Jump to content

Talk:Danny Schmidt

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


Illness?

[edit]

Enough rows about notability already, I've just listened to an extended session on national BBC radio, Schmidt's clearly now notable. So let's get on with improving this article. I'm pretty sure I've read in the past that Schmidt has beaten cancer, which inspired the song This Too Shall Pass among others. Anyone have any more info? The rest of the articles needs a lot of work, by the way. EJBH (talk) 00:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might look here for this: [1]. Have to search around for the dates. Artaxerxes (talk) 17:02, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

Concerning User:CalendarWatcher's removal of Whole Wheat Radio link and establishing Danny Schmidt's notablity - previous discussion includes:

Concerning Danny Schmidt's notablity:

  • Kerrville Folk Festival 2007 winner - please refer to each linked artist on that page. Those knowledgeable with the singer-songwriter profession will clearly identify Danny Schmidt as having achieved the same level of professional musicianship as any of the other notable entries.
  • Waterbug Records - the same is true when comparing artists from Waterbug Records in terms of notability. In fact, Danny has recently been signed to Red House Records, a recognized national label. Only artists who have achieved a level of professional recognition are on Red House.
  • It is, in fact, quite remarkable that anyone familiar with the independent singer-songwriter arena today would question Danny Schmidt's notability. With quotes from such notables as Rich Warren, WUMB, XM-Radio's Mary Sue Twohy and many others on that list, Danny has more bona-fide external source notability than several of the other artists on the two lists above.

Although I would happily remove some of the superlative "ad-like" wording of this article that I created, I am no longer comfortable editing singer-songwriter pages on Wikipedia because it is apparently assumed I have a COI even though I personally stand to gain nothing by enhancing the Wikipedia knowledge base of acoustic singer-songwriters and by providing a link to an external site that is completely non-commercial. The default assumption no longer seems to be "good faith" nor am I seeing a significant effort to research or communicate before claiming spam/COI. I am not interested in edit wars, notability wars --wars of any kind-- or defending against "assumption of non-good faith/spam/commercial/COI" attacks.

If others wish to remove this notable artist from Wikipedia and/or remove any/all links to an equally notable wiki-based non-commercial grassroots driven webcast called Whole Wheat Radio so be it. Whole Wheat Radio will continue to provide a source of non-commercial, grassroots, volunteer maintained, 100% free, wiki-based audio, video, encyclopedic and non-encyclopedic reference materials related to independent musicians and music. Jimkloss (talk) 06:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're directly promoting a venture that you have some direct connection with, it seems clear: whether you personally stand to gain monetarily is irrelevant. THAT is a conflict of interest, no matter how you try to spin it or what emotional manipulation you try out. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 11:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I'd already read those links, and I remain unconvinced. I shall escalate this for further feedback at the earliest opportunity. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 11:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your tone is attacking and does not assume good faith on my part. I will not discuss anything concerning Whole Wheat Radio, COI, independent musicians/music or edits I have made on Wikipedia with anyone who is unable to calmly discuss the matter in an informed and non-accusatory tone. I will happily monitor and participate in any "escalation" discussion, and would happily agree to speedy deletion of all reference to Whole Wheat Radio on Wikipedia, but I will not participate in personal abuse or attack. Jimkloss (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles, reviews, interviews

[edit]

Included originally to help build the article (and notability). No longer needed, so moved here:

Notability and Whole Wheat Radio

[edit]

I think it's a perfect example of cognitive dissonance that a link to the commercial MySpace website is somehow deemed appropriate when Whole Wheat Radio isn't. I love Wikipedia and use it everyday but I fear this continued dismissal sets a dangerous precedent. Using the "spam" defense is also very telling. Let it be known that some Wikipedians feel commercial sites are more important and noteworthy than collaborative, non commercial sites. It's not hypocrisy per se, but you can definitely see it creeping up.

For what it's worth, Danny Schmidt is also an extremely talented singer/songwriter who also happens to value independent distribution not commercial. As I've said above, I worry that we again are using "commercial" success as an indication of notability.

--rubenerd (talk) 10:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I feel its a dangerous precedent to rely upon emotional appeals and manipulation by a small band of users to justify conflicts of interest and trying to piggy-back upon the resources--and reputation--of a hard-built and widely used site like Wikipedia to promote one's own ventures, but that may just be me. No, actually, it's not. And yes, 'commercial success', dirty word you may believe it to be, IS an actual indicator of notability, not merely someone's subject opinion. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 11:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Does this mean Wikipedia itself is not notable then? I didn't get the memo. And don't be patronising mate, it makes you come off as arrogant and a tad desperate. If we're just going to just list links, stick to the issues not the people. --rubenerd (talk) 23:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Factually, as the frontpage of Whole Wheat Radio indicates: We are a non-profit, non-hype driven labor of love to which listeners have donated $42,559.96. Working musicians who've performed here at house concerts have brought in just over $20,000 for door receipts, CD sales and online tips ... 100% of which has gone right back to them. The books are available on the site and the general public is encouraged to study them. Although I have no way of knowing what percentile of websites have raised over $62,000 "commercially" directly from their participants without advertising or fund-raisers, solely for website's existence and not for a specific product, I wonder if that level of commercial success makes them somewhat "notable" in the realm of self-supporting online organizations. Jimkloss (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning "piggybacking" off Wikipedia: Whole Wheat Radio is an external resource that users of Wikipedia are likely to find useful when researching a artist. That definitely is piggybacking and something I think furthers the usefulness and encyclopedic value of Wikipedia. If such reference is deemed COI instead of providing additional useful resources, then I agree that all references to Whole Wheat Radio on Wikipedia (including the main page) should be nominated for speedy deletion. Jimkloss (talk) 18:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
CalendarWatcher: The intent of including WWR links on artist's pages is offer an audio resource for readers who are interested in hearing the artist. You see, on WWR anyone can request through the browser any song from the WWR library, then listen it it with their audio stream receiver software (iTunes, JetAudio, etc.). In many instances the WWR library has more songs available than the artist could ever make available on their own site without having them downloadable.
The intent is not to promote or drive traffic to WWR. The intent is to make available to wikipedia readers, the artists music. In fact, Kloss and WWR, have a history of trying to drive traffic away from WWR. WWR is interested in quality listeners - listeners who enjoy the music, the banter and/or contributing to an independent music resource. Listeners who aren't into those things are encouraged to go elsewhere.
I frankly feel that you've misread WWR and Kloss.
--sparkitTALK 02:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citing sources

[edit]

After reading the notes in Music notability and Giggy's guidelines, I'm not a whole lot closer than I was when it comes to understanding the definition of notability. And I've tried to list sources but I have yet to understand the markup for citing sources. So I'm listing some sources here for now, and maybe somebody else, in all their wisdom, will offer some guidance.

Atuuschaaw (talk) 11:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, most of these offer little citable information. Partly because they are mostly about single albums. A magazine, newspaper or website with a review of Schmidt might give us more citable info. I've not read that NY one in the "other reading" list.
Sing Out! has done a piece on him. We could track that down. Schmidt's website may have other such references.
I've set up the article to show inline citations in the "Notes" section. Now all you have to do to enter an inline citation is

<ref>the citation</ref>

--sparkitTALK 02:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Yes, I did see Sing Out did an article on Danny in Spring '08, but they do not have an online source. Do we just cite the issue? Atuuschaaw (talk) 03:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a link to the Sing Out! article to the Further reading section. However if anything in that piece is cited in the article it would be appropriate to add an inline citation. --sparkitTALK 05:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Schmidt and Notability

[edit]

Seems to me the Kerrville award, the Sing Out! review and the Red House signing establish the notability of Danny Schmidt. What say you? --sparkitTALK 04:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Devon Sproules sexy Daniel?

[edit]

So this is the guy who Devon Sproule keeps lusting after on the album Dont Hurry for Heaven ? - if so its probably the most famous thing about him and should be mentioned. 118.149.134.202 (talk) 07:09, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Danny Schmidt. 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) 23:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Danny_Schmidt&oldid=1201075152"