Talk:Jon Butcher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I am 99% sure that Jon Butcher was born in Alaska....I am checking with sources close to Jon...I have first hand knowledge of this because he told me personally, but I need to confirm...I am asking for his exact date and place of birth

What a mess[edit]

This article is completely unsourced, full of weasel words, and reads like an ad. I don't really see any way of saving it other than a complete re-write. Rees11 (talk) 14:52, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Jon Butcher Wiki page- help ![edit]

To Whom It May Concern, I am requesting help from some of you more knowledgable individuals who can help with my Wiki issue. Not long ago a friend and associate volunteered to assist me in improving my Wiki page because it was previously full of factual errors and other mistakes. To that end I supplied him with relevent factual information and specific detail in order to make the page interesting and factually correct. Upon reviewing his efforts today I now have multiple [public] warnings at my page and I don't know why, nor is it clear to whom I should be addressing these concerns, or even what the problems with the page are. I am keenly interested in fixing these problems asap, and as the subject himself I feel that I am in the best position to present factual and complete biographical information. I am therefore posting here to hopefully solicit some helpful direction regarding the creation of my Wiki page which confirms to the rules and is factually complete. If you can assist please contact me asap. Thank you, Jon Butcher phone no removed, studio 9/25/09

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckandthor (talkcontribs) 21:45, 25 September 2009

(answering on users talk page  Chzz  ►  19:29, 17 October 2009 (UTC))



Hello, We are in need of administrative assistance. As a friend of Jon Butcher himself, I've been given the opportunity to edit his official page here. As instructed by wikipedia, I've put in my subject line adminhelp. TY

—Preceding unsigned comment added by JBAxis (talkcontribs) 21:13, 26 September 2009

(answering on users talk page  Chzz  ►  19:29, 17 October 2009 (UTC))


To Chzz: It is imperative that you know that ALL info that had been populated on this Jon Butcher page was provided by himself personally to me. He ultimately wrote it himself and simply wanted to me to post & source his info along the terms that Wikipedia requires. I have to question why Jon himself would have to ensure that his info is verifiable - can you answer that for me? I am by no means a professional writer, therefore I lack many of the skills and understanding of what is required to post edits that will be approved by Wikipedia's standards. Therefore, as you have offered, what I'd like to do, from what I've learned thusfar, is to furnish you with what I think is my best effort edit and have you refine to Wikipedia standards. Again, Jon & I are 100% sincere about posting edits that are not in violation with Wikipedia and ask in turn to treat my/our work with respect towards the ultimate goal of getting this work posted and not simply deleted with no questions asked as has been done by yourself previously. IF you are unwilling to assist us in this manner, please say so immediately so that we may find the proper help elsewhere. Your response is requested and first draft is ready for you upon your response. Please remember, I am a novice and am not looking for trouble. (talk) 15:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC) JBAxis (talk) 16:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

A further question: 99% of the citations I used were from Wikipedia itself. Am I to assume that an official and approved Wikipedia page is not verifiable and a multiple violation of the Wikipedia laws? Sounds contradictive to itself. Please advise. JBAxis (talk) 16:46, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I am not aware of what is proposed for the article, but the answer to your question above is pretty simple (btw I am not an administrator, just a passing editor).
There are thousands of articles about living people. Anyone can make an account here, with any name they like, and they can claim to be any person. How would other editors know whether a claim that someone is a particular person (or that person's friend) is correct? Also, what if the person (or friend) wanted to remove a negative comment about a person? In short, Wikipedia cannot know who is and who is not reporting a situation accurately.
Therefore, all articles must comply with verifiability, and all contentious statements (and practically anything said about a living person might be contentious) must be reliably sourced, preferably with a secondary source. Note that WP:BLP requires that any contentious and unsourced material about a living person must be removed immediately.
A person is free to write their own biography on their own website. Articles here must comply with the policies mentioned above. If you have a question about a specific issue, please give brief details in a reply here. Johnuniq (talk) 23:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Johnuniq, You are missing my point, because what I did has been deleted by Chzz but also referenced above... I had said that all of my sources or citations were per Wikipedia's standards complying with verifiability, were reliably sourced, & were complying with being a secondary source BECAUSE they were all pulled from Wikipedia itself. Now granted, I said 99% so yes, there may have been 1 or 2 improperly sourced items but that doesn't justify deletion of EVERYTHING does it? Also, does it warrant failure to discuss and address POTENTIAL errors and simply have these administrators come in and delete without question. If so, this is a poor policy in working with people/editors who are sincerely and earnestly trying to do the right thing by all. Sir, you're not helping the situation either by simply shoving policies down my throat. JBAxis (talk) 14:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

This is explained at WP:CIRCULAR. Essentially, without this rule, you could insert whatever you want, use that as a source for a second article, then use the second as a source for the first. Rees11 (talk) 17:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

An additional point that JBAxis might like to bear in mind that is that regular Wikipedians generally just switch off when reading a comment that does not quickly address the facts. You do not need to convince anyone of how concerned you are, or what injustices have occurred. Just talk about the future and what you would like to do (you want to add what? with what as a reference?). Johnuniq (talk) 02:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your response Johnuniq, and I will follow your suggestions. I was only addressing the injustices and concern because I didn't want it to happen again....going forward. Jon & I went to, for instance, Sammy Hagar's page to view what appeared to be an acceptable wikiepdia page - Also Trent Reznor's. From there we got an idea for the sourcing that I will paste below.

Please review below and make any suggestions:

Early life

Born Jon A. Toombs to Joan Butts and John A Toombs Sr, Jon picked up a new last name and simultaneously his first guitar at age six, inspired by Gene Autry, Roy Rogers and other singing cowboys seen in old movies. Jon's stepfather, William Butcher, adopted Jon that same year and moved the family from Philadelphia to Clear Air Force Base, Clear, Alaska population 1,166 for career opportunities. In 1969, the family moved back to Pennsylvania where Jon and his younger brother Brian finished their secondary education at Conestoga High School. Jon then attended Grahm Junior College in Boston, Massachusetts for Broadcast Journalism and it was there that his professional music career began in earnest.

TYVM24.123.178.70 (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC) --JBAxis (talk) 15:03, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

What is the source for this? You still need a source citation. Rees11 (talk) 15:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Rees11, I don't think JBAxis is yet connecting with how things are done here. JBAxis, the subject of the article is considered a primary source of information, and thus cannot be used due to conflict of interest. Wikipedia itself is a tertiary source and also cannot be used. You have to cite information with reliable, neutral secondary sources such as magazines, books, and news articles. Wikipedia has pages of policy about these issues, but that is it in a nutshell. I would strongly suggest that you step away from working on the article, since you have already displayed bias. For example, I went through and made some good faith edits to the first couple sections of the old text, thinking changes were welcome. You went back through and re-added all the fluff and peacock language I took out. I know you mean well, but this is not the place for a PR piece on Jon Butcher. This is an encyclopedia, everything here has to be neutral and sourced to a secondary source. I hope this makes sense. Writing things like "create a formidable regional fan base" is neither neutral nor sourced. --Spike Wilbury talk 16:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Spike, There's alot going on here and I don't think you read it all, but that's not a problem. 1st off, the good faith edits that you made, I should have kept now in hindsight because of your expertise and my lack thereof - I apologize. I thought I knew what I was doing and in no way was trying to put yourself off. 2ndly, here's where you may not have read, BUT it was Jon Butcher himself that wrote "...create a formidable regional fan base." I was not displaying bias, but perhaps Jon was himself, unintentionally I'd think. I get your point on the neutral secondary sources. That was the 1% of sourcing that I'd done, but the 99% of sourcing was from Wikipedia itself. I am corresponding with Jon directly and he's given me the simple duties of posting and sourcing the edits, but clearly we've not sourced correctly and I think I got it now. I will re-edit that section with some good neutral sources and see if that gets a thumbs up. Thanks for your advice! JBAxis (talk) 20:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, JBAxis. Although I am still going to discourage you from editing this article, I see that you are determined to do so. As you go forward, please bear in mind that anyone may edit this article, and you and Jon may not always be pleased with the result; this is the precise reason why we discourage people with a potential conflict of interest from editing those articles. Also please understand that other editors may scrutinize your edits due to your position, and if conflict of interest problems arise, editors may pursue various dispute resolution remedies. I would encourage you to carefully read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before you edit again. Since you have openly declared your relationship with the artist, I'm sure everyone is willing to assume you mean well. Thanks! --Spike Wilbury talk 20:57, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Spike, Rees11, et al,

Please see the Wikipedia pages for Sammy Hagar Eddie Van Halen, Neal Schon, Jeff Beck, Bill Clinton, Vladimir Putin;

All of the aforementioned pages contain multiple if not completely sourced citations using Wikipedia as a source. Yet [as I understand it] per WP:CIRCULAR, your directions to me suggests that Wikipedia sources are unacceptable.

Obviously this is in direct contradiction to the to what I was told regarding using Wiki as a source.

I am thoroughly confused, Please advise. JBAxis (talk) 17:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I can answer this. Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source, for a number of reasons but one of which is the fact that as you know, anyone can edit a Wikipedia article and add information. Therefore it certainly can't be considered reliable, only the information in Wikipedia that is confirmed by a reliable source can be considered reliable, and in that case you're better off just citing non-Wikipedia source anyway. The sources that we try to use are secondary sources. Primary sources are the original source for information (such as a person's statement, or an eye witness). Secondary sources are generally professionals who have analyzed primary sources and published those analyses (such as an author of a book, or a journalist writing in a newspaper, or a scientist publishing a report). Tertiary sources are places like Wikipedia that collect and summarize information from secondary sources. Secondary sources are definitely preferred, and all sources should comply to reliable sources rules. -- Atama 18:54, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello Atama, I appreciate your response, BUT how can a page like Sammy Hagar which is 100% using Wikipedia as it's sourcing be approved by the Wikipedia community as being NOT in violation of all the policies mentioned by you above? Please go to that page to see for yourself and reply. Thank you! JBAxis (talk) 13:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't see Wikipedia used as a source at all for Sammy Hagar. I do see the San Francisco Chronicle, Business Week, and UPI, as well as some questionable music industry sources. Can you tell us which ref in particular you are talking about? Rees11 (talk) 16:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Rees11, Hagar was one of the three singers for Van Halen, as well as of the early 1970s rock band Montrose. It's the 2 links, Van Halen then Montrose. Please advise. Respectfully, JBAxis (talk) 18:54, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Those are called "Wikilinks". See WP:LINK if you want detailed information. Essentially, like other wikis, each article in the encyclopedia contains links throughout the text that allow the reader to easily access related topics. For example, you are reading about Sammy Hagar and read about his time with Van Halen. You think, that's interesting, I'd like to learn more about the band. You could go over to the search bar on the left side and type "Van Halen", but you don't have to, for convenience sake the link is right in the text where you read it. Those links are not ever meant to be used as references though. Usually, a reference will appear as a number in superscript after a section of text, like this: [1] If you click on the number, it takes you to the bottom of the screen where the reference is listed and you can see what reference that number is pointing to. I hope that answered your concern, and if I misunderstood you I apologize. -- Atama 19:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Can somebody tell me how I can recreate the sections of this page that were deleted by Chzz? I have saved them on a word document that I have been editing and sourcing. What I need is to simply creat new sections for where I will plug in my editted work. Please help!!! JBAxis (talk) 21:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I left a welcome message on your talk page. It contains several useful links, including one on how to edit an article. Rees11 (talk) 22:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rees11, Thanks for all your help thusfar! This page is coming together very nicely thanks to your contributions! Question for you: I am trying to create a wikilink to this page, but am getting it to only direct you this far How do I go abobut correcting this? As well, I have asked Jon Butcher to forward me some sources to accomodate your concerns posted in the Source discussion page Nov 17.JBAxis (talk) 16:00, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

You're still going about this backwards. First you find the sources, then you write the text. So far all you've done is re-added the material that was deleted previously. The "sources" you've given do not support the text. Rees11 (talk) 17:14, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


To all that come to this page, please know that I am in the process of editing this according to the policies of Wikipedia and although it may appear unsourced or verifiable, I am earnestly going to satisfy all concerns. I am not able to work on this page to it's completion in one session, so I ask that any of you that see these "violations" know that I am nearby working on the sourcing, etc. and please NOT delete my work. Thank you in advance. JBAxis (talk) 22:10, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It would be much better if you could add the sources at the same time you add the text. Is there some reason you can't do this? If you don't know how to format the reference, I would be glad to help. Rees11 (talk) 12:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Actually Rees11, I would VERY MUCH like you to help with formatting some references. I think that once I see how it's properly done, I can do the rest, but right now I am having a problem. I have entered info in the INFLUENCES section and can't seem to figure what is wrong. Perhaps you can look at what I did and format it properly. Have at it and thank you very much!JBAxis (talk) 13:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I fixed your ref close tags, which were simply missing a slash ("/"). But the bigger problem is that these sources do not support the text in the article. When you say, "Many people have made comparisons between Jon Butcher & Jimi Hendrix" and give a source, the source should be a reliable secondary source that says essentially the same thing you just said. But it doesn't. Your source is a Sony web site (not a reliable secondary source but acceptable under certain circumstances) that says nothing about Jon Butcher. An acceptable source would be, for example, a story in the New York Times (or other newspaper or magazine) that says, "Butcher is often compared to Hendrix." Rees11 (talk) 14:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I understand exactly what you are saying and I will begin obtaining sources like these. I also appreciate what you did for me - Thanks alot!JBAxis (talk) 18:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
One thing - The new sources in the reference section at the bottom look incomplete. Can you format them to that of the last group of them? Also, I clicked the edit link for that section and none of the sources were in there. How come?JBAxis (talk) 18:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Usually you want to put a title into a web ref, not just the url. I've done that to the first one to show you how. It just goes after the url, inside the brackets. The ref text all goes in the main text of the article, not in the "References" section itself. Rees11 (talk) 22:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Rees11: Regarding the sourcing, I am awaiting for better/proper sourcings from Jon. I agree with you on the qualifications of the sourcing, but I have directed him the "why" we need better sourcing and I am simply awaiting his response. We WILL get this right. Thanks for your continued support. JBAxis (talk) 17:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)