Talk:James Palumbo

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.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography Start‑class

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

England

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Business Start‑class Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

University of Oxford Start‑class Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Unsourced and contentious

Quite a lot of the material in the article is contentious and/or implausible as well as being quite unsourced. A.B.C.Hawkes (talk) 20:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

August 16th 2011 - Reliable references to souce material have now been added to the James Palumbo Wikipedia page...

How do we go about having the notice requesting reliable sources removed from the top of the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.189.244 (talk) 14:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear

It is not clear which novel the remarks refer to, not that it matters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.67.11 (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After studying Palumbo's web-site, it is still not clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.67.11 (talk) 15:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They might refer to both novels at once. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.67.11 (talk) 15:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move/Rename James Palumbo Wikipedia page

James Palumbo has recently been elevated to the House of Lords and given a Life Peerage...subsequently I need to Move or Rename his page with the appropriate new title information on his behalf.

Seeing as I am not a regular Wiki user or editor how would I go about this? My user account is not 'autoconfimred' as I don't make changes to others' Wikipedia pages

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxitech03 (talk • contribs) 11:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave this reply here and on your talk page. I have searched the London Gazette (see here - http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/all=Palumbo;sort=newest/start=1 ) and cannot find the title he has been conferred. Until the title of his peerage is confirmed, the article cannot be moved or renamed doktorb _words^deeds 15:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply Doktorbuk, his peerage title was announced in the press a couple of months ago but will be made official this Wednesday (02-10-13) https://www.gov.uk/government/news/working-peerages-announced

Once his title has been conferred how would I go about moving or renaming the article please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.189.244 (talk) 15:45, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may not be able to as an IP, so if I can get on line tomorrow when it happens (or if someone else does) it shouldn't be too difficult to move. (CURSE) doktorb _words^deeds 23:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I will post here once his peerage has been confirmed today. I have a Wikipedia user account but I'm not able to Move/Rename an article as my account hasn't been 'autoconfirmed'. Appreciate your offer of help with this... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.189.244 (talk) 07:14, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating the title of James' article so promptly Doktorbuk, but his full official title is "James Palumbo, Baron Palumbo of Southwark" would you mind amending this please so that it is inline with other Lords/Peers (Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Lane_Fox,_Baroness_Lane-Fox_of_Soho) - many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.189.244 (talk) 11:24, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey IP. I'm using WP:TITLE and WP:LEAD as my reasoning here. His full title is the first thing in the article, and the most common way to search for him will be the full name or part of the title. doktorb _words^deeds 19:06, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, but his Father is also 'Lord Palumbo' so having his full peerage title as the article title should help to remove any confusion between the two public figures. If you could please change the title it would be really helpful and much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.189.244 (talk) 07:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Conflict of Interest editing

It should be noted that 62.244.189.244 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) resolves to MSHK Ltd, one of the Ministry of Sound companies owned by James Palumbo. I have removed a selection of "puff quotes" about his novel which this IP inserted to the article - they read like advertising, and were referenced solely to James Palumbo's own website. The IP has also been editing the MoS page. I have placed a Conflict of Interest warning on the IP's talk page, and shall be keeping an eye on things. DuncanHill (talk) 13:19, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a noticeboard thread about this at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#COI editing by IP - Ministry of Sound, James Palumbo and related articles. DuncanHill (talk) 15:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DuncanHill, all taken on board. I am an employee of Ministry of Sound Ltd, working in the IT Department for a number of years. I originally removed offensive material added to James Palumbo’s page but subsequently have made several edits from IP Address 62.244.189.244 to ‘improve the article’. With hindsight I was naïve in my understanding of the rules and ethos of Wikipedia. I’ve reviewed the recent edits made by DuncanHill and Drumies to improve the article and bring it in line with Wikipedia’s rules. I would like to apologise for any issues my edits have caused.

Referencing

I have placed a "refimprove" template on the article. References to the subject's own website, or the sites of his companies, are unlikely to be sufficiently independent for encyclopaedic purpose. Some of the press pieces referenced are rather promotional in tone. Also, some refs link only to a front page of a website, and not to the actual content relied upon. DuncanHill (talk) 13:56, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DuncanHill could you please specify which of the ref links need improving please so new or more reliable references can be found if necessary.

I've also undone most of the changes made my Drimies as large chunks of the article were removed last night which seems unnecessary while steps are being taken to improve this article, as you've suggested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.116.207 (talk) 07:37, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any reference based on his own website or those of his companies for starters. Also, interviews, while ok for reporting his views, won't be acceptable for things he's done (unless phrased something like "he claims to have..."). Have a read of WP:SOURCE to get a better idea of what Wikipedia needs. In the meantime, I have to say I think User:Drmies was pretty much right to make the edits they did, so I am restoring them. DuncanHill (talk) 12:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you DuncanHill. Yes. The tone and the referencing were simply not OK, and claims like "Ministry of Sound has been at the vanguard of the digital music revolution with over 50% of its global sales now coming through digital platforms including Apple’s iTunes" is not logically consistent: that some percentage of their sales is digital doesn't mean (at all) that they're at the vanguard of anything, and the link to the iTunes catalog verifies neither the 50% nor any vanguardian status. But that was only one of many problems in the content I removed, the main problem being, as DuncanHill points out, the lack of reliable sourcing. If basic statements are sourced to the company that's already problematic enough, but if that information basically serves to paint a glorious picture of the company we have a prime reason for removal, and simply reverting is not a fruitful response. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as all but a fraction of this article has now been removed, leaving only well sourced/referenced statements and material, can you please explain why the notices/infoboxes need to stay on the page? If it's not appropriate for the COI editor to remove them, then who should be responsible for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.189.244 (talk) 09:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a note on your talk page. The article still needs improved references, and the COI notice should stay there until there is a consensus here to remove them. It would also be appropriate for you to declare your connexion with the subject of the article. DuncanHill (talk) 09:35, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]