Talk:Dick Latvala

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Untitled

The page on Dick Latvala should not be deleted. He was an important scholar and archivist of Grateful Dead and related music. He started the extremely popular CD series "Dicks Picks" which continues to release new albums 2-4 times per year.

what country does he originate from?

ye read headline —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.146.150.24 (talk) 21:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Latvala is a Finnish surname. J.S.Salonen 23:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really necessary to post his purported Anti-Semitic quote in its entirety?

Does the article on Adolf Hitler have every quote he ever said? If not, I question why Dick Latvala, a peace-loving Grateful Dead archivist who was probably friend to many Jewish people, has to suffer this indignity.

It's not the most important thing he ever said. It may be offensive, but that does not make it IMPORTANT. It's not. Unless someone responds, I will again delete the passage from Dick's internet chat, replacing it with on I find more historically representative.

Wikipedia is uncensored. The quote was rather noteworthy, as of the first 20 hits on Google Groups, 7 are in reference to the dead.net post. Most of the other first hits are in reference to his death. The recently deceased Bobby Fischer also has a Wiki section of anti-Jewish remarks. Nice invoking Godwin's Law in your first comment. 68.45.106.216 (talk) 04:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jangles1 (talk • contribs) 06:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just because Bobby Fischer (an notorious, noteworthy anti-Semite) has such notations does not justify the inclusion here. Sorry. This is clearly a case of Undue Weight [See Wiki Neutral Point of View Guideline]. The controversy itself is not attributed and not notable. Instead, Dick's larger musical role is what is notable. There should be at least 100 pages before we get to mis-interpretations about 1 web post.

The web "controversy" over the 1999 comment, was failure to comprehend Dick's idiosynchratic and oppositional writing style. He was saying all races were equal. There is nothing anti-Semitic, or noteworthy, about that sentiment. I think you are on a fishing expedition. And you are polluting a biography with a primary source, out of context, whose inclusion seems designed to foster mis-interpretation about the man.

A consensus view will show that Latvala was not a bigot, and innuendo to the contrary does not belong in his biography unless it were an established fact (as with Fischer).

Wikipedia's policy on minority views is this: if you would like to note a particular minority group view, make a new article. For example, people who think Dick was an anti-Semite. But as for the main article, I do not think it merits inclusion.

There is a pervasive bias to satisfy one's political lusts or pet issues while writing a biography. Have some sympathy for the deceased. He is not here to defend himself. The current portrayal is out of scale and imbalanced. I am deleting it again on behalf of wiki users. It is not appropriate to give undue bias to a misinterpretation of an irrelevant matter.

If you are not satisfied then we need arbitration.

I have no idea why you think that "I" am not satisfied. This information has been in the article for 2 years with no objections other than yours. The article was fine at it is, and it will stay that way. Also, the fact that Latvala is deceased actually makes the information more easily able to stay in the article, because there are stricter laws with regards to what one can say about the living than the deceased. 68.45.106.216 (talk) 12:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Bobby Fischer, the "notorious anti-semite" as you call him, was Jewish. The paragraph about Latvala's statements in no way takes a position about the comments, which is why it doesn't fall under [See Wiki Neutral Point of View Guideline]. It simply mentions his comments and says he apologized for them. At no point does the article take a position on the content of his statements. 68.45.106.216 (talk) 12:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced material

This bio could use serious help. Thanks, --70.109.223.188 (talk) 17:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]