Jump to content

Talk:Jian Ghomeshi

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dave Shishkoff (talk | contribs) at 06:24, 7 November 2014 (→Born: Jean Ghomeshi: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Police Investigation

Reports now (Oct 31) that two women have gone to police and an investigation has been launched: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/31/jian_ghomeshi_showed_cbc_video_of_bondage_beating_sources.html

I made a request to include that below. Tchaliburton (talk) 00:15, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 29 October 2014

I sent a wholesome, noncontroversial edit request earlier, it is a photo of JG being interviewed. It is from Wikimedia Commons. OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 23:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought, but that picture has another human being in it. (She's listed as Suanne Kelman, apparently a chair of Journalism at the university). It might be a bit awkward to add a picture of her smiling at Jian to the page, in the middle of a public scandal she presumably has exactly nothing to do with. I don't think the picture is horrible, but the adding it now might, at the very least, give some slight but avoidable embarrassment to an otherwise completely unrelated person. Are there any pictures that might be more representative of his biography? __ E L A Q U E A T E 00:52, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Elaquate on this one. At this particular juncture, it might create the false impression that Suanne Kelman is actually involved in the scandal. Bearcat (talk) 05:09, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In general I don't have an issue with another picture being taken, even one with another person. Having said that, if this was taken on the 27th, as the date on it says, on the licencing information, it would have to go after the radio career section. In this case I would agree with Bearcat and Elaquate. If it was not, and we could put a caption explaining the context (what he was being interviewed about, and the date) it could go in the radio section. --kelapstick(bainuu) 21:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The picture is from 27 January 2010, Left to right: Suanne Kelman and Jian Ghomeshi. If the caption says its from 27 Jan 2010, this doesn't implicate Ms. Kelman in any embarrassing scandal. I think the picture should be put in the radio section.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 01:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any policy on images that contain logos/watermarks, as this one does? __ E L A Q U E A T E 03:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WATERMARK, although I don't think the watermark precludes it from being freely used, the image use policy says it should be free of watermarks. Since the file is on Commons it would have to be dealt with over there. --kelapstick(bainuu) 13:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suanne Kelman posted at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Talk:Jian_Ghomeshi, and says she is not concerned about the use of the photo on the article. --GRuban (talk) 18:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not convinced that this crotch-shot photo adds anything of encyclopedic value. It's not a pic of the subject in the studio, it doesn't seem to represent a particularly significant event, and it's still watermarked against policy. (As a separate issue, I suppose it's not even certain that Suanne Kelman is necessarily the person who made that comment). __ E L A Q U E A T E 21:36, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking about that too, although I don't see it being a BLP vio by just including the picture anyway, so maybe we don't need to ask the user to confirm. But I'm in agreement that we shouldn't use a watermarked image, and it isn't a particularly elegant image of the article subject anyway. Ivanvector (talk) 21:39, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just uploaded and added File:Brent Butt interviewed on Q by Jian Ghomeshi February 18, 2010.jpg to the radio section. In this shot he is actually conducting a radio interview for Q, so I found it pertinent to the section. I am also trying to get one from the Moxy Fruvous days to add to the music section. --kelapstick(bainuu) 21:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That seems like an acceptable compromise. @OnBeyondZebrax: can we close this edit request? Ivanvector (talk) 21:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's better. Directly showing him doing one of the things that made him notable has encyclopedic value.__ E L A Q U E A T E 21:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 29 October 2014

In this sentence near the end of the article: "A fifth woman gave an interview to CBC Radio's As It Happens on October 29, also alleging that Ghomeshi physically abused her without her consent on their very first date." Can we remove the word very? It could be construed as implying that physical abuse would've been more acceptable on a second date, which is needless to say, WP:EDITORIALIZING among other problems. I think the statement speaks for itself without the word. Grayfell (talk) 00:25, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~ Also it is is factually inaccurate. - A Canadian Toker (talk) 02:59, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are now eight women who have come forwards with allegations of assault. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/29/jian_ghomeshi_8_women_accuse_former_cbc_host_of_violence_sexual_abuse_or_harassment.html23.16.255.231 (talk) 03:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Make that nine. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_dumped_by_pr_firm_over_lies_sources_say.html K7L (talk) 13:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 30 October 2014

The National Post is reporting that he was accused of sexual violence via Twitter earlier this year. If this wasn't being reported by reputable media I would say it has no place in the article, but because it is being reported I think we should mention the report. http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/10/30/jian-ghomeshi-was-accused-of-sexual-violence-in-twitter-account-named-after-his-teddy-bear-six-months-ago/ Tchaliburton (talk) 13:48, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's also reported in the Toronto Sun: http://www.torontosun.com/2014/10/30/big-ears-played-really-important-role-in-life-jian-ghomeshi-told-crowd

Tchaliburton (talk) 13:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This request seems to have escaped notice. Could someone address it? Tchaliburton (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Could you say specifically how you think it should be included, i.e. what specific edit you would make? I'm struggling with this one. I'm worried that the "BigEarsTeddy" Twitter is effectively an attack site - its purpose seems to be nothing more than to denigrate and to draw negative attention to the subject, at least from the way the source describes it. We'd be treading dangerously close to tabloid territory by including it, I think, and it would be really easy to give this undue weight in the whole thing. Ivanvector (talk) 22:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think something along the lines of "In October 2014 it was reported that an anonymous Twitter user claiming to be a Carleton University grad had made abuse allegations toward Ghomeshi that previous May." It's probably also worth mentioning that Carleton is investigating but can't confirm the allegation at this point and that the Ottawa Police do not have an investigation open (as mentioned in the reference I mentioned below). Tchaliburton (talk) 02:58, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Will respond below. Ivanvector (talk) 03:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Deactivating edit request, was added per a section below. --kelapstick(bainuu) 13:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jian Ghomeshi alleged sexual abuse scandal

I spun this off as its own article (Jian Ghomeshi alleged sexual abuse scandal) because I thought this section would get large and overshadow the main article. Tchaliburton (talk) 17:56, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Astonishingly the article is not blocked from creation ("salted"). Nevertheless, I wonder if there are WP guidelines (POV forking) that would make a single issue article like this problematic.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 01:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article was deleted at AfD pretty quickly, you can have a look at the reasoning there. A good-faith effort, but probably too soon. Ivanvector (talk) 03:09, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I should have sought a consensus before doing that. My bad. Tchaliburton (talk) 05:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was a fair move, per WP:BOLD. Community disagreed. That's how it goes. Ivanvector (talk) 14:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There would be no reason to salt the article title if it was not recreated against community consensus. --kelapstick(bainuu) 14:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that as the section on the 2014 allegations gets longer, it will get to the point where such a section would constitute WP:UNDUE weight on a few days of news articles in October 2014. For example, if the 2014 allegations section gets longer than the entire "Radio and television" career section, IMHO, this would look like WP:UNDUE. The policy says "Undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements." Here, I think the undue weight would be due to depth of detail and quantity of text. As a result, this makes the creation of an article like "2014 allegations about Jian Ghomeshi" seem desirable. (I have read through the AfD discussion) Thoughts? OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 16:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. We don't (and shouldn't) list every bit of detail that comes out in the next little while, but evaluate each new revelation for its appropriate weight within this article, by condensing the existing information. At some point it won't be appropriate to list what specifically happened on each day since last Thursday, it will just be one continuous event which we can summarize. Ivanvector (talk) 16:25, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I also disagree. First, as has already been mentioned, not every detail needs to be included in the section - in other words, a specific play by play of what happened is not needed or desireable. Think about reading the article in 20 years' time: a summary of events with references to a more detailed description is likely all that will be needed. If the whole situation is notable enough for its own article after the dust has settled and the allegations proven in court, a separate article can be written at that time. Second, creating an article whose primary content is unproven allegations is a BLP violation: from WP:BLP, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. At the moment, all we have are allegations and giving those allegations prominence by writing a separate article on them - even if "alleged" is included in the title - appears to be more tabloidish and less encyclopaedic. Ca2james (talk) 18:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well spoken! Good points you raised there. I was just focusing on WP:UNDUE and not at the bigger pictureOnBeyondZebrax (talk) 19:09, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 30 October 2014

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/cbc-hiring-outside-investigator-to-probe-jian-ghomeshi-allegations/article21386358/ There are a few pieces of info worth including from this article:

  • The CBC is now saying that they are "currently in the process of selecting a third-party company who will conduct a rigorous, independent investigation beyond what’s already done."
  • Police Chief Bill Blair confirmed again that there is still no investigation as of today's date but he has said "we have heard the media reports, and we want to make sure that anyone who has experienced that and believes they are the victim of a sexual assault or any form of assault, to come forward and report it."
  • Ghomeshi's PR firm, Navigator, has dropped him, saying "the circumstances of our engagement have changed and we are no longer able to continue."

Tchaliburton (talk) 22:25, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My take:
  • Point 1: I agree, but would need to think of wording before I would add it, rather than just adding a direct quote. Done
  • Point 2:  Done
  • Point 3: I don't think that is something we would include in an encyclopedia article. --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because that source wasn't being used for any other statemetns, I removed it. If there is something else it can source, it can be added again.
  • The source was: Blackwell, Tom (26 October 2014). "Jian Ghomeshi not facing investigation over anonymous sex abuse allegations, Toronto police say". National Post. Retrieved 27 October 2014. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help). --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Point 1: As a proposal: "As of 30 October 2014, Ghomeshi is not under police investigation relating to the allegations,[24] however the CBC announced that an investigation will be conducted by a third party.[source]"
  • Point 3: I agree. We didn't mention Navigator before, we don't need to now.
Ivanvector (talk) 23:14, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Tchaliburton (talk) 01:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just Navigator; from [1][2] "Crisis communications firm Navigator and PR agency rock-it promotions both announced they had dropped Jian Ghomeshi as a client on Thursday afternoon." K7L (talk) 02:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I didn't see that in the source that was posted here earlier. Neither one of these explicitly says that he was dropped from the promotions firm as a result of the allegations, so maybe we should put at the end of "radio and television": "On October 30, Ghomeshi's PR agency rock-it promotions announced they had dropped him." As for Navigator I'm still not sure it's important. Ivanvector (talk) 03:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's now being reported that Navigator dropped him because he allegedly lied to them. I think that is significant. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_dumped_by_pr_firm_over_lies_sources_say.html Tchaliburton (talk) 05:27, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From the same piece, "Ghomeshi’s profile vanished from the websites of two Canadian speakers bureaus, Keynote Speakers Canada and Speakers’ Spotlight." Looks like the rats are abandoning a sinking ship? K7L (talk) 13:35, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PR companies dropped Ghomeshi as client

Hi, could someone add this to the article?

Here's the source: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_issues_statement_on_allegations.html

--Guat6 (talk) 23:17, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is being discussed above. --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:19, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Missed that, thanks. Guat6 (talk) 04:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 31 October 2014

"In light of the disturbing allegations against former CBC radio host Jian Ghomeshi, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair is encouraging victims of sexual abuse to come forward to police." http://o.canada.com/news/jian-ghomeshi-allegations-toronto-police-chief-encourages-victims-to-come-forward The National Post Published: October 30, 2014, 4:2

OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 01:27, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: "As of October 30, 2014, Ghomeshi is not under police investigation relating to the allegations, however Toronto Police have encouraged victims to come forward, and the CBC announced that they would hire a third party to conduct an investigation.[24][source]" Ivanvector (talk) 02:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm marking this answered, per the edit request directly below. Feel free to reactivate if you disagree. Ivanvector (talk) 14:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 31 October 2014

http://www.ottawasun.com/2014/10/30/carleton-university-looking-into-allegations-against-ex-cbc-host-jian-ghomeshi I think this info should be included in some way (I don't have any particular wording in mind): Carleton University is investigating abuse allegations made toward Ghomeshi though they "have no information at this time that any of our students have been victims." Ottawa Police also say they have received no complaints about him. Tchaliburton (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is about "BigEarsTeddy" again, and I'll echo the same concerns I posted above. Ivanvector (talk) 02:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, it seems worth noting that Carlton has decided to investigate. Suggestion below (incorporating suggestion above):

"[...] lawyer Reva Seth who went on the record with abuse allegations against Ghomeshi.[23] On October 30, Carleton University announced that it would investigate allegations made in April 2014 against Ghomeshi by an anonymous Twitter account.[1] As of October 30, 2014, Ghomeshi is not under police investigation relating to the allegations, however the CBC announced that they would hire a third party to conduct an investigation.[24] Ghomeshi's lawyer has said his client "does not engage in non-consensual role play or sex and any suggestion of the contrary is defamatory."[20] Toronto and Ottawa Police have encouraged victims to come forward.[2][1]

Ivanvector (talk) 03:37, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b "Carleton University looking into allegations against ex-CBC host Jian Ghomeshi". Ottawa Sun. October 30, 2014. Retrieved October 30, 2014.
  2. ^ "Jian Ghomeshi allegations: Toronto police chief encourages victims to come forward". National Post. October 30, 2014. Retrieved October 30, 2014.
That looks good to me. Thanks. Tchaliburton (talk) 05:24, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. --kelapstick(bainuu) 13:18, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested edit

It seems odd that the article mentions that he "was born to" his father, without mentioning his mother who is readily identified as Azar (Sara) Ghomeshi (e.g., in his father's obituary http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/thestar/obituary.aspx?pid=172715753 and JG's thesis paper http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/thestar/obituary.aspx?pid=172715753).

Chris Tyler (talk) 04:35, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done thanks --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:41, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 31 October 2014

Two parts:

  1. Add the year to the first date in the allegations section: "On October 26, 2014, the CBC announced ..." as this is the first date mentioned in this section. Likewise, remove the year from the date in the third paragraph.
  2. Update the number of women involved: "By October 30, nine women ... allegations against Ghomeshi.[23][source]" - Reva Seth is the ninth, according to source: Donovan, Kevin (October 30, 2014). "Jian Ghomeshi dumped by PR firm over 'lies,' sources say". Toronto Star. Retrieved October 31, 2014.
Ivanvector (talk) 16:38, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the year to the first paragraph, however the third paragraph utilizes a template that flags for potentially dated information, so the year cannot be removed without replacing the template with text. I haven't done the second yet. --kelapstick(bainuu) 17:17, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. --kelapstick(bainuu) 17:24, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I didn't notice that, but you could use {{as of|2014|10|30|alt=As of October 30}} to produce the desired result. Ivanvector (talk) 17:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done, didn't know about that option.--kelapstick(bainuu) 17:34, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Globe and Mail source

This is a long and quite detailed investigative report on what exactly happened at the CBC. I don't have time to go through it right now, so posting here for other interested editors. Ivanvector (talk) 18:01, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 31 October 2014

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/31/jian_ghomeshi_showed_cbc_video_of_bondage_beating_sources.html I think the "BigEarsTeddy" Tweet merits more detailed mention at this point. It's now being reported that it was what set off initial concerns. The TorStar is reporting that Ghomeshi spotted it back in April and became concerned. At this point Navigator was hired to represent both the CBC and Ghomeshi. Jesse Brown also spotted the Tweet at this point and began investigating -- which set everything rolling to get us where we are today. (Obviously this isn't the wording I'm requesting, but I think these are the relevant facts to include.)

This article also says that the CBC fired Ghomeshi after viewing a video of him engaged in BDSM activities which he claimed were consensual. I'm not sure if this merits inclusion at this point, but I'd like to hear what others think. Tchaliburton (talk) 23:01, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just adding on another piece of info that should be included: "Two women have come forward to Toronto Police about Jian Ghomeshi and an investigation has begun, police spokesman Mark Pugash said." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/two-women-come-forward-to-police-about-ghomeshi/article21416903/ Tchaliburton (talk) 00:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another new piece of info: Lights has dropped him as a manager. The section that mentions him managing her should be updated accordingly. http://www.blogto.com/arts/2014/10/jian_ghomeshi_dumped_by_agent/ http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/10/31/lights-jian-ghomeshi_n_6085248.html Tchaliburton (talk) 05:28, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They may well have seen one or more video recordings "of him engaged in BDSM activities" etc, but that wording would suggest that it was because of seeing them that they fired him. The articles make clear that wasn't the case. Lovingboth (talk) 11:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why you say that. He was, in fact, fired due to the video: "In a staff memo sent Friday afternoon, the CBC’s executive vice-president of English services, Heather Conway, confirmed that the CBC saw on Oct. 23 'for the first time, graphic evidence that Jian had caused physical injury to a woman.' Conway’s memo says that after viewing the evidence, the CBC 'determined that Jian’s conduct was a fundamental breach of CBC’s standard of acceptable conduct for any employee.'" Tchaliburton (talk) 13:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Sees full text of memo.) Ah yes, they fired him on the basis of that - and would probably have had trouble justifying it in terms of his employment - but subsequent events have shown that what he showed them (which presumably was clearly consensual BDSM, unless he's been very badly advised) wasn't the whole story. Lovingboth (talk) 14:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Penguin Books, which had published his 2012 memoir, has also dropped him [3] abandoning plans to publish his second book. K7L (talk) 15:33, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 1 November 2014

Please make a wikilink to the Reva Seth Wikipedia article where her name appears in this article...it's two thirds of a way down this paragraph:

The Toronto Star published the allegations of three women who said that they experienced violence from Ghomeshi without consent, as well as a former CBC colleague who alleged that Ghomeshi had sexually harassed her in the workplace.[1] A fifth woman gave an interview to CBC Radio's As It Happens on October 29, also alleging that Ghomeshi physically abused her without her consent on their first date.[2] By October 30, nine women had approached media outlets with abuse allegations against Ghomeshi.[3] Actress Lucy DeCoutere was the first woman to agree to the publication of her name in conjunction with the allegations,[4] followed by Huffington Post blogger and lawyer Reva Seth who went on the record with abuse allegations against Ghomeshi.[5] On October 30, Carleton University announced that it would investigate allegations made in April 2014 against Ghomeshi by an anonymous Twitter account.[6]

OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 01:53, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:58, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference torstar allegations 27 oct was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ "We speak to a woman -- anonymously -- who claims she was hit by Jian Ghomeshi". As It Happens, October 29, 2014.
  3. ^ Donovan, Kevin (October 30, 2014). "Jian Ghomeshi dumped by PR firm over 'lies,' sources say". Toronto Star. Retrieved October 31, 2014.
  4. ^ "Jian Ghomeshi: 8 women accuse former CBC host of violence, sexual abuse or harassment". Toronto Star, October 29, 2014.
  5. ^ "Why I Can't Remain Silent About What Jian Did to Me". Huffington Post. October 30, 2014. Retrieved October 30, 2014.
  6. ^ "Carleton University looking into allegations against ex-CBC host Jian Ghomeshi". Ottawa Sun. October 30, 2014. Retrieved October 30, 2014.

Using several sentences from this article in a new WP article

The newly-created article about the Canadian blogger, lawyer, and author of two books, Reva Seth, uses a few sentences from the Jian Ghomeshi article. I acknowledge using this material on the talk page of Reva Seth and in my edit summary. To ensure openness regarding this sensitive BLP matter, I wanted to note what I used from the JG article (modified a bit):

Seth was one of nine women who went to the media in October 2014 to make allegations of abuse from former CBC radio host Jian Ghomeshi. Seth went on the record with abuse allegations against Ghomeshi.[1] As of October 30, Ghomeshi is not under police investigation relating to the allegations, however the CBC announced that they would hire a third party to conduct an investigation.[2] Ghomeshi's lawyer has said his client "does not engage in non-consensual role play or sex and any suggestion of the contrary is defamatory."[3] OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 02:40, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As of October 31, Toronto police are investigating. [4] Let's stop making excuses? K7L (talk) 04:22, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've done some tidying work on the new Reva Seth article (refs and cats mainly) and also asked for semi protection. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:26, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've trimmed the allegations section in the new article considerably. All those quotes alleging abuse are unproven and including them is a BLP violation. Also, neither the police nor the CBC are investigating her claims in particular so I removed them, too. I'm also not in love with the section title - 2014 allegations - but I couldn't think of a better heading so I left it. Ca2james (talk) 15:27, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Why I Can't Remain Silent About What Jian Did to Me". Huffington Post. October 30, 2014. Retrieved October 30, 2014.
  2. ^ Houpt, Simon (October 30, 2014). "CBC hiring outside investigator to probe Jian Ghomeshi allegations". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
  3. ^ Donovan, Kevin (26 October 2014). "CBC fires Jian Ghomeshi over sex allegations". Toronto Star. Retrieved 27 October 2014. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

A completely different matter

Why is the JG article categorized as a "Low importance radio article". He is a household name and has been very important to Canadian radio in the last half-decade.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 03:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to ask WikiProject Radio. Their criteria is "Topics of little interest outside of the radio field or those that are only included for complete coverage or as examples of a higher-level topic; peripheral or trivial topics or topics that have only a limited connection to radio". You could request a reassessment there, but the project seems to be inactive. Ivanvector (talk) 14:12, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

police investigating Ghomeshi

Please update. Toronto Star reports they have launched investigation into Jian Ghomeshi. http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/31/jian_ghomeshi_showed_cbc_video_of_bondage_beating_sources.html

Ryan Van Horne (talk) 08:48, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested edits need to contain word-for-word the information to be removed and the information to be added, as per the template text. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:12, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SOFIXIT applies here. Suggestion: replace third paragraph with:

In response to DeCoutere's report along with one of the anonymous women, Toronto Police launched a investigation on October 31.[1] The CBC announced that they would hire a third party to conduct an internal investigation.[2] Ghomeshi's lawyer has said his client "does not engage in non-consensual role play or sex and any suggestion of the contrary is defamatory."[3]

References

  1. ^ Donovan, Kevin (October 31, 2014). "Toronto police launch investigation into Jian Ghomeshi allegations". Toronto Star. Retrieved November 1, 2014.
  2. ^ Houpt, Simon (October 30, 2014). "CBC hiring outside investigator to probe Jian Ghomeshi allegations". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
  3. ^ Donovan, Kevin (26 October 2014). "CBC fires Jian Ghomeshi over sex allegations". Toronto Star. Retrieved 27 October 2014. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

Ivanvector (talk) 14:43, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It should be made clear that DeCoutere and the anonymous woman came forward to police. The way it's worded it might sound like the police were acting on media reports. Tchaliburton (talk) 16:02, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are now three women who have approached police. Here is my suggestion:

As of November 1 DeCoutere and two women who have not been publicly named have complained to Toronto Police.[1] Toronto Police launched a investigation on October 31.[2] Ghomeshi has not been charged As of November 1. Police have said he will be asked to come in to discuss the allegations though they are not aware of his location. The CBC announced that they would hire a third party to conduct an internal investigation.[3] Toronto Police have said they will be reaching out to the CBC in regards to "graphic evidence" that resulted in his firing. Ghomeshi's lawyer has previously said his client "does not engage in non-consensual role play or sex and any suggestion of the contrary is defamatory."[4]

References

  1. ^ "Three women contact police with allegations against Jian Ghomeshi". Toronto Star. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
  2. ^ Donovan, Kevin (October 31, 2014). "Toronto police launch investigation into Jian Ghomeshi allegations". Toronto Star. Retrieved November 1, 2014.
  3. ^ Houpt, Simon (October 30, 2014). "CBC hiring outside investigator to probe Jian Ghomeshi allegations". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
  4. ^ Donovan, Kevin (26 October 2014). "CBC fires Jian Ghomeshi over sex allegations". Toronto Star. Retrieved 27 October 2014. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

Tchaliburton (talk) 16:41, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing a slightly more conservative version of your section. I'm concerned that stating that he hasn't been charged implies that he will be, and we would need sources making that link in order to include it. It's also possible this request is stale because of new information, in which case I suggest we mark this section closed for the sake of organizing the requests here.

Toronto Police launched a investigation on October 31 after receiving complaints from three women, including DeCoutere.[1][2] Police have said he will be asked to come in to discuss the allegations though they are not aware of his location. The CBC announced that they would hire a third party to conduct an internal investigation.[3] Toronto Police have said they will be reaching out to the CBC in regards to "graphic evidence" that resulted in his firing. Ghomeshi's lawyer has previously said his client "does not engage in non-consensual role play or sex and any suggestion of the contrary is defamatory."[4]

Ivanvector (talk) 16:19, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually this is redundant to K7L's request below, which has already been implemented. Ryan Van Horne Tchaliburton can we mark this request closed? Ivanvector (talk) 16:22, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hearing no opposition, I have deactivated this as redundant to subsequent edits. Ivanvector (talk) 18:38, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

Kelapstick pointed out in one of their edit summaries that this article uses US dates. I've noticed we're going back and forth between dmy and mdy. We should pick one and stick to it. I've been through this debate a few times on Wikipedia, and in my experience there is no consensus for which date format to use for Canada articles, as there is no standard date format (sources differ on this). Our date and time notation in Canada article deals almost exclusively with how Microsoft Windows handles Canadian dates, which I've often found to be wrong, and the article has had a factual accuracy debate going for some time. I've always found it best to just use whichever date format is already in use most commonly, which in this case seems to be mdy, or the US format. There are a few dmy dates in use here that should be reversed. Ivanvector (talk) 15:13, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My experience is that for every day use, English Canada almost exclusively uses MDY and that is how the text of this article should be written. For the references, I usually use YYYY-MM-DD irrespective of how the text looks, but given the referencing format that already exists in this article, they should be standardized to MDY. Resolute 15:21, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) In general, preference in Canadian articles use dmy (although that is not to say that the majority are in that format). Typically the MOS in these matters (spelling and dates) says use whatever it was started in (although for Canadian articles we would always use Canadian spelling, for example). Specifically MOS:DATE TIES says:
Articles on topics with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the more common date format for that nation. For the United States, this is month before day; for most others, it is day before month. Articles related to Canada may use either format consistently.
Since the majority are in mdy format, maybe we should stick with that, despite it being contrary to my personal preference. Accessdates when I add references are automatically done in dmy as that is what my preference is set to, I simply have not been changing them. I have been begrudgingly forcing my self to use mdy in text. With limited success. Really it is a matter of pick one and stick with it.--kelapstick(bainuu) 15:30, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it really matters so long as it's consistent. kelapstick's suggestion seems reasonable and pragmatic. Tchaliburton (talk) 16:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency either way is what matters so I wouldn't really object if the article went DMY, but to be honest, the MOS as it relates to date formatting on Canadian does not reflect real world usage in the slightest. Also of note, the article was created using Day-Month format if we are going to default to first use. Resolute 18:33, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer DMY for Canadian articles which don't already have an established precedent. Here, the precedent seems to be for MDY, so let's be consistent and use that. Ivanvector (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 1 November 2014

From the last paragraph, delete the words: "As of October 30, Ghomeshi is not under police investigation relating to the allegations, however"


The claim that he was not under police investigation on the 30th is a misleading half-truth if an investigation was opened the very next day, Oct 31. See http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto-police-investigating-jian-ghomeshi-allegations-1.2820337 K7L (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, although I would prefer a non-CBC reference, to include as well. --kelapstick(bainuu) 17:37, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Will Ted Rogers do? http://www.macleans.ca/news/need-to-know/police-now-probing-3-complaints-in-ghomeshi-investigation/ K7L (talk) 17:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely, will update, it also includes a third. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:42, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Palmer invites, then uninvites Jian, for her book tour show in Toronto

See Talk:Amanda_Palmer#Jian_Ghomeshi_at_Toronto_book_tour_show_controversy for references. Factoring into the cancellation was that at least nine women have come forward accusing Jian of sexual abuse. — Lentower (talk) 01:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 2 November 2014

Under the "Early Life" section, please modify the description of Mr. Ghomeshi's studies at York University, which currently indicates he graduated with degrees in political science and history. According to an article in the National Post, he also minored in women's studies.

"Cute and awkward in equal measure, the book reads like a pick-up line in 12 chapters, and creates the impression of a mop-haired New Wave David Bowie fanatic, a theatre geek who minored in women’s studies, introspective and sensitive, ambitious and talented, reflecting on his suburban immigrant childhood from his throne atop Canada’s public broadcaster."[5]

"By the time he was at York University, studying politics, history and women’s studies, he was an activist on left-wing causes and was elected president of the student government."[6]

I propose this modification because there have been numerous seemingly incorrect claims made on social media that Mr. Ghomeshi "majored in" women's studies, and it would be helpful to include on his Wikipedia page a source for the accurate statement that he studied and minored in women's studies.

References

  1. ^ "Three women contact police with allegations against Jian Ghomeshi". Toronto Star. Retrieved 1 November 2014.
  2. ^ Donovan, Kevin (October 31, 2014). "Toronto police launch investigation into Jian Ghomeshi allegations". Toronto Star. Retrieved November 1, 2014.
  3. ^ Houpt, Simon (October 30, 2014). "CBC hiring outside investigator to probe Jian Ghomeshi allegations". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
  4. ^ Donovan, Kevin (26 October 2014). "CBC fires Jian Ghomeshi over sex allegations". Toronto Star. Retrieved 27 October 2014. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  5. ^ [http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/10/31/jian-ghomeshis-journey-from-immigrants-son-to-cultural-icon-to-pariah/ "Jian Ghomeshi’s journey: From immigrant’s son to cultural icon to pariah"National Post, October 31, 2014.
  6. ^ [http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/10/31/jian-ghomeshis-journey-from-immigrants-son-to-cultural-icon-to-pariah/ "Jian Ghomeshi’s journey: From immigrant’s son to cultural icon to pariah"National Post, October 31, 2014.

TrulyTessa (talk) 15:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The section currently reads that he graduated with degrees in politics and history, which I assume were his majors. When one minors in a subject, do they earn a degree? Ivanvector (talk) 16:33, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note that 'minor' in this context is a north-americanism. Other parts of the world don't sue the term, is there a phrasing of this that can be made globally understood? Stuartyeates (talk) 19:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I meant to ask. How would we phrase this? Browsing through some other personalities with similar careers to Ghomeshi, I'm seeing that a person's minor studies are often not mentioned, and in this case it feels a bit like we're forcing it in simply because of the recent allegations. The best I can come up with is: "graduating with degrees in political science and history with a minor in women's studies." Sourced per TrulyTessa. Ivanvector (talk) 21:34, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A degree with a major (or minor) concentration in one subject and a major (or minor) concentration in another is still one degree, not two. We shouldn't speak of "degrees" (plural) to refer to a single degree with a concentration in more than one subject. Ã common example would be a schoolmaster, who needs to hold a four-year BA/BSc with a major concentration in each of two teachable subjects; a budding science teacher may pick up the required number of credits in physics (likely at least five, don't remember) and a corresponding number of credits in chemistry (so both of these are "major concentrations" based on the number of courses taken). They get one BSc with major concentrations in those two teachable subjects, chemistry and physics, then head to teacher's college for a BEd. That's not the same as "a degree in chemistry" and "a degree in physics" as two separate BSc's, at four years each, which would be twice as much study. It's one degree with a minimum number of credits in each of two subjects. K7L (talk) 15:06, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense to me, but how do we word it here? The source says he has degrees (plural) in poli sci and history, and minored in women's studies. Maybe it's not specific enough for us to use? Ivanvector (talk) 16:50, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked through the sources cited here, and they don't say he has multiple degrees, just a single Bachelor of Arts. Am I mistaken or are you reading a source not listed here? __ E L A Q U E A T E 17:04, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I read it in the National Post source the OP gave, but it's not there now. The article was updated yesterday so maybe their fact-checkers got to it. Ivanvector (talk) 18:34, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The detailed description of his BA is from an intern-written piece here calls it a combined BA in History and Political Science from York University, with a minor in women studies. This description is roughly close to that given by Ghomeshi himself, here, who calls it a political science major/history minor with women’s studies as a minor as well. No matter what, it's only a single degree, basically a PoliSci B.A. with a couple of minor areas of study listed. Minors contribute to a degree, but aren't degrees themselves. If we want to modify the article, it should just match the wording in an actual source, without implying he has more than one degree. He says himself that he only ended up with one actual major. __ E L A Q U E A T E 17:39, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm closing this edit request because the corrected information has been added to the article already. Any editor may revert, of course. Ivanvector (talk) 18:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 3 November 2014

Please add the bolded text. Lights has cut her ties with JG http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/10/31/toronto-police-launch-criminal-investigation-into-jian-ghomeshi-after-two-women-come-forward/

Having managed musician Martina Sorbara (now of the band Dragonette) and produced for Dar Williams through his production company, Jian Ghomeshi Productions Inc., he managed the Juno Award winning artist, Lights, from 2007 to 2014. OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 01:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

yellow tickY Partly done (non-admin close?) - I have added this but I changed the wording because I thought it was awkward, and I used a source that covered her announcement more directly. Please post here if you disagree with my edit. Ivanvector (talk) 21:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 3 November 2014

A few little typos: a "for" that should be "by", a misspelling of "according" and a misspelling of "Ghomeshi"

On October 26, 2014 the CBC announced the end of Ghomeshi's tenure as host,[18] with a CBC spokesman saying "information came to our attention recently that in CBC's judgment precludes us from continuing our relationship with Jian."[18] Later that day, Ghomeshi announced plans to launch a $50 million lawsuit against the CBC "claiming general and punitive damages for among other things, breach of confidence and bad faith".[19] Ghomeshi subsequently released a statement on Facebook saying his dismissal was motivated by fear of an alleged smear campaign by an ex-girlfriend that according to Ghomeshi could release private details about his sexual life.[20]

The Toronto Star published the allegations of three women who said that they experienced violence from Ghomeshi without consent, as well as a former CBC colleague who alleged that Ghomeshi had sexually harassed her in the workplace.[21] A fifth woman gave an interview to CBC Radio's As It Happens on October 29, also alleging that Ghomeshi physically abused her without her consent on their first date.[22] By October 30, nine women had approached media outlets with abuse allegations against Ghomeshi.[23] Actress Lucy DeCoutere was the first woman to agree to the publication of her name in conjunction with the allegations,[24] followed by Huffington Post blogger and lawyer Reva Seth who went on the record with abuse allegations against Ghomeshi.[25] On October 30, Carleton University announced that it would investigate allegations made in April 2014 against Ghomeshi by an anonymous Twitter account.[26] Toronto Police began an investigation into Ghomeshi following police complaints by three women, including DeCoutere.[27] The CBC announced that they would hire a third party to conduct an investigation.[28] Ghomeshi's lawyer has said his client "does not engage in non-consensual role play or sex and any suggestion of the contrary is defamatory."[21] OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 01:54, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done (non-admin close?) - I consider this uncontroversial and the article is no longer goldlocked. Please comment here if you revert. Ivanvector (talk) 21:19, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Missing info

A few points which either are already cited to WP:RS on this talk page (but are not in the article) or were removed from the article:

  • Crisis PR firm "Navigator Inc." and promotional firm "Rock-it" have severed ties (cited above, in one of the edit-protected requests, with source)
  • A pair of speakers bureaux have severed their ties to Ghomeshi (also as cited above)
  • Q's executive producer has taken "a few days off while the CBC investigates" an allegation that a 2010 union attempt to raise the issue with management accomplished nothing. [5]

Is this info that should be in the article? It's widely covered in mainstream sources. K7L (talk) 17:41, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's reasonable to add that his crisis navigation firm, promotions firm, publisher, agent, and speakers bureaus dropped him and that Lights also dropped him as manager. However, if I remember rightly, none of the official reasons given for dropping him had anything to do with the scandal: each party published a statement saying that it would no longer represent him. Therefore, we can only say that each company terminated their relationship with Ghomeshi after the nine women spoke to the media.
With respect to the Q executive producer, I don't think his leave should be mentioned in this article because it isnt about Ghomeshi or the scandal. If this tidbit goes anywhere, it should be in the Q article, not this one. Once again, we have to be careful not to assume that any specidic part of the scandal caused this leave. In particular, all we know is that “He decided to take some time while we get more clarity around this situation,” Thompson said according to the National Post. We cannot say that he's taking time off while the allegations are investigated because to do so is WP:SYNTH and misrepresents the situation: it implies that he's taking leave because of those allegations and we have no proof of that. Ca2james (talk) 18:46, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I proposed wording for Rock-it before the discussion went stale. I'll try to find that and pull it back. As for Navigator and the speakers orgs, (and let's get Amanda Palmer out of the way), if we start to list off every performer, tour and organization that drops him as a client, the section will start to get very large indeed and present an undue weight problem. I suggest we only include orgs which he had a notable relationship with before the scandal broke (e.g. Lights, Rock-it seems to qualify, not sure about others), or alternatively to summarize them all by saying something like "several performers and organizations" have "ended their relationships" or "distanced themselves", etc. Ivanvector (talk) 18:31, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DUE requires that coverage of the allegations needs to be kept in proportion to the rest of the article. I have no problems with adding all of this detail, provided that rest of the article is bulked up in proportion. Otherwise we need to keep things very tightly focused on the subject and the specific allegations relating to him. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Bob Thornton - tour cancellation

Re: this edit

@Tchaliburton: the source given (MTV) mentions that Thornton's band dropped out of the tour the day after being jeered at their performance in Toronto, when the crowd booed them specifically in reference to his interview on Q. However it doesn't say anything about a band member having the flu - it might have been removed from the source in a subsequent update, the online sources do that sometimes. Can I suggest we mention it this way: "... many fans chanted "Here comes the gravy!"[25] The next day, Nelson announced that the Boxmasters had dropped off the tour.[MTV source]" Ivanvector (talk) 18:23, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's implying that they cancelled the tour due to the fallout from the interview. That might be true but we have no way of knowing, so I'd be hesitant to mention it. As it is I think the entire section is drifting away from anything about Ghomeshi and focusing on Thornton. Tchaliburton (talk) 18:45, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Billy Bob page covers it. The interview itself is relevant to Ghomeshi, but that section is still larger than all other other career sections. It could probably even lose the bit about the Thornton performance, unless we connect Ghomeshi to it by adding how Ghomeshi was mentioned there. __ E L A Q U E A T E 18:55, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. It doesn't directly relate to Ghomeshi. I removed it. It's covered on the Thornton page, which is appropriate. Tchaliburton (talk) 21:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2014

Near the end of the last section, add one line:

On October 30, 2014, publicity firm Rock-it Promotions, crisis PR firm Navigator and speakers bureaux Keynote Speakers Canada and Speakers’ Spotlight severed ties with Ghomeshi.[1]

2001:5C0:1000:A:0:0:0:45F (talk) 22:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done seems uncontroversial Mfhiller

2014 allegations and lawsuit section

This section is getting too long again, it's now about a third of the article and the content is creeping into other sections. It needs to be shortened by tightening wording, removing non-core details or careful summarisation. Please read WP:BALASPS before adding any new content related to the allegations and lawsuit. Feel free to add details of Jians' life prior to 2014. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My attempts to trim standard legal posturing have been reverted by User:Tchaliburton with the edit message This is factual. Please discuss this on the talk page if you think it should not be here which I thought I'd done above. I feel content still needs to be trimmed from this section, but I'm not going to edit war. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:SIZE, "content should not be removed from articles simply to reduce length." To balance the article I think it's only fair to mention the CBC's response to the suit. It might be better to rewrite it in someone else's words rather than quoting the CBC directly. Tchaliburton (talk) 03:41, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Born: Jean Ghomeshi

Jean was his name before he changed it to Jian, plus lots more details that can be gleamed from this thorough Maclean's article: http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/jian-ghomeshi-how-he-got-away-with-it/

  1. ^ http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/30/jian_ghomeshi_dumped_by_pr_firm_over_lies_sources_say.html
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jian_Ghomeshi&oldid=632796151"