17:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Qxukhgiels56 why do you think the tag should be there?- First of all, it is HotHat (talk · contribs) who has the COI, and Toa Nidhiki appears unfamiliar with this policy (1), and in a rather evasive manner, seems worried that I will accuse him of a COI. However, with the last major edit ouccuring on 25 May, I will not file a COIN unless the disruption continues. But I suggest that we leave the tag there for now, just as a notification.-Qxukhgiels56 (talk) 17:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at HotHat's edits and contributions and talk page. I see nothing to support your assertion of COI. If you are going to make such statements they need to be backed up with something that others can see and judge. In the absence of this information and evidence I can see no reason for the tag;s presence. Have I missed something? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Toa Nidhiki05 why do you think it should be removed?

It should be removed because HotHat does not have a COI. He does not qualify as any of the COI examples (Financial, Autobiography, Citing oneself, Self-promotion, Close relationships, Promotional article production, Campaigning, and Legal antagonists) and while HotHat may well be a fan of the artist (I am not, but am interested in Christian music as a whole), that is not in and of itself a COI - most people edit articles in their interest area. To give an example, I generally work on articles, improving articles related to bands or artists I enjoy. HotHat simply hasn't been promoting MacLean and the articles he has been making are quite neutral.

As for me, I am not unfamiliar with policy and I'm not worried Qxuhkgiels56 is going to accuse me of a COI - I simply pointed out that I am a fan of many of the artists of which I work on to improve articles, and by his logic I have just as much a 'COI' as HotHat. However, he would be laughed out of COI if he accused me of it because I am not producing biased or slanted articles, and neither is HotHat. The point stands that HotHat has no COI and it is not good to label him as having such. Toa Nidhiki05 20:18, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From the documentation at Template:COI this tag seems inappropriate. Tom Harrison ^Talk 17:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's first let Toa Nidhiki submit his opinion-Qxukhgiels56 (talk) 18:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to make the suggestion, having read the above, that, Qxukhgiels56 (or anyone), add {{citation needed}} to the bits in the article where there is a problem. That way, it'll probably be easier for everyone else (in terms of readers and editors) to see exactly where there may be problems. Once that's done we can discuss specific examples and the article overall. Then we can also discuss which maintenance, would be the best (such as {{COI}}, {{POV}}, {{Disputed}}, or maybe {{BLP sources}}). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article has now been tagged by one of those above, but not with any tags to require citations. See this diff. To me this seems to be the precise opposite of reaching consensus. There are no statements of significance without citations, there is no NPOV that I can see and the third tag appears simply to be pointed. I am reverting these edits. I suggest most strongly that consensus be reached before any further similar edits. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:04, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]