Talk:Jian Ghomeshi

past tense

Why is the article written in the past tense? He is (still) a musician, author etc... and as far as I know, he hasn't died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.148.60 (talk) 05:54, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Jian Ghomeshi's middle name

What is Jian Ghomeshi's middle name? Does he even have a middle name? I cannot find it anywhere. Most other entries like this list the person's full name. Samuel Stringman (talk) 19:22, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Samuel, Wikipedia is not a publication but standard usage should apply: one full first name or two initials (for those few of us who have initials but no names). I think the average reader is savvy enough to know that, if there are two persons with the same name their birthdates would be sufficient to distinguish them.23:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

We include middle names if we can find a source for them, and not if we don't. It's not required information that any biographical article has to include — it's valid information if we can source it properly, sure, but it's by no means a core requirement that all articles must contain. Bearcat (talk) 19:44, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

York University would not give me his middle name. I will email the CBC to see what I can get. Samuel Stringman (talk) 11:09, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

A possible middle name is not the kind of thing that needs original research. Even if you track down something about the subject in real life, it's not something we can add to the article anyway. (It's not unusual for people to not even have middle names.) Unless it's in a reliable, published source, that kind of thing can't go in the article.__ E L A Q U E A T E 13:08, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I am well aware that original research is ineligible for submission to Wikipedia articles. I would find a published source that could be used as a citation. I am sure it is on a public file somewhere. Samuel Stringman -Sam's talk page

Pretty much the only acceptable sourcing for his middle name would be its publication in media coverage of him. Due to WP:BLPPRIVACY concerns, we're not allowed to dig into "files" (birth/death/marriage records, court records, bankruptcy filings, etc.), "public" or otherwise, to track down information that hasn't already been published by a secondary source. Nor are we allowed to privately contact the CBC or York University (or even Ghomeshi himself) to ask for it — because even if one of them did somehow give it to you, "was given to me in a private e-mail" doesn't count for sourcing either if that e-mail hasn't been published somewhere for verification. The only alternative that exists to secondary media coverage would be if the copyrights page in a copy of 1982 explicitly listed his author credit as "Ghomeshi, Jian ________", in which case we could source it to the book itself — but absent that, it's "name has already been put on the record in media coverage" or nothing, and you're already skating on very thin ice in your efforts to track it down. If you can't find it in a published secondary source, then you need to let it go. Bearcat (talk) 21:52, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I was just going to mention WP:BLPPRIMARY. And the whole thing is probably a weird dead end quest, as Persian and Arabic cultured names most often don't have a middle name in any sense you're looking for here. The most likely scenario is that he doesn't have one. __ E L A Q U E A T E 22:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Most European countries, for example, people do not have a middle name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:4950:AB0C:EDA1:FBFD:E076:4EFF (talk) 14:02, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

The book (as listed on torontopubliclibrary and amazon) does not show any middle name. K7L (talk) 16:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Using a photo of Lights is appropriate

In the section on the artists JG managed, a photo of Lights, who he managed from 2007 to 2014, was included. Recently, it was deleted.

Lights performing in May, 2010

. Lights is discussed in the section, so it follows the image use policy. I believe that we should put the photo back.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 13:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

At the time the picture was added, I thought it was unfortunate for Lights, as it has editorial implications in the context of recent events beyond neutrally illustrating the section. This article never had a picture of Lights before, and this one was only added after she publicly said Ghomeshi wasn't going to be her manager anymore. Are we in danger of linking Lights more strongly with post-accusations Ghomeshi in readers' minds, beyond the weight of what sources have done? We could decide to either use or not use the picture, as I don't think policy disallows it, but I think using it right now could be read by some in a bit of a distasteful way. (I'm sure the editors involved are acting with the best intent.) As an analogy, it feels like if someone is in the news for something discreditable, and only then there's a rush to add all the pictures of his friends and family. Anyway, it's probably policy allowed, but I think it probably diminishes the article about as much as it arguably adds to it.__ E L A Q U E A T E 14:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

My only real concern is whether adding the image of Lights would give the impression that she is one of the women Ghomeshi is alleged to have abused. Even accounting for the fact that it would have been placed in a different section. Resolute 15:12, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree that the photo should be kept out, not just because it could be concluded that she was one of his accusers, but because he's no longer her manager. It would have made sense to include the photo when he managed her (and apparently it wasn't in the article at that point) but now that this relationship has ended, the photo isn't needed. Ca2james (talk) 15:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I am the editor who removed the photo. I don't necessarily object to a photo of Lights in the article, but only if it's related to Ghomeshi in a more direct way. For example, a photo of Lights with Ghomeshi when he was her manager would make sense and add understanding to the article. Images are included in articles to increase the reader's understanding of the subject. I don't think this image adds anything. I think that a more appropriate photo would be one that shows Ghomeshi in his Fruvous days -- if such an image is available. Tchaliburton (talk) 16:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I like the list of dated people

The following text was deleted by Elaquette on the grounds that the relationships were not that serious. I think a list of women Ghomeshi dated is interesting, even if they just went out a few times on dates. OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 22:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

• Ghomeshi has had few serious relationships but he dated Canadian actress Rebecca Davis (known for her role in the erotic thriller Where the Truth Lies). According to a Q staff member he has also dated Canadian singer Feist, ­American actress Christina Hendricks (known for her role in the Mad Men series), and Canadian actress and film director Sarah Polley.

A list of past romantic entanglements with named living women, on an article about a person with unresolved criminal charges regarding sexual assault and anonymous women, is undeniably interesting. I think a lot of people would be profoundly interested.__ E L A Q U E A T E 23:12, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

To be clear, "interesting" is not a reason to include these women in this article. Adding names that can't not be read as those of either potential accusers or potential victims is not fair to Ghomeshi, as it could give the gossipy implication he's assaulted these specific women, and its not fair to the women, as this connection only seems to be coming from an unnamed CBC employee in a single source. Adding a list of people he might have briefly dated is just a bad idea, especially with only a single source to back up something that might be considered radioactively contentious to all the people involved. This would probably be true about a list of "dates" even without the charges. But I would concede that his "little black book" is probably very interesting, to a lot of people. __ E L A Q U E A T E 23:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Wikipedia is not TMZ. A list of random people an article subject dated is not encyclopedic information. Resolute 01:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

There is some point at which point a relationship would become pertinent, but who could say what that is? 6 months? A year?OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 02:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

I generally only consider it in the case of marriage, child or a notable incident. I've never believed arbitrary times are what we should go by.

I agree that the list of women he's dated is probably interesting. However, those names don't belong in the article. Aside from the issues related to his recent scandal, it's gossipy. I'd support including names only if, as Resolute says, he was married or living with her, they had a child, or some other notable event occurred. These events must also have better sourcing than an unnamed single source. Ca2james (talk) 05:25, 16 December 2014 (UTC)