Jump to content

Talk:Ron Holloway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Improving the Article

[edit]

Believe me, everything in this article is factual and documented in books and reputable publications. There is no conflict of interest because there is no glorification or exaggeration of the subject . Additionally, the wording, which I have been refining for many years is ALL mine. Your questions wouldn't be in reference to Root Boy & the Sex Change Band would they, Leah?Ronsax (talk) 04:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC) Thank you for your observations and suggestions. I will do everything I can to improve this article and bring it up to Wikipedia's standards. Please have patience- I will be working to make it better over the next couple of weeks. It's just a matter of finding the extra time. I am the principle contributor to this article so I take great pride in it. It means a lot to me. I have worked very hard and put in some very long hours as you can imagine. Thank you Ronsax (talk) 09:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC) Update: I have eliminated all bolded words with the exception of Ron Holloway's name at the very beginning of the article. Ronsax (talk) 11:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Ronsax, first, this has nothing to do with Root Boy Slim, although I met Ron through his work with him when I was a teenager, that is true. The issue is that if you wrote everything for his website, it now must be listed on that website (his) too; that all the information was created here on the wikipedia. We cannot have mirror websites. This is an encyclopedia! Am I speaking to Ron himself? Or another person? I will help you with the work on this article if you wish, so we can pull these banners down, but I need to know your ties to Ron Holloway or whatever bands he's worked with- I'm familiar with several. You can leave a note on my talk page. I saw all the time consuming work you have put into the article, and that's why I didn't do anything foolish like delete it, but you really need to clarify your ties to Ron and your intentions with the website. If this is your first article, let me know. Thanks. --leahtwosaints (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ron-- from Leahtwosaints

[edit]

Ok, this article, was initially one written by a fan of Ron Holloway. After seeing it, Holloway himself began to edit it. However, learning to use the wikipedia, he continued to write what amounted to an autobiography to assist the wording in his own website. Ronsax, first, I urge you to read this: WP:AB. It is the reason for the banners on this talk page. This means, that you must be very careful about what you write about yourself. Even the really great anecdotes must either be removed, or you must provide references (like newspaper interviews) that prove everything on the page, including the actual conversations. An example would be the conversation between you and Dizzy Gillespie. References are used to PROVE that an event, a conversation, whatever, actually took place. It's like writing a term paper. For this reason, you can not refer to the person (Ron Holloway) as "Ron" here, but as "Holloway", except in some situations, as when in the company of his father, or mother, so it isn't confusing which Holloway it is.

Ron and Aleta- I placed a Welcome banner on Ron's personal talk page and offered to mentor him as best I can. I will be depending on you, Aleta for questionable areas. I know Ron from like, 25 years ago. Only this time, it isn't a musician from Food for Thought restauraunt, trying to further a career. Ron is famous, and has no need for such actions. I've begun editing the most obvious issues with the page. If another person from the Wiki Albums area is willing, we could use help for the Discography. (I just joined the Wiki Albums workgroup, but have a LOT to learn still..)

Lastly, Ron, I'll copy this to your and Aleta's talk pages, but as long as you are responding to someone on a talk page for an article, or a user's talk page, in the same section where they wrote, they'll automatically see your response- a note will appear at the top of the page saying you have messages, saving you the need to copy the same note to each person. Let me know if my re-wording of your text is unnacceptable to you. Best wishes!--leahtwosaints (talk) 04:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Leah

[edit]

First of all thank you so much for helping me clean up the article and bring it into an area of acceptability. I still have all of the newspaper articles and a long chapter in a book to back up everything in the article. You are correct when you point out the original Wiki article was started by a fan. Actually, by fans I don't personally KNOW! The couple had come home from one of my performances and decided they wanted to do it. I was totally surprised when I learned of the articles existence. I read it and I realized how SKETCHY is was. This kind of disturbed me. I didn't want sketchy, incomplete pieces out there. This is why I decided to try and create a piece that is based on provable, factual details. I welcome your input because I want to do this correctly or objectively. I'm not interested in creating a "promotional" piece as you rightly pointed out. You have done an excellent job of cleaning up some things! You have done so without losing the meaning of my original language and you retained the chronology of the events. I couldn't wish for more than that! Thank you Leah (and Aleta), Ronsax (talk) 12:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Ronsax

[edit]

Some words of wisdom, and hopefully, help- please keep in mind that we need verifiable sources (see WP:V) - verifiability takes precedence over truth - in other words, knowing that something is true from personal experience doesn't work -that would be considered original research which is not allowed. Reliable sources are the key. Please do not use You Tube as sources, and be sure to use inline referencing- we should talk.leahtwosaints (talk) 14:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needing help

[edit]

This article needs substantial cleanup giving references for all claims made within, regardless of it being about (and edited by) a notable musician. --leahtwosaints (talk) 14:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Videos for references

[edit]

References for the Ron Holloway page

[edit]

PUT THEM HERE!

References not yet incorporated into the text of the article, or ones that might be used in more than one place belong here! Please add other references that may be helpful here in this section as well, so we can find them and once you are convinced they can not be used anymore or if they are not helpful, reliable references, just cross them out like this. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 21:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. General:
  1. Reviews and articles
  1. Videos

Hello

[edit]

As I started this article I was asked to look at it due to a dispute. As the subject is editing I think this brings up potential conflict-of-interest concerns, which may cause an increased scrutiny as the article does not look particularly bad to me. Anyway to deal with some of that any remaining quotes from Holloway praising his own work should perhaps be trimmed. This may not exactly be necessary, may even seem unfair, but there's some tendency to be sticklerish about things like that. Related to this there might be too many adjectives of a disputable nature like "virtuosic" or "notorious" or what not. The section Root Boy Slim and The Sex Change Band is not sourced, but does make some claims. I may work on this. It is possible the citations don't always justify what's said in a statement, but determining this might be more work than I'm prepared for right now. Youtube videos as sources, this occurs just once I believe, seem to be a matter of controversy on other articles I've worked on. You would think that might be different with musicians, but it seems like I've seen it go either way. Seeing as the Youtube clip is just an added citation on his working with Gillespie it might be unnecessary, but if the existing editors don't object to it I'm indifferent on the issue.

All that said I would say the sourcing appears thorough and proper even if I have not validated all sources as saying what's claimed. I'm not sure this helped much, but these are my initial thoughts. Try to be respectful if/when you respond.--T. Anthony (talk) 03:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, T. Anthony. It is good to hear from you! Thank you so much for starting this article four years ago. It was a very nice gesture and I was touched that someone would do such a nice thing! I hope you and yours are well. Thank you for your comments. I appreciate any help you can give. I have many reliable references for the 'Root Boy Slim and the Sex Change Band' section. I just hadn't gotten that far, but feel free to contribute anything you'd like. I more than welcome it!

All the best! Ronsax (talk) 04:13, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, mny. I wasn't aware there even was a dispute!? Please note: we do not punish others via their articles here. My edits may have seemed to User:Ronsax to be merciless and swift, but I simply can not continue to balance both the wishes of the person in the biography with the demands in the guidelines of Wikipedia. I work 8-10 hour shifts nights, raise kids. Obviously this kind of thing has been problematic for others in the past, since so many pages in the WP that address problems that ensue, and why the subjects are discouraged from editing. WP:NPA Assuming good faith is one of the Five pillars of Wikipedia|. All who have worked with me know I am serious about my work. Ron, you must know that. If I spoke out of turn, and hurt your feelings, Ron, I apologize. We do not air dirty laundry on Wikipedia, and I think email and phone calls are not advisable to protect the fragile issues that could be interpreted as WP:COI. Thanks for the impartial review. We should be working toward the same goal to have an informed encyclopedia available for free on the web. I sought out other editors as I promised last week to assist. I've just insisted on using inline CITE references that can pass muster if this article makes it to a review of editors and passes for GA status. YouTube sources aren't often used. It's possible, but they run the danger of being pulled either from You Tube either for copyright violation, dropped from the uploader's "playlists", and are subject to international law.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 22:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I misunderstood. I just took your tone as exasperated and assumed it to be worse or that you're arguing. There is parts that might be gushy and need trimmed, I'm glad you removed the Youtube deal, etc. My initial look was a provisional skimming deal. Lastly when I really worked a on jazz articles some of them were truly terrible. Like they had virtually no references of any kind or were written as long unbroken paragraphs or what not. (The articles on people named Nikolaj Hess or Benjamin Feliksdal are maybe close to what I remember) Or when the editor is the subject they will insist on huge amounts of unsourced personal stories. There might be some of that last in this, but it seemed fixable. I hope you two can work it out, because I admit I'm kind of a lazy editor these days and am not quite prepared to clean an article of this length. I may look at it more later in the week though. I feel a bit guilty I'm not helping much as I really have little going on in my life, but there it is.--T. Anthony (talk) 15:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In My Defense

[edit]

Hello, T.Anthony and Leah, Thanks again for taking the time to look at the article, T. Anthony. When you have a moment, please take a look at the replies and messages I left on my talk page since you and I communicated there. I stand behind everything I said in those messages. There is a very different tone on display in Leah's above message than the volatile, sarcastic tone in her personal emails to me. It was the inappropriate tone and aggressive language in her emails that prompted me to make a public statement that I would no longer be responding to her emails. After the second harassing email I found out how I could get the email trail to the police so that they have a copy of exactly what was said. I haven't filed any formal complaints but I've been asked to report to them each time I hear from Leah outside Wikipedia. I take this seriously. I have been a gentleman with Leah in emails, here on Wikipedia and during telephone conversations. I have not gone from site to site making untrue statements about her. I do not have a prolific history of posts here on Wikipedia. Ninety-nine percent of my time here has been me working to improve the article. I only recently started to defend myself here out of necessity. Please do not feel "caught in the middle". I am only leaving this message here because I noticed the above statements. Above Leah states: "Obviously this kind of thing has been problematic for others in the past, since so many pages in the WP that address problems that ensue, and why the subjects are discouraged from editing." My problem is not with anyone making changes or edits on the article. A close examination will reveal this. My problem has to do with finding a significant number of negative, sarcastic, untrue statements made by Leah, about myself and the article! I know where each one of these are and have made copies of the comments. Ronsax (talk) 20:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ronsax has been blocked for threatening legal action. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reference advice again

[edit]

A good way of choosing references is to pick those that are not photoshoots, or videos, or those from so called "gray areas"- which would be websites that allow readers to register and their opinions (whether fact or fiction) are used in the text. The best references to stick with are in print, verifiable, and to allow the text of the printed interviews and reviews to tell the story-- wrapped around a framework created by the Wikipedia itself. It is why WP:MOS is such a necessity, and the pieces on writing your first article are of utmost importance. That will be the final judge in the end. My edits are nothing compared to the scrutiny that every article must go through to reach GA status, to say nothing of FA status. It is why I pointed out the difficulty and technical excellence involved in the fruition of the article on Bob Dylan. On the other hand, I have been one of two lead editors on the Cat Stevens article, which just lost it's GA status, and dropped to C status- with all the photo clips, sound bites and careful editing I placed- not to mention that of others as well. It's amazing what it takes to reach that point, when a year ago, it would have qualified for FA almost. It is one of the hazards when a biographer covers a living person. That drop took place while I was busy with other articles. Also, since referencing must be uniform, and is simpler to evaluate articles, please do use CITE. It will save lots of time otherwise, following after the inline references you are placing now and adjusting them to the same flow, in addition, it opens many boxes that will help you evaluate the validity of your references! Really! Finding that you must provide authors' names, URL, titles, date of the aricles being used, and more, it's easy to find what is missing in the references that will not pass inspection. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 22:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Won't do it

[edit]

I hadn't any idea there was an accusation about my edits. I explained that whatever we feel, we don't put it in biography articles, and assume good faith. Wouldn't mind responding to this negativity, but that would encourage it. I will not work on this article. I can not stoop down to this level. I won't do it. Victims of harrassment on the internet can call the police. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I was of no help with this situation. There's just too much I wasn't aware of it seems and I didn't feel capable of fixing it I suppose. Sorry. I will delete the discussion of it from my talk page and try to move on.--T. Anthony (talk) 18:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I've known Ron about 35 years and I see no inaccuracies on the page. I see that means little based on what I read regarding policy but how do you find newspaper and other articles for stuff 20-30 years old? Too bad, so as I read it things would have been cool if someone else wrote or edited it? Oh well......... Earl Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curlington (talk • contribs) 02:56, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ron Holloway/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
I began to clean up this page, only to find multiple problems with wikification, bolding, and references. I checked out the main website, Official Ron Holloway Website, and found the article to be copy-pasted from that site almost exclusively. This is why the first two paragraphs seem OK, (my cleanup, simply lacking references, but I believe the rest, sadly, is copyright violation. What a shame, because someone obviously put a lot of time into it, but used bolding for wikifying words, and copy and paste, and more. --leahtwosaints (talk) 01:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know User:Ronsax. There's no copyvio. He inserted much of the information from the biography on his own website. Finding an article existed about him in the Wikipedia, he began to try editing his article here with no experience. As he's the subject of the article, permission was obtained by an Admin., User:Aleta for him to edit it. Since he's performed with so many jazz, jam bands, and blues-rock luminaries, he has no need to boast here but it does merit watching and helping, since he's not normally an editor. In particular, the discography section and below really needs help- maybe it's own section, as well as the tone and inline referencing needs- it isn't uniform in the biography in most places.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 16:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm hoping that other experienced editors will assist in this article. I agreed to adopt User:Ronsax years ago when I was far too new myself to handle the responsibility. That is my fault, and still, I edit several articles, so I am hoping other editors will be bold and focus on this article. This man who has maintained a solo career, as well as backing up so many other reputable musicians; there's no need for fake claims given tbe facts. The excessive links piled on the article should be inserted into the text. Album and discography pages would help immensely. I don't see the page as needing a complete rewrite if only those sources are all inserted as inline citations, using CITE.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 18:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 18:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 04:51, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Ron Holloway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:24, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ron_Holloway&oldid=1207621565"