Talk:Josh Klinghoffer

Untitled

Not strictly conflict of interest - all facts sourced and verified. --JKDN 03:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, nothing has been sourced and verified. Leuko 04:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it has, but it's been a long night and the sources haven't been added in yet. --JKDN 10:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

This page has not been edited by the subject, but by the team at JoshKlinghoffer.Net. The edits provide facts, not opinions.

JKDN 02:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The autobiography tag has been removed, as it might give people the idea that Josh has been editing the page - we won't want to get people all excited, do we.

Left the sources tag to remind me to add in the sources.

JKDN 02:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest Problem

If "the team at Joshklinghoffer.net" doesn't stop editing this article, it is likely to be deleted and "salted" to prevent its recreation. Conflicts of interest are a major problem in Wikipedia, and the creation and maintenance of an article by parties with severe conflicts of interest can create a problem which in the long run will damage the interests of the subject of the article. The problem is not necessarily actual lies, but rather an unbalanced and partisan view of the subject individual. The Wikipedia ideal is information from impartial, third-party sources of note. What we have here so far is more like an advertisement or fansite for Klinghoffer, full of unsourced allegations and peacock terms. --Orange Mike 12:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

• Endorse statement: Everything I was too lazy to write. Leuko 15:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a difficult one. Everything written had been researched and verified over years, there are least two independent sources for all the information and sources were due to be added in. Yes, I agree that the tone needed changing. But... how can we do that or add in references, under threat of deletion? The researchers won't publish anything without independent verification. Obviously, from the outside it does look like COI, but the article would have been edited down to a much more neutral tone, rather than expanded. --JKDN 16:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The page can go back to the Red Hot Chili Peppers fans writing about every gig he ever played on the last leg of the tour. Which apparently was perfectly fine. We just thought the page could do with some actual information on it. As I said, it would have been edited DOWN, if we'd been given the chance.--JKDN 17:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean, "if we'd been given the chance"? This article hasn't been nominated for deletion! The fansite tag is a request for improvement, not a death sentence. Restore the information you deleted, sourcing it as you go. Just do the edits you're talking about, keep a neutral tone, and contribute to other articles in areas where you are expert. (You might consider getting an ID that doesn't include Josh's name or initials in it, though.) --Orange Mike 19:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I'm keeping the info offline until edits are complete. I don't want a fight, and I appreciate everything you guys are saying. The article was a bit of a brain download, because things are getting published that ARE wrong, and AREN'T sourced, so we wanted to put out all the research that has been done. Josh is in no way connected to what we're doing - none of this is at his request, we just want to make sure people get the correct info. And I'm working on putting this info in a form acceptable to Wikipedia. --JKDN 21:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio

This article is not a copyright violation: the team at joshklinghoffer.net says that they first modified the Wikipedia article, then used it for the About section of their website.[1] The text has thus been released under the GFDL. Mushroom (Talk) 04:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

SIGH. First, I came close to endorsing the proposed "deletion and salting" (mentioned last year-above) if it was totally screwed with. I got no edit issues with anyone! I wonder how many websites and You Tube fanatics realize how hard it is to tell copyvio from what isn't. B/c I've seen my work from... Patty Griffin to Cat Stevens, Mark Knopfler, to the Dixie Chicks used all over the place. Stuff I wrote. Sometimes from 1 1/2 years ago to one time, just 2 weeks later, on other websites, and it's HARD to figure out the same with other editors. Who wrote whatever? References? Or did someone copy them? That's why the Klinghoffer site- I shouldve said something then-- saying, they'd hold off till the page was done to copy it worried me. And they don't have to worry about NPOV and so forth, right? (Tearing my hair out, now... maybe I need to move back to translating Japanese..) --leahtwosaints (talk) 08:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails

I removed the mention of him playing with NIN because it is uncited, and, my understanding is that he was extended the offer but somehow it never happened. Unless someone can verify his involvment I don't think it should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.62.43.194 (talk) 19:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

This isn't right

To my knowledge, there has not been an official announcement from anyone about Josh being the newest guitarist for the red hot chili peppers. It should be taken out Undervenued (talk) 16:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

A number of spam/advertising links have been sneakily placed within the article. Please keep them out and keep the article clean of spam. SunSnake

I Assumed that references (footnotes) to specific articles on websites supporting content referred to in the text were acceptible, whereas direct links to site homepages within the text are considered spam. Please correct me if I am wrong. CharlyChucky (talk) 01:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Undervenued, until the band management issues a press release, or the official band web site posts a confirmation Josh's appointment and role in the band, the statement that he is the 'current guitarist' is not sufficiently substantiated to be included as fact (at least not without qualification). I will not, however, participate in further counter edits since this is unhelpful and confusing to readers. CharlyChucky (talk) 14:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, so keep your junk out of the article and stop making us have to edit your spam out. SunSnake —Preceding undated comment added 16:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC).

Removed comment stating that Josh is a confirmed member of RHCP. No verifiable source has come from the band or their management in terms of an official announcement. All sources for this story are currently traceable to a forum news release that has since been retracted (on Josh Klinghoffer's personal request according to the forum's Twitter page). Josh Klinghoffer is most likely in the band; other sources have supported that in addition to the original news release, but they do not state his actual role. Given that the band's guitarist, John Frusciante, did leave, it is a natural assumption that Josh IS the new guitarist but since he also plays a number of other instruments, nothing can be assumed for the purposes of this page until an official announcement has been made; Wiki 'rules' clearly state that Encyclopedic content must be verifiable and unfortunately, that is not the case right now for Josh Klinghoffer's involvement within the Red Hot Chili Peppers and although the original source was probably correct, it cannot be cited as verifiable evidence.Squitherwitch (talk) 13:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

It seems like the Peppers page is being changed daily. I continue to edit info about Josh being a Peppers but someone is always changing it back and posting the Rolling Stone article which got their info from Music Radar which got their info from a 4 year old fan message board called Stadium-Arcadium.com. The message board has since removed their BREAKING NEWS on how Josh has been confirmed because Josh's website pretty much asked them to however the media has yet to report on how Josh's own website basically shot down the reports and said nothing was official until the band or their managment makes it official and now with Josh's website directing to his Wiki page there pretty much is very little evidence from his site claiming the news wasn't confirmed. I fully expect him to be a Pepper but right now he's not confirmed and until he is neither his page or the Peppers page should post anything about him being confirmed. Jason1978 (talk) 9:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

the guy that runs that stadium-arcadium.com website is a little flimsy Undervenued (talk) 21:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

What really amazes me is that a credible source like Rolling Stone would be so careless like this getting their info which can be traced back to a fan's message board. Nothing against Stadium-Arcadium.com (they were just being fans and thought they had some good info) but the mainstream media got their info about Josh from a message board. How lazy has the media become? This isn't the first time the media has released false info on the Peppers. First it was reports that Anthony was in really bad health, which Blackie had to respond to by saying it was untrue (the media never once updated their story) and then it was Flea being in Faces, which the Peppers official site actually reported and it turned out Flea never even knew anything about it and the info was again false. I have never seen so much false info for a band as huge and popular as the Peppers coming from sources that you would expect to be reliable. Jason1978 (talk 18:11, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

^ That is so true; you would expect the media to actually check first but I think each writer was relying on the fact that the previous author had done so. Rolling Stone got their story from Music Radar who got it from... and nobody really stopped to check the details. I contacted one of the magazines that was running the story early on and was told the fact that SA.com was gaining the JKDN website was proof enough! Fans contacting the record companies aren't going to get very far even if they were to phone up Warner Bros. but surely magazines with the status of say, Rolling Stone, would be able to get some comment from them, even if it's the 'nothing is verified' tag? You would expect more accuracy from them and not for them to report stories as confirmed when there has been no official word; yes print the stories, but make the details reflect the information avaialable.

Although with hindsight, maybe the music press was reacting to circumstances themeselves? The story spread so quickly on Twitter that I think they just ran with it as it was gaining such momentum and that the first to print the story status was far more important than any accuracy, especially when the story could be traced back to Josh Klinghoffer/JKDN so it automatically seemed genuine.

However, I did pick up an article today through a Twitter link and it was discussing the Josh 'official/unofficial' story and it was saying that some of the leading magazines have now pulled the story from their websites but the story is so 'out there' now that only an official announcement is going to clarify the whole situation. Squitherwitch (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Anthony's dad Blackie replied to a MySpace message I sent him confirming Josh was a member and they are currently working on the next album. He has responded to quite a few fans messages (he's still really close with Peppers fans and ran their fanclub for years). I sent this info to stadium-arcadium.com and they posted it as their front page news so hopefully this can confirm things. They were the main source that the mainstream media got their info from so hey, maybe they will pick up on this news (would be cool for me lol).

Blackie has a bunch of photos and video from the MusiCares event on his page further indicating Josh is a member. Of course since this was a private message sent to me I cannot post a link or anything so you will have to take my word but I have been one of the people dedicated to removing Josh's name and infor until someone in or close to the band said something and Blackie is as close to a official statement as we might get. I have a strong feeling we might never get official word from the band and they will just continue making the record with Josh. Jason1978 (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't the fact that Josh recorded I'm With You and is currently the only guitarist of the Peppers make it official enough? Aleksandar Bulovic' (talk) 20:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

John never gave Josh his telecaster .

Hi, for all . John never gave Josh a guitar, these guitars have the same mod . And so if you have a nice eye you can see pictures and check it by yourself . Sorry by the poor english . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.137.22.219 (talk) 16:06, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Otherside

I'm not sure if this is really encyclopedic content , but I thought it might be cool to mention that Josh is the main character in the music video for "Otherside" off RHCP's "Californication". Aleksandar Bulovic' (talk) 20:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

^ you've got to be kidding me. it's not true — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.186.220.97 (talk) 14:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Josh Klinghoffer. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723155847/http://invisible-movement.net/articles/2004-press/alternativenation to http://invisible-movement.net/articles/2004-press/alternativenation
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716022550/http://screencrave.com/2011-02-18/trailer-for-sxsws-bob-and-the-monster/ to http://screencrave.com/2011-02-18/trailer-for-sxsws-bob-and-the-monster/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 22:56, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Effects pedals red links

I think it's unlikely that the majority of these effects pedals and devices will ever have their own WP article. I propose zapping all the links. Dhalamh (talk) 09:56, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind. I boldly did it myself. I'm a bit confused about the source for this link also, as there is another conflicting article here, and I'm not sure if the list derives from the text or the embedded video. Dhalamh (talk) 10:46, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Personal life

No mention of 67.245.160.5 (talk) 11:31, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

How does the religious affiliation of the subject's parents help encyclopaedic understanding of this topic?

I'm astonished that "ethnicelebs.com" is allowed to be cited without a raised eyebrow, especially on a BLP. The Fintzy 2012 source from JTA seems mostly... grabby? about possible links to ethnic Jewishness given the thrust of the article.

I've become aware of this article and its ethno-religious backstory trivia due to the article subject complaining to an admin about its inclusion, apparently also edit-warring about it. Yes, they shouldn't be editing the article with their inalienable COI, but really I think they have a point. Maybe the relationship to Leon Klinghoffer has encyclopaedic utility, but the religious background of the mother and the phrase "linked to Judaism" don't seem like they serve a useful purpose. Folly Mox (talk) 00:16, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I agree, and when I investigated who initially added the information, it appears to be someone who does that for their own personal motives, which is fine I suppose, but when the relevance is questioned, and a good faith request for it's omission is made, it seems only right to do considering that religion is a touchy topic, and in the case of the subject this specific wiki page, ALL religion, or religious affiliation is unnecessary. If someone wants to open Wiki pages for my parents and tell the world what religion they were born into, go right ahead, but I have very strong distaste for ALL religion and ALL religious practice and do not think it is relevant to include on this Wikipedia page. Marble Argument (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

This wiki needs a makeover

This wiki really needs some work, the information may be technically correct but the wording that's been used for some parts is so bad it's not funny BrightenRichardsDraper (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC)